Posted by: graemebird | September 27, 2010

Cancer-Killer-Supreme/B-Seventeen/The Appalling Standards Of Quakademia

Vitamin B17 would seem to be a cancer treatment of such power that the FDA had to pass laws to stop cancer doctors from recommending it. To throw cancer specialists in jail if they ever used it. So effective would B17 seem to be that laws needed to be passed to strike at peoples medical licenses should they even think about trying it on their patients. Doctors were so enthusiastic about the results they were getting that laws needed to be passed to stop them from curing cancer with this vitamin as part of the strategy.

THE HUMBLE HYDROGEN-CYANIDE MOLECULE ONLY CONSISTS OF THREE ATOMS. ONE HYDROGEN, ONE CARBON AND ONE NITROGEN.

Were these laws passed to prevent harm to the patients? I’ll answer that question with another one: Given that vitamin B17 has been with us since 1830, can you name three people who have suffered from B17 poisoning in all that time? If it is hard to name names on this topic we can see that it is implausible to ascribe the blanket ban on the use of B17 to an honest attempt to safeguard the patient.

Of course even in the most cartelized industry there still dwells the minds and hearts of the truly independent. So not all those affected by this hateful law obeyed it. Some heroically put the lives of their patients ahead of the evil whims of monstrous Leviathan. Here I will cut and paste a blurb on one of these heroic individuals. The publication of this fellows records is authentic evidence for the effectiveness of the vitamin B17 in the anti-cancer cause:

“In 1994, P.E. Binzel published his results from treating cancer patients with Laetrile between 1974 and 1991. He used a combination of intravenous and oral Laetrile. Intravenous doses started with 3 gms and worked up to 9 gms. After a period of months, oral Laetrile, 1 gm at bedtime, was begun in place of the injections. Binzel also used various nutrient supplements and pancreatic enzymes, as well as a low animal-protein, no junk-food diet as part of his regimen. Out of a series of 180 patients with primary cancer (non-metastasized, confined to a single organ or tissue), 138 were still alive in 1991 when he compiled his treatment results. At that time, 58 of the patients had been followed for 2 to 4 years, while 80 had a medical follow-up from 5 to 18 years. Of the 42 patients who had died by 1991, 23 died from their cancers, 12 from unrelated causes, and 7 died of “cause unknown”.

Among his metastatic cancer patients, 32 of 108 died from their disease, while 6 died of unrelated causes, and 9 died of “cause unknown”. Of his 61 patients still alive in 1991, 30 had a follow-up between 2 and 4 years, while 31 had been followed for 5 to 18 years.

Binzel’s results are impressive. Some of the individual patients discussed in his book were still alive (and well!) 15-18 years after their initial Laetrile treatment. Binzel also notes that none of the cancer diagnoses were made by him (a small town, “family doctor”) – all patients had diagnoses from other physicians. Many had already suffered the ravages of standard “cut-bum-and poison” (surgery/X-ray/chemotherapy) medicine before being given up as hopeless cases by orthodox doctors.

Other physicians who have worked with Laetrile have also reported favorable results using it.”

EVERYONE NEEDS VITAMIN B12 FOR SURVIVAL. BUT LURKING WITHIN THE HEART OF THE VITAMIN ARE ARRANGEMENTS CLOSE TO THAT OF CYANIDE.

Now some folks don’t seem to see evidence unless they see big corporate, or stolen money financing, coupled with the advanced use of statistics, and mixed up with some ratbaggery called “peer review.”

But in the real world, away from professional priesthood norms, evidence is merely data, related to a specific hypothesis, via a process of reason.

Now take the following for example. If this fellows story checks out, and if he can offer a non-falisfied explanation as to WHY he thinks B17 ought to be part of anti-cancer strategy, then added to this summary we see here, we would have valid evidence, and very good evidence at that:

“Manuel Navarro, M.D., former professor of medicine and surgery at the Univ. of Santo Tomas in Manilla wrote in 1971:

” I… have specialized in oncology [the study of tumors] for the past eighteen years. For the same number of years I have been using Laetrile-amygdalin in the treatment of my cancer patients. During this eighteen year period I have treated a total of over five hundred patients with Laetrile-amygdalin by various routes of administration, including the oral and the I.V. The majority of my patients receiving Laetrile-amygdalin have been in a terminal state when treatment with this material commenced……..

(site diety sez: Notice because of the homocidal laws that are in place the specialist has to leave matters to the very last moment before he can risk what he himself believes to be the most effective cure. This is murder by the FDA. Mass-murder).

…..It is my carefully considered clinical judgment, as a practicing oncologist and researcher in this field, that I have obtained most significant and encouraging results with the use of Laetrile-amygdalin in the treatment of terminal cancer patients, and that these results are comparable or superior to the results I have obtained with the use of the more toxic standard cytotoxic agents.”

THE B17 MOLECULE HAS A CYANIDE ASSASSIN, AND A BENZALDEHYDE CUT-THROAT, HIDING WITHIN. EACH A BRUTAL POISON. EACH A FORCE MULTIPLIER FOR THE OTHER. ATTACHED ARE A COUPLE OF BIG-TITTY “SWEETENERS”, TO GET THE CANCER CELL TO WELCOME ITS KILLERS INSIDE. QUAKADEMIA HAS NOT MUCH TO OFFER THAT COMBINES THE RUTHLESS LETHALITY, WITH THE SURGICAL PRECISION OF CANCER-KILLER SUPREME: B-SEVENTEEN.

Supposing some blockhead suggests that this is not evidence. Nor would it be if the Doctor agreed to take his records and write them up with all due diligence? Well what then is the evidence for the contrary thesis? Where are the testimonies from those doctors who gave B17 their best shot, but couldn’t seem to squeeze any value of the treatment for their overall strategy? It is this countering evidence that appears to be entirely absent.

The Wikipedia alleges that vitamin B17 is toxic. But this is quakademic-or-house-nigger PROJECTION. Since radiation therapy is toxic. Chemotherapy is toxic. And the drugs don’t work on their own, and they are toxic also.

Here is a fellow who has almost half a century experience working with vitamin B17. This is what he says with regards to the vitamins toxicity:

“Dr. Emesto Contreras has used Laetrile as a cornerstone of his cancer practice since 1963. He remarks that “For the prevention of cancer and the maintenance of remission, there is nothing as effective as Laetrile…. Its nontoxicity permits its use indefinitely while surgery, radiation and chemotherapy can only be administered for a limited time…. the majority of cancers that occur more frequently, such as cancers of the lung, breast, colon, ovaries, stomach, esophagus, prostate, and the lymphomas, are much helped by Laetrile.”

So in practice, on humans, its non-toxic. What you would be worried about is some unpredictable effect of the medicines that the quacks were giving you, liberating the B17 poisons, in situations where you do not want them liberated. My only advice would be to start taking it early, and if you are mixing it up with other treatments, stick to a very low dose. A very very low dose. Only go for the higher doses if you are taking a big long rest from the other stuff you are being prescribed. Don’t be taking risks on my recommendation. But the fact is its not the B17 that is toxic under normal circumstances. Only some complication with other remedies could potentially make it so.

Birds iron law of persistent controversies is that they cannot be sustained in the face of the authorities being right, or even more right then the dissenters. Yes its true that controversies can be sustained when both parties are wrong to some degree. But this controversy would not be with us if the authorities were correct in their baseless and homocidal opinion. They are the quacks. They are the cranks. And whilst they may affect to monopolize the alleged “scientific consensus” unto themselves, in truth we are talking about a bunch of bureaucrats, buttressed by a few medically-degreed bootlickers with the eye for the main chance.

So we have this idea that vitamin B17 can be an effective part of an overall cancer-fighting strategy. But how is it alleged to work? What is the process by which, in the eyes of its more knowledgeable supporters, B17, lays out its awesome wrath, to an unsuspecting cancer cell?

We remember the tagline for the alleged strategy of the first Gulf War: Cut them off and kill them. Killing cancer ought to involve a multipronged approach. But the most important thing is to raise pH (cut it off) and then find something specifically toxic to the cancer alone (and kill it). With these two planks in place cancer ought not be a difficult thing to deal with.

But supposing that B17 doesn’t work as advertised? Supposing it will not release its two poisons into the willing embrace of the cancer cell?

Well you would expect an hatchet job on the treatment to have at least attempted to show this would you not?

Try wiki and we will see the same sort of demonizing bullshit that we see when it comes to the global warming crowd. Prejudice posing as science. Look here at their introduction that I tried to make some modest alterations to:

“Amygdalin (from Greek: ἀμυγδάλη amygdálē “almond”), C20H27NO11, is a glycoside initially isolated from the seeds of the tree Prunus dulcis, also known as bitter almonds, by Pierre-Jean Robiquet[1] and A. F. Boutron-Charlard in 1830, and subsequently investigated by Liebig and Wöhler in 1830, and others. Several other related species in the genus of Prunus, including apricot (Prunus armeniaca) and black cherry (Prunus serotina),[2] also contain amygdalin.
It was promoted in a modified form called laetrile as a cancer cure by Ernst T. Krebs under the name “Vitamin B17”, but studies have found it to be ineffective.[3][4][5] It is also not a vitamin, and can cause cyanide poisoning.[6] The promotion of laetrile to treat cancer has been described in the scientific literature as a canonical example of quackery,[7][8][9] with Irving Lerner of the University of Minnesota describing it as “the slickest, most sophisticated, and certainly the most remunerative cancer quack promotion in medical history.”[10]”

This introduction is not supportable given the concrete facts mentioned in the rest of the article. Still even the tamest modification was resisted and overturned.

Now we will take some time out to see if they even pretend to have evidence that the one-two-kick of B17 does not occur as advertised ……………….

………

No they do not even pretend that this kicker doesn’t happen on a micro level. What we see instead is the conflation with eating bitter almonds. The allegation that since they managed to poison a few rats allegedly with this compound, that humans are likely to be poisoned too. The allegation that this gear will poison you without the evidence for the allegation ….. and ignoring decades of use of the product ….. And a generally bigoted attitude shown throughout.

While the footnotes and links seem impressive on the face of it, as far as it is possible to track back on the internet there seems to be next to nothing there.

Here is a representative example:

“Amygdalin toxicity studies in rats predict chronic cyanide poisoning in humans.
Newton GW, Schmidt ES, Lewis JP, Conn E, Lawrence R.

Abstract
Significant amounts of cyanide are released when amygdalin (Laetrile), a cyanogenic glycoside, is given orally or intravenously to rats. The amount of cyanide liberated following oral administration is dependent in part on the bacterial flora of the gut and can be suppressed by antibiotic pretreatment of the animals. Bacteria from human feces likewise hydrolyze amygdalin with release of cyanide.

Humans taking amygdalin orally in the hope of preventing cancer are likely to be exposed to levels of cyanide in excess of that associated with the development of tropical ataxic neuropathy in people of underdeveloped countries where food containing cyanogenic glycosides is a staple part of the diet.”

Not exactly convincing is it! Speculation of poisoning, oddly out of kilter with many decades of practice. You can buy the stuff now and eat it. Who has been poisoned? Name names?

When you follow the links you at first are expecting to find some evidence of human poisoning. But no such poisoning shows up with regards to the vitamin itself. Only the allegation of poisoning from someone eating bitter almonds. Stay away from the bitter almonds. Name names. Who has been poisoned by this product?

So in fact these homocidal maniacs are lying. Or we might say that quakademia and Leviathan are given to outbreaks of unscientific hysteria.

Back in the real world we see that radiation, chemotherapy, and cancer drugs are incredibly toxic. The first two making you shrivel up, and make all your hair fall out, just for starters. Quakademias potions and violations are dangerous, highly toxic and incredibly invasive. They make you sick immediately and you still die of cancer a lot of the time. Statistically quackademias treatments make you live maybe three months longer on average. And in nasty ill-health to boot.

Whereas B17 is not toxic to normal cells at relevant levels or else people could not have sustained the treatment over long periods, in accordance with the testimony of the specialists using this as part of their strategy.

Always remember. Socialism never works. “Socialism never works. But sometimes it can take sometime to fail.”

The vast bulk of health problems can be dealt with cheaply and with powerful effectiveness, with very little attention from doctors of a mainstream bent. Find the doctor and specialist who will listen to you. Find the born healer who is a conceptualist and a strategist. Find the fellow who is an independent man of reason.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Ed Griffon talking about the politics of cancer, and the use of vitamin B17.

  2. These evil bastards sent Jason Vale to prison for selling Apricot seeds as a treatment for cancer. Jason was a young bloke who had fought off cancer on two occasions.

    Apricot seeds are a big source of B17 and so a potential way to meet one half of a two-pronged strategy to wipe cancer out.

  3. Try selling apple seeds and apricot seeds to cure cancer. Along with efforts to raise pH this will in fact effect a cure. But try telling people this. 5 years in prison. Don’t believe me?

  4. Dr Sam Chachoua from Melbourne. Another person persecuted for curing people of nasty diseases:

  5. Bird

    So now you think apricot seeds stop cancer.

    YOU DUMB WOP. CAN YOU NOT LEARN TO THINK? ITS A STRATEGY THAT DEFEATS CANCER. NOT A SINGLE WEAPON. THATS WHERE THE MENTALLY RETARDED COME OFF THE BEAM. THEY THINK ITS ONE THING OR THE OTHER. THEY THINK ITS DDT FOR MALARIA OR VITAMIN C FOR CANCER OR SOME OTHER CHILDISH THING. THATS BECAUSE THEY ARE PRIMITIVE IN THEIR THINKING LIKE A GROWN UP WOPPY.

    ITS A STRATEGY THAT WINS OVER CANCER. ALWAYS ONE HALF OF THAT STRATEGY IS INCREASING PH. EVEN THE DRUGS OF QUAKADEMIA OUGHT TO WORK AS LONG AS PART OF THE STRATEGY IS TO LIFT PH. APRICOT SEEDS HAVE VITAMIN B17 IN THEM. THIS KILLS CANCER CELLS DIRECTLY. BUT I’M NOT CLAIMING ITS GOING TO WORK ON ITS OWN IF YOU DON’T WISH TO LIFT PH.

  6. Bird, I know you are busy working on a cancer cure, but what do you think about the head of the world chess org FIDE opinions.

    Lunatic or truth teller?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/kirsan-ilyumzhinov-chess-came-to-earth-from-outer-space-2085838.html

    “Oh, and he also believes that chess was brought to Earth by aliens, and that if not enough people take up the game, the aliens might destroy our planet.
    ….

    He has claimed on many occasions that in 1997 he was taken by aliens to a spaceship, where he chatted with them before returning to Earth. You do realise, he asks, that chess is a “cosmic game”? Excavations have shown that chess was played with similar rules, in various continents, centuries ago, he says, adding: “There was no internet before, so how did it get across the world? It means that it was brought from somewhere.”

    He also insists that there is “some kind of code” in chess, evidence for which he finds in the fact that there are 64 squares on the chessboard and 64 codons in human DNA. He then explains why he believes sweetcorn was brought to Earth by a different civilisation. “I’m not ill. I’m psychologically normal,” he says. “I didn’t hide it [the contact with aliens] even though I knew that people would laugh at me and say I was crazy. Maybe it was a form of self-sacrifice.”

    His main goal, if he is re-elected, is to increase the number of chess players in the world from 600 million to a billion. And he has serious reasons for wanting this to happen. “Above us, they are looking at us, and maybe they will get tired of us, and suddenly…” he tails off, making dramatic gestures of destruction. “How can we save ourselves from them? Only though intellect, concentration and spiritual energy. If a billion people are in these chess centres, playing chess, the world will have positive energy.”

    • I don’t think you could say he’s either a lunatic or a truth-teller on the basis of that summary. Sounds like he was being pretty flippant if you ask me. I’d say that some of the things he is saying are honestly held opinions that he could be right about, he could be wrong about, or he could be right in broad thrust and wrong in specifics, or wrong in broad thrust and right in specifics.

      It is a feature of the English-Speaking world that claims or speculations relating to the possibility of alien-earth interaction leads to the heaping of social opprobrium on oneself. But just itemise this matter of social opprobrium? Is this a logical argument? Or is it a sign that the culprit allows himself to be manipulated by elites?

      Take the abuse I got when to my amazement I found all those pictures of what looked like old relics on Mars? What was the logic behind the abuse? It wasn’t logic, it was a confession that even some of the smarter people were willing to pick and choose when and where to use logic. When they didn’t want to know logic was a luxury that they didn’t need at the time.

      Incidents that might be construed as outside visitations go back all the way in history. But there is something about the volume of this stuff that starts after World War II. Some of us may be living in the attitudes we held for good reasons back in the 70’s. Back in the 70’s all these stories of flying sauces hit the mainstream publishing businesses with a motherload of hocus pocus of one sort or another. I don’t know whether it was wise to keep an open mind about that stuff back then. I certainly had no time for it. But its the persistence of the reports and the pictures for three decades hence that ought to in logic give people pause.

      Whats most interesting is the persistence of the flying saucer shape in reports. The plausibility of this shape being used as a way to overcome gravity. And the more or less systematic breakdown of those assumptions we had of the galaxy which would have precluded outside visitors arriving, except perhaps once every several millions of years.

      Paul Davies has just written a bizzare book called “The Eeire Silence.” Apparently Paul is stunned and cannot understand why there is no evidence of alien life out there. Meanwhile many others are apparently convinced that they have been abducted, and have had medical instruments shoved up their anus to pierce their prostrate and suck out their sperm. Here we have the ultimate idiocy of people in a state of life-long trauma, and some ABC luvvy just cannot understand why the evidence isn’t there.

      Women are reporting being forcibly impregnated and harvested mid-pregnancy. But such is the social opprobrium about it, that Paul Davies thinks he doesn’t need to investigate these matter before he makes brazenly false statements. Whereas these people may all well be delusional, what with the strange metal objects implanted in them and horrible memories of stuff that may not even have happened …… Paul just knows that none of this happened.

      Well I’m basically a scientist. I’m not a luvvie like Paul Davies. So I have to recognise these reports for the fact that they constitute evidence. These people may all be delusional. But I don’t know that and neither does Paul Davies. Social opprobrium cannot substitute for real knowledge so it turns out that its Paul Davies that is definitely delusional, since he thinks he knows stuff he cannot possibly know.

      We start from the sound apriori starting point that, insofar as we think we know much about the galaxy, it ought to be the case that we will have been visited by aliens from time to time. The distances involved suggest that this would be an infrequent occurrence. Perhaps every several millions of years. Or every several tens of millions of years.

      Thats the starting point. But we have some hard evidence that surprisingly suggests that this starting point is not the reality. Lloyd Pyes hybrid skull is only 900 years old. I was as surprised as anyone when I found out about it.

  7. fucking fractional reservist bastards

  8. Alright. Check out the intellectually handicapped Gook:

    “Dear God. As if Bird couldn’t get any crazier
    https://graemebird.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/vitamin-b17-and-the-appalling-standards-of-quakademia/#comment-32795

    Apparently Paul is stunned and cannot understand why there is no evidence of alien life out there. Meanwhile many others are apparently convinced that they have been abducted, and have had medical instruments shoved up their anus to pierce their prostrate and suck out their sperm. Here we have the ultimate idiocy of people in a state of life-long trauma, and some ABC luvvy just cannot understand why the evidence isn’t there.

    Women are reporting being forcibly impregnated and harvested mid-pregnancy. But such is the social opprobrium about it, that Paul Davies thinks he doesn’t need to investigate these matter before he makes brazenly false statements.”

    The problem is that people ARE IN FACT reporting this sort of thing you dumb Gook. I cannot change the fact that people are reporting this. They seem to believe this sort of thing. I cannot do anything about it.

    Do you understand that you fucking dumb Gook?

    Witness testimony is, was, and always will be evidence. And people are claiming to be witness to this sort of thing. These are persistent claims. Nothing to do with me.

    See there is something wrong with anyone under 40. The kids cannot separate facts from bigotry from pure tribalism any more.

    Despite the fantasies of this stupid fucking
    Gook whom logic forgot, neither of us can do a damn thing about it. People report this stuff delusional or not. And since they report it, its evidence. Simple as that. We cannot make it non-evidence no matter how we might wish upon a star.

    Fucking dumb Gook thinks there is evidence in support of the global warming fraud. Recognizing evidence where there is none is the same syndrome in practice as where you pretend that the evidence you don’t like isn’t there.

  9. What I fail to understand though Bird is what wiuld be the point of, this semi-secret contact with Aliens.

    If we suppose that these witness testimonies are in aggregate true, why would an evidently techonologically advanced society be contacting us in such a way?

    Surely they could either just come out in the open or visit without us noticing at all? They don’t need to return abductees they could just take samples back to Tralfamadore to exhibit in the Zoo or breed etc.

    • I don’t suppose they are true. But you couldn’t sustain technology this far from home without an highly intelligent and entirely vulnerable white collar slave population. So the reports have a certain internal logic to them.

  10. Mr Bird
    Is it possible that Jewish Bankers are at the vanguard of this alien invasion?

    • They are doing enough wrong without trying to hang them with that?

  11. “Women are reporting being forcibly impregnated and harvested mid-pregnancy.”

    That’s one way of explaining a termination to the husband/boyfriend/parent.

