Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by THE Bigzoman View Post
    You're putting a stop gap in the scientific process.

    All ideas, whether right or wrong, begin as an outlier until the establishment gets blue in the face with facts.


    And before you knee jerk "anti vaxxer!", i'm arguing this in principle and not in support of an idea.
    Wakefield isn't just wrong though (wrongness should be tolerated), he committed academic fraud and engaged in unethical human experimentation.

  2. #22
    Stealthed Defender unbound's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    All that moves is easily heard in the void.
    Posts
    6,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Triggered Fridgekin View Post
    Source

    Seems like it's bringing out a ton of anti-vaxxers and is also catching heat for censorship.

    Thoughts?
    Most documentaries have some issues, but the anti-vax "documentary" was complete propaganda with almost no real facts in it at all. I think they were looking at it as being a conversation piece, but once it was found out that this "documentary" was nothing more than fan fiction, they understood that it would make Tribecca look really bad to essentially support the lie that it was a documentary.

    A good conversation has to be based on facts, not on a stream of lies and deception.

  3. #23
    There's no real sense in giving legitimacy to a falsified idea that kills people by preventable diseases.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    Having the authority to do a thing doesn't make it just, moral, or even correct.

  4. #24
    The Unstoppable Force THE Bigzoman's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Magnolia
    Posts
    20,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    This is simply not accurate.

    They did start out as outliers, but those views were never "discredited". No evaluation of their merits had been conducted, and when such evaluations were conducted, those ideas were found to bear merit, and were largely accepted. That initial skepticism and evaluation is not the same as the discreditation that Wakefield and his work received; they faced that same initial skepticism and the evaluation determined that not only did his arguments not have merit, Wakefield had deliberately and fraudulently manufactured and misrepresented the facts in question. That is where his work was discredited; when it was determined he was a liar and a fraud, which occurred after his work was evaluated for merit.

    It's not remotely comparable to new ideas that challenge preconceived assumptions, but bear actual merit when given their due consideration and evaluation.

    You are confusing an initial stance of skepticism, with an evaluation of an argument on its lack of merit and the discredit that results from determining that it was a deliberate fraud.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Wakefield isn't just wrong though (wrongness should be tolerated), he committed academic fraud and engaged in unethical human experimentation.
    Oh.

    I see the error of my application here. I was wrong.



    Carry on then.
    Last edited by THE Bigzoman; 2016-03-27 at 06:26 PM.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Triggered Fridgekin View Post
    Source

    Seems like it's bringing out a ton of anti-vaxxers and is also catching heat for censorship.

    Thoughts?
    I don't think this necessarily fits the definition of censorship. Censorship requires the change to be about objectionable material. It does come down to exactly why the final decision to pull it was made, but if it was pulled simply to not spread false information. Stopping the spread of false information (a documentary claiming a debunked study to still hold) isn't censorship. It would be like saying printing a retraction is censorship.

  6. #26
    Opinions are not shields. They do not protect you from criticism and they are not of equal value.

    Anti-vaxxers' opinions are neither factual and neither entitle them to an equal representation.


  7. #27
    I'm glad they pulled a movie made by that idiot scientist that started that damned anti vaxxer movement.

  8. #28
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    18,230
    It's a documentary, documentaries are build around facts. This has been disproved so many times it's downright unbelievable people still buy into this.

    Good on de niro to not allow misinformation to be spread. More people should do this.

  9. #29
    Elemental Lord Templar 331's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Waycross, GA
    Posts
    8,226
    It's good that he pulled it. ANY amount of credit this movement can get is bad.

  10. #30
    Thats good, a documentary based on not only false claims but the works of a doctor who commited academic fraud in order to get the results he wanted from his research shouldn't have his propaganda shown period.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by THE Bigzoman View Post
    Read what I write.

    Again, they all start out like that.

    Keynesian theory, started out as a "discredited outlier"

    The world being round, started out as a "discredited outlier"

    They were dismissed; laughed at by the scientific community, until shown otherwise with irrefutable real world examples or new knowledge.
    People knew the world was a sphere sometime around the 5th century. They even knew the exact circumference of the Earth by the middle ages.

