Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "NIH Director: We'd Have Ebola Vaccine If Not for Budget Cuts" video.

  1. I call BS on this one. This would imply that he knows how to make a cure but doesn't have money to create it.
    1
  2. ***** Even if you have all the money of the world it doesn't necessary mean that you will find the cure. This is something that not that many people have figured out yet apparently. Also in some cases people with lower funds than others were able to be faster and more successful than those who had larger funding.   So for this greedy bastard to make claim that he would've cure by now is same as he knows how to make it.
    1
  3. ***** Wow you actually did report whyamirpink from thrash message? That is so sad to resort to something like that. Breakthroughs as my resorts? No, they just act there to point out that just having lot of money doesn't necessarily mean that you will get any out of it. With your silly logic AIDS should've had cure decade ago. This BS talker haven't even provided any reasoning why extra money would've given him a miracle cure to a old disease that have exists for years already.
    1
  4. ***** I know perfectly what I'm talking about. But it's clear that you're too stupid to get my point. You claim  1. More money will cure everything. I stated that: 2. If that would be true then we would've got ridden of disease X (aids in this case). But as I said you clearly were too stupid to get the point.
    1
  5. ***** No it's not strawman since you clearly implied it very strongly in here, and you're defending that view since that's the view I was against in my initial comment. These people haven't shown any evidence that their development would've been ready by now with more funds and that is exactly what they are claiming here. They claim that with more money they would've cured it. Also outbreak? Geez... seems like some people are easily scared. Only 2 person has it in america and one of them died. Doesn't sound like an outbreak to me. This whole news is just attempt to attack current government and try to get more money for those greedy people. This is nothing more than political news. But I guess you weren't educated news reader enough to know the true motive of this claim these people made. Ebola has existed for years, lack of fund isn't excuse now since this isn't a new disease in here.
    1
  6. ***** You  were talking about outbreak in general notion. How the fuck am I suppose to know what you mean when you're so damn vague? "Anyway you can chose not to believe him however in this case he is the expert in this area and his words carries allot of weight. " Argument from authority. There has been many cases already where some expert claims something while they were actually lying about it for the profits. Especially in medical field. Of course most of them were caught later on and were thrown to the jail. "This is not some "maybe" mumbo jumbo but a specific case where we can point to and said "They could not do their job because they were not funded enough"." How do you know this? How do you know that there wasn't enough funds? How do you know even with certainty that vaccine would exists by now.
    1
  7. ***** You haven't provided any trustworthy source. Beside science and facts don't work on authority. They work with evidences instead of claims of some jackass who just wants to scam people for more money for himself. You believe him`? Then go ahead and donate money for him. I will just laugh in background how you will get fooled by a scam artist.
    1
  8. ***** Wouldn't be first time in the history of mankind where "leading expert" decides to scam people.  Not only you commit a logical fallacy here but you even fail to acknowledge it. You really have mental issues. He has not evidence to back his claims and neither do you. If you would have you would've already provided them instead of classical argument from authority. With your reasoning god is real because pope says so.... After all he is the "leading expert" in god stuff.
    1
  9. ***** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Not dismissing the possibility. I'm dismissing your argument which is based on logical fallacy. Or are you really too stupid to realize that you can't lean on a fallacy to prove your point? "By your logic we might as well not listen to any experts because herp derp some of them lies!" Listening and being blind followers are two different things. You know sceptic people listen and then try to see confirmation of certain claims instead of trusting words alone. You know like smart people would behave. Something that you might not know. Oh and your links prove nothing, they are just talking about two candidates which have't been even through clinical trials.
    1
  10. ***** Argument from fallacy doesn't make any sense in this context. Ok I just can't believe that there are gullible people like you who believe anything that someone with "professor" name can convince you of everything. Guess you believe those few biology professors who claim that earth is 6000 years old. "You have not done anything to address the facts " I have addressed every claim you have made, including your ridicilous fallacies which relies totally on ONE PERSONS WORDS ALONE.
    1
  11. ***** No actually it isn't different at all. You're trying to make special case that only professors who support your initial view should be taken seriously but not those who disagree with you. Now notice how you mentioned EVIDENCE showing that they are wrong. Now I'm waiting for you to provide EVIDENCE that this professor which you love so much is right. So far his words are now different from priest claiming that if people wouldn't be gay then there wouldn't be tsunamis. Edit: Also you fail to understand how burden of proof works. you're demanding that others need to prove you wrong, instead of you proving that you're right.
    1
  12. ***** "... A human source might be the most unreliable type of evidence/proof... but its still a valid evidence/proof. " HAHAHAHA XD. Oh you have to be joking xd... This can't be real seriously please tell me you're just a troll  :D Well I guess toothfairies, santaclaus, lochness, alien anal probes, bigfoots etc are real after all. Very valid evidence XD. You really are cracking me up. I didn't think you as a smart person but now you literally gave yourself a new low. This guys seriously believes that human testimony is enough as evidence xD. Hey guess what. You own me 1000000 dollars. Can't remember? Don't worry I remembered when you loaned that much from me, sorry I have on other thing to back this up expect my words alone but since you say it's enough to be evidence then you probably don't mind paying me back? " If you want evidence for ignoring Priests then I dont know if I can help you any more." Priests are experts in god issues right? :D So by your very own definition they know about how god works more than you. Don't get me wrong I don't believe in god but it's hilarious that you still didn't get the point :D You sir just got OWNED. Hah you really are a joke.
    1
  13. ***** Says guy who believes in fairies :D
    1
  14. ***** No I was sniffing your tears. They smell delicious. And it's now a fact that you cried on this morning since human testimony is reliable evidence. xD
    1
  15. ***** How can I replicate this claim of this professor who doesn't give any evidence that he might have created the vaccine by now with more money :D Sure santaclaus exists, though he doesn't give gifts for naughty people like you. "In other words you are advocating that everyone needs to do every experiment themselves because otherwise they have to trust a pesky scientist or other" that's what science is about. If you doubt then repeat the study or find flaw in it.
    1
  16. ***** Guess what. You're actually lizard. This is true because I'm professor of biology therefore I'm always right when it comes to biology. XD PS: You also have a brain cancer. You might want to go and check it out. I know this because I'm also a wizard.
    1