A New conspiracy theory

Author: sadolite

Posts

Total: 57
#31
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Added08.06.21 06:57PM
-->@oromagi
You only say that because you are ignorant about the nature of the testing.  Polymerase Chain Reaction tests for COVID and Flu both have excellent specificity and exclusivity- no competent health professional would mistake a COVID chain for a flu chain and almost of health professionals would have to be involved to disguise flu chains for COVID
We don't know what we don't know.
And we do know what we do know.  We know how to tell COVID from the flu.

I think scientists 20 years ago also thought that no popularly held belief among them could be wrong as well.
Nonsense.  Science was in general agreement that we'd be done will fossil fuels by 2020, that cars would be self-driving and China would be the world's top superpower but there were plenty of dissenters and science never  ever assumes infallibility.

I have recently seen news articles where the CDC has asked hospitals to stop using certain tests because of false positives. 
Yeah but you can't tell New York Times from Russian propaganda.  When you anecdotally drop that you read something somewhere, that makes that factoid far less likely to be true, right.  If it were some actual fact-checked piece of journalism, you would not accept it as fact because the facts consistently disprove you.  Case in point- the CDC has not asked hospitals to stop using the standard test because of false positives, the CDC has asked hospitals to stop using the standard test because they have multiplexed the test to scan for flu at the same time.  Not only will science not mistake COVID for the flu, science will diagnose both diseases side by side and distinguish which type of flu as well.

Well then you would have the documentary responsibility to show massive layoffs in the healthcare industry, which would be easy to document if it weren't the 180 degree opposite of true.  The truth is that the healthcare industry has been devastated by the epidemic and has been desperate for help since the pandemic began.
I think we talked about this before. It's possible that different areas were effected by the pandemic differently. Rural places that canceled elective surgeries for example, struggled and responded with layoffs and hospital closures. It exposed a weakness in our for profit hospital system. As you also know rural places are often well insulated from the same type of spread as densely populated areas and also might not see the same overwhelmed hospitals, and in fact especially during the beginning of this the pandemic had opposite effects on urban as on rural hospitals. 

You mentioned a specific scenario. I speculated as to one possibility for why you could see those nurses racking up so much overtime. 
Moving the goalposts.  You argued that the pandemic was fake and therefore hospitals empty and nurses idle.  You may not, in the face of contradictory evidence, now argue that the pandemic was real and nurses busy.  Either prove that hospitals were pretending to treat COVID patients when they were not or concede the point.
I know you won't understand this but America is built on trusting the wisdom of consensus, not a belief that the consensus is infallible or even necessarily well-informed but that consensus must be respected as wise.  I trust the scientific method and repeatable results and rely heavily on experts who follow the same methodology.
It's not even easy to know where the consensus is.  We just know what the experts of the particular administration and media choose to trot out to fit their narrative. 
The Trump administration never pretended to be interested in consensus or even agreement.  Consensus was the arch enemy of the Trump administration.

Also the scientific method is currently flawed. It has positivity bias because negative results are not reported and a large foundation of knowledge is not replicated but the original study is just taken as it is. Just look at the debates here between quality opponents. We don't see second studies to confirm a first one presented and in fact just see people arguing about methodology when their personal view disagrees with a study.
All humanity suffers from positivity bias, present company excepted.  Nor is that what I'd call a particularly damning trait since negativity bias tends to be self-re-inforcing and so more distortive than a bias towards positivity.

The scientific community is not ideally using the scientific method.
That's on you to prove.

Also science is a branch of philosophy and there are better ways of determining the truth than the scientific method anyway.
I call bullshit.  Up to you to prove philosophy determines more truth than science.



#32
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Wylted
The term hoax here means "mistaken". So to believe that large swarms of people cannot be mistaken is a cognitive bias towards public opinion.
Complete strawman. No one is saying large swarms of people can’t be wrong. The question here is which conclusion is most reasonable. To you, apparently, the idea that millions of scientists and doctors all around the world are all wrong and all of their mistakes lined up perfectly to create a vaccine and see positive results from it… is more plausible than the idea that all these people who have spent their entire lives studying epidemiology actually know what they’re talking about. It’s absurd.

#33
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
I call bullshit.  Up to you to prove philosophy determines more truth than science.


Science is literally a branch of philosophy. 


The scientific community is not ideally using the scientific method.
That's on you to prove

The scientific community understands that positivity bias, not enough people attempting to replicate studies and prior plausibility are problems. I'll refer you to the episode of Adam ruins everything where he discusses lack or replication in science. Remember the part of the scientific method where experiments are supposed to be replicated? It often gets skipped over. 

Also experiments and studies with no results do not get published by their nature. Prior plausibility is more controversial some claiming it is a bias, some saying it isn't and others saying it is a necessary bias because the alternative is worse. 

The Trump administration never pretended to be interested in consensus or even agreement.  Consensus was the arch enemy of the Trump administration.
That really has nothing to do with anything said in this thread.


Moving the goalposts.  You argued that the pandemic was fake and therefore hospitals empty and nurses idle.  You may not, in the face of contradictory evidence, now argue that the pandemic was real and nurses busy.  Either prove that hospitals were pretending to treat COVID patients when they were not or concede the point.

Never argued in this thread the pandemic was fake. It's also possible that the pandemic is real and that the media has blown it out of proportion because fear sells. I can tell you that if somebody believes the pandemic is real, they should be very pissed at anybody exaggerating the negative effects because it discredits them for being on the same side. 

CDC has not asked hospitals to stop using the standard test because of false positives
Moving the goalposts. I did not say the "standard test" I mentioned a test that was used by some facilities, and even that was just used as one example of why data collection is imperfect. 
#34
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
-->@oromagi
I call bullshit.  Up to you to prove philosophy determines more truth than science.
Science is literally a branch of philosophy. 
Sophistry and dodging.  You said, " there are better ways of determining the truth than the scientific method anyway."  Prove it.

The scientific community is not ideally using the scientific method.
That's on you to prove
The scientific community understands that positivity bias, not enough people attempting to replicate studies and prior plausibility are problems. I'll refer you to the episode of Adam ruins everything where he discusses lack or replication in science. Remember the part of the scientific method where experiments are supposed to be replicated? It often gets skipped over. 

Also experiments and studies with no results do not get published by their nature. Prior plausibility is more controversial some claiming it is a bias, some saying it isn't and others saying it is a necessary bias because the alternative is worse. 
Great.  The subject is Coronavirus is really just the flu.  You must demonstrate how lack of replication caused scientists to mistake the flu for some new virus.

The Trump administration never pretended to be interested in consensus or even agreement.  Consensus was the arch enemy of the Trump administration.
That really has nothing to do with anything said in this thread.
You said:
It's not even easy to know where the consensus is.  We just know what the experts of the particular administration and media choose to trot out to fit their narrative. 
The reason you don't know what the scientific consensus is regarding Coronavirus is the people who give you your opinion had no interest in communicating the scientific consensus, because scientific consensus contradicted that administration's agenda.  You say it isn't easy to know where scientific consensus is regarding coronavirus and that's false- it is difficult for you to know but the scientific consensus is clearly that coronavirus exists and is not just the flu.
Moving the goalposts.  You argued that the pandemic was fake and therefore hospitals empty and nurses idle.  You may not, in the face of contradictory evidence, now argue that the pandemic was real and nurses busy.  Either prove that hospitals were pretending to treat COVID patients when they were not or concede the point.

Never argued in this thread the pandemic was fake.
Why would you lie about what happened on the last page?

OP:Has anyone heard about this conspiracy theory that covid 19 doesn't exist and that it is just the flu. 

Wylted: The jews have faked pandemics before, the new faked one caused the entire earth to basically be shut down for a but and allowed it to heal years of polluting. 

It's also possible that the pandemic is real and that the media has blown it out of proportion because fear sells.
Just more lies but again, on you to provide evidence.


CDC has not asked hospitals to stop using the standard test because of false positives
Moving the goalposts.  I did not say the "standard test" I mentioned a test that was used by some facilities, and even that was just used as one example of why data collection is imperfect. 
You don't understand what "moving the goalposts" means.  And you still fail to support your argument. There's only one big coronavirus test standard that was recently halted.  If you're talking about something else then it is probably irrelevant to your argument.



#35
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
You don't understand what "moving the goalposts" means.  And you still fail to support your argument. There's only one big coronavirus test standard that was recently halted.  If you're talking about something else then it is probably irrelevant to your argument
Nope, it's really not. The premise is separate from the example. Don't be silly.

Why would you lie about what happened on the last page?

OP:Has anyone heard about this conspiracy theory that covid 19 doesn't exist and that it is just the flu. 

Wylted: The jews have faked pandemics before, the new faked one caused the entire earth to basically be shut down for a but and allowed it to heal years of polluting. 


This is called a thought experiment. It's really asking the question 

"Would faking a pandemic to stop global warming be justified?"

