Freebase Dali

Prove it.

__________________

Surell

Second hand smoke.

__________________

Freebase Dali

That's what I want proof for.

Find a case where someone who never smoked developed a smoking-related disease.
And EPA statements are not proof.
I'm talking about actual documented cases.

__________________

Wifey Boozer

My brother's kindergarten teacher had lung cancer when she was 22. Never smoked. Second-hand smoke, her doc's said. They caught it early, operated, I assume she got some kind of treatment, because she's still kicking now at 30something. Her name is Ms. Durivage, she works at PS 18 in Troy, NY.

__________________


... Stalin had a FANTASTIC moustache.

Formerly known as the Prime Minister of Spain.

[backintheubbr]

Freebase Dali

I question the validity of that diagnosis unless the Kindergarten teacher had some hereditary pre-disposition for developing cancer after only 22 years of ocassionally being around someone who smoked... Especially when there are people who have been smoking for more than 50 years and are fine.

If secondhand smoke is to be proven an unquestionable danger, it must be proven in 100 percent of the cases where someone is exposed to it.

People who are susceptible to certain diseases cannot be used to prove a general accusation.
It's like saying that everyone who falls off an 8 foot roof and lands on their feet will break their legs, then using someone with Osteoporosis to demonstrate it.

I can guarantee you that a 22 year old who doesn't smoke and ends up with lung cancer already had something wrong to begin with. Otherwise, you wouldn't have many 22 year olds alive today, considering how many 22 year olds are exposed to second hand smoke.

__________________

sleepy jack

The end of the world has been predicted over and over and over again by primitive societies, and still the world goes on. The human mind, particularly one that doesn't understand the atoms or where the sun goes at night, is capable of irrational delusions. There is nothing relevant to be gleamed from this and there is no possible way it connects to the events that surround us today. You can't logically argue that it does nor can you empirically prove that a person has some sort of psychic insight into events which have yet to occur and are therefore, impossible to figure out.

The Mayans had no factual or logical reason for the end of the world ending in 2012. There's no argument other than "well they thought so" and as advanced as the Mayans may have been, they don't understand the world or its intricacies. They didn't have the technology or the knowledge.

Nostradamus was a charlatan. He made a bunch of vague statements and every time something historical happens someone pulls up one his vague statements and says "see! he was right!" An actual impressive prediction would have been Nostradamus stating "On September 11th, 2001, there will be a terrorist attack on a superpower." He has never predicted anything accurately.

As far as the need for people to be governed by something...your historical reasoning is ridiculous. I understand you idolize Stalin, a mass-murderer, but don't dismiss all Russian history just to place him on some government pedestal. Prior to him Russia wasn't a country of churchees who just happened to be ruled by Lenin and before him the Czars you know.

So, a scientist/astronomer/philosopher who's name you can't even name is the only source you have for their being a "mass extinction?" I'm not going to watch a two hour documentary to get the answers to my question. If you can't answer them I'm going to assume you don't have any answers to provide. Your second source is even funnier seeing as it not only doesn't answer my questions, but it was written by an astrologer, as opposed to an astronomer...which makes it even less credible as astrology itself has no scientific basis behind it whatsoever. Now as for your third source, YAHOO ANSWERS! If this were any paper, these citations would get you an F-. Now to answer my fourth question, you didn't even provide a source you just said "it was said" said by who? Nostradamus?

Poverty and starvation has existed in the best of times as well....what's going on in the world doesn't necessarily affect the status of the Western industrialized nations. American, England - we've all been able to exist happily despite what's going on in Africa. So citing starvation in underdeveloped nation as a point that the rest of the world will suffer is illogical.

Global warming isn't about the astronomy, its about the ozone layer and the sun (the Sun specifically, not the rest of the planets) and really the sun wouldn't be an issue if the ozone layer was fine because then the world wouldn't be heating up. You can connect all these events by tenuously sure, but it's nothing more than a tenuous connection which is essentially all your argument amounts to.

You realize you just completely destroyed your own argument here right? You believe Nostradamus and the Mayans have predicted what was going to happen in 2012, and know more than NASA, despite the fact that you believe you can't know more about a time period you don't live in then someone who lives in. NASA is existing now, NASA is studying now, and NASA will continue to do so in 2012. NASA understands modern Astronomy, the Mayans and Nostradamus don't. The Mayans are Nostradamus are dead and will continue to be dead by 2012.

As far as your comment about tax cuts not helping a poor person. That's just stupid. There is no way possible way to argue that a poor person getting a tax cut isn't going to help them. Being poor, means having little or no money. Logically increasing the amount of money you have (which is what a tax cut would do since they're paying LESS taxes) would make them less poor. This isn't a hard concept to wrap your head around.

__________________

Surell

Some people have stronger systems than others. Every body is different in some way. So second hand smoke could have hurt that 22 year old teacher more because her immunities weren't very well developed. Or, she could have had a cancer of some sort early on. There's still the chance that the second hand smoke aggravated the cancer.

__________________

sleepy jack

I think you still need to provide an actual case (that teacher one was anecdotal, not documented.)

__________________

Wifey Boozer

Less poor doesn't mean not poor.

Jesus is coming.

And on that note of exhausted sarcasm, running on 3 hours of sleep... I am done with this. Because I can't win, because Ethan is always right and always will be. There is no more to be argued, I've said my piece and as you've said, this is an internet forum. I don't feel the need to cite my paranoias, or prove them to you. Everything is theory, and no one can ever be truly correct about a theory, unless something clearly comes true in black and white.

And as far as idolizing Stalin... just because I'm reading an amusing historical satire about him? Because I enjoy history and seek more? Because I feel bad that he was beaten viciously as a child and raised by a violent alcoholic? I don't idolize Stalin, I just see what others don't in him.

__________________


... Stalin had a FANTASTIC moustache.

Formerly known as the Prime Minister of Spain.

[backintheubbr]

sleepy jack

Unless he hands them a $100,000 check yearly they're going to be poor until this recession is over and they can start moving towards a better life. By giving them a tax cut he's improving their situation and allowing them an increase in their quality of life. Would you rather he keep operating under the Bush tax policy and have them pick up the richest slack?

What's funny about you sarcastically mocking Christians for believing Jesus is coming back is your theories (more like unsubstantiated claims) are just as unrealistic and silly. Gravity is a theory. The world will end in 2012 is not.

Oh you're so new age.

__________________