‘Man With the Golden Arm’ is Finally Retiring After Saving the Lives of Over 2 Million Babbies

by Guest Sun May 13, 2018 4:37 am

After 60 years of saving lives, James Harrison is finally retiring from his position as “the man with the golden arm.”

The affectionate nickname comes from homage to the Australian senior’s astonishing blood donor track record and the game-changing effect that his donations have had on his country. Because of a rare antibody that is found in Harrison’s blood, his donations have directly contributed to saving over 2.4 million Australian babies.

Harrison, now 81 years old, didn’t always know that his blood literally had the power to save lives. When he was 14 years old, he had to undergo chest surgery and the resulting blood transfusion saved his life – so he vowed to become a donor once he turned 18 (even though he was afraid of needles.)

After a few years of donating, doctors were shocked to find that his blood contained an antibody that directly neutralizes rhesus disease: a dangerous condition in which a pregnant woman’s blood attacks her unborn child.

According to Jemma Falkenmire of the Australian Red Cross Blood Service, more than 17% of Australian women are at risk of developing the condition.

“In Australia, up until about 1967, there were literally thousands of babies dying each year, doctors didn’t know why, and it was awful. Women were having numerous miscarriages and babies were being born with brain damage,” she told CNN in a 2015 interview.

https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/man-with-golden-arm-retires/

Ask yourself, what have you done to help others? Then be inspired by this man.

by 'Wolfie Sun May 13, 2018 5:24 am

Saw him on the news here during the week, giving his last donation...

He said then that he would have been happy to keep giving; but apparently doctors from the Red Cross decided to retire him..

by Original Quill Sun May 13, 2018 6:07 pm

goodnewsnet wrote:Because of a rare antibody that is found in Harrison’s blood, his donations have directly contributed to saving over 2.4 million Australian babies...an antibody that directly neutralizes rhesus disease: a dangerous condition in which a pregnant woman’s blood attacks her unborn child.

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 4:42 pm

Original Quill wrote:
goodnewsnet wrote:Because of a rare antibody that is found in Harrison’s blood, his donations have directly contributed to saving over 2.4 million Australian babies...an antibody that directly neutralizes rhesus disease: a dangerous condition in which a pregnant woman’s blood attacks her unborn child.

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

I was going to ask a similar question, but you put it better.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 4:44 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

I was going to ask a similar question, but you put it better.

Which shows how you both do not understand this at all

If only we could synthesize everything when it works, it would then be a cure

It shows an ignorance of science fom you both

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 4:47 pm

Didge wrote:
eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

I was going to ask a similar question, but you put it better.

Which shows how you both do not understand this at all

If only we could synthesize everything when it works, it would then be a cure

It shows an ignorance of science fom you both

Your last line wasn’t very polite or even accurate seeing as how I have never claimed to be science-smart.
You can’t debate with someone (and neither of us were actually disagreeing with the article, only wondering) and take a hostile tone. It’s not nice and it’s unwarranted!

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 4:51 pm

eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

Which shows how you both do not understand this at all

If only we could synthesize everything when it works, it would then be a cure

It shows an ignorance of science fom you both

Your last line wasn’t very polite or even accurate seeing as how I have never claimed to be science-smart.
You can’t debate with someone (and neither of us were actually disagreeing with the article, only wondering) and take a hostile tone. It’s not nice and it’s unwarranted!

If as i claim, you are not scientifically smart, then my point is true, is it not?

I do not care if you take that as not nice. Sometimes, when people as you both did, make false inaccurate claims, need to be told you are being dumb. Then that is what is needed.

You both made an ignorant and dumb claim

Should I allow that to pass, or correct it?

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 5:17 pm

Do you know why Quill's point was stupid Eddie?

Think of vaccines

That is the only hint I will give you and I bet Wolf will back me up here

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 6:00 pm

I don’t actually give a flying fuck. I was asking a question so how does that make me dumb?

You’re rude. I won’t tolerate it so we are done here.

by Original Quill Mon May 14, 2018 6:07 pm

eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

Which shows how you both do not understand this at all

If only we could synthesize everything when it works, it would then be a cure

It shows an ignorance of science fom you both

Your last line wasn’t very polite or even accurate seeing as how I have never claimed to be science-smart.
You can’t debate with someone (and neither of us were actually disagreeing with the article, only wondering) and take a hostile tone. It’s not nice and it’s unwarranted!

Eds, don't become defensive. Didge collects insults and petty affronts and reduces any competition to hurling things back and forth. It's like a primitive form of warfare...say, the Scots with stones, versus a contingent of Welsh bowmen. Razz

Didge cannot think: he is a curator of thoughts, not a builder of them. What do I mean? Imagine children with blocks, or the modern version, legos. One child simply collects them, puts them in a pile, and if afraid or becomes defensive, s/he will hurl them at an adversary.

Another child will study the legos, figure how to connect them, and thence to build something superior with them...oh say, a superior weapon like the Welsh longbow. So, curator = a collector of blocks; theorist = a builder of bigger, or greater things.

When it comes to ideas, it's a matter of a collector of words--notably insults--versus a theorist, who combines ideas to achieve greater things. You duck the blocks that are thrown, and come back with a well-aimed arrow. The Scots were always easy, eh? Twisted Evil

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 6:25 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

Which shows how you both do not understand this at all

If only we could synthesize everything when it works, it would then be a cure

It shows an ignorance of science fom you both

Your last line wasn’t very polite or even accurate seeing as how I have never claimed to be science-smart.
You can’t debate with someone (and neither of us were actually disagreeing with the article, only wondering) and take a hostile tone. It’s not nice and it’s unwarranted!

Eds, don't become defensive. Didge collects insults and petty affronts and reduces any competition to hurling things back and forth. It's like a primitive form of warfare...say, the Scots with stones, versus a contingent of Welsh bowmen.

Didge cannot think: he is a curator of thoughts, not a builder of them. What do I mean? Imagine children with blocks, or the modern version, legos. One child simply collects them, puts them in a pile, and if afraid or becomes defensive, s/he will hurl them at an adversary.

Another child will study the legos, figure how to connect them, and thence to build something superior with them...oh say, a superior weapon like the Welsh longbow. So, curator = a collector of blocks; theorist = a builder of bigger, or greater things.

When it comes to ideas, it's a matter of a collector of words--notably insults--versus a theorist, who combines ideas to achieve greater things. You duck the blocks that are thrown, and come back with a well-aimed arrow. The Scots were always easy, eh?

Well....when you put it like that..... Cool

by Original Quill Mon May 14, 2018 7:26 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Eds, don't become defensive. Didge collects insults and petty affronts and reduces any competition to hurling things back and forth. It's like a primitive form of warfare...say, the Scots with stones, versus a contingent of Welsh bowmen.

Didge cannot think: he is a curator of thoughts, not a builder of them. What do I mean? Imagine children with blocks, or the modern version, legos. One child simply collects them, puts them in a pile, and if afraid or becomes defensive, s/he will hurl them at an adversary.

Another child will study the legos, figure how to connect them, and thence to build something superior with them...oh say, a superior weapon like the Welsh longbow. So, curator = a collector of blocks; theorist = a builder of bigger, or greater things.

When it comes to ideas, it's a matter of a collector of words--notably insults--versus a theorist, who combines ideas to achieve greater things. You duck the blocks that are thrown, and come back with a well-aimed arrow. The Scots were always easy, eh?

Well....when you put it like that.....

Haha...yes it is interesting. I've been working on didge, pedagogically, for a number of years now, and I have developed a working hypothesis. He's a collector and a cataloguer of ideas (curator), but not a user of them (theorist). They exist as words to him, but not functioning components that he can drive or otherwise actuate.

The 'blocks/lego' metaphor ^^^ is apt for him. Ideas, for him, are inert components. That is the reason why he identifies so well through C&P's: ready-made components they are, and you don't have to operate or actuate them. Despite the new rule, he's still posting C&P's, just not including the link, or even quotation marks. (If you want to check, copy any sentence in the OP text and search for it on Google; it will come up in the original.)

If you have to set any idea in motion--that is, discuss, analyze or otherwise actuate it--didge inevitably gets angry. It disrupts his sense of order, which is static, which in turn probably explains why he calls himself a conservative. More importantly, he knows he is 'challenged' in terms of dynamic thought, and immediately becomes defensive should you go there. That's when the insults start.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 8:35 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:

Your last line wasn’t very polite or even accurate seeing as how I have never claimed to be science-smart.
You can’t debate with someone (and neither of us were actually disagreeing with the article, only wondering) and take a hostile tone. It’s not nice and it’s unwarranted!

Eds, don't become defensive. Didge collects insults and petty affronts and reduces any competition to hurling things back and forth. It's like a primitive form of warfare...say, the Scots with stones, versus a contingent of Welsh bowmen.

Didge cannot think: he is a curator of thoughts, not a builder of them. What do I mean? Imagine children with blocks, or the modern version, legos. One child simply collects them, puts them in a pile, and if afraid or becomes defensive, s/he will hurl them at an adversary.

Another child will study the legos, figure how to connect them, and thence to build something superior with them...oh say, a superior weapon like the Welsh longbow. So, curator = a collector of blocks; theorist = a builder of bigger, or greater things.

When it comes to ideas, it's a matter of a collector of words--notably insults--versus a theorist, who combines ideas to achieve greater things. You duck the blocks that are thrown, and come back with a well-aimed arrow. The Scots were always easy, eh?

1) Misdirection yet again, the fake judge, attacks the poster and sucks up to another in the hope, other people are as dumb as he is and dpo not see this

2) More misdirection and not once answering how the fact is very evident, that the point was in regards to Quill being ignorant on science and the claims he made. Instead what does he do and what does the other brainless alternative psudeo quack do? But praise each other and prove what is wrong with psuedo crap from such imbicilles

3) Then we have Quill try to dumb down something, when he was as dumb as Eddie on something, further proving that science is a not a subject he shoud talk about. Now the reality is, I am, no expert either, but at least I knew how dumb his claim was. So what does Quill do to rectify this?

Admit that he has a pea brain?

Nope?

Admit that he is ignornat on this issue?

No, he instead tried to look smart and was easily taken in by the most dumbest and gullible psudeo wally on science, Eddie

4) Then Quilll ends with more misdirection, clearly after knowing what I said was true

As did he at any point try to disporve what I have stated in regards to his scientific ignorance here?

No

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 8:40 pm

eddie wrote:I don’t actually give a flying fuck. I was asking a question so how does that make me dumb?

You’re rude. I won’t tolerate it so we are done here.

Thankfully, many people do not take you seriously on any scientific

You then use copout bullshit to retract from the fact it was you being ignorant here

Well, after the last couple of days watching people as idiotic as you, think they know what they are talking about on something they know fcuk all about and then as seen here, you make an idiot of yourself based on again talking crap. To then turn this on me, and claim I am rude, when its idiots like you that mislead people with bollocks medically. And you have the gull to say its me being rude?

Did you ever stop and think how damaging you're utter ignorance and poor unscientific views have on people?

Seriously?

Do you ever stop and think how utterly rude , dumb and dangeroues that is?

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 8:47 pm

Can you Fucking show me where I made any claims on this thread apart from one post where I said I was going to ask a question?
Seriously, what the fuck are you playing at? I bloody hope no one takes me seriously on anything scientific because science is not something I’ve ever claimed moral high ground on!

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 8:51 pm

eddie wrote:Can you Fucking show me where I made any claims on this thread apart from one post where I said I was going to ask a question?
Seriously, what the fuck are you playing at? I bloody hope no one takes me seriously on anything scientific because science is not something I’ve ever claimed moral high ground on!

I hope nobody does take you seriously scientifically

Look back at what Quill said, what you said and then you agree on

You could not take on my views, but both acted like two year olds and thought it was funny

When I then mock that in return you get angry

Go figure

Now either back up your claims or fuck off, either way I do not care. You are a danger with the fake unscientific bullshit you pedal.

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 8:55 pm

Ah, so you’re angry that I replied to Quill. You are not angry about any comment I made on this thread, because you can’t get angry at someone asking a question, right?

Why change your mind about what you’re angry about?

Perhaps you’re not even angry at me, but at yourself.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:00 pm

eddie wrote:Ah, so you’re angry that I replied to Quill. You are not angry about any comment I made on this thread, because you can’t get angry at someone asking a question, right?

Why change your mind about what you’re angry about?

Perhaps you’re not even angry at me, but at yourself.

Wow, if that is what you think, then you are utterly clueless

Quill made a poor comment.

You also agreed to this comment

You both thought it was then funny, not to actually back your poor claim, but to instead actually to mock the poster, that person being me.

That is being gutless, a coward and being very stupid

I'm not angry Eddie, but I will riduicule your stupidity here

Now, have either of you actually looked into the claim Quill made and you agreed on?

Have you even tried to understand it, before coming at me?

No

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 9:03 pm

I don’t think I agreed on any claim Quill made. I think I said I was going to ask a question.
How many more times will you avoid that fact?

Don’t you like people asking questions on your threads?

Oops! There’s another question.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:05 pm

eddie wrote:I don’t think I agreed on any claim Quill made. I think I said I was going to ask a question.
How many more times will you avoid that fact?

Don’t you like people asking questions on your threads?

Oops! There’s another question.

Back tracking bullshit, as if you did not agree, why then not be critical of his then poor view?

I have no problem with people asking questions

You though, are unable to understand many basic questions

That is the saddest part

by Vintage Mon May 14, 2018 9:18 pm

Here we go again.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:19 pm

Vintage wrote:Here we go again.

Shit stirring again

How many times is that now?

You simple cannot resist can you?

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 9:22 pm

Didge just stop spreading your negativity around. You’re being rude to people for no reason.

You did it yesterday and you’re doing it today. I’m trying really hard to be patient with you.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:25 pm

eddie wrote:Didge just stop spreading your negativity around. You’re being rude to people for no reason.

You did it yesterday and you’re doing it today. I’m trying really hard to be patient with you.

I could give a fuck what you think

This was a postive thread, that both you and Quill ruined with your pure ignorance

I just spent a weekend watching videos of people making as many dumb views unscientifically. The worst where they encourage people to stop stop taking medication with HIV

Its these kind of idiots that endanger the lives of people with their psuedo unscientific bullshit

You then jump in and say I am being negative, when the many threads I actually post are positive?

Wow

So I dont fuck#ing care what you think, when you badly try to misdirect from where you both went off something stupid that Quill said

If you had an ounce of decency in you, then you would admit you were wrong and stop trying to defend that by looking make out I am the issue here

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 9:29 pm

following quills quite interesting point, what surprises me is that, with the knowlege and ability we have of gene splicing and other genetic manipulations, they havnt yet got round to identifying which genes of this guy give him his unique antibody content. Knowing that, one supposes that it would not be entirely impossible to splice those genes into an "eternal cell line" (like the He La line for example (others exist)) and thus produce such antibodies..... maybe someone is working on that as we speak????

many other antibodies (as distinct from vaccines) are in fact "synthesised" ...its just the reaction vessel is the human body (or horse or growing egg) whereby the human is vaccinated against a given disese toxin (small amounts of inactivated tetanus toxin for example) or in fact gets the disese and survives...his/her blood then contains the antibody in the plasma and this can be seperated/concentrated and given to another human....NOT to prevent tetanus but to act as an antibody to stop the toxin that tetanus produces doing harm (and without which the tetanus is essentially crippled and your body can then beat it up like any normal bug.)

NOTE that the anti toxin ...(tetanus toxoid is given a) prophylactically to PREVENT any tetanus getting a hold and B) as a treatment in active tetanus.......you will ALSO be given a tetanus vaccine at teh same time to ensure your continued immunity to tetanus

tetanus TOXOID (the antibody) does NOT give you immunity to tetanus

hence the TOXOID is ONLY given to trauma cases and where tetanus is know to be present in the individual. The tetanus shot you get on going to college is the VACCINE..........

