They're called scientists. The debate on that one is long over, but you do like your fake news.Originally Posted by Letters
People who think HCQ prevents Corona
They're called scientists. The debate on that one is long over, but you do like your fake news.People who think HCQ prevents Corona
Für eure Sicherheit
It's more than possible. The tests aren't tests and don't work, and he gets tested quite frequently IIRC. So given the random nature of the thing, eventually 3 cherries in a row will come up.
It's not just the media that's the problem. People can be shown evidence, data, they can look at things with their own eyes - but STILL prefer to believe what the media tells them. The media can even tell them two things at once, mutually exclusive, and they'll believe both.
Although, judging by almost everything I see outside of social media and GW, fewer are buying into the media BS.
Für eure Sicherheit
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...event-covid-19
Of course, this is "fake news" in your little world, your definition of the term being "something you don't agree with".
Trump used long established medical knowledge (not his own knowledge of course, but knowledge passed on to him by medical professionals who still stand by their oath). And that knowledge has continued to serve well with this latest coronavirus strain. It exhibits all the classic traits of prior and related strains. As I have advised you, the data is now in. This second 'pandemic' obviously doesn't exist, immunity, to varying degrees, has developed across the globe. It has, indeed, faded both in infectiousness and intensity. Although, like any virus of this type, it will return on a seasonal basis - weaker each time, provided nobody tampers with it.
The Guardian, and the media in general, lies and misleads to push political and ideological agendas handed to them by paymasters. It falls on consumers of such media to be informed enough, smart enough and honest enough to read through those agendas. Many people aren't equipped to manage that, despite how transparent the media has become.
Für eure Sicherheit
I even posted up a link, this week I think (maybe last), that would have prevented you making an arse of yourself like this - again. Or maybe it wouldn't have deterred you at all.https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...event-covid-19
Of course, this is "fake news" in your little world, your definition of the term being "something you don't agree with".
Two in one week. Trump's $750 nonsense and now this. And you don't know why what you just posted is so embarrassing, do you? And how you gloating in your ignorance is so teeth grindingly painful to watch. Ignorance is not something to be proud of.
Für eure Sicherheit
QED. Doesn't conform to your little world view so it's wrong.
No Letters. I'm afraid that's not what it is at all.
That's both shoes I could have dropped on you now, exposing you comprehensively in the process. But that would be a silly Internet game. I'm hoping, somehow, you will quit parroting fake news and instead dig in and get yourself informed. I think you will, eventually. Because the fake news is so extreme now that many people are seeing through it, and once a critical mass is reached I anticipate you'll flip over to the new majority. You'll probably even chide me for not being informed
I post it all up for you to read should you choose to. Evidently you choose not to.
Für eure Sicherheit
Multiple people on this site have called you out on this sort of thing.
I just Googled "hcq trials covid", link after link of at best inconclusive results.
What sort of thing? What is it I do? Lie about WMD and assist in the mass slaughter of men, women and children?
Why don't you look on this site? Or read the information that gets posted up on a regular basis? It would help you.
Für eure Sicherheit
You form an opinion on something and then declare anything which indicates that opinion may be incorrect to be "fake news" or "not real science".
The real news or the real science - they just happen to be the things which agree with what you believe, which is convenient.
And hey, I'm not saying I'm immune to the same psychological effects which cause you to do that, I'm sure I do it too.
But the difference is I don't declare myself to be so definitively correct or accuse people who disagree with me of "parroting fake news".
You understand you're just parroting different sources, right? Doing that doesn't make you a "free thinker".
On this particular issue I've read lots of claims and counter-claims. There doesn't seem to be any definitive agreement on it.
But while I was trolling in my initial post about HCQ there is an irony in one of the cheerleaders for it now claiming to have tested positive.
I do look at the information you post - not all of it, admittedly, but I look at most of it. But I don't think you have any definitive hotline to the truth.
What makes your source more valid that another source which says the opposite? You don't have any personal expertise in these subjects any more than I do. We're both relying on things we read. So why are the things you read "right" and the things I read "wrong"?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote