posted                      

quote:

---

I think you are confused in the difference between a missile, which is a jet propelled rocket, and a cannon firing metal encased shells. They aren't the same.
As far as the use of cannons, China had them first"

---

quote:

---

India has a lot documented on their use of arms as well as airships, but at this stage of my discovery, they appear to be more myth than fact.

---

quote:

---

The descriptions you provide of India raining thunderbolts and fire-bolts from a wall doesn't sound like missiles, and more like catapults firing incendiary loads which were very common for the period.
The description doesn't mention any explosion, and there isn't any physical description of what these weapons looked like.

---

quote:

---

List of Korean inventions

Multiple rocket launcher:

Hwacha is a Multiple rocket launcher which was a platform device on wheels that used gunpowder to fire fire arrows, a predecessor of the modern MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System).

---

quote:

---

Armored warship: Turtle ships were large armored warships built during the Joseon dynasty from the early 15th century.

---

quote:

---

According tv ihe best authorities on curiosities of tlie navy ami warfare in general, tlie first armored' vessel was launched in the year 1511(1. It was one of the licet inaoiii'il by the Knights of St. John, and was entirely covered with sheets of lead. The accounts of the times leave us in darkness as to the thick.'ess of this lean armor, but they are very positive,ill the statement that they were of sutlici'iil, strength to "successfully resist all the shots of the day." At, the siege of (iibrall n>, i" l~*2i the blench anil Spaniards used war vessels which were arm iri-d with "light iron liliolu-proofing over their decks and tn the waters edge. The very first practical use of wrought iron plates as a defence for the sides of vessels was by the French in the ('riniean war in Is.",;!, .St, Limis liepiihlii

---

quote:

---

Greek merchantmen were fitted with lead sheets for that purpose by the 5th century BC.[1][2] A notable Roman example were the excavated Nemi Ships with an underwater hull covered by a thin layer of lead.[2] The practice was resumed by the Spanish and Portuguese in the Age of Exploration,[3] while the British Royal Navy began to copper their war ships in the 1760s.[4]
The huge Syracusia, built by the Greek tyrant Hiero II of Syracuse around 240 BC, featured bronze-clad mast-tops for marines and an iron palisade on its fighting deck against enemy boarding attempts.[5] Its hull was sheathed with lead plates fixed with bronze nails.[1] Roman naval cataphract warships were protected on their sides by a layer of tarred and lead sheathing. Although this does not provide much protection from ramming, it does provide protection from damage while at sea for lengthy periods of time.[6]
A few Norse longships were reinforced with iron armour along the waterline as early as the 11th Century, such as the Iron Beard of Eric Hakonsson of Norway.[7][8]
Peter IV of Aragon (1336–87) protected his ships with screens of hides against missile fire,[8] as the Roman navy had done earlier.[9]
A ship with iron plating on the ribs was commissioned in 1505 by Juan Lope de Lazcano, a Basque admiral of the Spanish Fleet.[10]
The Santa Anna, a lead-sheathed carrack of the Knights Hospitaller, is viewed by some authors as an early form of armoured ship.[8][11][12][13] From 1522 to 1540, the warship successfully operated in the Mediterranean Sea against the Turks.
The Galleon of Venice, the Venetian flagship which did serious damage to the Ottoman fleet at the Battle of Preveza (1538), was sheathed with plate.[14]
During the siege of Antwerp in 1585, the Dutch defenders partially protected their man-of-war Finis Bellis with iron plates.[15]

---

quote:

---

Time bomb: The first time bomb called Pigyok Chinchollae (비격진천뢰;飛擊震天雷) was developed during the Imjin War (1592-1598) by a technician, Yi Chang-son (이장손;李長孫).[20][21] It was used to propel into enemy camps and formations by mortar and detonate after a preset interval.

