Covid-19 vaccine

[UltraSUPRA]

Welcome to year two of fifteen days to flatten the curve.

 

[notimp]

The lügenpresse seems to think Bill Gates is an infectious disease/vaccine expert. I guess the qualifications to be a doctor, according to lame stream media, is be filthy rich and cripple a bunch of children in India with the vaccines that you push. But don't feel bad for Dr. Gates. The millions of dollars he donates to advance his eugenics program is repaid with interested in the BILLIONS when these countries buy whatever vaccine him and his boys cooked up.

Just FYI, if you use the term 'Lügenpresse' you are part of the far right german political fringe, that had an issue with the German press not reporting on "issues with migrants" earlier.
Filthy rich. Dr. Gates. The plot thickens.

If thats your standard of debate, then maybe come to terms with the fact that you are throwing around empty accusations, based in the worst propaganda memes imaginable. The ones where you have to actually become part of the fringes, and a racist, and a science denier, and maybe even rectify yourself, that you are not filthy, or not only spreading lies, as a media outlet.

Basically dumb racists tried to topple the german state - he's a fan.

edit: And no, Bill Gates is not a doctor, but his foundation is the biggest financier of the WHO and in a position to dictate what health matter it should attend to. Polio - right about now?
How come that happened. (PS: Its not Billy boys fault...)

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

Welcome to year two of fifteen days to flatten the curve.

You are insufferable.

Happy new year to you as well.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

You are insufferable.

I do what I do. I'm not harming anybody.

 

[Cachuchin1]

What is freedom ?

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

And yea I will get vaccinated. Whichever comes knocking my door.

 

[notimp]

I do what I do. I'm not harming anybody.

No, you are dragging the term OBEY in red along in your signature as a sign of critical rationalism, complaining that people dont ignore an epidemic more.. But apart from that...

Your criticism will be much more popular, if not much changed at the end of this year, after the first few vaccination 'drives'. Everything has its time.

 

[gene0915]

Respectfully, you clearly dont have either. So whats the standard? We list controversies for one President, but not for the other? All evidence for one president is missing? All evidence for one president is missing, so we hide it on a separate page, people will click on less often?

How about the incongruencies in tone? I mean, I might agree with it, but why is the Trump wiki page littered with qualifiers that make him sound like a bad president?

While Obamas is simply missing the criticism?

There is a critique on form thats possible here.

And before you get all flustered again, Wikipedia is not the unfaltering gift from god thats immune to criticism, void of controversy - and an an undisputed record of history, nor is your confidence in one source of information even close to healthy - and your attitude towards formal criticism dismissive - you resorted to a personal attacks to destract from that.

Only thing I'm saying is, dont employ double standards. And dont dismiss valid structural criticism as "whining". You might be wrong in this instance.

Don't waste your time. I know a LOT of liberals and they are all 1,000% the same. They only see everything the 'right' does as pure evil. Liberals are complete hypocrites (just like the conservative side).

Here's some talking points to make them do mental gymanstics;

• Point out Obama's drone killings of innocent women and children
• When Christine Blasey Ford went after Kavanaugh, we got the #MeToo movement and #Believeallwomen
• When Joe Biden's accuser, Tara Reade, went after him, the liberal hypocrites (Alyssa Milano and others) tore into Reade and said, "Well hey.... we need to hear both sides of the story."
• Democrats started the KKK
• Both parties to people losing their jobs and being crushed economically, "Well hey, you need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get a job and live off the money you should have been saving!"
• Both parties to big business and wall street execs, "Having tough times? How much money do you need? Tell ya what, here's a blank check and you fill it out with whatever you need."
• The Obama administration not putting a single bank exec in jail for the serious damage done to the economy with all those toxic bonds. Eric Holder, "Uh, these banking/investment people are just too big to jail."
• Eric Holder again..... Operation Fast and Furious and his contempt of congress charge
• Hillary Clinton and her, "Oh, I didn't INTEND to break federal law" excuse by having her own personal email server with state secrets on it
  
• Hillary Clinton being told not to erase her server. Then turning around and instructing her IT guy to erase her server.
  
