Steven Snider, Parapolitical QAnon |529|

#2
Great interview. Steven is level headed and relatively well informed.

That said, I find Alex's thinking disturbing. "Where there's smoke there's fire" and "You just gotta believe that there's all these connections"? Really? That's not anything like close to science. Worse, it's dangerous. It obfuscates reasoned understanding and corrodes societal cohesion, which just happens to be one of the goals of psi-ops/info-ops.

What if someone accused Alex of being a misinformation agent because, well you know, there are such things and he has a forum and he's attacking societal institutions? It must be true! Where there's smoke, there's fire. Who's he working for? The Chinese? Russians?

Or people have herpes. There's lots of herpes in California. So Alex has herpes! Silly, but that is CT thinking in a nutshell.

Terrible and stupid, right? Why do the same to others then?

It's terrible to accuse Comet Pizza of torturing children in the basement when there is no evidence that the place even has a basement, let alone kidnapped kids in it, just because there is such a thing as pedophilic rings and Podesta and Clinton have sick friends. How can anyone seriously make that leap. It does explain my gripe about The Finders and Alex's accusation that it was a CIA operation. I could never understand how his "evidence" forced that conclusion. Now I get it. We just "have to believe".

What if law enforcement and the judicial thought that way?

More observations;

A comment or statement often made by CTers - "He is a former Intelligence officer"!!!!!!!!

Steven correctly alluded to the issue with that "evidence" (former intel). There are a gazillion people who were "in" intelligence; many were pimple faced kids doing everything from cryptology to cartology to scout snipers to filing international cables. Intelligence covers a wide range of mostly mundane, but classified, activities. There are hordes of analysts who sit in a cubicle working on very specific and limited scope product. There are officers who are in the field, overwhelmingly, in foreign countries, trying to gather intelligence and recruit foreigners to provide the same. That is what the CIA does 99% of the time. IC People stay in their lane and anything outside of it is on a limited need to know basis. That never stops people from guessing and gossiping about the bigger picture, but I don't consider guessing and gossip to be evidence, although I note that CTists do. Stargate, btw, was a DIA project, not CIA. The DIA dropped it and the CIA picked it up only in the early 90s.

I've heard it said that Gloria Steinem was a CIA officer. No, she wasn't. She was recruited as a source by the CIA to provide information and to perform a role. She was never "in"the CIA. There are many people that the CIA convinces to agree to cooperate with them. Again, that's what they do. But those sources have little to no idea what the bigger picture is.

Loved Steven's comments about co-opting. Right. Try to guide organically forming movements that might pose a threat. Or at least try to understand them by gain insider info.

So I am not impressed by anyone claiming validity because they were "in"intelligence unless the topic is specifically one they were assigned to and they were at a level where they would be making decisions based on collating data/product from many desks.

People - including former military and IC - tell stories to make themselves appear more relevant or interesting - or because it's fun and that's what people do. Again, at best they are probably guessing at what was happening unless they worked on that specific issue for some time and at a high level. Then they are unlikely to reveal classified info and end up telling a story anyhow; or just not talking. Much truth to those who know, stay silent and those who do not run their mouths.

We, as humans, are first and foremost story tellers. Being a former member of the IC makes for fertile grounds for story telling. The veil of mystery and Hollywood depictions intrigues people. Everyone wants to hear interesting tales and become "in the know". You can get a lot of free beer that way; or maybe talk circuit gigs or book deals if you're more ambitious and less circumspect.

CTists don't always follow their own own smoke = fire philosophy. For example, 9/11. Islamic terrorists like to blow stuff up. They declared war on the US. They tried to blow up the towers in 1993. They were attacking US embassies with bombs, US military installations and ships all through the 90s. Lots of smoke (literally) there, but somehow it doesn't =fire for the CTists. Nope.Must of been "The Jews" or our own government. Crazy - people are story tellers and the world is an ink blot test. They see the patterns they want to (or have to based on their psychology).

Is Q-anon an info op? Most certainly. I like what Steven had to say about that. Info op by whom? A lot of that stuff is coming from the political parties and their hired guns in the political marketing and PR sector. Mostly democrat/Clinton sponsored, but some conservative crap too- or it could be an organically developed myth born of people's need to make sense of big confusing world. A collective subconscious kind of thing. Prophets alway arise in times of trouble and need.

I have some bad news for all of us, but especially CTists - that is, there is no one in charge, no master minds, no cabals, no geniuses controlling and directing everything. There are just people taking care of their own interests, which may, or may not, align with yours or mine. They fight each other just as we all we all conflict. No one can herd the cats, though some may try - and fail. Some step up and try to run things, some keep their heads downs and follow orders and some go 1%er rogue. No one has "the big picture" because the big picture is too big and its madnesses (from a physical human standpoint). CTists want there to be godlike figures. They just want them to be benevolent, but see them as malevolent because bad things happening the world. Get over it. It's just life and people doing what life and people do. It's always been that way and always will be. No one is running the show.
 
Last edited:
#3
I don't have much to add, except I still have no idea how people pick and choose their personal CT's while vehemently denying others.

And this joke was hilarious:

"The second time I met OJ Simpson:

And the only one with the courage to voice their disgust was a woman named Sharon. How could you, she said, how could you shake hands with that murderer? I said, with all due respect, that murderer ran for over 11,000 yards."
 
#5
I don't have much to add, except I still have no idea how people pick and choose their personal CT's while vehemently denying others."
Sometimes there really is a conspiracy. Iraq WMD + al Qaeda cooperation was a true conspiracy by a certain group that really did exist. they called themselves "Neocons". They even wrote a paper "Project for a New American Century" - You might even be able to Google it, if it isn't been disappeared. It called for the invasion of Iraq and other MENA countries. These same guys were on Bush's staff. Bill Clinton had turned them down and shut them out. They are the same people who pushed Iraqi WMD and mushroom clouds over NYC. They knew better. They deliberately set up an intel stove pipe to filter only marginal intel that favored themes negative view of Iraq.

Jimmy Hoffa conspired with the mafia, specifically Detroit family, to use teamsters pension funds to develop casinos and other enterprises, legal, quasi-legal and illegal. There were even convictions on that. The the Detroit mafia, with conspiratorial agreement of families in other states, killed Hoffa when he became too much of a loose cannon. Do you deny that massive conspiracy?

Covid is also shaping up to be a conspiracy of sorts, though a lot of the panic is organically developing out of fear.

Anyhow, even you cannot deny the Iraq and Hoffa conspiracies, though I'm sure you will try in a typically foolish dorky manner.

Are you saying there are never conspiracies?
 
Last edited:
#6
Great interview. Steven is level headed and relatively well informed.

That said, I find Alex's thinking disturbing. "Where there's smoke there's fire" and "You just gotta believe that there's all these connections"? Really? That's not anything like close to science. Worse, it's dangerous. It obfuscates reasoned understanding and corrodes societal cohesion, which just happens to be one of the goals of psi-ops/info-ops.

What if someone accused Alex of being a misinformation agent because, well you know, there are such things and he has a forum and he's attacking societal institutions? It must be true! Where there's smoke, there's fire. Who's he working for? The Chinese? Russians?

Or people have herpes. There's lots of herpes in California. So Alex has herpes! Silly, but that is CT thinking in a nutshell.

Terrible and stupid, right? Why do the same to others then?

It's terrible to accuse Comet Pizza of torturing children in the basement when there is no evidence that the place even has a basement, let alone kidnapped kids in it, just because there is such a thing as pedophilic rings and Podesta and Clinton have sick friends. How can anyone seriously make that leap. It does explain my gripe about The Finders and Alex's accusation that it was a CIA operation. I could never understand how his "evidence" forced that conclusion. Now I get it. We just "have to believe".

What if law enforcement and the judicial thought that way?

More observations;

A comment or statement often made by CTers - "He is a former Intelligence officer"!!!!!!!!

