Anecdotal Evidence

[brewer]

Evasive again. This is the act of the desperate.

I'll put it this way, biblical testimony is lacking in evidence. Even if it was first person evidence (which I believe it is not) I will not believe it based on any position that you have put forward in this thread. 

There is no cherry picking data from the anti-vaxers, it is there for all to see. Plus, if you thought the "vaccination/autism" testimony was cherry picked, I said you could pick another case (look above-said "your choice") but you declined. Another act of desperation. And there are not "limited accounts" from the anti-vaxers, as I said there are thousands if not more. That is not a small sample size. You are making an application that is incorrect, desperation, desperation, desperation. 

And then, "not sure what you are asking". One more desperate act of playing ignorant. I asked if you could explain how you came to the "not normally" belief statement regarding "vaccination causes autism" and how this compares to any other testimony for any case of your choice (note: not cherry picking) where you could make a "yes" belief statement. And then compare and contrast the evidence that has you come to a different conclusion for each case. Can you understand this? 

Again, if you want to believe in biblical testimony, I don't care. Just stop playing ignorant. I find it irritating because I don't believe that you are ignorant but using it as a ploy. If it continues then I'll be left with no choice but to bring your intelligence into question. 

If you can't answer directly then you have no answers and should stop.

It may seem evasive, but I did answer your questions, including about anecdotal evidence concerning cause (in the OP and you where too bothered to hit one button).   It may be the rhetoric and your approach, that make me less than forth coming, because I'm not expecting anything more.   I've noticed that in many who have chimed in as of late, and commonly attack the person, rather than the arguments or reason.  I don't think that it really matters how I answer, so I'm not going to give them much time.  

If I have misjudged, then I apologize, and you are welcome to respectfully ask your question again.  I'm not going to go back and forth, with posts like the above however.

Another dodge. So now I'm not playing nice (see the bold). Can you explain why we should not "attack" the obvious dodges or the person making them? And I did question your "not normally/anti-vaxer/autism cause" argument or reason. 

Seems that you will only accept testimony that you have a vested interest in and are unwilling to defend your non acceptance of other case/cause testimony that you do not have a vested interest in. 

Pathetic.