Why I don't believe in The Aspergers Theory

Post Reply New Topic

This is so bizarre that it rivals anything said here before in terms of idiocy.

I said nothing about doctors not being wrong, but so can perceptions - and the perceptual bias that a condition is being overdiagnosed seems more prevalent than what seems to be the reality, that the condition is underdiagnosed.

A diagnosis may not have an MRI, blood test, etc. but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a real basis. Such diagnoses are made by observing and interacting with clients, sometimes in fairly involved ways (such as the ADI-R and ADOS).

It seems peculiar to me to invoke autosuggestion, subjectivity, etc. in terms of discrediting diagnoses, but somehow the perception that overdiagnosis is a real thing is not subject to autosuggestion, subjectivity? Consider a common cultural narrative about primarily childhood diagnoses such as autism and ADHD is that they exist to give parents an excuse for their child's behavior without taking responsibility for their poor parenting. Such a narrative lends itself to belief in overdiagnosis or even belief in the idea that these disorders do not exist. It is also subjective and suggestive, and does not require direct interaction with those who are diagnosed with these conditions, except perhaps briefly. Brief interactions are subject to fundamental attribution errors in which behavior is misattributed to personality flaws when it may be a brief reaction to a temporary stressor or fit into a larger pattern of behavior with a more thorough and empirically valid explanation.

So it's not really about thinking that doctors are always right, but rather wondering why they might be considered systematically wrong in a particular way. Which obvious statistical discrepancies are you talking about?

I disagree. It is almost certainly factually incorrect, but the gist of the statement is true: People who actually work in the field of climate science largely agree that climate change is real, and presents real dangers. There really is no scientific consensus that climate change isn't happening.

Note that the statement limited it to graduate students and claimed that 98% of them agreed that it is occurring.

As far as presenting real dangers, that is largely imagination. Very little research has really been done to find out the effects. What we do know is from history and that is that a warmer Earth is a much more productive Earth and far more comfortable. The gross panic that so many people are engaging in is panic about change that they do not understand. If they understood the change, they would likely welcome most of it.

I'd like to point out here that the earth is always going thru changes beyond our control. If there is global warming, it probably has very little to do with us.

Have you seen the pictures of the damages that Hurricane Sandy has done so far?

The "increased food production" you're talking about - no, that assumes that we have water in the proper places. We're having flooding in areas, and droughts in others.

And that doesn't take into account the other effects on water.

What we know from history is that the earth survives an thrives in many different circumstances, including ones much warmer than we are now.

I think these are most of the factual claims you made. Do you, or does anyone, have sources for these?

Try and open google earth. Check your area or country and see how little Forrest is left. Compared to the time before humans. We have probably cut down 75% of the world's Forrest if not more. That isgonna have effects. I wa reading how.it now takes over 2000 years to renew the atmosphere something that once.only.took.200.

Its pretty scary and sad how anti and hostile.we are towards Forrest and trees which we need to survive. I don't believe in that we are to small to.cause.problems. we are 6 billion people. Most don't care about the environment.

For all our human intelligents we are the only living being who ruins the earth. All other adapts. It's kinda sad when.you think about it.

Imagine earth today with no humans. How many species would be alive. How much more green and amazing would the.world be like.

If they don't prevent people from getting kids soon. It's gonna be bad in the future.

I.don't mind humanity dying. I just hope.we don't ruin earth.for all the amazing and unique life because of how stupid we are.

And you have proof that Hurricane Sandy is the product of Global Warming?

I didn't think so.



Did you know that warmer air can carry more moisture?



Particularly when warmer than we are now.

It's no accident that our ancestors began to settle down and create the cradle of civilization at a time when it was about five degrees Fahrenheit warmer than today.

I've read many claims but that doesn't mean that I believe them.

The OP reminds me of this.

http://www.sonichu.com/cwcki/Asperger_syndrome

Sorry - But it's true.

Ok so the OP starts by comparing himself to Jesus and then makes a long unsupported rant about how we are all just coddled by our parents or grew up in the wrong type of location and our well-documented neurological difference is just a "theory." Skip to the last page, where everyone is arguing about a hurricane.

Am... Am I the only one who finds this hilariously absurd? Is no one else laughing? Or is it yet again time to bring out the old classic:

On the contrary, I am finding this whole thing quite amusing. I started of being slightly annoyed with the OP but am now starting to respect him sheerly for what was probably, in trolling terms, a masterpiece. LOL

You don't know s**t

Im laughing too.

The thread starts out stupid and then degenerates into a vitriolic brawl about a subject that has nothing to with the original post.

This thread got off to a very shaky start and now it's disintegrating into insults and off-topic stuff about the environment, it's time to lock it and wave farewell.

OP, when you have something peer-reviewed and published - please feel free to post a link to your work.