Read all the way to the end- as I “unpack”(using angry mom language) all the problems with this rant. So called Angry Mom from GTA ... is angry at the wrong partyI couldn’t help but notice the so called Angry Mom rant allegedly from the GTA. That is Greater Toronto Area, for those unfamiliar with Canadian vernacularSeriously, this 'news' couldn’t be missed no matter how hard I tried to avoid it!And that readers, was the very first problem that jumped out at me regarding this so called face book rant- It was absolutely everywhere. Covered everywhere. Every website.All main stream media outlets- Toronto Star- Globe and Mail- CBC- Huffington PostEven in my local very crappy paper!You get the idea? Tell a vision news covered it, last night- CBCWhat are the odds of that happening? Randomly? I don't see that level of coverage as something random. In fact the wall to wall mass media coverage reminded me of other PR stunts we have witnessed through these many years. PR stunts generated via social media. Phony Kony. I am Ukraine. Just to name two off the top of my head...I went to the facebook account to read it for myself.- But am not linking to it- You can find her facebook page in mere minutes- In my opinion she has had her day in the sun and she isn't getting any more light because of my post!This piece was over the top in it’s emotional grab for your heart, but, not your mind. And that readers, was the second problem. - Over the top emotion should suggest, should warn that one is being manipulated- The agenda is to push one into an irrational state, to become so emotionally charged a reaction of more irrationality is virtually guaranteedOf course you could say, she’s upset. You could, but you could also say this was an emotionally charged rant written by someone who knows how and which buttons to pushAnd then there was the third problemWhen I write up posts for the blog, some may recall me paraphrasing that saying “the devil is in the details” The devil is most often in the lack of detailsAngry mom from GTA in italics;
“ I received a phone call from York Region Public Health, informing me that Griffin, alongside my mother and I, was potentially exposed to the measles virus while attending a newborn weigh-in appointment at my doctor’s office in Markham on January 27th.”
She didn’t name the official that called her. Why? This so called official would surely have identified themselves to the mother so she could verify that this was an accurate call? And not some hoax. Yet, the mother did not identify this official. Why?The identification of the official would have helped natural skeptics, of everything, to verify this story to their own satisfaction, but, no name, no ability to verify. The name of the official would have enabled the msm to verify angry mom's story. If they had really wanted to.
“I won’t get angry at or blame the person in the waiting room. I would have likely done the same thing...you get sick, you go to the doctor. I have no idea what their story is and I will never know. But I do know one thing:If you have chosen to not vaccinate yourself or your child, I blame you.I blame you”
See, I find that really odd, so let's call that my fourth problem with this emotionally manipulative story, because I would be angry, if I was going to bother being angry, at the person who sat in the waiting room. Because that individual would be the the sole cause of all my angst and yet this ‘angry mom’ instead lashes out at those she labels as anti-vaxxers. But she claims she has no knowledge whether or not this person and anti-vaxxers are even connected to one another- And when you get to the end, you will have a broader understanding of my suspicions..Then there is a fifth issue, a fifth problem in “angry mom’s rant”Angry mom and her so called ‘argument’ felt like a re-run. A bad sitcom that keeps playing over and over so often that you throw something at the television. Her rant contained the exact same presentation addressed previously in the post- Vaccines, EDC's and the Chemical Manipulation of Humanity
Angry Mom“And I watch these arguments trotted out on Facebook and twitter citing false science and long discredited“studies” that just won’t stop and Jenny McCarthy quotes”
Isn't it ironic that angry mom trotted out her rant on Facebook? It seems that irony was lost on her. As it was all those who cheered her on via social media- Perpetuating the very problem she rails against-Then the Jenny McCarthy referral and discredited studies comment aka Andrew Wakefield-Take note discredited does not mean disproven. Discrediting is most often done via smear tactics or targeted campaigns to discredit - exactly like angry mom’s entire rant. Angry mom is presenting the ‘real science’ argument.Which is nothing more then an appeal to authority and kind of makes me laugh-Because all rational, informed, intelligent, persons know that science can be influenced and skewed to get the desired results- So, her entire argument is contrived. For her argument to have validity she would have to prove that science is ethical, moral and is free from influence of money, lobbyists and political agendas- She has the burden of proof. She couldn’t demonstrate that. Because it's simply not true in all casesThen there is problem number 6- The big problemBaby's possible exposure to measles
“York Region Public Health confirmed to CP24 that an adult has tested positive for measles. The person, spokesperson Lilian Yuan said, had previously been vaccinated against the virus and is not connected to the six confirmed cases in Toronto”
York Region confirms one adult has tested positive for measles- ONE vaccinated individual.Not an anti-vaxxer. One previously vaccinated individual is confirmed to have the measles.From York Region Public Health- the same Public Health office that is alleged to have gotten in touch with ‘angry mom’Kind of takes the wind out of angry mom’s sails, no? She railed on and on against derogatorily named ‘anti-vaxxers’ and yet, it was a vaccinated individual confirmed to have measles.There were many questionable aspects of “angry mom’s” rant. But the fact that she rails against the so called ‘anti-vaxxers’ when the person, who would have to be the one she is railing against, but not angry with, is a fully vaccinated individual. In other words this reeks of a PR stuntPerhaps angry mom should turn her ire against the failed measles vaccine that allowed this individual to contract the disease? Or perhaps it was the vaccine that gave the person the measlesIn either case ‘angry mom’ would have to rail against the vaccine’s failure and the failure of big pharma- You can bet ‘angry mom’ won’t be doing that any time soon!How many logical fallacies did angry mom include in her rant?Plenty- Here is a handy chart for you to refer to if you take the time to read her entire rant and unpack itAd hominem was definitely at play- Bandwagon. Appeal to authority. Burden of proof. False causeGet the idea?https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/assets/FallaciesPosterHigherRes.jpg
