COVID-19

[Lberry]

Thank you for proving my point

Resisting fake science that's all for profit and harmful for kids is not "extreme".

it's bare minimum diligence.

 

[notredomer23]

Resisting fake science that's all for profit and harmful for kids is not "extreme".

it's bare minimum diligence.

Again, you are proving my point. There is zero discourse to be had with someone like you just how it's incredibly unlikely anything you say, factual or not, would have any impact on Cackalacky or Toronto. Anyone could cite dozens of peer reviewed papers to the contrary of anyone's COVID views (regardless of which side of the debate you fall on), and the other would be able to find something online that upholds your truth. That's why the debate around this issue is pointless.

 

[Lberry]

Again, you are proving my point. There is zero discourse to be had with someone like you just how it's incredibly unlikely anything you say, factual or not, would have any impact on Cackalacky or Toronto. Anyone could cite dozens of peer reviewed papers to the contrary of anyone's COVID views (regardless of which side of the debate you fall on), and the other would be able to find something online that upholds your truth. That's why the debate around this issue is pointless.

That's fair. But when it's clear to nice 'centrist' folks who like to keep quiet because they are too worried about being nice over having a backbone, that's a problem.

And that problem will repeat itself specifically with covid again. The "oh shucks" people need to find their spine this time around. The left extremists won't be changed but there is a LOT in the middle who could use a boost of peer confidence in standing up this time around. There are a lot more people like you than there are far leftists, or people like me who knew it was BS from day 1. You have more of a voice and impact than you think


So I understand your point but I don't necessarily agree its "oh well"/pointless.

 

[TorontoGold]

Again, you are proving my point. There is zero discourse to be had with someone like you just how it's incredibly unlikely anything you say, factual or not, would have any impact on Cackalacky or Toronto. Anyone could cite dozens of peer reviewed papers to the contrary of anyone's COVID views (regardless of which side of the debate you fall on), and the other would be able to find something online that upholds your truth. That's why the debate around this issue is pointless.

My response is not to take issue or argue (always appreciate your level headedness and wish I could do it as well as you lol)

My only push back would be on the framing of myself being on the fringes. I know I am the resident pink pussy hat bleeding heart on here, but my positions on vaccines are not controversial and shared by the majority.

My overall position is that if these vaccines were so dangerous as many on here have stated, then why is it an apolitical issue? Why is there no country that has outlawed them? It is one of the only issues that Russia/US/France/Ethopia all have a similar approach to.

The reason why I think I get cast as lunatic/granola leftist is that I pushback on edge cases that some use here, like where someone has a vaccine allergy so they can't get the vaccine or other rare cases.

(Personally I have only gotten 3 shots and stopped wearing a mask in 2021 so at this point if people want to get a vax it's up to them)

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

FTR Im in the camp of generally accepting public policies that are rooted in peer reviewed scientific understanding and that erring on the side of caution is never a bad or morally wrong thing to do. When faced with unknown outcomes, the best we have is to make well informed decisions based on the preponderance of solid evidence with the understanding its not 100% fool proof and there will be things that we get wrong or do things that violate some societal norms. If this makes me an extremist, then I dont know what else to say to anyone who would label me as such.

 

[notredomer23]

My response is not to take issue or argue (always appreciate your level headedness and wish I could do it as well as you lol)

My only push back would be on the framing of myself being on the fringes. I know I am the resident pink pussy hat bleeding heart on here, but my positions on vaccines are not controversial and shared by the majority.

My overall position is that if these vaccines were so dangerous as many on here have stated, then why is it an apolitical issue? Why is there no country that has outlawed them? It is one of the only issues that Russia/US/France/Ethopia all have a similar approach to.

The reason why I think I get cast as lunatic/granola leftist is that I pushback on edge cases that some use here, like where someone has a vaccine allergy so they can't get the vaccine or other rare cases.