    • Well there are many possible explanations of course. One of them being that they were harvested by aliens looking to breed slaves. Another that they just made it all up.

      • And another explanation is that they didn’t intentionally make it up but believed it on some level. We’re weird and wonderful critters Graeme, our dreams and thoughts tell us that all the time. Which is kinda why I’m open to the evidence and suggestion of alien visitation but find it far less entrancing and interesting than the possibilities, potentialities and capabilities of our dear human selves.

      • Right. That would be my best bet. They truly believe it happened though it didn’t. But we cannot prejudice the evidence in advance. Also it could be a way for various players to destabilize and discredit people. Not necessarily the people that they would (in this scenario) abuse directly.

  12. “Meanwhile many others are apparently convinced that they have been abducted, and have had medical instruments shoved up their anus to pierce their prostrate and suck out their sperm.”

    Graeme, given the frequency nay ubiquity of male wanking I think aliens would’ve figured out far easier ways of bottling men’s sperm than this nightmarish, very human if I may so scenario.

    • Well yes you’d think so wouldn’t you. But still people report this stuff. The experiences they report have a few themes in common.

      • There’s a great book “Wisdom of the Elders” by David Suzuki and Peter Knudtson which shows the similarity even identity in the content of legends, myths, superstitions, creation stories, botanical and animal knowledge etc of all the world’s indigenous peoples AND how their insights and perspectives have so much in common too with the ecological and other types of knowledge of modern science.

  13. I DON’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT YOU DUMB WOP. I’M JUST TELLING YOU THAT PEOPLE REPORT THIS STUFF. PERSONAL WITNESS TESTIMONY IS IN FACT EVIDENCE. STUPID WOPS MIGHT THINK THAT THEY KNOW EVERYTHING BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW YOU DON’T HAVE THE GIFT OF SECOND SIGHT.

  14. “How the fuck ( no pun intended here) do think they’re able to inseminate our lusty females with their sperm.

    I mean a dog can’t get a cat pregnant and say a New Zealander is unable to impregnate a sheep. How do you figure aliens are able to get our wenches pregnant?”

    Oh dear. The dim Cataleprosy oafs and pygmies are still infesting your blog I see Graeme. Quite an illuminating comment nevertheless by Cousin A. It reinforces once more what we all know too well about the paucity of these rightard twerps’ knowledge and imagination. Too funny.

    • Thats Cambria. Stupid as ever. I point out the state of the evidence and he assumes that I have certain beliefs. You cannot get it through the thick head of someone as primitive as this that laying out where the evidence stands does not imply any belief at all.

      I just focus on process. I think of these things in terms of the scientific method. The dumb fucking wop imagines that if you point out the state of the evidence that means you are a committed believer.

  15. I see Joe Cambria is channelling BirdLab now through Cousin Achmed. God he must be a lousy fuck. So predictable.

  16. oops, I meant to type “full of muck”. No probs if you want to delete that comment Graeme. I don’t want to embarrass you or bring your blog into disrepute cos of my wicked tongue.

    Anyhoo, how the hell have you been??

    • Great Philomena. Nice to have you back.

  17. Bird:

    You either think there’s a possibility or you don’t. Now which is it?

    OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A POSSIBILITY. IF YOU THINK THERE ISN’T A POSSIBILITY THIS IS MORE EVIDENCE OF YOUR DELUSIONAL NATURE. OF COURSE THERE IS A FUCKING POSSIBILITY OF ALIEN LIFE OUT THERE. HAVE YOU NO IDEA HOW MANY STARS THERE ARE? AND OF COURSE THAT MEANS WE COULD BE VISITED BY ALIENS.

    TO DENY THAT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY WOULD BE TO ADMIT MENTAL DERANGEMENT.

    • I’m trying to get it through your thick head that its not about BELIEF??????

      Of course its possible that you could have visitors from another solar system. Simply on the grounds that there are so many solar systems. I don’t think you’ll ever understand epistemology Cambria. You will never understand the difference between what a person does and does not know. You are primitive. So you will always put it down to belief.

      Here is how matters are at this moment:

      Here are the main salient points.

      1. Direct first-hand witness evidence IS EVIDENCE and we cannot say its not evidence just because we are embarrassed by the implications. Whereas witness evidence is evidence personal embarrassment is no tool of cognition.

      2. “We start from the sound apriori starting point that, insofar as we think we know much about the galaxy, it ought to be the case that we will have been visited by aliens from time to time. The distances involved suggest that this would be an infrequent occurrence. Perhaps every several millions of years. Or every several tens of millions of years.”

      AND

      3. “Thats the starting point. But we have some hard evidence that surprisingly suggests that this starting point is not the reality. Lloyd Pyes hybrid skull is only 900 years old. I was as surprised as anyone when I found out about it.”

      Now the above is simply factual. It cannot be made non-factual by your childish make-believe Cambria. Its got nothing to do with what I believe. The hybrid skull is very direct and strong evidence. I cannot make it go away. Thats a dumb wop way of looking at things which I wouldn’t be capable of participating in even if I had a mind to.

  18. “To his credit, Phillip Adams once wrote an amusing column in which he pointed out that the UFOs people claimed to see in the 50s were very much like the ones depicted in erstwhile B-movies.”

    This wasn’t a real smart observation. Since the television writers were getting their queues partly from what people were saying. But its also not quite true. Whereas the pictures and witness stories of flying sauces are incredibly persistent and durable, those television producers made most of their flying objects conform to the current notions of rocketry.

  19. Look here is Larry King. No-one is obligated to BELIEVE the implications of Larry Kings story. But to suggest it isn’t evidence is quite delusional. You have these people on film. You can see that they are not gibbering maniacs, drooling at the mouth. You can see that a writer isn’t putting words in their mouths. And when you think about it only social pressure convinces you that they must be lying or insane.

    Another possibility might be that the spooks are looking at this ufo stuff, don’t know what to make of it, and so are rigging up these stories to see if they can work with what they take to be a mania of sorts.

    But to say this Larry King show is not evidence is really quite obnoxious idiocy.

  20. They get “Bill Nye the science guy” to come in. He’s a knee-jerk skeptic and he has nothing to offer. Its just ridiculous. Here the skeptic is the gibbering idiot. There could be any number of explanations for what these guys are talking about. And every one of them is a security threat. You have a mystery and you want to get to the bottom of it without taxeaters getting in the way. These are not matters that ought to be monopolised by the spooks or wished away by the knee-jerk skeptics. If someone can screw with your missiles this is a problem.

  21. Ho ho they’ve got a SETI guy in. There are wastes of money, damned wastes of money, and then there is SETI.

  22. The first two minutes of this one are interesting from the point of view of shadow government. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton wanted to find out about UFO’s when they finally became President. Gerald Ford too according to a guest on this show. Carter is apparently on film saying AS PRESIDENT that he wanted to get information on UFO’s and he was knocked back. It was right at the top of Clintons list when he got there along with the Kennedy assassination. If a President of the United States cannot get satisfaction on this matter what does this say about how powerful shadow government is?

    What we have in the US is a shadow government. I has to be wrapped up with fractional reserve and the Federal Reserve and Covert operations.

    And it looks like they get to hold over a lot of valuable technology.

    We have to face it that our allies government has run amok. Its got all this money that no-one has any control over. All sorts of secret projects and such. Maybe its good that they are going to crash. Wipe out all the dead wood and maybe release some of the better technology.

  23. I think it’s been observed that a pattern of similar extraordinary insights or behaviour is typically tied to material reality, not least socio-political.

    Freud wrote about the prevalence of “hysteria” afflicting Western middle-class women of an allegedly representative demographic in the late 19th century. And that diagnosis has been convincingly interpreted and linked to women’s status and life experiences at that conjuncture.

    Similarly today, psychological and other relevant physical manifestations have been linked to fundamental socio-economic factors at their specific stages of development: e.g. depression, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, narcissistic personality disorder (such as the typical Catallaxian inmate complaint).

  24. I’ve got a lot of time for JohnH actually but I had to verbally slap him the other day. The reason being that the Catallaxians had put up the show of smugnesss-as-knowledge when it came to the terrible tragedy of cancer ….. and all they were waiting for was some authentically scientific mind to fall in line with them.

    This is the dysfunction of it. When the mainstream is wrong, they can always coax someone to twist himself into supporting their stupidity. And John can go soft-headed from time to time. It was just too important a matter for me not to attack in the strongest terms. Because I was really attacking the group.

  25. Bird stop the lying. We know there’s an excellent chance of other life in the universe. In fact it’s as close to a given as you can get.
    But We’re not talking about that, are we? We’re talking about a bunch of space creatures coming down here and inseminating our sheilas.

    RIGHT. AND WE HAVE EXCELLENT AND HARD EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAD A PROGRAM FOR THIS AS RECENTLY AS 1000 YEARS AGO. BEYOND THAT I CANNOT SAY. EXCEPT TO REPEAT, THAT FIRSTHAND WITNESS EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE. ALWAYS WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE. THE MORONS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE WANT TO SAY THAT THE ONLY EVIDENCE IS PEER REVIEW AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS.

    SEE YOU WOULD HAVE TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT I’M SAYING. I’M ONLY SAYING WHAT IS TRUE. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THESE TRUTHZZZ?

    I DON’T KNOW IF THERE IS ALIENS AROUND AT THE MOMENT. WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT AMERICAN SOCIETY HAS A SHADOW GOVERNMENT OF SOME SORT. ONCE YOU GET THAT FAR YOU COULD HAVE PEOPLE BLOWING SMOKE IN OUR FACE FOR ANY NUMBER OF REASONS. WOULD THEY GO SO FAR AS TO PARADE THEIR MONOPOLIZED TECHNOLOGY IN THE CONTEXT OF STOOGING US THAT THIS GEAR IS ALIEN GEAR? WHO KNOWS? ONCE YOU CAN STEAL AS MUCH AS YOU WANT OFF PEOPLE WHO KNOWS WHAT BAD CRAZINESS YOU COME UP WITH IN COMMITTEE?

    THE AZTEC ROYALTY GREW SO ARROGANT THEY STARTED EATING PEOPLE. HUMAN NATURE DOESN’T CHANGE AND WHOEVER HAS EFFECTIVE POWER BEHIND THE SCENES RIGHT NOW WILL LIKELY THINK AS HIGHLY OF US AS THE AZTEC ROYALS THOUGHT OF THEIR PEOPLE.

  26. “…the tragedy of cancer”.

    Mortality is a given but acceptable tragedy that is a necessity – for the present – in any humane, democratic and healthily evolving world.

    Cancer is tragic in different ways cos the indication is that increased use of human-made chemicals have increased the incidence and threat of cancer, including among relatively young and otherwise healthy people today.

    I’m less interested in cures for cancer, which will only ever be available to a small minority in world population terms, even if agreed they are cures, which currently they are most certainy not, than I am in the investigation of what it is about how we live that causes the growing incidence of cancer.

    And, of equal interest, I’m interested in how can we best help people, loved ones, who have cancer and who will die of this or other unpreventable diseases, die more easily, since they must die and we must let them go.

    • Philomena. I’m thinking of the tragedy from the point of view of institutional dysfunction. Cancer treatment ought to be unconstitutional in the United States since it amounts to “cruel and unusual punishments.’ Cancer treatment is medieval in its cruelty.

      I see cancer as a very easy disease to cure. But these guys have been torturing people to death by sword (surgery) torch (radiation) and poison (chemotherapy), for such a very long time now, that they are determined to keep doing it until they get it right.

      Supposing they were to admit that cutting people, burning their flesh, and poisoning them wasn’t any way to restore health? What would be the legal implications of this after all this time? So they are in too deep now. They’ve got to keep going with this quackery. In the old days you could be quits with the leeches forever and turn over a new leaf. Now you’ve got to get more medieval and fundamentalist about it lest you admit to yourself that you have been ruining lives and murdering people your entire professional life.

      • Mainstream cancer therapies are horrendously debilitating and if I get cancer I’ll seriously consider partaking of none.

        There are plenty of alleged cures and curers of cancer on the market and given cancer’s prevalence there’s been plenty of opportunity for those who can afford the travel and state-of-the-art treatments, and the medical establishmen monitoring them to come to some conclusions.

        And what are these conclusions, realistically and actually?

        That there are currently no cures for cancer and we cannot definitively say or know why one person recovers – or suffers – from cancer and another does not.

      • Well Philomena, I take the view that there are cures for cancer. That we ought to be able to cure every last case of it, and that only institutional dysfunction stops us from doing so.

        I would say that curing cancer involves a two-pronged approach. Curing cancer consists of taking a two-pronged strategy of adding voltage/raising pH …. and along with that finding something that hurts cancer without hurting you.

        If I got a tumor I would not consider surgery, radiation or chemotherapy. I would consider some of the drugs. I’d not press the tumor, cut it open, or allow anyone to take a biopsy of it. I’d just try and make it shrink and be reabsorbed by various treatments.

  27. There is certainly pretty good evidence for “flying saucers.” They don’t look like Studebakers and the idea for them did not come from Hollywood. So clearly there is the likelihood of experimental craft that someone doesn’t want us to know about.

    And furthermore the shape is really quite a credible one in terms of negating gravity.

  28. Stupid Wopppy. Stupid Gook Cunt. Thieving fractional reservist Bastards.

  29. Bird:

    Do something about Ron. He’s ruining your very thoughtful discussions with racist junk. People might think you hate wops and gooks.

    • shut up you dirty fractional reservist bastard

  30. Bird,

    Why does a saucer shape negate gravity?

    • Too easy Edney. Since there is no such thing as action-at-a-distance then each proton in the galaxy must have, directly or indirectly, some sort of weak-and-elastic tether to every other proton. What we are saying here is that all protons in any given galaxy must maintain continual contact with every other. Now if that contact is effectively with orthogonal “ropes” that are akin to scaled down Birkeland currents …. or indeed if they are any sort of arrangement of what are effectively “ropes” as such ……. then to see what we see around us, all these many connecting ropes must stretch-break-and reform. They cannot be static, since a static stiff rope would just break and that would be the end to it. The time it could exert a force would be minimal.

      So the ropes must stretch, break, and reform with a sort of wrap-around action.

      Now the idea, should you wish to beat gravity, is to have a saucer-shaped craft. At the bottom you want a near frictionless liquid metal that you can have circulating at high speed. You want it that once you’ve worked up that speed the liquid metal would keep moving of its own accord, taking a long time to slow down. If the liquid metal is sufficiently dense and moving sufficiently fast it will cut off the “ropes” between you and the earth, faster than they can reform. So you wind up having a situation where the mountain to your right and the air above are exerting more gravity on your craft then what the ground below you is. So you will be able to hover cheaply without expending much energy.

  31. Anyway as to reports of UFO/alien encounters obviously there are several categories of reports.

    1) honest accounts by sane people
    2) honest accounts by insane people
    3) dishonest accounts.

    obviously some fraction fall into 2 and 3 and we must disregard these although isolating them from 1 is not easy.

    Also we can divide accounts into either,
    a) accounts that could have been natural phenomena (known or unknown) that they have mistaken
    b) accounts that we can’t explain in terms of natural phenomena – eg abduction and anal probes.

    To be honest while I know of quite a few accounts that would fall into 1a, but the accounts I am aware of that fall into b mostly come from people that would likely fall into the insane and/or dishonest category.

    The FIDE president (a corrupt and possibly murderous regional russian president and crony capitalist) likely falls into 3 and possibly 2

    • “obviously some fraction fall into 2 and 3 and we must disregard these although isolating them from 1 is not easy.”

      We can speculate that there might be some proportion of people in these categories. But we cannot dismiss their testimony AS EVIDENCE, since we weren’t there. See you can’t change epistemological rules just because you don’t like the answer. Either direct, first-hand witness evidence is valid, or we have to change everything about our society. You don’t get to put it in, take it out, and shake it all about, like the hokey-tokey, just to make yourself feel good.

      We have situations where many multiple people are witnessing the same thing at the same time. Looking around for non-alien explanations we might say:

      “If you want to control people… that is to say; control entire populations, then what you do is you blow smoke at them …. and put about enough mystery as a decoy, for doing strategic evil things.”

      Now the above appears to be true. So if you are emotionally committed to ruling out aliens then you have many other options. But you don’t have the dumb-skeptical option of being an idiot. And lets face it. Nowhere do we not see taxeater dysfuntion. Spook-elite dysfunction particularly doesn’t bottom out.

      So we have these situations where people who have been considered respectable right up until they report these things, are telling us they see flying saucers. Then they get the flying saucers on a polaroid and on film. They witness these things together in large groups. On Larry King the guests were talking about the Governor of Arizona being one of a large crowd who saw some massive craft unlike anything known in the world inventory of crafts. An ex-pilot and current Governor along with scores of other people saw this craft or apparition.

      Now supposing you just have some sort of mental problem where you cannot put up the optimal six best alternative hypotheses in parallel …… and admit that one of these top six involves aliens? Supposing you are just gutless like that. Well you would have to say that its covert ops. Shadow government trying out its hologram technology that has been off the books from the start. Or an orchestrated spook plan to pay off all the witnesses with money, backed up by iron-clad threats if they bucked the plan. Or a media-covert-ops gig where they only have a dozen people making this shit up, including the Governor, and they merely talk about the scores of other witnesses when its just a tight group of a dozen of them.

      There are many alternatives. But what you don’t get to do is imagine that you don’t follow the evidence just because you don’t like the implications. You don’t get to be an asshole and re-write the rules of epistemology over, and then break your re-written rules in order to be able to make it to work on time.

      See if you watch Stanton Friedman laying out the evidence and you watch some leftist skeptic house-nigger arguing against him …. And if you say, look I’m unconvinced by Stanton, but he is laying out the evidence like a true scientist and he beat that fools argument hands down …. well thats fine since science is not about belief.

      But if you say that he hasn’t got the evidence, and he’s a fool, and the other guy beat him in the debate then you are just being gutless and lying. When you boil it down the only reason you would take that approach and lie like that is that you have allowed yourself to be dominated and controlled by social approbrium coming from the top down. If spooktown says there is no evidence for this jive you nod your head like a zombie, agree with them in your heart, and act as a force multiplier for another spook-town lie by heaping abuse on people that are only telling you what they saw.

  32. Graeme, hopefully one day there will be a cure for many illnesses and diseases from the common cold, to multiple sclerois to cancer. At present there is no confirmed cure for any of these and any doctor (usually the surgeon or radiologist) who tells a cancer patient they are cured after surgery, radiation and chemotherapy is knowingly lying to the patient.

    Many people who’ve had these therapies of course go on to die of cancer. And others with so-called inoperable tumours and who pass on the chemo and radiation have seen their tumours disappear. These are the simple facts.

    I note that recent clinical trials and research now advise against the removal of all the underarm lymph nodes in women with breast cancer whose biopsy has shown that cancer cells are present in the so-called sentinel lymph node. Pathologists have been calling foul on this one for at least 10 years, let’s see if the surgeons take heed.

  33. The cure is not a dosage or a substance or a treatment. The cure is a strategy based on various paradigms to do with what you think cancer is and how it acts. One cannot say “Take substance xx. twice a day before meals and call me back Tuesday week.”

    “At present there is no confirmed cure for any of these and any doctor (usually the surgeon or radiologist) who tells a cancer patient they are cured after surgery, radiation and chemotherapy is knowingly lying to the patient.”

    But I think there is a cure. I think its an EASY problem to cure. And of course if they tell you they can cure you by cutting you up, burning your flesh, and poisoning you …. well yes sure they are lying. But the strategy for curing cancer doesn’t consist of doing these things.

  34. Supposing you are part of the fractional-reserve/spooktown shadow government. And you and your buds seek to maintain your effective primacy over the more visual organs of state officialdom. And one way of doing this is maintaining knowledge and control over all sorts of technology?

    Well how do you keep this a secret? The alien story would be the best possible way you could do it. Because the Americans, under normal circumstances, cannot keep a secret. A President can scarcely get a blow-job over by the photocopier without billions of people coming to know all about it.

    But in fact the blowjob story was only a cover for treason, in terms of these guys selling secrets to the Chinese for campaign contributions and other arbitrage. So even in the case of Clinton we see that a gaudy scandal is the only real protection for an even greater scandal. We call this the LESSER SCANDAL DEFENSE. And we also see the ubiquity of the LESSER SCANDAL TRIPWIRE.

    If you have new technology you have to be constantly testing it out and there is no way to keep this sort of thing a secret. Well yes there is one way. You have to wrap a conspiracy in a bigger and more salacious conspiracy. You need to put your grim, nasty and logical conspiracy in the dark by the blinding light of a gargantuan tabloid conspiracy.

    Blowjobs and cocktail dresses and relentless denial and lying stopped anyone from even so much as presenting what the scandal was really about. Which was treason with regards to weapons sales to China, and illegality in terms of the suspicion that part of the arbitrage was getting the Chinese to do all this dirty work for Clinton.

    Now the idea of aliens is a blazing bright light of a conspiracy. And its easily big enough to drown out everything else which goes with a shadow government practicing the age-old undertaking of exploiting humans as if they were farm animals.

    Always the plan, when you bury the real conspiracy in a fake conspiracy is to put all the evidence out for a fake conspiracy and then TO DENY IT VIGOROUSLY.

