Amazon.com Widgets

« Links With Your Coffee | Main | Links With Your Coffee »

Bill Maher Removes All Doubt

Bill Maher, not satisfied with his title of dumbass, went for fucking idiot. It was no contest, he secured the title while not exercising even a single brain cell, a practice he is making his trademark. He sounds like Jenny McCarthy, and Jim Carrey and the rest of the woomeisters. The quality of his arguments is pathetic. He had allergies as a child and wonders if it was the vaccinations he received. He has no proof he just wonders. The fact that hospitals serve jello in Bill's world is an argument in favor of healthy people don't die. Chris Matthews did a pretty good job with a medical experts all over the world are crazy, but not you. But Bill cinched the argument against vaccines with, lots of people feel the same way as him. That's right Bill, you're not the only fucking idiot on the planet just one with a platform where you can do real harm. The article you referred to as evidence that the debate had been revived was interesting. The gist of it was they're are a bunch of nuts debating an issue that is just as settled as evolution. Bill you're doing real harm. I'm sure you didn't read this far, but this describes you perfectly. You're disgraceful.

The increased interest is frustrating to health officials, who are struggling to persuade an already wary public to line up for shots and prevent the spread of the pandemic. . . “I wonder if the people disseminating this false information about this vaccine realize that what they are doing could result in some people losing their lives,” said Dr. Jonathan E. Fielding, the director of the Department of Public Health for Los Angeles County. The comments of vaccine dissenters, which he said “politically come from the left and the right,” were frequently “not just counterproductive,” he said, “but downright disgraceful.”
Maybe I'm being unfair to Bill, here is more thoughtful balanced take on Bill, and Michael Shermer has written Bill an Open Letter.


Alternate Link
Real Time with Bill Maher
Get Bill Maher's Religulous

 

Comments

I was interested to see what you thought about this as soon as I saw the segment.

Ditto.

I love how his guests looked at him dumbly after he brought up the subject. It's too bad none of them were educated enough on it to school him (most of his guests aren't).

If only Richard Dawkins had been on the show this week and in the panel. I'm sure he'd have some words for this that might straighten Bill up.

i know what this is really about. it's not something that nice, rational people concerned only about the data would know, so let me hip you: (ladies, cover your ears/eyes)- bill is after da pussy. that's right, america is full of hot milf's estranged from their more rational husbands over this issue and he wants to tap into that pool. i would say it's likely he already has, and that it would be worthwhile to find out the views of his current main squeeze on this issue.

trust me, i've seen this happen way too many times. some of you might take to using ridiculous terms like "western medicine" in public too when confronted by a willing milf who just wants her love of woo (which in her mind is the same as a responsible love for her offspring) backed up by a guy with some pull.

these milfs (as exemplified by jenny mcarthy) are the real reason otherwise rational men will start questioning their own convictions. and when they have a talk show, or a movie career (jim carrey), god help us all.

now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

btw in case it's not clear, bill is a well-known horndog who isn't above playboy playmates and even ann coulter. the man has few morals in this area, in spite of his claim here to "not be fucking his interns".

It does seem Bill is backpedaling a little bit. Now he's saying "I just think this needs to be debated".

It almost sounds like he's trying to close the door on the subject since several people have spoken out against his stance on vaccines. But I predict that he'll eventually get educated or be confronted by a scientist he admires and when he comes back in February he'll admit he was wrong and then try to drop it altogether.

agreed. but this will only happen when he breaks up with my postulated girlfriend who must currently have him by the balls.

Good take, Jonathan. I like a man who sees the world and tells it like it is. You formulated a theory that was just about developing in my (elderly and slightly dysfunctional) mind.

well it's only a theory, it has yet to be proven. but i've collected no small amount of evidence at no small cost to myself and others, i'm glad somebody appreciates it.

i admit the evidence is anecdotal, but anecdotal, no matter what some logicians would have us believe, does not mean invalid or inadmissable.

Sorry, but Pedantsareus is kicking in again. I may be elderly and slightly dysfunctional but I am still something of a scientist. Someone once said that 'proof' belongs to mathematics and logic, Science is about testing.* Scientific theories are not to be proven, they should be tested to destruction. If the point of destruction is not met, then the theory still holds, but it is not proven.

  • I would add spiritous alcoholic beverages in there as well.

Unless, of course, you used the word 'proven' in the context "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" in which case the word takes its older meaning of 'test', in which case, I apologise, Jonathan.

that is an excellent description of scientific proof. but as you note below, it's not how i (or most "folks" use the word.

spiritous alcoholic

isn't that a flat-out redundancy? do i get another prize?

Surely he knows that 'teach the debate' is now a warning sign highlighting the scientifically backwards.

He must have gotten an overwhelming amount of bad press to have to bring up the subject again. His second foray into stupidity will just bring more. I love how Chris Matthews nailed him for being no different than a $cientologist.

And he claims he just wants to have a debate on the issue. Puuuleeeeze! Like creationists just want to have a debate on the established fact of evolution, or Christian Scientists want to have a debate on the Heimlich Maneuver. Maher is a quack and was pwned by Dr. Frist and is trying to save himself from looking like a complete douche. I think I'll stick with the doctors debating the subject (even though Maher says there is no debate in science) rather than a washed up comedian.

furthermore, as a relatively thoughtful jewish israeli, i can tell you that, for you "enlightened" westerners, identifiying your actual enemies is not your strongest suit. in this case, just to cut to the chase, it isn't poor bill maher (the jew/atheist :)) but those i have called elsewhere "the oprah brigades" and the unscrupulous "scientists" who, like bill, are caught in the web of pussy and money.

As opposed to vinous alcoholic or beery alcoholic!

I was trying to distinguish distilled liquors (whose strengths are measured in degrees proof) from wine and beer (which are measured in percentage of alcohol)

It all comes back to the proof, you see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_proof

damn you're good. i concede.

Gracious as ever.

It is now past 5 o'clock in Blighty, so time for the Isle of Wight equivalent of a margherita.

A small G&T before our evening meal.

G'night.

Haha...Didn't Bill say that 9/11 "troofers" should ask their doctors whether Prozak is right for them?

Much as I generally enjoy Maher's New Rules segment one has to face the fact that he has firmly and irrevocably placed himself in the same class as the Truthers and the Birthers and all those other numskulls whose paranoid delusions are proof against any reasoned argument. We have only to assign him to his proper taxo. I propose we call such people Pharmers since the pharmaceutical companies seem to be the focus of their particular paranoia. Yep Pharmer Bill about covers it.

I think it goes a little far to compare him to a 9/11 crazy.

Suggesting Oj and whole grains can protect us all from disease is an irresponsible and moronic assertion when applied to most any disease.

That said He focuses his attacks on the the flu vaccine, which is a very overused vaccine. Those with weakened immune systems or respitory systems need it and those that routinely interact with last number of such people probably do to. But healthy adults are just getting it for convenience.

The very rare reactions that people have to them are a bit more rare than actually dieing from the flu. But there is no doubt some small negative impact to injecting a small quantity of formaldehyde or other toxin directly into ones blood stream. perhaps so minor for most it is hard to even see.

I say this not to imply that he is being rational in any way. He is clearly wrong. He is essentially implying a 1% risk is worse that a 10% risk. In distrusts that data that shows the 1% risk is really so small.

My point is that it is not as far a stretch as space lasers and missiles edited in every available video tape. Bill Maher is ignoring valid data from studies, troothers are ignoring the facts that they can observe with their own eyes.

One is crazier that the other.

Jenny McCarthys IQ is roughly equal to the sum total of her 3 body measurements as listed in Playboy magazine: 35+24+34=93. Bill Mahers IQ is apparently equal to his head circumference (adjusted for ego related enlargement) plus his penis length: 89+4=93. So I can see how they would come to the same ridiculous scientific conclusions on vaccinations.

Especially disturbing was his "maybe we could look into some of your past problems" lowblow. Wow! Stay classy, Bill. This shows how important this nonsense is to him.

He knows that after all these years of being the (factually correct, mind you) smart-ass on science and religion, this vaccine "skepticism" has the potential of doing real damagae to his image. He just stumbled into it: Stupid people are fat. Fat people are sick. He is not stupid nor fat, so he is healthy, ergo: he doesn't need vaccine.. - oops.

And now it's not that easy to backpedal without losing face. A smart-ass saying, "oh, I looked into it, had some discussions, seems I was wrong"...? Not that easy. Instead he keeps digging and digging.

He should just let the subject be, for a while. And come back to it much later, admitting the mistake. Or never bring it up again.

I think people are overreacting. A skeptic like Shermer used to be a global warming denier and he doesn't seem to think second-hand smoking is harmful. Almost everyone has a few opinions which are not scientifically supported.

