Coronavirus Pandemic

[Niall_Quinn]

This is pretty funny tbf

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-...virus/12204836

China

Trying to provoke a non-related reaction so you can wriggle away from your last transgression. Wasted, I'm afraid. Sorry about that.

[Letters]

I just thought it was funny.
What was my transgression again? Ah yes, looking up who your source was and posting a link about him you didn't like.
Diddums

This is another trait I've noticed with you, you do have a habit of inferring motives of people where none exist.

[Niall_Quinn]

I just thought it was funny.
What was my transgression again? Ah yes, looking up who your source was and posting a link about him you didn't like.
Diddums

This is another trait I've noticed with you, you do have a habit of inferring motives of people where none exist.

I inferred nothing. I made open statements. But look, it's safe to drop the fake indignation you are using to reflect your own behaviour on others. Plenty of new posts between there and here, your bullshit is sufficiently raked and covered by now.

[Niall_Quinn]

The counter-argument to Bill Gates' prehistoric views and broader misunderstanding of modern biology and medicine. And a doctor who is not afraid to speak openly about the corruption of science.

[Niall_Quinn]

Not that I would ever condone it, but if those cops were shot down and pissed on, I probably couldn't help laughing.

[Letters]

Upon which you launch into an amateur psychology session.

No. I was just talking about how you come across with your posting, I didn't say anything about the underlying psychology behind it..
You used the word "reflection" which implies you think you you know something about my psychology.

Deceit, of course.

Can I ask you nicely to give it a rest with that sort of thing.
We have very different world views, we disagree about a lot of things. But I don't for one minute think you are trying to deceive me or are lying, you just see things differently.
I am not lying to you or trying to deceive you so please stop accusing me of that.

You are stating the sad fact that unless a source has been approved in your mind you will not even consider it. Which makes you ignorant and uninformed by your own admission. You self censor and only ever receive information that you've run through your own self-imposed filter.

I've pretty clearly said that I intend to watch the video
Admittedly I haven't done so yet but I think you only posted it yesterday and I haven't had time yet.

1. Video gets posted.
2. Letters sees title.
3. Letters looks for the first derogatory article about that PERSON (not the information contained in the video).

Yeah, let me just stop you there. When I Google his name these are the results I get



The first result is his own page which given that he writes himself I didn't think of as objective. The RationalWiki is literally the next result I get.
You're implying I scrolled down the results until I found what you regard as a hit piece. I literally clicked on the first link which wasn't written by him.
Now, I could spend more time doing research about him - I did have a quick look at his YouTube channel and looked at the video titles - but I haven't had much time.
Is RationalWiki biased? Well, possibly although aren't all sources? This place rates them as generally factually accurate
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rationalwiki/

I didn't make a point of posting a hit piece, you regard it as such maybe because it's saying things you don't like. I just posted the first link I found.
And yes, I do think looking at the person who produced the video is relevant.

So coy. Habitually dishonest.

Again, please stop that. What is dishonest? I did NOT make a counter argument to the video. As I said, I have not watched it yet.
I did look up the person who made the video and posted the first link I found that wasn't written by him.

What's the title of the video visible in the thumbnail? Flat earth.

What has that got to do anything? The points Mitchell makes which are relevant is that things in the MSM aren't false because they're in the MSM.
And the MSM are under more scrutiny than some bloke on YouTube. Anyone can start a YouTube channel.

Video posted. Title upsets Letters.

This is ironic given that you keep going on about the title of the video I posted. I don't even know what the title of the one you posted is now, I can't remember, I probably would have had it upset me, all I did was have a quick look at who the video was by which is fairly reasonable.

Letters posts a hit piece.

Already addressed but once more for the cheap seats, I simply posted the first link I found about the dude which wasn't written by him.

Letters gets called out for not even reviewing the material before he condemns it.
Letters doubles down with the tired old conspiracy theory, UFO, lizard people, flat earth commentary that's free of charge and requires zero thought. Very lazy. But I'm the guy who's not a free thinker? And then you award yourself a medal for not having watched the material you have condemned.

All of that is completely made up.

The difference between me and you, or let's be fair, ONE of the many differences, is that I do trawl liberally through sources I fundamentally disagree with, such as the corporate, for profit, mainstream media.

That is commendable. Yes, you should look at sources you disagree with. Maybe I don't do that enough. But you seem to routinely dismiss things in the MSM because they're in the MSM, which is why I posted the video I posted that.

The fake news things on the BBC - I think they're in this thread. I think one was to do with a F1 race being cancelled which you declared fake news despite it being factually accurate.
I can't remember what the other one was but it was also factually accurate. Maybe you have a definition of fake news which differs from mine but I'd say if something is factually accurate then it isn't fake news. The fact you called out the BBC twice for "fake news" when the stories were factually accurate calls into question your judgement.

[Niall_Quinn]

Dude, I already said you'd shovelled enough. It's buried. No more bullshit required. Whats this all about? I mean I'll happily have a discussion with you about the content of the video. But all this shit? What ails you, my friend? I've decided not to punish you for the way you behave, but to try to help you. And I'm being honest. If you want some help then I will help you. I'll actually take the time to explain it all out for you if you need it. But you first need to admit you have a problem.

[Niall_Quinn]

I can't remember what the other one was but it was also factually accurate.

LOL

[Niall_Quinn]

Apparently the chinks have started a cyberwar. Considering Silicon Valley sold out to the CCP quite some time ago, the yellow peril is likely to win this one. Where it goes, nobody knows. As a techie, interested in seeing how this one pans out.

[WMUG]

For Christ's sake will you two just fuck already?