>While there are any number of support teams down there along with the formal researchers, both on the ice and in the water, there aren't any gift shops.
"The buildings were renovated in 1996 by a team from the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) and since then opened to visitors during the Antarctic summer. See more about the restoration. This is made possible only by the proceeds of the small gift shop which all go towards renovation of historic sites in Antarctica. "
You are confusing citizenship with where one lives.
The scientists in Antarctica certainly do live in Antarctica during their months/years of work. It's not like you can fly home after an 8 hour shift to your respective home country, sleep, and go back.
And you're wrong about the closest country, too. Chile is closer.
> There IS a health risk factor to be concerned about as well even from well established vaccines, esp the 'live virus' ones.
There are two polio vaccines, a killed virus, and a live vaccine. If you got a shot, it was the killed virus. If you got an eyedropper in the mouth, it was the live weakened virus.
Show me a single peer reviewed paper showing how the live polio virus has risk factors besides allergy.
If you take a mile, in feet, and divide by 80, you get 66. This is the length of a Gunther's chain. If you further divide by 4, you get 16.5 feet, a rod.
If the chain in your hands is 16.5 feet, it will have 25 links.
>They are not anti-science because they disagree with one or two things in science.
Science is more than just a subject. It is an outlook. It is a way of life. A bush hunter, who reads tracks and spoor is more of a scientist than any of these anti-vaxxers, because he observes the environment and tests his hypothesese by being either successful or not successful.
To disbelieve the mountains of tested evidence in favor of some quack celebrity's opinion means that you do not believe in the scientific method. You do not believe in the fact that things can be tested and conclusions drawn. It is *anti-science.*
Your argument has devolved into an argument about semantics.
You have lost.
If you are anti-evolution, you are anti-science. If you are anti-cosomology, you are anti-science. If you are anti-medicine, you are anti-science.
Because each of these positions means that you have to reject the fundamental basis of science - hypothesis, experimentation, and comparing the results experimentation with your hypothesis and reality.
Anti-vaxxer "logic" is much like the "logic" of a religionist. Circular, with no testing and no comparison with reality. Much like your arguments here.
Well, apparently Montagnier has gone off the deep end into pseudoscience himself. He claims that his new group, Chronimed, has discovered in autistic children
âoeDNA sequences that emit, in certain conditions, electromagnetic waves. The analysis by molecular biology techniques allows us to identify these electromagnetic waves as coming from ⦠bacterial species.â
What the heck? In what seems to be a desperate effort to stay relevant, Montagnier is promoting wild theories with little scientific basis, and now he is taking advantage of vulnerable parents (see his appeal here) to push a therapy of long-term antibiotic treatment for autistic children.
This is truly a wacky theory. Montagnier hasnâ(TM)t been able to publish this in a proper journal, for a very good reason: itâ(TM)s nonsense. He claims that quantum field theory â" an area of physics in which he has no qualifications â" explains how electromagnetic waves emanating from DNA can explain not only autism, but also Alzheimerâ(TM)s disease, Parkinsonâ(TM)s disease, multiple sclerosis, Lyme disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. Montagnier makes these claims and more in a self-published paper that he posted on arXiv.
It's not a false dichotomy. The anti-vaccine movement is unscientific and anti-science. It rejects biology.
Immunology is a science. If you are anti-vaccine, you have to discount all of immunology as a science. Disclaiming the fact that vaccines work is as bad as disclaiming gravity.
Anti-vaccine, at its core, is anti-science. It is not ad-hominem.
People who deliberately spread misinformation so that kids die of whooping cough, measels, and other preventable diseases do kill kids as surely as holding a gun and pulling the trigger.
Because they do it not out of concern for children, but because of money, and backing away from fraud exposes the fraud. So they continue.
If you feel that this is out of line, feel free to foe me.
>It seems you missed the overall point here, which was "Cite your source, or shut up". We likely share a similar opinion on this particular subject. However, if you can't cite a valid source, if you can't point out solid, peer-reviewed research, then you're essentially acting on faith, just like the creationists, just like the anti-vax crowd.
You missed the point in that the anti-vaccine crowd has *no* peer reviewed study that says vaccines cause autism, and the one that was, was retracted, and Andrew Wakefield lost his license due to fraud.
> I realize, probably better than most, how frustrating it is to have the same argument time and time again, with so little success swaying the opinions of others, but if you just say "screw it, they're all morons", then you're just helping history to repeat itself.
No, they need to be riduculed and made embarrassed, because of the hundreds of thousands of studies on how and why vaccines work, they can't be arsed to read a single one of them. They are kooks, and the way you deal with kooks is to riducule and ostracize them until they come around.
> you're no better than the anti-science fundamentalists.
Might I direct you to the nearest university library and fuck off.
The doubt is unfounded. There is *no* science to back up the claim that thimerosol or vaccines cause autism.
When the Netherlands, and I believe Denmark banned Thimerosol, the supposed trigger of autism caused by vaccinations, did the incidence of autism fall?
No.
The claim that thimerosol and vaccines cause autism has been proven wrong empirically because of this, and the people who continue to push this dangerous meme kill kids.
No it isn't. Anti-vaxxers do not have science on their side. All the science is against them.
To call them anything but anti-science is whitewashing the situation.
> If you disagree with the anti-vax crowd, offer reasoned counterpoints to their arguments.
Ever since former Dr. Wakefield's fraudulent study, for which the Lancet retracted and he lost his license, any and all reasoned arguments hae fallen on deaf ears.
>If you just write them off as a bunch of idiotic kooks,
But they are. It's like arguing with creationists.
I'm gonna get all pedantic on your ass. So apologies ahead of time.
>implying that chains are obscure
No, no they're not. They have been used in all English speaking countries ever since that guy Gunther came up with the system in 1620... all the way up to the middle of the 20'th century. If you ever found yourself in a land evidence vault in any city/town hall in any English speaking country, you'd find chains and links in all sorts of deeds predating the invention of steel tape.
With a little bit of adjustment, making a chain a decimal fraction of a nautical mile instead of 80 chains being a statute mile, the meter would have never stood a chance. A nautical mile is 92 chains and 6+1/4 links. If Gunther had made his chain 1/100'th of a nautical mile, we'd still be using it today instead of abandoning it in the 1940s for decimal feet and meters on steel tape.
And btw, 1 acre is 10 square chains. 1 statute square mile is 640 acres, since a mile is 80 chains.
It's a nice self-consistent system that only needed a little bit of a tweak for it to be used on steel tape and other measurement technology. It was revolutionary when Gunther came up with it, since it suddenly made land surveying math standardized and *easier.*
There's a reason why nautical miles are used. They are roughly one minute of arc along a meridian. They are what you use when you are out on the ocean, because that's the only thing that truly makes sense when you've got a sphere divided up into degrees, minutes, and seconds.
Also
American here, I know the english system (both imperial and not) and metric system of measurments and navigational measurements (which are neither "english" nor "metric" but are SI anyway). Instead of being mad at people using terms you're not familiar with, how about you go look them up and educate yourself?
By the way, they broke 65 knots average speed. You do the math to figure out how fast that is.
Slashdot Mirror
>Just go up to any random person and tell them to guess how fast is 60 knots is compared to a car.
Around here, the answer would be "slightly faster" and they would be correct.
Stop being a twat.
--
BMO
>While there are any number of support teams down there along with the formal researchers, both on the ice and in the water, there aren't any gift shops.
You would be wrong about this too.
http://www.ukaht.org/peninsula/port-lockroy
"The buildings were renovated in 1996 by a team from the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) and since then opened to visitors during the Antarctic summer. See more about the restoration. This is made possible only by the proceeds of the small gift shop which all go towards renovation of historic sites in Antarctica. "
http://www.yogoyo.com/antarctica-travel-guide/palmer-station-photos/gift-shop-palmer-station-antarctica.htm
A photo of a Ukrainian gift shop in Antarctica:
http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/p/m/1f4d46/
There are other links, but those were some of the top few.
--
BMO
Mercola is a quack. He doesn't even believe that HIV causes AIDS.
And to call Andrew Wakefield a doctor is false. He is not a doctor. His license was pulled because of his fraud.