    The Earth being flat was not a hotly debated thing as far as human record and evidence suggests. It's kind of a myth the whole, "the Earth is flat! Burn the heretic!" thing.

    Science is not vetted by art either.

  12. #32
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by GennGreymane View Post
    Censorship is an issue when its government sponsored.
    Censorship is an issue when people are being censored for nefarious purposes. I'm sure you are aware that the state can also give orders from behind the scenes.

  13. #33
    Banned GennGreymane's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wokeville mah dood
    Posts
    45,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffyman View Post
    Censorship is an issue when people are being censored for nefarious purposes. I'm sure you are aware that the state can also give orders from behind the scenes.
    I dont base my thoughts on conspiracy.

  14. #34
    Deleted
    You've just repeated the silly idea that only the state can be guilty of censorship.

    Quote Originally Posted by malletin View Post
    Thats good, a documentary based on not only false claims but the works of a doctor who commited academic fraud in order to get the results he wanted from his research shouldn't have his propaganda shown period.
    Which doesn't disprove concerns about safety either when you have a big business with vested interests.

  15. #35
    The first author/"doctor" of the authism argument was convinced of falsifying his tests and is banished from doing medicine for how many years again ? Was it 15-20 ? No point giving screen time to those kind of "documents".

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffyman View Post
    Which doesn't disprove concerns about safety either when you have a big business with vested interests.
    It does not. But you can't try to overthrow it with believes and falsified tests. That's retarded.

    My part in this story has been decided. And I will play it well.

  16. #36
    Dreadlord Axphism's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    909
    Quote Originally Posted by THE Bigzoman View Post
    I do.


    You're putting a stop gap in the scientific process.

    All ideas, whether right or wrong, begin as an outlier until the establishment gets blue in the face with facts.


    And before you knee jerk "anti vaxxer!", i'm arguing this in principle and not in support of an idea.
    Stopping that video from showing isn't going to stop gap scientific process. If it's legitimate it will continue being reviewed by scientists.

  17. #37
    Not really a "censorship thing" more of a ....discredited scientist trying to show a film about the subject matter he was discredited for...then a private film festival saying," Wait...you are who now? Oh, your a discredited "loon"?...yeah, here is your film back...we are NOT showing that BS here...try youtube." thing

  18. #38
    Good, we dont need more shit advertising that idiotic movement. I can imagine them screaming now that De Niro is payed by big pharma and similar crap

  19. #39
    Deleted
    The film-maker has been discredited and committed fraud; he is a disgraced doctor. The anti-vaxxer "movement" he helped create is extremely harmful to public health. In this instance, I am perfectly OK with this film festival not giving them screentime. They can release it on the internet or hold their own screening instead.

    This isn't just a matter of opinion or disagreement. There's no discussion or exchange of ideas to be had here, the man is simply a liar.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew...st_allegations
    Last edited by mmoc4359933d3d; 2016-03-27 at 07:41 PM.

  20. #40
    Herald of the Titans GodlyBob's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,713
    Quote Originally Posted by THE Bigzoman View Post
    Read what I write.

    Again, they all start out like that.

    Keynesian theory, started out as a "discredited outlier"

    The world being round, started out as a "discredited outlier"

    They were dismissed; laughed at by the scientific community, until shown otherwise with irrefutable real world examples or new knowledge.
    Not to nit pick, but the world being round was a pretty well established thing for more than 2000 years. The Greeks proved it mathematically and that knowledge was never actually "lost".

    I agree with you on principal though. No matter how much I may dislike what you say, I'll defend your right to say it.

    In this case though, the festival does have the right to what they show. It's kind of like if a western movie festival didn't want to screen the ridiculous 9...or whatever that last Adam Sandler movie was. They're not being antisemetic, they're just choosing to not show a bad film. The anti vaccine thing was made, so the right to free speech was not infringed upon, but it just looks like not a lot of people are interested in hearing what an asshat who turned his rival (and late) patent for a measles vaccine into one of the greatest harmful and persisting myth regarding modern medicine.
    /\ Was this sarcasm? Are you sure?
    || Read it again, I'll wait.
    || The results may surprise you.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •