ERV at Skeptics of Oz

Identification of a novel retrovirus in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20120503ptan20120107338.php

Agent: University Of Pittsburgh - Of The Commonwealth System Of Higher Education - ,
Inventor: Denise S. O'Keefe
USPTO Applicaton #: #20120107338 - Class: 4241871 (USPTO)

The BPH viruses disclosed herein are related to previously identified gammaretroviruses such as murine leukemia virus and xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV), but are distinct from these viruses based on nucleic acid and amino acid sequences

Good wideos

Awesome job :)

Superb, Abbie.

Don't let "the Others" bully you or any other women into submission.

That's awesome presentation and Q&A. It's great you're reaching out and educating the public.

Erv, if you really want to reverse the tables on mecfsforums and go after Robyn for libel...she's got the money..."

I think you have a good cause for action:
"Yes and it gave us the opportunity to do just that. Abbie Smith spewed that garbage out there and that is the problem, it is out there now and it was full of lies. Also when Abbie goes filling out those job apps she can refer back to this and how she libeled other scientists. Then we'll see how well she does."

There digging the dirt on you. You certainly pissed off the freethought group. Wow 500 comments

http://www.mecfsforums.com/index.php/topic,12219.45.html

No relation at all to the videos, but I thought you might appreciate the picture. :)

http://www.damnlol.com/science-is-like-sex-20279.html

The new look here is a bit different. A lot more... sterile looking, I guess.

Going to check out the videos. Found you thanks to PZ bad mouthing you. We are in the same boat in regard to the American Girlyban wing of the rationalist movement.

http://thetimchannel.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/phantom-sexist-of-skeptic…

Enjoy.

Abbie,

Serious question. So I understand how offspring of a B cell differentiate from the parent. Simple random mutation. What however is the selection pressure to eliminate the ones that less effectively fight a certain pathogen?

I'd imagine there would have to be either a penalty system in some way which can differentiate between cells that are worse than others. What is this?

More from Dr O'Keefe.

http://okeefe-lab.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/novel-mlv-gag-sequences-detec…

Denise S. O'Keefe, PhD.
May 24, 2012 7:13 AM
it is interesting that everyone, us included, seems to have much more trouble amplifying the env and LTR regions - if gag amplification was merely due to mouse contamination, why don't these regions amplify as well? Keeping in mind that tests for mouse DNA are coming up negative...this might suggest that there is more divergence from known MLV-type sequences in these regions - we managed to sequence the variable region of env from one patient -- the sequence was most similar to env from an MLV virus known to cause disease in mice in the wild -- which is pretty interesting if you think about it...

And Dr O'Keefes MLV Looks similar to an MLV John Coffin found.

See link....

http://peoplewithme.com/thread-1178.html

LOL. PZ: "I will not participate in any conference in which Abbie Smith is a speaker."

Eh, he can stay home and post "why I became an atheist" stories, which remind me of Christian witnessing and conversion stories.

It's not like he'd be speaking at any *science* conferences, anyway.

@GammaretroviralTroll,

The paper the O'Keefes lab is talking about does not say what they say it says. Take a moment from your trolling to actually read and understand the paper (though I know you won't). Let go of your religious zeal pertaining to "ZOMGIHaveXMRV!!!!!" and realize that the full body of evidence shows quite conclusively that it's a contamination....or keep whining about the scientific community doesn't take an anonymous internet troll with no knowledge of biology such as yourself seriously. Either way, you're just letting your ignorance of basic science shine through by posting junk like that.

Correction: that first line should have been "The paper the O’Keefes lab is talking about does not say what you think it says."

(although technically both are true)

Abbie coined Twatson and I get shit for American Girlyban? WTF?? My thinking on the original Skepchick elevator guy freakout is that she had just gone through a divorce and was in a man-hater mode. I was told it was inappropriate to speculate on her motives, but it has to be considered.

I don't totally understand this mess because I Abbie isn't ugly or stupid. Surely she must be getting molestered ALL THE TIME at these types of affairs (if what Skepchick and her ilk are posturing has ANY truth).

Abbie must have vaccinated herself against the virus that forces secular men to go into their molester modes. Why she is holding back on the cure is anyone's guess at this point. Perhaps she has a "crew" of fans (not unlike a popular rapper does) who trail her and provide security for her? Please Abby. Share your secret. Help these poor defenseless women of atheism fight the onslaught of male affectations that they are dealing with.

Enjoy.

Love how PZ is pissed off at Abbie. Smug asshole (I don't like ad-hominem attacks, but he has used so many over the years, it feels good to do so). Glad to see some people in science aren't afraid to give him some shit. I watched that old Blogging heads video . . . funny as hell. PZ talking to a "non-entity".

I am an atheist too, but we don't all think like PZ, thank goodness.

I'm almost afraid to ask but...why does he hate Abbie so much? I'm afraid I'm not up to date on all the drama.

Poodle, because he thinks he can treat people however the fuck he wants and not suffer the consequences of doing so.

@Week, in your defense, "smug asshole" is not an ad-hominem because you're not distracting from any kind of argument. What you're doing is nothing more than calling it as you see it.

Poodle Stomper:
"I’m almost afraid to ask but…why does he hate Abbie so much?"

Because she had the audacity to use naughty words when not agreeing with him. After all, it's clearly fine to insult people all the live-long day over at Phawrongula, but goodness help you if you dare to not agree with his troop of trained monkeys over there.

They were, at the time, basically trying to tar-and-feather the reputations of all the serious scientists (including Richard Dawkins) who didn't agree with the armchair radifems, with some help from Ophelia Benson and a few others. If you dared to even suggest that there might not be a sexism problem, you were branded a Men's Right Advocate or sexist.

Well that seems like a silly reason to hate another person. I'd rather just stick to my science then =P

Is PZ Myers an ass, or what?

why does he hate Abbie so much?

Because she doesn't share his ideology in re Elevatorgate and related subjects and doesn't dismiss everyone who doesn't share that ideology as an "MRA".

If you dared to even suggest that there might not be a sexism problem

It goes far beyond that. Many who are feminists and believe that there is a sexism problem have been tarred with the same brush because we don't share every tenet of that group's dogma on the subject.

Heh. PZ banned me because I called him out on a blatant lie he told in that thread.

Am BWE4 there. He misrepresented his accomplishments and directly lied about being the keynote speaker at SDB Hawaii. It was weirder than weird.

Here is a post I made at TalkRational outlining the dishonesty and lie:

http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=1818768#post1818768

There is always a market for hate-mongering but you have to convince the rabble there is something to fear first. If you just educate people rather than trying to control them,.. well, that could indicate possible imperfections in the ones who need control..

It has been very interesting watching the dynamics at Pharyngula over time.

Given many atheist's propensity for social justice, discussions ranged beyond science and then mocking the religious for their adherence to dogma, to issues of equity for the marginalised and under-privileged.

After a time, key spokespeople emerged and claimed to represent the oppressed against the privilege of the masses. Their experiences were obviously those of all people in their chosen group, and any whose views did not correspond were ostracised. Scepticism and evidence based arguments were only required of the out group. Self reflection or overt questioning within the group were to be avoided.

The rules and orthodoxy for discussion at the site were strongly enforced, and the defenders of the orthodoxy sought first to suggest that dissenters engage in anal self abuse with a decaying porcupine. Following this, they have sought to demonise those who who have mocked them, their rules, behaviour, and cognitive dissonance.

They have engaged in periodic purges of allies, and will no doubt periodically purge the useful idiots as well.

They consider it their duty to evangelise other people's blogs, shitting from a great height, as it were, rather than avoiding discussion on their self proclaimed trigger issues.

Your experience and mileage may differ.

Well, but that's really the way of the world and the reason attacking religion for its evils is like attacking stains for their inconvenience.

Obstructing or challenging bad behavior never needs to get into the issue of how many angels fit on the pin's head. No orthodoxy. No dogma. No need to place the judgement on the person.

The fact that gelatoguy grew and the gelatocaust was averted but for the few who wanted it to be a great battle is evidence that challenging behavior where it occurs rather than condemning ideas from an ivory tower moves us forward.

At any rate, PZ Myers directly lied and misrepresented his accomplishments. Whatever credibility he might have retained solely through the last bastion of integrity- honesty- is now gone. I think it's pretty important to make a little bit of a spectacle of his lie and academic misrepresentation so that he can't argue from authority in the future.

If he were to unban me and apologize I would obviously forgive him, but the fact is he doesn't appear to have a problem with being dishonest and his faithful actually said they didn't care.

Because PZ lies about his qualifications, he isn't trustworthy at all. There is no more important information to be honest about than the areas where humility and ego oppose each other. I might and probably do disagree with a lot of what most people who are part of an atheist movement/community/whatever, but I don't automatically assume they are lying. Whereas, with many creationists or other political activists who want power to go to their group rather than spread around to everyone, I do.

PZ has changed that for me. Because of him and his blog, I now have an almost wholly negative view of anyone who wears the label 'atheist' as any sort of positive claim at all. I have actually dropped the label in favor of pantheist. The universal label. The only reason I decided on that is that the vocal people who declare their atheism as a challenge of some sort or another have excluded me by being what I refuse to associate myself with.

I am now solidly opposed to any activities done to promote atheism. You can't force a belief without the information which supports it. You give the evidence, not the conclusion. If the evidence is good, others come to the same conclusion. If they don't, they don't have the same information. Trying to shove the conclusion down someone's throat is fundamentalism and cultish religion.

Education and propaganda are opposing forces. PZ myers has publicly lied and misrepresented his accomplishments in the service of his own propaganda. That is the end of his legitimacy as a teacher and as a credible public figure afaic.

I understand that I have something of a quixotic crusade going here, and I'm not under any illusions about that, but it seems to me like this is a game changer and that dishonesty and lies to promote propaganda by claiming false authority for the conclusions is basically the root of all evil. I think it is the root that PZ mislabels 'religion'. When what it is is lies and propaganda.

I don't think it should be able to go away until he publicly apologizes for what was inexcusable dishonesty. Am I the only one who thinks honesty should matter?

No one likes change. And BWE, I agree with you. People should be entitled to their opinions, but there is never any excuse to lie or make up information to make your views seem more credible. One problem is that we so often use religion as an excuse to defend the things we associate ourselves with. Religion and politics get so easily intertwined and it only leads to arguments. We should just be honest with ourselves and believe what we believe in. The way others think shouldn't prevent us from thinking the way we think.

That is really beautifully said in my opinion. Thank you for that Sarah.

BWE, you and I are practically on the same page with respect to all of this.

If you aren't already aware there is a comprehensive wiki that documents the misbehavior of PZ and the other so-called "baboons." I personally choose not to fight and simply let political atheism keep withering outward from its rotten core, but you should definitely contribute if you find it worthwhile. It seems like you have good things to add.

Trying to shove the conclusion down someone’s throat is fundamentalism and cultish religion.

Indeed!

Grad student MISS Abbie Smith, I have to correct you on a factual error. The limit for comments was never 5,000. It's about 700. My pet, talking hippo once told me.