Conspiracy Theory Coronavirus #2: Lockdowns

[BlueE]

Thanks for the link.

Your singular focus one element of that article is hardly a lethal indictment of Fact checking websites - you ignore the other 9.
Again I ask you to offer an example of egregious and demonstrably unhinged theories offerred by Fact Checking websites, that come close to the absurd Conspiracist claims.
Give me one Scientist quoted in a Fact Checking article, that would make the false, irresponsible and preposterous claim Cahill has, with death after 7-10 years after administration of an mRNA Vaccine.
Demonising Fact Checking while accepting Cahills lies is hypocritical.

And to further imply such websites do not debunk extreme views, but are designed as propaganda tools, is transparently anti-establishment posturing.

I thought everyone knew that under emergency Legislation that Australians can be forcibly vaccinated. In WA they can forcibly enter our homes, rip our jocks down and jab us in the butt! But you keep asking and asking and asking, can't be bothered to do a quick search, even on this thread where it's been discussed before because you blindly believe what the fact checkers say.

Cahill wasn't lying and even the "fact checkers" had to admit they found the published research on the effect of COVID 19 vaccines on children in a post script.

What are the other 9, 8 you were talking about?

But the poor demonised "fact checkers" have been debunked on here a few times, with the last I remember conveniently ignoring two published peer reviewed studies, one a meta analysis of 78,000 subjects and the other on 10 million to say the opposite of what was found, because that's what they do.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/coronavirus-2.1252045/reply?quote=69141222

 

[BlueE]

Pierre Kory board-certified in critical medicine, pulmonary diseases, and internal medicine, has worked closely with critical COVID-19 patients across the US throughout the pandemic. He is the chief of the critical care service and medical director of the trauma and life support center at the University of Wisconsin and founding member of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), "a group of highly published leaders in critical care" - makes an Assessment on Australian National Covid19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce

WHO has active reviews on data on 30 RCTs, while Australian has a passive review of 10 trials to use to not recommend IVM for use.

It's lazy and almost willfully negating, not to actively review all the trials.

 

[zill]

Thanks for the link.

Your singular focus one element of that article is hardly a lethal indictment of Fact checking websites - you ignore the other 9.
Again I ask you to offer an example of egregious and demonstrably unhinged theories offerred by Fact Checking websites, that come close to the absurd Conspiracist claims.
Give me one Scientist quoted in a Fact Checking article, that would make the false, irresponsible and preposterous claim Cahill has, with death after 7-10 years after administration of an mRNA Vaccine.
Demonising Fact Checking while accepting Cahills lies is hypocritical.

And to further imply such websites do not debunk extreme views, but are designed as propaganda tools, is transparently lamentable anti-establishment posturing.

I don't care about Cahills out there claims, I don't accept any of them and had never heard of her until you posted the article. However, she stated a couple of facts that the article said were lies. The fact checkers couldn't even be bothered to do any fact checking. They could have focussed their article on the out there claims and omitted the factual statements made, but they didn't. If they will flagrantly lie about something that can easily be googled, what else will they lie about?

As for being anti-establishment, absolutely I am. The establishment is corrupt as ****, why would I support that?

Demonising Fact Checking while accepting Cahills lies is hypocritical.

Trusting fact checking when you know they are either lying to you or are incompetent is rank stupidity. Like I said, I don't subscribe to Cahill's views. What's your excuse for your blind faith in "fact checkers".

 

[M Malice]

Who fact checks the fact checkers?

 

[MrKK]

the UK modeling was also wrong - but a forecast is just that, a prediction from available data.
That’s very different to Cahills video making absurd claims and BS statements.
Where is the evidence people will be dead in 7-10 years after getting the Vaccine?
It’s just BS, and you’re defending her.

'Available data' came from a very small sample of travellers from China and ignored other data like the Diamond Princess. Plus a host of dumb assumptions like no pre-existing immunity from T-cells.

Professor John Ionnadis from Stanford modelled at the same time as Ferguson and his predictions were miles closer. But you'll never hear of him in the mainstream media because he goes against the lockdowm grain.

 

[No SPIN]

'Available data' came from a very small sample of travellers from China and ignored other data like the Diamond Princess. Plus a host of dumb assumptions like no pre-existing immunity from T-cells.

Professor John Ionnadis from Stanford modelled at the same time as Ferguson and his predictions were miles closer. But you'll never hear of him in the mainstream media because he goes against the lockdowm grain.

yes I have heard of him - and agreed with his early rational assessments.

 

[No SPIN]

I don't care about Cahills out there claims, I don't accept any of them and had never heard of her until you posted the article. However, she stated a couple of facts that the article said were lies. The fact checkers couldn't even be bothered to do any fact checking. They could have focussed their article on the out there claims and omitted the factual statements made, but they didn't. If they will flagrantly lie about something that can easily be googled, what else will they lie about?

As for being anti-establishment, absolutely I am. The establishment is corrupt as fu**, why would I support that?



Trusting fact checking when you know they are either lying to you or are incompetent is rank stupidity. Like I said, I don't subscribe to Cahill's views. What's your excuse for your blind faith in "fact checkers".

not sure I can provide any explanation that would be acceptable to a person with an anti-establishment philosophy.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Now no one under 30 can get the AstraZenecca jab. Getting close to the no one can get the jab unless they are a decomposing corpse

 

[No SPIN]

Pierre Kory board-certified in critical medicine, pulmonary diseases, and internal medicine, has worked closely with critical COVID-19 patients across the US throughout the pandemic. He is the chief of the critical care service and medical director of the trauma and life support center at the University of Wisconsin and founding member of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), "a group of highly published leaders in critical care" - makes an Assessment on Australian National Covid19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce

WHO has active reviews on data on 30 RCTs, while Australian has a passive review of 10 trials to use to not recommend IVM for use.

It's lazy and almost willfully negating, not to actively review all the trials.

I actually agree with the effectiveness of Ivermectin, but please stop misrepresentating the information.

This video is a guess about what the TGA is doing as the speaker states he doesn’t know them. He then assumes they are doing a passive review, based on a guess fed to him by the interviewer. Who has no credibility quoting the TGA as the Therapeutic Good Association when the A stands for Administration.
No serious commentator makes such a mistake.

By all means push the case for Invermectin but use credible information not amateurish videos like this, speculating on issues, that you then posts as facts in your commentary.

 

[twotooto]

 

[Hawk Dork]

Who fact checks the fact checkers?

its the post fact world
anyone can creates "facts" in a meme or youtube channel from their garage

then there is always the convenience of Alternative fact

Alternative facts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[zill]

not sure I can provide any explanation that would be acceptable to a person with an anti-establishment philosophy.

Try anyway, your mental gymnastics might be good for a chuckle. Your precious fact checker has been discredited, and you still have faith in them. Truly pathetic.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Try anyway, your mental gymnastics might be good for a chuckle. Your precious fact checker has been discredited, and you still have faith in them. Truly pathetic.

So are all discredited facts not welcome in this thread now ?......

 

[No SPIN]

Try anyway, your mental gymnastics might be good for a chuckle. Your precious fact checker has been discredited, and you still have faith in them. Truly pathetic.

when you are an anti-establishment cynic, then why would I bother?
Given your insistence all fact checking is untrustworthy, just reinforces you have no interest in a sensible debate.

 

[zill]

So are all discredited facts not welcome in this thread now ?......

No, if you can provide proof to discredit a claim you should do so.

 

[Hawk Dork]

No, if you can provide proof to discredit a claim you should do so.

so memes are still ok unless I can copy paste ?

 

[zill]

when you are an anti-establishment cynic, then why would I bother?
Given your insistence all fact checking is untrustworthy, just reinforces you have no interest in a sensible debate.

I believe these "fact check" organisations are untrustworthy, yes. There are many other sources of information, you should do some research yourself and stop believing everything you are told. And it is you who has no interest in a sensible debate, or more probably are incapable of it.

 

[zill]

so memes are still ok unless I can copy paste ?

I don't even know what this means.

 

[No SPIN]

I believe these "fact check" organisations are untrustworthy, yes. There are many other sources of information, you should do some research yourself and stop believing everything you are told. And it is you who has no interest in a sensible debate, or more probably are incapable of it.

there is no possibility for a sensible debate when your starting position (per bold above) is so strident and unwavering, reinforcing your obstinate anti-establishment philosophy, which I suspect you wear as a badge of honour.

 

[faible]

1 billion flu cases every year. Sounds pretty transmissible.

Fortunately, I've already answered this.

Influenza is less transmissable than SARS-CoV-2 is what you've learned today.

 

[GuzzLG]

Fortunately, I've already answered this.

Source?

 

[faible]

Source?

dO yOuR oWn ReSeArCh

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

So apparently over 900,000 doses of vaccine have been administered here in Australia. Anyone know anyone who has had it? I don't know anyone, I some who were eligible but have chosen no to have it.

The vax seems a bit elusive, just like Covid

 

[Catfish Alley]

Not Australia but, yeah, I know around a dozen or so who have had it.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]