Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 49
46
Techmology and Scientism / Suppressed Knolwedge: Smoking PREVENTS Cancer!
« on: December 13, 2016, 05:18:01 pm »
https://www.sott.net/article/226999-Smoking

For too long the Lung-cuck has denied man his birthright of an organically formed protective mucus layer guarding against carcinogens. Now the truth comes out.

Quote
Every year, thousands of medical doctors and other members of the "Anti-Smoking Inquisition" spend billions of dollars perpetuating what has unquestionably become the most misleading though successful social engineering scam in history. With the encouragement of most western governments, these Orwellian lobbyists pursue smokers with a fanatical zeal that completely overshadows the ridiculous American alcohol prohibition debacle, which started in 1919 and lasted until 1933.

Nowadays we look back on American prohibition with justifiable astonishment. Is it really true that an entire nation allowed itself to be denied a beer or scotch by a tiny group of tambourine-bashing fanatics? Sadly, yes it is, despite a total lack of evidence that alcohol causes any harm to humans, unless consumed in truly astronomical quantities.

Alas, the safety of alcohol was of no interest to the tambourine-bashers, for whom control over others was the one and only true goal. Americans were visibly "sinning" by enjoying themselves having a few alcoholic drinks, and the puritans interceded on behalf of God to make them all feel miserable again.

Although there is no direct link between alcohol and tobacco, the history of American prohibition is important, because it helps us understand how a tiny number of zealots managed to control the behavior and lives of tens of millions of people. Nowadays exactly the same thing is happening to smokers, though this time it is at the hands of government zealots and ignorant medical practitioners rather than tambourine-bashing religious fanatics.

Certain governments know that their past actions are directly responsible for causing most of the lung and skin cancers in the world today, so they go to extreme lengths in trying to deflect responsibility and thus financial liability away from themselves, and onto harmless organic tobacco instead. As we will find later in the report, humble organic tobacco has never hurt anyone, and in certain ways can justifiably claim to provide startling health protection.

Not all governments around the world share the same problem. Japan and Greece have the highest numbers of adult cigarette smokers in the world, but the lowest incidence of lung cancer. In direct contrast to this, America, Australia, Russia, and some South Pacific island groups have the lowest numbers of adult cigarette smokers in the world, but the highest incidence of lung cancer. This is clue number-one in unraveling the absurd but entrenched western medical lie that "smoking causes lung cancer."

The first European contact with tobacco was in 1492, when Columbus and fellow explorer Rodriguo de Jerez saw natives smoking in Cuba. That very same day, de Jerez took his first puff and found it very relaxing, just as the locals had assured him it would be. This was an important occasion, because Rodriguo de Jerez discovered what the Cubans and native Americans had known for many centuries: that cigar and cigarette smoking is not only relaxing, it also cures coughs and other minor ailments. When he returned home, Rodriguo de Jerez proudly lit a cigar in the street, and was promptly arrested and imprisoned for three years by the horrified Spanish Inquisition. De Jerez thus became the first victim of the anti-smoking lobbies.

In less than a century, smoking became a much enjoyed and accepted social habit throughout Europe, with thousands of tons of tobacco being imported from the colonies to meet the increasing demand. A growing number of writers praised tobacco as a universal remedy for mankind's ills. By the early 20th Century almost one in every two people smoked, but the incidence of lung cancer remained so low that it was almost immeasurable. Then something extraordinary happened on July 16, 1945: a terrifying cataclysmic event that would eventually cause western governments to distort the perception of smoking forever. As K. Greisen recalls:
"When the intensity of the light had diminished, I put away the glass and looked toward the tower directly. At about this time I noticed a blue color surrounding the smoke cloud. Then someone shouted that we should observe the shock wave travelling along the ground. The appearance of this was a brightly lighted circular area, near the ground, slowly spreading out towards us. The color was yellow.

"The permanence of the smoke cloud was one thing that surprised me. After the first rapid explosion, the lower part of the cloud seemed to assume a fixed shape and to remain hanging motionless in the air. The upper part meanwhile continued to rise, so that after a few minutes it was at least five miles high. It slowly assumed a zigzag shape because of the changing wind velocity at different altitudes. The smoke had pierced a cloud early in its ascent, and seemed to be completely unaffected by the cloud."

This was the notorious "Trinity Test", the first dirty nuclear weapon to be detonated in the atmosphere. A six-kilogram sphere of plutonium, compressed to supercriticality by explosive lenses, Trinity exploded over New Mexico with a force equal to approximately 20,000 tons of TNT. Within seconds, billions of deadly radioactive particles were sucked into the atmosphere to an altitude of six miles, where high-speed jet streams could circulate them far and wide.

