Coronavirus Pandemic

[Niall_Quinn]

They're measuring levels of antibodies in the swabs and blood. They're not doing any DNA stuff.
They could of course, but you don't have to take part of course, you can opt out at any time and ask that the samples get destroyed.
So that video was fake news then? He certainly didn't provide any evidence.

After all this time, you don't know how their covid "test" works?

No, the video is not fake news. He's not claiming it's news. It's personal commentary. Misleading commentary in this case, I think. Which is why I asked about it. And you provided information. And that's the way it should work. We've done more investigation here in 5 minutes than the mainstream media has done in 5 years.

[Letters]

No Letters, you're the warmism nut and I wouldn't dream of cutting in on your action. You'll buy bullshit like the polar bears disappearing every 5 minutes, or a seasonal hurricane being a sign of end days

I'll just leave a pause here for everyone to enjoy the irony of you posting this while also posting stuff from all kinds of conspiracy nuts.

Have we all finished enjoying that? Cool, I'll proceed.

but when the UK becomes a totally different country, right under your nose, it's temporary.

Right. It's temporary. It's a response to something that's going on in the world right now, you might have heard about it. I continue to agree with you that it is the wrong response, but it is a response none the less. I have provided 2 pieces of evidence to back up my view that it's temporary:

1) Pretty much every country around the world no matter their political leanings have done similar things. Have they all simultaneously become authoritarian overnight? Or are they all responding to the same thing?

2) Countries have changed their level of restrictions as data has changed - we had lockdown, then things were eased, now more restrictions are coming in place. And the level of restrictions in the UK depends where you are. If this is all about control then why not blanket restrictions?

Why are you the problem? That's an easy one. You're one of the people who will tolerate anything handed down by authority and then, without bidding, find a reason to justify it.

No, you are lying. Because I've quite clearly said that I won't be downloading the track and trace app - I'm not having an app tell me I need to stay in my house. I've clearly said I won't be getting the vaccine, I certainly won't be an early adopter. Longer term, maybe - I'm not against vaccines per se, but having one when it's fresh off the production line. Nah, you're alright.
And you have asked me what would change my mind about this being a move towards a more authoritarian regime and I've agreed that soldiers marching down my street ordering me to stay indoors would be something that would give me pause. You prophesied their arrival but *looks out window*, nothing yet.

You think this is about control and a step towards more authoritarianism, but you also commended the government for not being as draconian with the lockdown as other countries. You've repeatedly said how unenforceable all this stuff is. Then you said the trouble is people meekly complying. But you also noted the way people were behaving and declared lockdown over long before the government said it was because people were doing what they want.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.”

And what are you doing? Come on, then. Apart from harrumphing and posting conspiracy theories on here what are you actually doing?
And what should I do?

I'll remind you that you were one of the people screaming "Think of the children, won't someone please think of the children" like Helen Lovejoy and demanding schools be closed earlier in the year.
Now, you can say you've changed your mind as more data has emerged and that is reasonable. But what are you actually doing now then?

You've avoided the science like it's more contagious than the plague.

Have I? I mean, your definition of science seems to depend entirely on whether any particular study or research confirms your world view or not. But I posted a video on here some time ago looking at the data, noting that masks and lockdowns haven't made much difference. I would have thought that would have aligned with your opinions quite well. So how have I avoided it?

once the science you never mention gives us the all-clear, it'll go back to the way it was, just like it always does when authoritarians gather power to themselves. And if it doesn't, well there will be a perfectly reasonable explanation for that too.

No. No there won't. So right now I can only meet up to 5 other people indoors or outdoors. From Saturday I won't be able to mix with anyone from a different household indoors. I think that's bollox, BUT in the context of a global pandemic you can make the argument that some unprecedented restrictions are justifiable in the short term. Whether the ones our government have imposed are the right ones is a separate debate. If you seriously think that they are going to continue those restrictions when this is all over then I'd suggest you're crackers. And no, I can't think of any reasonable explanation for them doing so.
But...that isn't going to happen. Because you are paranoid and wrong. The government don't care if you meet up with your friends. They don't care if you dance at a wedding.
They aren't out to get you. They might not be out to help you either but those aren't the only two options.

[Niall_Quinn]

I'll just leave a pause here for everyone to enjoy the irony of you posting this while also posting stuff from all kinds of conspiracy nuts.

Have we all finished enjoying that? Cool, I'll proceed.

Wait! Before you proceed, you forgot to post up all the stuff from all kinds of conspiracy nuts, so I can enjoy the irony. Let's do that. Let's savour it instead of just skipping on. All kinds of conspiracy nuts please. Don't leave anything out. I want maximum irony.

[Niall_Quinn]

There's the science, and then there's "the science".

[Letters]

Is that the science I'm ignoring?

[Niall_Quinn]

Is that the science I'm ignoring?

Wasn't aimed at you, but sure, it's a summary of some of it. You can argue all you want about what lockdown measures you agree or disagree with. Just like the media. Just like the politicians. But when there's no scientific reason for having lockdowns in the first place then that's where the focus should be.

[Letters]

Right. Except LDG posted a video from the exact same dude about a month ago.
I said it was a good video and then posted a graph showing the argument made in the previous video and making it pretty clear I agreed with it:

http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/sh...=4687&page=305

LDG posting the video and my reply is the page before that

[Niall_Quinn]

Well done.

