Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(January 13, 2022 at 12:46 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote:
(January 13, 2022 at 12:34 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: You do know that if we were really going to suspend release of vaccines until we're sure that there aren't huge long-term effects from the vaccine, things would probably take a needlessly long time before they could be released to the public. I don't know how long you'd say is good, but given how much you've been moving the goalposts throughout this thread, I wouldn't put it past you to say it should be decades. If Jonas Salk were listening to you in the early fifties, we'd probably still be dealing with polio and it'd still be in trial stage, and your grandchildren would be telling anyone telling anyone who said we should just release the damn vaccine that we need more time.
I didn't claim the vaccine shouldn't have been released. I'm simply saying that people shouldn't be compelled to take a brand new vaccine that was put together way more quickly than any other vaccine in history. I took the risk and took the vaccine because of my asthma, so I decided it was a risk worth taking. Others don't want to take it.
Do you support 8 year olds being forced to take the vaccine or get kicked off their little league team, like is happening here in Canada? What are the chances of an 8 year old dying from covid? 1 in 500,000? And that's with most of those children having comorbidities. What's the chance of a healthy child dying from covid? 1 in many millions?
Did your god tell you that? Your pastor/priest/bishop/whatever? You are neither irreligious, nor an atheist. You wear it on your sleeve. You have all the same talking points (if one can call them that). It is exactly the same as talking to a fundie christian (and I have engaged lots of those).
At this point, given the arguments you present, I am convinced that you are a wolf in sheeps clothing hoping to "expose" the atheists. I will continue to hold that view until I see tangible evidence that I am wrong. Should that arise, and I doubt it will, I will happily raise my hand and say yes I was wrong.
But for now, my conclusion is that you are in fact a fundie christian. Your current posts show it. Your past posts show it. Wanna prove me wrong? Go ahead, mate. All the posts are right there. Have fun and fuck off.
January 14, 2022 at 5:24 am (This post was last modified: January 14, 2022 at 6:07 am by Irreligious Atheist.)
(January 13, 2022 at 11:08 am)Spongebob Wrote:
(January 13, 2022 at 12:46 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: I didn't claim the vaccine shouldn't have been released. I'm simply saying that people shouldn't be compelled to take a brand new vaccine that was put together way more quickly than any other vaccine in history. I took the risk and took the vaccine because of my asthma, so I decided it was a risk worth taking. Others don't want to take it.
Do you support 8 year olds being forced to take the vaccine or get kicked off their little league team, like is happening here in Canada? What are the chances of an 8 year old dying from covid? 1 in 500,000? And that's with most of those children having comorbidities. What's the chance of a healthy child dying from covid? 1 in many millions?
Yes there are a lot of people who don't want to take the vaccine and I've encountered a number of them. One of my nephews is one; he's about 26 years old. It wouldn't be so confounding if these people had valid reasons other than just being contrary. I actually had an in depth conversation with a colleague who was resistant to taking the vaccine to understand his reasoning. The most common reason I hear is that it's too new/untested or some variant of that. This is not a logical reason. The vaccine has gone through the exact same testing procedures that any medical treatment goes through and passed. If it took 10 years to develop this vaccine, it would still go through the exact same process. And in fact, the technology for developing mRNA vaccines has been in development for over a decade, so its not as new as it seems.
This concern over the speed of development is an extension of a fear that the vaccine is dangerous in some way. But this is another product of bad logic. Because the testing is the same and the vaccine passed with flying colors, there's no more reason to fear it than any other medicine. We can expect some small portion of people to react badly to it, but again, all medicine has side effects so there's nothing different here. What we do know is that the probability of getting Covid and have extremely bad results is orders of magnitude greater than any bad result from the vaccine. So none of these fears are rational. Anyone who refuses to get the vaccine should consider using the same logic to decide other aspects of safety in their life, such as seat belts, fire alarms, seeing their doctor if they have chest pains, getting virtually any medical treatment.
Compared to all of the bad results of people not getting vaccinated such as deaths, long covid, community spread, over stressed hospitals, social and economic restrictions, the remote possibility of having a bad reaction to the vaccine is a much smarter bet.
And one of the inventors of the MRNA technology completely disagrees with you, and other well credentialed scientists disagree with you, so as a layperson, I'm not just going to agree with them, but I'm going to assume that they might have somewhat of a clue what they are talking about, especially since the people I'm listening to are not working for government agencies and I don't see an agenda with them, like I do with the people pushing the "they're safe so stop asking questions" line. What are your credentials?
Do you not see how disgusting it is to ask 5-10 year olds to take a brand new vaccine so we can protect obese people or 80 and 90 year olds from dying? 5 year olds making this sacrifice for 90 year olds? It's beyond gross.
(January 13, 2022 at 6:10 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:
(January 13, 2022 at 12:46 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: I didn't claim the vaccine shouldn't have been released. I'm simply saying that people shouldn't be compelled to take a brand new vaccine that was put together way more quickly than any other vaccine in history. I took the risk and took the vaccine because of my asthma, so I decided it was a risk worth taking. Others don't want to take it.
Do you support 8 year olds being forced to take the vaccine or get kicked off their little league team, like is happening here in Canada? What are the chances of an 8 year old dying from covid? 1 in 500,000? And that's with most of those children having comorbidities. What's the chance of a healthy child dying from covid? 1 in many millions?
Did your god tell you that? Your pastor/priest/bishop/whatever? You are neither irreligious, nor an atheist. You wear it on your sleeve. You have all the same talking points (if one can call them that). It is exactly the same as talking to a fundie christian (and I have engaged lots of those).
At this point, given the arguments you present, I am convinced that you are a wolf in sheeps clothing hoping to "expose" the atheists. I will continue to hold that view until I see tangible evidence that I am wrong. Should that arise, and I doubt it will, I will happily raise my hand and say yes I was wrong.
But for now, my conclusion is that you are in fact a fundie christian. Your current posts show it. Your past posts show it. Wanna prove me wrong? Go ahead, mate. All the posts are right there. Have fun and fuck off.
Good for you
The one unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I hereby blaspheme the Holy Spirit. There, happy? I accept your apology.
And in other news, Quebec has announced that they are going to start "taxing" people for not taking the vax And Trudeau says he's not ready "yet" to endorse this, which means he will soon enough, and Canadians in general are going to be "taxed" for not taking the shot. Tyranny.
January 14, 2022 at 4:07 pm (This post was last modified: January 14, 2022 at 4:38 pm by Rev. Rye.)
If the inventor you’re talking about is Robert Malone, the thing is, he’s nowhere near the only person who can claim to have helped create the mRNA vaccine, but as far as I can tell, he’s the only one of many who seems to publicly doubt its efficacy.
And, as I’m sure I’ve said before, children in developed nations tend to routinely get vaccines for diseases that are more likely to kill adults. And remember, I looked at VAERS the other day. I looked at the number of incidence of side effects vs. the number of doses administered. I even put the symptoms reported into a massive spreadsheet to see how likely certain symptoms are and found the vast majority of them are mild, the kind that tend to subside in a day or two. And as for it being “experimental”, well, it’s been shown to work time and time again, and even with Omicron, it’s still being shown that getting the jabs help a shitton with immunity.
And there’s other charts with more recent data that show the same thing, but I can’t actually show them here (the page won’t let me because it’s registering as a text instead of an image in Safari for whatever reason), so I’ll link to a page with them. And the gulf between severity in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals is just getting bigger, even with Omicron.
So, if you’re still afraid of taking part in a big experiment with the vaccine (and if it still is an experiment at this point, it’s one with a sample size big enough to contain the entire population of the world), like it or not, you can either be part of the experiment (like a bit less than 60% of the species has so far) or refuse and end up part of the control group (which is objectively doing worse.)
Do I have to break out Mr. Pink and the World’s Smallest Violin again?
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
January 14, 2022 at 4:45 pm (This post was last modified: January 14, 2022 at 4:55 pm by Spongebob.)
(January 14, 2022 at 5:24 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: And one of the inventors of the MRNA technology completely disagrees with you, and other well credentialed scientists disagree with you, so as a layperson, I'm not just going to agree with them, but I'm going to assume that they might have somewhat of a clue what they are talking about, especially since the people I'm listening to are not working for government agencies and I don't see an agenda with them, like I do with the people pushing the "they're safe so stop asking questions" line. What are your credentials?
I don't need medical credentials to accept the advice of the CDC and the majority of medical experts. I also do not listen to the tiny minority report, who most likely do have an axe to grind. What you need to ask yourself is why you accept the advice of the tiny outliers and reject the majority? BTW, if you have specific evidence of the inventor of mRNA technology rejecting the vaccine, please produce it.
Quote:Do you not see how disgusting it is to ask 5-10 year olds to take a brand new vaccine so we can protect obese people or 80 and 90 year olds from dying? 5 year olds making this sacrifice for 90 year olds? It's beyond gross.
What sacrifice? How many children have been harmed by the vaccine? Again, the CDC and majority of medical experts support the vaccine. You are listening to a tiny outlier.