(Personally I have only gotten 3 shots and stopped wearing a mask in 2021 so at this point if people want to get a vax it's up to them)

FTR Im in the camp of generally accepting public policies that are rooted in peer reviewed scientific understanding and that erring on the side of caution is never a bad or morally wrong thing to do. When faced with unknown outcomes, the best we have is to make well informed decisions based on the preponderance of solid evidence with the understanding its not 100% fool proof and there will be things that we get wrong or do things that violate some societal norms. If this makes me an extremist, then I dont know what else to say to anyone who would label me as such.

I had zero intent of framing either of you as *extremists* on this issue so I apologize for name dropping you guys lol, just saw you both posted on the previous page which is why I mentioned you as the foil to Lberry and co.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I had zero intent of framing either of you as *extremists* on this issue so I apologize for name dropping you guys lol, just saw you both posted on the previous page which is why I mentioned you as the foil to Lberry and co.

on no worries.... my reputation precedes me through time.

 

[Blazers46]

"low confidence" assessment by a whistleblower of "seemingly credible source", ....lol

ok

Definition of low confidence assessment in information intelligence:

• Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.[1]

So these intelligence offices stated there was sufficient evidence to claim the information was questionable or implausible or too fragmented to make a proper assessment lmaoooooooo. Run with it boys. LFG!

The point of the article is even with the low confidence they were allegedly paid to change their opinion or assessment. If you are arguing that the level of confidence is so insignificant, why pay them to change their mind?

 

[Blazers46]

How many people have changed sides in this debate? We're at 271 pages, surely we've seen a good amount of churn from both teams.

Realistically, nobody comes on this board to get their mind changed, or even to learn for that matter.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Y

That's fair. But when it's clear to nice 'centrist' folks who like to keep quiet because they are too worried about being nice over having a backbone, that's a problem.

And that problem will repeat itself specifically with covid again. The "oh shucks" people need to find their spine this time around. The left extremists won't be changed but there is a LOT in the middle who could use a boost of peer confidence in standing up this time around. There are a lot more people like you than there are far leftists, or people like me who knew it was BS from day 1. You have more of a voice and impact than you think


So I understand your point but I don't necessarily agree its "oh well"/pointless.

You did it again though. You start with thats fair but then label those who don't agree with you as either spineless centrist or left extremists.

 

[Blazers46]

Shit started in China near Wuhan. Doesn’t take a genius.

there is a lot to be said about being first. If Obama said it came from a Wuhan lab in China first then imagine how many people and how many bootlickers on this board would claim that it came from a Wuhan lab.

 

[Lberry]

I had zero intent of framing either of you as *extremists* on this issue so I apologize for name dropping you guys lol, just saw you both posted on the previous page which is why I mentioned you as the foil to Lberry and co.

I'm an extremist for being aware from the beginning that more people died of covid in the treatment group vs the control group in the Pfizer clinical trials?

And going "that's weird, I'm not getting it", and then turning out to be correct without hindsight?

You dont have to respond, it's rhetorical. Mark me as Xtreme x1,000 baby

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

The point of the article is even with the low confidence they were allegedly paid to change their opinion or assessment. If you are arguing that the level of confidence is so insignificant, why pay them to change their mind?

Thats not the point. 6/7 people have a low confidence assessment. Lol. Thats terrible and should not be worthy of entertaining. Major political decisions are not made based on low confidence intelligence assessments. If they were paid then they can prove it.... but as its stands with pretty much every whistleblower the GOP has put forth this session, they have ended up being not credible at all.

 

[notredomer23]

I'm an extremist for being aware from the beginning that more people died of covid in the treatment group vs the control group in the Pfizer clinical trials?

And going "that's weird, I'm not getting it", and then turning out to be correct without hindsight?

You dont have to respond, it's rhetorical. Mark me as Xtreme x1,000 baby

Pretty amazing how you make yourself look like a bigger imbecile with every post.