You, sir, are a fucking idiot.
--
BMO
>But they have no relevance to any of the readers.
Bullshit.
Not everyone is in a land-locked state, and when referring to marine events such as this, it only makes sense to use marine terms.
More than 50 percent live within an hour's drive of the coast.
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html
--
BMO
You are confusing citizenship with where one lives.
The scientists in Antarctica certainly do live in Antarctica during their months/years of work. It's not like you can fly home after an 8 hour shift to your respective home country, sleep, and go back.
And you're wrong about the closest country, too. Chile is closer.
--
BMO
I don't care what you think. You are a conspiracy nutbar.
--
BMO
I left out a word.
I said: "how the live polio virus"
Should say "how the live polio virus vaccine"
--
BMO
> There IS a health risk factor to be concerned about as well even from well established vaccines, esp the 'live virus' ones.
There are two polio vaccines, a killed virus, and a live vaccine. If you got a shot, it was the killed virus. If you got an eyedropper in the mouth, it was the live weakened virus.
Show me a single peer reviewed paper showing how the live polio virus has risk factors besides allergy.
--
BMO
No, a chain is 4 rods.
A rod is 16.5 feet.
If you take a mile, in feet, and divide by 80, you get 66. This is the length of a Gunther's chain. If you further divide by 4, you get 16.5 feet, a rod.
If the chain in your hands is 16.5 feet, it will have 25 links.
--
BMO
>My argument was always semantics.
Then you're a moron.
>They are not anti-science because they disagree with one or two things in science.
Science is more than just a subject. It is an outlook. It is a way of life. A bush hunter, who reads tracks and spoor is more of a scientist than any of these anti-vaxxers, because he observes the environment and tests his hypothesese by being either successful or not successful.
To disbelieve the mountains of tested evidence in favor of some quack celebrity's opinion means that you do not believe in the scientific method. You do not believe in the fact that things can be tested and conclusions drawn. It is *anti-science.*
So anyway, I'm done. You go back on ignore.
--
BMO
> Whether that is true or not, that vaccines cause damage in children, it doesn't matter
I said this before, and it has proven true again.
Your name fits you.
--
BMO
Your argument has devolved into an argument about semantics.
You have lost.
If you are anti-evolution, you are anti-science.
If you are anti-cosomology, you are anti-science.
If you are anti-medicine, you are anti-science.
Because each of these positions means that you have to reject the fundamental basis of science - hypothesis, experimentation, and comparing the results experimentation with your hypothesis and reality.
Anti-vaxxer "logic" is much like the "logic" of a religionist. Circular, with no testing and no comparison with reality. Much like your arguments here.
--
BMO
I suggest that the next time you get sick, that you definitely don't see a doctor, because big pharma is obviously out to get you.
--
BMO
Jenny McCarthy is only one of many. I'm using her as an example.
For instance, read this article in Forbes about a *nobel laureat* who has gone off the deep end.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/05/27/nobel-laureate-joins-anti-vaccination-crowd-at-autism-one/
It's not a false dichotomy. The anti-vaccine movement is unscientific and anti-science. It rejects biology.
--
BMO
>Anti-vaccine is not anti-science,
Immunology is a science. If you are anti-vaccine, you have to discount all of immunology as a science. Disclaiming the fact that vaccines work is as bad as disclaiming gravity.
Anti-vaccine, at its core, is anti-science. It is not ad-hominem.
You seem especially butthurt about this.
--
BMO
People who deliberately spread misinformation so that kids die of whooping cough, measels, and other preventable diseases do kill kids as surely as holding a gun and pulling the trigger.
Because they do it not out of concern for children, but because of money, and backing away from fraud exposes the fraud. So they continue.
If you feel that this is out of line, feel free to foe me.
--
BMO
Parent is a cunt that can't read.
>It seems you missed the overall point here, which was "Cite your source, or shut up". We likely share a similar opinion on this particular subject. However, if you can't cite a valid source, if you can't point out solid, peer-reviewed research, then you're essentially acting on faith, just like the creationists, just like the anti-vax crowd.