The American Government knew about the radiation in advance, was well aware of its lethal effects on humans, but bluntly ordered the test with a complete disregard for health and welfare. In law, this was culpable gross negligence, but the American Government did not care. Sooner or later, one way or the other, they would find another culprit for any long-term effects suffered by Americans and other citizens in local and more remote areas.

If a single microscopic radioactive fallout particle lands on your skin at the beach, you get skin cancer. Inhale a single particle of the same lethal muck, and death from lung cancer becomes inevitable, unless you happen to be an exceptionally lucky cigarette smoker. The solid microscopic radioactive particle buries itself deep in the lung tissue, completely overwhelms the body's limited reserves of vitamin B17, and causes rampant uncontrollable cell multiplication.

How can we be absolutely sure that radioactive fallout particles really cause lung cancer every time a subject is internally exposed? For real scientists, as opposed to medical quacks and government propagandists, this is not a problem. For any theory to be accepted scientifically, it must first be proven in accordance with rigorous requirements universally agreed by scientists. First the suspect radioactive agent must be isolated, then used in properly controlled laboratory experiments to produce the claimed result, i.e. lung cancer in mammals.

Scientists have ruthlessly sacrificed tens of thousands of mice and rats in this way over the years, deliberately subjecting their lungs to radioactive matter. The documented scientific results of these various experiments are identical. Every mouse or rat obediently contracts lung cancer, and every mouse or rat then dies. Theory has thus been converted to hard scientific fact under tightly controlled laboratory conditions. The suspect agent [radioactive matter] caused the claimed result [lung cancer] when inhaled by mammals.

The overall magnitude of lung cancer risk to humans from atmospheric radioactive fallout cannot be overstated. Before Russia, Britain and America outlawed atmospheric testing on August 5, 1963, more than 4,200 kilograms of plutonium had been discharged into the atmosphere. Because we know that less than one microgram [millionth of a single gram] of inhaled plutonium causes terminal lung cancer in a human, we therefore know that your friendly government has lofted 4,200,000,000 [4.2 Billion] lethal doses into the atmosphere, with particle radioactive half-life a minimum of 50,000 years. Frightening? Unfortunately it gets worse.

Quote
All mice and rats are used one-time-only in a specific experiment, and then destroyed. In this way researchers ensure that the results of whatever substance they are testing cannot be accidentally "contaminated" by the real or imagined effects of another substance. Then one day as if by magic, a few thousand mice from the smoking experiment "accidentally" found their way into the radioactive particle experiment, which in the past had killed every single one of its unfortunate test subjects. But this time, completely against the odds, sixty percent of the smoking mice survived exposure to the radioactive particles. The only variable was their prior exposure to copious quantities of tobacco smoke.

Government pressure was immediately brought to bear and the facts suppressed, but this did not completely silence the real scientists. Tongue-in-cheek perhaps, Professor Schrauzer, President of the International Association of Bio-inorganic Chemists, testified before a U.S. congressional committee in 1982 that it had long been well known to scientists that certain constituents of tobacco smoke act as anti-carcinogens (anti-cancer agents) in test animals. He continued that when known carcinogens (cancer-causing substances) are applied to the animals, the application of constituents of cigarette smoke counter them.

Nor did Professor Schrauzer stop there. He further testified on oath to the committee that "no ingredient of cigarette smoke has been shown to cause human lung cancer", adding that "no-one has been able to produce lung cancer in laboratory animals from smoking." It was a neat answer to a rather perplexing problem. If government blocks publication of your scientific paper, take the alternate route and put the essential facts on the written congressional record!

Predictably, this hard truth drove the government and quasi-medical "researchers" into a frenzy of rage. By 1982 they had actually started to believe their own ridiculous propaganda, and were not to be silenced by eminent members of the scientific establishment. Quite suddenly they switched the blame to other "secret" ingredients put into cigarettes by the tobacco companies. "Yes, that must be it!" they clamored eagerly, until a handful of scientists got on the phone and pointed out that these same "secret" ingredients had been included in the mice experiments, and had therefore also been proved incapable of causing lung cancer.

Quote
Many people ask exactly how it is that those smoking mice were protected from deadly radioactive particles, and even more are asking why real figures nowadays are showing far more non-smokers dying from lung cancer than smokers. Professor Sterling of the Simon Fraser University in Canada is perhaps closest to the truth, where he uses research papers to reason that smoking promotes the formation of a thin mucous layer in the lungs, "which forms a protective layer stopping any cancer-carrying particles from entering the lung tissue."

This is probably as close as we can get to the truth at present, and it does make perfect scientific sense. Deadly radioactive particles inhaled by a smoker would initially be trapped by the mucous layer, and then be ejected from the body before they could enter the tissue.