---

quote:

---

Naval Artillery: The world's first naval guns (cannons) were used by the Koreans to counter Japanese piracy during the Goryeo Dynasty in the 1370s

---

quote:

---

The Battle of Arnemuiden was a naval battle fought on 23 September 1338 at the start of the Hundred Years' War between England and France. It was the first naval battle of the Hundred Years' War and the first recorded European naval battle using artillery, as the English ship Christopher had three cannons and one hand gun.

---

quote:

---

Soft bullet-proof vest: Myeonje Baegab is a soft bullet-proof vest invented by Kim Gi-du and Gang Yun in the late 1860s in the Joseon Dynasty.

---

quote:

---

Although individuals have been creating and utilizing makeshift means to protect themselves from bullets for some time beforehand, Casimir Zeglen of Chicago Illinois is credited with producing the first commercial bullet proof vest available to the public starting in the late 1800s. Zeglen's vests were made of silk fabric based on the findings of Dr. George Goodfellow of Arizona. Dr. Goodfellow observed that the silk cloth of a handkerchief slowed bullet velocities and penetration capabilities when inspecting bodies after a gunfight. The Zeglen vests retailed at around $800 US dollars at the time, the equivalent to about $15,000 US dollars in 2005.

---

quote:

---

Weather India or Korea first introduced these weapons to the world is unclear. What is clear is that they both had them well before Europe and today's European designed weapons are based on those ancient Korean designs. [/QB]

---

Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindovermatter:

quote:

---

I think you are confused in the difference between a missile, which is a jet propelled rocket, and a cannon firing metal encased shells. They aren't the same.
As far as the use of cannons, China had them first"

---

No I am not confused at all, an arrow lighted or equipped with something is not a real missile, its no different then lighting an arrow for flame purposes. When I mean missiles, I mean in the modern sense, where a large cylinder with a coned top and a metallic casing in a rocket like body is propelled and launched. That was not a Chinese invention, that was more of an Arab/Indian invention, with the likes of Tipu Sultan.

And I am not discussing who invented cannons, I am discussing who made use of and discovered gunpowder first. There is proof that other civilizations besides the Chinese discovered and used gunpowder for all sorts of purposes INDEPENDENTLY. And there is plenty of documentation and written works in Sanskrit detailing the use of gun powder and other substances involved in making it. The Chinese came upon gun powder by circumstance, wheras in Southern Asia, you had the largest reserves of gunpowder saltpetre and other materials like it in all of Asia in the gangetic plains.

quote:

---

India has a lot documented on their use of arms as well as airships, but at this stage of my discovery, they appear to be more myth than fact.

---

No you are making a false comparison by putting an airship with the discovery of gunpowder. The use of gunpowder and gunpowder weapons may infact be of independent origin in Southern Asia and may be even predate the Chinese. There are entire detailed works and logs in Sanskrit and Ancient Indian works using gunpowder for even ceremonial purposes all the way back to vedic times.

The Chinese did not invent gunpowder, they accidentally discovered it but it's a distortion to say they invented it when they didn't and which is a common myth debunked by research.

quote:

---

The descriptions you provide of India raining thunderbolts and fire-bolts from a wall doesn't sound like missiles, and more like catapults firing incendiary loads which were very common for the period.
The description doesn't mention any explosion, and there isn't any physical description of what these weapons looked like.

---

No now you are just making assumptions about a subject which you have not thoroughly researched, as is evident by your complete lack of awareness of what I linked to, and insinuating it as fact.

There is no real conclusive proof, other then your own assumption, that those were catapult like weapons; if it were catapults with incinerating materials then Alexander the Great would have encountered them plenty of times BEFORE HE ENTERED INDIA AND ADAPTED TO THEM!

Although there are plenty of more passages which you did not look into my link detailing other uses of gunpowder in India during the time period, clearly if Alexander was scared of it then it was by all means a novel new weapon that he had not encountered yet.

And you have not read the other passages about the history of the use of gunpowder in rituals and texts in Ancient India utilizing gunpowder for all sorts of purposes which I did not quote.

quote:

---

List of Korean inventions

Multiple rocket launcher:

Hwacha is a Multiple rocket launcher which was a platform device on wheels that used gunpowder to fire fire arrows, a predecessor of the modern MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System).

---

I am sorry that is not a multiple rocket system because it's making use of arrows and not enclosed metallic heavy rocket like objects. I also don't believe Koreans invented it because they lie and exaggerate about these things and where they got these weapons from; in all likelihood the Chinese did have something like this before that and the Korean simply copied it since Korea for most of it's early history was dependent on China for gunpowder and gunpowder like weapons; and again this does not involve who was the first to use gunpowder or discover it and utilize it for weapon purposes.


Second of all you have not provided any more sources or formal sources that prove and claim that all modern multi-rockets systems or multiple rocket systems are all based on this original Korean idea or are complex derivations of it; you have not disproved the fact the modern multi-missile systems used in the West are independent creations and ideas that may been arrived upon SEPARATELY!


I don't trust Wikipedia as a formal source and since Koreans claims to be responsible for the Sumerian/Mesopotamian civilizations, yes you can look that up on youtube, I am going to take this with a grain of salt.

quote:

---

Armored warship: Turtle ships were large armored warships built during the Joseon dynasty from the early 15th century.

---

False, this may have been the first attempt at making metallic based ships, but armored ships were not a sole Asian invention and were used by ships all over the world.


Again I do not trust wikipedia because of obvious probability of intentional change and misrepresentation but here is what I found:

quote:

---

According tv ihe best authorities on curiosities of tlie navy ami warfare in general, tlie first armored' vessel was launched in the year 1511(1. It was one of the licet inaoiii'il by the Knights of St. John, and was entirely covered with sheets of lead. The accounts of the times leave us in darkness as to the thick.'ess of this lean armor, but they are very positive,ill the statement that they were of sutlici'iil, strength to "successfully resist all the shots of the day." At, the siege of (iibrall n>, i" l~*2i the blench anil Spaniards used war vessels which were arm iri-d with "light iron liliolu-proofing over their decks and tn the waters edge. The very first practical use of wrought iron plates as a defence for the sides of vessels was by the French in the ('riniean war in Is.",;!, .St, Limis liepiihlii

---

using your own source which I don't trust:

quote:

---

Greek merchantmen were fitted with lead sheets for that purpose by the 5th century BC.[1][2] A notable Roman example were the excavated Nemi Ships with an underwater hull covered by a thin layer of lead.[2] The practice was resumed by the Spanish and Portuguese in the Age of Exploration,[3] while the British Royal Navy began to copper their war ships in the 1760s.[4]
The huge Syracusia, built by the Greek tyrant Hiero II of Syracuse around 240 BC, featured bronze-clad mast-tops for marines and an iron palisade on its fighting deck against enemy boarding attempts.[5] Its hull was sheathed with lead plates fixed with bronze nails.[1] Roman naval cataphract warships were protected on their sides by a layer of tarred and lead sheathing. Although this does not provide much protection from ramming, it does provide protection from damage while at sea for lengthy periods of time.[6]
A few Norse longships were reinforced with iron armour along the waterline as early as the 11th Century, such as the Iron Beard of Eric Hakonsson of Norway.[7][8]
Peter IV of Aragon (1336–87) protected his ships with screens of hides against missile fire,[8] as the Roman navy had done earlier.[9]
A ship with iron plating on the ribs was commissioned in 1505 by Juan Lope de Lazcano, a Basque admiral of the Spanish Fleet.[10]
The Santa Anna, a lead-sheathed carrack of the Knights Hospitaller, is viewed by some authors as an early form of armoured ship.[8][11][12][13] From 1522 to 1540, the warship successfully operated in the Mediterranean Sea against the Turks.
The Galleon of Venice, the Venetian flagship which did serious damage to the Ottoman fleet at the Battle of Preveza (1538), was sheathed with plate.[14]
During the siege of Antwerp in 1585, the Dutch defenders partially protected their man-of-war Finis Bellis with iron plates.[15]

---

All this dates to before the use of turtle ships by Koreans. And even the Korean sources that I looked up say that the Koreans had to use earlier designs for their ships that they got from china to eventually developed their prototype turtle ships.


And again what does this have to do with gunpowder and gun weapons? To me this seems like a red herring argument meant to draw the argument away from the main discussion.

quote:

---

Time bomb: The first time bomb called Pigyok Chinchollae (비격진천뢰;飛擊震天雷) was developed during the Imjin War (1592-1598) by a technician, Yi Chang-son (이장손;李長孫).[20][21] It was used to propel into enemy camps and formations by mortar and detonate after a preset interval.

---

The only sources I am finding on this are on wikipedia which is a source I don't trust and korean nationalist sites. Regardless do you just copy paste stuff from the internet without thinking or what? This bomb was timed because of the time it took for the fuse to entirely detonate the bomb, not because of a clock like device, so I fail to see how this is a "time bomb".

Also again, this is completely irrelevant to who discovered and made use of gun powder and gun powder used weapons first. The above is not about that at all. Koreans did not discover gunpowder first and were not the first to properly assess and understand it's properties first.

quote:

---

Naval Artillery: The world's first naval guns (cannons) were used by the Koreans to counter Japanese piracy during the Goryeo Dynasty in the 1370s

---

This doesn't seem like it's true, according to wikipedia:

quote:

---

The Battle of Arnemuiden was a naval battle fought on 23 September 1338 at the start of the Hundred Years' War between England and France. It was the first naval battle of the Hundred Years' War and the first recorded European naval battle using artillery, as the English ship Christopher had three cannons and one hand gun.

---

The English had already utilized three cannons and guns on naval platforms in an artillery like device before the 1370's. And this doesn't matter because this has nothing to do with the original gun powder discussion and also because just because one entity/actor invents something BECAUSE THERE WAS A NEED FOR IT IN ONE PARTICULAR TIME, DOES NOT INDICATE THAT OTHERS CANNOT ALSO INDEPENDENTLY INVENT THE CONCEPT ON THEIR OWN IF THEY FIND A USE FOR IT! The European warship cannons WERE INDEPENDENTLY DEVELOPED FROM THE KOREAN WAR CANNONS!

Just because someone invents something before somebody else, does not actually mean they own the entire idea forever as a monolithic thing, and it does not mean THAT OTHERS CANNOT INVENT IT OR COME UPON THE CONCEPT ON THEIR OWN INDEPENDENTLY OF THE PERSON WHO ORIGINALLY INVENTED IT FIRST, IF THERE IS A NECESSITY FOR IT!

As the google sources tell me, the Chinese did not invent the naval cannons first because they did not find the necessity or use for it but Korea for most of it's history had to import rocket technology and gun powder ideas from China first, to eventually develop their own weapons which they needed to do because they were hard pressed against the Japanese at the time.

quote:

---

Soft bullet-proof vest: Myeonje Baegab is a soft bullet-proof vest invented by Kim Gi-du and Gang Yun in the late 1860s in the Joseon Dynasty.

---

I am sorry but mainstream sources are telling me this:

quote:

---

Although individuals have been creating and utilizing makeshift means to protect themselves from bullets for some time beforehand, Casimir Zeglen of Chicago Illinois is credited with producing the first commercial bullet proof vest available to the public starting in the late 1800s. Zeglen's vests were made of silk fabric based on the findings of Dr. George Goodfellow of Arizona. Dr. Goodfellow observed that the silk cloth of a handkerchief slowed bullet velocities and penetration capabilities when inspecting bodies after a gunfight. The Zeglen vests retailed at around $800 US dollars at the time, the equivalent to about $15,000 US dollars in 2005.

---

But the burden of proof is on you to disprove that using a reputable source to prove your original claim above.

And again this has nothing to do with who discovered and used gunpowder like weapons first.

quote:

---

Weather India or Korea first introduced these weapons to the world is unclear. What is clear is that they both had them well before Europe and today's European designed weapons are based on those ancient Korean designs.

---

False, Europe's weapons are not based on Korean designs and you have shown me no proof of that except invalid assumptions. Korea did not discover or use gunpowder weapons on their own, they had to import all that from the Chinese first.

The Europeans weapons and naval artillery were based on independent discoveries of their own, and mostly based on Persian/Turkish/Arab/Saracen/Indian innovations and transport of the technology to Europe. Not Koreans. You are using invalid logic and assumptions to claim that all of medieval gun weapons were based on Chinese/Koreans chinese when many actors arrived to them independently and without input from those places which you fail to take into account; then you are illogically asserting that independent discoveries are monolithic objects that cannot be reached upon or discovered by others independently of the first person that supposedly held it or discovered it first in a period of time which is faulty logic.

Korea for most of human history was an insignificant place and definitely not as important as Ancient Greece, Persia, India, China, Egypt, Rome, Sumeria, Babylon etc etc. So it would be extremely faulty and stupid to claim that European and Asian gun powder weapons were based on their designs given their lack of importance in world history, their small nation states, and all everything that I've written above. [/QB]

---

Correct.

The 1st tube missile developed by the Koreans looked exactly the same as modern missiles with the exception it's body was made from Tiber Bamboo which can grow to a diameter of a foot or two. It had a head containing the detonator and had a long range.



According to Wiki, India didn't invent a metal encased missile until 1780, or a few hundred years after Sejong.

The first iron-cased and metal-cylinder rocket artillery, made from iron tubes, were developed by the weapon suppliers of Tipu Sultan, an Indian ruler of the Kingdom of Mysore, and his father Hyder Ali, in the 1780s. Tipu Sultan championed the use of mass attacks with rocket brigades within the army, and he wrote a military manual on it, the Fathul Mujahidin. He successfully used these metal-cylinder rockets against the larger forces of the British East India Company during the Anglo-Mysore Wars. The Mysore rockets of this period were much more advanced than what the British had seen, chiefly because of the use of iron tubes for holding the propellant; this enabled higher thrust and longer range for the missile (up to 2 km range). The effect of these weapons on the British during the Second, Third and Fourth Mysore Wars in 1792 was sufficiently impressive to inspire the British to develop their own rocket designs. Several Mysore rockets were sent to England, who then took an active interest in the technology and developed it further during the 19th century.

History of Rocketry Chapter 1
Ancient Times Through the 17th Century

In 1045, a Chinese government official named Tseng Kung-Liang wrote a complete account of the Chinese use of gunpowder, including its adaptation to weaponry.

Called "Wu-ching Tsung-yao" (Complete Compendium of Military Classics) the work detailed the use of ballistic fire arrows not launched by bows, but by charges of gunpowder.

While the date of their introduction is uncertain, the fire arrows launched by gunpowder are considered to be the first true rockets. These fire arrows were traditional feathered arrows propelled by ignited gunpowder housed in a tube tied to the arrow.

The fire arrows carried flammable materials or sometimes poison-coated heads. In a form more closely resembling modern rockets, the gunpowder tube was lengthened to the tip of the arrow and given a pointed nose, eliminating the need for a traditional arrowhead.

Once it was discovered that the fire arrows flew a straight path even after their feathers were burned up by the gunpowder exhaust, the feathers were completely removed. The resulting fire arrow was quite similar in appearance to fireworks used today.

The Chinese typically launched these fire arrows in salvoes from arrays of cylinders or boxes which could hold as many as 1,000 fire arrows each. The fire arrows propelled by gunpowder may have had a range of up to 1,000 feet.