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:33 pm

Lord Foul wrote:following quills quite interesting point, what surprises me is that, with the knowlege and ability we have of gene splicing and other genetic manipulations, they havnt yet got round to identifying which genes of this guy give him his unique antibody content. Knowing that, one supposes that it would not be entirely impossible to splice those genes into an "eternal cell line" (like the He La line for example (others exist)) and thus produce such antibodies..... maybe someone is working on that as we speak????

many other antibodies (as distinct from vaccines) are in fact "synthesised" ...its just the reaction vessel is the human body (or horse or growing egg) whereby the human is vaccinated against a given disese (tetanus for example) or in fact gets the disese and survives...his/her blood then contains the antibody in the plasma and this can be seperated/concentrated and given to another human....NOT to prevent tetanus but to act as an antibody to stop the toxin that tetanus produces doing harm (and without which the tetanus is essentially crippled and your body can then beat it up like any normal bug.)

NOTE that the anti toxin ...(tetanus toxoid is given a) prophylactically to PREVENT any tetanus getting a hold and B) as a treatment in active tetanus.......you will ALSO be given a tetanus vaccine at teh same time to ensure your continued immunity to tetanus

tetanus TOXOID (the antibody) does NOT give you immunity to tetanus

hence the TOXOID is ONLY given to trauma cases and where tetanus is know to be present in the individual. The tetanus shot you get on going to college is the VACCINE..........

So because something has not been found, you beg the question why?

I mean, we have been looking at a cure for many cancers for years and people have survived many cancers.

Does that mean, we should have found a cure by now?

So its not a very interesting question, and as much as you try to put a spin on this, to clearly sucked up to Eddie, is not going to stand here

I mean, you know more than anyone, many things are looked at for years, without ever being able to replicate them. For goodness sake, the point here, was this guy has saved many babies lives.

maybe one day they will be able to replicate this, but at present that is not the case is it and no where else in the world have they been able to do so.

by Vintage Mon May 14, 2018 9:36 pm

Didge wrote:
Vintage wrote:Here we go again.

Shit stirring again

How many times is that now?

You simple cannot resist can you?

No, I can't. Its getting tedious now with you turning threads into boring monologues, trying to make out how intellectually superior you are to everyone else, not to mention your contemptuous attitude. I'm off to watch paint dry.

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 9:38 pm

Erm I don’t deny what this man did? I was going to ask if they could work out what the antibodies were in his blood and replicate them so that they didn’t need his blood?

But you never let me ask the question because you got rude and assumed something that I have no idea of.

You’re in a shitty mood and I’m really trying to help you out here.

And why are you accusing Vic of sucking up to me?

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:41 pm

eddie wrote:Erm I don’t deny what this man did? I was going to ask if they could work out what the antibodies were in his blood and replicate them so that they didn’t need his blood?

But you never let me ask the question because you got rude and assumed something that I have no idea of.

You’re in a shitty mood and I’m really trying to help you out here.

And why are you accusing Vic of sucking up to me?

Bullshit alert

Quill made a thread insulting attacking the poster, without ever taking on a single point and you thought this was great. Thus making a mockery on your view to take on the points and not the poster

I then took both of you to task over this and you got angry

Because I know Vic

He only now makes a view, because we are at odds on this

I am not in a mood and again Eddie peddals bullshit

I am simple taking people to taks over views

Get that in your pe brain, you will be taken to task over views.

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 9:41 pm

No YET...however.......
I think it is a fair question from quill.....

you rather rude reply was hardly informative...

let us suppose quill has little knowlege of medical biology and clincal chemistry

it wasnt a "stupid question" at all

there are numerous resons why such a antibody may be difficult/hyper expensive/(i wont say impossible) given the complexity of the biological systems involved.....but there are REASONS why it hasnt happened yet

perhaps you would have been better pointing these reasons out in a reasonable and decent manner (if you know them) rather than adopting your supercillious and overbearing attitude.

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 9:44 pm

oh and it is NOT your place to take anyone "to task" over what YOU think is "bullshit" when it turns out (as in this case) to be a perfectly valid question.

YOU are not the arbiter of what is "correct" or what is the "correct question to ask" or what is the "correct opinion"

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Lord Foul wrote:No YET...however.......
I think it is a fair question from quill.....

you rather rude reply was hardly informative...

let us suppose quill has little knowlege of medical biology and clincal chemistry

it wasnt a "stupid question" at all

there are numerous resons why such a antibody may be difficult/hyper expensive/(i wont say impossible) given the complexity of the biological systems involved.....but there are REASONS why it hasnt happened yet

perhaps you would have been better pointing these reasons out in a reasonable and decent manner (if you know them) rather than adopting your supercillious and overbearing attitude.

So why did he not back up his view, by then attacking the poster and not the points?

You then claim I have to debate in a decent manner

Care to explain how youi think this is in a decent manner and actually engages any points?

In your own time

Original Quill wrote:

Eds, don't become defensive. Didge collects insults and petty affronts and reduces any competition to hurling things back and forth. It's like a primitive form of warfare...say, the Scots with stones, versus a contingent of Welsh bowmen.

Didge cannot think: he is a curator of thoughts, not a builder of them. What do I mean? Imagine children with blocks, or the modern version, legos. One child simply collects them, puts them in a pile, and if afraid or becomes defensive, s/he will hurl them at an adversary.

Another child will study the legos, figure how to connect them, and thence to build something superior with them...oh say, a superior weapon like the Welsh longbow. So, curator = a collector of blocks; theorist = a builder of bigger, or greater things.

When it comes to ideas, it's a matter of a collector of words--notably insults--versus a theorist, who combines ideas to achieve greater things. You duck the blocks that are thrown, and come back with a well-aimed arrow. The Scots were always easy, eh?

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:47 pm

Lord Foul wrote:oh and it is NOT your place to take anyone "to task" over what YOU think is "bullshit" when it turns out (as in this case) to be a perfectly valid question.

YOU are not the arbiter of what is "correct" or what is the "correct question to ask" or what is the "correct opinion"

lol, so you are saying i now cannot question people on views

I have every right and you have no right to deny me that right

If I think its bullshit, I have every right to express that view and you to claim i cannot is trying to say what i can and cannot say

This is a debate forum, and to say I and only I, canot say whether i think something is wrong, is you trying to deny me my views

Only one reply is relevant to such a dumb view

Fuck off

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 9:48 pm

Didge you started it by being rude when all I did was state I wanted to ask a question.
Now you’re claiming you’re rudeness is due to what happened after.

You’re such a knob.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 9:51 pm

eddie wrote:Didge you started it by being rude when all I did was state I wanted to ask a question.
Now you’re claiming you’re rudeness is due to what happened after.

You’re such a knob.

Oh so now, it only takes one to tango, not two or three?

Unbelieveable, so now people saying crap is to you excused, due to when someone else says something

Not that then both would be wrong?

Wow

Youi just made yourself look a complete hypocrite

I would not have minded if both you and Quill had actually engaged into the point, which Victor was the only one that did. You thought instead it was funny to have Quill attack my character and when I acted in return, you got antsy

wow

by Ben Reilly Mon May 14, 2018 9:51 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:oh and it is NOT your place to take anyone "to task" over what YOU think is "bullshit" when it turns out (as in this case) to be a perfectly valid question.

YOU are not the arbiter of what is "correct" or what is the "correct question to ask" or what is the "correct opinion"

lol, so you are saying i now cannot question people on views

I have every right and you have no right to deny me that right

If I think its bullshit, I have every right to express that view and you to claim i cannot is trying to say what i can and cannot say

This is a debate forum, and to say I and only I, canot say whether i think something is wrong, is you trying to deny me my views

Only one reply is relevant to such a dumb view

Fuck off

‘Man With the Golden Arm’ is Finally Retiring After Saving the Lives of Over 2 Million Babbies MjAxMy02NjljNjMwOWRmZjUwNjZh

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 10:08 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:oh and it is NOT your place to take anyone "to task" over what YOU think is "bullshit" when it turns out (as in this case) to be a perfectly valid question.

YOU are not the arbiter of what is "correct" or what is the "correct question to ask" or what is the "correct opinion"

lol, so you are saying i now cannot question people on views

I have every right and you have no right to deny me that right

If I think its bullshit, I have every right to express that view and you to claim i cannot is trying to say what i can and cannot say

This is a debate forum, and to say I and only I, canot say whether i think something is wrong, is you trying to deny me my views

Only one reply is relevant to such a dumb view

Fuck off

you have clearly "lost the plot " didge....
a "question" such as quill asked is NOT a "view" it cannot by any definition be considered such.....it is a QUESTION...which in fairness requires a reasonable answer.

you see you confuse two issues....

teh Question which quill asked, as did eddie....

and quills reply to eddie

his "question requires no justification...no "backing up" or anything such

his comment about you to eddie is a "point of view" which does require justification, which justification he provides within that post

oh and dont tell me to "fuck off" THAT ended badly LAST time you did it....

you do not, any more than any one else on here, have the right to "do as you like"........

you MAY question views (in an appropriate manner)
you may "inform" and promote YOUR opinion and views (but of course expect to be challenged)

you MAY NOT attack a poster/posters for asking reasonable and genuine questions......thats NOT debate , thats deliberate killing of debate.
hells bells its not like the question that was asked was contentious.

you are NOT king dick, all knowing and always right.......

You WILL conduct yourself in a reasonable manner towards other posters.......

BTW you MAY also take quill to task for his post to eddie about you (on a seperate thread in the basement) if you wish.....see THAT is a POV which YOU may consider contentious...of course you should ideally still keep the debate civil.........after all fair is fair.....

finally...there is NO SUCH THING as a dumb question, if the question is asked genuinely.......

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 10:12 pm

I am telling you to fuck right off, if you think I cannot question people

That is a fact and placing me in the basement will never change that

Get that in your head

Dont tell me how i can conduct myself on this forum, as you will not like the answer

Its that simple

Like i say, neither backed up the view expressed and instead had Quill not debate the points but go on about me

Now i will question anything I want and you are never going to change that in me

Do as you please, ban me, place me in the basement, when you are unable to ban a mod for again being antisemitic

It proves the poor immoral equivelance that you use

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 10:24 pm

Didge wrote:I am telling you to fuck right off, if you think I cannot question people

That is a fact and placing me in the basement will never change that

Get that in your head

Read back what I said...I did NOT say you cant question a POV.....I said 1) do it reasonably and 2)you can ONLY question a POV, not a question.....

Dont tell me how i can conduct myself on this forum, as you will not like the answer

Its that simple

THAT...is my "job"

Like i say, neither backed up the view expressed and instead had Quill not debate the points but go on about me

do you actually understand what a question IS??? it requires no backing up since it is NOT a view fgs....

Now i will question anything I want and you are never going to change that in me

but even you will look plain stupid questioning a question derrrrr.

Do as you please, ban me, place me in the basement, when you are unable to ban a mod for again being antisemitic

erm...mods cant ban mods.....thats bens Job....is suppose i could put him in the basement...but hes got a key so hed let himself back out again....DOH

It proves the poor immoral equivelance that you use

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 10:28 pm

Seriously?

I cannot question a question?

Come again?

So for example, if someone posed the question, "Do you think the Jews deserved to die in the Holocaust?" You are saying i cannot then question the question and motives behind that question?

Seriously

That view to say i cannot question a question, is nonsense, on every level. Dont try and make up rules, that are essentially bullshit, as anything can be questioned, even a question.

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 10:37 pm

Didge wrote:Seriously?

I cannot question a question?

Come again?

So for example, if someone posed the question, "Do you think the Jews deserved to die in the Holocaust?" You are saying i cannot then question the question and motives behind that question?

Seriously

That view to say i cannot question a question, is nonsense, on every level. Dont try and make up rules, that are essentially bullshit, as anything can be questioned, even a question.

such a question presupposes a pov being held....you would of course have to question the MOTIVE behind asking such a question

HOWEVER

the actual question would require yet another answer

you cannot in debate treat the question asked and its motive as one and the same

moreover the question quill asked was NOT a "loaded" question as the example above it had no "motive". It was a question of curiosity, quill is not skilled in the sciences at that level, and his original question was perfectly reasonable and sensible..you could have just answered it in a reasonable manner, but instead attacked like he had just declared war on somebody....

It is YOU in that instance who is totally unreasonable and out of order....

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 10:41 pm

You are just making up rules, based on your own perceived view on debate. There is no written rules on this anywhere in life. I mean becoming an athiest, had to have me question, the questions around the life of Jesus as claimed to be a God.

So you are talking bullshit

Stop trying to invent thinks that is pure gibberish

If you think, I acted poorly to both Quill and Eddie, i accept that.

Happy to apologise

There is no exuse though for how they then acted either

Is there?

by Victorismyhero Mon May 14, 2018 10:49 pm

you really dont get the point do you didge???

its not "rules" its plain common sense

how can you "question" a simple motiveless question?????

I mean...if we were building a shed and I asked you "how far is it between the ends of the shed? would you a) "measure it for me and tell me on the assumption that i needed that information to cut the next rafter or would you b) jump down my throat questioning my motives for asking it????

some questions are just that....a request for information.....

as to what followed, as you will know damn well if you read back, you at least partially deserved it for your intial rude attack on a reasonable question.....YOU struck first......

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 10:52 pm

Lord Foul wrote:you really dont get the point do you didge???

its not "rules" its plain common sense

how can you "question" a simple motiveless question?????

I mean...if we were building a shed and I asked you "how far is it between the ends of the shed? would you a) "measure it for me and tell me on the assumption that i needed that information to cut the next rafter or would you b) jump down my throat questioning my motives for asking it????

some questions are just that....a request for information.....

as to what followed, as you will know damn well if you read back, you at least partially deserved it for your intial rude attack on a reasonable question.....YOU struck first......

You claim its common sense and then move the goal posts to now say a motiveless question

My response to you is that you can question a question

To say people cannot, is wrong and is not common sense, when one of the best ways to answer a question, is with a question

I deserved it? Wow

Two wrongs, never make a right and that is basic common sense

by eddie Mon May 14, 2018 10:55 pm

Get the thread back on topic or it’s getting locked.

Vic has been patient enough with you.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 10:58 pm

eddie wrote:Get the thread back on topic or it’s getting locked.

Vic has been patient enough with you.

Then lock it

I dont care, as all that proves, is you are now trying to shut down a debate me and Vic are having

Which would be very childish

Is there any nastiness going on between either of us?

No, we are debating whether its okay to question a question

There is nothing wrong with that

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 11:08 pm

nice work

by Ben Reilly Mon May 14, 2018 11:11 pm

Please, either debate the topic or wrap this up. Let's try to cut out all the squabbling.

by Guest Mon May 14, 2018 11:17 pm

Original Quill wrote:
goodnewsnet wrote:Because of a rare antibody that is found in Harrison’s blood, his donations have directly contributed to saving over 2.4 million Australian babies...an antibody that directly neutralizes rhesus disease: a dangerous condition in which a pregnant woman’s blood attacks her unborn child.

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

Since hearing about his special biological gift, Harrison has been giving blood every week for the last sixty years, which amounts to roughly 1,100 donations. Not only that, but scientists were then able to use Harrison’s blood to manufacture a life-saving vaccine for the disease called Anti-D.

i dont know what that means quill but is it anything to do with manufacturing something out of it?

by veya_victaous Mon May 14, 2018 11:39 pm

gelico wrote:
Original Quill wrote:
goodnewsnet wrote:Because of a rare antibody that is found in Harrison’s blood, his donations have directly contributed to saving over 2.4 million Australian babies...an antibody that directly neutralizes rhesus disease: a dangerous condition in which a pregnant woman’s blood attacks her unborn child.

You'd think, with a donor readily available, they would be able to synthesize the antibody by now.

Since hearing about his special biological gift, Harrison has been giving blood every week for the last sixty years, which amounts to roughly 1,100 donations. Not only that, but scientists were then able to use Harrison’s blood to manufacture a life-saving vaccine for the disease called Anti-D.

i dont know what that means quill but is it anything to do with manufacturing something out of it?

they actually use his blood to make the medicine, there are other people with the antibody that they can use too, but Blood donations are low in this country so this guys is a real hero.

https://www.donateblood.com.au/learn/anti-d/james-harrison

by Sponsored content