Vox Popoli

The wall of silence begins to crack:

Following the debate over MMR and its alleged link with autism, government documents just released under the Freedom of Information Act show there was another, earlier concern for which there was more evidence and, apparently, more immediate risk. Whitehall experts knew of it before MMR’s mass introduction into Britain, but the public was kept in ignorance….

The newly released documents include the minutes of a meeting of 15 experts and officials held in February 1988. According to the minutes, the group “read a report of cases of mumps encephalitis which had been associated with MMR vaccine containing the Urabe strain of the mumps virus. The Canadian authorities had suspended the licences of MMR vaccines containing the Urabe strain.”

This was bad news for the government: the Urabe strain was to be used in 85 per cent of early MMR injections. Canada did not withdraw the licences for Urabe MMR, but stopped using it as a precaution. In early 1987, just after the Thatcher government decided on MMR as an option in mass vaccinations, doctors in America had already reported “adverse reactions” to Urabe MMR. A few months later, the Swedes reported 52 cases of “febrile convulsions probably associated with MMR vaccination”….

In the same month, the JCVI’s “adverse reactions” sub-committee expressed “special concern” over reports from Japan linking Urabe MMR with high levels of meningoencephalitis.

It took until 1992 for Britain to stop injecting children with Urabe MMR, replacing it with MMR2, which contains a less potent form of the mumps virus. And, according to the minutes, that action owed more to the decision of the manufacturers of Urabe MMR to cease production….

American, British and Canadian governments kept quiet about known problems with vaccines then. Are you still 100 percent sure that they aren’t holding their tongues about known problems now?

I’m not being sarcastic here either, for once. Richard Dawkins aside, I can’t think of anyone better suited to provide us all with a conclusive definition of science from which to subsequently work. And I’ve read through several of Dawkins’ works, including his love letter to science, “Unweaving the Rainbow”, without finding one.

Dear Prof. PZ Myers,

I should very much appreciate it if you would be so kind as to send me your definition of the word “science”. I find myself in need of a definition that one could consider reasonably conclusive, and as you are one of science’s more outspoken defenders and advocates, I thought that you might be willing to provide me with one despite our obvious differences. While I am perfectly capable of perusing dictionaries and Wikipedia, and have in fact done so, I should not like my own biases to influence my selection from among the wide variety of definitions on offer.

Please be assured that this has nothing to do with any defense of ID, creationism or any of the presumably anti-scientific bete noirs that offend your professional sensibilities as a biologist.

Thank you,
Vox Day

More proof of the cowardly, obsequious nature of the so-called “conservative” commentariat, in case you needed it:

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter’s mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter’s invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Sean Hackbarth, The American Mind
James Joyner, Outside the Beltway
BoiFromTroy, Boi From Troy
Joy McCann, Little Miss Attila
Kevin McCullough, Musclehead Revolution
Fausta Werz, Fausta’s blog
Patrick Hynes, Ankle Biting Pundits
Ed Morrissey, Captain’s Quarters
Jane Stewart
Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres
N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear
Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit
Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08
Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone
Marshall Manson

Lawsy, I nearly swooned when I heard Miss Coulter use that dreadful F-word! No, not that F-word, the other one. Needless to say, I won’t be joining this attempt to drum one of the few genuine conservatives left out of the conservative movement. Although now perhaps you understand why I am so content to remain completely outside both the conservative movement and the conservative commentariat; a more spineless group of useless, self-negating pussies have been seldom seen outside of France.

I wonder if Me So Michelle will dare to sign the letter. You know she’s just dying to, but she’s afraid it might sink her with Ann Coulter’s many fans.

A WorldNetDaily report demonstrating one way in which science does not facilitate war:

Syria ready with bio-terror if U.S. hits Iran

An American biodefense analyst living in Europe says if the U.S. invades Iran to halt its nuclear ambitions, Syria is ready to respond with weapons of mass destruction – specifically biological weapons.

“Syria is positioned to launch a biological attack on Israel or Europe should the U.S. attack Iran,” Jill Bellamy-Dekker told WND. “The Syrians are embedding their biological weapons program into their commercial pharmaceuticals business and their veterinary vaccine-research facilities. The intelligence service oversees Syria’s ‘bio-farm’ program and the Ministry of Defense is well interfaced into the effort.”

Bellamy-Decker currently directs the Public Health Preparedness program for the European Homeland Security Association under the French High Committee for Civil Defense. She anticipates a variation of smallpox is the biological agent Syria would utilize.

“The Syrians are also working on orthopox viruses that are related to smallpox,” Bellamy-Decker said, “and it’s a good way to get around international treaties against offensive biological weapons development. They work on camelpox as a cover for smallpox.”

One presumes that since we know that religion causes war… that is to say, FACILITATES war, it must be Islamic mullahs and imported Hindu fakirs who are developing these offensive biological weapons through a sophisticated ascientific method that combines meditation, fasting, extispicium and neo-Anselmian ontology.

As for the vaccine-research facilities, that research is obviously being conducted by Shinto priests performing blood sacrifices to appeal to the ancient alchemical wisdom of their ancestors.

From Newsweek:

In spite of the fact that more than 90 percent of Americans say they believe in God, only a tiny portion of them knows a thing about religion. When he began teaching college 17 years ago, Prothero writes, he discovered that few of his students could name the authors of the Christian Gospels. Fewer could name a single Hindu Scripture. Almost no one could name the first five books of the Hebrew Bible. Prothero, who went to Yale in the early 1980s and speaks of his all-night bull sessions on politics and religion with reverence, realized that to re-create that climate in his classroom, his students first had to know something. And so he made it his job to (1) figure out what they didn’t know and (2) teach it to them. He began giving religious literacy quizzes to his students, and, subsequently, to everyone he knew. Almost everybody failed.

This is why most atheists are so woefully unequipped to even begin discussing theology, and why their omnipresent claims of having read the Bible are rightfully doubted until proven otherwise. It’s also the explanation for the idiotic scene that appears in so many science fiction novels, wherein the atheist hero triumphantly brandishes a certain verse from Matthew before the ignorant fundamentalist bigot, who recoils before this wildly exotic quotation.

In every church I have ever attended, you’d find more people who could quote the 1st Corinthians 13 in its entirety and could rattle off every book in the Old Testament in order than you could find that did not know the authors of the Gospel – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – or the first five books of the Bible – Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

I mean, one of the things I still find most annoying about other fundamentalists is their habit of dropping Bible quotations into everything. They may not be up on the Hindu scriptures or the latest quibblings in evolutionary biology, but if they know one thing, it’s their Bible. Hence the ubiquity of Bible studies in nearly every fundamentalist-leaning church.

Of course, this doesn’t say much about the sort of Christians who attend Boston University either. But I’d be interested to know how everyone does on this little quiz, which is both pretty easy and improperly scored. After getting 14/15, (I missed one of the Mormon questions), I received the following message:

Thanks for taking our quiz. You answered 100% of the questions correctly.

Of course, it could be that Christians are graded on a curve, given that we’re less intelligent and less-educated and all.

On this day in 1924, Nellie Tayloe Ross becomes the first woman to serve as governor of a state, in Wyoming. She was elected to succeed her deceased husband, William Bradford Ross, thus inaugurating the long American tradition of women obtaining elected office by standing on the corpses of their dead husbands.

It’s been said that behind every successful man, there is a woman. Usually left unsaid: beneath every successful woman, there is a dead body.

My, I have been remiss. Do allow me to attempt to amend matters:

On this day in 1901, Annie Edson Taylor, a schoolteacher from Michigan, becomes the first person to go over Niagara Falls in a barrel. Her husband is arrested and charged with attempted murder later that afternoon.

One notes certain similarities in the language:

“None of the freedoms which are recognized for citizens can be exercised contrary to the existence and objectives of the socialist state, or contrary to the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and communism. Violations of this principle can be punished by law.” – Constitution of the Republic of Cuba, Article 62

“(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
– The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 29

And I’d like to know yours. Specifically, I’d like to get your count on two things:

1) The total number of known officially atheist national governments in world history.

2) The total number of estimated officially Christian national governments in world history.

This can be trickier than it looks. For example, Sweden is commonly cited as an “atheist” country, but atheists are still a distinct minority there and it was actually an officially Christian country, complete with a state church, until 2000.

I’ll have a number of requests like these, some quite likely on the odd side, while I’m working on the book. Any assistance will be appreciated, but please make sure to provide your sources and/or rationale as well. In this case, just post it here and everyone can discuss the merits of various inclusions or exclusions.

Just to be perfectly clear, an officially atheist regime is one wherein ALL religions are legally banned and punishable by law, not just Christianity.