 

[GATTACA!]

there is a lot to be said about being first. If Obama said it came from a Wuhan lab in China first then imagine how many people and how many bootlickers on this board would claim that it came from a Wuhan lab.

Does anyone on this board even disagree that it probably came from a lab in Wuhan? I think you're fighting with ghosts on that one.

 

[Blazers46]

Thats not the point. 6/7 people have a low confidence assessment. Lol. Thats terrible and should not be worthy of entertaining. Major political decisions are not made based on low confidence intelligence assessments. If they were paid then they can prove it.... but as its stands with pretty much every whistleblower the GOP has put forth this session, they have ended up being not credible at all.

It actually is the point. Even with a very low confidence they were paid and offered money to change that assessment. That is the whole point of the article. The article itself is not arguing where it came from or how it became. A thing, its point is that six people were offered money to change their assessment. It just goes against your point so you have to immediately discredit it.

 

[Blazers46]

Does anyone on this board even disagree that it probably came from a lab in Wuhan? I think you're fighting with ghosts on that one.

Obviously Cack, he just literally said it’s not worth entertaining just because a few people had a low confidence score. And they keep arguing and hitting on the low confidence as opposed to people being paid part

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Obviously Cack, he just literally said it’s not worth entertaining just because a few people had a low confidence score. And they keep arguing and hitting on the low confidence as opposed to people being paid part

And you seem to believe a "seemingly credible source" (quoted from the article yet buried way down in it). We will see if there is anything to believe here or not. I'll wait to see if this seemingly credible source is anything other than just more bullshit. The consensus seems to be that it was of natural origin....THe only two agencies to have publically said anything about the lab origin is the Department of Energy and FBI both of which publically stated there was a "low confidence" assessment it originated in the lab which basically means they dont believe it. lol

 

[Blazers46]

Does anyone on this board even disagree that it probably came from a lab in Wuhan? I think you're fighting with ghosts on that one.

And you seem to believe a "seemingly credible source" (quoted from the article yet buried way down in it). We will see if there is anything to believe here or not. I'll wait to see if this seemingly credible source is anything other than just more bullshit. The consensus seems to be that it was of natural origin....THe only two agencies to have publically said anything about the lab origin is the Department of Energy and FBI both of which publically stated there was a "low confidence" assessment it originated in the lab which basically means they dont believe it. lol

There you have it @GATTACA!

I’ll let you two slap box and call each other names.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I see this with family members and coworkers. Polar opposites, my employer is in Silicon Valley, all I hear is the outrage from the left. We live in Indiana near family, all I hear is the outrage from the right. I refuse to let my life be dictated by sensational news. Everything is politicized so neutral is almost impossible to find.

• I've been told the right hates women, hates women's health, hates gays, hates trans and wants to destroy the planet, Trump is destroying democracy, classified documents can't be held privately, children should be allowed to choose their gender (and block hormones).
• I've been told the left stole the election, that Trump would be reinstated, that proof would be released (at least 3x's), that the COVID vaccine was going to kill me, the left wants to devour my children, Trump is the savior, Biden is the devil, classified documents can't be held privately, the Biden family is dirty.
  

I'm starting to realize how people get old and disenfranchised and begin feeling like they have no home. How in the hell can a two party system serve people who want to look at each issue individually and make a decision? Do we really have to decide on one or two issues as most important and then go with whichever party most closely aligns?

If there were only 8 issues we'd have 64 permutations of where you could find yourself when tallying your score card. Now compare the complexity of our world and the number of pressing issues and realize you've been given 2 choices and somehow 90% of the politicians completely align with their party across the board on every issue.

Discourse is dead for we have killed it.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

There you have it @GATTACA!

I’ll let you two slap box and call each other names.

I said I’ll wait and see. Not what I specifically believe. So far I’m not seeing anything to convince me one way or the other. Which is what I said. I remarked that the general consensus, which is a true statement, is that it is of natural origin which is consistent with the large majority of our government agencies stances put out during the Trump and a Biden Adminis. Oh the controversy…..

 

[Blazers46]

I see this with family members and coworkers. Polar opposites, my employer is in Silicon Valley, all I hear is the outrage from the left. We live in Indiana near family, all I hear is the outrage from the right. I refuse to let my life be dictated by sensational news. Everything is politicized so neutral is almost impossible to find.

• I've been told the right hates women, hates women's health, hates gays, hates trans and wants to destroy the planet, Trump is destroying democracy, classified documents can't be held privately, children should be allowed to choose their gender (and block hormones).
• I've been told the left stole the election, that Trump would be reinstated, that proof would be released (at least 3x's), that the COVID vaccine was going to kill me, the left wants to devour my children, Trump is the savior, Biden is the devil, classified documents can't be held privately, the Biden family is dirty.

I'm starting to realize how people get old and disenfranchised and begin feeling like they have no home. How in the hell can a two party system serve people who want to look at each issue individually and make a decision? Do we really have to decide on one or two issues as most important and then go with whichever party most closely aligns?

If there were only 8 issues we'd have 64 permutations of where you could find yourself when tallying your score card. Now compare the complexity of our world and the number of pressing issues and realize you've been given 2 choices and somehow 90% of the politicians completely align with their party across the board on every issue.

Discourse is dead for we have killed it.

Discourse died when we people decided the best place to change someone’s mind on Facebook and Irish Envy… one thing I’ve always preached in my past social work life and even my faith in practice is relationship is primary. We live in very unrelational society.

 

[Blazers46]

I said I’ll wait and see. Not what I specifically believe. So far I’m not seeing anything to convince me one way or the other. Which is what I said.

Talk to Gattaca. I haven’t said either way where I believe it came from. Just posted an article that suggested people were paid to change what they believe which obviously struck a nerve enough for your panties to get wet.

You will “wait and see” but ridicule anyone that hints at what is could be. Waiting and seeing is making it sound like you have no position… yet here you are… with your position. It’s quite bass akward isn’t it?

 

[GATTACA!]

There you have it @GATTACA!

I’ll let you two slap box and call each other names.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Well stated.

I see this with family members and coworkers. Polar opposites, my employer is in Silicon Valley, all I hear is the outrage from the left. We live in Indiana near family, all I hear is the outrage from the right. I refuse to let my life be dictated by sensational news. Everything is politicized so neutral is almost impossible to find.

• I've been told the right hates women, hates women's health, hates gays, hates trans and wants to destroy the planet, Trump is destroying democracy, classified documents can't be held privately, children should be allowed to choose their gender (and block hormones).
• I've been told the left stole the election, that Trump would be reinstated, that proof would be released (at least 3x's), that the COVID vaccine was going to kill me, the left wants to devour my children, Trump is the savior, Biden is the devil, classified documents can't be held privately, the Biden family is dirty.

I'm starting to realize how people get old and disenfranchised and begin feeling like they have no home. How in the hell can a two party system serve people who want to look at each issue individually and make a decision? Do we really have to decide on one or two issues as most important and then go with whichever party most closely aligns?

If there were only 8 issues we'd have 64 permutations of where you could find yourself when tallying your score card. Now compare the complexity of our world and the number of pressing issues and realize you've been given 2 choices and somehow 90% of the politicians completely align with their party across the board on every issue.

Discourse is dead for we have killed it.

Well stated. I remember when the possibility of a vaccine being approved led prominent Dems & celebrities to claim they’d never take a “Trump vaccine”. Then Biden was elected and the script flipped for both sides. Dems always used to be the party suspicious of big corporations…especially Big Pharma. Now it’s like they never had an issue with them. Weird considering the Sackler Family is still relevant news.