You missed the point in that the anti-vaccine crowd has *no* peer reviewed study that says vaccines cause autism, and the one that was, was retracted, and Andrew Wakefield lost his license due to fraud.
> I realize, probably better than most, how frustrating it is to have the same argument time and time again, with so little success swaying the opinions of others, but if you just say "screw it, they're all morons", then you're just helping history to repeat itself.
No, they need to be riduculed and made embarrassed, because of the hundreds of thousands of studies on how and why vaccines work, they can't be arsed to read a single one of them. They are kooks, and the way you deal with kooks is to riducule and ostracize them until they come around.
> you're no better than the anti-science fundamentalists.
Might I direct you to the nearest university library and fuck off.
--
BMO
We know that vaccines work.
They have worked ever since Jenner did his smallpox vaccine.
The science is indisputable.
I suggest you go to an anti-vaccine website and look around. Just pick one, and then go to a few more. It's not just anti-vaccine stuff.
Anti-vaxxers as a whole are anti-science.
And not only that, they are dangerous. They kill kids.
http://genome.fieldofscience.com/2012/07/anti-vaccination-propagandists-help.html
--
BMO
--
BMO
>That does not make them anti-science, it makes them skeptical about a claim.
When you take Jenny McCarthy's claim over a doctor's claim, you are anti-science.
There is being skeptical, and then there is just plain nuts.
Jenny McCarthy kills kids.
--
BMO
You, and others, don't get it.
The doubt is unfounded. There is *no* science to back up the claim that thimerosol or vaccines cause autism.
When the Netherlands, and I believe Denmark banned Thimerosol, the supposed trigger of autism caused by vaccinations, did the incidence of autism fall?
No.
The claim that thimerosol and vaccines cause autism has been proven wrong empirically because of this, and the people who continue to push this dangerous meme kill kids.
--
BMO
>It's a valid point.
No it isn't. Anti-vaxxers do not have science on their side. All the science is against them.
To call them anything but anti-science is whitewashing the situation.
> If you disagree with the anti-vax crowd, offer reasoned counterpoints to their arguments.
Ever since former Dr. Wakefield's fraudulent study, for which the Lancet retracted and he lost his license, any and all reasoned arguments hae fallen on deaf ears.
>If you just write them off as a bunch of idiotic kooks,
But they are. It's like arguing with creationists.
--
BMO
Anti-vaxxers are anti-science and kill kids.
People like former Dr. Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy have blood on their hands.
--
BMO
I'm gonna get all pedantic on your ass. So apologies ahead of time.
>implying that chains are obscure
No, no they're not. They have been used in all English speaking countries ever since that guy Gunther came up with the system in 1620 ... all the way up to the middle of the 20'th century. If you ever found yourself in a land evidence vault in any city/town hall in any English speaking country, you'd find chains and links in all sorts of deeds predating the invention of steel tape.
With a little bit of adjustment, making a chain a decimal fraction of a nautical mile instead of 80 chains being a statute mile, the meter would have never stood a chance. A nautical mile is 92 chains and 6+1/4 links. If Gunther had made his chain 1/100'th of a nautical mile, we'd still be using it today instead of abandoning it in the 1940s for decimal feet and meters on steel tape.
And btw, 1 acre is 10 square chains. 1 statute square mile is 640 acres, since a mile is 80 chains.
1 mile = 80 chains
1 chain = 100 links
1 acre = 10 square chains
It's a nice self-consistent system that only needed a little bit of a tweak for it to be used on steel tape and other measurement technology. It was revolutionary when Gunther came up with it, since it suddenly made land surveying math standardized and *easier.*
--
BMO
>I know you think using only knot
There's a reason why nautical miles are used. They are roughly one minute of arc along a meridian. They are what you use when you are out on the ocean, because that's the only thing that truly makes sense when you've got a sphere divided up into degrees, minutes, and seconds.
Also
American here, I know the english system (both imperial and not) and metric system of measurments and navigational measurements (which are neither "english" nor "metric" but are SI anyway). Instead of being mad at people using terms you're not familiar with, how about you go look them up and educate yourself?
By the way, they broke 65 knots average speed. You do the math to figure out how fast that is.
--
BMO