You might wonder what Easter Seals and Autism Speaks have in common with the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). NAMBLA is in favor of adults sodomizing young boys while these other two organizations appear to be legitimate charities.
Appearances can be deceiving. While NAMBLA's abuse of young boys is out in the open, the abuse by Easter Seals and Autism Speaks is more secretive. Easter Seals and Autism Speaks have conned the public into believing that they exist to help disabled children. The fact of the matter is that Autism Speaks refuses to actually help any autistic children. In fact, they disown people who are associated with them for trying to cure these children.
Autism Speaks also maintains a message board where they evict people who discuss methods of curing autistic children while allowing people to remain in good standing who lie about autism. They even allow people to remain on their forums who support frauds like Amanda Baggs who is pretending to be autistic to gain publicity for pharmaceutical company propaganda disguised as Neurodiversity. In short, by helping to perpetuate this fraud by Neurodiversity, Autism Speaks is taking the money that is donated to it and using it to bumblast autistic children. While the founders of Autism Speaks go about the business of curing their grandson with biomedical interventions, Autism Speaks gives a forum to crazed propagandists who continue with their messaage decrying every autism treatment to be quackery. So, we see that Autism Speaks takes care of their own which sets up the rest of the poor autistic kids for organizations like Easter Seals to bumblast the kids some more.
After Autism Speaks sends out the message that curing autism is quackery, and parents miss that slim chance they have to cure their kids, the kids will have to be sent to asylums. Easter Seals runs some of those asylums. So they can thank Autism Speaks for sending them all of those kids who won't be cured to rot in their dismal asylums. I don't know exactly how much Easter Seals rakes in for each kid that winds up in their looney bins but it is a hell of a lot more than they pay their staff. The administrators like Brian Cross must get a healthy salary for bumblasting these poor kids by allowing them to rot on mind numbing drugs in their facilities.
Easter Seals does keep some people employed using obsolete techniques to treat autism. They send lots of "therapists" out to play with the babies until they are 3 years old. The naive parents of the 3 year olds think Easter Seals has been a big help to them because they get a short break from the 24 hour a day horror of autism while someone else plays with their unmanageable kid.
The parents can also learn about Easter Seals' placement options where they can send the kid when he grows too big to handle. They think this is their only option since Easter Seals and Autism Speaks are still telling parents that there is no known cause or cure for autism. The pediatricians confirm this standard of there being no known cause or cure for autism ( since they don't want to admit they fucked up) and the unwitting parents wait in limbo for the kid to grow up a little where the "compassionate" people at Easter Seals will give the kid a "good home" where he will be bumblasted every day for the rest of his life.
In the meantime, Autism Speaks keeps raking in more and more millions of dollars so they can identify a gene that is common to all autistic children who are also prone to mercury poisoning. You see, if they can find a gene that is common to kids who can't excrete mercury, they can blame the gene instead of the mercury. Parents who aren't sciemtists will never know the difference and lots of them will simply be glad for an excuse to get the God damned autism out of their lives by shipping the kid off to a home.
This will keep Easter Seals happy since they can tell everyone how they take care of oodles of autistic kids and use that as their hook to pick philanthropists pockets. Autism Speaks can keep claiming they're looking for a solution to curing the genetic cause of autism which they will never find but it will keep their administrators in Corvettes as well as making ignorant philanthropists think they did something worthwhile with their spare change. The pediatricians and the vaccine manufacturers will be happy because all of this perpetuation of ignorance will get them off the hook. And NAMBLA will be the happiest of all because they will have insane asylums full up with non-verbal autistic people who they can bumblast all day long who can't speak to report the abuse. NAMBLA members will be happy to take these low paying jobs.
Quite a happy menage a trois, don't you think?
Friday, March 28, 2008
Bush Admits Vaccines Cause Autism
Not really, but I hope that got your attention so you can read the best piece ever written about vaccines and autism here.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Easter Seals New Hampshire, CAICA and Neuroinsanity
Here's another delusional neuroinsane blog that I just stumbled upon for the first time. As usual, it's written by a pseudonymous nitwit who calls herself S.L.. I believe the initials stand for Slimy Lamebrain.
Slimy Lamebrain found the Hating Autism blog displayed on Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA) so, she asked her fellow neuroinsane simpletons to start a letter writing campaign to remove this blog from their site. It worked.
CAICA, who must have thought Hating Autism had something useful to say when they added it to their site, buckled to the letters from people who do nothing but abuse autistic children all day long and removed the links. We can see that CAICA is run by people with shit for brains to be conned by the neuroinsane child abusers that they claim to be fighting against.
I wrote to CAICA but they did not reply. CAICA must not understand that those people who complained about Hating Autism are actually associates of the pharmaceutical industry who caused the autism epidemic. CAICA does not see that the psychopaths from the Autism Hub are going out of their way to discredit decent people who strive for one thing, curing autism.
I worked in an institution that abuses autistic children. I worked at the Zachary Road facility owned by Easter Seals in Manchester, New Hampshire. I pointed out to the director of that facility, one Brian Cross, exactly how he was abusing those autistic teenagers. Mr Cross took a similar action as CAICA when confronted with the truth. The horse's ass fired me.
I was reluctant to discuss this child abuse by Easter Seals since they had provided in home support for my autistic son when he was a baby. There was also the possibility that I would be cutting off my nose to spite my face by writing publicly about Easter Seals' child abuse since I might have to go to them for help with my son again.
Easter Seals Vice President Brian Cross is an old man who simply doesn't know anything about autism. I tried to explain to this bonehead how autism is caused by thimerosal and how chelation can help these kids. I even went to the trouble of writing it all out for him with links included so he could learn what autism scholars like myself had learned since 1999 when Verstraeten showed us the connection.
Bonehead Cross paid no attention to what I told him and continued on his merry way of drugging these kids into oblivion with seroquel and other drugs designed solely to make difficult teens controllable. I brought up the point that all Cross was doing with these kids was preparing them for life in an asylum from which they would never emerge. One reply from Bonehead Cross was that it wasn't his job to manage the kids' medical treatment.
Nice attitude, huh? The moron who runs the institution learns of a method that might cure the autistic children and his response is that doing anything about it isn't his job.
Well Mr Cross, it isn't my job either to point out your stupidity and ineffectiveness in caring for these teenagers. I've been remiss by not putting this in public sooner. It is my responsibility as a parent who knows the truth to see to it that everyone who cares for an autistic person knows where the autism came from and learns what can be done to help the afflicted people.
Old goats like Brian Cross need to be booted out the door and replaced with people whose thirst for knowledge is still alive. The lives of hundreds of thousands of children are counting on it.
What kind of world do we live in where peoples' lives are simply tossed in the trash barrel because old idiots who are no longer capable of learning do nothing but conduct business as usual. Should these teenagers be shipped off to the adult asylum when they age out of the Easter Seals facility because Brian Cross and others like him have not kept up with the science on autism?
It is now nine long years since we learned that autism is caused by mercury in vaccines. Easter Seals still does not understand this fact. They are still operating in the Stone Age as far as autism is concerned. Drug the children, throw them in timeout closets with padded walls and ship them off to the next asylum. What will it take for organizations like Easter Seals and CAICA to learn the truth?
Perhaps other people who read this blog could counter the insane letter writing campaigns by Neuroinsanity and advise CAICA and Easter Seals what has happend since 1999. CAICA also needs to learn who Tim Bolen is so they can gain an appreciation of exactly what Slimy Lamebrain and her associates are up to.
UPDATE: I received a nice note from one person at Easter Seals thanking me for this:
Mr. John Best
Thank you for your email. We appreciate your feedback. Your dedication and commitment to helping children with autism is commendable.
(Name deleted)
Easter Seals
Slimy Lamebrain found the Hating Autism blog displayed on Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA) so, she asked her fellow neuroinsane simpletons to start a letter writing campaign to remove this blog from their site. It worked.
CAICA, who must have thought Hating Autism had something useful to say when they added it to their site, buckled to the letters from people who do nothing but abuse autistic children all day long and removed the links. We can see that CAICA is run by people with shit for brains to be conned by the neuroinsane child abusers that they claim to be fighting against.
I wrote to CAICA but they did not reply. CAICA must not understand that those people who complained about Hating Autism are actually associates of the pharmaceutical industry who caused the autism epidemic. CAICA does not see that the psychopaths from the Autism Hub are going out of their way to discredit decent people who strive for one thing, curing autism.
I worked in an institution that abuses autistic children. I worked at the Zachary Road facility owned by Easter Seals in Manchester, New Hampshire. I pointed out to the director of that facility, one Brian Cross, exactly how he was abusing those autistic teenagers. Mr Cross took a similar action as CAICA when confronted with the truth. The horse's ass fired me.
I was reluctant to discuss this child abuse by Easter Seals since they had provided in home support for my autistic son when he was a baby. There was also the possibility that I would be cutting off my nose to spite my face by writing publicly about Easter Seals' child abuse since I might have to go to them for help with my son again.
Easter Seals Vice President Brian Cross is an old man who simply doesn't know anything about autism. I tried to explain to this bonehead how autism is caused by thimerosal and how chelation can help these kids. I even went to the trouble of writing it all out for him with links included so he could learn what autism scholars like myself had learned since 1999 when Verstraeten showed us the connection.
Bonehead Cross paid no attention to what I told him and continued on his merry way of drugging these kids into oblivion with seroquel and other drugs designed solely to make difficult teens controllable. I brought up the point that all Cross was doing with these kids was preparing them for life in an asylum from which they would never emerge. One reply from Bonehead Cross was that it wasn't his job to manage the kids' medical treatment.
Nice attitude, huh? The moron who runs the institution learns of a method that might cure the autistic children and his response is that doing anything about it isn't his job.
Well Mr Cross, it isn't my job either to point out your stupidity and ineffectiveness in caring for these teenagers. I've been remiss by not putting this in public sooner. It is my responsibility as a parent who knows the truth to see to it that everyone who cares for an autistic person knows where the autism came from and learns what can be done to help the afflicted people.
Old goats like Brian Cross need to be booted out the door and replaced with people whose thirst for knowledge is still alive. The lives of hundreds of thousands of children are counting on it.
What kind of world do we live in where peoples' lives are simply tossed in the trash barrel because old idiots who are no longer capable of learning do nothing but conduct business as usual. Should these teenagers be shipped off to the adult asylum when they age out of the Easter Seals facility because Brian Cross and others like him have not kept up with the science on autism?
