Covid-19 related debates (argue in this thread only)

[Hacky McAxe]

I think it’s the Elites in the west that are pushing this. Russia may be looking at currency in the future backed by gold again. China is buying a lot of gold also.

Not really a global thing then if it disregards 2/3rd of the world.

 

[Nexus]

Musk's whole complaint was that people shouldn't be banned for spreading misinformation because that's a breach of free speech. Then he bans people for spreading misinformation.

In each case it has nothing to do with free speech. The previous owners of Twitter could do whatever they want with their platform. As can Musk now that he owns it. But it's still hypocritical.

Lol, dude it was for impersonating, not for misinformation. Don’t try and label the impersonating as misinformation to try and make your statement correct. They are 2 different things and you know it.

4 pinocchios for you

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Lol, dude it was for impersonating, not for misinformation. Don’t try and label the impersonating as misinformation to try and make your statement correct. They are 2 different things and you know it.

4 pinocchios for you

Same shit in the end. Both are breaches of the Twitter rules, so both are valid bans. Nothing at all to do with freedom of speech like Musk claims.

 

[B-Town Lad]

Hi guys the CMO has just issued an important warning regarding the new strain of omicron variant XBB
get your masks back on, splash plenty of hand sanitiser around (waste of good lube imo) and exercise plenty of caution. Get in the kew for jab #6 too for extra protection

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Hi guys the CMO has just issued an important warning regarding the new strain of omicron variant XBB
get your masks back on, splash plenty of hand sanitiser around (waste of good lube imo) and exercise plenty of caution. Get in the kew for jab #6 too for extra protection

I will be right. I put some extra chilli and garlic in my Marinara sauce. That'll keep it away.

 

[N4TE]

I have it again went to an early Christmas celebration at my aunties as the family won’t all be able to make it on Christmas Day as some will be overseas and yeah we pretty much all got it but I’ve had it before and had 4 shots and just have a runny nose told work and I’m coming in. Drove in and in my role I need to be onsite but can stay distanced. So that’s COVID now. Just a cold.

 

[Rodzilla]

I have it again went to an early Christmas celebration at my aunties as the family won’t all be able to make it on Christmas Day as some will be overseas and yeah we pretty much all got it but I’ve had it before and had 4 shots and just have a runny nose told work and I’m coming in. Drove in and in my role I need to be onsite but can stay distanced. So that’s COVID now. Just a cold.

ive had 1 shot and never had it apparently, my new job is a big time covid trap, hundreds of people must touch the same thing

 

[Rodzilla]

ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE
-January 31st 2020: Eddie Holmes, Bob Garry, Kristian Andersen and Mike Farzan had discussions and all of them find that the covid genome is inconsistent with expectation from evolutionary theory

-January 31st 2020 10.32pm: Kristian Andersen emails fauci to say that parts of the virus look (potentially) engineered and that they have to look at it much closely so their opinions could change, informs him of the discussion with Eddie Holmes, Bob Garry and Mike Farzan earlier in the day.

-February 4th 12.05pm and 54 seconds: Kristian Andersen emails Peter Daszak, he says that the data conclusively shows that any sort of engineering was not done (in an intentional scenario someone would have used a SARS/MERS backbone and optimal ACE2 binding, and in a research incident would have used one of available reverse genetic systems), calls it a crackpot theory to suggest covid was created intentionally

-March 17th 2020: "Proximal Origin of Covid" by Kristian Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, Ian Lipkin, Eddie Holmes and Bob Garry is published in Nature Medicine, they describe their analysis as clearly showing that Covid is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus while their main text leaves that possibility open but describe it as unlikely

 

[Rodzilla]

