COVID-19

Posted by: bux-bux

Posted by: Lowcard

Part of the problem is that stupid people now have an equal or greater voice compared to actual experts, because of social media. And dumb people are the loudest. Scientists and doctors aren't on every Facebook article making comments like Jimmy Knuckledragger and all his coke-head buddies from high school do. And unfortunately, those morons are the loudest and therefore more convincing to people like him. These guys aren't the most critical thinkers, unless of course, somebody shares actual stats with them.

I actually find speaking with them to be quite fun, as their arguments are so full of holes that it makes it easy to point out.

Anyone in an Ed Hardy shirt or a black shirt with flames on it def knows what he's talking about. You should listen.....

Now would be the perfect time to post a pic of KenN in an Ed Hardy t-shirt that has flames on it.

Posted by: tashi

Posted by: KenN

Posted by: tashi

Posted by: KenN

Possible, but when one already knows that the source of "new information" is dodgy, then there's a low percentage on the likelihood of getting anything meaningful, so why waste the time going down that rabbit hole?

So, which part of The Intercept article was, in your words, “fake news”?

You're twisting my statement into something I didn't say. I said that I don't click on RT links out of principle, since I already know that it is massively skewed toward fake news and Putin propaganda. That means I didn't follow through to find it was hosting an Intercept report. I've made no claims about the veracity of Intercept reporting.

You said the RT report was fake news.

The RT report was simply regurgitating The Intercept article, thereby you called the news contained within “fake”.

But you didn’t read or check any of it it seems.

I’m sure this story will be reported more sources soon. Corporate right-wing media is currently lapping it up, corporate left-wing media will follow along soon, that’s how you sell papers.

No, I said in the aggregate, RT reports are filled with misinformation, and therefore I don't click on links to RT articles. Thus, if I don't follow the RT link, then I won't notice that the RT is just a passthru link to something else.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: bux-bux

Posted by: Lowcard

Part of the problem is that stupid people now have an equal or greater voice compared to actual experts, because of social media. And dumb people are the loudest. Scientists and doctors aren't on every Facebook article making comments like Jimmy Knuckledragger and all his coke-head buddies from high school do. And unfortunately, those morons are the loudest and therefore more convincing to people like him. These guys aren't the most critical thinkers, unless of course, somebody shares actual stats with them.

I actually find speaking with them to be quite fun, as their arguments are so full of holes that it makes it easy to point out.

Anyone in an Ed Hardy shirt or a black shirt with flames on it def knows what he's talking about. You should listen.....

Now would be the perfect time to post a pic of KenN in an Ed Hardy t-shirt that has flames on it.

That picture was 'shopped, I tells ya.

Posted by: KenN

That picture was 'shopped, I tells ya.

gansta Ken

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: KenN

That picture was 'shopped, I tells ya.

gansta Ken

Perfect just needs the frosted tips.

Posted by: KenN

Posted by: tashi

Posted by: KenN

Posted by: tashi

Posted by: KenN

Possible, but when one already knows that the source of "new information" is dodgy, then there's a low percentage on the likelihood of getting anything meaningful, so why waste the time going down that rabbit hole?

So, which part of The Intercept article was, in your words, “fake news”?

You're twisting my statement into something I didn't say. I said that I don't click on RT links out of principle, since I already know that it is massively skewed toward fake news and Putin propaganda. That means I didn't follow through to find it was hosting an Intercept report. I've made no claims about the veracity of Intercept reporting.

You said the RT report was fake news.

The RT report was simply regurgitating The Intercept article, thereby you called the news contained within “fake”.

But you didn’t read or check any of it it seems.

I’m sure this story will be reported more sources soon. Corporate right-wing media is currently lapping it up, corporate left-wing media will follow along soon, that’s how you sell papers.

No, I said in the aggregate, RT reports are filled with misinformation, and therefore I don't click on links to RT articles. Thus, if I don't follow the RT link, then I won't notice that the RT is just a passthru link to something else.

Okay, if you say so. 

I read that it was reporting The Intercepts reporting right in tungstens text so was able to get to the report without going anywhere near RT. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Posted by: tashi

Okay, if you say so. 

I read that it was reporting The Intercepts reporting right in tungstens text so was able to get to the report without going anywhere near RT. 🤷🏼‍♂️

I read the same thing as you but took the same approach as Ken.

Just because the RT article references the Intercept article, it does not mean that RT is not misrepresenting what was said in the Intercept article nor lying about it.  What if the RT article did in fact misrepresent the Intercept article? Then you'd have walked away believing incorrect information unless you took the extra step to go read the Intercept article as well.

Posted by: Schnickelfritz

Posted by: heckler

I only play a doctor on TV.  

Therefore have my 2x passport so this shit can get into the history books.   

Do you really know whats in the Big Mac or Coke that will also stay with you for life after guzzling them down?

What about the hash you smoked Friday night?   And the car exhaust you inhale during your commute or sitting at Timmies drive thru - perfectly safe?

Dummy: 'I'm not getting the Vaccine, who knows the long-term implications'

Gets COVID

Dummy: 'OMG!!!! Give me Monoclonal antibodies, Ivermectin, Vitamin drips, Hydroxychloroquine AND remdesivir STAT!!... uh... what else am I missing Doc?'

Doctor: 'Well, there's not a whole lot of evidence that treating COVID with Hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin won't have long-term impli....'

Dummy: - sprinting to farm and feed store -

This is unfortunately so true. I guess this is a bad time to let people know that contracting viruses can cause cancer? HPV, epstein-barr (aka mono) both have good track records to having long term health consequences for some. No one knows the long term consequences of COVID or the Vaccine. Not sure why they want to risk getting the virus, potentially being hospitalized and any long term consequences of having the virus yet don't want to risk a vaccine?

Conversation overheard this afternoon when a 30 something was talking to their parents and telling them about a service/ business that is going to ignore the vax passport rules starting up on Monday:

"They've decided they going to ignore the new rules as they want to be inclusive. I think it's the morally right thing to do "

Boy, did I ever have to bite my tongue on that one.

Posted by: syncro

Conversation overheard this afternoon when a 30 something was talking to their parents and telling them about a service/ business that is going to ignore the vax passport rules starting up on Monday:

"They've decided they going to ignore the new rules as they want to be inclusive. I think it's the morally right thing to do "

Boy, did I ever have to bite my tongue on that one.

What’s the business?  I’m going phone the by-law cops on any restaurant I go to that’s not checking,

I think that’s the morally right thing to do.

It's in Kelowna, think it's an RMT office

Kelowna’s out of my neighbourhood watch zone.  But I look forward to all the whiny stories about these “morally right” businesses losing their licenses.

I would be happy if construction sites started mandating it but I doubt that will ever happen. 

Mostly I just want to see my covid denier boss twist in the wind over it.