Select to expand quotejapie said..
I listen to them intently. Reason being is that people who are willing to speak out against what they believe to be incorrect and put their livelihoods at risk are, in my estimation, courageous and ethical.
I guess the important thing that you have left out is that 'they are correct'. Sure they may be courageous and ethical, but are they actually right in their opinions? We can all be courageous and ethical, but it doesn't mean that what we think is correct.
I presume this Wikipedia page is a smear job? Paid for by Pfizer?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Dalgleish
"The paper has three authors: Andres Susrud and Dr S?rensen who work at Immunor AS, a Norwegian company that created a potential Covid-19 vaccine the paper is assessing, and Professor Dalgleish, a Professor of Oncology at St George's University of London. According to the paper, all three authors own shares or have stock options in the company."
Select to expand quotephiln said..
I presume this Wikipedia page is a smear job? Paid for by Pfizer?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Dalgleish
Nooo! They wouldn't do that!
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Well, I guess we should assume that you are gloating over someone that disliked anti-vaxxers and then died.
I think this is where you would say something about your soul and shame, or words to that effect.
I don't wish death on anti-vaxxers, but merely would have liked the option where they could have tested their ideas on natural immunity without being constrained by the authorities forcing them to isolate and protect their own health.
That Henry Makow fella, he is just tops isn't he 
Brain-rot is not exclusive to the TV.
Flip his script and it could have been written by you.
How many time do you write similar things, just from the other end of the spectrum?
Suggesting that anyone who doesn't agree with you deserves what happens to them as a result of taking a 'clot-shot', eating bugs, swallowing the mainstream narrative.
All While trying to maintain your own smug sense of moral and intellectual superiority?
I'm not condoning what that guy wrote, I personally think it's pathetic and disgusting attitude to have towards your fellow humans.
Gloating - absolutely not. RIP
And i quote - But i want to maintain my smug sense of moral and intellectual superiority while making fun of Darwin'd anti - vaxxers.
It's actually pretty noble, really.
His attitude albeit to a lesser extent has been shared by many on this forum over the last four or so years.
In August 2021, a number of American conservative talk radio hosts who had discouraged COVID-19 vaccination, or expressed skepticism toward the COVID-19 vaccine, died from COVID-19 complications. These included 65-year-old Marc Bernier, self-nicknamed "Mr. Antivax", from Daytona, Florida; 65-year-old Dick Farrel, who referred to the pandemic as a "SCAM DEMIC"; Jimmy DeYoung Sr, an octogenarian Christian radio host who decried the vaccine as a form of government control; and 61-year-old Phil Valentine, who compared vaccination status badges worn by medical workers with the yellow badges which German Jews were ordered to wear by the Nazis. In September 2021, another anti-vaccine conservative radio host, 62-year-old Bob Enyart, who "vocally refused to get vaccinated and actively spread false claims about the COVID-19 virus", died of COVID-19, prompting a new round of reports discussing the phenomenon within that demographic. The phenomenon was repeated in November 2021, when Marcus Lamb, co-founder of the Daystar Television Network who promoted skepticism toward all vaccines, died of COVID-19.
Olavo de Carvalho, Brazilian COVID-19 vaccine critic, journalist, and conspiracy theorist, was reported by his daughter to have died of COVID-19 after testing positive.
When Hai Shaulian, a prominent Israeli opponent of vaccination, died from COVID-19 in September 2021, his supporters "claimed that he was murdered by government authorities... so that he would not disclose the truth about what they claim is a fictitious pandemic and a dangerous vaccine", a response characterized by Israeli newspaper Haaretz as a cult-like refusal to acknowledge reality. - Wikipedia.
"A Hamilton child under five years old has died of measles, says the city's public health agency.
"This is a profoundly tragic situation where a young child has left us too soon with their whole life ahead of them," said Dr. Brendan Lew, Hamilton's associate medical officer of health, in a statement Friday.
"To respect and protect the privacy of the child and their loved ones, we will not be speaking to further details of this individual case."
