Advanced Maternal Age Associated with AIS?

[rohrer01]

Come on guys, knock it off already! This isn't a political forum. Let's just stay on the subject of scoliosis research shall we?

[Ballet Mom]

The idea that I would want to delete is it part and parcel of your misunderstanding of these issues.

Not all. The Third Reich was not leftist. They were fascistic which is another word for Catholic right wing.

All such ideologies, left and right, failed. The totalitarians on the right, however, persist especially in the US and are arguably more pervasive and more dangerous especially going forward.

They didn't call it the National Socialist German Workers' Party for nothing. They went after the owners of the means of production i.e. capitalism.

The totalitarian ideologies failed after Western Civilization put a stop to it at great cost and death. The despised right is who protects the ignorant here in the US from being bombed into oblivion by your beloved socialists who murdered over 100 million poor souls in their unobtainable quest for utopia. Where do you think your right to free speech comes from or any other of your rights? They could disappear tomorrow although I doubt you'd miss them.

[Pooka1]

I'm going to respond to this comment only so you can't delete it. Just so you know, all the totalitarian ideologies of the last century were leftist socialist.

The idea that I would want to delete is it part and parcel of your misunderstanding of these issues.

Not all. The Third Reich was not leftist. They were fascistic which is another word for Catholic right wing.

All such ideologies, left and right, failed. The totalitarians on the right, however, persist especially in the US and are arguably more pervasive and more dangerous especially going forward.

[Ballet Mom]

Emphasis added...



Social psychologists? There is no connection between these guys and the guys in the hard sciences like Dr. McIntire and myself. Sociology is not a science and Psychology is arguably not a science. Anthropology is also mentioned. Physical anthropology is a hard science but cultural anthropology probably is not.

By the way, Haidt did a piece a while back trying to explain why people vote Republican as against their own interest. It is such a strange phenomenon that it needed some explanation. I think the answer is much simpler than he surmises... I think it's because they are totalitarians on social issues and will sacrifice their interests in economic areas in order to shove their totalitarian social views down the throats of innocent, rational free thinkers.

ETA: Here is the Haidt piece with comments from others (link at bottom) in the reality club...
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haid...t08_index.html

I'm going to respond to this comment only so you can't delete it. Just so you know, all the totalitarian ideologies of the last century were leftist socialist.

[Pooka1]

Just so no one thinks I was directing my comment to anyone in particular:


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/sc...=3&ref=science

Emphasis added...

Dr. Haidt argued that social psychologists are a “tribal-moral community” united by “sacred values” that hinder research and damage their credibility — and blind them to the hostile climate they’ve created for non-liberals.

Social psychologists? There is no connection between these guys and the guys in the hard sciences like Dr. McIntire and myself. Sociology is not a science and Psychology is arguably not a science. Anthropology is also mentioned. Physical anthropology is a hard science but cultural anthropology probably is not.

By the way, Haidt did a piece a while back trying to explain why people vote Republican as against their own interest. It is such a strange phenomenon that it needed some explanation. I think the answer is much simpler than he surmises... I think it's because they are totalitarians on social issues and will sacrifice their interests in economic areas in order to shove their totalitarian social views down the throats of innocent, rational free thinkers.

ETA: Here is the Haidt piece with comments from others (link at bottom) in the reality club...
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haid...t08_index.html

[Ballet Mom]

Just so no one thinks I was directing my comment to anyone in particular:


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/sc...=3&ref=science

[Pooka1]

Evidence for a bottleneck in human population...

... several tens of thousands of years ago. The other paper said circa 50K years ago and this one says circa 60K years ago. That's pretty close in this game.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidenc...ecent_creation

Human Y-chromosomal ancestry

The Y-chromosome, unlike most DNA, is inherited only from the father, which means that all DNA on the human Y chromosome comes from a single person. This does not mean that there was only one person alive at that time, but that a single man's Y-chromosomal DNA has out-competed the other strains and is now - not taking into account smaller and less drastic mutations - the only one left. Because the only factor affecting the makeup of the DNA on the chromosome is mutation, measuring mutation rates and extrapolating them backwards can tell you when this man lived. Calculations by the geneticist Spencer Wells have shown that this man lived around 60,000 years ago.[14]

[Elisa]

Hey Big Blue. At the top left of the screen, under Settings, and then under Edit Ignore list in the left toolbar.

I don't mind chit chat. It's when I'm in the middle of a conversation and suddenly . . . whoosh . . . a chair goes flying past my head and I'm in the middle of Jerry Springer set.

Ohhh, I want Springer Beads! *lifts top* LOL.

[hdugger]

How do I implement ignore button? It appears I could benefit from this feature.

Hey Big Blue. At the top left of the screen, under Settings, and then under Edit Ignore list in the left toolbar.

I don't mind chit chat. It's when I'm in the middle of a conversation and suddenly . . . whoosh . . . a chair goes flying past my head and I'm in the middle of Jerry Springer set.

[Pooka1]

"Not even wrong" and "wronger than wrong"

Here is one way to understand how scientists can produce wrong answers but science is still the only game in town...

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ger-than-wrong

Some excerpts...

Achieving almost canonical status as the ne plus ultra put-down is theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli's reported harsh critique of a paper: "This isn't right. It's not even wrong." I call this Pauli's proverb.

Asimov's axiom holds that science is cumulative and progressive, building on the mistakes of the past, and that even though scientists are often wrong, their wrongness attenuates with continued data collection and theory building.

The view that all wrong theories are equal implies that no theory is better than any other. This is the theory of the "strong" social construction of science, which holds that science is inextricably bound to the social, political, economic, religious and ideological predilections of a culture, particularly of those individuals in power. Scientists are knowledge capitalists who produce scientific papers that report the results of experiments conducted to test (and usually support) the hegemonic theories that reinforce the status quo.

Such egregious examples, however, do not negate the extraordinary ability of science to elucidate the natural and social worlds. Reality exists, and science is the best tool yet employed to discover and describe that reality. The theory of evolution, even though it is the subject of vigorous debates about the tempo and mode of life's history, is vastly superior to the theory of creation, which is not even wrong (in Pauli's sense). As evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins observed on this dispute: "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong."

Simply wrong. When people thought that science was unbiased and unbound by culture, they were simply wrong. On the other hand, when people thought that science was completely socially constructed, they were simply wrong. But if you believe that thinking science is unbiased is just as wrong as thinking that science is socially constructed, then your view is not even wronger than wrong.

[Pooka1]

How do I implement ignore button? It appears I could benefit from this feature.

Thanks Dingo! I like reading about solutions and less about random chit chat...lol although it can be entertaining I have too much to do then read thru the muddle.

Click on "Settings" on the upper right and then look at the lower and find "edit ignore list" or something like that.

Then in the box type, "pooka1"

[Bigbluefrog]

I can tell from the quotes that Pooka1 made the claim that the rate of Scoliosis is the same throughout the world and the incidence doesn't fluctuate over time? 8-)

I'm still waiting for somebody to produce the study that supports that contention.

I've got a feeling that Pooka1 is still making things up at random which is one reason she's still on my ignore list.

How do I implement ignore button? It appears I could benefit from this feature.

Thanks Dingo! I like reading about solutions and less about random chit chat...lol although it can be entertaining I have too much to do then read thru the muddle.

[Ballet Mom]

This has nothing to do with the point I was making. How does my current research, that I posted before, pushing forward a leftist agenda?

You know, I really wasn't directing my comment at you personally.

[hdugger]

Wow, the flu vaccine might trigger Narcolepsy? Scientists have long suspected that damage from a virus is the trigger for Narcolepsy. I wonder if this suggests that the flu virus is what they've been looking for.

So, I haven't really focussed on the germ theory before - more interested in figuring out progression then trigger - but how do they begin to suspect that a virus is the trigger for a disorder? Is there something they can detect in the body itself? Or is it just the regular epidemiological detective work?

[skevimc]

How do you plan on making sure her curve stays as small as possible when they've decided to make their cost savings by having you come back in a year's time? As we all know, there can be dramatic increases in curves during that time, and any increase is not desired.

I'm not going to carry this hypothetical situation out any further. It's pointless. You asked if it was ok, and I gave you my initial thoughts.

Doctors don't put kids in braces now unless they're progressive curves. That is a high-risk group. Just because the Scoliscore folks don't think that a larger curve is a problem to them because they've seen worse, it does matter to most other people. It should be up to the patient and their family to see if they're willing to go through bracing and all it entails.

And they've identified those that progress as the high-risk pool. Not everyone who get scoliosis. If the scoliscore results stand up to real time clinical scrutiny, then it's time to reassess. Again, this doesn't mean no treatment for the lower-risk group.

Unfortunately, the scientists are right here on the web, so we can read exactly what they're saying and thinking verbatim, and they're not just associated with global warming. It's not intermediated by the press. And a whole lot of it is not very attractive. Why is it okay for your Stanford scientists to attack the opposition as "deniers" as if they're Nazis? There are plenty of reasons for them not to be right in their science and yet they can use leftist tactics to attack their opposition. Have you heard of Alinsky?


I'm sorry if people who are not involved with it feel offended, but lots of people don't even recognize what they are doing when coming from a default viewpoint. And the universities definitely have a default viewpoint, and it is not mainstream.

This has nothing to do with the point I was making. How does my current research, that I posted before, pushing forward a leftist agenda?

It's always easier for everyone when someone rolls over and puts up with the bullying, isn't it? Never does anyone doing the bullying get asked to stop it. It's amazing.

It's not 'easier' for me. I don't care what you do and usually skip over the religious stuff. My faith is my own and generally, I won't let anyone on a chat board bother me about it. You evidently take a different tack.