    So for example the Kennedy hit left us with an absolute mountain of evidence for communist involvement. Yet the idea of communist involvement was vigorously denied to the point of extremism, and to the point of making people feel embarrassed for even mentioning it.

    So the technique would be to set up all the multiple lines of fake evidence for alien visitation and then to have a parallel campaign to deny deny deny and to discredit anyone who took the fake bait.

    You make the fake alternative the only alternative that a rational scientific man can take. Then you Marshall every non-scientific social manipulation against what appears to be the scientific conclusion. That way you can be powerfully effective in hiding the real conspiracy.

  35. It is not “a problem” singular, for starters, since cancer is a class of diseases. We really understand very little about the class as a whole let alone each of its manifestations in particular organs or parts of the body. Its unpredictable appearance and often very rapid development make it one of the deadliest of diseases that potentially can kill people who’d had no reported symptoms within a matter of a couple of months. So “easy” is not a word that is in any way applicable to any form of cancer or proven successful treatment. There simply are none.

  36. I don’t think cancer is a class of diseases. I think its just one disease. And we call it differently in accordance only with its location.

    On a cellular level the cancer cell is always damaged in only one part of it. Which tells us that its no mutation but rather a hard-wired RESPONSE to stress. So you have too much UV light and some skin cells lose their ability to act like specialists, and they are “damaged” but always in exactly the same way. Or if a hard-core juicer damages his digestive tract lining one too many times then we will have cells losing their specialty function and responding (wrongly understood as “mutating”) in the exact same way as what the skin cells did.

    Doesn’t matter where the cancer is- the “mutation” (its not a mutation but rather a “response.”) is always the same, and the cell loses its specialty function, and loses its ability to kill itself off. It then acts like a single-celled animal but in a learning-network. That is to say it communicates with the other cancer cells. So it can take any drug that quakademia launches against it and overcome the effects of the drug over time.

    So we have to assume that there isn’t all these different types of cancer. Rather there is only one cancer. And we just call it different names in accordance with where it shows up.

  37. Yes, I think you are right about that Graeme, differentiating it into a 100+ classes as the quacks do is the necessary precursor to fooling people that some cancers can be graded less deadly or more treatable than others when of course that is not necessarily so at all. Some cancers have a higher five year survival rate, true, though that crude data too is very problematic for obvious reasons.

    The other thing is that there are no definitive tests – and there would have to be a zillion of them even under current conditions and known knowns – for determining whether any cancer has metastasized. Even symptomatic and biopsy verified cancer cannot be shown to have not metastasized in other parts of the body. Nor is the patient adequately if at all tested for that after a specific cancer diagnosis has been made.

  38. sorry, 100 + types (not classes)

  39. Well the thing is if you have a tumor you want to get it to go away without testing it. What you have in a tumor is the cancer sectioned off to some extent, and funnily enough it may be containing some other arch-nasty as a sort of quarantine.

    So here you have this tumor. You don’t know whether its malignant or not. But you can measure how you are doing by whether you can get it to shrink or not. Now supposing the quack pushes it. Or cuts it open for the biopsy. No longer is the cancer quarantined. Nor is the arch-nasty that the cancer has quarantined for you.

    So now the cancer and the nasty can chase eachother around your body. They can show up in your colon or make nasty shadows on your lungs. They can show up in any secreting organ. Even finding their way into your tear-ducts. They will infect every secreting organ in your body before they would invade (for example) your eyeball itself.

    Now here is the thing. Clearly if you find a large lump and you don’t know what to do about it, and you don’t know how to make it go away …. then time will be of the essence. So its inevitable, if you aren’t experienced with all the various effective components of your anti-cancer strategy …. that the time factor will force you into the hands of the money-mill.

    But supposing you’ve trialed the half a dozen components of your anti-cancer strategy prior to even suspecting you might get cancer?

    You’ve gone through the problem of taking too much of the oxidizing agent. You’ve worked out how much B17 you can work up to. You’ve gotten used to stronger and stronger alkalised water, and you have worked out your eating/alkalising schedule so that you can put away five litres of fluids during a working shift somehow.

    You’ve gotten used to all the problems of detoxification and can rid your body of more garden variety parasites without spending 2 hours of an 8 hour day detained in the toilet block.

    You know your limits and you know what to expect from every part of your anti-cancer strategy.

    Well then.

    You can be cool about it. You see the lump you go into high gear. Increasing your pH. Taking the cancer-killing B17 or some other more modern potion that you have already trialed years in advance. You’ve got your shower rigged up for incredibly hard blasing showers that pump electrons into you. You have it sussed how to work swimming in the ocean around your shedule since the ocean is pH 8+ and the crashing waves also blast you full of electrons.

    See if you already know how much of these various components you can build up to, and you’ve got some of this gear already around the house, then when you find that tumor you can go to work making it fade away of its own accord.,

    But you are only going to have the courage to do that if you sort everything out in advance. Believe me. You and I can talk tough about it, but if we haven’t rehearsed we will wimp out and be buying wigs by next Tuesday.

  40. The idea of cutting, burning and poisoning ONESELF in order to kill cancer is only a rational choice if one lacks for other options. I lacked for other options even up to a few months ago.

    Every part of your strategy ought to be of the health-building variety if you were to do these things in a less competitive and virulent way.

    So for example, pushing your pH up to 7.45 is probably good for you. I don’t know how successful one can be in trying this on, so I’ll have to confirm down the track whether this is possible.

    But supposing it is possible and supposing you can push your pH up to 7.6. Then supposing you can go higher to 7.7 but it is unhealthy to do so?

    Well curing cancer will consist of doing things that would be inherently healthful, but pushing them a bit further than the needs of good health would normally require.

    So supposing that health is optimised when you try to push pH to 7.6. Well then push it to 7.7 and cop a bit of the strain.

    And supposing you would normally use 3 drops a day of the oxidiser to get rid of some routine infection, and to use six drops a day is not unhealthy. Well when you are fighting cancer maybe you would try getting to 20 drops a day if you could handle it.

    And the same would go for B17 or whatever alternative you are using that attacks the cancer directly.

    But you would never want to use a quackademic therapy that was inherently bad for you. People cutting you up is not good when its a severe thing but its not powerfully healthy even in moderation. Paper cuts do nothing good for you physically or emotionally, and they are even pretty nasty to think about.

    Radiation in x-rays is seldom a good thing, except in the smallest background trace amounts. And posioning oneself on purpose is something you don’t need even in moderation.

    So we see that we want to have various strategies that we would like to use in moderation under normal circumstances. And cranking up to non-moderate use is an easy step should cancer rear its head.

  41. “What you have in a tumor is the cancer sectioned off to some extent”.

    No that is not necessarily the case at all which is what I was explaining. The tumour manifestation is not always the only location of cancer and it doesn’t tell you anything much about the location of dormant or aggressive cancer cells in the rest of the body.

    Graeme, if I got cancer the last thing I would think of doing is “fighting” it as the cliche du jour goes. I would probably not have surgery for many aggressive, advanced cancers and certainly not chemo or radiotherapy for very serious cancers. What for? There is no proof they cure cancer, in fact the evidence rather is against that and they can and do make your last precious months/year alive a nightmare when you could spend the time often relatively pain free doing what you most enjoy with people you want to be with.

  42. Right. There is not much in the way of evidence that these things work sure.

    But when I say “quarantined” I don’t mean in an absolutist sense. I mean if you have a tumor and you cut it open for a biopsy, this is a good way of spreading nasty things around your body. I don’t mean that the tumor signifies that there are no nasty things in the rest of your body already.

    For example if you have some part of your body that reaches a pH under 7 for a sustained period, it is likely that cancer cells would spring up their spontaneously. And if you got a tumor in the first place its likely that the pH of the organ is abnormally low.

    On another note cancer tends to attack secreting organs. All secreting organs require Iodine. Iodine is a line of defense against infections. And so Iodine is part of the protection against cancer and some of the infectious organisms that might set it off.

  43. The Japanese smoke a lot. But they also eat more Iodine more regularly than any other population on the planet. They have less cancer of all types than anyone else except for stomach cancer. Jerry Tennant thinks that the stomach cancer anomaly for the Japanese is to do with nitrates in their food neutralising the Iodine.

    So Iodine is big when it comes to dealing with and preventing cancer. And because Iodine is big, then cutting down on the Ingestion of Chlorine and Fluoride is also big. Since Chlorine and Fluoride are in the same family of elements as Iodine. And they grab onto the molecules that Iodine would normally grab onto and neutralise the effects of Iodine. This is particularly a problem where Thyroid hormone is concerned.

  44. G Edward Griffin contends that there is the phenomenon of “winter tumors” in cattle. The cattle get the tumors during the winter in some states where it snows. But in the spring the broad leaved grasses containing vitamin B17 poke through the snow. And the cattle eat it and so the tumors are re-absorbed. The cancer may well be having a protective effect against potential infectious diseases that the cattle could be subject to in its weakened and hungry winter state.

    Now we ought not infer from this that B17 is going to be all we need to cure cancer in humans. The cattle are injesting massive amounts of mildly alkaline foodstuffs and not much that is neutral or acidic. So we want to combine a strategy to raise pH with the B17. And combine this also with a strategy to wipe out infectious diseases and also with a high uptake of Iodine.

  45. yes, not just that biopsies and other cancer surgery may spread the cancer but that other diagnostic tests using radiation (mammograms and similar) may do likewise. And then the deeply problematic of using radiation (which is a known carcinogen) to supposedly “cure” cancer. It’s all kindergarten stuff and the problem is there are so many people milking the cancer industry that it will take a revolution in diagnosis and treatment for all this mistreatment and hubris and plain money gouging by capitalist medicine and its beneficiaries to be called to account and overhauled.

  46. It’s good that your genuinely skeptical mind allows you to take up such issues as the cancer wars, Graeme. It’s generally been only the Left and left leaning people who have had the guts to do so now and in the past and all advances in knowledge and caution about the triumphalism of capitalist medicine in relation to cancer treatment and cures (a complete misnomer) can be attributed overwhelmingly to genuine left-libertarians, in many case Marxists.

  47. Phil

    So you’re saying that only Marxists have been making great strides in dealing with cancer?

    Hey Bird do you agree with agree phil?

  48. Your wording isn’t quite what she said Achmed. But if you are asking me to judge the concern the hard left has shown with it versus the non-conspirational right …… I don’t know. I’m new to this sort of enquiry Achmed. If you want to get your comments through you know not to try and chase Philomena away from my blog with bad and unmanly behavior.

    She may be right you know. Or mostly right. Because I haven’t heard a great deal of non-conspirational rightists talking about what turns out to be a scandal.

    Philomena Sez:

    “…. kindergarten stuff and the problem is there are so many people milking the cancer industry that it will take a revolution in diagnosis and treatment for all this mistreatment and hubris and plain money gouging by capitalist medicine and its beneficiaries to be called to account and overhauled.”

    Yes I agree except to the extent that I prefer to classify the medical profession as a “public-private-partnership” which is the most offensive of all organisational forms. That doesn’t mean that every aspect of modern medicine is offensive. It means that insitutional dysfunction will continue to work on the profession, despite the idealism of young people seeking medical degrees.

  49. Of course, as I have intimated, the tendency for government and cancer institutes, and personally interested practitioners such as radiation therapists, surgeons, etc to say that cancer is curable has been offset increasingly effectively by the experience of cancer patients and their families and loved ones, plus the independent voice of medical journals, such as The Lancet, probably the pre-eminent journal of its kind.

    These genuinely independent voices underline in their ongoing research that with a few exceptions the incidence and survival rates of cancer today have not markedly changed in recent decades and most of any discernable improvements occurred long ago.

  50. Well cancer isn’t curable by the three mainstream strategies in any case. But they probably have quite a few good drugs up their sleave.

    People have experimented with ceasium compounds that penetrate the cancer cell without penetrating the normal cell. And the ceasium compound lifts the cancer cells pH to 8.0 and will thereby kill these cells. But this is not an entire cure on its own except with good fortune. Since we need to lift the bodies pH more generally.

    Any drug they want to throw at cancer, any cancer-attacking virus …… the cancer-network will eventually learn how to overcome. But still if the cancer can be attacked, and at the same time the bodies pH increased, then the cancer will be killed off prior to it learning how to overcome this or that nasty drug.

  51. If you are walking up the street and someone asks you for a donation for cancer research, what must be understood is that this is a waste of money. Its just helping keep the entire racket going. If they found a cancer treatment that actually worked, the institutional dysfunction (or worse) would see to it that this treatment was demonized.

    They aren’t going to change by giving them more money. There needs to be a class action against these people. I don’t want to see cancer specialists committing suicide. But they need to have their feet held to the fire for sure.

    I’ll give you an example. The idea that water ionizers represent crankery. Now this meme must have come from somewhere. But its the first time in my life I remember an electrical appliance being vehemently denounced as crankery. Its as if we are saying that the vacuum cleaner is a pimp. The liquidizer is a shady operator. The calculator is running the numbers racket. The drink vendor is poisoning the children.

    This meme was out there and hardwired into matters prior to me even finding out what a water ionizer was.

  52. “The idea of cutting, burning and poisoning ONESELF in order to kill cancer is only a rational choice if one lacks for other options. I lacked for other options even up to a few months ago. ”

    Sorry, I missed this earlier up thread. What do you mean you lacked options?

  53. Well you have to know what to do and I was unprepared. I hadn’t thought about this topic before. I had just assumed that the medical guys were doing an okay job of it.

    So had I found a big lump four months ago I’d have just followed along with what the specialist was telling me. Whereas if I found it in four months time I would have everything to hand. And if I saw the specialists, I’d at least be calling the shots.

  54. Here is a good news story. Quakademia tried to close down a couple of our good Muslim brothers who hadn’t fallen for the groupthink. But they were able to continue with their treatment in any case. Perhaps if they had been anglo they would be in jail now.

    “Akbar and Humaira Khan have since March 2007 treated cancer patients using DCA off-label at their private clinic, Medicor Cancer Centres, in Toronto.[22]

    They have treated several types of cancer and said on their web site that some patients “are showing varied positive responses to DCA including tumour shrinkage, reduction in tumour markers, symptom control, and improvement in lab tests”.[21]

    Although they have not published their results nor reported it at medical conferences, they have uploaded details of patient responses and overall statistics on their web site.[23]

    Significantly, by combining DCA with traditional chemotherapy, at least two patients have purportedly experienced complete remission of metastatic cancer[24], a response that is extremely atypical with chemotherapy alone.

    Terry Polevoy, of Kitchener, Ontario, called on the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario to take away the Khans’ licences for offering a compound that hasn’t been proven to shrink tumours in humans.

    “They are not oncologists. They should not be making these decisions. I think they should be disciplined for using this stuff. That, to me, is unethical, to use something that has never been proved to do anything.”

  55. “Whereas if I found it in four months time I would have everything to hand. And if I saw the specialists, I’d at least be calling the shots.”

    We can thank the WWW for this to a very great degree. There are still GPs who moan about the fact of its existence and accessibility to the plebs, and the fact it means in practice they have an increasing number of people fronting who have more up to date info about medical conditions and diagnostic and treatment options than they can quickly summon to mind or properly assess in the consultation timeframe.

  56. Yeah the net is way cool.

    • Much like you, Mr Bird.

  57. Now I know you are very indulgent with my poetry fixation. So I know you won’t mind if I post this one now pertinent to this discussion.

    “The wind doth blow today, my love,
    And a few small drops of rain;
    I never had but one true love,
    In cold grave she was lain.”

    “I’ll do as much for my true love
    As any young man may;
    I’ll sit and mourn all at her grave
    For a twelvemonth and a day.”

    The twelvemonth and a day being up,
    The dead began to speak,
    “Oh who sits weeping on my grave,
    And who will not let me sleep?”

    ” ‘Tis I, my love, sits on your grave
    And will not let you sleep,
    For I crave one kiss of your clay-cold lips
    And that is all I seek.”

    “You crave but one kiss of clay-cold lips,
    But my breath smells earthly strong;
    If you have one kiss of my clay-cold lips
    Your time will not be long:

    ” ‘Tis down in yonder garden green,
    Love, where we used to walk,
    The finest flower that ere was seen
    Is withered to a stalk.

    “The stalk is withered dry, my love,
    So will our hearts decay;
    So make yourself content, my love,
    Till God calls you away.”

    from “The Unquiet Grave: A Word Cycle by Palinurus” (Cyril Connolly)

  58. Mr B

    I told Mrs Hansons that you were discussing gr@v1ty. She got very Upset and Concerned for you because Mrs Hansons knows that Bad Things tend to happen to who challenges the fractional reserve Gr@v1ty Maffia. ……

    (IF I WAS TEACHING OR RESEARCHING GRAVITY AT THE UNIVERSITY I’D BE SACKED FOR SUCH POLITICALLY INCORRECT VIEWS RON. IN ONCOLOGY THEY SACK YOU, BANKRUPT YOU, OR THROW YOU IN JAIL IF YOU SHOW PEOPLE HOW TO CURE CANCER OUTRIGHT. IN PHYSICS THEY SEND YOU TO A MINIMUM WAGE JOB. SO YOU HAVE TO KEEP YOUR MATHS SKILLS UP TO DATE AND PRETEND THAT FELLOW IN THE WHEEL-CHAIR IS A GENIUS. WHICH HE ISN’T.)…..

    ….. Those Fucking Bastard Sons Of The Fractional-Reserve Ascendancy at NASA are very dangerous and have a very long reach.

    (INDEED THEY DO RON. BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THE EUROPEANS HAVE A SPACE PROGRAM. SO ALL OF A SUDDEN MARS HAS CHANGED ITS COLORS. PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND INSTITUTIONAL DYSFUNCTION. ONCE NASA PUT A RED FILTER OVER THE VIEW OF MARS, IT KEPT IT THERE FOR DECADES. SINCE NOT REINFORCING OLD LIES AND MISTAKES IS UNTHINKABLE IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR. PEOPLE NAIVELY ASSUME THAT PEOPLE WILL ACT WITH SOME SORT OF GRUDGING HALF-HONESTY. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. ONCE AN INSTITUTION GOES BAD THEY LIE ALL THE TIME EVEN WHEN THEY DON’T REALLY NEED TO. LYING, BY PUTTING A RED FILTER OVER ALL THEIR COLOR CAMERAS THAT EVER TOOK A PICTURE OF MARS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING. THERE IS NOTHING NASA WON’T LIE ABOUT. THE LIST OF THOSE MATTERS THAT NASA WILL NOT ACT DISHONESTLY ABOUT IS A SHORT ONE. NOT MANY ITEMS ON IT. THOSE ITEMS UNKNOWN. THE LIST HIDDEN FOR ALL TIME.)

    Please Mr B, Mrs Hansons is very worried and she made me promise I would ask you not to mention the “G” Word ever again.

    (TELL HER ITS OKAY. MY EMPLOYMENT SITUATION CANNOT GET MUCH WORSE. UNLESS THE FELLOW WHO WAS CHARGED WITH BURNING DOWN MY HOUSE WAS A MERE PATSY, THEN IT LOOKS LIKE I’M STILL UNDER THE RADAR.)

    Please Mr B this is even more dangerous than 9/11 or who killed Jack which is not say that all these things aren’t Related.

    (I THINK THE LAST PERSON TO BE MURDERED OVER THE KENNEDY HIT WOULD HAVE BEEN HIS SON IN ABOUT 1989. I THINK PEOPLE ARE PRETTY SAFE ON THAT SCORE NOW.)

    Not that I’ve ever thought about it but perhaps there was NASA involvement in both Jack and 9/11.

    (PERHAPS. NOT AS CRAZY AS IT SOUNDS. IT DEPENDS WHETHER NASA IS PART OF THE FRACTIONAL-RESERVE COVERT-OPERATIONS NETWORK.)

    Not saying it happened but think about it. Or maybe better if you Don’t.

    (I TAKE THE SAME VIEW. NOT SAYING IT HAPPENED. BUT THEN I DON’T KNOW THE STRUCTURE OF THE NETWORK. ALTHOUGH WE CAN BE PRETTY SURE THAT THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS NEAR THE CENTRE.)

    I’m off to the bunker with Mrs Hansons for the long weekend but I’ll see you on the flipside.

    Don’t go over to the side of darkness. I’d never know how to break such a thing to Mrs Hansons.

    Cheers,
    Ron

  59. You aren’t the first to look upon NASA with suspicion. Whereas some outfits start off sound and grow more corrupt over time, Nasa appears to have been dirty at its core from the start. And not without authentic, literal nazi influence.

  60. This is neat. The famous physician, Al-Razi, born in 865 in Persia near present day Teheran, wrote a book titled “Why People Prefer Quacks and Charlatans to Skilled Physicians”.

    His medical textbooks (over 100), along with those of the other great Muslim physician, Avincenna, served as the basic textbooks in European medical schools until at least the C17th.

    The world’s first hospitals were developed under Islam in the C8th in Baghdad, Cairo, and Damascus, as were the world’s first pharmacies.

  61. Avicenna (Ibn Sina). He was way cool too.

  62. Supposing you go to give Stanton Friedman and his critics a conceptual audit, and you want to find out who is following “best practice” in the scientific method? You want to find out whose thesis the evidence favors?

