25 August 2009

Is America really this gullible? Parental Alienation Syndrome

 

From RightsForMothers.com 
Parental Alienation Syndrome: How Gullible Are We?

Up for inclusion in the new DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the most widely used psychiatric reference in the world) is the so-called “Parental Alienation Syndrome,” a syndrome invented by the pedophile-loving psychologist Dr. Richard Gardner, who committed suicide eventually.  Also up for inclusion again is making women’s menstrual cycles a psychiatric syndrome. Geezzzzz.

Money-grubbing nutcase lawyers and/or psychologists (in some cases they have both degrees!) work to get these so-called syndromes included so they can use them as a basis for taking children from protective parents (and make more money).  They use this twisted science as a basis for their claims…just how gullible do they think we all are?  Apparently many judges are, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges are trying to correct this: see Family Courts are Warned They Should Not Accept So-called “Parental Alienation Syndrome”.

Here is a good example of how gullible people can be when you start throwing out so-called “scientific claims”:

Dihydrogen Monoxide

Dihydrogen Monoxide

A student at Eagle Rock Junior High won first prize at the Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair, April 26. He was attempting to show how conditioned we have become to alarmists practicing junk science and spreading fear of everything in our environment. In his project he urged people to sign a petition demanding strict control or total elimination of the chemical “dihydrogen monoxide.”

And for plenty of good reasons, since:

1. it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting 2. it is a major component in acid rain 3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state 4. accidental inhalation can kill you 5. it contributes to erosion 6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes 7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients

He asked 50 people if they supported a ban of the chemical.

Forty-three (43) said yes, six (6) were undecided, and only one (1) knew that the chemical was actually just plain old water.

The title of his prize winning project was, “How Gullible Are We?”

He feels the conclusion is obvious.

http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp

No comments: