COVID-19 / Coronavirus

Remove this Banner Ad

Nathan Detroit said:
No Government in all of history, be it a Democracy, a Monarchy, a Dictatorship, a Communist structure or any other that has ever existed has EVER put its population's needs ahead of their own. If the needs of the people are in any way in conflict with the needs (or wants) of a Government, the Government will act to protect itself ahead of its people. If you can show an example to the contrary, you'd be the first.
Click to expand...
How was the government protecting itself when bringing in vaccines and mandating its use and lock downs? Not everything the government does is for its ppl i will agree with that.
 
Just as an aside Mathematics is used to prove a lot of scientific theories. Maths in itself is a man made creation our understanding of the universe. It is to quote another famous scientist the language we have created to describe the universe around us. Just putting this out there it doesn't really have any real relevance to the topic but i just love that description
 
TheFourPillars said:
Just as an aside Mathematics is used to prove a lot of scientific theories. Maths in itself is a man made creation our understanding of the universe. It is to quote another famous scientist the language we have created to describe the universe around us. Just putting this out there it doesn't really have any real relevance to the topic but i just love that description
Click to expand...
One of my favorite classes ever was non-Euclidean geometry. Fascinating stuff.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

TheFourPillars said:
How was the government protecting itself when bringing in vaccines and mandating its use and lock downs? Not everything the government does is for its ppl i will agree with that.
Click to expand...
They had to do something regardless of effectiveness and did what they felt was right. Only history will tell, but doing nothing was a sure way to be ousted.
 
Nathan Detroit said:
They had to do something regardless of effectiveness and did what they felt was right. Only history will tell, but doing nothing was a sure way to be ousted.
Click to expand...
I think there was consensus across the globe in the actions they took
 
mount eerie said:
You believe that it is acceptable behaviour for an adult to bully and laugh in someones face when they offer an opposing opinion to yours?

The term 'anti-vaxxer' is of course a slur, designed to humiliate and alienate people who might not agree that vaccines are health promoting. The justification for vaccines is based on germ theory. Like I mentioned before, since this is only a theory, not yet proven despite seemingly infinite funding and resources, it should remain open to debate.

I don't subscribe to Qanon because I don't believe that salvation is something to be sought externally, but I still respect people's right to explore that path.

Anyone claiming to be a sovereign citizen is confused from the get go and will face an uphill battle to achieve their goals.
The two words a from polar jurisdictions.
What I was claiming in the other thread about law being distinct from legislation was backed with evidence, yet was responded with only mockery, hearsay or opinion.


I have been reading BigFooty for years. I remember when you were Echols and Galon before that was it?
Your asssumption that I am only here for these threads is false.
I am feeling the need to contubute now because I percieve an injustice being dealt upon people who disagree with the popular narrative, and I'm trying to raise further understanding of why we believe what we do.

If you are intolerant of differing opinions to your own, perhaps a public forum is not for you.
Maybe you could invest in a private forum where you can be more discerning about the people you let in.
Click to expand...
Your posts resonate with an antivaxer and someone who thinks there’s tunnels under Melbourne where all the satanist’s cage children.

Spare me the histrionics.
 
Strapping Young Lad said:
Your posts resonate with an antivaxer and someone who thinks there’s tunnels under Melbourne where all the satanist cage children.

Spare me the histrionics.
Click to expand...
He doesn't believe in germ theory mate therefore he believes we get sick by ourselves and because of the way we take care of ourselves
 
mount eerie said:
You believe that it is acceptable behaviour for an adult to bully and laugh in someones face when they offer an opposing opinion to yours?

The term 'anti-vaxxer' is of course a slur, designed to humiliate and alienate people who might not agree that vaccines are health promoting. The justification for vaccines is based on germ theory. Like I mentioned before, since this is only a theory, not yet proven despite seemingly infinite funding and resources, it should remain open to debate.

I don't subscribe to Qanon because I don't believe that salvation is something to be sought externally, but I still respect people's right to explore that path.

Anyone claiming to be a sovereign citizen is confused from the get go and will face an uphill battle to achieve their goals.
The two words a from polar jurisdictions.
What I was claiming in the other thread about law being distinct from legislation was backed with evidence, yet was responded with only mockery, hearsay or opinion.


I have been reading BigFooty for years. I remember when you were Echols and Galon before that was it?
Your asssumption that I am only here for these threads is false.
I am feeling the need to contubute now because I percieve an injustice being dealt upon people who disagree with the popular narrative, and I'm trying to raise further understanding of why we believe what we do.

If you are intolerant of differing opinions to your own, perhaps a public forum is not for you.
Maybe you could invest in a private forum where you can be more discerning about the people you let in.
Click to expand...
Lay off the joe rogan mate. You've had your fill
 
Blokes like Morrison wouldn't have been front of the queue for the vaccine if they didn't think it would work

And blokes like Pete Evans wouldn't be spreading covid misinfo if it wasn't profitable for them personally

It always amazes me that people think the snake oil salesmen are morally superior to the large pharmaceutical companies

They are both after your money but one of them is regulated

The level of scrutiny and ongoing study of covid and the vaccines is huge, there is a lot of data out there but that doesn't mean its all good or that what is presented to you from some YouTube channel or zoom call or Craig Kelly sms is accurate or true
 
Mercy Seat said:
God I just lost a few brain cells reading the last couple of pages.

Do people actually know how vaccines work? They are essentially a piece of code that tells your body how to react to a certain virus when it sees it. It’s technically impossible to give you long term effects once it leaves your body, which is absolute max 40 days (ish). Impossible. There is no way for it to affect you beyond that, as all it essentially is is a piece of data.

If it were a medicine, then sure, long term effects of drugs can almost be unlimited in terms of scope, but as far as vaccines go, they are safe as houses and this one is probably one of the greatest feats of medical achievement in history. We should all be profoundly grateful to live in an era where we got to witness it, and hope that this sort of coming together of minds can be applied to some of the worlds other great problems.
Click to expand...

You claim that it is impossible for vaccines to give you long term effects once it leaves your body.
Impossible?
How can you guarantee that all adjuvants can't remain in the body long after administration?

It is documented that Polysorbate 80, a common ingredient in vaccines, is used in pharmacology to assist in the delivery of certain drugs across the blood-brain-barrier.

Is it impossible that heavy metals contained within certain vaccines could be transported to the brain via this chemical?

Heavy metals are notoriously difficult to excrete from the body.

Is it impossible that heavy metals residing in the brain or other parts of the body can cause disease until they are removed?

And I don't believe something that can cause death, no matter how rare, can be considered 'safe as houses'.
 
cryptor said:
If this is the crux of your whole position then you might as well give up now. A scientific theory isn't the same thing as the type of "theory" presented by people in everyday language. When people say "ooh I have a theory about this because I just saw/heard/read this other thing" what they really have is a hypothesis. A theory - a proper scientific theory - like the one you referenced is the result of a many studies being meticulously performed with the proper scientific method to ensure reliable and repeatable results, and then being rigorously scrutinised by other scientists worldwide before finally being accepted as one instance of supporting evidence for that theory.

As far as there are things we know are true and things we think are true, scientific theories come with some of the highest levels of certainty. To question the justification for vaccines based on your ignorance of the meaning of a term makes you look like a fool.
Click to expand...

This is a great post, and I agree with most of it.
My issue is that I question if the 'proper scientific method' has been applied to the field of virology.

If you examine any paper claiming to have 'isolated' a virus, you may discover that they have redefined what the word 'isolated' means, which is a misnomer at best, and scientific fraud at worst.

If you do not have a sample of a purified virus, how can you use it to determine if the virus is the cause of disease?

I would challenge you to find any study which has isolated and purified a virus from a diseased host, administered it to a healthy host, and then observed an exact replication of symptoms.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gralin said:
Blokes like Morrison wouldn't have been front of the queue for the vaccine if they didn't think it would work

And blokes like Pete Evans wouldn't be spreading covid misinfo if it wasn't profitable for them personally

It always amazes me that people think the snake oil salesmen are morally superior to the large pharmaceutical companies

They are both after your money but one of them is regulated

The level of scrutiny and ongoing study of covid and the vaccines is huge, there is a lot of data out there but that doesn't mean its all good or that what is presented to you from some YouTube channel or zoom call or Craig Kelly sms is accurate or true
Click to expand...
Does anyone seriously believe that the directors and people of influence within pharmaceutical companies are noble and benevolent?

Theirs is a business model which relies solely on keeping their customers dependant on as much medication as they can for as long as they can.

If they were in the business of health creation, they would be treating the cause, not the symptom, and be aiming not to have repeat customers.

It think it would be extremely naive to believe that these companies have no influence of the policies created within a government.
 
mount eerie said:
Does anyone seriously believe that the directors and people of influence within pharmaceutical companies are noble and benevolent?

Theirs is a business model which relies solely on keeping their customers dependant on as much medication as they can for as long as they can.

If they were in the business of health creation, they would be treating the cause, not the symptom, and be aiming not to have repeat customers.

It think it would be extremely naive to believe that these companies have no influence of the policies created within a government.
Click to expand...
Have you posted your best 22 for round one yet or are you just gonna lurk around in this thread spouting conspiratorial health-nut psycho-babble?

It is a footy forum after all :drunk:
 
mount eerie said:
Does anyone seriously believe that the directors and people of influence within pharmaceutical companies are noble and benevolent?

Theirs is a business model which relies solely on keeping their customers dependant on as much medication as they can for as long as they can.

If they were in the business of health creation, they would be treating the cause, not the symptom, and be aiming not to have repeat customers.

It think it would be extremely naive to believe that these companies have no influence of the policies created within a government.
Click to expand...
Read what I wrote not what you think I wrote.

By your logic here they'd not have been making vaccines, just pills to treat symptoms
 
Interestingly Pfizer once again in the list of most ethical companies

worldsmostethicalcompanies.com

2022 World's Most Ethical Companies List

Ethisphere® Institute 2022 World’s Most Ethical Companies® Honoree List
worldsmostethicalcompanies.com worldsmostethicalcompanies.com

It is a list of 136 honorees from 22 countries and 45 different industries
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top