Steven correctly alluded to the issue with that "evidence" (former intel). There are a gazillion people who were "in" intelligence; many were pimple faced kids doing everything from cryptology to cartology to scout snipers to filing international cables. Intelligence covers a wide range of mostly mundane, but classified, activities. There are hordes of analysts who sit in a cubicle working on very specific and limited scope product. There are officers who are in the field, overwhelmingly, in foreign countries, trying to gather intelligence and recruit foreigners to provide the same. That is what the CIA does 99% of the time. IC People stay in their lane and anything outside of it is on a limited need to know basis. That never stops people from guessing and gossiping about the bigger picture, but I don't consider guessing and gossip to be evidence, although I note that CTists do. Stargate, btw, was a DIA project, not CIA. The DIA dropped it and the CIA picked it up only in the early 90s.

I've heard it said that Gloria Steinem was a CIA officer. No, she wasn't. She was recruited as a source by the CIA to provide information and to perform a role. She was never "in"the CIA. There are many people that the CIA convinces to agree to cooperate with them. Again, that's what they do. But those sources have little to no idea what the bigger picture is.

Loved Steven's comments about co-opting. Right. Try to guide organically forming movements that might pose a threat. Or at least try to understand them by gain insider info.

So I am not impressed by anyone claiming validity because they were "in"intelligence unless the topic is specifically one they were assigned to and they were at a level where they would be making decisions based on collating data/product from many desks.

People - including former military and IC - tell stories to make themselves appear more relevant or interesting - or because it's fun and that's what people do. Again, at best they are probably guessing at what was happening unless they worked on that specific issue for some time and at a high level. Then they are unlikely to reveal classified info and end up telling a story anyhow; or just not talking. Much truth to those who know, stay silent and those who do not run their mouths.

We, as humans, are first and foremost story tellers. Being a former member of the IC makes for fertile grounds for story telling. The veil of mystery and Hollywood depictions intrigues people. Everyone wants to hear interesting tales and become "in the know". You can get a lot of free beer that way; or maybe talk circuit gigs or book deals if you're more ambitious and less circumspect.

CTists don't always follow their own own smoke = fire philosophy. For example, 9/11. Islamic terrorists like to blow stuff up. They declared war on the US. They tried to blow up the towers in 1993. They were attacking US embassies with bombs, US military installations and ships all through the 90s. Lots of smoke (literally) there, but somehow it doesn't =fire for the CTists. Nope.Must of been "The Jews" or our own government. Crazy - people are story tellers and the world is an ink blot test. They see the patterns they want to (or have to based on their psychology).

Is Q-anon an info op? Most certainly. I like what Steven had to say about that. Info op by whom? A lot of that stuff is coming from the political parties and their hired guns in the political marketing and PR sector. Mostly democrat/Clinton sponsored, but some conservative crap too- or it could be an organically developed myth born of people's need to make sense of big confusing world. A collective subconscious kind of thing. Prophets alway arise in times of trouble and need.

I have some bad news for all of us, but especially CTists - that is, there is no one in charge, no master minds, no cabals, no geniuses controlling and directing everything. There are just people taking care of their own interests, which may, or may not, align with yours or mine. They fight each other just as we all we all conflict. No one can herd the cats, though some may try - and fail. Some step up and try to run things, some keep their heads downs and follow orders and some go 1%er rogue. No one has "the big picture" because the big picture is too big and its madnesses (from a physical human standpoint). CTists want there to be godlike figures. They just want them to be benevolent, but see them as malevolent because bad things happening the world. Get over it. It's just life and people doing what life and people do. It's always been that way and always will be. No one is running the show.
Eric, You use what i would like to call "Well if they don't want to be poor, why don't they just move away from the bad neighborhood??" type logic, to prevent/undermine conspiracy theories

A Jenga tower remains a tower until tips over. No matter how many holes you see in it.

How much less intellectual effort does it require to always argue on behalf of established power
 
#7
Eric, You use what i would like to call "Well if they don't want to be poor, why don't they just move away from the bad neighborhood??" type logic, to prevent/undermine conspiracy theories

A Jenga tower remains a tower until tips over. No matter how many holes you see in it.