It's the first such death in Ontario since 1989, when tracking began, according to Public Health Ontario (PHO).
In an update published Thursday, PHO said the child was not vaccinated against the highly infectious respiratory virus."
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/measles-death-child-ontario-1.7207293
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
Flip his script and it could have been written by you.
How many time do you write similar things, just from the other end of the spectrum?
Suggesting that anyone who doesn't agree with you deserves what happens to them as a result of taking a 'clot-shot', eating bugs, swallowing the mainstream narrative.
All While trying to maintain your own smug sense of moral and intellectual superiority?
I'm not condoning what that guy wrote, I personally think it's pathetic and disgusting attitude to have towards your fellow humans.
I think he has missed that point. It is clearly gloating that someone has died that has expressed his own dislike of anti-vaxxers. What other reason could there be for posting this? There was no commentary from PM33, so it must be a feeling of superiority.
There have been cases of anti-vaxxers that have died of Covid and at the end asking for the vaccine. I don't gloat over this. I just think it's unfortunate that someone realised the reality of vaccines being able to prevent serious disease, but too late.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
That's a, "Filthy, disgusting post. Your lowest yet."
Firstly what is the actual cause of death Pete? Your screenshot doesn't include a PM report or death certificate. It says a medical episode. I have googled a fair bit and nowhere shows any claimed cause, only that eh had the jab, made fun of anti-vaxxers then died weeks later.
He died 6 weeks after the jab. I reckon we could blame a fkload of deaths on panadol
Or coffee
Or beer
Or windsurfing...
So, your point?
Select to expand quoteremery
That's a, "Filthy, disgusting post. Your lowest yet."
Most of your posts are about attacking the messenger rather than the message and you claim to be a scientist.
You simply cannot stop yourself.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
More disgraceful conduct against anti vaxxers.
"Trusting the experts is not a function of science. Trusting the experts is not a function of democracy. It is a function of religion and totalitarianism."
Well done that man Kennedy.
Who wrote The Real Anthony Fauci. Which will define Fauci when he is committed to the annals of history. And who has been remarkably silent considering he is The Science and the book tore him to shreds!
Fauci like Gates has sold his soul with all the other lying cronies who pushed the shots
Bob Dylan even admits it......
Sorry, that's not Bob Dylan. That image of him is from 60 odd years ago.
This is what he looked like in 2022.
More misinformation and deceit. The singer is trying to sound like Dylan, but it's a travesty.
Select to expand quotedecrepit said..
Sorry, that's not Bob Dylan. That image of him is from 60 odd years ago.
This is what he looked like in 2022.
More misinformation and deceit. The singer is trying to sound like Dylan, but it's a travesty.
In the video it is not an image but part of an interview he gave from many years ago.
Where is the misinformation and deceit you claim?
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
Firstly what is the actual cause of death Pete? Your screenshot doesn't include a PM report or death certificate. It says a medical episode. I have googled a fair bit and nowhere shows any claimed cause, only that eh had the jab, made fun of anti-vaxxers then died weeks later.
He died 6 weeks after the jab. I reckon we could blame a fkload of deaths on panadol
Or coffee
Or beer
Or windsurfing...
So, your point?
Pete?
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Fauci like Gates has sold his soul with all the other lying cronies who pushed the shots
Bob Dylan even admits it......
%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2F&embeds_referring_origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com&source_ve_path=MjM4NTE
Seriously, where do you get this garbage from?
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Where is the misinformation and deceit you claim?
Every post you make.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
In August 2021, a number of American conservative talk radio hosts who had discouraged COVID-19 vaccination, or expressed skepticism toward the COVID-19 vaccine, died from COVID-19 complications. These included 65-year-old Marc Bernier, self-nicknamed "Mr. Antivax", from Daytona, Florida; 65-year-old Dick Farrel, who referred to the pandemic as a "SCAM DEMIC"; Jimmy DeYoung Sr, an octogenarian Christian radio host who decried the vaccine as a form of government control; and 61-year-old Phil Valentine, who compared vaccination status badges worn by medical workers with the yellow badges which German Jews were ordered to wear by the Nazis. In September 2021, another anti-vaccine conservative radio host, 62-year-old Bob Enyart, who "vocally refused to get vaccinated and actively spread false claims about the COVID-19 virus", died of COVID-19, prompting a new round of reports discussing the phenomenon within that demographic. The phenomenon was repeated in November 2021, when Marcus Lamb, co-founder of the Daystar Television Network who promoted skepticism toward all vaccines, died of COVID-19.