The use of gunpowder propelled weapons proliferated in the coming centuries, especially after their existence was confirmed by Europeans. In 1232, descriptions of a Mongolian siege of the city of Kai-fung-fu were widely circulated.

During this battle, the Mongols employed a potent form of fire arrow described as causing "thunder that shakes the heavens". These may have been primitive grenades launched by gunpowder propelled fire arrows. A single one of these was reportedly able to burn a 2,000 foot area.

In 1258, the Mongols were reported to have used gunpowder propelled fire arrows in their effort to capture the Arab city of Baghdad. The Mongols reportedly launched gunpowder propelled fire arrows from ships during their attacks on Japan in 1274 and 1281.

The Use Of Gunpowder Fire Arrows Spreads

By the end of the 13th century, armies of Japan, Java, Korea and India are believed to have acquired sufficient knowledge of gunpowder propelled fire arrows to begin using them against the Mongols. Use of the weapons quickly spread throughout Asia and Eastern Europe.

Military writings of al-Hasan al-Rammah indicate that in 1285, Arabs began using gunpowder propelled fire arrows in combat. It is believed that gunpowder propelled fire arrows were subsequently used by Arabs against French troops of Louis IX during the 7th Crusade.

There is still debate as to the specific design and effectiveness of gunpowder propelled fire arrows, but they remain the solitary spark that ignited the path to modern rocketry.

Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Real tawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Real tawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
^So, you would be ok with it, if whites received same treatment, as I have described in the posts, in this thread? Is that right?

It's very simple question, which you can respond to, with yes or no.

quote:

---

"STUDY: 5 Of 10 Falsely Convicted Prisoners Are African American

---

http://www.businessinsider.com/study-5-of-10-falsely-convicted-prisoners-are-african-american-2012-5?IR=T

quote:

---

Prison sentences of black men were nearly 20% longer than those of white men for similar crimes in recent years, an analysis by the U.S. Sentencing Commission found.

---

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324432004578304463789858002

quote:

---

Black Americans Given Longer Sentences than White Americans for Same Crimes

---

http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/black-americans-given-longer-sentences-than-white-americans-for-same-crimes?news=843984

---

No I would not be okay with it.

---

But why not?

---

if it is occurring in my lifetime, I would have a problem with it as that would be injustice. But if this were a historical event, I'd see it for what it was.

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindovermatter:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindovermatter:

quote:

---

Let's not forget where the west stole gunpowder , missile as well as Astronomic instrumentation technology from in the 1st place; China/Korea.

---

No the first missiles were actually made by Indians like Tipu Sultan, Turks and Arabs. The Chinese accidentally discovered gunpowder but did not really invent gun weapons as we know them today. It was actually Indians and Arabs who created the first guns, the Indians used gun like weapons, against Alexander the Great, and the Saracens/Arabs adopted this gun technology from India and Persia and brought it to Europe with their conquests; they also supplied the British empire with the largest reserves of saltpetre, gunpowder in asia.

First hand pistol and pistol like weapons were used by the Mamluks against the Mongols in Ayn jalut, so it was the Turks, Arabs, Moors, who brought the concept of guns/cannons/grenades to Europe WITH THEIR CONQUESTS! The Moors also successfully used gun powder against the Vikings which was coined "greek fire" at the time.

Europeans DID NOT ADOPT IT FROM THE CHINESE BUT IT WAS BROUGHT TO THEM FORCEFULLY BY COMBINATION OF SARACENS/ARABS/MOORS/TURKS!

---

Do you have any documentation on this?

