RE: Covid 19 conspiracies dump
January 12, 2022 at 10:55 pm
(This post was last modified: January 12, 2022 at 10:57 pm by Irreligious Atheist.)
(January 12, 2022 at 10:31 pm)Helios Wrote:Quote:Millions of people have taken the vaccines and their have been a shitload of potential adverse health effects after taking the vaccines. Look at VAERS and the huge spike in reported potential adverse health effects after taking the vaccines. You are completely ignoring this and being anti-science. These things need to be looked into. Why is the establishment resisting this, pray tell? The default position by the mainstream is that we have to assume that these adverse health effects were just coincidental. You can not say they are just all coincidental when you haven't done further study into this.
You are strawmanning me and I never posted that I expect vaccines to be 100 percent safe. Read before you post, please. How are you just going to jump into a discussion without reading what's been posted in the argument? Quit being lazy and actually read and try to understand the argument the other side is making. I decided it was safe enough for me to take, and I literally said the vaccines are reasonably safe, but I think it would be extremely immoral for me to make that risk assessment and decision for other adults, as the government seems to want to do.
You don't seem to understand the Copernicus point either. Right over your head. Quit being so emotional and actually read the other persons' argument. You have taken the blue pill and you have put your complete trust in the government and governmental agencies. I, on the other hand, took the red pill more than a decade ago, and I see that the NHS and WHO and etc are all corrupt to the core. I don't blindly trust like you do. I'm not religious like you are. You worship the government and the priest class like people did back in the days of Copernicus. You see these scientists speaking up today as heathens like you, someone who worships the priest class, would have seen Copernicus back in the day. You would have wanted him silenced for offending the state and for thinking outside of the box. He certainly was not in line with scientific consensus. You say there is scientific consensus about the vaccines, but scientific consensus in a developing situation means a lot less than scientific consensus in hindsight, obviously, and scientific consensus has been wrong over and over throughout history. That's how science advances.
This video below beautifully explains how you are just like those who called for the punishment of Galileo. I have a deep appreciation and love for the scientific method, while you worship governmental agencies. You should be ashamed, placing your worship of the priest class above the scientific method. Please watch this video and educate yourself, and quit with the strawmanning.
(January 12, 2022 at 10:11 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: I'm looking through the VAERS, and here's what I found when looking for the side effects and how serious they are:And hell even the graph you cite makes it clear it didn't prove the Vaccine was the cause
And here's the criteria I used:
Note that by 12/31/21, the date cited on the report form I got, the US had administered 513.19 million doses of the vaccine.
And doing the math, this means: 715857/513190000=0.1394916112941% showed side effects notable enough to get into the VAERS database.
And for these effects to be considered serious by the VAERS, 63588/513190000=0.01239073248%.
Odds of getting a side effect notable enough to get into the VAERS database: 1 in 716.
Odds of getting a side effect serious enough to be registered as serious in the VAERS database: 1 in 8070.
Kim Iverson does an excellent job laying out her position about Galileo, and no she is not just talking shite. The point is, both you and I would have supported the censoring of scientists who were correct back then, because odds are we would have been pretty religious and would have been offended by their ideas, and we would have been pretty ignorant about the world. Let's not make the same mistake today by worshiping the priest class. I won't make that same mistake, at least. Do you seriously not understand how scientific consensus during a rapidly developing situation is very, very different from scientific consensus years down the line, in hindsight? Galileo never lived to see his ideas become accepted. Scientific consensus formed during the first year of a situation is not always correct, or to be trusted, and history has shown this to be true over and over again. Challenging the consensus is how science advances, is it not? This is what makes you anti-scientific. I have no doubt that you and most people here were very pro-science before the pandemic came along, but emotion has changed that. People are throwing their own scientific values out of the window because of emotion over death tolls. I do not look at things emotionally like that. Science always has to come before emotion. Like Richard Dawkins says, he cares more about he truth of the matter than how that truth might impact society. I am the same way. The truth comes first, and the scientific process comes first. Other people seem to place the potential harm done to society as more important than the scientific method itself (which is why you see so many here shockingly calling for the censorship of scientists because apparently they're "causing deaths" with supposed misinformation), and I guess I can see how they would do that, since it does suck to see all of this death, but death tolls and emotion can never trump science and the scientific method, or a person is not thinking rationally enough.
(January 12, 2022 at 10:41 pm)Helios Wrote: Well, this just confirms what we all figured. You are an irrational knob
(January 12, 2022 at 10:11 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: I'm looking through the VAERS, and here's what I found when looking for the side effects and how serious they are:Well looks like I was proven right. IA responded exactly how I predicted he would
And here's the criteria I used:
Note that by 12/31/21, the date cited on the report form I got, the US had administered 513.19 million doses of the vaccine.
And doing the math, this means: 715857/513190000=0.1394916112941% showed side effects notable enough to get into the VAERS database.
And for these effects to be considered serious by the VAERS, 63588/513190000=0.01239073248%.
Odds of getting a side effect notable enough to get into the VAERS database: 1 in 716.
Odds of getting a side effect serious enough to be registered as serious in the VAERS database: 1 in 8070.
Percentages only mean so much. I have a better than 99.9 percent chance of surviving covid, but that doesn't mean that covid is still not 'dangerous'.