    Of course you will find that Stanton Friedman is following the evidence and his critics are just being the usual smug assholes. But what if you are troubled by the implications of this? How might the scientific method and Occam’s razor have let you down? How could a really smart and intellectually honest fellow like Stanton be stooged like this?

    To solve this mystery without prejudicing against the idea that Stanton may be quite correct, we note that Occam’s razor stops, as a valid cognitive tool, once conspiracy starts. Or at least once a well-resourced conspiracy starts. If money is no object when it comes to blowing smoke in everyone’s face, then Occam’s razor is not helpful.

    In no other category-of-situations does Occam’s razor not apply. In no other investigation will the scientific method, not be the most reliable method to try and get to the bottom of things. Occam’s razor being unhelpful, means that this is the one category of investigation wherein the scientific method, followed with powerful intelligence and scrupulous intellectual honesty, would lead you astray. Since after all the whole point of the conspiracy WOULD BE to lead you astray.

    The order of my investigations into the alien possibility was a little bit out of sync from how you would want it. So it may take me a very long time to dwell on things and to come up with an estimate that I can say to myself is an honest one.

    You see while I pretty much always, on sheer apriori grounds, followed a Von-Daniken-lite estimate of things (ie that we have probably been visited, but only every several millions, or tens of millions, of years) I had not taken the alien stories the least bit seriously. And nothing involving the written-word-alone could have shaken me out of my torpor and convinced me to do so. Since words on a page are weak evidence indeed.

    Words on a page are weak evidence, whereas Youtube is strong evidence. This is just a fact and only an idiot would say otherwise, since only with youtube (currently) can you assess how close you are to source. Reading a report can give you a CLAIM that someone said something. But youtube can tell you if he did say it, what the context was, and it can give you all the non-verbal information you need to make a best estimate if someone is full of shit. Because you can see the fellow saying what he is alleged to have said, right there on film.

    Peer review by specialists is a particularly weak tool when it comes to cognition. But far moreso if you read the summary of a written report, with a hope of picking up a whiff of the SENTIMENT attached to the wording of the study. This is the way that public servants read scientific reports. True science and the public servant are natural enemies, even as the chainsaw is the natural antagonist of the domesticated cat.

    What happened with me is I found some weird pictures on Mars and immediately presented them to Catallaxy as an object lesson of how you must follow the evidence no matter if the sky falls. Well the sky did promptly fall. Not one of the blokes on Catallaxy was either willing or able to objectively assess the pictures and put them into context.

    Forced into playing the Devils advocate, and not wanting to back down, I had to keep looking at all this stuff. The scenario of some sort of lunar-outpost, was internally consistent with economic science. Which would have been an odd coincidence. Were they aliens who built these industrial structures? Or we they us, during a prior space-age?

    If I had of looked at Stanton Friedmans presentations up front I would probably have acknowledged his superior argument but still put his views as a very distant second to the idea of a shadow government conspiracy.

    But what happened is Lloyd Pye shows up with what must be a hybrid skull. So since the scientific method is all about developing, ranking, and re-ranking hypotheses in parallel, the existence of Lloyd Pye’s hybrid skull must pull the Stanton Friedman thesis much closer to the shadow government thesis. Too close for comfort. Or another fellow might rank them in the other order, since the matter is far from resolved.

    Just to take one example of direct evidence for the Friedmanesque outlook: You see It doesn’t sound to me like Whitley Strieber is bullshitting us. It doesn’t sound like he’s lost his marbles. So if someone was painting Strieber a picture, then we are talking about a massively-resourced, flippant, and totally-ruthless shadow government apparatus …… using the flying saucer business to blow fucking smoke in all our faces. One conspiracy covering up another. Or we are talking aliens. Whereas for technical reasons I believe in ranking 3-6 competing hypotheses in parallel, in this story there is not really a close third.

    And no Jason Soon you fucking stupid Gook. I’m NOT micronising the evidence and basing it all on Whitley Strieber so lets not have any more of that Catallaxy bullshit.

    The evidence for alien intervention is so direct, sound and ubiquitous that it implies a full-blown shadow-government conspiracy to use this meme for all its worth. There are very good reasons why they would profit from doing this. And there were excellent national security reasons (back in the late forties) for why such a massive operation would have been seen as essential.

    Putting all the evidence on the table, I ought to point out that Lloyd Pye once had a spook job. I don’t place much importance on that score, since I’m not willing, on this blog, for anyone to entertain the notion that he’s bullshitting us. But still you want to put up anything that may be seen as relevant to all the various competing hypotheses.

  63. “Not one of the blokes on Catallaxy was either willing or able to objectively assess the pictures and put them into context.”

    I believe you.

    Those joyless blokes are the saddest group of fellow travellers I’ve ever come across anywhere: no sense of the numinous. no sense of awe, of possibility, of art or culture, or community.

    Of course all these are basic prerequisites for achieving anything worthwhile or indeed living a life worth living.

  64. Notice my wording. I had to use “blokes” since at least you were willing to take on the idea as an hypothetical.

    Its still hard to explain a lot of the old photos with conventional excuses.. The new ones smack of the usual bizzare NASA behavior. Since while they appear to be clearer and with greater fine detail than ever, the new pictures are actually rigged up to eliminate a lot of the “depth” you would normally get in photographs of this type.

    You go to google and dial in the exact Mars address for some of the stuff that looked amazingly suspicious in the old photos. And you have a hell of a time finding what ought to be a photo that sheds light on the old photo that looked to be evidence for artificial intervention.

    People find it hard to believe that government departments would be motivated to horde knowledge in this way. Why would they do it? This is what they say to themselves. But one has to look at their behavior straight. And not alibi them for no good cause. Imagine perpetrating a red lens hoax for decades? Incredibly corrupt behavior.

  65. Fucking NAZI Bastard.

    SOME OF THE FOUNDERS WERE LITERAL NAZIS RON.

  66. From unleashed.

    Graeme Bird :
    01 Oct 2010 9:34:35pm

    “And did you know that Australia’s productivity actually declined between 2003-04 and 2007-8?”

    The treasury only came to this conclusion since they are too stupid to measure productivity correctly. This is an important issue too. Because if this nonsense is believed it would imply that saving reduces productivity. And that going on shopping sprees increases productivity.

    By their measures output during the Christmas break would be awesome. And of course their Christmas break productivity would be through the roof.

    The fact is that treasury is filled with dummies. Thats the take-home-story here.

    Reply Alert moderator

  67. “Graeme, hopefully one day there will be a cure for many illnesses and diseases from the common cold”

    MMS ought to be useful in getting rid of colds. Its likely to be banned on account of its usefulness. I think the Canadians have banned the selling of it. And sellers aren’t allowed to point out its effectiveness.

  68. Here is a person who would fit into the Catallaxy mode. He’s claiming that he’s debunked MMS. And yet not such debunking has taken place:

    http://sites.google.com/site/mmsdebunked/

    This is what has happened to so-called “skeptics”. They don’t know what evidence is any more. So they have no idea what it takes to debunk anyone. Over at Catallaxy it is believed that you have debunked someone, merely by assuming a smug posture. Pure fantasy. Go to the mirror. Allow an expression of condescension to wash over your ugly mug ….. and according to Catallaxy you have changed the known universe. The Catallaxy approach to natural philosophy.

  69. “Acidification of Oceans May Contribute to Global Declines of Shellfish

    ScienceDaily (Sep. 29, 2010) — The acidification of the Earth’s oceans due to rising levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) may be contributing to a global decline of clams, scallops and other shellfish by interfering with the development of shellfish larvae, according to two Stony Brook University scientists, whose findings are published online and in the current issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).”

    WHAT ocean acidification John H? Where is your evidence that the oceans are not INCREASING their pH?

    Note how Cambria immediately fell for your post.

  70. Alternative view of the structure of protons.

  71. There is a fellow called Richard Guy who reckons that the seas are receding rather than rising. This sounds a little bit implausible to me so far. But he seems to be able to come up with a lot of evidence for it, when it comes to many coastal areas. I’m getting used to the quakademia being so hopeless that I’m willing to look at anything until I can find excellent evidence against it.

    So what is the evidence for the seas rising? Certainly that appears to be the uncontroversial consensus? But where is the hard evidence for this?

  72. Whereas Hydrogen and Oxygen ought to be produced disproportionately, in the process of new matter creation, still ultimately these are two elements that our atmosphere ought to be losing to space more or less constantly. So right there from first principles this receding seas idea seems plausible ….. if you are already sold on expanding earth theory.

    I’m skeptical since we’ve always been told the seas have been rising. With a 2mm per year average for perhaps the last 8000 years or so. Ergo 3mm per year in recent decades is no big deal. But recent measurements aside, its hard to know where these assumptions are coming from.

  73. “Last I read, farmed fish made up around 1/3 of total consumption, but that was from 2005. So not a majority yet, but getting closer.

    Personally I don’t see how fishing to the point that it “depletes fisheries” is anything but a self correcting problem. You catch so many of a certain kind fish that it becomes unprofitable to target them any more, but it’s still not even remotely close to endangering that species. It’s just endangering the commercial fishery of that species.”

    No no good. This works sure. But only up to a point. So for example, Yobbo’s logic meant that the Cod industry yielded untold dividends for decade after decade. Certainly a lot longer then anyone not working under the Yobbo logic would imagine. But we eventually wrecked the Cod industry AND FOR ALL TIME by resting too hard against this supposed “automatic mechanism.” The mechanism Yobbo is invoking is analogous to classical economics itself.

    Its one of those ideas that becomes the smart crowds orthodoxy a couple of decades prior to disaster. Its one of those things that you expect to become the orthodoxy, simply because its powerfully true but only up to a point. So that all the doomsayers, naysayers and worriers have switched sides.

    I could scarcely believe the stupidity of catallaxy in 2007. One of my election demands was to take aquaculture out of the tax system. We are pretty much at a peak fishing catch already. We could really devastate some of these feral species at any time. But the principle that Yobbo invokes tends to allow us to keep going with our current practices beyond the point where people have become complacent.

    This is foolishness. What ought to have happened is that the inland canals ought to have been built and the fish-farming out to have been expanding at a faster rate. Until such time where the feral stocks are so plentiful, they can serve as our fallback under disaster. And the same people at Catallaxy who were mindless CO2-bedwetters were against dealing with this authentic environmental and food-security problem with a blow against Leviathan. The stupidity never ends.

  74. Fucking fractional reservist Bastards.

  75. “last winter was the second-warmest on record.”

    No you are lying John H. You are full of shit.

  76. “Countless sceptics and even brave scientists themselves prepared to be wolf packed by political operatives have long suggested that although we know man has contributed to some warming….’

    Stop the loose talk Cambria. Even if the extra-C02 did make for a tiny warming, it has to be assumed that SO2 and pollution would win out, so our net influence would be on the cooling side.

  77. Was their a more prescient 20th century writer and thinker than Aldous Huxley?

    “The world of fishes is in a state of revolution. Within the next 20 or 30 years the strangest things may happen in that world – with incalculable results for all concerned in the catching and processing of seafood.

    This revolution in the watery world is a consequence of a larger revolution in the earth’s atmosphere – a revolution which is changing the climate of the northern hemisphere and is likely to affect profoundly the course of human history during the next few generations or even centuries. The cause of this climactic revolution are obscure; but its effects are manifest.”

    [Adonis and the Alphabet, 1956]

    • Its hard to know what he would have been talking about. In 1956 he was probably talking about global cooling. Certainly he would not have been talking about warming.

      • Well, in fact he was talking about warming. You should not jump to preconceived conclusions. That is not the scientific way. It reeks of bias and in the end constitutes junk science and self-defeating denialism.

        I’ll post the rest of the piece on which that quote is predicated, if you’re interested.

      • Sure I’m interested. Its a bit of a mystery.

  78. Huxley was a scientist and artist in one. A virtuosic man among men. Christopher Isherwood said “fearless curiosity” was one of his “noblest characteristics”.

  79. The mental handicap of Cambria and Soon continues.

    “Jason:

    I honestly don’t understand why this shocks you…”

    We are only talking about facts here you two dopes. This is a fact that they doctored the photos. And for no reason. All you have to do to prove this 100% is to compare the old US colour photos withe the new European colour photos. All the old NASA photos were put through a red filter.

    Don’t ask me why. This is what the public service does. You for example put everything through a Keynesian filter. We just have to get used to institutional dysfunction.

  80. Here is an example. You would have never seen these colours on Mars through a NASA red filter:

  81. Its just astonishing what idiots Cambria and Soon are. Both of them just imagine that they know things through extra-sensory perception. Here I am telling them facts. Easily proven facts. And they just assume I’m wrong? They cannot tell me why I’m wrong. They just assume I’m wrong.

    But we have all seen those red-filtered Mars photos. And we now have the European ones without the red filter.

    Wake up you two morons.

  82. How did these two get to be this stupid. Thats the real mystery here. What happens to these people? Are they genetically degenerate? Or did a silly aunty drop them on their heads?

  83. Is it some profound mental derangement? Do Cambria and Soon simply HAVE TO BELIEVE that NASA didn’t put a red filter on all its Mars shots?

    We have the European photos for comparison. And they don’t have a red filter on them. This is total proof. So what is this mental derangement on the part of Cambria and Soon?

  84. I think extermination is the only answer. When you have total proof like this and these fellows refuse to acknowledge it, you might as well just try and stop the stupid gene from being passed on.

  85. Pedro coming up with a powerful version of epistemology:

    “JC, without even clicking on your link, I know it was Buzz Aldrin punching some fool in the gob for suggesting the moon shot was staged in a movie studio.”

    Astonishing evidence on the part of Pedro. This is the old cunt punching someone proof. Its a done deal right there. The Americans went to the moon many times. Only the first time has anything that looks dodgy about it. But clearly the old cunt punching someone is not evidence for anything one way or another.

    But not in pedro’s book.

    We are talking about some very stupid fucking cunts over at Catallaxy.

  86. Look at these morons. Since they were proved wrong on the Mars filter, they’ve changed the subject to the Moon landing. A subject I know almost nothing about. And now Cambria, the lying cunt, has claimed that I claimed that Buzz Aldrin was a liar:

    “Yea, it was Buz. The dude was using the same as Bird referring to him as a liar.”

    Its Joseph Cambria that is the liar.

    How about your red filter story now you dumb wop? How about focusing on that you degenerate? Instead of changing the subject to some old cunt punching someone?

    Fuck me. I’ve been missing out bigtime if punching someone is now thought to be ultimate proof.

  87. Stupid Woppy.

  88. I’d like to punch that Stupid Wop Cunt right in the Schnozz. Make that Prick think before he acts like such a stupid cunt next time.

  89. Writing in 1956, Aldous Huxley said that in just one generation fish had been noticed to have been “behaving in an eccentric manner”, to wit, tuna and other fish which had been thought of as being exclusively tropical or native to the temperate zones had moved north including into the Arctic and northern Scandinavia and this was having a massive impact on the European fishing industries. He said this was due to climate change, to the warming of the Earth.

    Other evidence he provided for this included the receding of the glaciers, the diminishing of the snow packkk on mountains such as the Jungfrau, the opening of Norway’s Spitzbergen archipelago to shipping nine (previously only ever four) months each year, the steady movement of Canadian and Siberian agriculture into higher and higher latitudes, along with plants, birds and mammals hitherto unknown in those regions, forests in Africa north of the equator being replaced by savannahs and savannahs drying up into deserts.

  90. Right. Very interesting. Certainly this would have been the case a little bit earlier than that. One wonders whether he was a little out of date, Its hard to know what was going on there. Global warming really stopped around 1940. What we got since then has been achieved largely via the rigging of figures. So for example the Goddard record starts with about 15000 measuring stations, and wipes out the colder ones until they are down to a current 5000 measuring stations. So its all a big fat rort. Just constant lying.

    But the twentieth century more generally has been a period of terrific warming.

  91. No Huxley wasn’t out of date. The man was scrupulous in what he wrote. He is utterly reliable in the scientific arena, i.e. he didn’t distort or lie, though he may be challenged over some of his (unrelated) sociological interpretations (such as his views about national and class levels of intelligence.

    His evidence about climate change in the early 50s as summarised is wide ranging, indeed global. And up-to-date at that precise time. The earth was warming at least at the time he wrote this. He would not have written what he did in 1956 if what he recounted had been in evidence only up until 1940, as you claim. That is highly unlikely, highly improbable given Huxley’s access to and study of scientific data and knowledge, and his always scrupulously honest, disinterested investigation of it, a hallmark of this great man.

  92. The earth was warming at least at the time he wrote this.

    No phil, you’re wrong as usual. The earth was cooling at the time. The earth cooled from the 40’s to the 70’s.

    BUT NOT CONSISTENTLY SO. IT WAS ALL OVER THE PLACE. IT WASN’T REALLY UNTIL THE 70’S THAT A CLEAR COOLING TREND COULD BE SEEN TO BE IN PLACE. SO IT WOULD BE VERY EASY TO BE TALKING ABOUT WARMING IN THE 50’S, EVEN IF IN RETROSPECT IT HAD RUN OUT BY ABOUT 1940.

  93. The US south of course in the period Huxley wrote this piece and was referring to (i.e. the 1950s, early 60s) was in the grip of a severe persistent drought with attendant very high temps, and water shortages. Huxley also documented this.

  94. Solar cycle 19 was on at the time. From a sunspot point of view it was the biggest of the century.

    “Solar Cycle 19. Cycle 19 began in April 1954 with a smoothed sunspot number of 3.4 and ended in October 1964.”

    So its very likely there were a lot of hot days around at the time. When we are talking global averages its also to do with which phase you are in, in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

  95. Absolute scandal to do with unscience when it comes to AIDS.

  96. The US south of course in the period Huxley wrote this piece and was referring to (i.e. the 1950s, early 60s) was in the grip of a severe persistent drought with attendant very high temps, and water shortages. Huxley also documented this.

    And I’m sure if he looked around other places in the world he would have found flooding.

    YOU MAY BE A LITTLE NEW TO THE PROBLEMS WITH GLOBAL AVERAGES CAMBRIA. ITS NOT THE CASE THAT HUXLEY WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE HAD THE SIBERIAN FIGURES TO HAND. WHEN HE HAD THE UNEQUIVOCAL WARMING IN THE EARLY CENTURY, PARTICULARLY THE 30’S, AND THEN HE’S TALKING DURING THE STRONGEST SOLAR CYCLE OF THE CENTURY BY SOME MEASURES.

  97. The only stupid person here at the mo, JC, is your own dumb, unlovely self. Go take a bath there’s a good chap and lay off the giveaway ad homs. It’s always a signal that you’re literally lost for intelligent words in the face of an overwhelmingly superiorpolitical opponent.

    btw, the only thing big about my head is my hair. True I havevery big hair, natural of course, my luxuriant locks being, oh, about 10th on the list of my best (physical) features. Or so I’m often told.

    Eat yr heart out, gasper.

  98. Graeme, what is yr ancestry on both sides? Irish and what else?

    • I think its basically British Isles.

      • British Isles is a big and diverse place. And people moved all over and too and from it.

        Still, it’s worth trying to pinpoint, not least because it’s so historically instructive and a bit like solving a mystery. Always fun.

  99. This AIDS story just gets worse. The quackademics were prescribing all these horribly damaging drugs that killed all these people. Ghastly stuff.

    AZT for example. Its side-effects indistinguishable from what we colloquially imagine to be the symptoms of AIDS. So these guys were killing people from prescription. So they were essentially prescribing people into coffins.

  100. Finally a good story. This kid had HIV. She was prescribed AZT. So she started getting the symptoms of AIDS. Started losing weights and getting cramps. But these are symptoms of AZT.

    Fortunately her parents took her off the drugs in time. And she’s almost 19 years old at the time of the documentary. But many parents would have doggedly continued with the drugs and killed their kids.

    The terror of the collapse of the scientific method never ends.

  101. Graeme there’s a fabulously revealing piece in a recent edition of the LRB about how clinical trials for drugs developed by big pharma and their investors, e.g. NASA, are carried out in a completely unregulated and harmful way on the American poor and in the most economically deprived and desperate countries of the world, such as the the central Asian countries of the former USSR.

  102. Right. Its such a scandal the whole thing. We have to get rid of patents and government funded research. Without the patents these guys won’t have the financial incentive to screw things up the way they do.

    The destruction of infectious diseases is actually a pretty simple undertaking. You follow the bodies lead. You want to oxidize any invader. But since you cannot target the invader like the white corpuscles would do, you need an oxidiser somewhat weaker then what the body uses. The body uses ozone and hydrogen peroxide. Well we can use these too and they will work. But they are strong enough to do damage to human cells as well.

    So the idea is to have weaker oxidisers then that. But still strong enough to wipe out all the pathogens. Which tend to be anaerobic and weaker.

    Well we have such oxidisers now. So we don’t need all these drugs, which are for the most part pretty useless.

  103. “We have to get rid of patents and government funded research”

    Actually the problem is that pharma companies in the recent past have been in search of cheaper venues and today around 70% of clinical trials take place in the private sphere in a wholly Taylorised corporate system guided by the profit motive at the expense of people and their needs or even the common good.

  104. It ought to be just an American problem. Since the FDA is a big problem there. But the scientific method isn’t being followed in other countries either. So we tend to follow along with whatever the FDA winds up deciding.