But it wasn't aimed at you or else I'd have said so. It's a video anyone might find useful. Or not. Up to them.

The science you are ignoring relates to the testing. If you don't understand how that works (doesn't work, to be accurate) then you don't understand how the lockdowns can't possibly be for health reasons. And if they aren't for health reasons then they are for some other purpose. And then we get into the whole "temporary", "responding to a crisis", 'back to normal" stuff.

[Letters]

I’m not ignoring it, I haven’t seen anything about the tests not working. And let’s just agree now we can spend all evening with you finding links which says they don’t work and me finding links which say they do. Fact is, I’m not an expert in this field and (correct me if I’m wrong) neither are you.
And neither is Boris Johnson. So all that matters is not whether the tests work but whether he (and other decision makers) believe they do.
If it’s not about health (in their minds at least) then what is about?
You think the government really give a shit if you meet up with your mates in a pub? Why do they only care about that in certain areas?

[Niall_Quinn]

There's no need to post links back and forwards. There's plenty on this forum already from my nutters, like epidemiologists, and virologists, and lawyers tackling the legal implications of this fraud. There's NOTHING from government scientists about these tests. NOTHING. The creator of the test said it was entirely unsuitable for the detection of infectious disease and it should never be used for that purpose. A growing number of eminent scientists agree. The scientists on the other side are silent. And yes, I do understand the science because it's not very complex. I wouldn't pretend to be able to debate a trained lab scientist, I have the basic knowledge that is required to understand the mechanics. Like I understand I need petrol in the car to make it go. And I don't need to be an engineer to pop down to the petrol station and fill up a tank. The principle is very easy to understand even though, when you break down the mechanics and chemistry it soon becomes a whole lot more complex and specialised. But in terms of these tests, which aren't tests at all, if you can grasp the fundamentals it becomes self-evident why they are so flawed for this purpose. Or you can just listen to the scientists who have explained it in layman's terms, or in far more specific terms for specialised audiences.

Boris no way believes the tests work. He knows exactly what is being tested for or else he's the most ignorant PM in history. And for sure, those frauds Whitty and Vallance know. Rabb knows for sure because he told Kay Burley live on TV, though he was trying to weasel out of another issue while doing it. They know. And they also know about coronaviruses in general and can see virtual identical behaviour with this variant, but they keep claiming this is entirely new and nobody has ever seen anything like it before. Hence the repetitive series of "mistakes" that keep dragging us back to lockdown and stringing this out. Sweden is just a few hundred miles away, laughing in their faces.

You don't need conspiracy theories when science and medicine can simply prove the fraud, although this is most certainly a conspiracy, zero theory about it. What do you think it's about? It's about these puppets servicing their masters as always. When was it ever different? Why ask such a dim question? We're not privy to their actual plans, but we know who they represent and who will pay the price for all this shit. Is that not enough? Where's the line in the sand. At what point will people say, we know you're all a bunch of massive piss-takers, we've lived with that, but there's a limit!

Why have ALL nations gone into lockdowns, bar the irritating few who just sit there exposing the whole sham? That's a good question, isn't it? Why do you think I've been talking about health officials from several nations and their ties to big business? Why do you think I expose the fake stream media? Why do I cross reference this by materials published by governments and think tanks and NGOs and other professional bodies that tally with what's happening now? If they were all so smart back then, why have they all become murderously dumb overnight.

I know you don't buy into anything that suggests powerful and influential people, companies, public "servants", could ever be so corrupt as to feather their own nests at the expense of the wider population. I don't know why you think that. It's a very surprising line of thought given all the evidence over so many years. But I get that's how you think, and I can sort of understand why your preferred option is to wait and be told by these people what is happening, I suppose in the hope they are telling the truth? Okay. Normally that's fine. But when this complacency affects me directly, then I have a problem. For example, we can all pretend the government is there to serve the people. I know that's not true, again based on the evidence, but I won't start some campaign to try to get voting banned, or to ban political parties, or to take away any of the state apparatus that many people think is useful. But it's not reciprocated. If I want to say, hey there's a a criminal over there, people shout, shut him up! That's why I'm against censorship, that and on foundational moral grounds. If censorship was applied fairly, nobody could ever speak. So it is always wrong.

These are the things I talk about, providing material to support my thoughts all the way. Nutter conspiracy theories, of course. Has to be, doesn't it? Because if I'm not a nutter it means certain influential people who decide on issues like our economy, our health, our education, war, increasingly everything, might not have our best interests at heart and are behaving in such a manner that actually holds society back, makes us less than we could be. Who do you think actually promotes racism, violence, poverty, murder and mayhem? A skinhead down the road? What does the evidence tell you?

As for the privacy angle, well that's just part of the bigger picture. More information, more control. It's a simple equation. Less information, less control. And you really don't want bad people to have too much control.

I don't look at the single jigsaw piece. I don't study its edges under a microscope or work out all the colours on its face or argue about its merit in isolation. I look at the hole before the piece is ever found. And I know what shape it is going to be and I know what it's going to look like and I know where it's going to fit. Because it's not rocket science. It's as easy as figuring out why PCR "tests" aren't real tests.