It is now nine long years since we learned that autism is caused by mercury in vaccines. Easter Seals still does not understand this fact. They are still operating in the Stone Age as far as autism is concerned. Drug the children, throw them in timeout closets with padded walls and ship them off to the next asylum. What will it take for organizations like Easter Seals and CAICA to learn the truth?
Perhaps other people who read this blog could counter the insane letter writing campaigns by Neuroinsanity and advise CAICA and Easter Seals what has happend since 1999. CAICA also needs to learn who Tim Bolen is so they can gain an appreciation of exactly what Slimy Lamebrain and her associates are up to.
UPDATE: I received a nice note from one person at Easter Seals thanking me for this:
Mr. John Best
Thank you for your email. We appreciate your feedback. Your dedication and commitment to helping children with autism is commendable.
(Name deleted)
Easter Seals
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Wacko Planet Defends Amanda Baggs
I was reading an interesting thread on Wrong Planet about Amanda Baggs. It discussed how Baggs is malingering. As usual, Dave Seidel showed up to defend his wife's spokesmodel for Neuroinsanity. Alex Plank banned the person who started the discussion about the fat fraud, Baggs.
It looks like lunacy as usual for the Wrong Planet denizens. It wouldn't be good for Plank to allow the discussion to continue and further enumerate Baggs' fraud.
To see just how screwed up the founder of Wacko Planet is, you have to read this list of Ten Myths about Autism Debunked.
This kid Plank is so out to lunch with his alleged debunking of facts that someone should throw a net over him. And, he is one of the leaders of about 15,000 brain damaged people associated with Wrong Planet who could all benefit from a cure for autism and Asperger's.
Don't we have laws in the USA protecting brain damaged citizens from being preyed on by people like Alex Plank and Amanda Baggs? These two con artists are convincing people with diminished mental capacities to avoid treatments that can help them repair damaged brains. Who put these con artists up to this deranged propaganda? I think our Attorney General should begin investigating these two for fraud.
It looks like lunacy as usual for the Wrong Planet denizens. It wouldn't be good for Plank to allow the discussion to continue and further enumerate Baggs' fraud.
To see just how screwed up the founder of Wacko Planet is, you have to read this list of Ten Myths about Autism Debunked.
This kid Plank is so out to lunch with his alleged debunking of facts that someone should throw a net over him. And, he is one of the leaders of about 15,000 brain damaged people associated with Wrong Planet who could all benefit from a cure for autism and Asperger's.
Don't we have laws in the USA protecting brain damaged citizens from being preyed on by people like Alex Plank and Amanda Baggs? These two con artists are convincing people with diminished mental capacities to avoid treatments that can help them repair damaged brains. Who put these con artists up to this deranged propaganda? I think our Attorney General should begin investigating these two for fraud.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
David Wolman, Wired Magazine's Genuis
I was rummaging through the neuroinsanity blogs today and came across one titled "A Very Good Blog Post". I naturally thought it was about somethimng I had written so I checked it out. It turns out the blogger was referring to David Wolman, the simpleton who had been conned by Amanda Baggs in his Wired Magazine article. This post also referred the reader to another blog post by Wolman in which one PhD demonstrated his ignorance of autism because his kid was actually doing things that Amanda Baggs had been faking. It's a shame when well meaning but naive PhD's are conned by scam artists.
Wolman has a list of his articles that discuss topics such as bugs, grass and Mt Fuji. It doesn't look like there is anything in his background that gives him a clue about what autism is all about. Yet, this 33 year old wizard sees fit to ignore the concerns of people with extensive experience in autism while he helps perpetuate Amanda Baggs' con job on an unsuspecting public.
The fact that Amanda Baggs is not autistic has been brought to the attention of Joanna Pearlstein, an editor for Wired Magazine along with David Wolman. Pearlstein stated that she has no interest in writing about this fact. Wolman has not responded to anyone who voiced this concern, as far as I know.
We can see on Wolman's blog that he does not like experts in the field of autism pointing out the truth about vaccines and autism. He rambles on with some junk about horrible diseases that we all had as kids with no ill effects. This young genius who has, in has vast experience, learned about Mt Fuji, bugs and growing grass must have all of a sudden become an expert on autism by his association with a liar who began her descent into autism by abusing LSD.
So, there you have it. Wired Magazine writes pure BS and refuses to acknowledge anyone who points out their lack of integrity. Amanda Baggs goes merrily on her way, misinforming the public about autism thanks to mental midgets like Pearlstein and Wolman who tacitly agree to the LSD as the cause of autism theory. I wonder if anyone who later determines that a flu shot to a pregnant mother caused their child's autism can sue Wired Magazine for this misinformation? Can their stupidity be held against them in a court of law?
UPDATE: As you might expect, David Wolman has deleted one of my comments from his blog asking about his foolishness of not investigating allegations of Amanda Baggs' fraud. You can hide from the truth Dave, but that won't make it go away.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Autism Speaks Run by Trolls
Here, the Autism Speaks message board manager moderates the trolls.
The Autism Speaks message board is a place where you would think you could discuss information related to autism and find some answers as to how to help autistic children. While this is sometimes possible, the norm is that any good advice that is given to parents seeking information quickly degenerates into argument.
This is because Autism Speaks is infested with vermin from the Neurodiversity movement. Let's look at who some of the wackos are who try to harm children with ridiculous propaganda.
One notable wacko is Margaret Toigo, an ex stripper who tries to present her deranged opinions as though they were facts. This ugly slug (she couldn't have done very well as a stripper) just keeps writing that vaccines do not cause autism and rants on and on calling any doctor who helps an autistic child a quack. I don't think most people are stupid enough to listen to this brain dead nitwit but her tactics do disrupt intelligent discussion and get in the way of parents new to the horrific world of autism from learning the facts.
Another simpleton from the Neurodiversity Cult is a woman who calls herself Momof26 children (or something like that). Her real name is Jeannette McDonald and she claims to have 5 autistic children. This woman is so intellectually challenged that she refused assistance from Dr Wakefield, the man who discovered that the MMR vaccine causes autism. She also managed to wheedle herself a new house for free from that stupid TV show that goes around building houses for people who have problems. I don't watch the show but it might be interesting to see if it is sponsored by any drug companies. Perhaps that sponsorship played a role in addling this woman's brain so that she now claims all autistic kids need is love and they'll be fine. From the looks of her kids, it seems that only one of them has autism. The others don't appear to be that bad off.
Auntie Em is the pseudonym used by another nasty wack job who slithers around the Autism Speaks boards. I'm not sure but I think this moron used to blog under the name Soapbox Mom. This nut has never had anything useful to say but she is adept at starting arguments to distract people from the business of helping autistic children.
Then we have Autism Diva, AKA Camille Clark. This infamous lunatic is an expert at taking quotes out of context and trying to use them against the sane people who uttered them. She's also good at character assassination which she is happy to do for anyone she can dig up a little dirt on who helps autistic children. She's one of the psychopaths who try to claim that all chelation is dangerous just because one doctor committed malpractice by giving a child the wrong chelator. The fact of the matter is that chelation has been the standard treatment for mercury poisoning for over 60 years. Yet, this fat, old lady just keeps rambling on, ad infinitum that chelation is quackery and it's all a scam to line the doctors' pockets. The truth of that matter is that a lot of the parents who are curing their autistic children are learning how to cure them from Dr Andy Cutler and the Autism Mercury Group for free.
Next in our list of Neuronitwits is a woman named Liz who uses the moniker Roo2. She's married to a guy who's some sort of scientist so she must have him help her with using scientific terms to distract people from the truth about Vaccines. She has nothing at all to say that is useful to anyone who is trying to help a kid with autism but she's a real pain in the ass when decent people are trying to elaborate on the facts of how to help these children.
Matt is a guy who is too stupid to converse anywhere near intelligently on autism so, he hops around the message board using argument ad hominem to try to discredit decent parents. He also butts into discussions and asks stupid questions to try to derail the topics. A minor pain to sane people but contributes enough disruption to earn a gold star from Neurodiversity for his efforts.
Li'l Bo Peep is a woman from Long Island who looks something like the wicked witch of the west. She persists in stating that Autism Speaks should be a place where differing opinions can be exchanged, as though opinions from wackos who oppose curing autism have any value. She seems harmless on the surface but her contribution of stupid opinions helps add to the total effect of this collection of liars spreading their propaganda.
Next we have some sad cases. These are the people who claim to be on the Autism Spectrum and make the absurd asserion that they do not want to be cured.
Beau seems to be a nice kid who has been perverted by the Cult of Neurodiversity. He isn't very bright which is obvious by his falling in with this strange cult but he serves their purpose well with his "I don't want to be cured" nonsense. He probably believes he is doing a good thing by participating in this assault on decent parents and I tend not to blame him for his disruption. However, it should be noted that whatever he says should not be taken seriously by anyone.
There is also a person known as Zarathustra who appears to be a 40ish lesbian from England, although I can't state that as fact. Most of these people try to hide their identities. She oozed across to Autism Speaks from the extrenely wacky Wrong Planet discussion group. That's where people who claim to have Asperger's make excuses for all of the bonehead things they've done in their pathetic lives. And these losers don't need to be cured, yuh right. Anyhow, Zarathustra flits around AS and interjects inanities here and there as a few more bits of distraction, anything to prevent parents from helping autistic kids.
Some guy who calls himself Darwin also haunts AS when he's not locked up for abusing drugs. He and his wife are a couple of oddballs who, I think, claim to have Asperger's. They're pretty good at derailing threads and adding stupid pictures in that they think are comical. Neither one of them makes any sense but, again, they contribute to the overall assault on decent parents learning the truth about how vaccines cause autism.
That's enough for now. I know I missed some of the nitwits who spread their propaganda at Autism Speaks. It would be nice if one of the founders of Autism Speaks recognized what these lowlifes are doing on their forum and banned them all. First though, AS needs to ferret out the neurodiverse moderators who allow these liars to spread their drivel.
Let me know which nitwits I missed and I'll add descriptions of them in later.
Autism Sucks, Not Autism Speaks
You can help counter the deceit practiced by Autism Speaks and Neurodiversity by advertising the truth about autism. Autism sucks, plain and simple. Click here or on the bar at the top of the blog to go to Cafe Press where you can purchase hats, t-shirts, stickers and other lovely items that let people know that Autism Speaks sucks and so does Neurodiversity.
All proceeds will go to the Megan Foundation to help cure autism.
All proceeds will go to the Megan Foundation to help cure autism.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Autism Speaks Bans the Truth about Autism
I was just banned from the Autism Speaks message boards for life. That's the second time these geniuses banned me for life for going on their message board and telling the truth about how autism is caused and how to cure it. They even went to the trouble of going through all of the comments I put there and deleting the link to this blog. That says a lot about the dishonesty of Autism Speaks.
I wrote to their office last week and asked them to consider the research Tim Bolen had done to expose the organization known as Quackbusters. Austism Speaks never wrote back. The fact that they left my comments alone but deleted the reference to my blog just confirms that Autism Speaks has also been infiltrated by Neurodiversity and Quackbusters. Neurodiversity has gone to great pains to keep my blog from being referenced in Wikipedia and now they have deleted the reference to it from Autism Speaks.
It is obvious that this action must have been taken by a neurodiverse nitwit who snuck into Autism Speaks and found a job as a moderator. If this was a genuine person taking this action, they would certainly delete references to idiotic blogs like Autism Diva's and a bunch of others associated with Neurodiversity. No, this had to have been some friend of Amanda Baggs, Neurodiversity's fraudulent spokesmodel.
Neuronitwits have taken great pains to keep this blog from being seen. They complained to blogger about it along with the Autism Fraud blog that is completely dedicated to Amanda Baggs' fraud and had a code put on both of them so that search engines could not find them. I contacted Blogger and explained about Neurodiversity's insanity and they removed the code.
It is nice to see that Neuroinsanity is so terrified of what I have to say that go to these extremes to try to keep what I have to say from being seen. However, sanity will always prevail over psychopaths who intentionally harm disabled children. Now we can add Autism Speaks to that group of psychopaths since this action confirms that they are allies with Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters in preventing autistic children from being cured.
I wrote to their office last week and asked them to consider the research Tim Bolen had done to expose the organization known as Quackbusters. Austism Speaks never wrote back. The fact that they left my comments alone but deleted the reference to my blog just confirms that Autism Speaks has also been infiltrated by Neurodiversity and Quackbusters. Neurodiversity has gone to great pains to keep my blog from being referenced in Wikipedia and now they have deleted the reference to it from Autism Speaks.
It is obvious that this action must have been taken by a neurodiverse nitwit who snuck into Autism Speaks and found a job as a moderator. If this was a genuine person taking this action, they would certainly delete references to idiotic blogs like Autism Diva's and a bunch of others associated with Neurodiversity. No, this had to have been some friend of Amanda Baggs, Neurodiversity's fraudulent spokesmodel.
Neuronitwits have taken great pains to keep this blog from being seen. They complained to blogger about it along with the Autism Fraud blog that is completely dedicated to Amanda Baggs' fraud and had a code put on both of them so that search engines could not find them. I contacted Blogger and explained about Neurodiversity's insanity and they removed the code.
It is nice to see that Neuroinsanity is so terrified of what I have to say that go to these extremes to try to keep what I have to say from being seen. However, sanity will always prevail over psychopaths who intentionally harm disabled children. Now we can add Autism Speaks to that group of psychopaths since this action confirms that they are allies with Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters in preventing autistic children from being cured.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
More Proof of Dishonesty from Wikipedia
I was told yesterday by some disingenuous editors at Wikipedia that blogs were an unacceptable resource for their childish encyclopedia.
Upon looking back at some of this dishonest discussion, I noticed they had some concerns about a page they have about Dr Mark Geier.
On Wikipedia's page about Dr Geier, there are links that take you to controversies, to Neurodiversity, to the Neurodiversity Movement (where they have a course description of to become a neuroinsane simpleton). There, Wikipedia has links to blogs. They link to Kathleen Seidel's completely dishonest and disingenuous rantings where she bashes people who help autistic children. Wikipedia also links to about 50 blogs run by complete and total morons associated with the Autism Hub.
So, Wikipedia has allowed links to a mass of crazed, lying bloggers who bash esteemed scientists like Dr Geier, who is curing autistic children. Yet they refuse to allow a link to a blog that takes great pains to point out the fraud of a phoney autistic woman named Amanda Baggs who is spreading false information about autism.
This bit of deceit by Wikipedia is really all we need to know to conclude that Wikipedia is not a respectable source for anything. It is manasged by liars and they help to promote an agenda that harms autistic children.
Upon looking back at some of this dishonest discussion, I noticed they had some concerns about a page they have about Dr Mark Geier.
On Wikipedia's page about Dr Geier, there are links that take you to controversies, to Neurodiversity, to the Neurodiversity Movement (where they have a course description of to become a neuroinsane simpleton). There, Wikipedia has links to blogs. They link to Kathleen Seidel's completely dishonest and disingenuous rantings where she bashes people who help autistic children. Wikipedia also links to about 50 blogs run by complete and total morons associated with the Autism Hub.
So, Wikipedia has allowed links to a mass of crazed, lying bloggers who bash esteemed scientists like Dr Geier, who is curing autistic children. Yet they refuse to allow a link to a blog that takes great pains to point out the fraud of a phoney autistic woman named Amanda Baggs who is spreading false information about autism.
This bit of deceit by Wikipedia is really all we need to know to conclude that Wikipedia is not a respectable source for anything. It is manasged by liars and they help to promote an agenda that harms autistic children.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Amanda Baggs Sings, But She Can't Talk (my ass)
Because You Are Not One Of Us
Posted Jan 23, 07 by silentmiaow (Amanda Baggs pseudonym)
I actually meant by it, the same thing you mean when you talk about false admiration in
some of your videos. Not people who genuinely are interested in me as a person, but the
sort of thing where people are just going "Wow how amazing you are." I
more...do have a bit of a sarcastic way of presenting it in this song (which is my own
voice, not a computer one), but bitterness isn't generally one of my problems. less
Processing....
As we see from the comments, this is Amanda Baggs singing this stupid song. Is there anyone who believes Amanda can sing like this but is unable to talk? If so, please bring me all of your cash, I'll store it in my magic golf bag and, in 50 years you can come back and it will have turned into 50 million dollars worth of gold.
UPDATE: 9:09 PM EDT
Hating Autism Blacklisted by Wikipedia or How to Torture Children
This blog entry involves the fact that Amanda Baggs is a fraud and Wikipedia will not allow that fact to be presented on their encyclopedia. They are blocking every effort to present the facts of this fraud. In effect, Wikipedia is now a party to the fraud. Wikipedia is abusing autistic children by allowing Amanda Baggs to lie to the world with her misinformation about autism.
Below is an exchange on the Administrators' Noticeboard at Wikipedia. Not only does Wikipedia delete comments that are critical of frauds like Amanda Baggs. Now we see that they slink behind your back and, without allowing you any say in the matter, decide to "blacklist" the truth about the frauds they promote in their third rate encyclopedia.
Mention is made to my being blocked for what they call "linkspamming" last August when I added my blog as a reference to counter some of the insanity by the cult of lunatics who try to prevent people from curing autism. In this discussion, they don't mention the fact that it was a neurodiverse nitwit known as Elmindreda who originally deleted my links to counter this insanity. So we can see clearly that Wikipedia allows themselves to be managed by mentally challenged individuals who are in favor of torturing children by preventing them from being cured. Thank you, Wikipedia, for showing the world that you are a corrupt bunch of child abusers. Allowing Amanda Baggs to lie to the world about autism on your encyclopedia, unopposed by sanity, makes you a party to child abuse.
UPDATE:[edit] February 2008
Since you were previously blocked for linkspamming that blog, I assume you know not to do it again.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Adding the truth to a fraudulent article is far from link spamming. You are abusing autistic children by allowing this article to exist without opposition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bettwice33 (talk • contribs) 10 March 2008.
This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Your edits fail WP:NPOV and it would seem clear that you are unable to do so due to being too close to the issue. As you have been previously warned and blocked this amounts to vandalism. GetDumb 01:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the comment they deleted that they try to write off as vandalism
The standard for diagnosing autism is that it is diagnosed by age 3. Amanda was diagnosed with PDD/NOS at age 20. Her lengthy diatribe aside, how did every doctor she saw as a child miss all of the hand flapping, eye contact avoidance, inability to toilet herself properly and other behaviors consistent with autism? That behavior in a child can not possibly be missed by anyone and that is the autism standard that Baggs is trying to sidestep here. When does common sense come into play for Wikipedia? ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettwice33 (talk • contribs) 18:21, March 11, 2008 UTC
Call someone else a bastard, disingenuous or perverted and I will block you. Simple. If you cannot maintain any degree of civility on Wikipedia, you can go elsewhere. I don't give a damn about whether you think Amanda Baggs is a fraud; don't do it again. Last warning. —Dark (talk) 06:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC
Here we can clearly see that the editors at Wikipedia, in their own words, don't give a damn about whether Amanda Baggs is a fraud.
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
SECOND UPDATE:[edit] User:Bettwice33
Dark Falls, I note that you were the admin who blocked this account for 31 hours in August 2007. The user has not learned a thing and I have slapped a test4 template on his page.
As a background, this person has a long history of psychotic behaviour off Wiki, demonstrated on the blog he persists in trying to link. He has a son with Autism and is convinced beyond reason that Autism is caused by vaccines. He is also convinced that Amanda Baggs is a fraud - due to the lies of a couple of other people.
COULD THIS GARBAGE HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY ANYONE OTHER THAN A PSYCHOPATHIC NITWIT FROM THE CULT OF NEURODIVERSITY? JUST MORE EVIDENCE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS PART OF THE QUACKBUSTER SCAM.
I realise that off Wiki behaviour is not really relevant to the blocking and banning policies of Wikipedia, but I'm just pointing out that this person may be extremely dangerous and needs to be dealt with in the strongest possible terms. If you are interested - he has just placed a posting on his blog taking Wikipedia to pieces.
FYI and action, maybe through some senior admins who are familiar with the area concerned?
Oh - and it may be an idea to do a check user on User:Appto to see if the two are the same person, given the similarlities in argument. GetDumb 01:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Bettwice's answer doesn't even answer the actual question, considering he was asked about a specific person and has answered with a strawman statement about curing autistic children, something that is not possible. Given this particular person's online history, I sincerely doubt there will be anything constructive from this account. Natalie (talk) 12:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bettwice33"
We can see that Natalie is a 24 year old history major who is ignorant enough to state that autism can not be cured.
Let the edit warring begin [66] *sigh* Tiptoety talk 00:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Amanda Baggs
I need help at Amanda Baggs; I'm not an admin it's moving faster than I can keep up with. It appears that an off-Wiki blog dispute has spilled over to Wiki, there are COI issues, and I'm removing personal attacks, attempted outings of Wiki editors,[67] and BLP violations from the talk page at a rate I can't keep up with.[68][69] I'll come back and add some diffs in a minute. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
More, this editor was previously blocked for linkspamming this blog.[70] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
More, the COI spills over into the Mark Geier, Seidel controversy; Dave Seidel is apparently an involved, COI editor. I'm unwatching. URL REMOVED SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Given Baggs editors aren't autoconfirmed, I've semi'd that for a week. Moving to look at Geier. MBisanz talk 21:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
No recent activity at Geier, so no admin actions taken. MBisanz talk 21:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how to direct you to all the pieces, Mbisanz. I became aware months ago of the issues at Mark Geier, and when I waded into Amanda Baggs, I didn't realize there was a connection. Apparently, according to that blog, there is. Ugh. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It gets better: apparently (according to someone posting on the talk page there) there's also a link to the Wiki chiropractic mess.[71] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It may be most parsimonious to note that these articles (Geier, chiropractic, etc) have significant problems with off-wiki recruiting and importation of outside disputes, and to take a fairly stern line with editors who fit this profile. MastCell Talk 22:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Would it make sense to blacklist the blog links people are trying to add? There's basically no way they're going to be allowed, nor will they be particularly appropriate anywhere else, so the blacklist seems like a neat solution. Natalie (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, since no one has objected, I'm going to add the blogs to the spam blacklist. They can always be de-blacklisted if a good reason for including them surfaces. I will also remove those links from the talk page so there is no confusion. Natalie (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I have no idea how the blacklist works, but endorse adding things such as this. MBisanz talk 01:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, I apparently failed, so I've asked an administrator who knows how to help with this. Sigh. Natalie (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Hu12 has added these to the spam blacklist. Natalie (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the resolved tag; Natalie Erin has made a lot of progress at Amanda Baggs, but the situation continues at Donna Williams (author) and doesn't show any signs of letting up. BLP, COI, NPA, Civil, AGF; you name it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Below is an exchange on the Administrators' Noticeboard at Wikipedia. Not only does Wikipedia delete comments that are critical of frauds like Amanda Baggs. Now we see that they slink behind your back and, without allowing you any say in the matter, decide to "blacklist" the truth about the frauds they promote in their third rate encyclopedia.
Mention is made to my being blocked for what they call "linkspamming" last August when I added my blog as a reference to counter some of the insanity by the cult of lunatics who try to prevent people from curing autism. In this discussion, they don't mention the fact that it was a neurodiverse nitwit known as Elmindreda who originally deleted my links to counter this insanity. So we can see clearly that Wikipedia allows themselves to be managed by mentally challenged individuals who are in favor of torturing children by preventing them from being cured. Thank you, Wikipedia, for showing the world that you are a corrupt bunch of child abusers. Allowing Amanda Baggs to lie to the world about autism on your encyclopedia, unopposed by sanity, makes you a party to child abuse.
UPDATE:[edit] February 2008
Since you were previously blocked for linkspamming that blog, I assume you know not to do it again.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Adding the truth to a fraudulent article is far from link spamming. You are abusing autistic children by allowing this article to exist without opposition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bettwice33 (talk • contribs) 10 March 2008.
This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Your edits fail WP:NPOV and it would seem clear that you are unable to do so due to being too close to the issue. As you have been previously warned and blocked this amounts to vandalism. GetDumb 01:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the comment they deleted that they try to write off as vandalism
The standard for diagnosing autism is that it is diagnosed by age 3. Amanda was diagnosed with PDD/NOS at age 20. Her lengthy diatribe aside, how did every doctor she saw as a child miss all of the hand flapping, eye contact avoidance, inability to toilet herself properly and other behaviors consistent with autism? That behavior in a child can not possibly be missed by anyone and that is the autism standard that Baggs is trying to sidestep here. When does common sense come into play for Wikipedia? ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettwice33 (talk • contribs) 18:21, March 11, 2008 UTC
Call someone else a bastard, disingenuous or perverted and I will block you. Simple. If you cannot maintain any degree of civility on Wikipedia, you can go elsewhere. I don't give a damn about whether you think Amanda Baggs is a fraud; don't do it again. Last warning. —Dark (talk) 06:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC
Here we can clearly see that the editors at Wikipedia, in their own words, don't give a damn about whether Amanda Baggs is a fraud.
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
SECOND UPDATE:[edit] User:Bettwice33
Dark Falls, I note that you were the admin who blocked this account for 31 hours in August 2007. The user has not learned a thing and I have slapped a test4 template on his page.
As a background, this person has a long history of psychotic behaviour off Wiki, demonstrated on the blog he persists in trying to link. He has a son with Autism and is convinced beyond reason that Autism is caused by vaccines. He is also convinced that Amanda Baggs is a fraud - due to the lies of a couple of other people.
COULD THIS GARBAGE HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY ANYONE OTHER THAN A PSYCHOPATHIC NITWIT FROM THE CULT OF NEURODIVERSITY? JUST MORE EVIDENCE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS PART OF THE QUACKBUSTER SCAM.
I realise that off Wiki behaviour is not really relevant to the blocking and banning policies of Wikipedia, but I'm just pointing out that this person may be extremely dangerous and needs to be dealt with in the strongest possible terms. If you are interested - he has just placed a posting on his blog taking Wikipedia to pieces.
FYI and action, maybe through some senior admins who are familiar with the area concerned?
Oh - and it may be an idea to do a check user on User:Appto to see if the two are the same person, given the similarlities in argument. GetDumb 01:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Bettwice's answer doesn't even answer the actual question, considering he was asked about a specific person and has answered with a strawman statement about curing autistic children, something that is not possible. Given this particular person's online history, I sincerely doubt there will be anything constructive from this account. Natalie (talk) 12:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bettwice33"
We can see that Natalie is a 24 year old history major who is ignorant enough to state that autism can not be cured.
Let the edit warring begin [66] *sigh* Tiptoety talk 00:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Amanda Baggs
I need help at Amanda Baggs; I'm not an admin it's moving faster than I can keep up with. It appears that an off-Wiki blog dispute has spilled over to Wiki, there are COI issues, and I'm removing personal attacks, attempted outings of Wiki editors,[67] and BLP violations from the talk page at a rate I can't keep up with.[68][69] I'll come back and add some diffs in a minute. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
More, this editor was previously blocked for linkspamming this blog.[70] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
More, the COI spills over into the Mark Geier, Seidel controversy; Dave Seidel is apparently an involved, COI editor. I'm unwatching. URL REMOVED SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Given Baggs editors aren't autoconfirmed, I've semi'd that for a week. Moving to look at Geier. MBisanz talk 21:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
No recent activity at Geier, so no admin actions taken. MBisanz talk 21:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how to direct you to all the pieces, Mbisanz. I became aware months ago of the issues at Mark Geier, and when I waded into Amanda Baggs, I didn't realize there was a connection. Apparently, according to that blog, there is. Ugh. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It gets better: apparently (according to someone posting on the talk page there) there's also a link to the Wiki chiropractic mess.[71] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It may be most parsimonious to note that these articles (Geier, chiropractic, etc) have significant problems with off-wiki recruiting and importation of outside disputes, and to take a fairly stern line with editors who fit this profile. MastCell Talk 22:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Would it make sense to blacklist the blog links people are trying to add? There's basically no way they're going to be allowed, nor will they be particularly appropriate anywhere else, so the blacklist seems like a neat solution. Natalie (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, since no one has objected, I'm going to add the blogs to the spam blacklist. They can always be de-blacklisted if a good reason for including them surfaces. I will also remove those links from the talk page so there is no confusion. Natalie (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I have no idea how the blacklist works, but endorse adding things such as this. MBisanz talk 01:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, I apparently failed, so I've asked an administrator who knows how to help with this. Sigh. Natalie (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Hu12 has added these to the spam blacklist. Natalie (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the resolved tag; Natalie Erin has made a lot of progress at Amanda Baggs, but the situation continues at Donna Williams (author) and doesn't show any signs of letting up. BLP, COI, NPA, Civil, AGF; you name it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Monday, March 10, 2008
Wikipedia Supports Amanda Baggs' Fraud
This is just one example of the unprofessional nature of Wikipedia. Note how the editor here references blogs and forums as hearsay and not acceptable when one wants to expose the fraud of Amanda Baggs and Neurodiversity. At the same time, these jackasses defend Amanda Baggs' right to have her fraudulent blog posted as though it was a respectable reference. Nonsense.
Wikipedia consistently allows Neurodiverse nitwits to say anything they want on their inane excuse for an encyclopedia. They also consistently delete everything that points out the deranged nature of Neurodiversity and fraudulent autistic people like Amanda Baggs.
Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia. It is just a propaganda factory for frauds.
The following is an exchange that took place on Wikipedia where some people, including myself, were trying to illuminate the fact that Amnanda Baggs is a fraud impersonating an autistic person. Dave Seidel was involved, deleting comments from sane people and writing untrue things that an editor deleted.
Upon being given a link to Tim Bolen's report that describes how neurodiversity and Quackbusters manipulate Wikipedia, the editor deleted the whole exchange. I saved it below before they could delete it. Here's the link to the Wikipedia page about Amanda Baggs after their editor deleted the truth.
I just removed a passage that I believe violates WP:BLP guidelines. It lacks NPOV and fails to provide any reference to the so-called "controversy". - DaveSeidel 16:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
THIS IS RICH, A HORSE'S ASS LIKE DAVE SEIDEL CLAIMING ANYTHING TO DO WITH AMANDA BAGGS LACKS A NPOV (NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW)
The article cites American Chronicle article references her "harsh critics" who dispute that she is a low functioning autistic. Her background to the contrary has been discussed in several autism community forums and blogs as well as a recent mention at randi.org. It is my understanding that forums and blogs are not good references, but perhaps they would fit here better than the American Chronicle article? How many forums/blogs would I need to include to have this accepted as a controversy?
Also, please point out the NPOV language so that I can remove it.
Thanks.
75.13.45.198 17:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)oddmountain
As a rule, blogs and forums are not acceptable per WP:RS, so your question of "how many I would need to include" is irrevelant. Wikipedia is not about hearsay or unfounded opinion. If you wish to discuss a "controversy", especially one in reference to a living person, only a reliable source is acceptable. I don't see any problem with referencing the American Chronicle article in and of itself, but this entry is entirely one-sided in a negative sense, and thus NPOV, since no balancing views or references are provided. There is also no reference to any source for the Simon's Rock information, nor to the fact that she left after one year and was institutionalized after she left there. -- DaveSeidel 17:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
In fact, controversy may indeed exist, but because of WP:BLP in general, and the personal nature of the issues in specific (which revolve around medical and psychological diagnoses), the bar must remain high, and WP:RS is a must. - DaveSeidel 03:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
For HiEv and others: I agree that appropriately verified material should be included when summarized properly and adequately weighted. However, I'm not sure that AmericanChronicle.com meets WP:SOURCES. Is it a "reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", or is it (as this article suggests) more of a republisher of material, e.g from blogs?
Regarding the Donna Williams interview reprinted at American Chronicle, I noticed that the original piece (from Ms Williams' blog) had been previously cited in the article, but deleted as non-reliable. That makes sense in WP terms, since per WP:SOURCES "Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer."
If Ms Baggs posts the interview on her own site, then we can use it (in this article, involving claims only about Ms Baggs herself and no one else). Otherwise, it appears that we can't, unless we can agree that AmericanChronicle.com is a reliable source, i.e., that it has the resources to vet the accuracy (and not merely to boost the google ranking) of material it republishes. regards, Jim Butler(talk) 03:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank, Jim, excellent points. According to the American Chronicle's Author Agreement, they rely entirely on the author's word that "[t]he Content is based on true facts and diligent research"; nothing there (or in any other part of the site that I've been able to find) about any editorial oversight or fact-checking whatsoever. IOW, they don't even claim to be a reliable source -- how can we treat them as one? - DaveSeidel 04:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Yup, then "American Chronicle" is out as a reliable source. I also note that Tim Langmaid, a managing editor at CNN Medical News, commented on the questions about her diagosis and mentioned in general some of the resources they checked to verify her story.[1] -- HiEv 13:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Potential COI
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
Appto 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia requires that the sources used to verify content in its articles are reliable enough (see WP:RS). Blogs are not reliable enough sources. In addition, special care needs to be taken to make sure articles do not contain potentially damaging information about living persons (see WP:BLP). This information is potentially damaging so cannot be included with sources as poor as blog entries. Also, I have looked through the sources you gave on this talk page and they did not even verify this information. In the final four URLs you gave in your post, the first three made no reference to Baggs, and the fourth gave no information about who the author of that "letter" was. That is only the beginning of the problems with those sources that makes them unreliable. Q0 (talk) 04:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It was requested to the editor that the matter be investigated.--Appto (talk) 18:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
By the way, something's off in the talk page history here: both of the old AfDs are supposed to be listed on the talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, please post the relevant AutismSpeaks threads here to the talk page; they can't be used to source the article, but they are relevant to COI issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
This LiveJournal [8] article is done by a witness to Amanda Baggs' who knew her at 14 years old and testifies that she was not autistic in any sense then, and onward during their friendship. This is in the last sentence of the first paragraph...and there is other statements in this LiveJournal initial post. Then note the response posts by the author, and the often biased intense replies by supporters of Baggs, including Dave Seidel (who is it seems a major contributor to this wikipedia article on Baggs).
Some autismspeaks.org threads, the first [9] of which has an introduction to the controversy, then 251 posts and 10,000+ views, which is many times the level of typical autismspeaks.org involvement; I note this just to indicate the level of interest and apparent importance of the matter. Other links which began to promote Baggs, and which ended in critical discussion about the legitimacy of her diagnosis per the testimony of a multitude of witnesses who observed her at Simon's Rock College in 1994-1995 and elsewhere, and continuing for one witness to 1998. [10] [11]--Appto (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought the Dispute of Neutrality would remain until the matter was fully discussed and resolved. Some contributors of this article, especially Dave Seidel, are not neutral. Note in the above linked threads that Dave Seidel is a highly personal supporter and defender of Amanda Baggs, and not an objective reporter of information, and has a highly biased interest in the promotion and defense of Baggs. Also, as moderator SandyGeorgia noted "By the way, if it came to AfD again, I'd be a "delete"; the entire article is nothing but quotes from a CNN blog, and I don't see notability here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)"--Appto (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Appto, slow down. First, I am not a "moderator" nor am I an admin. Second, please stop including my sig in your posts, as that makes it appear that they are my posts. Third, there is not a neutrality dispute here; you are confusing WP:NPOV with WP:COI. Please take some time to learn policies and guidelines; this isn't an "emergency", and the rest of us will catch up as soon as we have time. Post reliable sources here to the talk page, and we'll deal with it. Also, take time to read WP:BLP, lest you post here info which is not based on reliable sources; if you do, we are obligated to delete it. I'm still trying to catch up with your posts, as you are altering old AfDs. Please slow down. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Please note: livejournal.com and autismspeaks forums are not reliable sources. We can't write an article based on what they say. That info is relevant to notability and conflict of interest, but please take care with WP:BLP. Those are NOT reliable sources by WP:RS and WP:V policy; they are self-published sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
The link to Hating Autism should be left here because it has a year's worth of discussion that, all together, shows unquestionably that Amanda Baggs is not autistic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.39.117 (talk) 19:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, blogs are not considered to be reliable sources. That blog appears to be nothing but hearsay. - DaveSeidel HERE WE SEE THAT DAVE SEIDEL HAS TOLD US THAT HIS WIFE KASTHLEEN'S BLOG IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A RELIABLE SOURCE.(talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the entry made here by DaveSeidel due to unfounded allegations of a personal nature, and an untrue and unsupported reference to a particular person's name, and untrue and unfounded allegation that this person is doing something on the Internet, and a personal allegation about the nature of this person's website. I'd like to note that DaveSeidel does this peristently as shown in the above mentioned autismspeaks.org links and LiveJournal link (see my post above with the references), and I'd like to note that DaveSeidel is a contributor and editor of this article on Amanda Baggs, and reiterate my request that his contributions and editings be reviewed for neutrality, and be strickened due to his clear and intense personal involvement with supporting and promoting Amanda Baggs - he is not a neutral nor objective source.--Appto (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Appto, it is not OK to delete someone else's comment: Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission. You would benefit from taking some time to learn the policies around here. If you have a specific WP policy to invoke, then please do so, but you can't just invent your own. - DaveSeidel (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Appto, you are making unreasonable requests, not grounded in wiki policy. We delete items that violate WP:BLP or that aren't sourced to reliable sources. The last time I went through this article, it was reliably sourced. There is nothing to be deleted, and who added it is not relevant except to the extent that we need to be aware of future WP:COI editing. Seidel, attempting to out the real life identity of any wiki editor is a serious offense. If you do it again, I'll make sure it is dealt with. Both of you need to get some perspective and slow down; there is nothing urgent here. I'm going to post to an admin noticeboard to get some attention on this, as you both appear to be dragging an off-Wiki dispute on to Wiki, and that needs to stop. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the name from my comment and reinstated it. - DaveSeidel (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
If Amanda Baggs' blog is relevant and can be used as a link, Hating Autism should also be allowed as a blog that, with Amanda's own words, disputes the veracity of everything that Baggs claims. Hating Autism elaborates on the disingenuous nature of Neurodiversity and Amanda Baggs.
Neurodiversity is simply an opinion, and a deranged opinion at that, that tries to dissuade anyone from trying to cure autistic children.---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettwice33 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Please read WP:SPS; blogs may be used to source one's own entry, insofar as they make statements about what one says about oneself. They may NOT be used to source other content. Seidel, yes it is acceptable under some circumstances to remove talk page posts, for example, personal attacks, attempts to out someone's real life identity, and BLP violations. Bettwice33, you are violating WP:BLP and WP:NPA; stop now or you can be blocked. I've removed part of your post. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like to also refer the readers to the Talk page and recent entries at the article on Donna Williams [12] under "Controversial Diagnosis". There are several parallels between this matter and the matter with Amanda Baggs.
ABC Radio National[[13]]. The Health Report. From Australia (Williams lives in Australia). "Autism - a special report by Kathy Gollan" An investigation by Kathy Gollan. There is considerable proof and evidence undermining the legitimacy of Donna Williams's diagnosis of autism, as discussed by autism experts and others, including Donna Williams doctor, a former college professor, Yale's Fred Volkmar, a former friend, and others. The article is a serious investigative report. A similar situation, and even far more supported and compelling, appears to be true of Amanda Baggs, and efforts are being made to secure several third-party investigations into this matter.--Appto (talk) 20:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
http://www.bolenreport.net/feature_articles/feature_article070.htm
I thought this was a discussion page. How can we discuss this matter if everyone's deleting comments? Please read the page in the Bolen Report that I have provided the link to. It explains exactly what's going on with Amanda Baggs and Neurodiversity's attempt to obfuscate the truth about autism.----
I've directed this page to the relevant policies.
* Please read WP:BLP regarding violations on biographies of living persons.
* Please read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:SPS regarding self-published sources like blogs.
* We must/should immediately remove any material that violates WP:BLP from talk pages and articles.
* Also see WP:TALK for talk page guidelines.
We do NOT repeat blog-sourced information that maligns a living person on either talk pages or in articles. If anyone here continues doing that, they can be blocked. Further, bringing off-wiki blog wars on to Wiki is not likely to be viewed well by uninvolved admins. Please keep your on-Wiki discussion confined to reliable sources. Blogs are not reliable sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sandy, Did you read what Bolen had to say about how Neurodiversity, AKA Quackbusters, manipulates Wikipedia? Whether you block me or not, that won't change the truth. The truth can never malign anyone. Exposing a fraud is not maligning the fraud. When a fraud's own lawyer admits that her client is a fraud, as you can plainly see on Hating Autism "When the Music's Over", and Wikipedia ignores that, you are taking part in the fraud. ----
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Amanda_Baggs"
After Wikipedia deleted my posts above, I left the following message for them.
So, Wikipedia deleted my comments. I copied them and will be sending them to your owners. I showed you the Bolen report that described how Wikipedia is perverted by disingenuous editors and, I guess, a disingenuous editor deleted it. Well, fuck you, I'll just put it on my blog and let anyone who cares see how Wikipedia is engaged in fraud. Amanda Baggs will be exposed as the fraud that she is and you bastards won't prevent that.
John Best----
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Amanda_Baggs"
Wikipedia consistently allows Neurodiverse nitwits to say anything they want on their inane excuse for an encyclopedia. They also consistently delete everything that points out the deranged nature of Neurodiversity and fraudulent autistic people like Amanda Baggs.
Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia. It is just a propaganda factory for frauds.
The following is an exchange that took place on Wikipedia where some people, including myself, were trying to illuminate the fact that Amnanda Baggs is a fraud impersonating an autistic person. Dave Seidel was involved, deleting comments from sane people and writing untrue things that an editor deleted.
Upon being given a link to Tim Bolen's report that describes how neurodiversity and Quackbusters manipulate Wikipedia, the editor deleted the whole exchange. I saved it below before they could delete it. Here's the link to the Wikipedia page about Amanda Baggs after their editor deleted the truth.
I just removed a passage that I believe violates WP:BLP guidelines. It lacks NPOV and fails to provide any reference to the so-called "controversy". - DaveSeidel 16:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
THIS IS RICH, A HORSE'S ASS LIKE DAVE SEIDEL CLAIMING ANYTHING TO DO WITH AMANDA BAGGS LACKS A NPOV (NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW)
The article cites American Chronicle article references her "harsh critics" who dispute that she is a low functioning autistic. Her background to the contrary has been discussed in several autism community forums and blogs as well as a recent mention at randi.org. It is my understanding that forums and blogs are not good references, but perhaps they would fit here better than the American Chronicle article? How many forums/blogs would I need to include to have this accepted as a controversy?
Also, please point out the NPOV language so that I can remove it.
Thanks.
75.13.45.198 17:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)oddmountain
As a rule, blogs and forums are not acceptable per WP:RS, so your question of "how many I would need to include" is irrevelant. Wikipedia is not about hearsay or unfounded opinion. If you wish to discuss a "controversy", especially one in reference to a living person, only a reliable source is acceptable. I don't see any problem with referencing the American Chronicle article in and of itself, but this entry is entirely one-sided in a negative sense, and thus NPOV, since no balancing views or references are provided. There is also no reference to any source for the Simon's Rock information, nor to the fact that she left after one year and was institutionalized after she left there. -- DaveSeidel 17:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
In fact, controversy may indeed exist, but because of WP:BLP in general, and the personal nature of the issues in specific (which revolve around medical and psychological diagnoses), the bar must remain high, and WP:RS is a must. - DaveSeidel 03:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
For HiEv and others: I agree that appropriately verified material should be included when summarized properly and adequately weighted. However, I'm not sure that AmericanChronicle.com meets WP:SOURCES. Is it a "reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", or is it (as this article suggests) more of a republisher of material, e.g from blogs?
Regarding the Donna Williams interview reprinted at American Chronicle, I noticed that the original piece (from Ms Williams' blog) had been previously cited in the article, but deleted as non-reliable. That makes sense in WP terms, since per WP:SOURCES "Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer."
If Ms Baggs posts the interview on her own site, then we can use it (in this article, involving claims only about Ms Baggs herself and no one else). Otherwise, it appears that we can't, unless we can agree that AmericanChronicle.com is a reliable source, i.e., that it has the resources to vet the accuracy (and not merely to boost the google ranking) of material it republishes. regards, Jim Butler(talk) 03:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank, Jim, excellent points. According to the American Chronicle's Author Agreement, they rely entirely on the author's word that "[t]he Content is based on true facts and diligent research"; nothing there (or in any other part of the site that I've been able to find) about any editorial oversight or fact-checking whatsoever. IOW, they don't even claim to be a reliable source -- how can we treat them as one? - DaveSeidel 04:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Yup, then "American Chronicle" is out as a reliable source. I also note that Tim Langmaid, a managing editor at CNN Medical News, commented on the questions about her diagosis and mentioned in general some of the resources they checked to verify her story.[1] -- HiEv 13:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Potential COI
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
Appto 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia requires that the sources used to verify content in its articles are reliable enough (see WP:RS). Blogs are not reliable enough sources. In addition, special care needs to be taken to make sure articles do not contain potentially damaging information about living persons (see WP:BLP). This information is potentially damaging so cannot be included with sources as poor as blog entries. Also, I have looked through the sources you gave on this talk page and they did not even verify this information. In the final four URLs you gave in your post, the first three made no reference to Baggs, and the fourth gave no information about who the author of that "letter" was. That is only the beginning of the problems with those sources that makes them unreliable. Q0 (talk) 04:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
By the way, something's off in the talk page history here: both of the old AfDs are supposed to be listed on the talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, please post the relevant AutismSpeaks threads here to the talk page; they can't be used to source the article, but they are relevant to COI issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
This LiveJournal [8] article is done by a witness to Amanda Baggs' who knew her at 14 years old and testifies that she was not autistic in any sense then, and onward during their friendship. This is in the last sentence of the first paragraph...and there is other statements in this LiveJournal initial post. Then note the response posts by the author, and the often biased intense replies by supporters of Baggs, including Dave Seidel (who is it seems a major contributor to this wikipedia article on Baggs).
Some autismspeaks.org threads, the first [9] of which has an introduction to the controversy, then 251 posts and 10,000+ views, which is many times the level of typical autismspeaks.org involvement; I note this just to indicate the level of interest and apparent importance of the matter. Other links which began to promote Baggs, and which ended in critical discussion about the legitimacy of her diagnosis per the testimony of a multitude of witnesses who observed her at Simon's Rock College in 1994-1995 and elsewhere, and continuing for one witness to 1998. [10] [11]--Appto (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought the Dispute of Neutrality would remain until the matter was fully discussed and resolved. Some contributors of this article, especially Dave Seidel, are not neutral. Note in the above linked threads that Dave Seidel is a highly personal supporter and defender of Amanda Baggs, and not an objective reporter of information, and has a highly biased interest in the promotion and defense of Baggs. Also, as moderator SandyGeorgia noted "By the way, if it came to AfD again, I'd be a "delete"; the entire article is nothing but quotes from a CNN blog, and I don't see notability here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)"--Appto (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Appto, slow down. First, I am not a "moderator" nor am I an admin. Second, please stop including my sig in your posts, as that makes it appear that they are my posts. Third, there is not a neutrality dispute here; you are confusing WP:NPOV with WP:COI. Please take some time to learn policies and guidelines; this isn't an "emergency", and the rest of us will catch up as soon as we have time. Post reliable sources here to the talk page, and we'll deal with it. Also, take time to read WP:BLP, lest you post here info which is not based on reliable sources; if you do, we are obligated to delete it. I'm still trying to catch up with your posts, as you are altering old AfDs. Please slow down. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Please note: livejournal.com and autismspeaks forums are not reliable sources. We can't write an article based on what they say. That info is relevant to notability and conflict of interest, but please take care with WP:BLP. Those are NOT reliable sources by WP:RS and WP:V policy; they are self-published sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
The link to Hating Autism should be left here because it has a year's worth of discussion that, all together, shows unquestionably that Amanda Baggs is not autistic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.39.117 (talk) 19:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, blogs are not considered to be reliable sources. That blog appears to be nothing but hearsay. - DaveSeidel HERE WE SEE THAT DAVE SEIDEL HAS TOLD US THAT HIS WIFE KASTHLEEN'S BLOG IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A RELIABLE SOURCE.(talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the entry made here by DaveSeidel due to unfounded allegations of a personal nature, and an untrue and unsupported reference to a particular person's name, and untrue and unfounded allegation that this person is doing something on the Internet, and a personal allegation about the nature of this person's website. I'd like to note that DaveSeidel does this peristently as shown in the above mentioned autismspeaks.org links and LiveJournal link (see my post above with the references), and I'd like to note that DaveSeidel is a contributor and editor of this article on Amanda Baggs, and reiterate my request that his contributions and editings be reviewed for neutrality, and be strickened due to his clear and intense personal involvement with supporting and promoting Amanda Baggs - he is not a neutral nor objective source.--Appto (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Appto, it is not OK to delete someone else's comment: Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission. You would benefit from taking some time to learn the policies around here. If you have a specific WP policy to invoke, then please do so, but you can't just invent your own. - DaveSeidel (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Appto, you are making unreasonable requests, not grounded in wiki policy. We delete items that violate WP:BLP or that aren't sourced to reliable sources. The last time I went through this article, it was reliably sourced. There is nothing to be deleted, and who added it is not relevant except to the extent that we need to be aware of future WP:COI editing. Seidel, attempting to out the real life identity of any wiki editor is a serious offense. If you do it again, I'll make sure it is dealt with. Both of you need to get some perspective and slow down; there is nothing urgent here. I'm going to post to an admin noticeboard to get some attention on this, as you both appear to be dragging an off-Wiki dispute on to Wiki, and that needs to stop. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the name from my comment and reinstated it. - DaveSeidel (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
If Amanda Baggs' blog is relevant and can be used as a link, Hating Autism should also be allowed as a blog that, with Amanda's own words, disputes the veracity of everything that Baggs claims. Hating Autism elaborates on the disingenuous nature of Neurodiversity and Amanda Baggs.
Neurodiversity is simply an opinion, and a deranged opinion at that, that tries to dissuade anyone from trying to cure autistic children.
Please read WP:SPS; blogs may be used to source one's own entry, insofar as they make statements about what one says about oneself. They may NOT be used to source other content. Seidel, yes it is acceptable under some circumstances to remove talk page posts, for example, personal attacks, attempts to out someone's real life identity, and BLP violations. Bettwice33, you are violating WP:BLP and WP:NPA; stop now or you can be blocked. I've removed part of your post. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like to also refer the readers to the Talk page and recent entries at the article on Donna Williams [12] under "Controversial Diagnosis". There are several parallels between this matter and the matter with Amanda Baggs.
ABC Radio National[[13]]. The Health Report. From Australia (Williams lives in Australia). "Autism - a special report by Kathy Gollan" An investigation by Kathy Gollan. There is considerable proof and evidence undermining the legitimacy of Donna Williams's diagnosis of autism, as discussed by autism experts and others, including Donna Williams doctor, a former college professor, Yale's Fred Volkmar, a former friend, and others. The article is a serious investigative report. A similar situation, and even far more supported and compelling, appears to be true of Amanda Baggs, and efforts are being made to secure several third-party investigations into this matter.--Appto (talk) 20:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
http://www.bolenreport.net/feature_articles/feature_article070.htm
I thought this was a discussion page. How can we discuss this matter if everyone's deleting comments? Please read the page in the Bolen Report that I have provided the link to. It explains exactly what's going on with Amanda Baggs and Neurodiversity's attempt to obfuscate the truth about autism.----
I've directed this page to the relevant policies.