  105. Of course, the majority, the poor, can resort to litigation against Big Pharma.

    Litigation is the classic libertarian alternative to regulation, innit?

  106. I wouldn’t see it that way. I’d see the legal system as another body wrapped up with government, and another scam. More an income-support-scheme for lawyers. And not an extension of natural law.

    So I don’t see litigation as any answer. If this sort of thing is happening, and there isn’t some guilty individuals to prosecute, then we are talking a systemic problem that needs a systemic solution. It looks to me like economic fascism has run amok. When I say economic fascism, I mean we have a runaway problem involving the nexus of government and big corporations.

    So you clip the wings of both. You take away patent protection. Make ltd liability imply 100% equity finance. Cut off the funds from the FDA and a string of other agencies. This sort of thing.

  107. I think you’ll find that “libertarian” legal practitioners today are individuals who abhor state legislation and regulation for the principal reason that they’re self-interested ambulance chasers who willingly help subvert justice and will happily flout even formal law in order to make a buck and earn a place at the corporate table.

    Utterly contemptible creatures and don’t they know it.

  108. Well you see state regulation may be necessary in the current setup. But it is state regulation that is THE PROBLEM here. So whereas I might disagree with some of the people you are talking about, there can be no question that state regulation is no good answer to the problem, since state regulation is bound up with the problem.

    You can have state regulation. You cannot have something like the FDA. The FDA is rubber-stamping all the evil stuff that goes on out there, and imprisoning anyone who actually goes out there and cures anyone. They are a giant killing machine. They ARE the regulators you see. The problem is not one of lack of regulation. It is much more a total systemic failure then just some sort of unwillingness to regulate.

    Worst of all is the rejection of the scientific method.

  109. Really this is the big problem. Not regulations. But REGULATORY AGENCIES. If the regulations are sunsetted and there is no agency attached to them, this is a chance that over the long haul the democratic process might have us retaining the more sensible ones.

  110. More on the AIDS unscience:

  111. Our current medical failures, with AIDS, cancer, and against things that actually work ….. this is a much bigger scandal then the business with that Stalin-era scientist that caused a few problems. Its a far more systematic campaign against the scientific method. And its a situation where far more people are being killed.

  112. It may sound like I’m letting the big companies off the hook. This is not the case. But the more you hear about these scams the more you see the hateful role that various government-funded bodies play in this anti-science. Of course the most extreme case is every international body that has backed the global warming business. But its the same in cancer and AIDS. You have formal international and national bodies and departments locking these terrible problems in.

  113. Bird;

    What exactly is this theory of yours about cancer, as you seem to be every where about it? Are you saying that if I drink purified water it would limit my chances of getting cancer or if someone has it, it would eliminate it?

    Is this what you’ve arrived at?

    WHERE DID I SAY THAT IF YOU DRINK PURIFIED WATER IT WOULD CURE CANCER YOU INCREDIBLE BLOCKHEAD? ASK YOURSELF? “HOW COULD DRINKING PURIFIED WATER CURE SOMEONE OF CANCER?” IF YOU HAD A BRAIN IN YOUR DEAD WOPPY HEAD YOU WOULD REALISE THAT THERE WOULD BE NO WAY THAT PURIFYING THE WATER AND DRINKING IT COULD CURE ANYTHING AT ALL. LEAST OF ALL CANCER. FOR FUCKSAKES YOU DUMB WOP. CAN YOU PUT YOUR THINKING CAP ON?

  114. Fuck off Woppy.

    If you’d been paying attention, you wouldn’t need to ask such bloody stupid questions.

    Just fuck off.

    THERE-THERE. THERE-THERE. I KNOW ITS UPSETTING. TRYING TO MAKE YOUR WAY IN THIS WORLD AS THE NEW DARK AGES CLOSES IN. THE WAVES OF STUPIDITY JUST KEEP COMING. BUT DON’T LET HIM UPSET YOU TOO MUCH. SOMEONE OUT THERE WILL GET THE MESSAGE AND SAVE HIS LITTLE GIRL FROM THE QUAKADEMICS AND THATS WHAT ALL OF US HAVE TO FOCUS ON.

  115. Fucking hell. Cambria has really excelled himself in the department of stupid and now its time for his promotion. This is what happens when the culture turns bad. A dumb wop, barely out of the trees, is seen to be a fine upstanding fellow. Too stupid to ask too many thorny questions, and ripe to be groomed for the big jobs. The big jobs of a sort where you don’t have to do any work, or create anything.

  116. The Russians are forecasting and gearing up for the coldest winter in 1000 years.

    http://rt.com/prime-time/2010-10-04/coldest-winter-emergency-measures.html

  117. Bird:

    I presume you’re talking to me and not the wop.

    But isn’t you cancer cure a course of purified water?

    FOR FUCKSAKES MAN. I WILL REPEAT:

    “WHERE DID I SAY THAT IF YOU DRINK PURIFIED WATER IT WOULD CURE CANCER YOU INCREDIBLE BLOCKHEAD? ASK YOURSELF? “HOW COULD DRINKING PURIFIED WATER CURE SOMEONE OF CANCER?” IF YOU HAD A BRAIN IN YOUR DEAD WOPPY HEAD YOU WOULD REALISE THAT THERE WOULD BE NO WAY THAT PURIFYING THE WATER AND DRINKING IT COULD CURE ANYTHING AT ALL. LEAST OF ALL CANCER. FOR FUCKSAKES YOU DUMB WOP. CAN YOU PUT YOUR THINKING CAP ON?”

    FOR THE LOVE OF GOD MAN. ATTEMPT TO BE LESS OF A DUMB CUNT WILL YOU?

  118. You ought to understand Cambria, that you brought this level of stupidity to most issues since about 2007. It is with that same determined dumbness that you judged, for example. the problems with Obama’s background. You might want to go back to some of these issues wherein you made an idiot of yourself. Like for example the idea that you just knew that Obama was born in Hawaii.

  119. Okay Bird, Got ya. So purified water doesn’t cure cancer.

    So what is the discovery you’ve found. How does one cure cancer? What potion have you found?

    ITS NOT ABOUT POTIONS. ITS ABOUT STRATEGIES BASED AROUND THREE PARADIGMS OF CANCER. NONE OF WHICH CONTRADICT THE OTHERS OUTRIGHT. THE PATIENT NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THE THINKING OR HE’LL SCREW IT UP.

    NOW TELL ME SOMETHING. IS THERE ANYONE YOU CAN HELP WHO HAS CANCER? I’M NOT INCLINED TO HURRY THIS ALONG. BUT IF THERE IS SOMEONE YOU CAN HELP THEN I’LL TRY AND GET IT DONE.

  120. I’m sorry to say but you’re all over the place on this Bird.

    Now please summarize this new medical paradigm.

  121. I’ve got three or four paradigms to understand cancer.

    1. In the first paradigm I’m saying the mainstream theories of evolution are way insufficient to explain the complexity of the cell and the consequent complexity of human life. The complexity of the genome is less problematic. Up until recently it was thought that the complexity of the genes took in the complexity of the cell. But now we know that this is not the case. The cell is every bit as complex as the human body itself. Its an incredible thing. Its as if the world is fractal and maintains its complexity when things get really little. Its hard to understand how evolution can account for it.

    That is to say evolution near the surface of planet earth. There is one place on planet earth where the conditions exist for the evolution of greater and greater complexity at the cellular level. That place is the mid-ocean ridge. Thousands of kilometres of erupting volcanoes, deep in the water. The underwater mountain range, if flattened, would be one third the earths surface. The cellular life down there is advantaged if it gets close to the source of energy. But since the eruption is variable, a strategy of closeness to energy will lead to periodic annihilation.

    Near the eruption the water is presumably acidic. The further back you go the water is presumably more alkaline. Thus the scenario is set up for electrical flows. And predators who wish to stay back from the energy source.

    The problem is that there was no mid-ocean ridge on the early earth. The oceans, or most of them, are very young. So we cannot have the mid-ocean ridge as our explanation for the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION. So we must interpolate some setup in the deeper earth that allowed for growing complexity of cells …….

    …… Or an alternative is the mid-ocean ridge ON A PLANET FAR FAR AWAY AND LONG LONG AGO.

    As far as cancer is concerned the paradigm is one of DEVOLUTION. The cancer cell devolves to a cell that can live close to the erupting lava. It is still an electrical system. But it exists and can only survive in, an acidic environment. It must be able to cope with all the other little critters that like the acidic aneorobic environment. O2 doesn’t come out of volcanoes. So the cancer cell must be able to live in a high-CO2 low O2 environment. And it must be able to defeat all other organisms that also like this environment.

  122. Paradigm 2 is a simple version of paradigm one.

    Our healthy cells are an electrical appliance and a system of electrical flows. But so is the cancerous cell. In this story each cell lives in its own preferred voltage range with very little overlap.

    As it turns out high pH means lots of O2 dissolved in our body. Since our bodies are about 70% water. The high pH water that comes out of the Alkaliser is chock-full of tiny bubbles of O2.

    Almost all friendly bacteria like O2 and are robust critters with strong cell walls. Almost every pathogen is weak, as evil is fundamentally weak. The harmful bacteria, fungus, and viruses are weak and they hate O2. So getting rid of cancer and most of the invaders that give us trouble is simply a matter of raising pH under this paradigm.

    Its really all about adding electrons and adding O2 to make all the bad pathogens go dormant. You could do it with well-placed electrical current. You could do it with a fantastically healthy thyroid. You could do it with Alkaline water.

  123. The third paradigm is simply that cancer tends to be the result of exceeding the Hayflick limit.

    When you take a human cell and try and grow it in the lab it will divide a finite number of times and then it will grow old and stop dividing. Cancer often comes in those areas where the cell is stressed and damaged so much as to push it above its hayflick limit. But some parts of the body are able to exceed their Hayflick limit. For example John H came up with a study that seemed to suggest that something in BILE allows the Hayflick limit to be exceeded. And you can see why that makes sense. Since your stomach wall is always being broken down by stomach acids. And so they need to continue beyond the normal limit of cells dividing.

    So its no absolutist thing this Hayflick limit. This is why this paradigm needs to be sort of sumperimposed on other paradigms.

    But what we are saying here is that many things can cause cancer. Funguses and viruses, and too much UV rays, and too much of the harder hooch burning your oesophegus, and too much cigarette smoke damaging your lung cells and so forth

  124. The next paradigm, that is to say PARADIGM 4 is the idea that cancer has come to haunt the human race as a runaway evolutionary response to infectious diseases.

    Think back to the time before the Portuguese and Spanish Empires got going. Back then you had a pretty strong division of the races. Back then Europeans tended to mix with Europeans. Your average bloke never went further then fifty miles from his birthplace, unless he was part of a tribal migration that displaced other tribes.

    Well yes there were earlier times of international trade and the mixing of people from distant lands. But whenever you had this trade and this mixing you would have the pestilence. Trade brought greater wealth to the seafaring tribes for sure. But it also brought the plagues. The Celts in England were better traders than the Anglo-Saxons. They had their trading partners in Gaul, whereas the Germanic tribal peoples tended to keep to themselves more. And the Celts most likely had these guys beaten back after the initial inroads of the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes.

    But then trade brought the plague to the Celts. The tables were turned in favor of the Anglo-Saxons. And the Anglo-Saxons began an era of ass-kicking, that in effect didn’t end until perhaps the last few years.

    Now take the situation from the age of colonisation onwards. And even more extreme then that from the industrial revolution onward. Here was the opportunity for massive affliction by way of infectious disease.

    This time around we had the wealth in the lower classes, and the ability to provide clean drinking water. Then from Louis Pasteur onward we had the knowledge of sanitation.

    But never before did we have this level of human populations travelling and mixing and being able to pass on infections. Yes we managed to mitigate the really big pandemics, the post World War I pandemic was the exception ……

    …. But the thing was, the human race was bombarded with infectious diseases like never before after the industrial revolution. That we tended to side-step outright pestilence is neither here nor there. The human cells were being bombarded by all manner of infections. AND NOTHING CONTROLS INFECTIONS LIKE CANCER.

    Supposing you have a cancer patient. And he’s riddled with cancer throughout his body but because of various treatments he’s not yet on his deathbed. You can throw a great deal of infections at him and the cancer will quarantine these infections for him.

    And infectious disease in the old days could kill you in three days flat. Whereas cancer might take three years to kill you, and thats if you are pretty unlucky.

    The likelihood is, is that the post-Industrial Revolution human race began to evolve a greater level of background cancer cells to deal with this bombardment of infectious invaders. A Melbourne genius cancer-fighter, who I referenced at an earlier date but whose name escapes me right now ………

    …. He points out that the credit for the fight against infectious disease is usually sheeted off to penicillin. And others give a lot of the credit to vaccinations. But the story is far less clear than that. Since death from infectious diseases was falling PROGRESSIVELY for a long time before penicillin showed up. Before vaccination was widely used. So whereas these factors may have played a part, the species getting a greater and greater propensity for the generation of cancer cells might be part of this story also.

    • Quite right, Mr B. The Wogs and Darkies are a Cancer on Western Civilisation. Don’t even ask about the Jews.

      RON I KNOW YOU ARE UPSET. BUT I TAKE A VERY DIM VIEW OF PEOPLE COMING DOWN ON BLACK PEOPLE AROUND HERE BECAUSE OF ALL THE SUFFERING THAT LEFTIST ELITES HAVE VISITED UPON THE BLACK MAN. YOU CAN HASSLE JEWS ALL YOU WANT, JUST SO LONG AS ITS SPECIFICALLY SINCLAIR DAVIDSON AHEAD OF HIM BACKING DOWN ON THE KEYNESIAN MULTIPLIER AND APOLOGIZING FOR HIS STUPIDITY MORE GENERALLY.

      • Wops and blacks

        aren’t they the same race if they’re from the south of Italy?

        A LOT OF BLACK PEOPLE WOULD BE MIGHTILY OFFENDED BY YOUR TAKE ON MATTERS.

  125. Paradigm 5 is the idea that VOLTAGE IS HEALING. And that for the most part higher voltage, or higher pH is desirable in the human body.

    When the pH is higher there is more oxygen dissolved in to the body since the body is 70% water. When the pH is higher, then there is more electrical energy for cell growth and therefore for healing. There is a greater ability for the body to fight infections, and the infections go away of their own accord because of the higher pH and the greater preponderance of oxygen.

    With reference to most of the other paradigms, when pH is higher, the cancer doesn’t like it and won’t multiply. But also the impetus for the cancer cells to be produced or converted is less there because most of the infectious diseases are now dormant.

  126. What a Dirty fractional reservist Bastard. No wonder you are pissed off, Mr B.

    RIGHT. BUT HE MAY BE ENQUIRING AS A WAY TO GET ME TO HURRY IT ALONG, ON THE GROUNDS THAT HE KNOWS SOMEONE WITH CANCER. IF THAT IS THE CASE THATS OKAY. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE THE CASE WHICH IS WHY I STAYED UP TYPING.

    • Who?

      I was talking about that Dirty Jew Bastard, not Woppy.

      Why would I call Woppy a Jew? He’s too stupid to be a Jew.

      The Lord knows he’s greedy enough to pass for Hebrew though.

  127. Cambria, it is important for you, as head bloke in your household, to put together your cancer fighting strategy into operation and have various trials afoot, before anyone actually gets cancer. Otherwise the time factor will put the victim in the hands of the quackademics so if you are unwilling to prepare in advance, you might as well go shopping for wigs now.

    Condensing all of the above down to the level of strategy we find that we want to do just a few things.

    1. Add electrons TO/Raise pH IN the body generally.

    2. Add electrons and O2 to the afflicted area specifically.

    3. Target infections generally. After all; under at least two of the paradigms, these various infections may be stimulating the cancer cells.

    4. Target the cancer cells directly.

    Now we see that you can kill infections and not cure disease. For example if you are low PH, this encourages all manner of pathogens to come alive and start doing you damage. If your only tool is to kill them directly, then you are left with all these dead bugs in your system and new bugs growing all the time. You can kill them and kill them and kill them some more. Each day you will visit the toilet relentlessly as your body tries to deal with the dead bugs you are murdering.

    But you cannot end the disease this way. Since you are providing the ideal growing environment for pathogens, and yet you are leaving yourself with a poor environment for the generation of new human cells.

    Its actually surprisingly easy to kill infections. And it may be pretty easy to kill cancer cells also. But you cannot cure disease by killing one or the other or both ….. in the absence of changing the growing environment that is your body.

  128. Don’t expect Woppy to be grateful for your Sage Advice, Mr B.

    NO OF COURSE NOT.

  129. Putting the strategy together we find that the infection killers are the water purifiers.

    We have Jim Humbles miracle mineral supplements one and two. We have hydrogen-peroxide but thats less important and ought to be used infrequently. The other two are weaker and therefore (paradoxically) far superior.

    We also have Iodine. Another water purifier and also important for maintaining body voltage. But we can get too much too quickly of Iodine. There is a case on the books at the moment where there is a class action against a Japanese Soy Milk producer. Japanese are used to high levels of Iodine, which is why they have the lowest cancer rates in the world. But apparently the levels of Iodine in this Soy milk was too much for Aussies who had all sorts of problems.

    So you’ve got to build up your intake of Iodine slowly and you have to know when to back off. Iodine will protect you from both infectious diseases AND cancer AND it will help you maintain a high pH. But take too much and you can get very sick very quickly. We are not Japanese after all.

    On top of all that you want a top of the line water alkaliser.

    And to kill the cancer cell directly …….. WHICH COUNTER-INTUITIVELY IS ONLY ONE PART OF THE STRATEGY ….. you want “vitamin B17”

    The reason why cancer was such a tough nut to conquer was that people thought in terms of A (UH) CURE.

    But its not about UH QUEWER. Its about a strategy based on the totality of ones understanding of the problem.

    If b17 works as advertised it will kill millions of cancer cells every day you take it. But still, this is insufficient to be free of the disease and to guarantee survival, for the reasons explained in the last few posts.

  130. Sure this fellow is deluded. But the behavior of white leftist elites certainly makes it very easy for this fellow to make this case. And its very easy to see how he came to this point of view.

  131. The more one looks at mainstream science the more one finds out what a scam it is. I still haven’t been able to find evidence for this contention that the sea level typically rises. I don’t know if seas rising is just a late twentieth century phenomena and the rest of the time the seas tend to recede. It certainly looks that way.

    I mean how could these scientists cock something like that up so badly? Why make these claims, and lock them in, when they don’t know for sure either way? They must have been relying on ice melt alone.

    From here on in we have to assume that the sea is receding and opening up new land all the time.

    Growing earth theory would probably have a deeper ocean, with more water all the time BUT A RECEDING SEA AS THE PLANET GROWS FASTER THAN THE OCEANS.

    So you have the earth expanding. Being blown up like a balloon. But since water is oxygen and hydrogen, these gases will be lost to space over time. Whereas many of the elements that make up the land won’t be lost at all.

    So though there is more water on earth every day the seas ought still recede. And the testimony of the scientific community aside, this does seem to have happened.

    • “I still haven’t been able to find evidence for this contention that the sea level typically rises. I don’t know if seas rising is just a late twentieth century phenomena and the rest of the time the seas tend to recede. It certainly looks that way. ”

      The east coast of Australia is magnificent evidence of rising sea levels. Sydney Harbour, Broken Bay and Botany Bay are all drowned river valleys.

      Milford, Doubtful and the other exquisite Sounds in NZ likewise are sea-drowned glacial valleys.

      • Right. Thanks for that. I know that Delta areas are typically sinking. But where all the action was in the ancient world. Thiese areas seem to have risen.

  132. Some good work by our female economists. Good article by Julie Novak at unleashed. Interesting article by Judith Sloan in the Australian. Talking about geography and economics. I’m not sure I’d draw the same conclusions with regards to the city-country debate. Since “consolidation” in that context could mean a population drain (for example) from New York to Silicon Valley.

    There is a town South of Chiang Mai that is famous for ceramics. Now if ceramics there boomed, and the place wound up taking people from Chiang Mai, this could be part of population consolidation. Its not always from the smaller to the bigger towns.

    • Graeme, Judith Sloan is a not very bright lemon-mouthed female eunuch who has chosen to serve the machine.

      • If she writes stuff I don’t think is particularly good I reserve the right to mention it. If she were to endorse the Keynesian multiplier like that dummy Sinclair, I will not go easy on her. But for the moment I think its good to accentuate the positive. The article started particularly well. And I would have liked to see her continuing with the analysis of spatial matters in economics. She mentioned that the ideologues (not her words) got rid of the historians of economics and the people who studied economic geography. Which furnishes a bit of an explanation to me why this generation of Australian economists are so damned narrow in their vision. In New Zealand when I did my degree, we had dudes from many different Keynesian perspectives. I know that sounds like a bad joke but it isn’t.

        The Otago economics faculty at the time, was this outfit where economists from all over the world seemed to show up between more weighty appointments. The Keynesian bias was palpable, but aside from that these guys were coming in from all these different perspectives. Whereas in Australia a quarter of a century on, you have this horrible tunnel vision.