Bingo. You can't call him a 'fucking idiot' for not wanting a nation to be immunised against a minor threat such as swine flu (which was the biggest non-event since Y2K). And you can't use a joke of his about hospital food in your case against him. You'd just come off as having unquestioning faith in science and sounding like one the religious ideologues you enjoy deriding so much. Better living through chemistry right?

There's just one difference: Shermer looked at the facts again and again, and changed his mind. Big difference.

What bothers me in this, besides Bill Maher's obvious dumbness on all of this, is the dragging of very different kinds of controversies (or noncontroversies, as the case may be) in and their presentation as somehow comparable.

In particular, it really bothers me to see global warming and the scientific case for evolution slapped together as if the evidence in support of each and the scientific understanding of each as comparable. Scientific understanding of the progress and mechanisms of evolution are many orders of magnitude better than is scientific knowledge of global warming. On the latter, the consensus if reasonably strong, fairly convincing, but NONE of the IPCC reports convey either the kind of evidence or certainty about global warming that modern biology has concerning evolution. On the basis of the evidence, to deny the latter is just bat-shit crazy; to deny the former is just now moving into realm of stubbornly conservative. Frankly, to deny evolution is far crazier than 9-11 conspiracies or gunmen behind the grassy knoll. As far as degrees of scientific certitude are concerned, evolution is nearly up there with the laws of thermodynamics or quantum mechanics (even after accounting for their intended realms of application).

BTW, the Becker "pussy hypothesis" (I don't think it qualifies as a theory yet) is interesting. In recent years, I've seen Maher talk about Ann Coulter as if she is totally insane, but for a while there he was a bit enthralled – I always assumed it was a pussy thing.

I would argue that the level of craziness is related not to the mountain of evidence but how observable it is.

You can watch the 911 video and watch it happen and hear relatives talk about the people that actually died or were there.

We have all seen shifts in weather over the years.

Outside of a course in comparative biology or a lab, its hard to see evolution.

With viruses, everyone that gets a vaccine knows they feel like shit the next day. Meanwhile, I know zero people that have died of polio or flu.

C'mon. Natural science museums full of dinosaur bones can be found in many major cities! It isn't about being observable, its about being socially acceptable. Virtually everyone would agree that anyone who proudly announced an alternative theory of semiconductor physics that proves their iPod is populated with angels who sing all the songs inside of it is totally fucking crazy – regardless of whether they've know how integrated circuits work or whether they can see electrons. Can more people understand how a hard drive stores information than can understand natural selection – even after both are explained to them? Yet people who understand absolutely nothing about biology feel no compunctions about being no less insane about something that is actually easier to observe and understand.

Ok, that moves Natural selection up the crazy scale. But really, are dumb people going to museums?

I had a classmate in HS (his father was on the schoolboard) that didn't "believe" in dinosaurs.

That still strikes me as pretty high on the crazy scale.

Oh, you're right about how remarkably crazy people's beliefs can be. The young woman who serves as a secretarial assistant to my colleague and I - who spends her days typing his scientific manuscripts and proposals (he still won't touch computers, at eight-one he never will) – says she wants to home school her future kids specifically to avoid them being taught about evolution.

I guess my point is that ignorance is self-imposed and that it happens because there is a huge social/religious support system making their craziness acceptable. I wonder if your classmate would be a bigger outcast if he'd said he didn't believe in the planet Mars - something that is comparably easy to ignore and therefore to deny, right?

Is it just me or was this post uncharacteristically ineloquent? The grammatics of it make my mind reel.

I just have to say - I do not get the level of animosity toward Maher. There are so many people who are personally responsible for so much worse that haven't received half the skewering.

Yes, I suppose he is influencing others not to get the flu vaccine but...are they people that wouldn't be looking for someone to agree with any way? And Maher isn't a doctor - he is a political commentator. If it makes you doubt his whole gig - so be it - but I don't think he is personally responsible for sending us to war, causing Americans to torture, rolling back environmental standards, fighting those who are trying to prevent global warming, trying to prevent Americans from getting health insurance, the one who pursued financial deregulation, pushing for schools to teach creationism, etc.....and I don't remember those guys getting this many rounds of of vitriol.

