EDIT: You encouraging old people to get the vaccine...
Hah. So you lied when you claimed that I "encouraged" everyone to get the vaccine. Figures for someone who does get his views from blog posts he views online.
Not quite "conspiracy theory" but you called people "right-wing loons" for pointing out the dangers of the vaccines:
OK, so you lied about that as well. Or maybe I'll be charitable and say that you just misremembered. For all your faults, you do sound like a somewhat sincere (if fanatical) fellow.
Yes, some people are right-wing loons. And yes, people who claim that old people died because of the vaccine are insane. This wasn't "pointing out the dangers of the vaccine", which your own post shows that it's not about.
And you're foremost among them. Your lunacy is demonstrated by the fact that you think the vaccine is a net negative for even older people, even ages that have a double-digit death rate from the coronavirus.
Here you are saying that people asking for treatments of mRNA poisoning are "posting crap":
And it still is.
I'll post this for now and when I find your comments about the vaccine not being bad or "safe" for old people, I'll edit the comment and add it later.
You don't need to. I only ask you to provide evidence when it's something that I never said (and do note that you failed to demonstrate any of your claims which you misremembered).
But that was not your claim to begin with, and while I never called anything 'safe' as I think that's stupid, the benefits definitely outweigh the costs for old people.
He's old. Cost-benefit ratio will be pretty good for him even if he already had been infected.
This is plain common sense, but you lack not just common sense, but any sense whatsoever. Like I said: anti-vaccine loons gonna loon.
How exactly are they destroying themselves? Even if you take all claims about side-effects at face value, it's infinitesimal compared to the number of vaccinations.
Not in that particular comment, in that comment you called the medical research...
The mere fact that mainstream sources have shown themselves to be bankrupt, does not mean that I have to accept any form of nuttery that comes from your no-name websites.
Not sure how medical research on one of the most respected medical journals is considered a "no-name website".
Hah. So you lied when you claimed that I "encouraged" everyone to get the vaccine. Figures for someone who does get his views from blog posts he views online.
Link to my comment where I said "everyone".
And yes, people who claim that old people died because of the vaccine are insane.
Your lunacy is demonstrated by the fact that you think the vaccine is a net negative for even older people, even ages that have a double-digit death rate from the coronavirus.
It is, since there is no peer reviewed data showing it is a net positive in any capacity.
the benefits definitely outweigh the costs for old people.
Where's the longitudinal phase III data that shows that?
You would have looked like even more of a clown if you had said, breathlessly, HE SAID 90-YEAR-OLDS SHOULD TAKE THE VACCINE.
Even you understood this. So you spun mightily.
That literally happened...
"COVID GENOCIDE MURDER"
You'll believe literally anything based on an internet video or blog post. Quite amusing. And that calls itself an independent thinker.
It is, since there is no peer reviewed data showing it is a net positive in any capacity.
If you are proudly stupid, then be honest next time, and cry that "Antonio said that NINETY YEAR OLDS should take the vaccine. THIS IS MURDER AND GENOCIDE!"
By posting an unqualified claim of "encouragement", you did say everyone.
That's not how words work.
If you are proudly stupid, then be honest next time, and cry that "Antonio said that NINETY YEAR OLDS should take the vaccine. THIS IS MURDER AND GENOCIDE!"
"it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt"
That is how words work, though I am not at all surprised that a guy who takes his opinions from blog posts and random videos doesn't understand them. Your dishonest statements are comparable to saying that I "encourage people to cut off their hands" if I say that you should cut off your hand if it is gangrenous.
"it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt"
So next time you will be honest, and phrase it in such a way that will show you to be the fool that you are, eh?
You have no defense of your other claims? Figures. Honestly, I did not expect you to collapse just this easily. You came in with a lot of bravado, I thought you would have slightly more to show for it than nothing.
There's no mention of 'blog post' there.
Hah. So you lied when you claimed that I "encouraged" everyone to get the vaccine. Figures for someone who does get his views from blog posts he views online.
OK, so you lied about that as well. Or maybe I'll be charitable and say that you just misremembered. For all your faults, you do sound like a somewhat sincere (if fanatical) fellow.
Yes, some people are right-wing loons. And yes, people who claim that old people died because of the vaccine are insane. This wasn't "pointing out the dangers of the vaccine", which your own post shows that it's not about.
And you're foremost among them. Your lunacy is demonstrated by the fact that you think the vaccine is a net negative for even older people, even ages that have a double-digit death rate from the coronavirus.
And it still is.
You don't need to. I only ask you to provide evidence when it's something that I never said (and do note that you failed to demonstrate any of your claims which you misremembered).
But that was not your claim to begin with, and while I never called anything 'safe' as I think that's stupid, the benefits definitely outweigh the costs for old people.
This is plain common sense, but you lack not just common sense, but any sense whatsoever. Like I said: anti-vaccine loons gonna loon.
Still unanswered by you, despite your ravings.
Not in that particular comment, in that comment you called the medical research...
Not sure how medical research on one of the most respected medical journals is considered a "no-name website".
Link to my comment where I said "everyone".
That literally happened...
It is, since there is no peer reviewed data showing it is a net positive in any capacity.
Where's the longitudinal phase III data that shows that?
So you're trying to move the goalposts?
Not sure why that would be 'one of the most respected medical journals', but I do know that you posted three links.
It is understood. By posting an unqualified claim of "encouragement", you did say everyone. https://kotakuinaction2.win/p/16ZXaFpyZn/x/c/4ToiCotUKhz
You would have looked like even more of a clown if you had said, breathlessly, HE SAID 90-YEAR-OLDS SHOULD TAKE THE VACCINE.
Even you understood this. So you spun mightily.
"COVID GENOCIDE MURDER"
You'll believe literally anything based on an internet video or blog post. Quite amusing. And that calls itself an independent thinker.
If you are proudly stupid, then be honest next time, and cry that "Antonio said that NINETY YEAR OLDS should take the vaccine. THIS IS MURDER AND GENOCIDE!"
That's not how words work.
"it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt"
That is how words work, though I am not at all surprised that a guy who takes his opinions from blog posts and random videos doesn't understand them. Your dishonest statements are comparable to saying that I "encourage people to cut off their hands" if I say that you should cut off your hand if it is gangrenous.
So next time you will be honest, and phrase it in such a way that will show you to be the fool that you are, eh?
You have no defense of your other claims? Figures. Honestly, I did not expect you to collapse just this easily. You came in with a lot of bravado, I thought you would have slightly more to show for it than nothing.