        I tried to explain to Andrew Leigh the importance of economic history. That the history of the subject was nine-tenths of the subject and that a research scientist ought to be a dab-hand at the history of thought in the area he is researching. Leigh didn’t get it the blockhead. He figured he had his paradigm and he knew what was going on.

        I’ve never seen such a deterioration in the breadth and depth of economic thought in a localised area. I mean we never took our various economic models seriously. We knew they weren’t the reality. But the dummies on Catallaxy and equally on Club Sissy seem to have fallen for their models.

        We had this Scottish fellow who was an economic historian. He was just magnificent. I’d always see him in the London hotel with a jug in front of him talking with these pretty proletarian looking types. When I went to his lectures I had to use a pencil since I couldn’t get it all down fast enough with a pen. He was a specialist in Russian economic history apparently but we didn’t have lectures so much in that. I remember when it came to the Great Depression, and since this is a subject that has been the subject of so much lying I was expecting that maybe he’d let us down. He explained various theories of the depression. And then he says: “Regretably we have to concede that Milton Friedmans thesis is fundamentally right….”

        This was the sort of crowd we had back in those days. They could be hard left or coming from any crazy point of view you can imagine. But you would often have these oddballs who took their science seriously, and when the other fellow was right they would admit it openly.

        Thats all gone now it seems.

  133. Bird your expanding earth theory is one of his more ridiculous and easily disproved. We know that various places were joined relatively recently (ie 100 million years ago) and are now 1000′s of kms apart eg. Sth America and Africa.

    EXACTLY. AND HERE YOU PROVE THE EXPANDING EARTH THESIS OUTRIGHT. THESE ARE CONTINENTS EDNEY. THEY ARE NOT INFLATABLE RAFTS. WITHOUT EXPANDING EARTH YOU CANNOT SO MUCH AS DRAW THE FORCE VECTORS THAT COULD MOVE THEM AROUND. WHERE WAS THE FORCE APPLIED TO MOVE CONTINENTS IN YOUR FANTASY EDNEY?

    If you assume that is due to expansion then the earth is expanding far too rapidly and is only a few hundred million years old.

    NO THATS COMPLETELY WRONG. WE KNOW THAT THE EARTH EXPANSION IS EXPONENTIAL. THE OCEAN FLOOR HAS BEEN TESTED FOR AGE AND WE HAVE THE COLOUR CODING TO SEE WHICH AREAS GREW AND HOW FAST THEY GREW. THE LAST TEN MILLION YEARS GAVE US MORE SURFACE AREA THEN THE TEN MILLION PRIOR. THE NEXT TEN MILLION YEARS WILL BE FASTER STILL. THE LAST TEN MILLION YEARS GAVE US NEW AREA THE SIZE OF AFRICA. BUT THE GROWTH OF MARS AND THE MOON, BY COMPARISON IS VERY SLOW.

    Not to mention even if you accept that matter is being created in the earth, the two most obvious assumptions (constant rate of creation over time, or creation proportional to mass) give in the first case gives no enough change in gravity to the dinosaurs (only a few percent).

    WELL THATS JUST SILLY. WOULD YOU EXPECT A SMALL OBJECT IN THE ASTEROID BELT TO BE AN EFFICIENT MASS-CONVERTER? NO OF COURSE NOT. OBVIOUSLY THERE WILL BE ECONOMIES OF SCALE HERE. YOU ARE BEING SILLY EDNEY. SINCE YOU ARE IGNORING THE THESIS AND MAKING IT UP AS YOU GO ALONG. THE THESIS IS EXPONENTIAL GROWTH. ITS NOT YOUR THESIS SO YOU DON’T GET TO MAKE IT UP AS YOU GO ALONG IN YOUR APPRAISAL OF IT. SO YOU ARE BEING UNSCIENTIFIC.

    If you calibrate a model with mass increase proportional to current mass (ie exponetial growth of mass) to give say 75% of gravity at the time of the dinosaurs you run into a different problem. (On top of the continental drift argument above).

    NO YOU DON’T RUN INTO ANY PROBLEM AT ALL. WE KNOW THE GROWTH WAS EXPONENTIAL SINCE WE HAVE THE AGES OF THE OCEAN FLOOR.

    Although the change in gravity per year would be relatively small. Here we would see observable shifts in the orbit of the moon.

    WE DO HAVE OBSERVABLE SHIFTS IN THE ORBIT OF THE MOON. SO THATS MORE EVIDENCE IN FAVOUR OF THE THESIS.

  134. We have to accept that the earth is expanding. Since we cannot explain what we observe any other way.

  135. Graeme@12:55

    Sounds like you had the very best education. You certainly have a very enquiring mind.

    Universities have certainly degenerated in recent decades thanks to the Dawkinisation process onwards and education geared primarily for the market and the vocational/career overemphasis.

  136. Well you could blame it on Dawkins I suppose. And one sees the correlation. But I would say its an inevitable deterioration under socialism and corporatism. I would suspect the deterioration started before Dawkins and took Dawkins in its stride.

  137. WE KNOW THAT THE EARTH EXPANSION IS EXPONENTIAL. …. THE LAST TEN MILLION YEARS GAVE US MORE SURFACE AREA THEN THE TEN MILLION PRIOR. THE NEXT TEN MILLION YEARS WILL BE FASTER STILL. THE LAST TEN MILLION YEARS GAVE US NEW AREA THE SIZE OF AFRICA

    Of so the earth surface area grew 5.9% over the last ten million years.

    Since we know the size and that its exponential (in area you seem to be suggesting) we can work that 150,000,000 years ago the earth was (0.941)^15 times smaller. about 40% of the total surface area at the late jurassic, and gravity would have been around 2/3 of the current level.

    • When I say exponential growth I’m not saying the earth dances on a chain to some sort of mathematical formula. I don’t know exactly what the theory says. But one would expect that the earth was about the size of Mars back then, and not too much bigger when the dinosaurs copped it. The growth has really sped up since then.

      You see we didn’t have the oceans 150 million years ago. And were only just starting to get them when the dinosaurs died out. We know this from the age of the ocean floors. So this is very sound science with a great amount of empirical evidence to it.

  138. Mr B

    There is no reason to treat the fractional reservist scientist Edney with such kid gloves.

    HE’S NOT BEING TOO BAD HERE. HE’S JUST TAKING AWHILE TO GET ON TOP OF THE SHOCKING PARADIGM. BUT THIS IS THE STRONGEST OF THE PARADIGMS I PUT FORTH HERE. MATTERS COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED ANY OTHER WAY. YOU CANNOT DRAW THE FORCE VECTORS THAT COULD EXPLAIN THE CONTINENTS MOVING ANY OTHER WAY.

  139. Alfred Wegener, the German meterologist said the six continents were once one huge continent and that they’d arrived at their present position by drifting like huge icebergs.

    His theory (continental drift) was tested when he and others began to work out how the actual land masses would have been pieced together. As the continents consist of land below sea level because sea levels have risen and fallen throughout geological time, as ice ages have lowered the water table and warmer times raised them, so the continental shelves – those areas currently below water but relatively shallow, before the contours fall off sharply by 1000s of feet – can be the bits that help work out how each continent fitted together with the others.

    • Right. Its little known, but that Wegener was a proponent of growing earth theory as well. But he must have come to the conclusion at some stage that it was a bridge too far. A bit like Milton Friedman. Friedman started off believing in 100% backing. He must have concluded early on by the insane and obsessive reaction to 100% backing, that he had to find a substitute. That 100% backing was a bridge too far. So he came up with this idea of the “monetary rules” which was not really a total failure. But there were problems with it. It wound up being what Bob Ellis called “Sado-monetarism.”

      One could make the argument, if I’m right in my contention, that Friedman “sold out” as it were. But its a very tough gig with these sacred cows. Do you really have to sacrifice your entire career on the grounds of whining?

      So anyway both of them appeared to have taken the soft option. But Friedman says to Bill Still over the phone “Listen boy. It doesn’t matter if you get rid of the Federal Reserve. You won’t have done a DAMN THING unless you get rid of fractional reserve.” And of course he’s right. Unless you get rid of fractional reserve the exploitation and overlordship of the central bank will make a comeback.

      Well with Wegener he seems to have noticed that the continents fitted both ways. But if he had up and said that he would have been coming up against this physics bullshit-artists. And so he seems to have formulated a bogus theory, based on the idea of the Atlantic being new but the Pacific being old. When the work was done later on it was found that both Atlantic and Pacific were new.

  140. The age of the oceans was calculated by geologists thusly. Their starting point was the assumption that the world’s oceans initially consisted entirely of fresh water, but gradually accumulated salts washed off the continents by the world’s rivers. By calculating how much salt is deposited in the oceans each year, and dividing that into the overall salinity of the world’s body of sea water, a figure for such salination was able to be deduced. The best answer at the moment is between 100 and 200 million years.

    The seabed was formed by rocks emerging from the depths of the earth, which then spread out across the sea-floor, literally pushing the continents apart. This confirmation (by US oceanographers) of continental drift achieved by seafloor spreading occurred in 1965 more than half a century after Wegener first proposed it in 1912.

    In the 1950s, seismic shocks from atomic bomb explosions allowed for this calculation: that the ocean floor is only about 6kms thick, whereas the continents are 20 kms thick.

  141. a figure for the time such salination has taken can be deduced.

    • Well now they’ve mapped the oceans and they can tell you how old each part of them is. And the oceans are very young. The Pacific even younger then the Atlantic. There wasn’t a great of either even 65 million years ago. Some but not much.

      The way I would see salinity is that Sodium, Chlorine, Hydrogen and Oxygen are all being produced in the new matter creation factory somewhere deep in the earth. And it may be that Hydrogen and Oxygen are being produced more readily. But the deal is that Hydrogen and Oxygen keep getting lost to space. Whereas Sodium and Chlorine don’t. So I would suspect that th oceans will tend to get more salty over time for this reason.

  142. THATS ALL BULLSHIT CAMBRIA. AFTER SHE WAS BANNED THE TENOR OF THE PLACE DETERIORATED INTO TOTAL STUPIDITY, AND HAS NOW RECOVERED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE OF

    1. GOOD POSTS BY RAFE
    2. MORE POSTS BY KATES
    3. THE PRESENCE OF A LADY AS ONE OF THE THREAD-STARTERS
    4. YOU BEING LESS OF A STUPID LITTLE BITCH. YOU WERE APPALLING BEFORE AND AFTER PHILOMENA WAS BANNED. YOU REALLY BROUGHT THE PLACE DOWN AND ENCOURAGED THE OTHERS TO DROP THEIR GAME. ITS TRUE THERE HAS BEEN A RECENT RECOVERY. BUT THERE IS NO QUESTION BUT THAT YOU WERE BRINGING CATALLAXY DOWN AND PHILOMENA GETTING KICKED OUT PRECEDED THE TRULY LOWEST LEVEL THAT CATALLAXY HAD EVER REACHED.

    • JC obviously has had yet another rejecting phone call from his much-abused daughter who has fled to another country to get away from him. I really feel sorry for her and send her my best wishes for her future life away from him.

  143. No daughter should have to put up with her father telling all and sundry on an all-male read blog that her panties go up and down like the elevator in Chicago’s Willis Tower.

  144. WELL I DON’T REALLY LIKE THAT SORT OF THING. BUT DID YOU SAY THAT STUFF? IF YOU ARE BEING QUOTED THEN PERHAPS YOU OUGHT NOT BE SAYING STUFF LIKE THAT.

    ON THE OTHER HAND IF YOU ARE NOT BEING QUOTED, DON’T YOU SUPPOSE THAT THIS SORT OF THING IS LEGITIMATE IF YOU ARE PILING ON IN A SORT OF GROUP LYNCH-MOB VIBE? IF THERE IS ONE THING I CANNOT STAND ITS THE LYNCH-MOB MENTALITY. AND THE FACT IS THAT YOU AND SINCLAIR WENT SO FAR AS TO ENCOURAGE THAT ON CATALLAXY. IT COULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED OF COURSE IF IT WASN’T FOR THE FACT THAT I WAS CONSTANTLY MODERATED THE WHOLE TIME. IF I WAS CUT LOOSE THERE IS NO WAY I WOULD HAVE PERMITTED THIS SORT OF LYNCH-MOB BUSINESS TO EVER BE PART OF ANY BLOG I WAS ON.

  145. 1. ARE YOU BEING QUOTED?

    2. HAVE YOU NOT BEEN INVOLVING YOURSELF IN LYNCH-MOB-LIKE BEHAVIOR?

    I DON’T CONDONE THIS SORT OF THING, BUT I’LL NOT PUT THE COMMENT ON MODERATION UNTIL YOU GIVE ME MORE INFORMATION.

    NOW CLEARLY, GIVEN YOUR LANGUAGE, YOU AREN’T FAIR DINKUM ABOUT THIS WHOLE SITUATION. WHY FLING THOSE SORT OF WORDS ABOUT?

  146. YOU ACT LIKE YOU WANT THE COMMENT REMOVED AND THEN YOU GO ON USING THAT VILE LANGUAGE? YOU ARE NOT BEING SERIOUS.

  147. Graeme, with the benefit of hindsight one might ask why, by 1912, scientists had not accepted Wegener’s conclusions about continental drift sooner than they did. He took the theory for granted, based admittedly we would say today on limited evidence. And many geologists, particularly in the US, were not convinced. They believed that the continents were fixed and immobile and thought the evidence as they knew it verified that.

    Eventually, capitalising on evidence produced by French and British scientists in the 1950s, American scientists in the 60s came up with the view that the continents were formed from a series of global or “tectonic” plates slowing inching their way across the surface of the earth.

    In turn, this work helped provide the basis of the theories about how human beings spread out across the earth.

    • Well he was stuck both ways. If he had gone with the growing earth theory, then he would have come up against physics sacred cows. If he goes with continental drift, there is no way to push continents around like that. So either way he’s stuck.

  148. Graeme, perhaps the less said about the Catallaxy crew and their violent misogyny, including towards relatives, the better.

    Except of course when they need to be called on it.

    Joe Cambria as every one knows is the worst offender, but then you know that yourself from another angle in the way he has for so long cruelly and vulgarly hounded and sexually denigrated you on various blogs though his multiple aliases.

    What a goatish über-schmuck he is.

    Male-on-male sexual obsession refracted through misogyny is always pretty dire and JC/BirdLab/Cousin Achmed has given ample evidence of that here and elsewhere. The man is truly obsessed with you in the most malevolent way. But you have fended him off very well.

    What is clear too is that Sinclair Davidson and Jason Soon as chief pooh bahs of that sorry right wing blog Catallaxy deliberately and consciously enabled, condoned and encouraged a culture of vile, anti-woman, anti-Black, anti-Semitic comments simply because they were made by men who are anti-left. Such is the mindlessness and viciousness of their ideological hatred.

    What a putrid and shameful form of politics they embrace and promote.

  149. Bird,

    What happenned to your thread about selling coal too cheaply? Its all very Orwellian.

    • I’ll bring it back later.

  150. Congratulations on bringing some light on the B-17. It takes guts to tell the truth in the midst of widespread deception, namely, the “status quo”.
    If you really do your homework, you will find out that it has been tested, and it does work! It’s just one of the best kept secrets in America.

    • “Mud can make you prisoner
      And the plains can bake you dry
      Snow can burn your eyes
      But only people make you cry” (L. Marvin).

      Thanks Joanne. How did you find this site? Are you able to testify to anyone you know who was helped by this naturally occurring substance?

      Its so hard you know Joanne. I cannot afford to make one mistake. So I cannot so much as send B17 to my Mother, until I have the full and full-proof package together. The quakademics can make all the mistakes they want. I make one mistake and everything is my fault.

      B17 is the key to one part of a three-part strategy. And its cheap. But the worst thing about this conundrum is that the first part of the strategy is a little expensive. And because of all the naysayers, we seem to have hit a roadblock.

      I’ve got a mobile phone number to talk to her with. And the knowledge that when I bail out of Skype , everyone she meets will be working against anything I might have told her. If only she was here with me and I could look after her. Because cancer is an easy disease to cure. Cancer is a very easy disease to cure. Its only people that get in the way.

      • I found this site through some searching for likeminded people who weren’t motivated by profit, but have a greater interest in sheding some light on Cancer with the truth.
        Yes,I have treared 10 people so far, with a natural protocol I developed with B-17 as the heart, and other aspects to build and strengthen the immune sustem, keep poisons flowing out of the body, and promote healthy white and red blood cell production, and regenerate healthy tissue, All very naturally and safely. Of the ten I treated, three were stage 4, inoerable, terminal. another had non hodgkins lymphoma, another stomach with mets to the liver, one with brain cancer with mets to the blood and lung….. EVERYONE’S CANCER RETREATED, STOPPED SPREADING, ENCAPSULATED ITSELF OFF FROM THE REST OF THE BODY, AND BEGAN TO SHRINK! ALL Became Cancer Free!
        Unfortunately, one credited the Chemo, and stopped taking the protocol 11 months ago. His cancer has returned, and is spredaing again.
        I wish I knew how to help many more. My mother died of cancer in the worst way, when I was a child in the sixties. I wished all my life to be the one to find a cure, and used to daydream about going back in time and saving her. I’ll save as many as I can, in her name.

  151. Bird.

    So purified water is not the first line attack against cancer.

    What’s this B17 bullshit anyways.

    • dumb jew wop bastard

    • To put it Quite simply, When you think of Cancer, Think of Scurvy, because they are both metabolic in nature. Remember this: VITAMIN C is to SCURVY as VITAMIN B-17 is CANCER!
      Let that be the center of your tripod for support. Vitamin B-17 contains a natural bonded cyanide that can only be unlocked by a cancer cell, which it kills. It is the most specific, natural chemo that god could have created to keep cancer in check. It’s side effects are trmendous, increased energy, increased healthy bone marrow production, red blood cell production…….

      In my honest opinion, All the money is in Chemo, but all the Cure is in B-17.

  152. How could purified water do a damn thing against cancer dopey?

    What could purified water even POSSIBLY DO to aid with cancer.

    We want to wipe out cancer. Kill it. We win, cancer loses. We don’t want to get cancer wet? We don’t want to throw a bucket of water over cancer and just piss it off some?

    What is wrong with you you dope?

  153. ODE TO A FRIEND WITH CANCER

    I was given insight
    To bring into the light!
    But, the people prefer darkness,
    They claim it as their right!

    No one wants to listen;
    No one wants to hear,
    As the months keep flying past us
    And his death is drawing near!

    What could the Harm be,
    In trying just once more,
    With the clearest understanding
    of what could gently be restord?
    In case you hadn’t noticed,
    The grim reapers at the door!

    Once he is gone form us,
    There is no turning back,
    Tomorrow’s 20/20 hindsight
    will be a constant,
    Stinging
    Slap!

  154. Bird:

    What the fuck are you doing taking all these potions and stuff when you know shit about this area. Stay the fuck away from stuff you have no idea about. Get this shit out of your head.

    • Maybe you don’t know much about this, and should follow your own advice.

    • No no Cambria. YOU!!!!!! have no idea about this stuff. Thats not the same as me having no idea about this stuff. I’ve researched the matter. As you ought to have seen by now.

  155. Honestly, these are not magic potions, nor are they witches’ brews; they are simply a return to natural medicines, some of which have been relied upon since Roman times. Take beet juice, for example. It was given to Roman soldiers who had lost a lot of bl0od in battle. In reality it does help your body produce red blood cells, and is very good for trearing people with anemea.
    What is so wrong with giving the body the natural things it needs to fight off disease, rather than relying on expensive poisons that the body has no idea of how to break down? Once the FDA made it basically illegal to prescribe the medicines our Grandparents grew up with, Medicine took a step backwards. They should have incorporated the ancient knowledge, rather than dismiss it. There, they lost the widom of the ages.

    • Thanks for showing up Joanne. I’m shifting house at the moment and have scant access to the internet. Is it alright if I email you once I’ve gotten hold of B17 and sent it to some relatives? I bought three more alkalisers all at once for family members in the face of massive pro-quack cartel propaganda. I also sent her some miracle mineral supplement. The effort is to normalize the use of the water ionizers, and also to put my Mother in a position where she always has one to hand, no matter where she is visiting.

      The effort to persuade people to support a different route then burn, cut and poison, has lead to terrible delays, so next step is to send her the B17 right away. My order of roll-out was to support a higher pH, then knock out all other infections with Miracle Mineral Supplement, then attack the cancer directly with B17. Thereafter to follow through with a more comprehensive program of locking the gains in.

      I’m not the least bit worried about the toxicity of B17 on its own. But I wondered if there was any possibility of it combining with the other measures or with whatever the quacks are poisoning her with. I wondered if that could lead to B17 injecting its death blow into other cells. It hardly seems likely. But while the quacks can make one mistake after another, I cannot afford to make a mistake ever.

