• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

The Last Covid-19 Megathread v. Hopefully...

Yes - I don't think that was an insult, merely an observation. I doubt anyone thinks otherwise.

At the bottom of the post you appear infurated by is a list of refutations. You appear to demand a far higher quality of evdience than you provide... well, you don't provide ANY evidence. This is more formally known as application of double standard or, more generally, contradiction.

People appear to fall into two catagories. Patient people like @tryptakid spend a long time in analysis and construction of a dialogue but because they don't directly assert a falsehood, appear not to be given the simple respect of an answer. But if someone does provide evidence, assert disagreement and flick whatever switch it is that moves you into 'insult mode' gets just that. Insults. When pointed out that ad hominem attacks are invalid, continue with the ad hominem attacks. You know, it doesn't exactly reflect well on you as a person, let alone as a reliable source.

I still note the profound lack of ANY evidence whatsoever. on your part. If you think refutation is simply saying 'no it's not', I have news...

If you're not an expert but you think you have destroyed the entire foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that could could be wrong.

As I've pointed out, Bluelight has a jolly handy search function so anyone can read every post by a specific user.
 
Last edited:
-=SS=- said:
It was in direct response to this:

I was happy bringing up points but he decided to twist in a personal direction so.. you get what you give.

Nowhere did he actually provide any data. A summary by GPT isn't even his own thoughts or effort either, nor is it really substantial in its own right. For example:

This is just straight up bollocks. It's not a precise tool for detecting infection at all! It's a method for amplifying genetic material, that's all it is.. period. The fact GPT couldn't even get that part correct tells you all you need to know. The Kary Mullis quote captures the essence succinctly of why that is the case; just because you found 1 fragment of some arbitrary gene sequence does not mean you have an active infection or whatever else you wish to ascribe to it.. all it tells you is that particular gene fragment was present. That's all. Anything else is inference.

"eXteNsiVe rEguLatOry bla bla bla".. this is just guff. Neither GPT nor the poster can actually argue the case, argue the very simple point that; when you amplify up some genetic material that does not mean the genetic material is sign of disease.. nor does the absence of it indicate the absence of disease.

You take this rubbish to its conclusion and you end up with reGulAtoRy eXpeRtS literally wading through human shit at treatment works, looking for fragments of polio. Completely oblivious to the fact that waste material is going to contain genetic fragments from just about every type of living organism: human, animal, bacterial, fungal. You could find just about anything in that scenario, it means the square root of fuck all.
Click to expand...

4DQSAR said:
Yes - I don't think that was an insult, merely an observation. I doubt anyone thinks otherwise.

People appear to fall into two catagories. Patient people like @tryptakid spend a long time in analysis and construction of a dialogue but because they don't directly assert a falsehood, appear not to be given the simple respect of an answer. But if someone does provide evidince, assert disagreement and flick whatever switch it is that moves you into 'insult mode' gets just that. Insults. When pointed out that ad hominem attacks are invalid, continue with the ad hominem attacks. You know, it doesn't exactly reflect well on you as a person, let alone as a reliable source.

I still note the profound lack of ANY evidence whatsoever. on your part. If you think refutation is simply saying 'no it's not', I have news...

If you're not an expert but you think you have destroyed the entire foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that could could be wrong.
Click to expand...

2e4nv6C.gif
 
I don't think this even qualifies as an argument - not when one party resorts to gainsaying, insults and nothing else.

More like that Monty Python sketch.

 
I suggest the dance is somewhat longer and IF there is a difference, it's that someone forgot to bring a fish. Saying 'I have a very large fish' isn't the same as having a very large fish.

But in essence, yep, cannot disagree with you.
 
4DQSAR said:
At the bottom of the post you appear infurated by is a list of refutations. You appear to demand a far higher quality of evdience than you provide... well, you don't provide ANY evidence. This is more formally known as application of double standard or, more generally, contradiction.
Click to expand...
If it's so simple then why can none of you besides @tryptakid actually argue the bloody points yourselves, with your own words and thinking, without having to constantly defer to authority. All you can do is point to authority figures or 'approved' citations like a schoolboy regurgitating from a textbook.

Masks. Vaccines. PCR. It's always the same. Can't actually take on the points raised at all, just defer to authority and attempt to shut the doubter down. That's religion you know.

EDIT: ":ROFLMAO:". Go on, try taking on any of the points with your own words instead of flapping your lips about the way I post. You've got nothing and you know it.

And please stop with this rubbish "but he provides no evidence".. because all this actually means is "I will not believe anything unless its coming from an approved authority", hence why you immediately launched into a character assassination of Kary Mullis instead of taking on the quote I posted. If his opinion was the opposite and aligned with the conventional narrative I'm sure you'd be quite happy to use him as a source of information.
If you're not an expert but you think you have destroyed the entire foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling
Click to expand...
^ This is basically the disingenuous nature of your posting encapsulated. As if the stuff I'm saying is purely the result of google search cherry-picking, and that there aren't in fact many people within the respective fields who also profoundly disagree with masks, vaccines, pcr, etc, who were speaking up at the time.. but were mostly drowned out by the government controlled media.

I've said it already but if doubts and doubters were treated as you guys seem to want, we'd have never escaped the Catholic Church.
 
Last edited:
the psychopath post isn't fine. i just didn't go back far enough.

if you are dissatisfied with the actions here, sue me. i have stuff to do and cleaning up this mess is down my list of priorities at this point.

i'll reopen this later but for now, we're done.

alasdair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top