McCarthy is being humiliated over and over again. But he'll still win. Even when people don't want him, they get him. DEMOCRACY! And there's your politics, and if you can't figure it out from there then fuck - dude! Really?
McCarthy is being humiliated over and over again. But he'll still win. Even when people don't want him, they get him. DEMOCRACY! And there's your politics, and if you can't figure it out from there then fuck - dude! Really?
Für eure Sicherheit
How do you know then?Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
What's your source for that stat?
Source: Trust me, bro.
NOTE: The location of this post has been moved and the thread title (which was previously Wenger is Leaving) has been manipulated by a notorious pro-Wenger moderator. What was previously a message that contained no profanity and made a comment on a real life event has now been manipulated by a deliberately provocative title. An old and crude propaganda and censorship technique.
Source? None. Reading of the official government yellow card data was all I did. You could do that too, if you weren't so determined to wait for an approved source to tell you what to think.
Für eure Sicherheit
Hilarious. Don't trust me, trust that guy with his dick up your hole. When did he ever lie to you?
Für eure Sicherheit
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
How is "official government yellow card data" not an "approved source"? Your straw man of me is that I believe everything the government says. Sounds pretty approved to me. I based many of my thoughts on the pandemic on the government Covid data.
You started your post by saying you have no source and then immediately went on to tell us what the source is.
So OK, I had a look at this yellow card thing and before I looked at the data I saw this:
(Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...card-reporting )The Yellow Card scheme is a mechanism by which anybody can voluntarily report any suspected adverse reactions or side effects to the vaccine. It is very important to note that a Yellow Card report does not necessarily mean the vaccine caused that reaction or event. We ask for any suspicions to be reported, even if the reporter isn’t sure if it was caused by the vaccine. Reports to the scheme are known as suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
Many suspected ADRs reported on a Yellow Card do not have any relation to the vaccine or medicine and it is often coincidental that symptoms occurred around the same time as vaccination. The reports are continually reviewed to detect possible new side effects that may require regulatory action, and to differentiate these from things that would have happened regardless of the vaccine or medicine being administered, for instance due to underlying or undiagnosed illness.
It is therefore important that the suspected ADRs described in this report are not interpreted as being proven side effects of COVID-19 vaccines.
My emphasis. So I'm not really sure there's much value in looking at the data. This is self-reported data, it's not irrelevant but just because someone reports that their 90 year old gran had the Covid vaccine and then died, that doesn't mean they died because they had the vaccine. Something something correlation something causation. Come on, dude, you know this stuff. So, in brief:
1) You haven't presented the data you looked at or explained how you came to your conclusions based on it.
2) You seem to have drawn conclusions from data when the explanation of it explicitly warns not to do that.
3) Why are you look at government data anyway? Throughout the pandemic you repeatedly claimed it was fake.
And it wasn't a character assassination above, nor was it a response to your post about the climate or any other specific post. It was more of a general observation about you.
You used to be one of the funniest posters on here, now your cynicism seems to have just turned into bile, paranoia and bitterness.
It wasn't really logic, it was a combination of straw manning and irrelevance.
The climate a million years ago and more is the irrelevant bit. There wasn't human civilization then. Yes, of course there have been times in the earth's history when the climate has been more extreme than now.
The difference this time is that we are around to experience it, and the climate change we are seeing right now is being driven by human activities and causing problems for human civilizations.
We aren't all still alive, people are dying as a result of extreme climate events, and literally no-one is saying we are all going to die if the earth continues to warm up (that's the straw man bit). But the fear is it will make the weather ever more extreme and that will lead to more people dying.
Actually, I looked into this and the number of people dying because of extreme weather has actually gone down, not because extreme events aren't happening more, they are, but because we have become better at dealing with them.
If you believe that the climate isn't changing then you're just not paying attention.
If you believe that human activities aren't driving or at least contributing to that then your argument is with climate scientists, not me.
If you believe that the effects of that change and consequences of it are being over-stated then that's a position I can get on board with. My overall feeling is that it is happening, there's nothing we can do about it - simply because dealing with it requires co-ordinated action from multiple governments and the political will just isn't there to make that happen. Will it affect me personally? Probably not. Will it affect a lot of other people? Fairly likely but see above about not being able to do anything about it.
LOL. It's entertaining, in a way. How you deliciously suck on that which I have provided. It meets your fastidiously indoctrinated standard, which I knew it would."That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
How is "official government yellow card data" not an "approved source"? Your straw man of me is that I believe everything the government says. Sounds pretty approved to me. I based many of my thoughts on the pandemic on the government Covid data.
You started your post by saying you have no source and then immediately went on to tell us what the source is.
So OK, I had a look at this yellow card thing and before I looked at the data I saw this:
(Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...card-reporting )
My emphasis. So I'm not really sure there's much value in looking at the data. This is self-reported data, it's not irrelevant but just because someone reports that their 90 year old gran had the Covid vaccine and then died, that doesn't mean they died because they had the vaccine. Something something correlation something causation. Come on, dude, you know this stuff. So, in brief:
1) You haven't presented the data you looked at or explained how you came to your conclusions based on it.
2) You seem to have drawn conclusions from data when the explanation of it explicitly warns not to do that.
3) Why are you look at government data anyway? Throughout the pandemic you repeatedly claimed it was fake.
And it wasn't a character assassination above, nor was it a response to your post about the climate or any other specific post. It was more of a general observation about you.
You used to be one of the funniest posters on here, now your cynicism seems to have just turned into bile, paranoia and bitterness.
As for the data - it's simple maths.
Count everyone who died that received the money shot within 28 days of blessed departure. That gives you the amount of people killed by the vaccine. In the same way as we calculated Covid deaths during the good old days. Compare the mortality rate with the next most lethal vaccine and it's 38x higher.
Surely you can't refute this methodology, as it was the approved method of running the death porn daily on the BBC?
Then again, maybe you can have it both ways according to taste?
Für eure Sicherheit
If you believe that the climate isn't changing then you're just not paying attention.
And I'm the straw man?
You people.
You base your fantasies on the very fact the climate changes. By 52C, as I pointed out. In ONE Year.
And then, when the indoctrinated pull you up on your fairy tales you claim THEY are the ones who deny climate change, as if climate change and man-made climate change are equivalent. They aren't. One is inevitable and the other is mere speculation based on a metaphorical cork bobbing in an ocean.
The blindingly obvious reality that we simply haven't been here long enough, on geological timescales, to affect anything at all entirely escapes warmist nutters. The millions years (a mere blink) is relevant. The carefully engineered and inverted hockey stick is of no consequence whatsoever.
The very fact you believe any of the warmist nonsense is in any way credible is bullet-proof conformation you know nothing about the subject. The same as the "climatologists" who are failed geologists. And their models that are necessary in a world where reality conflicts with their revenue streams.
To put your mind at rest - no, the world is not ending in 2012 or even in 2025 or 2030. Civilisation might well end on those two latter dates, but it will have nothing to do with actual nature and everything to do with human nature.
Für eure Sicherheit
Do you know what "if" means?
By "warmist nutters" you mean the vast majority of climate scientists. But I'm sure some bloke on YouTube knows better.The blindingly obvious reality that we simply haven't been here long enough, on geological timescales, to affect anything at all entirely escapes warmist nutters.
Again, your argument is with the experts, not me.
Reply With Quote