  156. Yes, please do e-mail me. I know I can help. The side effects of B-17 are all good, and I would not think to take the things given to me by the quacks without it. (Personally, I’d start with the naturals, Then, they’d be no need for the others) I will send you a link explaining how the Cyanide in B-17 is bonded, and can only be released by a cancer cell, which it kills. At that time, it releases an analgestic. which relieves pain. Ususally, there is no need for any other pain relief. There are a few more things I add, simple things like aloe vera that corrects the PH, and colloidal silver which is like adding a second immune system. It destroys over 650 bacteria, including MRSA. I then add one teaspon of liquid Astragalus (Jade screen), that, according to the studies At the University of texas, can rebuild the immune system to better than new, and increases the effectiveness of Chemo by 100%
    It’s simply amazing how these things work together to stimulate the body to be strng and healthy. It sends cancer packing! Please e-mail me, and I’ll send you some great links. I’ll also help you come up with an all natural protocol, designed specifically ffor your mother, if you tell me what she has cancer of. Please do write me. We can fix people one at a time. Once you have this knowledge, no one can take it away from you. Peace, Joanne

    • I think the only mistake you can make is by not giving it to her. The only B-17’s you regret are the ones you don’t take. Check out these sites, if you can. You’ll feel alot more confidence.

      http://www.1cure4allcancer.com/

      • Look how the quacks have made me paranoid? I could find no evidence to so much as to think the POSSIBILITY of it not-being-effective, was plausible. Since how could a cell survive if its was injected with two poisons, one being cyanide?

        And I had checked the medical gear, and there was a lot of hot air but no confirmed human poisonings ever.

        So the only thing I was worried about was some reaction with something the quacks were feeding her. But still I could make no mistakes and they can make as many as they like. So I was totally paranoid.
        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

        On the strength of what you are telling me I’ll get up early tomorrow and order some of this gear.

      • Take no notice of the anti-semite communist. He’s trying to indict me as an anti-semite. You know how these people project their own tawdry habits onto others. Sometimes I don’t have the time or inclination to edit these people.

  157. WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU COMMENTING WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW A THING ABOUT THIS? YOU STUPID FUCKING WOP!!!!

    AND WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY EXPENSIVE? THE WIG THE GOVERNMENT BOUGHT MY MUM COST ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS MORE THAN THE IONISER I BOUGHT HER. LAETRILE COSTS AS LITTLE AS $10 FOR A BOTTLE OF PILLS. GET IT RIGHT YOU DUMB WOP. THE QUACKS ARE THE ONES MAKING MILLIONS BY RORTING THE TAXPAYER AND POISONING THEIR PATIENTS.

    WHY CAN YOU NOT GET YOUR FUCKING ACT TOGETHER MATE?

    (TAKE THIS WOP OUT THE BACK AND SHOOT HIM BEFORE HE HAS ANY MORE KIDS.)

    • Very well said, Mr B.

  158. I have support for my claims. And, If you did your homework, as I have, you would know that the FDA did approve Amygdalin (B-17) for treatment for stage four terminal cancer patients from 1977 – 1986. Then for political/financial reasons, it was taken away again! I have handwritten testimony from some of the people I have worked with! They LIVE around me.
    Too many people are so ready to accept the propaganda that B-17 is poisonous, when, It’s been listed in England as safe and non toxic for 100 years. There are countries in this world that have a normally high intake of vitamin B-17 in their dailey diets, these countries have gone 900 years without a single case of cancer; if you take these citizens to the United States, let them eat this Western Diet, they get cancer like everyone else!
    Before you try and jump all over people whose opinions, based on fact, differ from yours, please educate yourself.
    I know of many, including my own mother, who were literally poisened to death from Chemo, and I know if I knew then what I know now, she’d be here with me.

  159. Also, one more thing: My very good friend was diagnosed with terminal, inoperable, stage IV Liver cancer with metastisis to the stomach, he was given 6 months.
    At that time, I researched for over four hundred hours, while I treated him holistically. His beautiful complection returned, he became energetic, optimistic, he gained weight, and his kiver tumor shrank to half it’s size. His stomach cancer stopped spreading, and he was able to have surgery. When the oncologist opened him up, she was baffled because she had never seen a stage IV cancer without spread. She was quite sure she got everything, and told him that there was a 98% chance he would remain cancer free! Well, he credited the Chemo he was also receiving, and the Doctor for his life. He stopped taking the protocol I invented for him. I begged him not to stop, as with a vitamin deficiency disease, if you stop taking the vitamin, the disease returns. Six months after he stopped, the cancer was back, it is now in his blood, lymphatic system, and lungs!(11 months later) He looks like death! All the naysayers got to him. I only hope in this 11th hour, he wakes up!

    • The psychic net the quacks throw over people is incredible. I’ve experienced it and found it to be incredibly shocking, but your example is even more extreme. Such an easy disease to cure. And yet the whole culture is singing this siren song, and goading people onto sickness and death.

      • I know, you tell them the most wonderful news in the world, and actually prove it to them, and still, if the doctor tells them they are terminal, that is what they chose to believe. They give up hope, and get ready to die. Like lambs to the slaughter.

  160. There are countries in this world that have a normally high intake of vitamin B-17 in their dailey diets, these countries have gone 900 years without a single case of cancer;

    Which countries?

    • Quote from http://rationalargumentator.com/B17Cancer.html

      “Vitamin B17 prevents cancer in the same way that vitamin C prevents scurvy.

      If cancer is in fact a vitamin deficiency disease, then there must be an essential vitamin that has been edited out of modern man’s diet. Further, preventing or controlling cancer would be as simple as restoring this food compound to our daily diet.

      Over the past century researchers from a number of fields have discovered such a vitamin; the scientific community calls it amygdalin, or simply vitamin B17, and in its concentrated form, it is called Laetrile.

      Vitamin B17 is indeed present in foods that westerners once ate in abundance but have, over time, ceased consuming. For example, while vitamin-B17-rich millet was once the world’s largest staple grain, it has been replaced by wheat, which has practically no vitamin B17 at all. Similarly, sorghum cane, also rich in vitamin B17, has been replaced with sugarcane, which has a low nutritional value. Apple seeds also contain the vitamin, and while it was once common for apple cores to be consumed along with the rest of the fruit, people rarely do so at present. It has come to the point that westerners consume almost no vitamin B17 on a regular basis.

      How do we know this vitamin works? Well, aside from lab research, researchers from a number of fields have observed vitamin B17 working in nature. If you have a pet, you may have noticed that it will often search for certain grasses to eat even when it is completely full, and if an animal is sick, its instinct to consume these grasses is even greater. A nutritional examination of the grasses they select has revealed that they all contain an especially high concentration of vitamin B17. Zoo keepers have observed a similar phenomenon. When given a fresh peach or apricot, primates dispose of the fruit’s soft flesh, crack open the hard pit, and consume the seeds inside of it. These seeds are also extremely rich in vitamin B17.

      Mammals of every kind, all around the world, instinctively include foods high in vitamin B17 in their regular diets– which is why a wild animal contracting cancer is rarely, if ever reported. It is only when animals are domesticated or zoo’d, and forced to eat a human prescribed diet, that they regularly contract cancer.

      In addition to wild animals, there is a number of human populations throughout the world that have a regular intake of vitamin B-17 in their diet and — get this — they never get cancer!

      A careful reviewer of the claim that some populations never get cancer might speculate that these same populations have low life expectancy rates, leading other factors to kill them off before cancer can develop. But that’s not so with Hunzakuts who live in a remote area of the Himalaya Mountains. Hunzakuts are known for their amazing longevity — many of them live beyond 100, and some surpass 120 years old and more! In 1922, a doctor from the Journal of The American Medical Association visited Hunza to study just why its people might be living so long. He noted, “The Hunza has no known incidence of cancer. They have an abundant crop of apricots. These they dry in the sun and use very largely in their food.”

      It is fitting that the author mentioned apricot seeds, since they contain the highest known concentration of vitamin B17 found in nature. One observer noted, “it was not uncommon for them to eat thirty to fifty apricot seeds as an after-lunch snack.” He continues, “In addition to the ever-present apricot, the Hunzakuts eat mainly grain and fresh vegetables including buckwheat, millet, alfalfa, peas, broad beans, turnips, lettuce, sprouting pulse or gram, and berries of various sorts. All of these with the exception of lettuce and turnips contain vitamin B17”

      That there is no cancer in Hunza still holds true today. Numerous visiting medical teams from the west have done studies, and all of them returned to report not a single case. Yet, studies have also shown that when Hunzakuts leave their remote kingdom, travel to the west, and abandon their vitamin-B17-rich diets, they become as susceptible to cancer as Europeans and Americans.

      Missionaries and medical journals have reported other cancer-free populations from every continent in the world — from natives in Africa and South America to Eskimo tribes in northern Canada and Alaska. In addition, many informed westerners have re-introduced the vitamin back into their diets. And in all cases, the degree to which these populations are free from cancer is in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin B17 found in their natural diets.

      The gravity of this information is truly amazing. Think about it — while more than one in every three Americans will contract cancer in their lifetime, not one in a thousand who regularly ingests vitamin B17 has been recorded to contract the disease.

      4. The system is failing us. anticancerinfo.co.uk

      VITAMIN B17 THERAPY – DOES IT WORK?

      4. Does vitamin B17 work in real life?

      For groups of people
      The Hunzas in the remote Himalayas, the Eskimos, tribes of South Africa and South America living on native foods, the North American Indians, The Australian Aborigines and other native or so-called primitive peoples rely upon a diet carrying as much as 250 to 3,000mg of nitriloside (vitamin B17) in a daily ration. All populations living close to a Neolithic level appear to have a diet with a high consumption of nitriloside-rich foods. Among such people there is rarely a case of cancer. But once these people abandon their traditional diet and begin to eat westernised foods then they are prone to cancer.17

      Civilised or Westernised man, on the other hand, relies on a diet that probably provides an average of less than 2mg of nitriloside (vitamin B17) a day and as a dietary group is increasingly prone to cancer.

      Vitamin B17 As a Preventative

      Vitamin B-17 is one of the main sources of food in cultures such as the Eskimos, the Hunzas, the Abkasians and many more. Did you know that within these tribes there has never been a reported case of cancer? According to Dr. Krebs, we need a minimum of 100 mg of vitamin B-17 (the equivalent of about seven apricots seeds) too nearly guarantee a cancer free life.

  161. Not to mention it fails in clinical trials

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7033783
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1902140

    FOLLOW THE FUCKING LINKS BACK YOU FUCKING MORON.

    WHERE DID IT FIND THAT LAETRILE DOESN’T DO WHAT WE SAY IT DOES? WHERE DOES IT NOT INJECT THE CANCER CELL WITH TWO POISONS? IF IT INJECTS THE CANCER CELL WITH THOSE TWO POISONS THEN HOW CAN THE CANCER CELL SURVIVE? IF IT DOES NOT DO THIS THEN WHY IS THAT NOT PROVEN BY THIS REPORT?
    IF SOMEONE WAS POISONED BY COMMERCIALLY PROCESSED LAETRILE WHO WAS THAT PERSON?
    IF YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO SNIFF OUT A HATCHET JOB WHEN ITS PRACTICALLY HITTING YOU OVER THE FOREHEAD THEN THINK ABOUT TRUSTING MY JUDGEMENT RATHER THAN YOUR OWN.

    • To the contrary, it did very well in clinical trials at sloan kettering. The big wigs surpressed those results;they changed the parameters of the study, decreasing the amount used until it wasn’t enough to make a difference, then, reported those results.
      Also, in 1955, it was reported that the B-17 showed poor results….This was reported by the very Doctors who said a pack of cigarettes A day would keep cancer away! Ten years later, the actual scientists that conducted the study said they reported that B-17 Did have an effect on cancer! The surgeons in charge had lied! He also died of lung cancer. Give me a few, I’ll posts the links.
      I see you are posting links from the Govt. Don’t be so easily fooled by everything your Govt tells you!

  162. Did you read this correctly.
    “Hunzakuts are known for their amazing longevity — many of them live beyond 100, and some surpass 120 years old and more! In 1922, a doctor from the Journal of The American Medical Association visited Hunza to study just why its people might be living so long. He noted, “The Hunza has no known incidence of cancer. They have an abundant crop of apricots. These they dry in the sun and use very largely in their food.”

    We can agree to disagree. If you choose to believe that cancer is not curable by vitamin B-17, that’s your choice..
    I, on the other hand, know it’s true, I’ve seen it work! I take 1,000 mg of B-17 daily. I have for a year.

    Prior to that I had my colon removed, and six lbs of breast cancer removed from both breasts. I was put on Tamoxifin (Chemo) for five years.
    After the first six months, I was tired, was losing my hair, and felt very old all of a sudden. I stopped taking it!
    I was scheduled for a needle biopsy, and an ultrasound for a lump found on my left breast. I started on the B-17, and postponed my biopsy for four months. When I went in for it, I was mamogrammed twice, and waited an extra hour before they told me I could go home, the lump was gone!. Now, you can tell me until you are quite blue in the face that this is utter rubbish, but I will always beg to differ, as I know the truth; I will continue to help lead people to the truth.

    I’ll check out your Tazmanian devil story……

    • Joanne

      Have you ever seen a Dago as stupid as this bird flaps aka Cambria aka Dumb Woppy?

  163. LOOK EDNEY. FOLLOW THE LINKS BACKWARDS YOU DOPE.

    OH NO YOU PIGLET. THIS IS FUCKING “GLOBAL WARMING” ALL OVER AGAIN. YOU THINK THE SCIENCE IS ON YOUR SIDE. AND YOU DON’T CHECK FOR SCIENCE SENTIMENT VERSUS CONCRETE FACTS.

    WHO WAS POISONED BY PROCESSED B17? YOU ARE FUCKING MAKING IT UP YOU DOPE.

    BE MORE CAREFUL NEXT TIME. YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A PHD, AND YOU OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ACTUAL FINDING AND A TENDENTIOUS HATCHET JOB.

    I CHECK THESE THINGS OUT BEFORE COMMENTING. YOU WOULD DO BETTER TO DO THE SAME.

  164. The reports you linked to are just propaganda in my opinion. Sometime, do a search on how people with stage 4 terminal cancers claimed to have survived to live cancer free for many years… The results may surprise you….. It isn’t just me it’s worked for, it’s every single person I’ve helped so far! We’ve all had the same type of results…. Death sentences reversed. Doctors are literally baffled, or come into the room dancing……. I hope you never know what it’s like to be diagnosed with cancer, but if you do, please think twice before you get burned, cut, or poisoned! Look at these typical results for cancer patients who have used B-17. I have read countless pages of testimony from real people.

    CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF CLINICAL PROGRESS
    1) Decrease of pain, indicated by a decrease in the amount or frequency of the use of narcotics or sedatives.
    2) Increase in the sense of well being.
    3) Increased appetite.
    4) Disappearance of fetor from lesions.
    5) Increased energy or endurance.
    6) Increase in weight.
    7) Increase in muscle strength.
    8) Improvement in blood and urine chemistry.
    9) Increased tissue repair.
    10) Decrease of tumefaction.
    11) Decrease in the output of presumptive chorionic gonadotrophin in the serum or urine as measured by a blood test.
    12) Return of symptoms following the use of placebos or interruption of treatment.
    13) Remission of symptoms follows the reinstatement of therapy.

    These are the things I have seen and can attest to.

    Sadly cancer has become an industry, with billions going into Chemo. I think we took a wrong turn in the ’50’s, and that is why we have not officially cured cancer.
    I think the cure for cancer is already here, and I know it takes courage to go against what is taught to us, but sometimes the truth does lie outside the box.

    The United States has a vested interest in Big Pharma, and the use of chemical drugs and chemo. They say B-17 is Poison.

    When I helped my stage 4 friend, I was giving him 10, 500mg tablets per day. all the while, his doctor told him his blood work had become perfect; He was no longer anemic, his T cells were up. He was told to keep doing exactly what he was doing.

    My friend never told his doctor what he was doing, for fear. I can tell you one thing, I wasn’t poisoning him!

  165. EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE IS NOT SANCTIFIED BY PEER REVIEW. BUT I’M GOING ON THE BASIS OF PEER REVIEW JUST THE SAME. WHAT ARE YOU GOING ON THE BASIS OF?

    NAME ONE PERSON WHO WAS EVER POISONED BY COMMERCIALLY SOLD B17. YOU DIDN’T READ THE FUCKING STUDY YOU MORONIC WOP.

    NO-ONE HAS EVER BEEN POISONED BY COMMERCIALLY SOLD LAETRILE. YOU DIDN’T READ THE LINK DID YOU? SOMEONE ONCE HAD TROUBLE WITH BITTER ALMONDS.

    FUCKING READ THE SOURCE LINK. DON’T BE GETTING ALL HIGH AND MIGHTY ABOUT PEER REVIEW WHEN YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO CHECK FOR CONCRETE FACTS VERSUS CARTEL SENTIMENT.

    SO NAME NAMES. NAME ONE PERSON HURT BY LAETRILE? ONE PERSON POISONED, TO THE POINT OF EVEN MILD SICKNESS BY LAETRILE.

    IT DIDN’T HAPPEN DOPEY.

    • SO IN FACT YOU KNOW YOURSELF THAT YOU’VE GOT NO-ONE AT ALL THAT HAS EVER BEEN POISONED BY COMMERCIALLY PROCESSED LAETRILE.

      IN 50 YEARS OF USAGE?

      SO WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR POINT? BECAUSE THE DRUGS THE QUACKS USE POISON EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEIR PATIENTS. SO MUCH SO THAT WHEN THE PATIENT KNOWS HE’S GOING TO TAKE THESE POISONS ……. THESE POISONS THAT ARE THEMSELVES CARCINOGENS ….. JUST TO SHOW HOW PRIMITIVE THE QUACKS ARE …….. THAT THE FIRST THING YOU DO IS YOU BUY AN EXPENSIVE WIG.

      THAT EXPENSIVE WIG THAT YOU NEED TO BUY, DUE TO THE SEVERITY OF THE QUACK-POISONS …. TREATMENTS NOT BACKED BY THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD ……..

      THAT EXPENSIVE WIG IN THIS CASE COST ENOUGH FOR A BOTTLE OF SODIUM-CHLORITE (WHICH CAN RID THE BODY OF ALMOST ALL KNOWN INFECTIONS SAVE HAY-FEVER CAUSING SPORES …. AND CAN BLOW HOLES IN THE SIDE OF CANCER CELLS) A BOTTLE OF B17 (WHICH KILLS THE CANCER CELLS DIRECTLY BY INJECTING TWO DEADLY POISONS INTO THEM) AND A 1900NZD DOLLAR VENUS ALKALISER (WHICH DRAINS THE CANCER CELLS, AND GENERAL PATHOGENS OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY EVEN AS IT RECHARGES AND ENLIVENS HUMAN CELLS.)

      SO FOR THE SAME COST AS A 2000NZD WIG, TO COVER ONES HEAD, ANTICIPATING THE EFFECTS OF TAKING EXTREME POISONS, FOISTED ON YOU BY THE QUACKS, YOU HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES TO EFFECT REMISSION YOUR OWN SELF.

  166. What a dopey fucking wog.

  167. I don’t mind the tenor of these latest posts. Thats better.

  168. LIKE I DIDN’T KNOW THAT CAMBRIA. AHURA MAZDA …. YOU ARE ONE DUMB WOP.

  169. Anyway I never claimed B-17 was poisonous, some people are taking serious doses of it so it can’t be too bad. What I claimed was that the clinical trials did not show benefits. NO YOU ARE LYING.

    SOME DID AND SOME DIDN’T. SO WHY IGNORE THE ONES THAT DID AND EMBRACE THE ONES THAT DIDN’T? LIKE I SAID. GLOBAL WARMING ALL OVER AGAIN.

    EVIDENCE ISN’T EVIDENCE WITHOUT A SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS. WHAT IS YOUR SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS MORON? AND IN WHAT WAY DOES YOUR CLINICAL TRIAL ADD OR DETRACT FROM YOUR SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS?

    IN FACT YOU HAVE FUCKING NOTHING. YOU DIDN’T HAVE A SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS IN MIND. SO YOU DON’T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE. YOU ARE CLAIMING THAT CLINICAL TRIALS DID NOT SHOW BENEFITS? BENEFITS FOR WHOM?

    FUCKING GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER EDNEY YOU GREAT FAT LUMP. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT ME TO DO. PICK YOU UP AND THROW YOUR FAT ASS THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD?

    WHAT IS YOUR SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS?

    THAT B17 HURTS RATS? THAT IT DOESN’T HURT RATS? THAT IT INJECTS TWO POISONS INTO CANCER CELLS? THAT IT DOES NOT DO SO?

    YOU NOTICE THAT JOANNE NEVER CLAIMED THAT THE FACT THAT B17 POISONS CANCER CELLS WAS ENOUGH TO CURE CANCER. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT LIKE MYSELF, SHE ALSO WAS USING A THREE-PRONGED. INCREASE pH, KILL OTHER INFECTIONS, THEN ATTACK CANCER CELLS DIRECTLY WITH B17. ATTACKING CANCER CELLS ON THEIR OWN MAY NOT CURE CANCER. IF THE GROWING ENVIRONMENT YOU ARE LEFT WITH IS CONDUCIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF MORE CANCER CELLS.

    NOW HAVING SAID THIS I’M FUCKING BAFFLED AS TO WHAT SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS YOU THINK YOU HAVE EVIDENCE FOR???

    IN FACT YOU DON’T HAVE EVIDENCE AT ALL DO YOU EDNEY? NO YOU DON’T!!!!! SINCE EVIDENCE REQUIRES A SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS AND YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT IT IS YOU WERE TRYING TO PROVE.

