Fail Quotes

[BlameThe1st]

Nominate the OP for Idiot Extraordinaire and give the BOGUS! rubberstamp.

No, just find some libtarded moonbat raging about it and make them Idiot Extraordinaire. I'm sure The Young Turks or Rachel Maddow are having heart attacks over this.

[Travis Retriever]

While nowhere near as stupid as that meme pic above, I feel I simply *have* to post these two, if only for the sake of my own integrity:

http://www.furaffinity.net/full/4113487/
("Living wage for art?"--his T shirt)

http://www.furaffinity.net/full/2613400/

Don't get me wrong, I love TKDye's artwork and have been following his comic Newshounds II for weeks now (after reading all the way from 2007 beginning to catch up and then from the 1997 intro of Newshounds I to about 2002 ish.  Still working on that one). But goddamnit, like so many furries he leans to the left.  In these two, he goes on about that "living wage" nonsense. >.<*  He also seems to be mainly against corporations (rather than pro-government), but...I guess he never did check his dictionary for the part where a corporation is a legal entity created by government, and as such the nasty shit they do cannot, by definition, be part of a free market.

[BlameThe1st]

I'm sure most of you have seen this post:



Turns out that a bunch of statists have decided to twist this meme in order to (badly) criticize libertarians:



There's an entire thread of these parodies that grossly miss the point.

Anti-libertarians, why you no understand non-agression principle?

Oh, and then there's this:



The right to my property does not require your consent anymore than the right to my body! You wouldn't tear out someone's kidney. Why would you trespass on someone else's property?

Sorry. I have more important things to do that fret over willfull ignorance. I'll leave this all for you lot to tear a new one.

[Travis Retriever]

I'm sure most of you have seen this post:



Turns out that a bunch of statists have decided to twist this meme in order to (badly) criticize libertarians:



There's an entire thread of these parodies that grossly miss the point.

Anti-libertarians, why you no understand non-agression principle?

Oh, and then there's this:



The right to my property does not require your consent anymore than the right to my body! You wouldn't tear out someone's kidney. Why would you trespass on someone else's property?

Sorry. I have more important things to do that fret over willfull ignorance. I'll leave this all for you lot to tear a new one.

Shane, is there any reason the images BTF posted aren't showing up as embedded in the post itself like they should? The URLs all work when pasted into the address bar.

And yeah, the ironic thing about the child prostitution one?  THEIR policies are proven to cause that shit when they go into some third world country and forbid child labor.  So if anyone can rightfully use that card, it's us.
And the original pic kinda blows too:  "Property more important than life."  Because fuck the billion or so killed by governments and countless lives ruined right in the ass, right?  Statists, why do you not understand self ownership?  Good lord.  This is something even CHILDREN grasp.  When I was 4 years old, my mom ran a day care and the kids would be told if they were rough-housing, "keep your hands to yourself!" and it just made sense even at that age for me.

In fact, it was when TJ talked about the war on drugs being bogus "If you can't even be allowed to control what you put in your own body! If you don't even own your own body!..." was when libertarianism REALLY started clicking for me on a much more fundamental--UPB style--level.

[MrBogosity]

Shane, is there any reason the images BTF posted aren't showing up as embedded in the post itself like they should?

Beats me; I can see them just fine.

[Travis Retriever]

Beats me; I can see them just fine.

Okay, so I just fiddled and for some reason I had Adblock Plus blocking stuff from the site they were hosted at...oops. My bad.

[Travis Retriever]

Ya this sounds like the same arguments I get when I debate Katana fanboys.

Good lord! I didn't know Katana fanboys were so anti-empirical/fanatical.  But yeah, the biggest "Oh, Hell no!" in that article by Casey Butt was his basing of scientific research while claiming "Now, I'm a scientific with 5 degrees in hard science and a PhD." (Riiiight, just like the guy who says he has a Nobel Prize in Grammar does too, despite his inability to type in anything but text speak!) and how academics doesn't beat 'real world experience.' and citing an academic on nutrition (or whatever) being unable to beat a boxer as a reason...um, non-sequitor/ad hominem much?   And of course him doing the old, "Now I'VE been a scientist, and I've seen the horrible shit/fraud/etc they do.  It just can't compare to world experience!).  As if someone "with experience" has never done wrong too or lied too, right? Gimme a fucking break. If he was a scientist on my payroll, I'd fire and blacklist him & rightly so.

As far as I'm concerned, as with the shitty parents who say, "WELL, LET'S SEE THOSE SCIENTISTS HAVE KIDS AND THEN THEY'LL BE THINKING DIFFERENTLY!111"
(Fact:  Not all parents are good at it, so having kids =/= being an authority on that.), just because you have good genetics/drugs doesn't make you an authority on sports/body building/training etc.  In fact, if anything it makes you even WORSE at it because you never had difficulties because of your genetic blessings (and while Casey might not fall into that group, it's still a valid criticism as people who do fit that bill are vastly more likely to go into those fields over others).

I mean, yeah, as if "real world experience" (whatever the fuck that means) is better than empirical support and theory...I think I'll toss that one of "hur dur experience!11" into the bin along with "just a theory!" "Do you even lift, brah?" "That's just your opinion." "I guess we'll have to agree to disagree" and every single emotional appeal/fallacy all as a way of really saying: "I have no argument and just lost it badly, and so rather than pull up my big girl panties and admit it, I'm going to try and look like the better person when I'm actually that much worse for being sleazy about it.  I'm suck a fucktard PoS. lol"

[Travis Retriever]

While nowhere near as stupid as that meme pic above, I feel I simply *have* to post these two, if only for the sake of my own integrity:

http://www.furaffinity.net/full/4113487/
("Living wage for art?"--his T shirt)

http://www.furaffinity.net/full/2613400/

Don't get me wrong, I love TKDye's artwork and have been following his comic Newshounds II for weeks now (after reading all the way from 2007 beginning to catch up and then from the 1997 intro of Newshounds I to about 2002 ish.  Still working on that one). But goddamnit, like so many furries he leans to the left.  In these two, he goes on about that "living wage" nonsense. >.<*  He also seems to be mainly against corporations (rather than pro-government), but...I guess he never did check his dictionary for the part where a corporation is a legal entity created by government, and as such the nasty shit they do cannot, by definition, be part of a free market.

/sigh
And I found *this* in his photobucket album:



While he hasn't said a word about Obama's or Clinton's wars...War is war, and murder is murder, Tom.

[dallen68]

Okay, so I received a claim that being exposed to the feces of babies(like if you're a parent, sibling or nanny) that get the Salk vaccine (for polio) induces something called "vaccine induced paralytic polio(something)". Is there truth, or is it just bogosity?

[AnCap Dave]

Okay, so I received a claim that being exposed to the feces of babies(like if you're a parent, sibling or nanny) that get the Salk vaccine (for polio) induces something called "vaccine induced paralytic polio(something)". Is there truth, or is it just bogosity?

It sounds like a bunch of shit.



I regret nothing.

[BogosityForumUser]

Okay, so I received a claim that being exposed to the feces of babies(like if you're a parent, sibling or nanny) that get the Salk vaccine (for polio) induces something called "vaccine induced paralytic polio(something)". Is there truth, or is it just bogosity?

It sounds like a bunch of shit.



I regret nothing.

And yet, it is half true.  While the Salk vaccine (aka IPV) does not cause vaccine-derived poliovirus, the oral vaccine can.  That is why they try to vaccinate the entire community because the oral vaccine also vaccinates you from VDPV.  See http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/99/2/300.full  among other papers.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

[R.E.H.W.R.]

Wow, strawman and ad hominem in one picture.

[evensgrey]

Okay, so I received a claim that being exposed to the feces of babies(like if you're a parent, sibling or nanny) that get the Salk vaccine (for polio) induces something called "vaccine induced paralytic polio(something)". Is there truth, or is it just bogosity?

There is no problem with properly prepared Salk (that is, killed virus) vaccines causing the disease.  The virus is dead, after all.

The problem with killed-virus polio vaccines is that the protection they provide fades over time.

The solution to the fading protection is the attenuated live-virus vaccines.  In this case, 'attenuated' refers to the virulence of the virus, which is reduced by growing it in culture for several generations.

Unfortunately, this process cannot completely remove the disease-producing capacity of the virus, which will give a small proportion of those exposed who are not already protected debilitating polio.  As the virus is shed in the feces, this means anyone who is not protected who has contact with the feces of a child recently vaccinated with a live-virus vaccine (essentially anyone who acts as a caregiver) has a risk of contracting polio.

The solution, as has been known for decades, is the modern, two-stage vaccination: First with the Salk-type killed virus vaccine (which eliminates the risk of developing polio in the short term), then after a few weeks the live-virus vaccine (which will induce permanent immunity).

The people at risk in this scenario are those who are old enough to have gotten the Salk-type vaccine as children, but who never got a live-virus booster (as is now standard).  Due to how the virus spread, essentially everyone who is too old to have gotten a Salk-type vaccine as a child had it anyway, mostly without symptoms (which is why quarantines were largely ineffective in halting outbreaks, and sanitation didn't stop them because sanitation was what caused outbreaks in older children to begin with, before modern sanitation it almost always infected everyone as a baby and rarely caused complications).

[dallen68]

There is no problem with properly prepared Salk (that is, killed virus) vaccines causing the disease.  The virus is dead, after all.

The problem with killed-virus polio vaccines is that the protection they provide fades over time.

The solution to the fading protection is the attenuated live-virus vaccines.  In this case, 'attenuated' refers to the virulence of the virus, which is reduced by growing it in culture for several generations.

Unfortunately, this process cannot completely remove the disease-producing capacity of the virus, which will give a small proportion of those exposed who are not already protected debilitating polio.  As the virus is shed in the feces, this means anyone who is not protected who has contact with the feces of a child recently vaccinated with a live-virus vaccine (essentially anyone who acts as a caregiver) has a risk of contracting polio.

The solution, as has been known for decades, is the modern, two-stage vaccination: First with the Salk-type killed virus vaccine (which eliminates the risk of developing polio in the short term), then after a few weeks the live-virus vaccine (which will induce permanent immunity).

The people at risk in this scenario are those who are old enough to have gotten the Salk-type vaccine as children, but who never got a live-virus booster (as is now standard).  Due to how the virus spread, essentially everyone who is too old to have gotten a Salk-type vaccine as a child had it anyway, mostly without symptoms (which is why quarantines were largely ineffective in halting outbreaks, and sanitation didn't stop them because sanitation was what caused outbreaks in older children to begin with, before modern sanitation it almost always infected everyone as a baby and rarely caused complications).

Thanks