* Please read WP:BLP regarding violations on biographies of living persons.
* Please read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:SPS regarding self-published sources like blogs.
* We must/should immediately remove any material that violates WP:BLP from talk pages and articles.
* Also see WP:TALK for talk page guidelines.
We do NOT repeat blog-sourced information that maligns a living person on either talk pages or in articles. If anyone here continues doing that, they can be blocked. Further, bringing off-wiki blog wars on to Wiki is not likely to be viewed well by uninvolved admins. Please keep your on-Wiki discussion confined to reliable sources. Blogs are not reliable sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Sandy, Did you read what Bolen had to say about how Neurodiversity, AKA Quackbusters, manipulates Wikipedia? Whether you block me or not, that won't change the truth. The truth can never malign anyone. Exposing a fraud is not maligning the fraud. When a fraud's own lawyer admits that her client is a fraud, as you can plainly see on Hating Autism "When the Music's Over", and Wikipedia ignores that, you are taking part in the fraud. ----
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Amanda_Baggs"
After Wikipedia deleted my posts above, I left the following message for them.
So, Wikipedia deleted my comments. I copied them and will be sending them to your owners. I showed you the Bolen report that described how Wikipedia is perverted by disingenuous editors and, I guess, a disingenuous editor deleted it. Well, fuck you, I'll just put it on my blog and let anyone who cares see how Wikipedia is engaged in fraud. Amanda Baggs will be exposed as the fraud that she is and you bastards won't prevent that.
John Best----
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Amanda_Baggs"
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Neurodiversity, Amanda Baggs, Wikipedia and Quackbusters
To understand Neurodiversity, you have to read this page from Tim Bolen's latest report. For anyone who has run into a Neurodiverse knucklehead opposed to curing autism, this will make it crystal clear what you are dealing with.
There are no people opposed to curing autism. There is only this group of cockroaches that Mr Bolen describes who spread propaganda. Please read it. This describes Neurodiversity and the Autism Hub perfectly.
There are no people opposed to curing autism. There is only this group of cockroaches that Mr Bolen describes who spread propaganda. Please read it. This describes Neurodiversity and the Autism Hub perfectly.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
When The Music's Over, Amanda Baggs and Neurodiversity
Here's an interesting discussion about Amanda Baggs. I confirmed the following comment:
"I got a nice phone call from Nightsong's lawyer a few weeks ago where she said "Look, you and I both know Amanda's not autistic, but that's the life she wants, and you have no right to take it from her."" (Nightsong is Amanda Baggs.)
That quote is attributed to a lawyer representing Amanda Baggs. I confirmed that the conversation did take place and that the caller had information that should have only been known by the lawyer. I also confirmed that the person who posted this information had the lawyer's office phone number on his caller ID. You can click on the link above to read the denials that began a short time after this comment showed up on the Live Journal page. The people who tried to deny this identified themselves as Anne Bevington and Dave Seidel.
Let's look at Anne Bevington's motivation to assist Amanda Baggs. We can see that she is hooked up with Kathleen Seidel. Together with other bloggers from the Autism Hub, these people have made it their mission to assault an organization that does nothing more than attempt to cure children with autism. The key here is that Bevington, Seidel and the rest have used Baggs to give themselves some legitimacy. They support Baggs and her claims that she does not want to be cured. The whole time, we now find out for certain that they knew Baggs was not autistic.
This establishes the fact that Neurodiversity and the Autism Hub of bloggers have engaged in a conspiracy to defraud the public as to the truth about autism. Their lawyer thinks we have no right to take the life Amanda Baggs has chosen for herself from her. How quaint. It is not just about Amanda Baggs.
Amanda Baggs has been the publicity vehicle by which Neurodiversity has been able to make themselves heard. They have used her acting to convince the general public that nobody should try to cure autism.
In all of Kathleen Seidel's attacks on Mark Geier, Richard Deth, Rick Rollens, Generation Rescue and others, she has had Amanda Baggs as her Ace in the Hole to press the point that autistic people do not want to be cured, can not be cured and should not be cured. If Baggs' lawyer knows she is not autistic, certainly Seidel must know this. This establishes what I have said all along, that everything to do with Neurodiversity is a fraud.
Is there an Attorney General someplace who can prosecute these people for publicizing knowingly false information about autism?
Friday, March 07, 2008
Fire Julie Gerberding Now
Jenny McCarthy has asked that we join her in asking President Bush to fire Julie Gerberding, (pictured here) head of the CDC. Please call the White House on Monday, 3/10/08 starting at 9:00AM EDT, (202)456-1414.
Gerberding has stood by and done everything in her power to allow the Pharmaceutical industry to poison more babies into autism. She came out with some idiotic statement yesterday claiming that it has not been proven that any vaccines have caused autism. This is obvious spin control to protect Pharma that will allow more children to be poisoned into the nightmarish abyss of autism.
That's enough, Julie!! We're sick of your damn lies. We've known that thimerosal causes autism for 9 long years while Gerberding has sat there and continued to deny this fact. Now that a court case conceded that vaccines caused the autism, one would think this bitch, who is supposed to be looking out for our health, would admit that she has screwed up for the last 9 years and do the right thing. Nope, she's going to keep trying to "spin" the simple facts.
No way Julie, your reign of arrogance is all over. Too many people now know that you intentionally allowed the vaccine industry to poison our children. It's time to make all of the vaccines safe, right now, today. No more thimerosal. We know the truth!!! STOP POISONIONG OUR BABIES!!!
Please take a minute on Monday to call the White House and demand that Gerberding be fired. Asl all of your friends to call too. Thank you.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Some Sympathy for Senator Bill Frist
I'm sure Senator Bill Frist is feeling blue today that he let his benefactors in Pharma down so I wanted to dedicate this song to him.
In Memoriam, Neurodiversity
Neuroinsanity sustained a fatal blow today in Atlanta. I found a version of "Taps" where the bugler flubbed a couple of notes that I thought was appropriate to commemorate the passing of these nitwits.
Thank You CNN, Vaccines Do Cause Autism
Finally, a major network has allowed a doctor to state on TV that vaccines cause autism. They even let Dr Poling discuss the role of thimerosal as a factor in causing autism. I believe he said that the thimerosal can have an effect on the mitochondria. Wow!! It's hard to believe we have finally seen this in this media.
CNN made an error by continuing to allow Dr Sanjay Gupta his idiotic stab at raising doubt that thimerosal is responsible for the epidemic but, that's OK. Now that CNN has helped the general public to see the truth about this horror that the vaccine industry has perpetrated on our children, I don't think Sanjay will be allowed to continue to lie to the public much longer. I think Gupta will have to be fired pretty soon. He has now become an embarrassment.
Anyhow, this is cause to rejoice!!! The truth came out!!! All those parents of autistic kids who were lied to by their pediatricians, who still claim thimerosal does not cause autism, heard the truth from a Neurologist who had his own child poisoned by vaccines. Now that the truth came from an MD, all those parents who have believed the lies from our corrupt government should be deluging their Senators with demands for proper action. All of the liars in Congress now have to face the truth and stop defending their corrupt and negligent friends in the vaccine industry.
Hurray for CNN for covering this press conference!!!
Here's part of the press conference.
You have to scroll down to the video labelled "Baby's Descent into Autism".
CNN made an error by continuing to allow Dr Sanjay Gupta his idiotic stab at raising doubt that thimerosal is responsible for the epidemic but, that's OK. Now that CNN has helped the general public to see the truth about this horror that the vaccine industry has perpetrated on our children, I don't think Sanjay will be allowed to continue to lie to the public much longer. I think Gupta will have to be fired pretty soon. He has now become an embarrassment.
Anyhow, this is cause to rejoice!!! The truth came out!!! All those parents of autistic kids who were lied to by their pediatricians, who still claim thimerosal does not cause autism, heard the truth from a Neurologist who had his own child poisoned by vaccines. Now that the truth came from an MD, all those parents who have believed the lies from our corrupt government should be deluging their Senators with demands for proper action. All of the liars in Congress now have to face the truth and stop defending their corrupt and negligent friends in the vaccine industry.
Hurray for CNN for covering this press conference!!!
Here's part of the press conference.
You have to scroll down to the video labelled "Baby's Descent into Autism".
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Press Conference on Court Concession of Vaccines Causing Autism
LANDMARK FEDERAL COURT CONCESSION THAT LOCAL CHILD FROM ATLANTA DEVELOPED AUTISM FROM VACCINES
CHILD JOINS PARENTS IN PRESS CONFERENCE ABOUT THIS HISTORIC RESULT AT ATLANTA FEDERAL COURT HOUSE TOMORROW
LOCAL COUPLE FROM ATLANTA WILL JOIN WITH THEIR 9 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER, HANNAH, IN A PRESS CONFERENCE DISCUSSING THEIR DAUGHTER'S DEVELOPMENT OF AUTISM AS A RESULT OF VACCINES. THIS LANDMARK CASE ALLEGED THAT AUTISM WAS CAUSED BY CHILDHOOD VACCINES AND WAS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD AS A TEST CASE BEFORE THE CONCESSION WAS MADE.
THE PRESS CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD TOMORROW, THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2008 AT 11:30 AM ON THE STEPS OF U.S. FEDERAL COURTHOUSE AT 75 SPRING STREET IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA.
THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL HAVE ESTIMATED THAT 1 IN 166 CHILDREN HAVE AUTISM, AND MANY HAVE LINKED THE AUTISM EPIDEMIC IN THIS COUNTRY TO THE MERCURY BASED PRESERVATIVE USED IN CHILDHOOD VACCINES.
CHILD JOINS PARENTS IN PRESS CONFERENCE ABOUT THIS HISTORIC RESULT AT ATLANTA FEDERAL COURT HOUSE TOMORROW
LOCAL COUPLE FROM ATLANTA WILL JOIN WITH THEIR 9 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER, HANNAH, IN A PRESS CONFERENCE DISCUSSING THEIR DAUGHTER'S DEVELOPMENT OF AUTISM AS A RESULT OF VACCINES. THIS LANDMARK CASE ALLEGED THAT AUTISM WAS CAUSED BY CHILDHOOD VACCINES AND WAS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD AS A TEST CASE BEFORE THE CONCESSION WAS MADE.