    CHOOSE FUCKING SCIENCE EDNEY.

    DON’T BE A FUCKING MORON ALL YOUR LIFE. YOU HAD A CONCEPTUAL FAIL ON RELATIVITY. THEN ON GLOBAL WARMING. NOW ITS YOUR FUCKING HAT-TRICK. ALL BECAUSE YOU REFUSE POINT BLANK TO FOLLOW THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. WHICH HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH PROCESS AND NOTHING TO DO WITH QUALIFICATIONS.

    NOW GO AGAIN. AND THIS TIME FIND SOME EVIDENCE.

  170. A wonderful Article in Health News For Americans I just found, and would like to share:

    “Health News for Americans
    Will Cancer Come Back After Chemo?
    September 24th, 2010

    For people who have already suffered through cancer, it can be devastating to learn that their cancer has returned. After going through all kinds of cancer treatments-including the often-upsetting chemotherapy-to have a doctor tell you that your cancer has come back is like a slap in the face. So if there is some way to get some kind of guarantee that the cancer won’t return-any way at all-cancer sufferers would likely quickly grab it.

    Well, there are no guarantees in life-we all know that. There is no way to guarantee that your cancer will stay away after you have gone through chemotherapy or any other forms of treatment. Actually, cancer is in all of us just ready to break out. Thankfully we have an immune system. There is, however, a way that you can try to prevent the cancer from returning-a way that you can proactively work to keep the cancer out of your body. You can follow a B17 treatment program.

    Taking vitamin B17 along with eating apricot seeds can boost your immune system. Getting started with a B17 treatment program can keep your body from becoming deficient in B17-and, vitamin B17 deficiency has been proven to be the cause of cancer. Haven’t heard that before? It’s true. Being deficient in vitamin B17 is what causes cancer to be able to run rampant in your body, much like the way that a deficiency in vitamin C can cause the disease called scurvy. It hasn’t been well-publicized because the drug companies cannot make money off of cancer prevention-they can only make money off of cancer treatments and cancer drugs.

    In any case, keeping your body sufficient in vitamin B17 will help to keep the cancer at bay. How? This vitamin has a special substance called amygdaline in it. Amygdalin contains cyanide-but, the cyanide is locked away tight. Only cancer cells have the key to the cyanide. When the amygdaline comes into contact with a cancer cell, the cyanide is unlocked and it destroys the cancer cell. (A neutralizing enzyme is also released to protect the healthy nearby cells from the cyanide.)
    So, starting a B17 treatment program will mean that your recent chemotherapy was your last-the cancer will not return.

    Yes, that’s right-vitamin B-17 is a natural product, as its source is just a regular, everyday, common fruit. Apricot seeds are what make up vitamin B-17, that’s it. This vitamin is a purified form of the substance that is found inside apricot seeds. This substance is called amygdalin, and it is what is used to create vitamin B-17.

    That makes taking vitamin B-17 to prevent cancer completely natural. When you take these vitamin tablets-available in either 100mg or 500mg strength pills, which can be split to smaller sizes-you can be confident in knowing that you are taking a natural product. Apricot Seeds? Really?

    It may seem rather strange, but this is, indeed, where vitamin B17 comes from. There’s good reasoning behind this, too-it wasn’t done arbitrarily by some vitamin manufacturer. Apricot seeds contain amygdalin. Amygdalin has cyanide locked away, ready to battle cancer-and this cyanide can only be unlocked by a cancer cell because only those cells have the special unlocking enzyme. Once unlocked, the cyanide kills the cancer cell.

    Nearby cells aren’t harmed because a neutralizing agent is released with the cyanide to protect those cells. Once this was discovered, a biochemist studied the substance and learned how to purify it. Then, in 1952, amygdalin was given its vitamin status based (at least partly) upon recommendation from the co-founder of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Today, the NCI doesn’t readily acknowledge the benefits of vitamin B17, though. Perhaps one day they will and lets hope it’s sooner than later.

    Jonathan Bell has more on this subject. Please visit More Info and ask a question.

    Tags: After · Back · Cancer · Chemo · Come”

  171. Obviously its a massive redundancy to say that it is the cancer specialists and their sycophants that are going against the scientific method here. And not Joanne and myself. Just to review:

    1. All evidence is scientific evidence. There is no demarcation.
    2. Evidence is merely data, applied for or against a SPECIFIC hypothesis, through a process of logic and human reason.
    3. The scientific method involves marshaling evidence for or against competing hypotheses or paradigms in parallel. There must be two or more competing hypotheses. Three ought to be considered a minimum from a professional point of view. Six is better, even if a couple of them or dummy hypotheses.
    4. There is no being in denial of evidence. All evidence ought to be considered. There is a lot of loose talk about “anecdotal” evidence. All evidence counts. But in the final analysis rightful certitude only comes from CONVERGENT EVIDENCE. Evidence that comes in from different and independent angles. You can be very sure of something, though no single piece of evidence is totally righteous, if you have many lines of convergent evidence.
    5. Official stolen money or big Pharma studies are not evidence without a specific hypothesis. They are not. You might think they are but they are not. Science sentiment doesn’t count. Only factual data related to a specific hypothesis through a process of reason counts as evidence. No amount of clinical trials are evidence if you don’t have that three-way relationship. And to develop that three-way relationship you need to concrete facts of the study. A summary showing the sentiment of the reviewer is insufficient.

    6. Studies on rats do not constitute powerfully effective evidence even with a specific hypothesis, if the concrete facts of the studies are unknown or if they are known but the process of reason is not applied scrupulously.

    Let me give you and example of number 6. There was a trial with Kangen water on chickens. The chickens with the Kangen water had a far greater survival rate. Were healthier, grew bigger and faster.

    Another study was with rats. The rats had some problems. They developed lesions. What specific hypothesis do these dimly known facts go for or against.

    Taking the second example given to me by a Catallaxian, there is no evidence at all that goes against anything I’ve said. The Catallaxian implied that I hadn’t been reading the scientific reports. In fact that is about all that I had been doing.

    So what evidence is there either way? Alkaline water is dangerous if you drink it before, during or after you eat protein. Since we are not supposed to have protein in our bloodstream. The body treats protein as an invading pathogen. It starts attacking the protein as if it were a bacterial and viral infection. You develop food allergies. Your immune system is compromised. And so you are prone to developing symptoms of those diseases like AIDS where the quacks reckon the immune system is attacking the body. Despite not being sure the quacks are correct here, these are the symptoms you are going to bring down on your head if you work real hard to mix up strong protein ingestion with destroying your stomach acidity with alkaline water.

    So where is the evidence with the rats example that is for or against anything I’ve lectured about on this blog?

    The evidence is not there. Because evidence is only evidence if we are talking data (broadly considered) related to an hypothesis (narrowly considered) by a process of human reason (competently engaged in).

    So Joanne has competently brought forth strong evidence indeed (PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITNESSED FIRST-HAND NO LESS) for what I’ve been telling you guys. Whereas Edney, Cambria, and the Catallaxians have brought us no evidence at all against the hypotheses that I have being expounding on. I’m not being absolutist here. It is a fact that they have brought no evidence at all. Nothing. Zip. Because evidence requires a specific hypothesis, data, the one related to the other by human reason.

    Now what is my best guess about the different results, on the surface of things, between the trials with the baby chicks, and the rats? Well rats don’t know when they are supposed to use and avoid the alkaline water do they??? Fucking obviously not. Yes they got lesions. So do AIDS sufferers. So did those AIDS sufferers who absorbed multiple different proteins, in the form of sperm and blood, as well as fecal material, and innumerable viruses …. through their rectum. And they took all sorts of drugs, including nitrates, and spent all night dancing, using uppers and poppers, and then treated themselves with anti-biotics, that encourage L-form bacteria and other resistent critters. All the drugs and constant bouts of sickness would also lead to reduced pH, which would lead to even normal pathogens coming fully alive and going into rapid action like they tend to do in your low-pH mouth.

    So the rats got lesions. So did the humans. This is all evidence in support of stuff that I’ve been telling you. But then we don’t know the concrete facts about the study on the rats. We don’t know what they were eating and the timing of their eating and drinking the Kangen water.

    Well then how about the baby chicks? Well one imagines that the chicks were brought up in controlled conditions and were given almost exclusively low-protein plant material to eat. You throw all the scraps out to the chickens in the chook pen on the farm. But when you are hatching baby chicks in cramped conditions by the many thousands, you would presumably give them a vegetarian diet.

    So there you are. The rats get the lesions, thanks to their stomach acid being destroyed when they are trying to digest stronger proteins. But the chicks are on a vegetarian diet and therefore get all the gains, and yet none of the problems, that the rats did.

    Thats what we assume. But we don’t have the concrete details. So many people make hay out of the “peer reviewed literature” without having the concrete details or relating these to a specific hypothesis. If they did not do this the global warming fraud could never have happened. Since the evidence supports the idea that CO2-emissions are good for the biosphere (although coal-electricity generation has at least potentially many other nasty by-products).

    So please. Can we follow the scientific method from here on in. Edney try harder. You too Cambria. Constantly haranguing me with unscientific stupidity, and claiming you are the voice of science is just plain rude.

    • Specific hypothesis: Amygdalin (Laetrile) is beneficial in the treatment of cancer.

      http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198201283060403

      DISPROVE THIS IN LIGHT OF THE CONCRETE FACTS BROUGHT TO LIGHT BY THE STUDY. WHY DID YOU CHOOSE THIS PARTICULAR STUDY? WHY THAT HYPOTHESIS? SINCE IN MY CASE I’M ONLY CLAIMING THAT THE TWO POISONS WOULD KILL THE CANCER CELL. HOW IN YOUR VIEW, DOES THE CANCER CELL SURVIVE THE TWO POISONS? YOU SEE I DON’T THINK THE CANCER CELL SURVIVES THE TWO POISONS. iN WHAT WAY DOES YOUR STUDY SHOW THAT THE CANCER CELL SURVIVES THE TWO POISONS.

      ITS A GOOD START YOU DUMB WOP. IN YOUR ORIGINAL POST YOU ALMOST GOT AS FAR AS THE DATA. BUT YOU DON’T HAVE THE CONCRETE FACTS OF THE STUDY. SO YOU ALMOST HAD THE DATA. YOU FORMULATED A SPECIFIC HYPOTHESIS. BUT THERE WAS NO PROCESS OF REASON AND NO REAL DATA AS IT TURNS OUT. SO YOU WEREN’T ABLE TO PUT THE THREE TOGETHER TO HAVE EVIDENCE.

      BUT EVIDENCE IS NOT ENOUGH. YOU HAVEN’T GOT THE EVIDENCE, BUT IF YOU HAD IT THIS WOULD BE INSUFFICIENT. SINCE YOU NEED CONVERGENT EVIDENCE TO BE SURE OF ANYTHING. YOU HAVE MADE A START ON THE FORM OF THINGS. BUT SUBSTANCE-WISE YOU HAVEN’T EVEN STARTED.

  172. A series entitled “The wit and intellectual prowess of Graeme M Bird.” Part No 1:

    TELL A FUCKING STUPID BASELESS LIE AGAIN, WITHOUT EVIDENCE AGAIN, I’LL BLOCK YOU, I’LL FUCKING FIND YOU, I’LL FUCKING BEAT YOU UP YOU CUNT.

    OKAY. IT JUST SHOWS WHAT A DUMMY YOU ARE CHOOSING THE IRRATIONAL SIDE IN THAT ARGUMENT. YOU CANNOT GET ANYTHING RIGHT. YOU WOULD THINK YOU WOULD HAVE AN OUTSIDERS PERSPECTIVE. BUT YOU SIMPLY LACK THE BRAINPOWER.

    LOOK YOU FUCKING MORON. WHAT IS YOUR SUPERIOR PARADIGM? I’VE EXPLAINED THREE PARADIGMS OF CANCER, TRANSPOSED ONE UPON ANOTHER, AND CRAFTED A STRATEGY OUT OF THAT. AND YOU COME ALONG YOU DUMB CUNT. YOU KNOW FUCKING NOTHING ABOUT IT. YOU DON’T SHOW HOW YOUR PARADIGM IS BETTER……

    JOSEPH CAMBRIA. YOU ARE A LIAR. YOU ARE A MORON. YOU ARE JUST A FUCKWIT. WHAT IS MORE BEFORE THE BAILOUT YOU AGREED WITH THE MAINSTREAM VIEW OF MONEY CREATION.

    HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA CAMBRIA RECKONS HE’S GOING TO GIVE ME A CLIP OVER THE EAR. DUMB WOPPY WOULD BE ON THE GROUND SO FAST. AS IF YOU WOULD PLUCK UP THE COURAGE FOR THAT CAMBRIA. YOU’D RATHER BE GARGLING RAZOR BLADES.

    YOU GUYS ARE DELUSIONAL. YOU ARE FUCKING MORONS. NO WONDER YOU HATE GROWTH-DEFLATION AND A FUNCTIONING SETUP SO MUCH. BECAUSE ONCE STUPIDITY CEASES TO BE UPWARDLY-MOBILE YOU DUMB CUNTS ARE ALL OUT OF A JOB.

    CRACKPOT ALERT. ONE OF THOSE DUMB CUNTS WAS A STUPID PRIMITIVE WOP.

    NOW HAVE YOU GOT ANY EVIDENCE OR ARE YOU JUST BEING A STUPID CUNT?

    LOOK YOU FUCKING CUNT. STOP LYING. FIND SOME EVIDENCE, OR FUCK OFF.

    LETS GO OVER IT AGAIN YOU DUMB CUNT. I’VE POINTED THIS OUT MAYBE TEN FUCKING TIMES AND YOU STILL DON’T GET IT

    HOW DID YOU GET TO BE SUCH A DUMB CUNT CAMBRIA. FUCKING HELL YOU ARE LUCKY YOU WOUND UP IN A SUBSIDISED PARASITICAL INDUSTRY.

    YOU ARE PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH. YOU’VE JUST GOT TO STOP DOING THIS YOU STUPID OFFENSIVE CUNT.

    SEE YOU ARE A STUPID CUNT CARLOS. YOU THINK YOU ARE BEING A SMARTY-PANTS. BUT IN REALITY YOU ARE IN DENIAL. AND OBVIOUSLY STUPID.

    MY GOD YOU ARE AN OBLIVIOUS CUNT. ITS JUST OCCURRED TO ME NOW THAT YOU ARE ANDREW REYNOLDS IN YOUR OBLIVIOUSNESS.

    YOU REALLY ARE A FUCKING DUMMY AREN’T YOU? YES YOU ARE! AND LIKE HITLER (BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION) YOU ARE A NATIONAL SOCIALIST.

    QUOTE NEWTON PREDICTING WRONGLY YOU LYING CUNT.

    STOP IT. FOR FUCKSAKES STOP THE FUCKING NONSENSE.

    YOU ARE A LIAR. YOU ARE FUCKING PUTTING WORDS IN NEWTONS MOUTH. YOU ARE LYING.

    YOU SILLY SILLY SILLY CUNT. ITS A BIG FUCKING PROBLEM WHEN SCIENCE WORKERS ARE IN REBELLION FROM THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

    DON’T BULLSHIT ME CAMBRIA. I DON’T CALL ITALIANS WOPS I CALL YOU A WOP. I DON’T CALL BLACK PEOPLE NIGGERS, I CALL YOU A HOUSE-NIGGER. I DON’T CALL CHINESE PEOPLE GOOKS I CALL JASON A STUPID GOOK SINCE HE IS COMPLETELY UNREACHABLE THROUGH REASON.

    OH FOR FUCKSAKES. WHY WOULD I ENGAGE IN SUCH A PURE FANTASY AS A “GRAVITY WELL” YOU REALLY ARE AS THICK AS TWO PLANKS. A WELL IS A HOLE YOU DICK. FOR IT TO BE A HOLE IT HAS TO BE A HOLE IN SOMETHING.

    YOU USELESS CUNT. SO YOU’VE GOT NO ARGUMENT AT ALL? ALL YOU DID IS RESTATE THE WRONG AND IGNORANT THEORY OF RELATIVITY.

    THATS EXACTLY WHAT HE DID DO YOU FUCKING MORON. BUT THATS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO FALSIFY A THEORY. AND THATS NOT YOUR STARTING POINT YOU FUCKING STUPID CUNT.

    I’VE GOT NO FUCKING TIME FOR DUMB SCIENCE WORKERS, IN REBELLION AGAINST REASON.

    DON’T TELL FUCKING LIES HERE YOU DUMB WOP. YOU HAVEN’T SPECIFIED A CHALLENGE ON THIS SITE. NO USE LYING ABOUT IT.

    YOU’VE SAID THIS BEFORE AS WELL YOU NAZI CUNT. BUT YOU WON’T SAY WHAT YOUR POINT IS.

    SEE YOU ARE A NAZI GOOK CUNT. NOTHING YOU SAY HAS ANY LOGICAL SENSE TO IT.

    NO YOU ARE JUST A LYING CUNT TILLMAN. OF COURSE THE BOMBING AND THE AID DIMINISHED THE ABILITY TO OFFER CLOSE SATURATION AIR SUPPORT.

    AND YOU YOU DUMB WOP CLOT, CAME RUNNING IN AND ASSUMING I WAS ADVOCATING INFLATIONARY MEASURES … JUST LIKE THE STUPID WOP DOPE THAT YOU ARE.

    WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOU MORON? YOU AREN’T INTERESTED IN EVIDENCE.

    WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT OPERATION MONGOOSE THAT I DON’T YOU STUPID GOOK ?

    FUCKING HELL YOU DUMB WOP. PUT SOME EPISTEMOLOGY TOGETHER.

    I’VE TOLD YOU THREE FUCKING TIMES WE AREN’T YOU STUPID CUNT. THATS NOT WHATS BEING SAID, NOW FUCKING DO IT.

    OU ARE SUCH A FUCKING MORON CAMBRIA.

    READ WHAT I SAID AGAIN YOU STUPID WOP. I THINK YOU WILL SEE I ACKNOWLEDGED YOUR MORONIC ATTITUDE UP FRONT. IT DID NOT PASS MY NOTICE YOU FUCKING PRIMITIVE ILLOGICAL CUNT.

    • Bravo, Mr B.

      Very well said. An eloquent defense of the scientific method.

      If Woppy doesn’t yet realize what a stupid, unscientific cunt he is, he never will.

      Bravo.

  173. One last thing, that everyone should know if they are about to begin metabolic therapy with B-17. Once you hear those wonderful words from your doctor that you are now Cancer Free, you must continue to take your metabolic protocol that stopped your cancer in its tracks. You cannot simply rely on the doctor, who most likely does not know the reason for your remission. Many people think they’ve won at that point, and stop taking everything, only to have their cancer return with a vengeance! Metabolic therapy must be a continued way of life if you are to remain in remission. You may cut down the dosages by 1/3 for four months, then 1/3 again, so that your mantainence dose is 1/3 of what you began with.
    Nothing is more important than keeping your immune system up and the cancer controlled by the B-17. Please keep this in mind. Thanks, Josie

  174. “Nothing is more important than keeping your immune system up ….”

    You would think that this point wasn’t all that hard to grasp. But just a little bit too hard to grasp for advocates of chemotherapy.

  175. Hi, Nice to see some people agree with me! I’ve just been told I have two tumours – one in the throat and another in the neck, confirmed by high glucose uptake in a PET scan.

    I’m takign B17 and also a trojan horse mix of treacle and baking soda, which the tumour cells take in and then unexpectedly meet with a high alkiline environment which they can’t survive.

    When I consume a mix of papaya and crushed almond kernels (the papain tears apart the fibrin around tumours, and the b17 works as you describe) I feel an aching in the larger (3cm) mass in my neck. Aches like crazy. Just started this diet and will blog my success..

    The alternative is one year of treatment which the surgeon says will be “rather unpleasant..” involving chemo, radiation and surgery. He says it will be a year before I feel I have survived the treatment, and “am likely to” have lost the ability to generate saliva and swallow properly!

    Not much choice!

  176. Wow. Good luck. Keep us posted hey? Everyone who gets cancer has to be their own scientist. You need to go two tracks here. Reducing your pathogen load and improving health as well as killing the cancer cells. This is where the quacks come off the beam. They kill the cancer cells without worrying about general health. So they poison the patient.

    Don’t forget to send for some Iodine. If you get hold of tincture of iodine you can put it on your skin and blow-dry it. Then if your body wants to use it the skin cells will absorb it through your skin without you having to kill much of the benevolent bacteria in your intestine. Also you ought to go to a website which says freedom from parasites and get hold of a zapper. Get it kit for making silver colloids as well as keep some MMS on hand. Not that you can do everything at once but you really want a lot of ammunition to put together a strategy.

    The sodium bicarbonate is good stuff but it takes a great deal of masochism to use a lot of it. My view is that everyone ought to have a water alkaliser as well. Then you can get more alkalising on the fly going then you would be disciplined enough to do with just sodium bicarb alone.

    You want to get back from this healthier and stronger then before. Healthier then all your friends.

    Good luck and it would help people a lot if you could keep a bit of an online self-treatment log going. It would give other people, feeling in a situation of fear, the confidence to follow science instead of the poisoners.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: