5 Hours Long

[Anastasia]

4 hours ago, ReasonableFaith said:

This particular paper was presented as not being from ‘cranks.’  The final paragraph, as well as the paranoia concerning the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the notion a spike protein has been engineered as a species-wide receptor for a secondary virus to be released by government actors, may indicate to some the author has ‘crank’ tendencies. 

To be precise "paranoia" (a definition) is "an unrealistic distrust of others or a feeling of being persecuted". You may recall some time ago in another thread I gave the link to the paper HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World  . I think such info is more than enough for judging "a distrust of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation" to be realistic i.e. quite far from paranoia. Unfortunately, the facts are that "Gates initiative" to vaccinate African women had a hidden part, their sterilization and those facts are given in the paper.

Naturally, after the paper was released some made an argument that yes, there is sterilization agent there but there was "some sincere mistake of we do not know who". Then it is a matter of faith, to allow the possibility that Gates and likeminded have never wanted to sterilize women in poor countries - despite actually proclaiming the need to drastically reduce the population in the third world.

I understand why many choose not to see those facts or to explain them away. They are too disturbing and ugly. As for me, I choose to face them and to acknowledge that the agenda to give to the unsuspected women a vaccine which would render them infertile (and cause spontaneous abortions in already pregnant) is evil. To give something evil in the package of good is even more evil and brings to a mind certain practices of the past in concentration camps.

Observing Bill Gates on mass-media I got a sense that he is probably sincerely deluded. He clearly thinks about himself as "a saviour of humanity"; I am quite sure he thought he benefited African women via giving them a vaccine with a sterilizing agent. A person who feels he is a god is very dangerous, especially if he is not a simple "a selfish greedy god" but "a selfless god". A selfish god at least has some stop button in him; he stops when his endeavors begin hurting him. "A saviour of humanity" does not have a stop button because he is convinced that all he does is good, since he does it for "the greater good". He is totally blind. It makes a sense then to keep away from a blind man with a saviour complex - but by no means I am trying to convince anyone, I am just outlining my position.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Anastasia

[ReasonableFaith]

On 2/24/2021 at 3:58 PM, fides' Jack said:

I guess my request wasn't clear, so I'll have to clarify.  Each of these persons made remarks that were clearly their own opinions, and each of them made scientific or legal remarks based on their experience and knowledge coming from their positions.  It is one of these latter remarks that I'd like you to bring up some kind of actual evidence against.  Just one of them.

These people were declared as  ‘experts at the top of their field’ making arguments worthy of consideration. It now appears some are people tangentially connected to their purported field of expertise opining on matters of interest to some while occasionally interjecting scientific, legal, or logical arguments. 
 

They use personal opinions, ad hominem attacks, ad institutium attacks, and straw-man arguments without drawing the ire of the original poster. 
 

The very first ‘expert’ in the field of face masks is a chiropractor. In the first five minutes he makes the claim no evidence exists indicating masking ‘works’ in relation to COVID. He claims the evidence is in fact quite the contrary. Not contrary in the sense masking ‘doesn’t work’ but contrary in the sense masking is harmful. He goes on to cite a German study with the initiative of discovering ‘feely’ responses from its subjects (ie fatigue, headaches, emotional moods, lack of concentration, etc.). He ignores studies with quantifiable data suggesting face masks help to alleviate/slow the transmission of the virus and are ideally used in conjunction with distancing and good sanitary habits.  He doesn’t call the studies into question, doesn’t dispute the methodology, doesn’t dispute the statistical analysis, doesn’t dispute the findings, he claims they wholesale do not exist. 
 

He also indicates the large number of death certificates he has examined (surely tens of thousands) point to the danger of masking because some list bacterial respiratory infections as co-morbidities.  All this is done without any reference to causal evidence.  A reasonable observer would expect to see such infections. Additionally he cites the statement that a large number of deaths during the Spanish Flu epidemic were from bacterial respiratory infection is further proof of the dangers of masking. Once again one would expect to see such infections when immune and respiratory systems had been ravaged by the Spanish Flu. 
 

He finally cites his anecdotal evidence of seeing many ‘kids,’ in his primary care practice, who have bacterial respiratory infections as even more evidence against masking. Children get bacterial repository infections, they even get pneumonia. Where is the scientific analysis for a ‘scientific claim?’ It is of note he is treating such a number of youthful patients as a ‘primary care provider.’  He is a chiropractor. This is not an oddity. It is the fundamental objective of his practice. Just one of his initiatives as a’ primary care provider’ has been to encourage ‘“parents come to us at least 2 years before conceiving a child to first correct unidentified health issues with them in order to prevent those genes from being passed down.” This is a very interesting proposition coming from a DC.  

The FTC and BBB have responded to more than one claim coming from his practice.  The ACA has called for its members repudiate and refrain from claims appealing to areas outside of their clinical expertise.  

In other forums he has declared a host of unsubstantiated adverse consequences to wearing masks. This is all from a expert who has purported to be a ‘physician,’ declared tonic water as a viable preventive, and propositioned God would have made you with a mask if He intended you to wear one. These are not words I have put in his mouth...these are words coming out of his mouth. 

Given the totality of evidence, I am perfectly comfortable dismissing Nepute as an expert at the top of any field mentioned in the origins of this thread or claimed by the host. I am also perfectly comfortable if someone thinks they may benefit from and decides to purchase his ‘Patriot Pack’ of vitamins or visit him for what may be a wonderful adjustment.  

