Reply With Quote
You realize that the signatories are the "undersigned representatives of a majority (eleven) of EPA’s employee unions"?
Would you like to deal with all members of all 11 unions?
Parker claims an extreme skepticism... except in the sources he touts.
You realize that the signatories are the "undersigned representatives of a majority (eleven) of EPA’s employee unions"?
Would you like to deal with all members of all 11 unions?
and yet you would assert that all day in this forum. Youre life view must be ed like mine.
Now if you take it there THATS a strawman.
you realize the le of the article you cited to disprove the validity of your assertion was led:right?Why We Have Not Changed Our Minds about the
Safety and Efficacy of Water Fluoridation:
A Response to John Colquhoun
you realize you cited one for you, two for meright?Ernest Newbrun, D.M.D., Ph.D.
Herschel Horowitz, D.D.S., M.P.H
fish in a barrel.
I realize that but in that link, the union referenced a source that I read up on and found it to be easily debunked.
You also said federal scientists are divided on it.
I'd like to know what scientist exactly has a problem with fluoridated water.
I know it's a tough task for you to back up your claims, but you should it give a try. Otherwise, it's just us thinking you are ass talking again.
Thanks for verifying you have no clue what strawman means.
if we cant win on the argument at hand, lets shift the argument so that I can claim points.
If you are losing on fluoride, lets attack credibility of the opponent on a seperate argument, but insinuate that the two are somehow tied.
you didn't read the article and the sources they provide.
right.
I cited one quack author and two legitimate authors.
right.
imminent jpeg coming.
so now you want me to tell you why these professionals have reached the conclusion that fluoridation is bad?
Well, I do know, but why cant you just assume that professionals in the field know more than us?
Is it because their views dont comport with your own, and you want to stay delusional on this issue?
what exactly is your argument?
I'm not sure you even know what your argument really is.
I'm not personally attacking the credibility of the opponent.If you are losing on fluoride, lets attack credibility of the opponent on a seperate argument, but insinuate that the two are somehow tied.
Legitimate sources have done that already in very convincing fashion.
There's a reason why we have experts: to determine the truth of things. Do they get it wrong sometimes? Of course. But if you're going to say that the experts are wrong, you have to provide PROOF that shows they are wrong. You can't just take a competing claim and elevate it to the same stature.
Let me make the point again for you. I have never been to Africa, so I don't know personally what animals live there. I have two friends, one who tells me that elephants live in Africa, and one that says penguins live in Africa.
Should I take both their claims as seriously? Should I discount their claims until I'm able to verify personally? Tell me what YOU think I should do in such a situation.
no, just a name of a scientist that is against it please.
Are the words I am typing that hard to understand.
"Name" "Scientist" "Please"
I absolutely believe the word of real professionals in the field.Well, I do know, but why cant you just assume that professionals in the field know more than us?
Why do you not believe the word of the surgeon general?
It's because the views of the "professionals" you have cited have been found to be lacking in real evidence.Is it because their views dont comport with your own, and you want to stay delusional on this issue?
Please continue to stay ignorant on this issue.
You did that for me.
These two guys are against. The two guys you cited. You supported my contention. Do you need me to explain further?
you realize you cited one for you, two for me
Ernest Newbrun, D.M.D., Ph.D.
Herschel Horowitz, D.D.S., M.P.H
right?
no one is arguing that the fluoride is harmful within limits. EVERYONE IS ARGUING that the whole practice is unnecessary. Or did you not get that memo?
empty house. naysayers that went toe to toe for hours scatter like dogs when the same info that has been there all along is regurgitated.
you guys are classic.
Let me make the point again for you. I have never been to Africa, so I don't know personally what animals live there. I have two friends, one who tells me that elephants live in Africa, and one that says penguins live in Africa.
Should I take both their claims as seriously? Should I discount their claims until I'm able to verify personally? Tell me what YOU think I should do in such a situation.
One intersects with tons of other data you already have knowledge of (penguins live in cold climate, africa doesnt have a cold climate)
One also intersects with stuff youve been exposed to since childhood (african elephants are real)
Fluoride doesnt lend itself to such "common sense". This cir stance deals with ingesting fluoride, as distinguished from topical application. no knowledge is available without scientific research. Same with Earth is round.
and yet the peanut gallery doesnt believe the scientific unions. Do they believe that the earth is round?
go figure.
These guys are for, idiot.Why We Have Not Changed Our Minds about the
Safety and Efficacy of Water Fluoridation
Ernest Newbrun, D.M.D., Ph.D.
Herschel Horowitz, D.D.S., M.P.H.
http://www.dentalwatch.org/fl/newbrun.html
RIF failure yet again.
NOBODY worth note is arguing that it is unnecessary.
I've been asking for the name of the scientist that provided you with such a memo.
Your constant failure to provide just one name does nothing but further confirm that you are nothing more than an asstalker.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