---

https://books.google.com/books?id=7n6Cg9znFrUC&pg=PA43&lpg=PA43&dq=gunpowder+india+alexander+the+great&source=bl&ots=_GSUrtP30F&sig=btxHqod6Gkd5_aRW7igjJX0lyjU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUK Ewj-nf-A_aLKAhUBGBQKHVuADVYQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=gunpowder%20india%20alexander%20the%20great&f=false

quote:

---

In his book on fireworks in ancient India, Haridas Mitra suggests that the Hindus had mastered the use of fire missiles by the fourth century BC. Flavius Philostratos, in his history of Apollonius of Tyana, mentioned that when Apollonius was travelling to India, he learned the real reason why Alexander the great desisted from attacking the Oxydrace: "These truly wise men, dwelt between the rivers Hypasis and the Ganges:...beloved by the Gods, (they) overthrew their enemies with tempest and thunderbolts shot from their walls." In the apocryphal letter that Alexander is said to have written to Aristotle, he describes the frightful dangers to which his army was exposed in India when the enemies hurled upon them flaming thunderbolts

---

I am too lazy to copy the other passages but all the information and everything is there in the book and other books like it.

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Is the dramatic rise in autism tapering off?

The theory holds that the CDC has covered up vital data and committed fraud. It’s based on concerns that a CDC scientist, William Thompson, raised about a study that he and several colleagues published in the journal Pediatrics in 2004.

Thompson, who has been hailed in the anti-vaccine community as a whistleblower, has said he believes the study omitted data that would have shown a link between a certain vaccine and autism in certain African-American boys.

---

quote:

---

A conspiracy theory, you say?

That’s right. “Vaxxed” promotes the unsubstantiated claim that the CDC covered up crucial data about a purported link between vaccines and autism.

Here’s the backstory: One of the CDC researchers who co-authored a 2004 study that found no link between vaccines and autism harbored concerns about the way the analysis was conducted.

A decade later, he shared his concerns with the anti-vaccine activist Brian Hooker, who along with Wakefield began to promote the idea of a coverup.

As the conspiracy theory grew, the CDC researcher, William Thompson, came forward with a public statement. He said he wanted to make “absolutely clear” that he believes vaccines save lives and that he would never advise a parent not to vaccinate. Yet he said data had been omitted from the study that would have showed an increased risk for autism among African-American boys who received the MMR vaccine before age 3.

[...]

Those are serious accusations. Could it be fraud?

There’s no reason to think so. Let’s go through the many problems with the conspiracy theory.

Nobody has produced evidence that the CDC covered up anything. The CDC makes the raw data from the study available to researchers to analyze, and no credible scientists have raised an alarm.

There’s also no compelling biological explanation why African-American boys would be the only group at increased risk for autism. The smaller the subgroup you’re analyzing, the more likely you are to stumble across false positives.

Hooker, the anti-vaccine activist, did his own analysis of the raw data, looking at all African-American kids, not just those with Georgia birth certificates. He found that black boys who were vaccinated before age 3 were 3.4 times more likely to have autism than those who weren’t. The journal Translational Neurodegeneration published his study, then quickly retracted it, citing concerns about Hooker’s “competing interests” and the validity of his methods and statistics.

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by kdolo:
"Blacks are oppressed world wide, because they're seen as Ugly, Stupid, and Uncivilized People.
Some blacks are seen as very strong physically, but our world is run by Brains Not Brawn!!
Like Animals, Blacks Are Inferior Humans!! "

The full extent of Albino degeneracy and delusion appear to have no limit

Unfortunately, your delusion does not change your biological reality.



the defect and "inferiority" if you will is plain to see. no conjecture needed.

As for your being civilized, please understand who you got the notion from.....this is you when u encountered it ...



...and clearly you haven't mastered it




"our world is run by Brains Not Brawn"...

oh really ??

http://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0053_defense-comparison

THE U.S. SPENDS MORE ON DEFENSE THAN THE NEXT SEVEN COUNTRIES COMBINED



It appears that for the Albino, once a barbarian always a barbarian...

the fundamental quandry then is: how can a creature who cant even go out into the sun be "superior"....

---

Kdolo turned into Brother Polight.

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged |