nbohr1more on 15/6/2021 at 13:14
Quote Posted by fett
nbohr1more I'm looking for citations or any credible sources for half the crap you've said over the last 4 pages. Either spit them out or knock it off. You're running us out of tin foil and I've already been to the store this week.
Where was anyone asking for "citations" when the Trump Dump thread was filled with aimless Russia-Gate speculations?
Are we now restricted to "only discussing things backed by citations"?
Or is it now acceptable to for only unpopular viewpoints to be vetted for discussion while popular ones can espouse anything
regardless of validity?
When forum posters claim to have gotten the vaccine, do I need to grill them about the source that "proves" that they did it?
This is a discussion, not a scientific journal.
Anyway, I can certainly bring forth many recent articles about how the "Lab Leak Theory" is gaining momentum and credibility and that the Biden Administration is investigation this issue.
Of course, the narrative will shift to "we were wrong, there was nothing to see there" once the AZ election audits are over.
driver on 15/6/2021 at 14:10
Screw China losing half a billion, I think TTLG can stand to lose one.
Jashin on 15/6/2021 at 14:16
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Where was anyone asking for "citations" when the Trump Dump thread was filled with aimless Russia-Gate speculations?
Are we now restricted to "only discussing things backed by citations"?
Or is it now acceptable to for only unpopular viewpoints to be vetted for discussion while popular ones can espouse anything
regardless of validity?
When forum posters claim to have gotten the vaccine, do I need to grill them about the source that "proves" that they did it?
This is a discussion, not a scientific journal.
Anyway, I can certainly bring forth many recent articles about how the "Lab Leak Theory" is gaining momentum and credibility and that the Biden Administration is investigation this issue.
Of course, the narrative will shift to "we were wrong, there was nothing to see there" once the AZ election audits are over.
This feint of victimhood is just copying trump.
You're comparing your outrageous claims with evidently no knowledge of the subject you're "discussing," and you compare that to others personal claim to getting the vaccine??
You have to know stuff to discuss stuff. You're trying to have an opinion based on selective internet, other know-nothings' magical thinking, and tell-you-what-you-want-to-hear-trumpers, that makes you a manipulated peon. Right now you're unconsciously incompetent.
But it's not just that is it? You're getting a secondary payoff somehow from all this blocking out of sensible advice to stay reality.
Jashin on 15/6/2021 at 14:53
From a tabloid like NYPOST, now Vanityfair. A youtube link next?
I'll indulge you: If you read the piece, Vanityfair isn't anywhere near as confident as you when asserting a claim. The last sentence is “There are unanswered questions,” she says, “and a few human beings know the answers.”
The heart of the piece is from a paragraph before, “We needed to create a space where all of the hypotheses could be considered,” which is funny considering how quickly un-judicious people come to another conclusion altogether.
If you had stopped at "we don't yet know" with Vanityfair, okay. But that's not what you did is it? And when people call on you to cite your outrageous claims, you paint yourself a victim of censorship for "unpopular views." How and why do you think you came into those views that you can't cite with reputable sources?
nbohr1more on 15/6/2021 at 15:22
Quote Posted by Jashin
From a tabloid like NYPOST, now Vanityfair. A youtube link next?
I'll indulge you: If you read the piece, Vanityfair isn't anywhere near as confident as you when asserting a claim. The last sentence is “There are unanswered questions,” she says, “and a few human beings know the answers.”
The heart of the piece is from a paragraph before, “We needed to create a space where all of the hypotheses could be considered,” which is funny considering how quickly un-judicious people come to another conclusion altogether.
If you had stopped at "we don't yet know" with Vanityfair, okay. But that's not what you did is it? And when people call on you to cite your outrageous claims, you paint yourself a victim of censorship for "unpopular views." How and why do you think you came into those views that you can't cite with reputable sources?
Where were such venomous retorts when people gasped about Carter Page's possible Russian connections or how connected Giulliani might be to the Italian Mafia?
Did a bunch or right-winger come out of the wood-works to say "how dare you muse about these topics without citing 50 peer reviewed sources"?
Remember when people were ALLOWED to have personal opinions and discuss their internal speculations or the speculations of others?
Remember when people were free to discuss whether JFK was assassinated by the Government or whether 9/11 was an inside job and nobody would bat an eye.
It was just normal folks grasping at limited public info and trying to make some sort of sense of things? To attempt to dig deeper.
TV stations even made shows where pop-culture "experts" discussed topics like these.
Now, because people are so indoctrinated against "conspiracy theory" such free flowing discussions are halted.
That smells to me like a coordinated effort at information control ( info warfare ).
lowenz on 15/6/2021 at 15:25
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Anyway, I can certainly bring forth many recent articles about how the "Lab Leak Theory"
But it's not 1) engineered 2) a weapon
Of course a virus can infects lab members and go outside the lab. So?
lowenz on 15/6/2021 at 15:31
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Now, because people are so indoctrinated against "conspiracy theory" such free flowing discussions are halted.
It's NOT good to feed paranoia presented as "
controversial theories rejected by the system to protect itself!!1111"
Paranoia IS REAL. And it can kill, remember Breivik here in Europe. 70 kids killed by a paranoid maniac who wanted to "
Show Europe the road to the freedom from young and blind leftists". 70
executed kids. 1 by 1.
Now tell me it's a CIA move......or some other conspiracy interpretation about the action of a man obsessed by "globalist" conspirations.
No, it's PARANOIA, simple as that.
nbohr1more on 15/6/2021 at 15:35
Quote Posted by lowenz
But it's not 1) engineered 2) a weapon
Of course a virus can infects lab members and go outside the lab. So?
The question of whether it is a weapon, comes down to whether it was "leaked intentionally".
The question of whether it was engineered, comes down to "can scientists speed up evolution by breeding viruses in human tissues and "selecting" those that are more virulent?".
The former may be unanswerable.
The latter appears to be up for debate with a number of scientists claiming that is what it looks like ( no good chain of ancestor viruses, highly specialized infection behaviors, duplicate encoding sequence, unusual cleavage).
nbohr1more on 15/6/2021 at 15:42
Quote Posted by lowenz
It's NOT good to feed paranoia presented as "
controversial theories rejected by the system to protect itself!!1111"
Paranoia IS REAL. And it can kill, remember Breivik here in Europe. 70 kids killed by a paranoid maniac who wanted to "
Show Europe the road to the freedom from young and blind leftists". 70
executed kids. 1 by 1.
Now tell me it's a CIA move......or some other conspiracy interpretation about the action of a man obsessed by "globalist" conspirations.
No, it's PARANOIA, simple as that.
So you will give Governments and Corporations the tools to silence open discussions because random schizophrenic people might glean
dubious info from conspiracy theories and decide to kill based on this type of exposure?
Shall we also censor movies and video games that might "inspire" these people? Where do we draw the line?
