DYV...before and after

Totally surreal when it comes to the depth of absurdity.  Six days ago I posted about DYV's dishonesty blogging about a lightning strike saying a deaf man with a cochlear implant was struck but offered no sources or proof that it was the case. In fact, that video was already proven to be a fake.  A week later offered such a banal, dishonest response if not a totally paranoid one leaping into the fire and now into the frying pan.

Notice: This article has been no proven which is no information and none of sources due to the cochlear implant industry possibly cover up of this incidental situation to prevent avoid bankruptcy. perhaps, only a theory which could it be possible happen to everybody like this video.

The cochlear implant industry is in collusion to cover up on sources to the fake lightning video? What an utterly moronic claim. Again, the video has already been shown to be a fake. No need for a "theory."  If a deaf person with a cochlear implant was hit by a direct lightning strike he would most likely be dead or severely maimed for life. Whether the cochlear implant gets damaged isn't really worth writing about.  How about being honest for a change and admit that you, DYV, were just making things up out of thin air on a whim?


Before:

After:

Update: Good grief. Now, he/she is claiming in his/her blog piece was merely an opinion piece. How can it be an opinion piece when it's littered with so called "facts" stating unequivocally that the (fake) lightning victim is a cochlear implant user with no way of confirming it and no sources to support that claim?   Below you can his post-response to my blog response to his first blog piece about the (fake) lightning victim video. His reference to me as "Mickey Mouse" was my old user name during the VAX days at Gallaudet University.  Not afraid to show my face around here.

And lastly, it is in poor taste to list links under the "Surfer Deaf Websites" a link to Candy's blog as "Extreme Radical Gina Sutton" while all the other names linking to other sites are neutral.

UPDATE II. More on DYV involving counter hits. It's easy to see the difference between the visitor map (clickable) and see the hits total and the hits number displayed below the map. This is a similar incident with the DBC's own mess.

A quack and a liar

Here's a captioned video clip of Charlie Brown and Lucy that I put together by myself. . There are some things to watch out for when it comes psychiatry. Even Charlie Brown doesn't quite see it and still he succumbs to such quackery and dishonesty each and every time. As a deaf or hard of hearing person, what are some of the things you can do to avoid the same mistakes Charlie Brown makes?



As for me, I'm like Schroeder. Just sit down at my piano and enjoy playing my ragtime and early jazz pieces. And on occasions, when I'm into it, play some classical pieces. It'd be cool to hear Schroeder play some ragtime pieces. One can only imagine.

Bleached article

Reading this bleached article piece again and again I can only conclude it to be a non sequitur piece. It made no sense, intellectually so. What I saw is an emotional piece in the guise as an intellectual discourse simply because of the attempt to insert the idea of "neglect" into the whole picture when it comes to parents' decision on implanting their deaf child. That agenda is clear. A subtle message without overtly saying it. Hence, my question to the author. What is he trying to say? What is his official stance on cochlear implantation for children?

You have parents making an informed decision on getting a cochlear implant for their deaf child versus making an uninformed decision of Jamaican parents who apply bleaching agent to their children's dark skin in the effort to lighten their skin color.  The former is not a neglect or child abuse issue while the latter is definitely considered as a neglect and child abuse issue because of the increased inherent medical risk, health issues and side effects to the child where it can disfigure the skin on the face, the most prominent feature to be bleached. An attempt to play "doctor" while using unsafe chemical products on the skin.

It's not even close between the two examples. Nothing to compare when it comes to parallels.

One is based on an approval from doctors and specialists before getting a cochlear implant while the bleaching example has nothing to do with any medical issue but about vanity and peer-pressure. The decision process on getting a cochlear implant is a long one that require many visits and researching before deciding on implantation. As for the bleaching part, it's an impulse decision without any regard to the child's own health and well being.

Again, no parallels. Nothing to compare.

The bleaching of skin is a fad much like tattooing. Cochlear implantation is not a fad. Bleaching is not a medical issue while getting a cochlear implant is a medical issue. No different from getting Lasik surgery for your eyes to help improve vision or getting the right prescription glasses for those blurry eyes. There is something to be said when senses are impaired do people seek medical correction or assistance.  Changing the color of one's skin isn't a medical correction or a need but purely a cosmetic one, just like using Botox to enhance the face.

Again, nothing to compare.

The bleaching of skin is due to peer-pressure based on the need for social acceptance and survival. Getting a cochlear implant addresses the need to access sound and not about peer-pressure or survival. However, cochlear implantation does allow the opportunity to develop listening and speaking skills over time. Bleaching one's own skin does not improve anybody's skills but it's purely on the basis of social acceptance. You cannot compare between the two as having parallels. Simply irreconcilable. 

Getting a cochlear implant does not preclude a child from learning sign language. Nor does it preclude a child from a social aspect on the opportunity to mingle among his or her signing, deaf, hh or hearing peers. You have a child's right to hear from the very beginning when the opportunity to develop listening skill would be at its peak (0 to 4 years old). Once that opportunity is past then it is too late to have that upper hand for the rest of the child's life.  It's purely a medical fact. Timing is everything when it comes to the brain's development on learning new sound and words. Having said that, the introduction to deaf culture can occur anytime during a child's life from birth to adulthood should child decide later or get introduced with the help of his or her parents.

Again, noting to compare when it comes to parallels.

That blog piece appears to covertly impart guilt on parents by using emotionally laden words like "cultural genocide," "neglect," and "criminal" and parallel them with the bleaching of children all in the guise of an intellectual discourse as far as I'm concerned since the author refuse to clarify his reason for that blog piece. I am left to make this observation on my own.  It turns out to be a non sequitur piece since one example is considered to be a medical issue while the other is obviously not.