• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Covid-19 vaccine

Will you get the vaccine?

  • Yes

    Votes: 500 67.1%
  • No

    Votes: 245 32.9%

  • Total voters
    745
Status
Not open for further replies.

MMX

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
122
Trophies
1
XP
904
Country
United States
Vaccinated people generally shouldn't have to social distance, wear masks, etc., both in public and especially when only around other vaccinated people. The reason that's starting to change is because so many people are unvaccinated. In other words, vaccinated people aren't breaking the rules when those rules don't apply to them.


my my my, have you seen the number of Flu deaths going down last year? Obviously to save the lives of others we should wear Masks most of the time. btw, will you get the flu shot this year? it is irresponsible not to!

Travel restrictions - not just good to contain infectious diseases are also a very plus on the carbon footprint.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,334
Country
United States
I know exactly what it says about me and I'm totally okay with it. I have no responsibility to make data collection easy.
If you care about whether or not publicly available data is correct, like data you yourself use, then you do have a responsibility to make data collection easy or not participate in the process.

How do you control for people lying on surveys? The burden of proof is on the people reporting the data.
The only burden that exists is reporting the results of the survey and reporting on the methodology of the survey. That's all it takes to fulfill the burden of proof on the one claiming survey results.

I say that the data is invalid and all respondents lied. There's literally no way to refute my claim.
This statement has a burden of proof it hasn't met.

Or is this another example of the fact that you lack the ability to think scientifically?
Could you provide a single example where I have said something "unscientific"? Please be very specific.

As for the topic of the survey results, please remember that there's no reason to think any significant portion of the respondents provided false information.

Also keep in mind that no evidence has been provided that suggests one type of answer would be significantly misreported more than another. For example, you could claim some of the apparent microchip believers might have been lying, but some of the apparent microchip deniers might have also been lying. Some of the microchip believers might have lied to be funny. Some of the microchip deniers might have lied out of embarrassment. In addition to demonstrating that a significant number if respondents lied, you would also have to demonstrate that the liars are disproportionately on one side. In other words, I could agree with you that a significant number of respondents lied (I don't), and since the liars would cancel each other out, we would still be left with the same survey results.

Anecdotally, I live in a red state, and 1/4 or 1/3 of Trumpers believing in the microchip conspiracy theory sounds about right.
 
Last edited by Lacius,

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,334
Country
United States
my my my, have you seen the number of Flu deaths going down last year? Obviously to save the lives of others we should wear Masks most of the time.
There is an argument to be made that perpetual mask-wearing isn't a bad idea. I don't disagree with you. However, I see no reason for it to be compulsory outside a severe pandemic like the one we are seeing.

I think anyone who is sick should definitely wear a mask in public.

btw, will you get the flu shot this year? it is irresponsible not to!
I've always gotten the flu shot. This year won't be any different. Everyone who can medically get the flu shot should get one yearly.

Travel restrictions - not just good to contain infectious diseases are also a very plus on the carbon footprint.
I'd agree that the reduced carbon footprint is a silver lining of the travel restrictions, particularly the restrictions that occurred early in the pandemic when people were sheltering in place.
 

MMX

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
122
Trophies
1
XP
904
Country
United States
I think anyone who is sick should definitely wear a mask in public.

I've always gotten the flu shot. This year won't be any different. Everyone who can medically get the flu shot should get one yearly.

I was kinda baiting u with that flu shot line, that was f***in funny man lol. Maybe Bill Gates is using his Nanochip Windows to make you write all these replies to always have the last word on something. I too got the vaccine but they did a mistake and got me a full vial - now I turned into magneto. obviously just joking

Agree with you on the sick part and mask unless obviously someone is too sick/bedridden
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,334
Country
United States
I was kinda baiting u with that flu shot line, that was f***in funny man lol. Maybe Bill Gates is using his Nanochip Windows to make you write all these replies to always have the last word on something. I too got the vaccine but they did a mistake and got me a full vial - now I turned into magneto. obviously just joking

Agree with you on the sick part and mask unless obviously someone is too sick/bedridden
I can't get any of the Microsoft nanochips since I don't have a TPM.
 

jimbo13

Terry Crews #1 Fan
Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,083
Trophies
0
XP
1,065
Country
United States
20% of Americans believe the vaccines "definitely or probably" contain microchips. Among Trump supporters, the number is 29%. Among Biden supporters, it's 8%. It is a widespread belief.

I recommend knowing what you're talking about instead of just posting what feels right. You'll look less foolish and make a lot fewer mistakes that way.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


It's literally a logical fallacy to say human-made = bad, but natural = good.

114% of polls are bullshit, 300% of un-sourced polls are bullshit, 101% of people with a sense of humor fuck with pollsters.

And 0% of Jimbo's ever said his choices were superior to anyone elses. Saying percent and debunked like a tourette's tick doesn't make it true.
 
Last edited by jimbo13,

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,334
Country
United States
114% of polls are bullshit, 300% of un-sourced polls are bullshit, 101% of people with a sense of humor fuck with pollsters.
The results of the survey can be found here (it's a PDF):
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/w2zmwpzsq0/econTabReport.pdf

I'm sorry if the data is inconvenient for you, but that doesn't mean you can reasonably make up your own facts. It's this kind of thinking that led crybaby Trump supporters to whine about imaginary election fraud.
 

The Catboy

GBAtemp Official Catboy™: RIP Akira Toriyama
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
27,736
Trophies
4
Location
Making a non-binary fuss
XP
38,495
Country
Antarctica
The results of the survey can be found here (it's a PDF):
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/w2zmwpzsq0/econTabReport.pdf

I'm sorry if the data is inconvenient for you, but that doesn't mean you can reasonably make up your own facts. It's this kind of thinking that led crybaby Trump supporters to whine about imaginary election fraud.
Jimbo can't be convinced that he's ever wrong. I am pretty sure he just makes stuff up the second he's called out on something.
 
Last edited by The Catboy,
  • Like
Reactions: ghjfdtg and Lacius

jimbo13

Terry Crews #1 Fan
Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,083
Trophies
0
XP
1,065
Country
United States
The results of the survey can be found here (it's a PDF):
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/w2zmwpzsq0/econTabReport.pdf

I'm sorry if the data is inconvenient for you, but that doesn't mean you can reasonably make up your own facts. It's this kind of thinking that led crybaby Trump supporters to whine about imaginary election fraud.

The only reference I see to Microchips is on Pg.102,

"The U.S. government is using the COVID-19 vaccine to microchip the population" is not the same as "the vaccine itself contains a microchip" it's a vague question that many people would answer in the affirmative as it is leading to monitoring, data, collection and lead to micro-chipping.

The number of people according to Gallup that lie, mock or choose randomly dwarfs the 8-20%,
https://dandygoat.com/gallup-poll-majority-of-people-lie-to-gallup-pollsters

You can make a poll say anything, you ask people ridiculous questions they will give you ridiculous answers.

Not any different than Mark Dice, Jay Leno or Penn & Teller doing "Man on the street polls".


Jimbo can't be convinced that he's ever wrong, I am pretty sure he just makes stuff up the second he's called out on something.

Neil Tyson has a great lecture on objective truth vs political truth.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,334
Country
United States
The only reference I see to Microchips is on Pg.102,

"The U.S. government is using the COVID-19 vaccine to microchip the population" is not the same as "the vaccine itself contains a microchip" it's a vague question that many people would answer in the affirmative as it is leading to monitoring, data, collection and lead to micro-chipping.

The number of people according to Gallup that lie, mock or choose randomly dwarfs the 8-20%,
https://dandygoat.com/gallup-poll-majority-of-people-lie-to-gallup-pollsters

You can make a poll say anything, you ask people ridiculous questions they will give you ridiculous answers.

Not any different than Mark Dice, Jay Leno or Penn & Teller doing "Man on the street polls".




Neil Tyson has a great lecture on objective truth vs political truth.

You should check my previous post about how, even if there are liars in the poll, the liars on various sides have the ability to cancel each other out. If we say 2% of respondents lied, for example, you don't know if they were the pro-microchip folks, the anti-microchip folks, or a mix of the two. If you are going to argue a significant number of the pro-microchip folks lied and the anti-microchip folks didn't, you need to demonstrate that.

And this is all in addition to having to demonstrate that a significant number of respondents lied in the first place.

