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

Status
Not open for further replies.

The DoggFather

OG DF
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
106,404
Reaction score
117,537
Even those ones that can tricky, because while they say that they're "asking questions", they're actually asking closed questions designed to make you believe what they believe. That's probably even more dangerous because people are more likely to believe something if they believe they came up with the idea themselves.

View attachment 61684
Well with these clots, I'd ask...

What's causing them?

Have they increased or has reporting on them increased?

How common were they pre and post covid.?

How common were they pre and post vax?

How did you go from wearing multiple masks change to no masks?
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
Well with these clots, I'd ask...

What's causing them?

Have they increased or has reporting on them increased?

How common were they pre and post covid.?

How common were they pre and post vax?

How did you go from wearing multiple masks change to no masks?
And that's definitely what you should be asking.

The problem you get with anti-vaxxers (and I mean actual anti-vaxxers, not vaccine hesitant people or curious people) is that they ignore the stuff that doesn't support their beliefs.

For example, they will scream that an increase in heart problems could ONLY be due to vaccination. But all this heart damage can be caused by catching Covid-19


They claim that blood clotting could ONLY be from vaccination. And we know that one vaccine can cause blood clotting. But we also know it's extremely rare and we know that you can get blood clotting from catching Covid-19


This is why it's impossible to actually debate with anti-vaxxers. They will always ignore evidence that doesn't support their stance, and when everything scientific goes against them, they turn to "The Science Lies!"
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
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

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
ok i would like to enter into evidence kristian andersen emailing Marion Koopmans and Christian Drosten on Feb 8th, he says what they are considering is far from another conspiracy theory, he says his main work over the last couple of weeks has been trying to disprove any lab theory and that the scientific evidence isn't conclusive enough to have a high confidence in any one of the possibilities

Farrar Fauci Comms - DocumentCloud

you can find this exchange by scrolling down to page 56
 

Doogie

Kennel Lizard Lord
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
9,728
Reaction score
12,207
ok i would like to enter into evidence kristian andersen emailing Marion Koopmans and Christian Drosten on Feb 8th, he says what they are considering is far from another conspiracy theory, he says his main work over the last couple of weeks has been trying to disprove any lab theory and that the scientific evidence isn't conclusive enough to have a high confidence in any one of the possibilities

Farrar Fauci Comms - DocumentCloud

you can find this exchange by scrolling down to page 56
so I went to page 56 and all I found was this...
1669525138430.png
3
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
beating a dead horse would be talking about it once trump, gates, fauci, daszak and others have been put in prison or given the death penalty

this is a very much alive horse
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
Feb 8th 2020 at 10.15pm to be exact

View attachment 61835
And?
What part of this is your smoking gun?
I don’t even see a cap gun let alone any smoke…

Earlier comms made it clear their position could be changed with more information to hand and that’s pretty much what happened.

But you’re going to get 3.5 by adding 2 and 2 again and then the question of Bill Gates and why he wants the world population reduced will come up again.

Do you ever get off the hamster wheel Zil? :-).
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
And?
What part of this is your smoking gun?
I don’t even see a cap gun let alone any smoke…

Earlier comms made it clear their position could be changed with more information to hand and that’s pretty much what happened.

But you’re going to get 3.5 by adding 2 and 2 again and then the question of Bill Gates and why he wants the world population reduced will come up again.

Do you ever get off the hamster wheel Zil? :-).
so i can put it into evidence?