Olavo de Carvalho, Brazilian COVID-19 vaccine critic, journalist, and conspiracy theorist, was reported by his daughter to have died of COVID-19 after testing positive.
When Hai Shaulian, a prominent Israeli opponent of vaccination, died from COVID-19 in September 2021, his supporters "claimed that he was murdered by government authorities... so that he would not disclose the truth about what they claim is a fictitious pandemic and a dangerous vaccine", a response characterized by Israeli newspaper Haaretz as a cult-like refusal to acknowledge reality. - Wikipedia.
Remember when Tucker Carlson was anti vax on Fox but behind the scenes was first in line to get the vaccine. LOL, good times.
Select to expand quotejapie said..Pcdefender said..
More disgraceful conduct against anti vaxxers.
"Trusting the experts is not a function of science. Trusting the experts is not a function of democracy. It is a function of religion and totalitarianism."
Well done that man Kennedy.
Who wrote The Real Anthony Fauci. Which will define Fauci when he is committed to the annals of history. And who has been remarkably silent considering he is The Science and the book tore him to shreds!
I hope you applied some critical thinking when you read that weighty tome?
He attacks others with claims of dishonesty, but he plays pretty fast and loose with the concept himself.
I like how he contradicts himself. He spends pages denying that HIV causes AIDS, and then says that he believes that it does. He calls America's media "bought, brain-dead and scientifically illiterate," but then relies on that same media to try bolster his position by frequently quoting from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal, as well as from television channels.
I like how he made a big deal about the Cochrane review of mask effectiveness because it supports his position, but scrupulously avoids any mention of the Cochrane review on Ivermectin effectiveness.
Why? Because that did not support his position.
Being inconsistent is the main skill of being a conspiracy theorist.
If the scientist supports the CT position, like Dalgliesh and Atlas do, then they are right. If fhe scientist doesn't support the CT position then they are wrong.
If a science writer supports the CT position they quote them with approval; if the same science writer doesn't support the CT position they are abused.
If a poster on a forum supports the CT position they must have common sense and know how the world works; if a poster on a forum doesn't support the CT position then they must be ignorant and have no idea, no matter how successful they are in a bunch of different fields, no matter how much more experience they have in the way the world really works.
Perhaps the most striking one is the hypocrisy about climate science. CTers say that you can't trust the scientific consensus on vaccines because helps the profits of big pharma. CTers say that you can't trust the scientific consensus on global warming despite the fact that it harms the profits of big oil.
In one field they say the big corporations change the science to increase their profits. In the other field they say the big corporations don't change the science to increase their profits. It's completely inconsistent and illogical but that's the CT way.
Select to expand quotejapie said..
As predicted the whole Covid19 narrative is crumbling before our eyes. Here is a very interesting article from The Stanford Review. I don't know that much about Stanford but I'm sure our resident expert on ScienceTM will be able to come up with his standard response. Which is to throw critical thought out of the window and vilify the content and producer thereof.
Anyway they Published Scott Atlases Comments On Censorship, Academic Freedom, and the Pandemic.
For a little perspective:
Scott W. Atlas, MD is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow in health policy at Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and served as Advisor to the President and on the White House Coronavirus Task Force from August through November 2020.
He was the only credentialed expert on public health policy on the task force. Says a lot for Trump's ability to follow sane advice. Either that or it says a lot for the ability of Fauci and his pals to drown sane advice. My words.
An excerpt from the article is particularly poignant to this thread: Students cannot learn critical thinking without hearing differing views, especially ideas they may not agree with - and critical thinking is THE most important lesson to learn in college.
stanfordreview.org/dr-scott-atlas-on-censorship-academic-freedom-and-the-pandemic/
What are Atlas' credentials as an expert on public health policy? You state that he is an expert so you must know them.
How do Atlas' credentials in that area compare to those of other people on the Taskforce?
Do you believe that the editors of scientific reviews are often wrong, as your earlier post indicates?
If you believe that the Task Force should have believed Atlas because he was a "credentialed expert" then how can other people not believe other "credentialed experts"?
These are very simple and direct questions that anyone with critical thinking skills should be able to state clearly, and they are about issues that any skeptic should have checked, so there's no reason at all for you to not answer them.
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.
Richard Horton, Editor in chief
The Lancet, 2015
Evidence-based medicine is actually so corrupt as to be useless or harmful,***It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor.
Marcia Angell, 2009, Former editor in chief
New England Journal of Medicine
The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practise of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it's disgraceful.
Dr Arnold Relman,
2002, Former editor New England Journal of Medicine
I think we have to call it what it is. It is a corruption of the scientific process. It's led me and others to increasingly question the idea that the manufacturer of the drug could ever be considered the right people to evaluate its effectiveness and safety,
Fiona Godlee,
2016 Editor
BMJ
They are committing more crimes than any other business on the planet, and the crimes are worse. They're more serious, and they lead to a huge amount of death. Our prescription drugs are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.
Peter G?tzsche, 2013, Co-founder
The Cochrane Collaboration
Our prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer in the United States and Europe. Around half of those who die have taken their drugs correctly; the other half die because of errors, such as too high a dose or use of a drug despite contraindications.
Peter G?tzsche, 2014, Co-founder The Cochrane Collaboration
Major reasons for the many drug deaths are impotent drug regulation, widespread crime that includes corruption of the scientific evidence about drugs and bribery of doctors, and lies in drug marketing, which is as harmful as tobacco marketing and, therefore, should be banned.
Peter G?tzsche, 2014, Co-founder
The Cochrane Collaboration
The pharmaceuticals] are committing more crimes than any other business on the planet, and the crimes are worse."
Peter G?tzsche, 2013, Co-founder
The Cochrane Collaboration
"Our prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer in the United States and Europe."
Peter G?tzsche, 2014, Co-founder
The Cochrane Collaboration
"Around half of those who die have taken their drugs correctly; the other half die because of errors, such as too high a dose or use of a drug despite contraindications."
Peter G?tzsche, 2014,
Co-founder The Cochrane Collaboration
"Antipsychotics are dangerous drugs that should only be used if there is a compelling reason, and preferably as short-term therapy at a low dose because the drugs produce severe and permanent brain damage."
Peter G?tzsche
Co-founder The Cochrane Collaboration
If peer review was a drug it would never get on the market because we have lots of evidence of its adverse effects and don't have evidence of its benefit.[i]It's time to slaughter the sacred cow.
Dr Richard Smith, 2015,
Former Editor BMJ
The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability - not the validity - of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the pivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.
Richard Horton, Editor in chief
The Lancet, 2015
What, then, should we think about researchers who use the wrong techniques (either wilfully or in ignorance), use the right techniques wrongly, misinterpret their results, report their results selectively, cite the literature selectively, and draw unjustified conclusions? We should be appalled. Yet numerous studies of the medical literature, in both general and specialist journals, have shown that all of the above phenomena are common. This is surely a scandal.
Prof. Douglas Altman, 1994,
Chief Statistical Advisor,
BMJ
Huge sums of money are spent annually on research that is seriously flawed through the use of inappropriate designs, unrepresentative samples, small samples, incorrect methods of analysis, and faulty interpretation.
Prof. Douglas Altman, 1994,
Chief Statistical Advisor, BMJ
The poor quality of much medical research is widely acknowledged, yet disturbingly the leaders of the medical profession seem only minimally concerned about the problem and make no apparent efforts to find a solution.
Prof. Douglas Altman, 1994,
Chief Statistical Advisor, BMJ
