(05-10-2016, 12:53 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: How dare you use science bfine.

(05-10-2016, 01:11 AM)fredtoast Wrote: McHugh lets his religious beliefs influence his "professional" opinions.  George Bush appointed him to his Presidential Council of Bioethics because he opposed stem cell research for purely religious reasons.  Now he is doing the same thing with the issue of transgender identification.

(05-10-2016, 01:14 AM)fredtoast Wrote: McHugh is nothing but a religious shill.

if you are really interested in science read this

http://www.transadvocate.com/clinging-to-a-dangerous-past-dr-paul-mchughs-selective-reading-of-transgender-medical-literature_n_13842.htm

(05-10-2016, 01:15 AM)bfine32 Wrote:  And this has to do with stem cell because.....

(05-10-2016, 01:18 AM)bfine32 Wrote: For realz? You came back with an article from the TRANSADVOCATE to show what someone should read.

Thanks for that. I could not have asked for more. 

(05-10-2016, 01:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: What do you think about all the actual studies it cites and the analysis of how McHugh is twisting the truth?

I notice that the quote you posted about McHugh had ZERO links to any studies at all to back up his claims.  Why is that?

Quote:Tip this TransAdvocate!

Quote:Writers for the TransAdvocate work hard to bring you news and commentary. If you found this article meaningful, let the author know that you appreciate the work they do with a tip!

(05-10-2016, 01:24 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The guy is an expert; folks should link him. Who the hell should he link? His credentials speak for themselves. 

But please post more from the TRANSADVOCATE (Thanks for that again) so we get a better insight from where you get you expert data.  

But hey, I hope you at least tipped them:

(05-10-2016, 01:36 AM)fredtoast Wrote: the reason you refuse to comment on the content is because it proves your guy is a fraud.

I realize that when you live in an echo chamber it seems acceptable to refuse to consider any information that does not confirm your bias.  But in the real world that is called "hiding from the truth".

(05-10-2016, 01:43 AM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt I should listen to this over a guy who graduated form Harvard Medical school and has all the aforementioned accolades or a fraud as you call him.  

But you roll with TRANSADVOCATE, You never did say if you tipped them or not. As you see it is tax deductible.

Please, please, please continue. 

(05-10-2016, 01:53 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So let me get thisd straight.

You claim you are right and when I post something to prove that you are wrong your only response is

"I am going to ignore any source that disagrees with my opinion.  And the only proof I am going to provide to prove it is wrong is that it disagrees with my opinion.  By definition any source that disagrees with me is automatically wrong."

(05-10-2016, 02:10 AM)bfine32 Wrote: You don't have to get anything straight; folks can read. I posted a report from a Harvard grad with over 40 years of accolades and you dispute it with an opinion article from TRANSADVOCATE and somehow I'm the one ignoring a source.

I am not ignoring a source; I am absolutely embracing it. Did you see the poll where you could vote on how the article made you feel? I'll put you down for angry, you can put me down for amused. 

You still haven't told me if you tipped the source. 

Please, please, please continue.

(05-10-2016, 02:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: What's funny is the guy accusing others of an echo chamber ...... Cites the transadvocate lol

(05-10-2016, 02:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: What's funny is the guy accusing others of an echo chamber ...... Cites the transadvocate lol

(05-10-2016, 01:15 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, yes..his views should be dismissed because he is religious.  And this has to do with stem cell because.....

(05-10-2016, 02:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The source of the information does not matter.  You have to address the content.  

Your belief that McHugh is the only person qualified to have an opinion on this subject is high comedy.  What do you have to say about all the people who are equally as qualified as McHugh who disagree with him?  

What do you say about McHugh's proven religious bias?  If you reject biased sources then why don't you reject McHugh because of his religious bias?

(05-10-2016, 08:39 AM)GMDino Wrote: Ben Carson was/is a brilliant brain surgeon...on other stuff not so much.  Much of his misinformation or denial of science was based on his religious beliefs.  Such as the age of the Earth.

If I am reading this correctly your source is much the same.  He understand the science but uses his religious views to interpret them the way that agrees with his views.

It's not new or unique to the religious or the non-religious, but if you can't accept that then it explains a lot.

(05-10-2016, 10:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes silly us for rejecting something from TRANSADVOCATE as perhaps being biased. We should be more acceptable of various sources. Just look how open you were to McHugh's views. A Harvard educated doctor with over 40 years of experience in the feild becomes a "shill' and a "fraud" simply because you disagree with his findings.

You quote TRANSADVOCATE and dismiss the findings of an expert in the field and insist someone else is providing the "high comedy".

I will keep in mind your "the source doesn't matter" stance. Do you use that one in court much?

(05-10-2016, 10:17 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The guy is Harvard educated, has spend over 40 years in the field of psycology, and 26 years as the Psychiatrist in Chief of Johns Hopkins Hospital.

What would you consider him an expert on?

I have zero idea what Ben Carson's view of the age of the earth has to do with the matter at hand.

(05-10-2016, 10:19 AM)GMDino Wrote: Well that's because you have an agenda and don't want to read what other people post in context.

Ben Carson is a brilliant surgeon...but his person bias on social issues clouds which facts and what science he "believes".

It is possible that man who is brilliant in understanding psychology ALSO has person biases based on his religion that allows him to fit conclusions to match his beliefs.

(05-10-2016, 10:24 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I will admit I don't make it a rule to go to the transadvocate website and read their scentific studies. But you seem to be fine with them; obviously no bias there, just with that religious guy. You're killing me Fred. Please continue,