All of this may be a bit depressing for non-smokers, but there are probably one or two things you can do to minimize the risks as far as possible. Rather than shy away from smokers in your local pub or club, get as close as you can and breathe in their expensive second-hand smoke. Go on, don't be shy, suck in a few giant breaths. Or perhaps you could smoke one cigarette or small cigar after each meal, just three a day to build up a thin boundary mucous layer. If you cannot or will not do either of the above, consider phoning Michael Jackson to ask for a spare surgical mask!

47
Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: December 13, 2016, 04:11:09 pm »
Why does he respond to anything I post? Does he think I'm reading his posts? I only see them when people quote him, which I really don't understand why people bother to do. He doesn't have anything to say.

Of course you dont sweatheart. Thats why you post consistently in every one of my threads.

48
Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: December 13, 2016, 04:02:07 pm »
I'm reading The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris; she co-wrote Mistakes were made (but not by me) with Aronsen, and it was really good, so I picked this up and so far it is also very good. Basically, at this point, she is just talking about all the research that has been conducted in an attempt to find concrete neurobiological differences between men and women, and how that research has been interpreted.

LOL didnt Mistakes Were Made push False Memory Syndrome?

Yes yes Ron. You be the cleverest.

Also, it did the exact opposite.

Why does he respond to anything I post? Does he think I'm reading his posts? I only see them when people quote him, which I really don't understand why people bother to do. He doesn't have anything to say.

WOW SON,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            


 U BUT ANGREY I hav neer seen sum1 so pooper peeved u ned to tak chilpil and stop raping your ownasswit with husband you are the gayest fgt in fgtopia, no u r the mayor lol u troled so fukin hard u wan sum ice for the ASSBURN? U cry tears of blud and cum ur mom's penis out your angry butthole gb2 pussybaby land where u git own3d by dick "omg i love sukin dicks and crying to link park"-You ur butt is evaporating cum bcuz it is steaming wit angr SUMBUDY IS ANALLY ANGUISHED its lik u r seeding wit raeg

Also thats interesting. I might have to pick that book up since its so rare for mainstream scientists to call out False Memory creeps on their bullshit. Especially related to sacred cows of the "it couldnt happen here" consensus like McMartin.

49
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Generic split from AI/political threads
« on: December 13, 2016, 03:57:38 pm »
The stuff that was clogging up the sink on Ron never getting his 'Converted a Discordian forum' merit badge.

WOW SON,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            


 U BUT ANGREY I hav neer seen sum1 so pooper peeved u ned to tak chilpil and stop raping your ownasswit with husband you are the gayest fgt in fgtopia, no u r the mayor lol u troled so fukin hard u wan sum ice for the ASSBURN? U cry tears of blud and cum ur mom's penis out your angry butthole gb2 pussybaby land where u git own3d by dick "omg i love sukin dicks and crying to link park"-You ur butt is evaporating cum bcuz it is steaming wit angr SUMBUDY IS ANALLY ANGUISHED its lik u r seeding wit raeg

Also I dont need to convert discordians to anything. The Alt-Right already has a large amount of Discordians.

50
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 13, 2016, 03:54:04 pm »
Your brain might be wired wrong.

The correct term is NeuroAtypical and I would appreciate it if you would keep the ableism to a minimum.

Wrong.

It ableist and bigoted to attempt to use my neurological abnormalities to discredit my beliefs.

51
Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: December 13, 2016, 07:24:19 am »
I'm reading The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris; she co-wrote Mistakes were made (but not by me) with Aronsen, and it was really good, so I picked this up and so far it is also very good. Basically, at this point, she is just talking about all the research that has been conducted in an attempt to find concrete neurobiological differences between men and women, and how that research has been interpreted.

LOL didnt Mistakes Were Made push False Memory Syndrome?

52
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 13, 2016, 06:24:51 am »
Your brain might be wired wrong.

The correct term is NeuroAtypical and I would appreciate it if you would keep the ableism to a minimum.

53
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 13, 2016, 06:18:54 am »
Could I be more eloquent, sure.

YOU SUCK ASS


WOW SON,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            


 U BUT ANGREY I hav neer seen sum1 so pooper peeved u ned to tak chilpil and stop raping your ownasswit with husband you are the gayest fgt in fgtopia, no u r the mayor lol u troled so fukin hard u wan sum ice for the ASSBURN? U cry tears of blud and cum ur mom's penis out your angry butthole gb2 pussybaby land where u git own3d by dick "omg i love sukin dicks and crying to link park"-You ur butt is evaporating cum bcuz it is steaming wit angr SUMBUDY IS ANALLY ANGUISHED its lik u r seeding wit raeg

54
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 13, 2016, 05:58:17 am »
A world where the person who gets the most votes wins the election is

Just realized Ive had this convo like 4 times.

Two things:

1) Would this reform extend to the senate as well? Because its the same principle and few people ever bitch about it.

2) This would have been no guarantee against a Trump victory this year and if it ever happens would not guarantee a lack of future victories. As he himself explained, he built his campaign around scoring electoral votes because thats what it takes to win. If the election was based on the popular vote he would have altered his strategy for that.

Also, think about this for a moment. California and New York being the big contendors seems nice, but the other two heavy weights would be Texas and Florida. I know you think Trump is bad, but do you really really want every Republican candidate from this point on basing his platform on winning the Texan vote out of necessity?

   Which brings us to the point of the EC. America isnt a homogeneous nation, it has a lot of different interests and cultures. Without the EC (and the Senate) America would be run by Texas, Florida, New York and California with the rest of us all just along for the ride. Do you honestly want this? Just because Clinton won in some alternate reality what if fanfiction where Article II vanished on November 7th?

55
The TPP isn't about free trade, IIRC

YDNRC

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32498715

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpLQzeCoNnA


Why should their vote count any more than mine!?

Because otherwise their vote would not count at all, and depending on where you currently live yours could not count at all either.

56
HOW is the internet capable of being so boring today? I swear, I was able to find more interesting things on the internet when there was less STUFF on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDUHe1Sxyqk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBCYXe5ufas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgnH34e5SAo

57
Aneristic Illusions / Re: How Trump Happened Part 1 of Whatever
« on: December 12, 2016, 07:45:48 pm »
Well at least youre consistent.

58
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/electoral-college-slavery-constitution/

This is some solid gold butthurt. Finding one mention of slavery in relation to the Electoral College and ignoring all the other reasons given for it and why almost everyone agreed with it, including ones who opposed Slavery like John Adams and Northerners.

Its also worth noting that the people who are so opposed to the Electoral College are currently doing so for the exact reason the founders thought we needed it. So population dense urban areas can bully flyover states into free trade agreements and immigration policies that are good for them(the urban areas) and bad  for everyone else. Of course, thats totally, not what this is about. Youre just moral upright warriors of truth and justice fighting against an evil monster supported by ignorant hateful rednecks, and its just a coincidence that youd rather someone who wants completely free trade was in office instead of the person who is promising to kill the TPP.


59
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 12, 2016, 04:35:35 pm »

Of course not. He got into the White House through a combination of abusing our electoral system and tampering on his behalf by Vladimir Putin.


This is gold."He abused the electoral system by winning more electoral votes." The whole point of the electoral system, and THE SENATE(which none of you get made about despite running on the exact same principle) is to keep densely populated states from pushing around the mores sparsely populated ones. Trump won by doing exactly what president Obama did. He actually campaigned in these less populated more backwater areas that had electoral votes he needed. But I guess when Densely populated Urban areas dont decide the election that means the system was "abused."

Excuse me, let me revise that then:

He won because we're not a real democracy

So a world where Florida, California, New York and Texas decide every election is?

60
Aneristic Illusions / Re: RP still not getting it
« on: December 12, 2016, 04:24:00 pm »
Also you were all totally skeptical of the Cosby allegations just like you are of Clinton:

At this rate, we should be into Cosby territory by the end of the week. And that really isn't funny or unlikely.

And a very on the nose observation by Nigel:

On a related note, I am finding it fascinating how in the Atheist and Skeptic community, allegations of sexual misconduct by their leaders generates a completely different reaction than allegations of sexual misconduct by religious leaders.

When young men come forward and say that a priest molested them when they were children and that the Church did nothing, that is substantial evidence. When young women come forward and say that a prominent member of the Atheist/Skeptic community molested them when they were drunk and that the convention organizers did nothing, that is hearsay and not enough evidence to reasonably influence whether or not we attend his talk on morality.

Actual quote:

Quote
I'm asking if you have any proof that this actually happened? Michael Shermer been accused of being a rapist on many occasions. That doesn't mean Michael Shermer is actually a rapist.

What I'm saying is that this is a common accusation of something. The links that were posted are also not evidence of anything except people making accusations without evidence.

It's not a fact, and what you all are doing is not educating, it‘s spreading further misinformation. If you have any actual evidence (keeping in mind that wild accusations are not evidence) then I will be happy to change my position.

It's my suspicion that A. these double standards are necessary to protect their sense of superiority and reduce their cognitive dissonance arising from their pure and precious leaders doing the same vile things they've been touting as the sole domain of the religious,

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 49