How much less intellectual effort does it require to always argue on behalf of established power
I have no idea what you're saying/gettin at. Perhaps use a different analogy?
 
#10
I have no idea what you're saying/gettin at. Perhaps use a different analogy?
Ok.
Poor Guy briefly leaves wallet sitting on a table at restaurant.
Celebrity Lady walking by takes wallet from counter and (expertly)removes cash and replaces wallet as if undisturbed.
(Camera angle only sees only her look-at and politely replace wallet)

Poor Guy: “Celeb Lady stole my money and it turns out she has a history of stealing money from people including the church she grew up in!!!”

CTist: “Celeb Lady gets off on stealing for some Culty vibe reason. And she paid off her church to not talk about it.”

Eric: “Actually. The church is on record denying any theft incident, and nobody has actually won a lawsuit against Celeb Lady yet. The camera evidence doesn’t show any money being removed from the wallet. So is most likely that Poor Guy was trying to set up Celeb Lady.”
 
#11
No, don't be silly.

I said CTs.

It would be useful to distinguish between conspiracies, and what people go on about here. Oh wait, someone's done it for me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory#Difference_from_conspiracy
Hmm. Maybe I have covid and it has impaired my thinking, but I actually think, for once, you've supplied something worthwhile.

Not a bad link. I generally agree, though I quibble with the appeal to authority.

What we have with covid is Fauci and a handful of others declaring that they - and they alone - are "science". That is what makes a conspiracy possible. Actually, Fauci is a form of CTist. If you disagree with him, you are not "science" and are a CTists. Nice jiu jitsu move there. You attempt, basically, the same thing. The covid thing is not in line with your link's description. There are plenty of people with the right credentials that are 180 degrees from Fauci. The entire country of Sweden is contrary to him. Fuaci has set himself up as The Authority that must be appealed to. That's like being a false god. So covid does not adhere to your definition of a CT.
 
#12
Ok.
Poor Guy briefly leaves wallet sitting on a table at restaurant.
Celebrity Lady walking by takes wallet from counter and (expertly)removes cash and replaces wallet as if undisturbed.
(Camera angle only sees only her look-at and politely replace wallet)

Poor Guy: “Celeb Lady stole my money and it turns out she has a history of stealing money from people including the church she grew up in!!!”

CTist: “Celeb Lady gets off on stealing for some Culty vibe reason. And she paid off her church to not talk about it.”

Eric: “Actually. The church is on record denying any theft incident, and nobody has actually won a lawsuit against Celeb Lady yet. The camera evidence doesn’t show any money being removed from the wallet. So is most likely that Poor Guy was trying to set up Celeb Lady.”
Not a good analogy.

The world you want to live in - CT Land - is that a few professional athletes have well known drug and alcohol issues and beat their women. Joe is a professional athlete. He has never been personally charged or convicted of any crime. One day his wife says he beat her in a drunken rage. There are no witnesses and the wife has an injury consistent with closing her finger in the car door. She also has been having an affair and wants to leave Joe. She has no obvious means of support other than a big divorce settlement with Joe. In court she has a professional witness testify that the injury to the finger could only be caused by Joe. Joe's professional witness reiterates it was caused by a car door type slam.

You conclude that Joe is an athlete and athletes are known drug and alcohol and spouse abusers. You choose to believe the wife's professional witness. You like to repeat over and over again what he said in testimony. You ignore what Joe's orthopedic physician witness says because he works for Joe. He's being paid to lie! So Joe is guilty.

You're also of the mindset that the worst of law enforcement exhibits. Black male youths out on the streets after dark. They must be up to crime because....well you know how they are....13% of the population and 50% of violent crime. Science is on your side! Without any real probable cause, you go in tough and rough them up and arrest them on bogus charges to clean up the streets.
 
Last edited:
#13
Not a good analogy.

The world you want to live in - CT Land - is that a few professional athletes have well known drug and alcohol issues and beat their women. Joe is a professional athlete. He has never been personally charged or convicted of any crime. One day his wife says he beat her in a drunken rage. There are no witnesses and the wife has an injury consistent with closing her finger in the car door. She also has been having an affair and wants to leave Joe. She has no obvious means of support other than a big divorce settlement with Joe. In court she has a professional witness testify that the injury to the finger could only be caused by Joe. Joe's professional witness reiterates it was caused by a car door type slam.

You conclude that Joe is an athlete and athletes are known drug and alcohol and spouse abusers. You choose to believe the wife's professional witness. You like to repeat over and over again what he said in testimony. You ignore what Joe's orthopedic physician witness says because he works for Joe. He's being paid to lie! So Joe is guilty.

You're also of the mindset that the worst of law enforcement exhibits. Black male youths out on the streets after dark. They must be up to crime because....well you know how they are....13% of the population and 50% of violent crime. Science is on your side! Without any real probable cause, you go in tough and rough them up and arrest them on bogus charges to clean up the streets.
Excellent Retort!
Now we know how we sound to eachother. Most of which is probably exaggerated filtration of some triggered defense mechanism...

My main point is, that you can see that your tendancy is to argue on behalf of the established Power.
As for the last part (13% x 50%), that's you own extrapolation. In fact, it seems like an attempt to paint my point about you onto me...

I mentioned "POOR" subjects.. and somehow you assumed poor implies racial?? You come out lookin more suspect as having racial inclination there..
 
#14
Hmm. Maybe I have covid and it has impaired my thinking, but I actually think, for once, you've supplied something worthwhile.

Not a bad link. I generally agree, though I quibble with the appeal to authority.
My preference is to appeal to people who know what they are doing. Yes, there is substantial overlap between the two, but I think people are best served by learning how to find a reliable source. This includes figuring out when authority is meaningful and when it isn't.

What we have with covid is Fauci and a handful of others declaring that they - and they alone - are "science".
I don't really care about or pay attention to Fauci. I certainly don't see any indication that he (or they) alone are "science". I've got enough knowledge and practice that I can work my way through primary sources, but I can see the advantage of using him as a source if you need someone to summarize the science for you.

Fake COVID isn't a CT because different leaders choose differently among several viable options (e.g. Sweden), in the face of uncertainty. It's a CT because the claims are in opposition to those in the best position to evaluate the accuracy of the claims (e.g. the various government health departments who collect and act on public health information, the doctors working on the front lines, the research on the virus and the vaccines, etc). It goes even further. Not only are all these people suddenly incompetent. Conveniently, they are now all in on the conspiracy.
 
#15
Excellent Retort!
Now we know how we sound to eachother. Most of which is probably exaggerated filtration of some triggered defense mechanism...

My main point is, that you can see that your tendancy is to argue on behalf of the established Power.
As for the last part (13% x 50%), that's you own extrapolation. In fact, it seems like an attempt to paint my point about you onto me...

I mentioned "POOR" subjects.. and somehow you assumed poor implies racial?? You come out lookin more suspect as having racial inclination there..
To be clear, I actually think that your analogy would be one where I would generally agree that the celebrity lady was guilty given what we know. However, I disagree that it is a good analogy for the typical CT.

I disagree that I argue in favor of established power. I've been going on about how covid is mostly a scam perpetrated by established power. I've said right here how established power illegally invaded Iraq based on lies that they spread throughout society in the build-up to war.

How can you say that I am default in league with established power?

I call them as I see them. I have no allegiance to any side in all of this. Sometimes that means I'm generally aligned with the official findings and sometimes I'm not. Why do you have to be all black and white all of the time?

And what's with the racism comment? 13%/50% is a fact straight from FBI crime statistics. I mentioned it because it is well known and often cited among law enforcement types. Now it's a thought crime to cite facts? That just about makes you the established power (woke variety).

I inferred nothing from your use of the adjective "poor"other than I assumed it to be merely proof that you waver toward a focus on inconsequential trivialities (which could explain the tendency toward CTs).