• Clinton Crime family (Mena airport/CIA/Don Henry and Kevin Ives...... crazy rabbit whole for ya)
  
• The FBI and big tech companies working 24x7 to paint the orange clown as some Russian asset (which turned out to be a complete fabrication)
  
• Big tech covering up the fact that the Biden crime family is corrupt to the core with the discovery of the emails on Hunter's laptop
• Joe Biden, ON CAMERA AND BRAGGING ABOUT IT, talking about how he got a prosecutor in Ukraine fired for digging into his and Hunter's illegal activities surrounding Burisma

But hey..... these are all just wild conspiracy theories. The big government would never EVER EVER lie to its' citizens and cover up dirty little things like this. We're a nation of laws darn it!

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

Just FYI, if you use the term 'Lügenpresse' you are part of the far right german political fringe, that had an issue with the German press not reporting on "issues with migrants" earlier.
Filthy rich. Dr. Gates. The plot thickens.

If thats your standard of debate, then maybe come to terms with the fact that you are throwing around empty accusations, based in the worst propaganda memes imaginable. The ones where you have to actually become part of the fringes, and a racist, and a science denier, and maybe even rectify yourself, that you are not filthy, or not only spreading lies, as a media outlet.

Basically dumb racists tried to topple the german state - he's a fan.

edit: And no, Bill Gates is not a doctor, but his foundation is the biggest financier of the WHO and in a position to dictate what health matter it should attend to. Polio - right about now?
How come that happened. (PS: Its not Billy boys fault...)

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


You are insufferable.

Happy new year to you as well.

I'll call a duck a duck when I see it. The worthless press we have now is like the worthless press the Germans had back in the lead up to WW2. Lügenpresse is 100% fitting. We no longer have journalists. What we have now is teleprompter reading, vapid puppets of the deep state. All the real investigative journalist have long since been pushed out of the system.

And calling me far right German political fringe, because I dare to use the word lügenpresse? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

So Dr. Gates can be a vaccine expert because he has money and I can be a German far right fringe type because of a single word. Got it.

 

[Lacius]

Respectfully, you clearly dont have either. So whats the standard? We list controversies for one President, but not for the other? All evidence for one president is missing? All evidence for one president is missing, so we hide it on a separate page, people will click on less often?

How about the incongruencies in tone? I mean, I might agree with it, but why is the Trump wiki page littered with qualifiers that make him sound like a bad president?

While Obamas is simply missing the criticism?

There is a critique on form thats possible here.

And before you get all flustered again, Wikipedia is not the unfaltering gift from god thats immune to criticism, void of controversy - and an an undisputed record of history, nor is your confidence in one source of information even close to healthy - and your attitude towards formal criticism dismissive - you resorted to a personal attacks to destract from that.

Only thing I'm saying is, dont employ double standards. And dont dismiss valid structural criticism as "whining". You might be wrong in this instance.

I don't want to come off as flustered, so I'll just say to come back when you have a specific and verifiable instance of left-wing bias on Wikipedia.

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

Keep this in mind; the nasal testing that is taking place all over the world (that is being used to tell people if they are negative or positive for COVID and governments are using this data to force people to stay at home and destroying the economy and driving small companies out of business) is NOT accurate.

There are different kinds of nasal swab tests, and some are highly accurate.

 

[notimp]

I don't want to come off as flustered, so I'll just say to come back when you have a specific and verifiable instance of left-wing bias on Wikipedia.

How do you verify bias?

I reread the Obama entry, and it reads like fluff piece, where his retraction from iraq and his reengagement are split over two terms so you dont catch on, what that meant too early, where the first sentiment of his second term is presented to be 'championing the LGBT crowd', and that ends with -- and everyone loved him internationally.

If that was in the Encyclopedia Britannica, I would have burned it...

The Trump entry - on the other hand, doesnt read like that.

 

[Lacius]

How do you verify bias?

I reread the Obama entry, and it reads like fluff piece, where his retraction from iraq and his reengagement are split over two terms so you dont catch on, what that meant too early, where the first sentiment of his second term is presented to be 'championing the LGBT crowd', and that ends with -- and everyone loved him internationally.

If that was in the Encyclopedia Britannica, I would have burned it...

The Trump entry - on the other hand, doesnt read like that.

Respectfully, I don't care if you arbitrarily think the Obama article reads like a fluff piece. If you have something relevant to add anywhere, do it and cite your sources.

