Page 5 of 5

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:38 pm
by Striker
Independent source please.

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:04 pm
by Xman
Medical Practitioner $40,000 $450,000 $219,384

http://content.mycareer.com.au/salary-c ... /australia

Anything else? :roll:

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 9:01 pm
by Striker
You still haven't provided an independent source.

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:44 pm
by Xman
Striker wrote:
You still haven't provided an independent source.
What? the last site has no link to any specific profession. How is that not independant? :roll: Its an employment site FFS!

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:34 pm
by TLPG
Striker wrote:
TL, Wakefield CAN appeal! He probably already has and has stayed it while collecting more evidence! You can do that on the quiet you know! And you want to talk about chemistry. Hydrogen is a gas, dickhead! Mercury is a liquid! You work it out for yourself!
Wakefield hasn't appealled. That's been checked out in the United States I've been told. He can't appeal in the UK because his time is well up!

Hydrogen is a liquid when taken twice and combined with oxygen!

Striker got F in chemistry obviously! :roll:

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:01 pm
by Striker
Xman wrote:
Striker wrote:
You still haven't provided an independent source.
What? the last site has no link to any specific profession. How is that not independant? :roll: Its an employment site FFS!
That only puts the positives and not the full story! Aside from the fact that it's medically and financially incompetent!

Re: Debate For & Against Vaccinations - Fight Club Rules app

Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:02 pm
by Xman
Striker wrote:
Xman wrote:
Striker wrote:
You still haven't provided an independent source.
What? the last site has no link to any specific profession. How is that not independant? :roll: Its an employment site FFS!
That only puts the positives and not the full story! Aside from the fact that it's medically and financially incompetent!
What? Its an average and ranges of the professional incomes :roll:

I've shown you two links backing up claims I know are personally true.

Where's your evidence?