Yeah, it's exactly like Nazi Germany, Dr. Wakefield. Right.


If you'd like your head to spin, click right on the latest and largest piece of festering, smoldering pile of crap you're likely to encounter over at AoA today. I mean I thought it would be hard to top the gunky, clumpy blood thing from yesterday, but I was wrong.

Stupid really hurts sometimes:

A response to Wakefield's idiocy: "The difference between Nazi Germany and now is basically one: the internet. The Powers That Be have tremendous power, still; but so far they haven't been able to put choke points on internet traffic."


Connie said...

Yeah, when you have to play the Nazi card, you pretty much know you've reach intellectual bankruptcy.

What do you think about Orac's statement the other day, that he "senses a disturbance in the antivaccine movement"? I think so too, though I can't quite put my finger on it.

I mean, AoA even allowing a post like Bob Sears, in which he says "what if" a link between autism and vaccines are found. "What if"?? I thought it HAD been found. Are they backtracking?

Sort of like David Kirby . . . doesn't it seem like he's pulling back a little, too?

What gives? What's your take on this?

KWombles said...

I wonder if they sense a growing backlash coming? The science is not flowing their direction; Jenny McCarthy is too kooky (that's a word, right? Is now anyway), too loud, and too much a liability. And the people who comment on that site are scary in their lack of information and absolute certainty. Kirby's piece seriously stepped back from previous assertions, There's still ample crazy, as the 9/11 Baron-Cohen piece, the clumpy blood piece, and the Nazi/it's not fair to ask factual questions about my flawed and fraudulent science piece all demonstrate.

Maybe enough voices of rationality and reason are standing up and being heard so that AoA is beginning to rethink their approach. It will be interesting to watch. They've certainly proved they are not interested in dispassionate debates on the merits of the case.

They're a one-dog show, and if vaccines aren't to blame, they're going to have difficulty in shifting to something else without their base having hissie fits.

Connie said...

Extra added bonus! Andrew Moulden posts one of his classic, crazy, rambling commentaries on the "A Tale of Autistic Blood" article.

If you're not familiar with Moulden, you're in for a . . . er . . . "treat."

KWombles said...


Orac does a frakking brilliant piece on this!

DarienMcDermott said...

KWombles, come on... "brilliant"? Clearly your assessment of brilliance and mine differ by a magnitude of degrees.

KWombles said...

Since I don't know, you, Darien, how would I know what you consider brilliant. I guess it would depend on whether you liked Wakefield or liked Orac, to some degree. Whether you appreciate wit, sarcasm, farce, or you are a fan of histrionics, hyperbole, and falsehood.

I thoroughly enjoyed Orac's piece, which my comment reflects. Brilliant as in hilarious, amusing, witty, delightful piece.

Perhaps you could elucidate on your opinion concerning the pieces in question in a manner that would clearly deliniate your opinion regarding either piece, Wakefield's piece of chum, or Orac's biting dissection of it.

Seriously, feel free to expound. Otherwise I'm left in wonderment as to where you stand. :-)