13 thoughts on “Memories of discord and deniers”

  1. With us being the first phase of testing the mRNA vaccine and the studies coming out (like, recently, from Switzerland), I am not sure about trusting those vaccines.

    • Good, don’t take them. For that matter, never go see a doctor, drive a car or use the internet. The rest of us believe in science and medicine, not some doofus operating out of the Philippines who enjoys duping morons with ridiculous conspiracies.

          • Given that just about everything that the media and government was labeling “misinformation” turned out to be true or that they were just making stuff up like the 6 foot rule and having to wear masks, which part are you not ignoring?

            • What you fail to realize, is that it wasn’t misinformation. It was information seen as best until we learned more. That’s called science. Science is not the truth. Science is finding the truth. When science changes its opinion, it didn’t lie to you, it learned more.

              It seems sadly odd that all these doctors, nurses, microbiologists, epidemiologists and other researchers kept saying COVID-19 is dangerous, but all those who barely passed science in high school kept saying it’s not. Even more ignorant people kept saying that one side had an irrational fear of a deadly virus, even more odd, it was said by people who are afraid of immigrants, LGBTQ, Black and Brown people, working women, windmills, vaccines, electric cars, voting by mail, universal health care, environmental protections, higher wages and face masks.

              That’s the unfortunate reality you seem to ignore, choosing rather to live your life parroting talking points provided by a right wing propaganda network.

      • Why would a dufus from the Philippines be involved in a scientific study in Switzerland? Or any scientific study unless they are a “guinea pig”?

        Also, reading and looking at a scientific study is unscientific? Way to jump to illogical and incorrect conclusions.

        And science is not a religion, so one does not believe in it. One can use it to find answers or prove/disprove answers and issues but believing is for religion.

        And I will ignore your “For that matter…” stuff since I do all three. And if I did not “believe” in medicine, I never would have made it to my 8th birthday.

        To add to this, is a quote from the late Michael Crichton: “Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

        • You have selective definitions of words. I never spoke to beliefs in the context of religion. Belief is an acceptance that a statement is true; it is trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something. If a father tells his son he “believes he will do well at (fill in the blank)” that’s not a statement about religion. Your ability to grasp the English language needs work or more likely, you’re being disingenuous.

          Your understanding science is limited to ignorant representation from propaganda forces. You simply chose to not believe what they said, not with any real rational argument, just parroting an ideology designed for no other purpose but to be contrary.

          As I said above, “Science is not the truth. Science is finding the truth. When science changes its opinion, it didn’t lie to you, it learned more.” Basically says the same thing as Crichton, only in your case, you see a change of opinion as a lie. You create a false narrative to fit your worldview rather than see it for what it is. Ironic you pull out a quote that you fail to understand what it means in the real world.

          The guy in the Philippines made his name by spreading various false conspiracy theories to dupes who simply wanted a version of contradiction for sake of owning the libs. The fact that those accepting lies, either by this guy or someone else, led to higher death count for those was unfortunate. There’s a good chance another pandemic is around the corner. Unfortunately, the orange gelatinous blob of subcutaneous fat has depleted our main source of reliable science information and put a dipshit in charge, who traffics in disproven theories, of what was once an esteemed position in the world.

          While on the subject of the Q Anon source and trafficking, how about the Florida resort where they sex traffic children? You haven’t heard about that? I understand the White House has a ton of information on the people involved but are withholding the information.

          • You said “the rest of us believe in science and medicine” and I was pointing out that belief is for religion not science. As for medicine, you either take it unquestioningly or you trust it will treat or fix what it is supposed to.

            You don’t know me well enough to know where my understanding of science comes from, but it is definitely not from propaganda. I question everything.

            In your last paragraph, if you are implying Trump was involved with Epstein: why did the Democrats not release that information when they held the White House and Congress? If his opponents didn’t release anything, what makes you think Trump was involved? Propaganda? I am an independent so I really don’t care–I just hope the guilty are tried and the innocent and victims are protected.

            • Let’s answer the last question first. Two possible reasons: One, and the most likely, the DOJ was designed to operate independently from the White House and not with undue influence or politicization of the DOJ by the executive branch. If this is the case, Biden may not have had detailed information of what was in the files. The other reason may be that Biden knew and withheld it because of the circus peanut’s participation and if he put it out there he didn’t want to be accused of using the info for political purposes, possibly saving it for the future to release.

              Which begs the questions: why is he NOT releasing it? Why have a 1000 FBI agents, working 24/7, to redact his name anywhere in the files?

              I can assure you, it is nothing of what the circus peanut has said. That being, it was written by the Democrats, yet includes many Democrats in it, and was sitting on Biondi’s desk, but doesn’t exist or whatever head up one’s ass excuse he belched out.

              The funny thing is, he should release it unredacted, short of the victim’s names, because his base, as I said, will not care if he raped little girls and/or trafficked them, they want the names of the other people. But because we have a festering carcass of American rot shoved into an ill-fitting suit: a sleaze of a conman, the cowardice of a draft dodger, the gluttony of a parasite, the racism of the white pointy hooded ones, the sexism of a back-alley creep, the ignorance of a bar stool drunk, and the greed of hedge-fund ghoul—all spray painted orange and paraded like an prize hog at a county fair. Not a president. Not even a man. Just the diseased distillation of everything this country swears it isn’t but always has been—arrogance dressed up as exceptionalism, ignorance passed off as common sense, cruelty sold as toughness, greed exalted as ambition and corruption worshipped like gospel. It is America’s shadow made flesh, a rotting pumpkin idol proving that when a nation kneels before money, power and spite, it doesn’t just lose its soul—it shits out this bloated obscenity and calls it a leader—a leader that allows them to be total assholes who now feel free to use the n-word with impunity.

              Now to address to your first point. As I said, it was either you being disingenuous or lacking English comprehension. I thought it was the the former, but I guess I was wrong. I gave you too much credit.

              NO. There was no claim to “take it unquestioningly”. When it came to COVID 19, it was a new type of virus and science was learning as it went along and in doing so, advised best practices which were simply “better safe than sorry” advice. The first call to action was to prevent mass infection as hospitals were not equipped to handle it. This is a matter of public record. Now as far your cry about mRNA vaccines, I have provided a link in another post to debunk any claim the research was too new. Which goes back to your unquestioning comment. If you’re as smart as you like to think you are, you would have seen how the research had progressed and had good reason to be trusted.

              Which brings me to your second point: I know you well enough to know you lack the capacity to critically think and research because otherwise you wouldn’t make that talking point that was pushed by the right wing propaganda machine.

              Additionally, the idea of you not making it to your 8th birthday suggests you had no parents or adult guardian as you made all your underage medical decisions on your own, because it would be only a few years before you realized there was no Santa Claus. (That, by the way, is a hyperbolic response to your ridiculous retort.) The mere fact is that the three things you need to avoid were all products of science, a field you have reluctance to truly understand choosing to resort to superficial conclusions based on… what? Having heard similar responses from others like you, it often is the case they lack concrete information in which to pose an educated opinion. They are often referred as misinformed, mal-informed or uninformed which often is a conscious choice.

Comments are closed.