I do believe that if powerful people feel it is justified and that doing so is a heroic deed, they would do it, just like the doctors who faked a pandemic to save their fellow man in WW2. 

It's a thought experiment done with rhetorical flair. 

Great.  The subject is Coronavirus is really just the flu.  You must demonstrate how lack of replication caused scientists to mistake the flu for some new virus.

You are confusing macro and micro arguments. If your argument for the pandemic being real is the following

The pandemic is real because the scientific community is in agreement it is real.

Than my argument is not

"The pandemic is not real"

My argument is merely your premise is wrong, and I showed the flaws in science. 

You are always taking debates off course with me, and I believe it is because you think I give a shit about the macro arguments. 

I don't. 

I care about the micro ones. I don't know enough to say the pandemic is real or not. I'm no expert. Whiteflame says it is, and I know him personally and trust his expertise. This is called using a current event to make the micro arguments.

Just more lies but again, on you to provide evidence.

I stated the media sensationalized things. It's self evident. Kinda stupid to ask for evidence. Everyone knows the media sensationalized things.besides that I used the word "possible" and did not make a declarative statement.


#36
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
“I Wasn’t Successful, No I did Not Win The Court Case” Patrick King on Press For Truth!
Topic's author
#37
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
I was just wondering if in fact the man actually did win his case because the state couldn't provide evidence to justify the fine, or if it was a conspiracy and the state did provide the evidence. Or if the case is even real.  If in fact the case is real I was thinking it would be a precedent defense against fines involving covid mandates. The state has to prove the virus has been isolated in order to say it exists according to this. The state failed to do so. Is the case real? That's the conspiracy I was talking about.
Topic's author
#38
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Actually the case is not over according to this link. The case is on going because of willful procedural violations by the state and failure to provide the evidence that the virus has in fact been isolated. The state has to prove this to pass any mandates or restrictions with regard to any virus or pandemic. So far, I say half true. The case is real and is ongoing.
#39
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Wylted


How many daft rednecks, in their plaid shirts with their big beards and their baseball caps, actually own a microscope.
#40
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know. Not sure why you asked me that
#41
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Wylted
OK....Let me put it another way.

Q. Why do numpties disagree with virologists, epidemiologists etc.

A. Because they are gullible numpties.
#42
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@zedvictor4
not all virologists and epidemiologist agree with each other 100% about everything pertaining to the virus. Agreeing with all.of them would be impossible, since their opinions vary. 
#43
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Wylted
Undoubtedly a truism.




#44
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@zedvictor4
and yet your questions imply anyone that disagrees with any member of a group that disagrees with each other, is an idiot. 
#45
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Wylted
Questions don't imply.

Questions question.


I'm questioning why do covid conspiracy theorists assume to know better than experts.
#46
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm questioning why do covid conspiracy theorists assume to know better than experts.

Maybe it is because they are a smart-ass, or, because they tbey believe they are, literally, a smart ass { donkey in human form }.

I think the primary reason is because of the rise of USA's president { bully-pulpit ergo some sense of ego based credibility } Trumpet tooting non-sense of non-sense crowd { 74 million in last election }.

Either way I think it primarily involves ego. I dunno and maybe I dont know, because I'm not a smart ass { literally }. :--)

However, I did read an article recently that trys to make clear, that, the Trumpeteer crowd is not primarily suicidal --as Colbert and others have laid out clearly---, rather they have homicidal tendicies and that may not be so much the ego as brain disorder.  I will try and find the article.


..." The truth is worse — and here I am speaking specifically of those who are resisting obtaining the vaccine, rather than those whose access is limited by location, poverty or issues with mobility to a vaccine center. '..... 

Topic's author
#47
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
Using disparaging words to marginalize people and their opinions  just makes one  look like a condescending asshole. Just saying. You will never get anyone to listen to anything you say not ever. Might as well talk to yourself in a mirror and a echo chamber. That's why people who question vaccines and covid have doubts. There is no other reason. Science has proved with out any doubt to flip flop on a weekly bases and is at best guessing. The arguments here are just the same as govt officials and scientists, condescending and insulting with the added negative of threatening people and their lively hoods threats of fines and imprisonment  and last but not least stooping to offering  offering bribes. Ya that's science. Real convincing. Just saying.  I choose not to live and fear, don't like it? to fucking bad.  The long term will prove the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine and nothing else. All who have taken it will know in a few years. Hears to your "faith" in science. I have faith in my immune system.