Everyone wants to be the established power. CTists seek the same. They want to be the go to version of truth. They need to take down those who already have power to get there. So they defame them and call them liars, etc.; which is accurate to some extent, but they themselves lie to do the take down. Same snot, same nose, different nostril.

Don't you see? It's all a power struggle; who's story is going to be believed. It's all BS. I won't play. If you seek power over others, you are evil. I don't care what "side" you're on. Stand on your own two feet and stand alone if you must. That's what a real man does. A woman should seek a place by a real man's side. Join a herd and put your life in pain; doesn't matter if it's an establishment herd or a rebel herd. A real man seeks to help others be free when he must interact with them.

Btw, Leadership is not power over others, it is setting an example that helps others realize their own personal strength and freedom.
 
Last edited:
#16
I don't really care about or pay attention to Fauci. I certainly don't see any indication that he (or they) alone are "science". I've got enough knowledge and practice that I can work my way through primary sources, but I can see the advantage of using him as a source if you need someone to summarize the science for you.

Fake COVID isn't a CT because different leaders choose differently among several viable options (e.g. Sweden), in the face of uncertainty. It's a CT because the claims are in opposition to those in the best position to evaluate the accuracy of the claims (e.g. the various government health departments who collect and act on public health information, the doctors working on the front lines, the research on the virus and the vaccines, etc). It goes even further. Not only are all these people suddenly incompetent. Conveniently, they are now all in on the conspiracy.
You should pay attention to Fauci because he is highly political and everything is political. E.V.E.R.Y.T.H.I.N.G. The guy has flip flopped dozens of times on masks, vaccines, you name it. So was his "science" wrong then or is it wrong now?

You aren't concerned that Fauci more than once has declared himself to represent science, real science and that anyone who disagrees with him is going against science?

Fauci has never qualified his statements and policies by saying that his way is just one way, one of several, to deal with covid. Nope. He says it is the only way and if we don't do it, we're all going to die.

And you're not being honest about your position. You've basically towed the party (Fauci) line on all things covid. Yet, there is Sweden - not some CTist hiding in his trailer park - doing the opposite of what Fauci (science itself!) says is necessary and the only way to survive. There are many highly qualified scientists, some who have worked extensively on the mRNA tech, saying that Fauci is full of it. These guys aren't some handful of rogue jerks, like the chicken coup builders who say that, as architects they know a building can't fall straight down or collapse due to fire. These guys are the equivalent of the guys who actually built the world trade towers (if the builders of the towers came out and said that there is 0 chance that crashing airplanes and fire could cause them to collapse, I would pay attention).

As for all of your experts, how can Sweden defy them? Is the whole country of Sweden populated by incompetent maniacs? Why aren't they all dead by now?
 
#17
You should pay attention to Fauci...
Why? Even if any or all of what you claim is true, it doesn't make Fake COVID true.

If you want to claim to not be a CTer, why not talk science instead of personalities?

And you're not being honest about your position. You've basically towed the party (Fauci) line on all things covid.
That's probably a side effect of looking at the science/evidence.

Yet, there is Sweden - not some CTist hiding in his trailer park - doing the opposite of what Fauci (science itself!) says is necessary and the only way to survive.
Why are you going on about Sweden? They didn't do the "opposite" of what the science says. Nor have they had some sort of remarkable or unexpected outcome.

There are many highly qualified scientists, some who have worked extensively on the mRNA tech, saying that Fauci is full of it.
Really? References, please.
 
#18
Why? Even if any or all of what you claim is true, it doesn't make Fake COVID true.

If you want to claim to not be a CTer, why not talk science instead of personalities?
Because the personality is a cult. The man claims to be SCIENCE. Can a cultist be a scientist?



That's probably a side effect of looking at the science/evidence.
You overly rely on science. You keep mentioning primary studies/original source that you've read. Yeah? You've never mentioned a single one. If you did, I could probably cite one with contrary findings. Your reading of the India mask study was highly flawed. So excuse me if I don't just believe you.