Some readers may interpret a little levity as dear Aunt Sally. This is fine by me. No, the dear DC did not claim you should add gin to the Schweppes tonic water, nor lime. I also doubt alien lizard humanoids were actually invoked, but I can’t say I spent 5 hours with these ‘experts.’  
 

As an aside, I suggest it would do one quite well to tread very lightly on the ground of the Holocaust and being compelled to wear stars on their arm. 
 

I am not here to convince the original posters of anything. My object was to comment on the very nature of the presentation of the material which was posted in a public forum.  My inclination is to believe direct confrontation of or rebuttal to persons holding to many such positions actually works to further entrench them in their positions. 

3 minutes ago, Anastasia said:

You may recall some time ago in another thread I gave the link to the paper HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World  . I think such info is more than enough for judging "a distrust of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation" to be realistic i.e. quite far from paranoia.

Thank you for the link to the paper. I don’t think I’m am familiar with the thread and will be happy to give it a read.  
 

I know what I understand as Bill Gates’ position on world population has a potential to sow much distrust and skepticism. And I agree he can and come off as exhibiting a savior complex. I appreciate the opportunity to examine additional information on the subject. 

[fides' Jack]

Ad hominem after ad hominem.  Straw men and red herrings.  Not a single real argument, yet.

I agree not all of them are "at the top of their field" which is a phrase you seem particular irked by.  I never suggested they were.  I gave a summary.  That's all.  

And it's very true, the evidence is now overwhelming, masking hurts both the person wearing the mask and those around them.  Statistically, it has been shown globally, by a leftist university, that mandated masking actually increased covid-19 cases.  There's no reason to mask, unless you want to submit to the immoral left.

[Anastasia]

I do not know about "immoral left" but I found that a prevailing opinion Russian scientists (no links because it is in Russian i.e. useless for people who read this forum)  that a mask is needed by one who is ill and sneezes. Others may use masks in the places where they are literally like herring in a jar, when someone may spit into another's face - yet the mask does not protect the eyes anyway. All agreed that to wear a mask in the streets is not just an idiocy but bad for health.

Interestingly, there was an important research in Denmark about the effectiveness of masks and apparently the difference between a group with masks and no masks was very small. Yet, as soon as the results were published the counterargument appeared, that no one checked whether the participants wore masks non-stop (or did not wear) etc... so again, it is matter of faith. 

[Ash Wednesday]

I'm going to post this today now that I'm in a more charitable mood, but it's just a general note regarding people that lurk anonymously and report and ask us to censor people that aren't violating any laws or phorum rules. It's an alarming trend, and in the many years I've been here I've never seen people ask for censorship in this manner until recently.

As I've said before, we're not facebook or twitter.  I don't recall us ever picking and choosing how people were allowed to discuss current events in that way, and I for one am not going to follow that trend now. I would rather see people participating and debating instead of just asking us to shut people up. 

Have a good Sunday. 

[ReasonableFaith]

On 2/26/2021 at 7:02 PM, fides' Jack said:

I agree not all of them are "at the top of their field" which is a phrase you seem particular irked by.  I never suggested they were.  I gave a summary.  That's all.  

 

This rings hollow. The readership here has already been apprised of the care you take with words. The ‘summary’ is a parroting and amplification of Westen’s introduction which is designed to promote certain views and advance a journalistic agenda under the guise of ‘expert’ analysis. 
 

Perhaps the readership would appreciate some insight as to who are the ‘actual experts at the top of their field’...ie. face masks, vaccines in general and COVID-19 vaccines in particular. 

[chrysostom]

The readership is of decidedly mixed opinions about a lot of things.

[fides' Jack]

4 hours ago, ReasonableFaith said:

This rings hollow. The readership here has already been apprised of the care you take with words. The ‘summary’ is a parroting and amplification of Westen’s introduction which is designed to promote certain views and advance a journalistic agenda under the guise of ‘expert’ analysis. 
 

Perhaps the readership would appreciate some insight as to who are the ‘actual experts at the top of their field’...ie. face masks, vaccines in general and COVID-19 vaccines in particular. 

If you submit to the government "experts", you are submitting to satan.

[ReasonableFaith]

On 2/26/2021 at 3:13 PM, Anastasia said:

To be precise "paranoia" (a definition) is "an unrealistic distrust of others or a feeling of being persecuted". You may recall some time ago in another thread I gave the link to the paper HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World  . I think such info is more than enough for judging "a distrust of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation" to be realistic i.e. quite far from paranoia. Unfortunately, the facts are that "Gates initiative" to vaccinate African women had a hidden part, their sterilization and those facts are given in the paper.

After considering the paper, its premises, methods, findings, and conclusions, I find it unpersuasive, particularly so in light of:

-the entirety of the TED talk taken in context 

-rebuttals by others, including governmental and quasi-governmental agencies

-the testing equipment used 

-reports of statements by laboratory personnel

-the revocation of the testing laboratory’s national certification 

-and finally the withdrawal of the cited paper. 
 

I feel comfortable with the language used, paranoia, and would feel comfortable using such language in the future. 

[fides' Jack]

Masks have been not just bad, but disastrous:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/

All of you here need to stop wearing masks, and refuse to wear them going forward.  Don't believe the lies!