Topic's author
#48
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
The very second govt and science used threats and shaming I quit listening
#49
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
I saw Doctor on TV other day and he was emphatic, that, .paraphrasing....' dont think that you going to ge by without be exposed or infected by Delta '.......

..." These are people who didn’t and don’t want to die. They simply thought there was no way they would.

..To them, COVID was a virus of the big city and those who live there, of old people, or persons with multiple pre-existing conditions (of which they didn’t believe their cholesterol-lined arteries and COPD qualified as examples).

...It was only killing the weak.

..And they were strong — cowboy strong, to be precise, or at least Sturgis motorcycle ridin’ strong.

..High on a delusional mix of rugged individualism, toxic masculine bravado, pseudoscientific faith in vitamin supplements, and a belief that God would pull them through, they were convinced they were safe.

..Only others were at risk — the less good people.

..The ones who don’t do CrossFit, or go to a megachurch, or better still, a CrossFit in a megachurch. "...



Topic's author
#50
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
Sooo how many bikers at Sturgis have died of Covid? You most certainly have the numbers or you wouldn't have mentioned it. You wouldn't just post some unsubstantiated BS would you?


#51
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
You wouldn't just post some unsubstantiated BS would you?
Just because it is "unsubstantiated" does not make necessarily "BS". Plus I dont recall what I posted saying anything ab out bikers dying.

I think you need to reread what I posted and what you posted, to get your facts straight, first and foremost. Thanks Sad-do-lite



#52
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
-->
@sadolite
@ebuc
lol ok i find it funny how ant vaxxers say the same thing like "i got coVid before i have antibodies" or "im immune" you may be immune but others arent its super selfish and could cause deaths. why do you choose not to listen to science? also i notice your trumper and I seeing as to how his other supporters act (could be wrong) you seem to really like listening to whatever trump says . trump actually endorsed the vaccine? https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2021/04/23/its-a-real-lifesaver-trump-gives-strongest-endorsement-of-covid-19-vaccines-yet/?sh=45af839d4cf6 fox news also who had spread anti vaccine bs thus spreading covid has turned around and started promoting the vaccine https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/04/fox-news-viewers-covid-vaccine-hesitancy/ but both could have been hijacked by liberals.

(your most likely gonna say im stereotyping or something but technically thats true)


....also maybe start looking at data for once?
Topic's author
#53
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,171
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@drlebronski
Don't know who you are talking to but Trump isn't President anymore so I don't know why his name even enters into any discussion. Who gives a shit what Biden says or Trump says. Science? What science? I see politicly motivated attempts to control human behavior.  Selfish? Your health and well being are your responsibility. If you are afraid of getting sick and dying and living in fear for the rest of your life, then you stay home and never go out. You would have the entire population bow to your fears. Talk about selfish.
#54
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@drlebronski
lol ok i find it funny how ant vaxxers say the same thing like "i got coVid before i have antibodies" or "im immune" you may be immune but others arent its super selfish and could cause deaths.
the entire point of a "vaccine" is to trigger your OWN immune system into producing antibodies.

there is absolutely no way that a "vaccine" is going to make you MORE immune than experiencing the actual contagain first hand.

91% of severe cases and deaths are people over the age of 65 and 72% are overweight or obese




so, forcing school kids to get the jab makes no sense
#55
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
there is absolutely no way that a "vaccine" is going to make you MORE immune than experiencing the actual contagain first hand.
True to whatever degree, however, the vaccine may save life of human ---of any age--- and may keep other more detrimental effects at bay/away.

Masking makes a differrence ---contrary to you past anti-masking stance--- and CoVid2 vaccine is safe and effective in the above, as stated.

There exists an anti-vaccine and anti-mask cult --irrational religious like fevor---   and it is possible for a person to change their mind, if their open to the truth, facts etc, irrrespective of their education or social financial class. 




#56
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ebuc
there is absolutely no way that a "vaccine" is going to make you MORE immune than experiencing the actual contagain first hand.
True to whatever degree, however, the vaccine may save life of human ---of any age--- and may keep other more detrimental effects at bay/away.
EVERY TIME YOU BUY A BANANA, YOU PARTICIPATE IN THE SLAUGHTER OF INNOCENT LIVES.
#57
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
EVERY TIME YOU BUY A BANANA, YOU PARTICIPATE IN THE SLAUGHTER OF INNOCENT LIVES.

Huh? Sorry 3ru, youve lost me again. I dont have your depth of philosophical where-with-all. I need the big dummies guide to whatever it is your connecting to what I stated.