IA busted https://factcheck.afp.com/http%253A%252F...2F9V36YN-1
Further busting of IA
Quote:Inaccurate: The development of the mRNA vaccines is due to the work of hundreds of researchers, one of which is Robert Malone. Together with his co-authors, Malone contributed early evidence that mRNA could be delivered and produce proteins in cells. However, because crucial hurdles to develop the mRNA vaccines were resolved by many researchers , Malone cannot be claimed the inventor of this vaccine technology.
Quote:TORONTO -- Scientists generally don't seek the limelight, but Dr. Katalin Kariko has been thrust right into it. The once obscure biochemist is now on the covers of magazines and newspapers because of her role in developing mRNA vaccine technology.
An idea she started working on in the 1990s when no one thought it would work.
“They said: ‘Oh, poor Kati,’” Kariko told CTV News. “Because people just knew about [how] the RNA degrades, but I could make RNA and it didn't degrade
Quote:The story involves hundreds of people all over the world and highlights the importance of fundamental and applied research. Advancements in our understanding of messenger RNA (mRNA) and its potential for use in medicines, along with the creation of new technologies over the last 30 years, made these vaccines possible. Recent research on coronaviruses, in particular, made these vaccines effective.
Quote:Messenger RNA, or mRNA, was discovered in the early 1960s; research into how mRNA could be delivered into cells was developed in the 1970s. So, why did it take until the global COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 for the first mRNA vaccine to be brought to market?
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?” –SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
The guy sounds like a (once) very smart nutcase who is bitter about not being recognized as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, and now gets to do so on every anti-vax podcast.
The guy sounds like a (once) very smart nutcase who is bitter about not being recognized as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, and now gets to do so on every anti-vax podcast.
Yup sounds like bitterness
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?” –SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Why do you reject scientific consensus in favor of the views of a minority of scientists and/or medical professionals? Because the latter set feeds your pre-conclusions? That’s called “confirmation bias.”
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
The guy sounds like a (once) very smart nutcase who is bitter about not being recognized as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, and now gets to do so on every anti-vax podcast.
Sounds a bit like Peter Duesberg, to be honest. He was a gifted researcher (specifically in cancer, and he's still been known to do research significant enough to appear in Scientific American), who got this strange bee in his bonnet when AIDS came into being: he latched onto the idea that it's caused not by HIV, but by drug use. And thousands of studies showing that HIV is the cause for AIDS somehow hasn't stopped his enthusiasm for his pet theory. Hemophiliacs, which you claim is the best case study proving your hypothesis, works the other way? No, of course it's still the best way to prove it. AIDS becomes a major epidemic in Africa among people who were never introduced to amyls? It's all just the misdiagnosed result of disease and malnutrition. The HIV-AIDS link managed to fit Koch's Postulates? No, it doesn't, according to my wonky interpretation of it. AZT, an anti-retroviral, proves successful in suppressing HIV, a retrovirus? Hell, AZT is one of the drugs that causes it. That last one makes no sense? Pshaw, I don't care.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
The guy sounds like a (once) very smart nutcase who is bitter about not being recognized as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, and now gets to do so on every anti-vax podcast.
Sounds a bit like Peter Duesberg, to be honest. He was a gifted researcher (specifically in cancer, and he's still been known to do research significant enough to appear in Scientific American), who got this strange bee in his bonnet when AIDS came into being: he latched onto the idea that it's caused not by HIV, but by drug use. And thousands of studies showing that HIV is the cause for AIDS somehow hasn't stopped his enthusiasm for his pet theory. Hemophiliacs, which you claim is the best case study proving your hypothesis, works the other way? No, of course it's still the best way to prove it. AIDS becomes a major epidemic in Africa among people who were never introduced to amyls? It's all just the misdiagnosed result of disease and malnutrition. The HIV-AIDS link managed to fit Koch's Postulates? No, it doesn't, according to my wonky interpretation of it. AZT, an anti-retroviral, proves successful in suppressing HIV, a retrovirus? Hell, AZT is one of the drugs that causes it. That last one makes no sense? Pshaw, I don't care.
Aids denialism hit a lot of scientists for some reason. I mean David Rasnick,Matthias Rath,Lynn Margulis etc
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?” –SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
And Trudeau says he's not ready "yet" to endorse this, which means he will soon enough, and Canadians in general are going to be "taxed" for not taking the shot. Tyranny.
![[Image: 11-MORNING-CASES-CHART-superJumbo-v3.png...&auto=webp]](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2022/01/10/briefing/11-MORNING-CASES-CHART/11-MORNING-CASES-CHART-superJumbo-v3.png?quality=75&auto=webp)
![[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/yxR97P23/harmlesskitchen.png)
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