Feb 8th 2020 10.15pm: Kristian Andersen emails Koopmans and Drosten as part of a group discussion, says what they are considering is far from a conspiracy theory, that he has been working over the last couple has been focused on trying to disprove any lab theory but the scientific evidence isn't conclusive enough to have a high confidence of any possibility

he also is not in favor of publishing in a scientific journal at this stage, claiming that publishing something open ended would backfire, he thinks its important to gather additional evidence including waiting on the pangolin sequence and further scrutinizing the furin cleavage site/o linked glycans
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,180
Reaction score
22,884
I’m looking forward to a cracking summation..truly I am.. Cannot wait.. :blush:
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
@Hacky McAxe you want to weigh in on this or are you hiding?

you found it odd that he switched his opinion in a few days, he was adamant that it wasn't any lab incident and said it was conclusive, now don't you find it extra odd that a few days later he says it isn't conclusive and doesn't want to publish yet

when he emailed fauci and said his opinion could change he wasn't kidding ffs, he is the flip flop man
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
@Hacky McAxe you want to weigh in on this or are you hiding?

you found it odd that he switched his opinion in a few days, he was adamant that it wasn't any lab incident and said it was conclusive, now don't you find it extra odd that a few days later he says it isn't conclusive and doesn't want to publish yet

when he emailed fauci and said his opinion could change he wasn't kidding ffs, he is the flip flop man
I found it odd that it was so fast, but it's not in unheard of. Especially when you have so many people working on it.

It's not flip flopping though. It's science. This is how it works. Opinions change when new data is revealed.

As Dinkum said. No smoking gun here. You're just seeing shadows and claiming it's the bogeyman.
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
I found it odd that it was so fast, but it's not in unheard of. Especially when you have so many people working on it.

It's not flip flopping though. It's science. This is how it works. Opinions change when new data is revealed.

As Dinkum said. No smoking gun here. You're just seeing shadows and claiming it's the bogeyman.
so i can put it into evidence?

Feb 8th 2020 10.15pm: Kristian Andersen emails Koopmans and Drosten as part of a group discussion, says what they are considering is far from a conspiracy theory, that he has been working over the last couple has been focused on trying to disprove any lab theory but the scientific evidence isn't conclusive enough to have a high confidence of any possibility

he also is not in favor of publishing in a scientific journal at this stage, claiming that publishing something open ended would backfire, he thinks its important to gather additional evidence including waiting on the pangolin sequence and further scrutinizing the furin cleavage site/o linked glycans
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
so i can put it into evidence?

Feb 8th 2020 10.15pm: Kristian Andersen emails Koopmans and Drosten as part of a group discussion, says what they are considering is far from a conspiracy theory, that he has been working over the last couple has been focused on trying to disprove any lab theory but the scientific evidence isn't conclusive enough to have a high confidence of any possibility

he also is not in favor of publishing in a scientific journal at this stage, claiming that publishing something open ended would backfire, he thinks its important to gather additional evidence including waiting on the pangolin sequence and further scrutinizing the furin cleavage site/o linked glycans
Thank you for re-typing almost verbatim what you originally posted :tearsofjoy:.

And once again I say: ‘So What?’
Key words were that ‘nothing was conclusive enough’ (yet forever you were oh so sure the virus was deliberately engineered).

And of course you wouldn’t publish anything until you had confidence in your position. Any decent scientist would do the same. So again: ‘So What?’

You can place whatever you want into ‘evidence’ - doesn’t mean you’re going to get a conviction :-).
 

Rodzilla

Terry Lamb 1996
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
42,535
Reaction score
6,140
Thank you for re-typing almost verbatim what you originally posted :tearsofjoy:.

And once again I say: ‘So What?’
Key words were that ‘nothing was conclusive enough’ (yet forever you were oh so sure the virus was deliberately engineered).

And of course you wouldn’t publish anything until you had confidence in your position. Any decent scientist would do the same. It means nothing really.

You can place whatever you want into ‘evidence’ - doesn’t mean you’re going to get a conviction :-).
i can only place into evidence things that i and you or hacky mcact agree happened, so do you agree this email happened and kristian andersen wrote it
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
i can only place into evidence things that i and you both agree happened, so do you agree this email happened and kristian andersen wrote it
Where did you obtain this ‘evidence’?
Who says it’s legit (even though it says nothing)?
So if that’s the basis of submitting ‘evidence’ - then no, you’ll have to prove the legitimacy of the material and even if you can do that - it still means nothing and your chances of a conviction remain slim to none :-).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top