On the flip side, the Reps conveniently forget that Trump supported lockdowns, the vaccine & Fauci. And he’s hardly “conservative”. He’s savvy (and Americans are gullible). Then look at the recent history w/ “forever wars”: the left used to be opposed to them. Now you’re pro-Russian if you criticize the war in Ukraine. And on the other side of the aisle, the right supported every war the US got into in our lifetime, now they cite the Military Industrial Complex pushing for more wars so they can profit & how the money could be better spent on Americans suffering in the US.

The neo-Cons have seemed to be consistent. They never saw a conflict (real or imagined) that they didn’t love. So they’re cool w/ the war in Ukraine. Now they have simply replaced their Republican colleagues w/ Democrats.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I said I’ll wait and see. Not what I specifically believe. So far I’m not seeing anything to convince me one way or the other. Which is what I said. I remarked that the general consensus, which is a true statement, is that it is of natural origin which is consistent with the large majority of our government agencies stances put out during the Trump and a Biden Adminis. Oh the controversy…..

Talk to Gattaca. I haven’t said either way where I believe it came from. Just posted an article that suggested people were paid to change what they believe which obviously struck a nerve enough for your panties to get wet.

You will “wait and see” but ridicule anyone that hints at what is could be. Waiting and seeing is making it sound like you have no position… yet here you are… with your position. It’s quite bass akward isn’t it?

Considering multiple posters quotes the apparently affirmative statement that quotes the low confidence assessment…… I don’t think they understand what a low confidence assessment was so I clarified it for them a low confidence assessment while seemingly affirmative really just means it’s not likely to have occurred. Surprising so many have misunderstood that and quotes it like it was exposing something.

It’s also funny to me at the same time creedance being given to a low confidence assessment from a seemingly credible source talking about CIA. Agents getting paid to change their low confidence assessments. That’s funny to me. But people talking about discours e problems ….this is a prime component. What info is valid and what authority do we accept and dismiss. I personally am not apt to believe a single seemingly credible source on low confidence assessments. It’s nonsense. Should more info come out that Carrie’s more weight than being buried in an obscure Fox News article with a bombastic headline…. I’ll evaluate that.

 

[Lberry]

I said I’ll wait and see. Not what I specifically believe. So far I’m not seeing anything to convince me one way or the other. Which is what I said. I remarked that the general consensus, which is a true statement, is that it is of natural origin which is consistent with the large majority of our government agencies stances put out during the Trump and a Biden Adminis. Oh the controversy…..

What's your most compelling evidence it came from a Pangolin? With confidence ratings.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

What's your most compelling evidence it came from a Pangolin? With confidence ratings.

Thats the general consensus amongst our government. The FBI and DOE said their assessment isa low confidence assessment it came from a lab which = its bullshit it came from a lab. This document is by far the best one I have looked at and I think its very credible and fair.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Declassified-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf

The IC assesses that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure that occurred no later than November 2019 with the first known cluster of COVID-19 cases arising in Wuhan, China in December 2019. In addition, the IC was able to reach broad agreement on several other key issues. We judge the virus was not developed as a biological weapon. Most agencies also assess with low confidence that SARS-CoV-2 probably was not genetically engineered; however, two agencies believe there was not sufficient evidence to make an assessment either way. Finally, the IC assesses China’s officials did not have foreknowledge of the virus before the initial outbreak of COVID-19 emerged.

Thats their assessment not mine. My personal assessment is irrelevant. I dont know. The preponderance of scientific evidence indicates natural origin but China is also secretive and quite difficult to deal with so its impossible to rule out their involvement fully. How controversial.

 

[Lberry]

Thats the general consensus amongst our government. The FBI and DOE said their assessment isa low confidence assessment it came from a lab which = its bullshit it came from a lab. Thats their assessment not mine. My personal assessment is irrelevant. I dont know. How controversial.

Lol the government doesn't think it came from a Pengolin. That's just what they told you to believe hoping it'd go away.

 

[Blazers46]

View attachment 3054349

Bro, you accuse me of arguing with ghost, because apparently you think everybody agrees it came from the lab but Cack does not so I’m confused why you’re still talking to me.