Lying in polls is a real thing, but the only data I am aware of shows that the lies most frequently occur when people are embarrassed by their answers (e.g. the shy Trump supporter in 2016), not because people are just prankin'.

Edit: Also, a couple more things. First, I can't find the Gallup poll you cited. Do you have a link? (you don't, because you cited a satire site). Second, I hope the irony is not lost on you that you're attempting to use a poll to discredit the accuracies if polls. That seems like a paradox.
 
Last edited by Lacius,

jimbo13

Terry Crews #1 Fan
Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,083
Trophies
0
XP
1,065
Country
United States
You should check my previous post about how, even if there are liars in the poll, the liars on various sides have the ability to cancel each other out. If we say 2% of respondents lied, for example, you don't know if they were the pro-microchip folks, the anti-microchip folks, or a mix of the two. If you are going to argue a significant number of the pro-microchip folks lied and the anti-microchip folks didn't, you need to demonstrate that.

And this is all in addition to having to demonstrate that a significant number of respondents lied in the first place.

Lying in polls is a real thing, but the only data I am aware of shows that the lies most frequently occur when people are embarrassed by their answers (e.g. the shy Trump supporter in 2016), not because people are just prankin'.

Edit: Also, a couple more things. First, I can't find the Gallup poll you cited. Do you have a link? (you don't, because you cited a satire site). Second, I hope the irony is not lost on you that you're attempting to use a poll to discredit the accuracies if polls. That seems like a paradox.


If I posted a poll right now "Have Aliens probed Lacius's ass" I am confident It would break 30%, doesn't make it true or that anyone thought that it actually happened.

If you don't think 20% of the public would troll a pollster asking them ridiculous questions about Microchips you need friends with a better sense of humor.

That 20% views your stance as "mission accomplished".

Satirical poll intentional.
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
"The U.S. government is using the COVID-19 vaccine to microchip the population" is not the same as "the vaccine itself contains a microchip" it's a vague question that many people would answer in the affirmative as it is leading to monitoring, data, collection and lead to micro-chipping.
Okay, so I found where the whole microchip thing came from. It was facebook playing telephone.
The original quote from bill was not about microchips, but rather identification dyes, specifically for people crossing the border in the event they loose their vaccine documents, so when they reach hospitals, they know what vaccines they had.
This somehow got mangled into microchips, not only do you carry one all the time already (your phone, your laptop, your desktop etc. Which all track your location, even connecting to the internet already does that)
But also it's physically impossible, for anyone to have a small enough microchip that's not detectable, have enough features for wireless capablity, AND also have no battery (as a battery would require surgery).
Let's not forget fluids fuck with a network signal greatly. which you know, your body has a lot of, and a thick layers of skin of muscle and other tissues. Two if there was a battery, it would have to be roughly replaced every five years, and that's the biggest battery you can get, which then needs to get replaced by, a fucking surgery.
third in the event of no battery, it simply wouldn't work, the human body doesn't provide enough electricity to even remotely power a microchip for long enough to get usable data if at all.

fourth, this shit is EASILY testable. We have things called wireless sniffers for a reason. The only other option would be rifid. Which means that , it would have to be scanned over that specific spot where the vaccine was received. Which also means, it's extremely easy to test.
 
Last edited by ,
  • Like
Reactions: DarknessPlay3r

BlazeMasterBM

I Eat Garlics
Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
929
Trophies
1
Age
20
Location
the snow
XP
3,076
Country
United States
Okay, so I found where the whole microchip thing came from. It was facebook playing telephone.
The original quote from bill was not about microchips, but rather identification dyes, specifically for people crossing the border in the event they loose their vaccine documents, so when they reach hospitals, they know what vaccines they had.
This somehow got mangled into microchips, not only do you carry one all the time already (your phone, your laptop, your desktop etc. Which all track your location, even connecting to the internet already does that)
But also it's physically impossible, for anyone to have a small enough microchip that's not detectable, have enough features for wireless capablity, AND also have no battery (as a battery would require surgery).
Let's not forget fluids fuck with a network signal greatly. which you know, your body has a lot of, and a thick layers of skin of muscle and other tissues. Two if there was a battery, it would have to be roughly replaced every five years, and that's the biggest battery you can get, which then needs to get replaced by, a fucking surgery.
third in the event of no battery, it simply wouldn't work, the human body doesn't provide enough electricity to even remotely power a microchip for long enough to get usable data if at all.

