The media is creating mass hysteria over the Coronavirus.

[FAST6191]

Fun one coming up it seems
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/cov...cts-from-shots-wont-be-walk-in-the-park-.html

Side effects from various vaccines have medics worried about people returning for a second dose, but also figuring out how to stagger rollout so they don't drop all the staff as they feel like refried death a day later and can't man all the posts.

Seems medics, or at least those that don't normally spend so much time with patients, are also far less versed in weasel words than the marketing scum that usually take up such tasks.

 

[notimp]

Covid did not originate in Wuhan, at least - if the supplied 'likely first sample' originating in a bat - was the ancestor.

Also Bat>Human crossover likely happened 50 years ago.

Fun.

src:

 

[SG854]

Covid did not originate in Wuhan, at least - if the supplied 'likely first sample' originating in a bat - was the ancestor.

Also Bat>Human crossover likely happened 50 years ago.

Fun.

src:

Likely but still uncertain. The bat to human could've happened last year as the guy said. They still don't know yet.

The Wuhan market likely was the accelerator.

 

[notimp]

Likely but still uncertain. The bat to human could've happened last year as the guy said. They still don't know yet.

The Wuhan market likely was the accelerator.

As far as I've understood it, bat virus genome still very much different from human virus genome ver A. Transmodification (very official termTM, not) to ver A. should have happened in something 'very human like'. As in - still a whole lot of difference there.

Three options.

a. jump over happened 50 years ago (many iteration cycles in humans)
b. transmuted in a race of bat - genetically very close to humans - we havent discovered yet (many transmutation cycles in not yet known mystery bat with 99.9% human genome).
c. common ancestor 'first bat virus sample' is a lie



If anyone wants to know for sure, read the study papers..

 

[SG854]

As far as I've understood it, bat genome still very much different from human genome ver A. Transmodifikation (very official termTM, not) to ver A. should have happened in something 'very human like'. As in - still a whole lot of difference there.

Three options.

a. jump over happened 50 years ago (many iteration cycles in humans)
b. transmuted in a race of bat - genetically very close to humans - we havent discovered yet (many transmutation cycles in not yet known mystery bat with 99.9% human genome).
c. common ancestor 'first bat virus sample' is a lie



If anyone wants to know for sure, read the study papers..

Wasn't it 95% close to human. 99.9% is too close to human genome, that's into great ape territory.

 

[notimp]

Wasn't it 95% close to human. 99.9% is too close to human genome, that's into great ape territory.

Someone watch it again and tell us.

 

[tabzer]

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

 

[Deleted User]

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

Implying?
And I also ask, what are you trying to argue? Since your argument is unclear.

 

[tabzer]

Implying?
And I also ask, what are you trying to argue? Since your argument is unclear.

It's not an argument. It's a question. The implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history. Correct me if I am wrong. kthxbai

 

[Deleted User]

It's not an argument. It's a question. The implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history. Correct me if I am wrong. kthxbai

no you clearly have an argument to make.
You make the comparison of the us, to china specifically within the context of viruses.

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

I'm merely asking what point are you trying to make, since questions themselves can be an argument.
For example, if I say "well, sweden handled the Corona virus badly. But what about the United States? Is the president there being transparent?"


That question(s) imply that you take the position of "united states did worse than sweeden , and the information from the president is inaccurate/false" regarding to how well it's being dealt with. Stop trying to doge. You have a motive, so please, tell me what where you trying to imply with this statement.

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

 

[tabzer]

no you clearly have an argument to make.
You make the comparison of the us, to china specifically within the context of viruses.

It was a statement that we know more about the US's history with viruses and how they handled them, and that I don't know about Chinese history in the proper respect. It was an appeal for someone who is more informed than me to chime in. Not for some monkey boy to come try to fight me.

I'm merely asking what point are you trying to make, since questions themselves can be an argument.
For example, if I say "well, sweden handled the Corona virus badly. But what about the United States? Is the president there being transparent?"


That question(s) imply that you take the position of "united states did worse than sweeden , and the information from the president is inaccurate" regarding to how well it's being dealt with. Stop trying to doge. You have a motive, so please, tell me what where you trying to imply with this statement.

You are going off the deep end and you are not contributing anything useful. Bye.

 

[Deleted User]

It was a statement that we know more about the US's history with viruses and how they handled them, and that I don't know about Chinese history in the proper respect. It was an appeal for someone who is more informed than me to chime in. Not for some monkey boy to come try to fight me.

Bruh...
why don't you look it up?
Oh wait, because I feel like your answer is most likely dishonest.
For any person who doesn't know what I'm getting at.
there is a lot of conspiracies about china and covid.
One doesn't ask the very specific question of "we know USAs history of viruses. but what about china. is it transparent?"
It doesn't take many braincells to put two and two together.


further more you used the keyword "transparent"
No person ever uses transparent to mean "not accessible" it's always been used in the context of dishonesty or intentional concealment.


if you try to argue there is no difference between concealment and not accessible there is. concealment is the act of hiding something from another. Not accessible could come from poor documentation or additional reasons.


additionally,
if you really where trying to ask that question.
Why did you ask it in the thread called "The media is creating mass hysteria over the Coronavirus."
When you could of just asked it in a discord chat, or maybe made a separate thread here on this site.
I could go on, but I have a lot of reason to believe you asked that question dishonestly given my reasoning above.

 

[tabzer]

Bruh...
why don't you look it up?
Oh wait, because I feel like your answer is most likely dishonest.
For any person who doesn't know what I'm getting at.
there is a lot of conspiracies about china and covid.
One doesn't ask the very specific question of "we know USAs history of viruses. but what about china. is it transparent?"
It doesn't take many braincells to put two and two together.


further more you used the keyword "transparent"
No person ever uses transparent to mean "not accessible" it's always been used in the context of dishonesty or intentional concealment.


if you try to argue there is no difference between concealment and not accessible there is. concealment is the act of hiding something from another. Not accessible could come from poor documentation or additional reasons.


additionally,
if you really where trying to ask that question.
Why did you ask it in the thread called "The media is creating mass hysteria over the Coronavirus."
When you could of just asked it in a discord chat, or maybe made a separate thread here on this site.
I could go on, but I have a lot of reason to believe you asked that question dishonestly given my reasoning above.

You are being a moron. "Transparent" does not mean "not accessible". If you can't answer the question then back off and let someone else answer it.

 

[Deleted User]

You are being a moron. "Transparent" does not mean "not accessible". If you can't answer the question then back off and let someone else answer it.

It's not an argument. It's a question. The implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history. Correct me if I am wrong. kthxbai

I never said it did, but you tried to make that assertion.

here's the banter between us.

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

Implying?
And I also ask, what are you trying to argue? Since your argument is unclear.

It's not an argument. It's a question. The implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history. Correct me if I am wrong. kthxbai

this is the exact order of posts. I asked what you were trying to imply with your question, and you answered "the implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history"simply put, I busted you lying. Since we both know that wasn't what you were trying to imply with the word "transparent" and you yourself just confirmed that. by saying that transparent doesn't mean not accessible.


There is now a lot of evidence that you were being factitious with that question. Since even from your own mouth, you just contradicted what you stated you were trying to imply. It also doesn't add up to why you asked the question here when you could of made it a thread, or ask whatever search engine you prefer. Especially considering this is the political side of the forms and asking it conveniently on the topic of "the media is creating mass hysteria" when we have multiple covid threads. It also doesn't explain why you used loaded question. Since "(usa backround) what about china? is it as transparent?" counts as a loaded question.

 

[gregory-samba]

@tabzer China restricts access to the Internet for its own citizens so I highly doubt they are going to open their records for the UN, WHO or CDC. Actually China has been vanishing scientists in their country for speaking truths about the Chinese Wuhan Coronavirus (COVID-19). Getting your question answered might be difficult and risky.

 

[tabzer]

@tabzer China restricts access to the Internet for its own citizens so I highly doubt they are going to open their records for the UN, WHO or CDC. Actually China has been vanishing scientists in their country for speaking truths about the Chinese Wuhan Coronavirus (COVID-19). Getting your question answered might be difficult and risky.

Thanks. I guess that's the best answer so far. I know that America teaches about its own history in schools and that smallpox and other diseases have been largely contained, while keeping samples on military bases/science facilities. I just wondered how it is for a Chinese citizen, and what kinds of things they learn about in school. I don't know what life is like there. @notimp's scenarios had me thinking about the possibility of "scenario a" and wondered how aware citizens would be about their own history with viruses and disease.

There is now a lot of evidence that you were being factitious with that question. Since even from your own mouth, you just contradicted what you stated you were trying to imply. It also doesn't add up to why you asked the question here when you could of made it a thread, or ask whatever search engine you prefer. Especially considering this is the political side of the forms and asking it conveniently on the topic of "the media is creating mass hysteria" when we have multiple covid threads. It also doesn't explain why you used loaded question. Since "(usa backround) what about china? is it as transparent?" counts as a loaded question.

Stop being a whiny brat.

No person ever uses transparent to mean "not accessible"

That's DUMB. Learn English, then read my original post again. If you still don't get it, request help from someone who is smarter than you.

 

[Deleted User]

Stop being a whiny brat.



That's DUMB. Learn English, then read my original post again. If you still don't get it, request help from someone who is smarter than you.

the dodging continues.
I'll just quote you.

the question:

So while America had its smallpox and other viruses, and contained samples of them in their history--what about China's history? Is that as transparent?

When asked what you were implying with your question

It's not an argument. It's a question. The implication is that Chinese history is not as accessible as American history. Correct me if I am wrong. kthxbai

if we take what you said about transparency.

You are being a moron. "Transparent" does not mean "not accessible".

Then we know what you said you were implying is false.
this doesn't take much brain power to understand



so I ask again.
Why did you ask that question, here out of all threads? Why did you use the word transparent, if you weren't trying to mean not accessible?
Since you yourself already told us that wasn't what you were trying to say.

I also ask what were you trying to imply. If the thing you said you were trying to imply is false, then what is the real implication?
this is called holding your statements accountable. You said one thing, and contradicted yourself. The burden of proof is on you.

 

[tabzer]

Then we know what you said you were implying is false.
this doesn't take much brain power to understand

I used "as" (adverb) to compare the quality of transparency between two countries, with the primary (US) being more of the quality and the latter (China) of being less or equal to. It was not my goal to ask if China is more accessible than America, because that would imply that there's a possibility of that--and that is something I already don't believe. The question was loaded, sure, but I didn't realize we had people willing to shut down potential dissent from the CCP here. I'm sorry that you think you have the right to be offended, but you have not provided any reason to believe that you are an acting official, or that you'd even have jurisdiction.

What I said didn't betray the intention and you need an extra braincell, it would appear.

Now run away, like you usually do, after losing another stupid argument. I look forward to the next time you acost me like a spaz.

 

[ki11ermax]

In some countries, the situation has become really bad as the virus is technologically advanced so it's not possible to tell who has it straight away till they start to feel the symptoms.

However, in U.S. and U.K. it's like they're prepping up for the Zombie Apocalypse.




When I see that there's a need to get actually serious about it, then I will. But panic buying because the media is always talking about Coronavirus won't really help.

the media loves panicking people its nothing new. its just crazy that they can get away with it without any repercussions

 

[th3joker]

This has been one of the best social experiments. This is not the spanish flu like we first thought. This is imo sensationalism infotainment fueled by integrated internet and social media cult sheep follower mentalaty