THE PRESS CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD TOMORROW, THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2008 AT 11:30 AM ON THE STEPS OF U.S. FEDERAL COURTHOUSE AT 75 SPRING STREET IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA.
THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL HAVE ESTIMATED THAT 1 IN 166 CHILDREN HAVE AUTISM, AND MANY HAVE LINKED THE AUTISM EPIDEMIC IN THIS COUNTRY TO THE MERCURY BASED PRESERVATIVE USED IN CHILDHOOD VACCINES.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
ABC's Dr Tim Johnson, Nitwit
I think Dr Johnson should be sued for this crapola. This idiot claims that studies have looked at kids who've been vaccinated versus kids who have not been vaccinated to determine if vaccines cause autism. That is untrue.
A CDC employee gave us the proof that the thimerosal in vaccines caused an autism epidemic in 1999. Since then, horse's asses like Dr Johnson have been going on TV and handing out pure BS to try to allay the public's fears so they will keep making Pharmaceutical companies wealthier by buying their hazardous vaccines.
Dr Johnson, you are either an idiot or a liar. Your stupidity or your lies (take your pick) will cause a lifetime of the most horrendous human suffering I can imagine for countless children and their families. Autism is the worst thing that can possibly happen to any human being. You need to start preventing this horror instead of supporting the monsters who cause it.
NY Times Falls for Hoax, Amanda Baggs
Amanda Baggs has found another victim to help her spread misinformation about autism. I wrote to the author of this nonsense, Tara Parker-Pope but she has not replied. I also commented on the NY Times site but they did not decide to publish the truth, that Amanda Baggs is not, and has never been autistic.
At the end of this piece, the Times links to an article they published in 2004 about not curing autism. This bit of misdirection says nothing at all about autism but discusses a kid with Asperger's. It's impossible to tell if the author is simply ignorant since she won't reply to my information letting her know that she was conned or if she is an active participant in the sham being perpetrated by Neuroinsanity.com.
To fully understand Amanda Baggs' fraud, one also has to understand the fraud coming from Neuroinsanity. Neuroinsanity exists for the sole purpose of bashing anyone who has anything to do with curing autism. The preferred method of attack by this band of psychopaths is character assassination. Neuroinsanity links back and forth to Quackbusters which is a Pharma financed group that exists to try to discredit all forms of alternative medicine.
In the case of curing autism, Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters would have us believe that chelation to remove mercury from poisoned children is some form of quackery practiced by witch doctors. The fact of the matter is that chelation has been used since the 1940's and is standard practice in mainstream medicine for cases of mercury poisoning. What Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters are really up to is an attempt to prevent people from curing autistic children because those cured children are evidence against Pharma for poisoning babies into autism with thimerosal in vaccines.
If this bunch of sadists can use Amanda Baggs to spread their deranged message, they can influence parents to forego treatments that will help their children. They can make naive people think that there is actually something good about having autism. They can also influence the general public through the NY Times and CNN into believing that autism is no big deal, that people like Amanda Baggs, who acts like a low functioning autistic person can get along in life with a minimum of support.
The truth of the matter is that children who act like Amanda Baggs will never improve without intense medical intervention. They will remain unable to communicate for the rest of their lives, will never be able to care for themselves and will require 24 hour a day care in an institution once they become too large for their parents to handle. By confusing the distinction between Asperger's and autism, Neuroinsanity and Amanda Baggs can deflect blame from the Pharmaceutical industry. They have a willing cult of adults with Asperger's who also spread this message that they do not want to be cured. The fact of that matter is that many of these cult members diagnosed themselves with Asperger's yet, they advertise themselves as autistic.
Ask yourself if you'd label yourself as a severely disabled person who can't even wipe your butt versus a college educated professional if you were applying for a job. That's what these adults, who claim to have Asperger's do when they refer to themselves as autistic. It just does not make sense. One would think they'd want to make sure they marked themselves with a wide distinction from the horrible nightmare that autism is. Who would ever consider hiring an autistic person for any job when they would have to have at least two other employees to care for them and, of course, the autistic person could never accomplish one single task in any form of employment?
That's what autism is, a condition in which no person will ever accomplish anything and will never be able to communicate anything but the most basic of needs, if that. With rare exceptions, it would be absolutely impossible to teach an autistic child to type coherent thoughts without treating the cause of the condition so their brain could function at something approaching normalcy.
The only reason Amanda Baggs can type coherent thoughts at 120 words per minute and make her own Youtube videos is beacuse she is a phoney. Amanda Baggs entered Simon's Rock College at age 13. She left her home in California, unaccompanied, and travelled to Massachusetts where she lived in a dormitory and took care of herself. While attending college, she used magic mushrooms and lots of LSD. She soon found herself out of college and in an asylum after threatening suicide. Later, in her delusional state which was diagnosed as schizophrenia, she decided she was an elf. Then, at age 19 or 20, she managed to find a doctor who gave her an autism diagnosis.
She became friends with a lesbian in Vermont and moved across the country again to live in her own apartment. At some point, she became involved with Neuroinsanity. The owner of that site visits her and has driven her places from her home in New Hampshire. When I discuss Amanda Baggs on certain forums, the husband of Neuroinsanity's owner shows up to try to defend Baggs. Of course, his only defense of her involves trying to assassinate my character, a trick I'm sure he learned from his wife. Baggs has also had a lawyer following discussions about her. This lawyer makes legal sounding threats, has comments about Baggs deleted and even went so far as to try to hold another autistic woman responsible for anonymous comments made on this blog that were uncomplimentary towards Baggs.
Tara Parker-Pope needs to meet a real autistic person some day. I'd love her to spend a day with my son so she could appreciate the full horror that autism is. Perhaps then, she could stop being conned by the likes of Amanda Baggs and write a piece that describes the nightmare that our Vaccine industry has perpetrated by negligently poisoning our babies.
This whole circus of Baggs, Neuroinsanity and lawyers is a disgrace. These people belong in prison for the scam they have engineered to obfuscate the truth about autism.
At the end of this piece, the Times links to an article they published in 2004 about not curing autism. This bit of misdirection says nothing at all about autism but discusses a kid with Asperger's. It's impossible to tell if the author is simply ignorant since she won't reply to my information letting her know that she was conned or if she is an active participant in the sham being perpetrated by Neuroinsanity.com.
To fully understand Amanda Baggs' fraud, one also has to understand the fraud coming from Neuroinsanity. Neuroinsanity exists for the sole purpose of bashing anyone who has anything to do with curing autism. The preferred method of attack by this band of psychopaths is character assassination. Neuroinsanity links back and forth to Quackbusters which is a Pharma financed group that exists to try to discredit all forms of alternative medicine.
In the case of curing autism, Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters would have us believe that chelation to remove mercury from poisoned children is some form of quackery practiced by witch doctors. The fact of the matter is that chelation has been used since the 1940's and is standard practice in mainstream medicine for cases of mercury poisoning. What Neuroinsanity and Quackbusters are really up to is an attempt to prevent people from curing autistic children because those cured children are evidence against Pharma for poisoning babies into autism with thimerosal in vaccines.
If this bunch of sadists can use Amanda Baggs to spread their deranged message, they can influence parents to forego treatments that will help their children. They can make naive people think that there is actually something good about having autism. They can also influence the general public through the NY Times and CNN into believing that autism is no big deal, that people like Amanda Baggs, who acts like a low functioning autistic person can get along in life with a minimum of support.
The truth of the matter is that children who act like Amanda Baggs will never improve without intense medical intervention. They will remain unable to communicate for the rest of their lives, will never be able to care for themselves and will require 24 hour a day care in an institution once they become too large for their parents to handle. By confusing the distinction between Asperger's and autism, Neuroinsanity and Amanda Baggs can deflect blame from the Pharmaceutical industry. They have a willing cult of adults with Asperger's who also spread this message that they do not want to be cured. The fact of that matter is that many of these cult members diagnosed themselves with Asperger's yet, they advertise themselves as autistic.
Ask yourself if you'd label yourself as a severely disabled person who can't even wipe your butt versus a college educated professional if you were applying for a job. That's what these adults, who claim to have Asperger's do when they refer to themselves as autistic. It just does not make sense. One would think they'd want to make sure they marked themselves with a wide distinction from the horrible nightmare that autism is. Who would ever consider hiring an autistic person for any job when they would have to have at least two other employees to care for them and, of course, the autistic person could never accomplish one single task in any form of employment?
That's what autism is, a condition in which no person will ever accomplish anything and will never be able to communicate anything but the most basic of needs, if that. With rare exceptions, it would be absolutely impossible to teach an autistic child to type coherent thoughts without treating the cause of the condition so their brain could function at something approaching normalcy.
The only reason Amanda Baggs can type coherent thoughts at 120 words per minute and make her own Youtube videos is beacuse she is a phoney. Amanda Baggs entered Simon's Rock College at age 13. She left her home in California, unaccompanied, and travelled to Massachusetts where she lived in a dormitory and took care of herself. While attending college, she used magic mushrooms and lots of LSD. She soon found herself out of college and in an asylum after threatening suicide. Later, in her delusional state which was diagnosed as schizophrenia, she decided she was an elf. Then, at age 19 or 20, she managed to find a doctor who gave her an autism diagnosis.
She became friends with a lesbian in Vermont and moved across the country again to live in her own apartment. At some point, she became involved with Neuroinsanity. The owner of that site visits her and has driven her places from her home in New Hampshire. When I discuss Amanda Baggs on certain forums, the husband of Neuroinsanity's owner shows up to try to defend Baggs. Of course, his only defense of her involves trying to assassinate my character, a trick I'm sure he learned from his wife. Baggs has also had a lawyer following discussions about her. This lawyer makes legal sounding threats, has comments about Baggs deleted and even went so far as to try to hold another autistic woman responsible for anonymous comments made on this blog that were uncomplimentary towards Baggs.
Tara Parker-Pope needs to meet a real autistic person some day. I'd love her to spend a day with my son so she could appreciate the full horror that autism is. Perhaps then, she could stop being conned by the likes of Amanda Baggs and write a piece that describes the nightmare that our Vaccine industry has perpetrated by negligently poisoning our babies.
This whole circus of Baggs, Neuroinsanity and lawyers is a disgrace. These people belong in prison for the scam they have engineered to obfuscate the truth about autism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