@Hacky McAxe @DinkumDog ok now ill try to piece together this Feb 1st teleconference, any reference to it was redacted and republicans were allowed to go in and take notes of the email summary of the call, then we have an anonymous email complaint from someone on the call to Jon Cohen of science magazine and the Eddie Holmes reply to Jon Cohen enquiries, Jeremy Farrars book also talks about it and years later bob garry and eddie holmes have talked about it

republicans notes of the email summary by Jeremy Farrar
Letter-Re.-Feb-1-Emails-011122.pdf (house.gov)

the Jon Cohen anonymous tipster emails from july 2020 and responses
Obtain, but Verify - (joncohen.org)

the tipster says that 2 coronavirus experts schooled KA, EH, BG and MF on that call, apparently it got heated with accusations that they had no idea what they were talking about and it was nonsense, importantly the tipster claims that all of the counter argument produced that day made it into the proximal origins of covid paper

cross referenced with the republicans notes, Francis Collins emails Farrar about Ron Fouchier and Christian Dorsten presenting arguments more forceful than necessary, these are coronavirus experts and sure the individuals mentioned by the tipster, Collins then agrees its most likely natural and wants to convene experts within WHO framework (WHO is a puppet apparently) otherwise the conspiracy would dominate and do harm to science and international harmony

i think this is all evidence that the guys switched their opinions when word got back to them of collins opinion of Feb 2nd, they ended the call still thinking they were right, arguments used on feb 4th and in proximal origins paper (specific techniques would have been used by engineers) is the main argument that Andersen was accused of stealing

but its all about what will you allow me to put into evidence, to start with can i enter that nobody thought that the RBD was engineered, or at least Mike Farzan thinks they are all in agreement that the RBD is natural

 

[Rodzilla]

take your time btw, there is no time limit here

 

[Hacky McAxe]

@Hacky McAxe @DinkumDog ok now ill try to piece together this Feb 1st teleconference, any reference to it was redacted and republicans were allowed to go in and take notes of the email summary of the call, then we have an anonymous email complaint from someone on the call to Jon Cohen of science magazine and the Eddie Holmes reply to Jon Cohen enquiries, Jeremy Farrars book also talks about it and years later bob garry and eddie holmes have talked about it

republicans notes of the email summary by Jeremy Farrar
Letter-Re.-Feb-1-Emails-011122.pdf (house.gov)

the Jon Cohen anonymous tipster emails from july 2020 and responses
Obtain, but Verify - (joncohen.org)

the tipster says that 2 coronavirus experts schooled KA, EH, BG and MF on that call, apparently it got heated with accusations that they had no idea what they were talking about and it was nonsense, importantly the tipster claims that all of the counter argument produced that day made it into the proximal origins of covid paper

cross referenced with the republicans notes, Francis Collins emails Farrar about Ron Fouchier and Christian Dorsten presenting arguments more forceful than necessary, these are coronavirus experts and sure the individuals mentioned by the tipster, Collins then agrees its most likely natural and wants to convene experts within WHO framework (WHO is a puppet apparently) otherwise the conspiracy would dominate and do harm to science and international harmony

i think this is all evidence that the guys switched their opinions when word got back to them of collins opinion of Feb 2nd, they ended the call still thinking they were right, arguments used on feb 4th and in proximal origins paper (specific techniques would have been used by engineers) is the main argument that Andersen was accused of stealing

but its all about what will you allow me to put into evidence, to start with can i enter that nobody thought that the RBD was engineered, or at least Mike Farzan thinks they are all in agreement that the RBD is natural

That's not actual evidence. At best it's circumstantial evidence, but it fits more in the anecdotal evidence bag. Sure, there's some interesting claims, but they are just claims without evidence to back them up.

I will put it another way.

Remember that email conversation we had a few weeks back you had with your group? An anonymous source told me that you said that you don't actually believe that Covid-19 was engineered and that you just do this to troll people.

Was my source lying?

 

[Rodzilla]

That's not actual evidence. At best it's circumstantial evidence, but it fits more in the anecdotal evidence bag. Sure, there's some interesting claims, but they are just claims without evidence to back them up.

I will put it another way.

Remember that email conversation we had a few weeks back you had with your group? An anonymous source told me that you said that you don't actually believe that Covid-19 was engineered and that you just do this to troll people.

