Link to this Article: http://drrimatruthreports.com/do-vaxxers-remember-phlogiston/
.
Thomas Scott-Phillips wrote a breathtakingly idiotic article called “Why Anti Vaxxers Just Know They’re Right” on a site called Ïnfections of the Mind (which might just as well be called “Why Evolutionary Anthropologists Just Know They’re Right”.
.
[INFECTONS OF THE MIND? WOW! Before you read a single word you know you are dealing with an intellectual fascist!]
.
The author of the astonishingly smarmy piece which says that Anti Vaxxers are naive because they do not understand science or, for that matter, reality, is one Thomas Scott-Phhillips, PhD. His advanced degree, which apparently confirred upon him the right to know that he is always right (something no anti vaxxer I know would claim) is in Cognitive Psychology and comes from the University of Edinburgh.
.
Here is what Thom has to say about himself in a paroxysm of modesty:
.
“I study the cognitive and evolutionary foundations of the human mind and human culture. I have published many academic articles in high-profile, peer-reviewed publications, and have received multiple awards and prizes for my research, including the New Investigator Award from the European Human Behaviour and Evolution Association in 2011. My first book, Speaking Our Minds, was published in November, and has been called “the most important and best book ever written on the evolution of language”.”
.
He does not list those high profile publications, nor their location, nor the prizes and awards, nor the publisher of his book. How very endearingly modest of him to not give us enough informaiton to validate his modest self assessmennt.
.
When I read Thom’s astonishingly condescending piece, I wrote a reply and posted it three times on his article’s site. Why three times? Because it was removed twice. The third was apparently a charm and it stuck. But then I thought, who is this Thom and what is he all about? Maybe he is just ill informed, arrogant and foolish with an academic’s prediliction for pompous nonsense. Maybe the lad is not really a shill for the globalist Big Pharma Agenda 21 Crony Corporatist psychopaths at all, just a misguided little lost academic in way, way, way over his head.
.
So I thought I would look up his site and write him a personal note that incorporated and expanded my reply.
.
.Here it is:
.
I responded to your article on why anti vaxxers think they know more than the “experts.”
.
Remember Phlogiston? Anyone, including Priestly, the discoverer of oxygen, who did not believe in Phlogiston as the explanation for combustibility was a fool since it was so well established and “the Science Was Settled”.
.
How about bloodletting and purging, which were the height of modern medicine and good enough for kings to die from at one time. Then there’s symphysiotomy, first advocated for pregnant women first advocated by the French surgeon Severin Pineau in 1597. Never heard of it? That could be because it turned out to be both dangerous and totally unnecessary. But the experts took a long time killing a lot of women in figuring it out (sort of like the dirty coats that spread puerperal fever so well that Semmelweis lost his license and his life over even though he turned out to be absolutely correct.
.
Mercury as a treatment for infections, including syphilis and red lead impregnated gauze for burns? State of the art in their time.
.
Vaccines are powerfully adhered to but woefully poorly supported by independent, reproducible science.
.
I am an anti vaxer because of science, not in spite of it. I am not naive. But I do not follow, herd like, where others want me to go just because they tell me I should.
.
I ask questions like whether the 100 year morbidity and mortality rates for infectious diseases, with and without vaccines developed and deployed somewhere along the way, do, indeed, show that the decline in incidence, deaths and adverse events only occurred after the introduction of vaccines or if the decline was precipitous before the vaccines were introduced.
.
http://tinyurl.com/vaccinationisviolation
.
That happens to be the statistical and epidemiological reality. Hardly naivete, Thom. Hard, cold facts.
.
Then there are the adverse event issues: safety of vaccination is a myth, and a dangerous one. If you care to engage I will be happy to share my large data bank with you on that issue.
.
Then there is efficacy: ditto the above.
.
I do not know what your characterization of nativity is supposed to mean, but it certainly is neither scientific nor just.
.
So I propose a sharing of data and information. If you are a fair minded scientist who is simply stating his opinion and conclusions, that will appeal to you.
.
If you are a shill it will not.
.
You have my email.
I look forward to your response.
.
Yours in health and freedom,
.
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.DrRimaTruthReports.com
@DrRimaLaibow