fourth, this shit is EASILY testable. We have things called wireless sniffers for a reason. The only other option would be rifid. Which means that , it would have to be scanned over that specific spot where the vaccine was received. Which also means, it's extremely easy to test.
as if the elites don't have technology powerful enough to withstand these obstacles (not saying i belive in the microchip thing)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimbo13
D

Deleted User

Guest
as if the elites don't have technology powerful enough to withstand these obstacles (not saying i belive in the microchip thing)
Consider the cost of R&D, consider the fact that most people already have phones that track their location. There is no reason for the elites to do that, they already have what they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarknessPlay3r

Dakitten

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
414
Trophies
0
Age
41
XP
1,030
Country
United States
Consider the cost of R&D, consider the fact that most people already have phones that track their location. There is no reason for the elites to do that, they already have what they want.

Also, as I've brought up elsewhere, vaccines aren't actually profitable. I think a problem that the right has is they've lost the ability to understand other people.

So, basic question. Which of the following would make oodles more money?
a. Treating symptoms instead of tackling illnesses head on, and waiting until demand is super high and there is no other competition to stop you withholding excess, creating demand, and from draining wallets for all time going forward... or
b. Making a one-time cure for an illness that has strict government guidelines for pricing and distribution

If you answered b, you're playing Capitalism wrong and you must turn in your credit cards to your nearest non-comrade. Now, further down the crazy ladder, we can hit up the microchip option. Which of the following makes more sense to the ultra-wealthy?

a. Spying through already existing means on the vast majority of the general public through common luxuries with no need for any additional cost for equipment (i.e. cell phones, personal computers, and even watches and smart televisions) or
b. Injecting ultra high tech and thus likely ludicrously priced transceivers into everybody via the formerly established largely unprofitable vaccines before partying at freddy fazbear's child sacrifice basement of pizza and satan

And lastly, I have one more question directed at an individual. Which of the following is most likely true?

a. certain users of this forum have convinced themselves that there are tiers of society where they reign supreme and lesser tiers are literally lesser lifeforms that should be killed or at least imprisoned and threatened in order to maintain what status quo they feel comfortable with, and they create an echo chamber with which to insulate themselves from the terrible notion that they might actually have been ignorant and cruel and they might be equal to everyone else on some level, or
b. certain users of this forum have mastered 4d chess and as long as they keep talking, future historians will note their genuis in the endless annals of victory their media sources swear will be owed to them for their zealotry regardless of how their sources are lacking in credibility and diversity and their arguments are riddled with logical inconsistencies and infantile insults

At this point, it seems apparent that the "opposition" is only here to squawk loudly and parade their rebellious individuality as an admirable quality... even while sounding exactly the same as their peers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ghjfdtg

subcon959

@!#?@!
Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
5,830
Trophies
4
XP
10,036
Country
United Kingdom
So, basic question. Which of the following would make oodles more money?
a. Treating symptoms instead of tackling illnesses head on, and waiting until demand is super high and there is no other competition to stop you withholding excess, creating demand, and from draining wallets for all time going forward... or
b. Making a one-time cure for an illness that has strict government guidelines for pricing and distribution
The plan is to go with option (a) after all this vaccine stuff is done, and for specifically the reason you mentioned. Pharmaceutical companies are developing extremely expensive new treatments because it's way more profitable than eradicating the virus with already existing out-of-patent molecules. I still recommend people watch the JRE podcast with Brett Weinstein (evolutionary biologist) and Pierre Kory (intensive care doctor) where they discuss how effective Ivermectin has been.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimbo13

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,815
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,768
Country
Poland
I don't know why people think the government needs to inject them with a microchip secretly to know their every move. It's the government - they already know, if they have the interest. It's as if the Snowden leak never happened, and that was almost a decade ago - take a wild guess on whether the surveillance technology has improved or stayed the same since then. More importantly though, you're just not that interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy: *teleports behind you* "Nothing personnel, kiddo" +1