 

[Ericthegreat]

Fuck all of you not getting vaccinated, may you die a brutal and gruesome death.

 

[notimp]

Respectfully, I don't care if you arbitrarily think the Obama article reads like a fluff piece. If you have something relevant to add anywhere, do it and cite your sources.

The Obama entry reads like a fluff peace, the Trump entry reads like an attack pice, one of the Wikipedia founders criticized this as Wikipedia not adhering to objectivity and impartiality criteria anymore, and showing open signs of political bias. You tried to burry this, because the person bringing it up linked to it via breitbart (which still is a horribly partisan not even really news source).

I think thats noteworthy.

Also great dismissal of me trying to identify bias. "You be not interested in if it reads like a fluff piece."

There is a narrative arch to the Obama article. Showing him as the greatest of guys, from a humble beginning, responsible for 'oh so many changes' (so that you dont hone in on how much Obamacare actually changed), listing his military involvement last, splitting his actions in iraq over two terms, so you can champion him as the president, that ended the iraq war first, fluffing up his second term with 'he loved the LGBT crowd and the gays' - as the first context item, and ending with -- and he was so popular around the world, everyone agrees.

Thats fluff. With a narrative arch. Devoid of any criticism.

Trump entry doesnt read like that.

 

[Lacius]

The Obama entry reads like a fluff peace, the Trump entry reads like an attack pice, one of the Wikipedia founders criticized this as Wikipedia not adhering to objectivity and impartiality criteria anymore, and showing open signs of political bias. You tried to burry this, because the person bringing it up linked to it via breitbart (which still is a horribly partisan not even really news source).

I think thats noteworthy.

Also great dismissal of me trying to identify bias. "You be not interested in if it reads like a fluff piece."

There is a narrative arch to the Obama article. Showing him as the greatest of guys, from a humble beginning, responsible for 'oh so many changes' (so that you dont hone in on how much Obamacare actually changed), listing his military involvement last, splitting his actions in iraq over two terms, so you can champion him as the president, that ended the iraq war first, fluffing up his second term with 'he loved the LGBT crowd and the gays' - as the first context item, and ending with -- end he was so popular around the world, everyone agrees.

Thats fluff. With a narrative arch. Devoid of any criticism.

Trump entry doesnt read like that.

First, repeating claims something reads like a fluff piece and that a creator of Wikipedia doesn't like something doesn't identify any specific and verifiable instances of bias. Interpreting Obama's page as fluff with a narrative about a guy who can do no wrong is nonspecific, subjective, unverifiable, and demonstrably wrong.

The reason you might notice some differences between the Trump article and the Obama article is that Trump was a relatively scandal-ridden president, and Obama was relatively scandal-free in comparison.

That all being said, this has gotten way off topic. Contact me on PM or start a new topic.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

Fuck all of you not getting vaccinated, may you die a brutal and gruesome death.

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

 

[notimp]

First, repeating claims something reads like a fluff piece and that a creator of Wikipedia doesn't like something doesn't identify any specific and verifiable instances of bias. Interpreting Obama's page as fluff with a narrative about a guy who can do no wrong is nonspecific, subjective, unverifiable, and demonstrably wrong.

Hide the criticism in the 22nd paragraph, and no one might read it.

But its the structural criticism part that I'm more attached to. Dont just set it aside it with swift dismissal. Acknowledge that its there. Dont get defensive about it. Dont get high browed - because many of the Obama era scandals were manufactured (and they arguably were).

If you are creating something for posterity, and there is an obvious difference in how the last two presidents Wikipedia pages read, people are right to criticize it. Maybe less because of errors in content, but because of presentation.

Sometimes, that counts for more.

Dont overhaul the entire article - because somone like me said it, but certainly - meet the criticism with something other than dismissal on grounds of 'sounds like whining'.

I'm a stickler for method here, not so much for 'if the content is factual or not' - it is, but presentation differs. Strongly.

 

[gene0915]

Fuck all of you not getting vaccinated, may you die a brutal and gruesome death.

Fuck all of you sheep lining up for the COVID vaccine, may the poison in that mystery fluid make you sterile and lead to a brutal and gruesome death.

Ever wonder why virtually all liberal ran cities are complete shit holes? Ever wonder why we stopped hearing about BLM/fascist riots..... whoops, I meant....peaceful protests... in the weeks leading up to the election?

 

[Lacius]

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

There is nothing tyrannical about mask mandates and getting vaccinated. Grow up, you petulant child, and start caring about the lives of the people around you.

Given your previous comments about how the lives of strangers literally don't matter, I know that's a big ask.

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

Fuck all of you sheep lining up for the COVID vaccine, may the poison in that mystery fluid make you sterile and lead to a brutal and gruesome death.

Ever wonder why virtually all liberal ran cities are complete shit holes? Ever wonder why we stopped hearing about BLM/fascist riots..... whoops, I meant....peaceful protests... in the weeks leading up to the election?

View attachment 240110

All of the evidence suggests the vaccine is safe. It is not poison. It does not cause sterility. It does not lead to a "brutal or gruesome death." It helps to prevent the spread of a deadly infectious disease.

If we're talking about sheep, I'd argue that posting unsubstantiated, conspiratorial bullshit that's contradicted by virtually all evidence and reason is what's sheepish. Posting these things demonstrates conspiratorial sheepish thinking, and it demonstrates a fundamental lack of critical thinking skills.

 

[gene0915]

There is nothing tyrannical about mask mandates and getting vaccinated. Grow up, you petulant child, and start caring about the lives of the people around you.

Given your previous comments about how the lives of strangers literally don't matter, I know that's a big ask.

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


All of the evidence suggests the vaccine is safe. It is not poison. It does not cause sterility. It does not lead to a "brutal or gruesome death." It helps to prevent the spread of a deadly infectious disease.

If we're talking about sheep, I'd argue that posting unsubstantiated, conspiratorial bullshit that's contradicted by virtually all evidence and reason is what's sheepish. Posting these things demonstrates conspiratorial sheepish thinking, and it demonstrates a fundamental lack of critical thinking skills.

What evidence? They injected folks and tested them later to see if they caught COVID. Again, my lightning vaccine example is the exact same. If they injected people with both doses and then exposed them directly (under controlled conditions) to COVID-19, THAT is how they could have tested the efficacy of the vaccine.

Also, wow, a never before tried/experimental vaccine that is a few weeks old and you already want to claim it's safe? The phrase, "long term effects" means nothing to you? And if the vaccine is so safe, why were laws passed to shield these pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits due to potential harm from the vaccine that might surface months/years down the road?

Do you realize that tossing around the 'conspiracy theorist' label shows how dumb you are and indicates you're a sheep parroting what the lügenpresse programs you to say? Google up 'Operation Northwoods'. Since you're like most liberals, ignorant to history and need spoon fed, that was a plan hatched by the Dept. of Defense/CIA to commit acts of terrorism on AMERICANS, mainly in Florida, so the Cuban government could be blamed. But hey.... crazy conspiracy theory, right??? They actually planned on KILLING innocent, American citizens, on our own soil, and blaming another country. Kennedy shit all over that plan and it was abandoned. After Kennedy was murdered, and people started looking closely at the activities of the CIA and their possible role in his assassination, the label of 'conspiracy theorists' entered the lexicon. The CIA used that label to discredit anyone that was asking uncomfortable questions.

Same for the word, 'regime'. When you see that word, you've been programmed to think..."evil foreign military killing their own citizens, corrupt to the core" and the lügenpresse uses it when describing the Syrian government, Iranian government, etc. But never mind the war crimes the USA has committed in country after country.

So you see, you really, REALLY need to re-think your world views and step outside your liberal bubble. Both parties are war parties, neither party gives two shits about you or your life.

Not to defend Hitler but did you know that Ford had factories in Nazi Germany and after the war, they successfully sued the US government for damages to their factories from the allied bombing?

It's a hard pill to swallow but everything you think you know about history is bullshit.

I bring up the Ford/Nazi example just as more evidence that you need to wake up to the reality around you. The government, big pharma, lügenpresse.... they all lie. They want/need people like you to be willfully ignorant so they can maintain power over you.

 

[Lacius]

What evidence? They injected folks and tested them later to see if they caught COVID. Again, my lightning vaccine example is the exact same. If they injected people with both doses and then exposed them directly (under controlled conditions) to COVID-19, THAT is how they could have tested the efficacy of the vaccine.

Also, wow, a never before tried/experimental vaccine that is a few weeks old and you already want to claim it's safe? The phrase, "long term effects" means nothing to you? And if the vaccine is so safe, why were laws passed to shield these pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits due to potential harm from the vaccine that might surface months/years down the road?

Do you realize that tossing around the 'conspiracy theorist' label shows how dumb you are and indicates you're a sheep parroting what the lügenpresse programs you to say? Google up 'Operation Northwoods'. Since you're like most liberals, ignorant to history and need spoon fed, that was a plan hatched by the Dept. of Defense/CIA to commit acts of terrorism on AMERICANS, mainly in Florida, so the Cuban government could be blamed. But hey.... crazy conspiracy theory, right??? They actually planned on KILLING innocent, American citizens, on our own soil, and blaming another country. Kennedy shit all over that plan and it was abandoned. After Kennedy was murdered, and people started looking closely at the activities of the CIA and their possible role in his assassination, the label of 'conspiracy theorists' entered the lexicon. The CIA used that label to discredit anyone that was asking uncomfortable questions.

Same for the word, 'regime'. When you see that word, you've been programmed to think..."evil foreign military killing their own citizens, corrupt to the core" and the lügenpresse uses it when describing the Syrian government, Iranian government, etc. But never mind the war crimes the USA has committed in country after country.

So you see, you really, REALLY need to re-think your world views and step outside your liberal bubble. Both parties are war parties, neither party gives two shits about you or your life.

Not to defend Hitler but did you know that Ford had factories in Nazi Germany and after the war, they successfully sued the US government for damages to their factories from the allied bombing?

It's a hard pill to swallow but everything you think you know about history is bullshit.

I bring up the Ford/Nazi example just as more evidence that you need to wake up to the reality around you. The government, big pharma, lügenpresse.... they all lie. They want/need people like you to be willfully ignorant so they can maintain power over you.

Your lightning example demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of double blind studies. In addition, lightning strikes are very rare, and you would need a LOT of participants to have a good study for something that claims to prevent lightning strikes.

This is as silly as me saying I invented a vaccine that prevents you from getting hit with lightning. I inject 1,000,000 people with it and set them free in the world. If nobody gets struck by lightning, my vaccine is 100% effective.

This is not a double blind study. If you came up with a vaccine for COVID-19, for example, gave 1,000,000 people the vaccine, gave 1,000,000 people the placebo, all participants are treated the same because not even the nurses know what's in each vial, and the ones with the vaccine were 95% less likely to get COVID-19 than the ones with the placebo, then you have a double blind study that demonstrates the effectiveness of the vaccine.

TLDR, your lightning example demonstrates a misunderstanding of how double blind studies work, and lightning is poor example given the odds of being struck by lightning relative to the odds of being infected by COVID-19. You would benefit from developing a scientific literacy that would allow you to process these things.

 

[gene0915]

Your lightning example demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of double blind studies. In addition, lightning strikes are very rare, and you would need a LOT of participants to have a good study for something that claims to prevent lightning strikes.

This is not a double blind study. If you came up with a vaccine for COVID-19, for example, gave 1,000,000 people the vaccine, gave 1,000,000 people the placebo, all participants are treated the same because not even the nurses know what's in each vial, and the ones with the vaccine were 95% less likely to get COVID-19 than the ones with the placebo, then you have a double blind study that demonstrates the effectiveness of the vaccine.

TLDR, your lightning example demonstrates a misunderstanding of how double blind studies work, and lightning is poor example given the odds of being struck by lightning relative to the odds of being infected by COVID-19. You would benefit from developing a scientific literacy that would allow you to process these things.

Fine, lets split hairs.

I'll inject 1,000,000 people in group A with my vaccine that prevents cancer and I'll inject another 1,000,000 people with a placebo in group B.

After 1 year, if only 10,000 people get cancer from group A and 500 from group B, my mystery vaccine has a 99% success rate, START INJECTING IT!

Happy now?

Also, read up on Operation Northwoods yet? I'm positive the big government and CIA never ever ever attempted anything like that ever again.

Our government and big pharma always has our best interests at heart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

 

[Lacius]

After 1 year, if only 10,000 people get cancer from group A and 500 from group B, my mystery vaccine has a 99% success rate, START INJECTING IT!

Check your math.