Was my source lying?

keep it about this situation, the tipster clearly was in on the call and mentions very specifically what happened, this was 2020 a year before the freedom of information fauci email dump gave anybody any sniff of a conference call

he mentions the exact date it happens and all the members involved, that kristian andersen and the others thought it was engineered

so you must agree that he was there on that call, and only top level trusted experts were able to be included on that call, that automatically makes this guy a credible witness, i want this included just like any witness testimony

 

[Rodzilla]

*guy/gal btw, *he/she, how sexist of me

 

[GoTheDoggies]

Covid is back in time for Christmas what an absolute farce this whole 'pandemic' has been

 

[Hacky McAxe]

keep it about this situation, the tipster clearly was in on the call and mentions very specifically what happened, this was 2020 a year before the freedom of information fauci email dump gave anybody any sniff of a conference call

he mentions the exact date it happens and all the members involved, that kristian andersen and the others thought it was engineered

so you must agree that he was there on that call, and only top level trusted experts were able to be included on that call, that automatically makes this guy a credible witness, i want this included just like any witness testimony

None of this makes any sense. The blog from the Science Magazine writer states that the email was conflicting and clearly states that:

1) the person sending the email was not part of the call and was making the claim based on what they apparently heard from two people on the call

2) the anonymous source clearly states that the Coronavirus experts said that engineering of the virus was ridiculous (on the call)

3) the anonymous source claims that the article submitted to Nature says the opposite (it doesn't), and they are clearly trying to claim credit as stated by the Science Mag editor

So I have to ask, why are you trying to submit this as evidence when it:

1) is basic hearsay without corroboration

2) doesn't actually support your claims at all

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Oh. Nevermind. I think I just figured out what you're arguing.

You are saying that Andersen believed that it may have been engineered, then the actual experts went into detail on why that's ridiculous, then he took the advice of the experts.

And your problem is that he shouldn't have listened to the experts but instead should have listened to random people online that probably never finished high school.

Is that the whole argument covered?

 

[CrittaMagic69]

Oh. Nevermind. I think I just figured out what you're arguing.

You are saying that Andersen believed that it may have been engineered, then the actual experts went into detail on why that's ridiculous, then he took the advice of the experts.

And your problem is that he shouldn't have listened to the experts but instead should have listened to random people online that probably never finished high school.

Is that the whole argument covered?

Why you got to do me dirty like that? I tried to finish highschool but they wouldn't let me

 

[Rodzilla]

None of this makes any sense. The blog from the Science Magazine writer states that the email was conflicting and clearly states that:

1) the person sending the email was not part of the call and was making the claim based on what they apparently heard from two people on the call

2) the anonymous source clearly states that the Coronavirus experts said that engineering of the virus was ridiculous (on the call)

3) the anonymous source claims that the article submitted to Nature says the opposite (it doesn't), and they are clearly trying to claim credit as stated by the Science Mag editor

So I have to ask, why are you trying to submit this as evidence when it:

1) is basic hearsay without corroboration

2) doesn't actually support your claims at all

1) i think the person on the email knows too much information for it to be relayed from someone else, that the experts listened to the evidence for a while, that one of them was entertaining guests and wanted to get back to them, these are not things explained to others when telling a story, the tipster hides his name and says he wants to keep out of it, the claim about hearing this from others is probably another diversion

2) exactly

3) he meant the article said the opposite of kristian andersens presentation at the conference call

1b) its got big corroboration

2b) it does

ok lets go to the summary emails by Farrar, i want to put the conference call into evidence

can i put into evidence that on early morning Feb 2nd they all agree or Mike Farzan thinks they all agree that the RBD is not engineered

Mike Farzan says:

"The RBD didn’t look ‘engineered’ to him – as in, no human would have selected the individual mutations and cloned them into the RBD (I think we all agree)"

Andrew Rambault emails Farrar 9am Feb 2nd and says "From a (natural) evolutionary point of view the only thing here that strikes me as unusual is the furin cleavage site"

 

[The DoggFather]

Anyone watched Died Suddenly yet?

If you have, what's your take of it?

 

[Brizdog]

Anyone watched Died Suddenly yet?

If you have, what's your take of it?

I watched it last night. I feel I made the right decision being unvaxxed. What are your thoughts on it?