But you and your science are, in essence, the same as a conspiracy theory. You want to control the story as a High Priest of Science; The Guardian of Truth. You can read the primary studies and interpret them You know the truth; unlike us stupid unwashed rubes! Well, that arcane understanding is exactly what CTists claim. It's what all power mongers claim.

You have this fantasy that 'science" is all about the truth. I don't know if you even really believe that. Anyhow, It isn't all about truth. That is an ideal that will never be realized. If there is an opportunity to cheat to gain power, money, fame, people will take it. Scientists are people.

The only science that is real is something we can all see it work (like a bridge that cars drive over for years or a space ship that completes its mission). Everything else is suspect at best. What I just said is real science. It's skeptical. It demands further proof. It doesn't just accept because the government said so.

If you're telling me that you've read the scant covid related studies and are therefore convinced that the Fauci party line is Truth, then you are more completely full of shit than I thought. There haven't been enough studies of any of this. There hasn't been an opportunity for replication of what little has been done. There haven't been sufficient peer reviews. This is a new thing. Science - the idealized form - takes years to get a handle on something like this.



Why are you going on about Sweden? They didn't do the "opposite" of what the science says. Nor have they had some sort of remarkable or unexpected outcome.
Sweden didn't follow any of the mask, lock down or vaccine policies that Fauci's cult demands (based on The Science, of course)



Really? References, please.
I have given them to you. Warren, Malone and several others. You just summarily dismiss them as having ulterior motives, like a good CTist would.

You're going back on ignore now
 
Last edited:
#19
You overly rely on science. You keep mentioning primary studies/original source that you've read. Yeah? You've never mentioned a single one.
Huh? I've provided dozens of links to primary research in our discussions, plus quoted from them.

Your reading of the India mask study was highly flawed.
Yet you were unable to offer even a single coherent counterpoint to anything I said, eventually resorting to name-calling instead. Excuse me if I don't believe you.

Sweden didn't follow any of the mask, lock down or vaccine policies...based on...science.
Of course they did. People used masks. They limited social interactions and large gatherings. They worked from home. They got vaccinated. They tested and quarantined. The main difference was it was largely voluntary, and they didn't close schools at any point. And about what you'd expect happened - they did worse than nearby countries and better than some others in Europe. And they were about average among countries of similar size and economic status. They seem to have followed the science better voluntarily, than the US did involuntarily. Their vaccination rate is higher, for example.

I have given them to you. Warren, Malone and several others.
No you didn't. You gave me a link to a snide comment on Twitter. So...appeal to authority - "there are many highly qualified scientists, some who have worked extensively on the mRNA tech" - instead of making any effort to find out if they are a reliable source.

Explain to me again how you're not a CTer?
 
#20
Huh? I've provided dozens of links to primary research in our discussions, plus quoted from them.



Yet you were unable to offer even a single coherent counterpoint to anything I said, eventually resorting to name-calling instead. Excuse me if I don't believe you.



Of course they did. People used masks. They limited social interactions and large gatherings. They worked from home. They got vaccinated. They tested and quarantined. The main difference was it was largely voluntary, and they didn't close schools at any point. And about what you'd expect happened - they did worse than nearby countries and better than some others in Europe. And they were about average among countries of similar size and economic status. They seem to have followed the science better voluntarily, than the US did involuntarily. Their vaccination rate is higher, for example.



No you didn't. You gave me a link to a snide comment on Twitter. So...appeal to authority - "there are many highly qualified scientists, some who have worked extensively on the mRNA tech" - instead of making any effort to find out if they are a reliable source.

Explain to me again how you're not a CTer?
I repeat - If you're telling me that you've read the scant covid related studies and are therefore convinced that the Fauci party line is Truth, then you are more completely full of shit than I thought. There haven't been enough studies of any of this. There hasn't been an opportunity for replication of what little has been done. There haven't been sufficient peer reviews. This is a new thing. Science - the idealized form - takes years to get a handle on something like this.

You're not science. You're "sciencey", which is a form of CT that denies real science, and is info ops.

Now you really are going on ignore. You've dragged me off topic and we've disrupted what could be an interesting thread about CTs and info ops. Screw you.
 
Top