And, to part of his point, people are over-medicated and that's where the super bugs came in. Where my ex- used to take antibiotics for EVERYTHING, doctors are no longer prescribing them unless they feel it is absolutely necessary. And, I always question my doctors. There have been some real tragedies in my family where people haven't waqnted to keep questioning doctors because some of them really don't like it - one of the guys who wrote for denialism (pre-respectful insolence) was a perfect example - he wrote a couple of times how HE was the doctor and had all the training and he knew. (On the other hand, when I was apologizing to the surgeon I was dealing with for my mother for all the questions I was asking he said I was doing exactly what I should be doing). As far as the vaccines, a woman I knew did get a mild case of polio from the vaccine, I got all kinds of vaccinations when I was going to do some heavy traveling and went home sick for two days and I don't doubt things can go wrong so why not ask questions.

I think Maher is being a born-again fanatic about this but I think you guys are being way too hard core. And I'm not even particularly a Maher fan.

I just got around to seeing this episode, and I guess Maher's making excuses and backpedaling is kind of a good thing. Who knows if he will change his opinion, but this one was less stupid than the last one, at least. I guess he felt the pressure of educated liberals talking about how Bill freaking Frist "schooled" him last time.

It seems it did offend Maher's liberal sensibilities being compared to Tom Cruise (spot-on, Matthews), and being seen as a conspiracy theorist, who he despises. Maybe he'll do an ep about it, and invite "both sides"? Nah.

Baldwin changing the subject was kind of how I imagine him behaving at a family reunion. "Hey Stephen, why rehash this Jesus crap that got you into trouble with the other Baldwin bros the last time?"

Maybe I'm dumb too, but I don't think Maher's main target is vaccines. He's mainly commenting on the fact that we as a people are progressively focusing more on symptoms and cures than health and causes. He's just stupidly stumbling into anti-vaccine tangents instead of staying on the real message.

Hey, we're the most sedentary, shit-eating society in history. We take all kinds of pills and other trash to fix things that shouldn't be wrong in the first place because we sit around all day and eat cheetos. Naturally, shooting something in your arm probably just seems like another similarly unnecessary solution to Bill.

He may be stupidly bungling this point by throwing it up against established science (a separate issue), but he has a hell of a statement to make when he gets on his cheeseburger rants. We ARE sick for a lot of the reasons he points out. Where's the crazy in that?

Does anyone remember about 4 years ago when Bill was giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iraq? He would go into a condescending hissy fit whenever anyone would suggest Iraq was a quagmire. No matter what the person would argue he would not listen. Sort of a modified Bill O'Rielly pig-headedness.

As Bill was getting needled, he turned to the "And we'll have to leave it there" tactic TDS pointed out. In this case,it was the anchor who was under fire - though not a raging blaze - not a debate being cut off for a cute human interest segment.

For the format given, and the fact that this is still sort of a comedy show, I think the panel's collective response was OK. Glad to see Martin O'Malley get some good points in edge-wise. Took me back to my charm city days.

Bill can be skeptical all he wants, but throwing out the baby with the bathwater ain't cutting it. The Tom Cruise reference was apt. I agree with Jill that Bil isn't being as destructive as a war mongerer or wall street executive/thief. Unfortunately, though, there are those who are just looking for a major figure to sanction disdain for medical procedures. People in the risk groups should get this vaccine. If you're not in a risk group, consider your options.

Normally I wouldn't post a conspiracy theory video, but I found this one fascinating because of the media coverage included in the video.

I would just say that I have seen studies and read articles here and elsewhere that dispute the data included the channel seven interview and the the Kennedy interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMqYlnAiIUU&feature=player_embedded

That said, I found the fear mongering around the H1N1 virus really bizarre. National guard and quarantine? I also found the coverage of the outbreak in the 70's somewhat informative although questionably relevant.

my goodness, red7, you surprise me.

btw did you catch the milf putting in her 2 cents?

One track mind today, JB?

hey what kind of antisemitic remark was that, you antisemitic bastard? :)

who doesn't like a nice milf from time to time?

Oh, I am sorry. Is today a high holiday or something?

Bill Posted these links with the same video tonight

The H1N1 Debate [HD] by Bill Maher (videos) 2:40 HBO Real Time with Bill Maher October 16, 2009

U.S. Centers for Disease Control Vaccine Ingredients: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

user-pic

Damn! You beat me to it.

Half of those preservatives or at least similar ingredients are also in food.

I think a fish dinner and coolwhip and jello dessert seems to be the equivalent in chemical content. It is a little worrisome to inject those directly into the bloodstream avoiding the digestive filters. But as you said, compared to the benefits against dangerous diseases, the risks are irrelevant.

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives