The Open Thread is a place for open discussion among my readers. Post anything you feel like sharing! From now on, the Open Thread will no longer be monthly. Instead, there will be a new Open Thread whenever it is adequate. The stage is yours. Go ahead!
The latest Open Thread is made ‘sticky’ to improve access.
Please consider throwing a few coins into the tip jar, and buy my books! They are great. Your support is greatly appreciated.
Interesting to read through the vaxx discussion in the other open threads.
It’s become really emotional in my circle
The rebuttal to me not wanting is vaxx is simply “no you’re wrong, end of discussion” and other reverse psychology (“I don’t care, get sick and when you do it’s not my problem” yet they keep ganging up on me – if you don’t care then why do you care what I believe or do re: vaxx??)
It’s like talking to a feminist about the mythical pay gap
I keep hearing the stat / percentage of “the vaxx provides 95% protection “ and all the unvaxxed are the ones who will die off / get sick. Is there any reliable database I can peruse ?
Moreover, if vaxxed ppl can get you sick, is there any merit to the logic / reasoning of “well you have to join the majority (ie vaxxed) because now you are exposed to covid transmitters”
One of the most remarkable findings is that Fauci admitted that at the CDC, which Fauci runs and which is pushing the Covid bullshit onto the world, only about half of employees are vaccinated. These are probably the most informed people on the vaxx on the planet, yet somehow they think that the benefits do not outweigh the risks. It’s probably a complete coincidence that according to the mainstream narrative the vaxx is worth it despite all the side effects.
What I would suggest you :
Read some arguments from people who are pro vaccine, and people who are anti vaccine. Try to balance it 50-50
Then make your conclusion.
Most people here are anti vaccine. So if you read this blog, and also some other material that is more pro vaccine, it should somewhat account for the bias.
Not going to say what you should do. Make your own decision
Also try to gauge what political positions someone holds, and how that would affect his stance.
For example libertarians are mostly anti vaccers.
Hahahhaa
Here we can see Alek reverting back to the state of a 2 year old toddler.
Covid must have been really harsh on him.
I am no anti-vaxxer per se, but I am profoundly skeptical of taking a vaccine based on experimental technology, production of which was rushed, where the long term effects are unknown.
Also, to top it all off, it is being heavily promoted by an industry that is not known for having your best interests in mind, to say the least, plus it is being promoted on the basis of unscientific claims, which is a huge red flag.
Oh, and btw, there are some indications (see VAERS data) that there are plenty of adverse side effects and deaths that can be connected to thr vaxx. The number is tiny, in proportion to the millions of jabs already given, but it does suggest it is not harmless.
It may make sense to vaxx if you have risk factors that put you in actual danger from covid. Healthy and under 60 should not take them, as the risk likely exceeds any benefit.
My brother is a pro-vaccine doctor who has taken it (i’m pretty sure his wife and daughter have as well), and when I said “look, if something is good for me, you don’t have to twist my arm to get me to take it.”. He didn’t even attempt to convince me that it was good for me. Instead, he said, “it’s not about you, it’s about everyone else.” He then reminded me that I took the meningococcal vaccine in order to stay in the dorm my freshman year of university because meningitis thrives in those scenarios.
Well can I get some love from my individualist brother Uber? How about it?
Give me a white country, and this appeal to the public good might carry some weight. A multicultural faggot fest? Not so much.
@Herkerderker:
Yes I’m an individualist/libertarian, so of course I’m against the government forcing anyone to do anything.
If my posts here came across to you that I support any kind of forced vaccination, then to clarify: I don’t.
One thing is right though, that there can be situations, where each individual has the incentive to not take the vaccine, even though it would be a benefit for the entire population, if everyone took it.
Think about it from a game theoretical POV.
Each individual has the incentive, to NOT want to take the vaccine (unless he is part of a risk group), so that he does not incur the risk on himself. On the other side, you want everyone else to take the vaccine, so that the virus spread stops and no lockdowns are required
(even if you think that covid is bullshit, my argument would still hold for some hypothetical virus)
But now you have a situation that is somewhat of a prisoners dilemma: if everyone just does what is best for him, you get the worse outcome for the entire population.
So here you normally need an external force to solve this coordination problem, in that case by make vaccinations mandatory.
(again, I’m against that, just wanted to highlight this problem)
I would still be against it, as I’m not a utilitarian, I’m very libertarian leaning, and I’m for personal freedom, even if it does not maximize the population outcome.
I also understand your sentiment, that in a cultural & political ZeitGeist that is anti-white, you are not happy to make this choice.
This post was just to highlight that both things can be true: individuals not wanting to take the vaccine, and the government to want everyone to take the vaccine.
And again to point out, before the people here come swarming me that I just want to peddle the vaccine to them: I don’t care if you take it, and I’m against any kind of forced vaccinations
You make the assumption that the vaxx is actually beneficial. I would say that the verdict is out, but it’s not looking good, considering that more people got vaxxed to death with a supposed anti-Covid injection than with all other vaccines combined in recorded history. There is also mounting evidence that the vaxx does not protect you from Covid anyway. How does this change your prisoner-dilemma scenario?
I see. Yeah i was being cheeky. I’m glad we have some common ground.
I actually think a dorm type situation is fine to mandate it because the students have other options for housing. To travel? That’s just sociopathic. I won’t have the option to fly with the other unvaxxed heathens in that scenario. Pure evil.
“There is also mounting evidence that the vaxx does not protect you from Covid anyway. How does this change your prisoner-dilemma scenario?”
The assumption for the scenario is that the vaccine works, obviously.
I’m not going to discuss the “mounting evidence” with you, as I think that you are heavily biased about this whole issue. If your evidence is biased in one direction because of your sources, it does not amount to much.
And of course you will deny that you are biased, but that’s the nature of bias.
Anyways. no need to further discuss this.
@Aaron, I’m assuming you mean more per capita right? Obviously, if more people take this vaccine than all the others combined, then it’s not exactly damning, if there’s more deaths than all the others combined.
I was referring to the VAERS database. Given that a lot of vaccines are mandatory or at the very least pushed very heavily, and with greater success than “the vaxx”, I think it’s safe to say that the latter is the deadliest vaccine ever created, both per capita and in total.
@Aaron: question, if you think there is a big conspiracy going on, with the government and companies colluding to fake data on a massive scale, why would they not also manipulate this database?
Seems quite easy to me to manipulate a single database, would only require a few IT database admins. You could probably do this with a single database query.
The game you are playing here is quite simple: all data that tells you the vaccine is dangerous, you trust, and all other data, you declare as manipulated.
You either have to give up your belief in a big conspiracy, or you have to give up trusting this data.
Uber, I find your stance almost comical, to be quite frank. Nobody claims that there is a totalitarian, all-encompassing conspiracy with some ultra-evil Jew on top with an IQ of 2000 who directly taps into all the brains of his 666 henchmen. Instead, organizations conspire, i.e. collaborate, to achieve a certain goal that furthers their own interests.
By the way, how much do you know about how big organizations are run? Do you think the CEO controls absolutely everything? Quite frankly, I think you lack significant experience of how the real world works, business and politics alike. You have formal and informal hierarchies, and you delegate tasks. Some managers/leaders are more controlling, others less so, and sometimes the outcomes an differ quite significantly compared to their plans.
@Ubermensch: in the particular topic of Boris Johnson’s quote, they got you beat, sorry. I’m no expert in so-called British humor and I understood all the nuances.
In the big picture of the global conspiracy thing, I still think there’s some small level of it. There’s too much collusion between government officials, millionaires, media and some (((agents))) for it all to be explained by just sheer incomplete and entropy.
BTW, you only need *some* governments, media, agents, etc. for it to work. Small countries like mine always fall in line and mimic at least one of the great powers, and I think that’s true for a majority of countries in the world.
I meant “sheer incompetence” above.
See, this strawman is part of that moronization process we were talking about. Nobody is saying that there’s a perfectly orchestrated global conspiracy where every single aspect is perfectly controlled.
That’s not physically possible, and no sane person with an IQ over 20 would even claim it. But you have to make up these moronized versions of things in order to make yourself better (Boris Johnson said getting the virus prolongs your life, what a moron!!).
Remember false dichotomies?
The idea that you either can either control every single system, every single database, every single governmental body and every single scientist and every single government worker OR you can’t conspire at all is a false dichotomy.
Your argument amounts to “people can’t control every little thing on the planet, therefore they can’t conspire at all in any way shape or form” ?♂️
But nobody claims that it works. Your cartoon characterization isn’t what anyone claims.
The way it works (to take a random example that isn’t covid related). Is that (for example) feminist academics get lots of funding from Soros NGOs, conspire and create plans to change laws, regulations and curricuale… and over decades they infiltirate different goverment and educational bodies, and over time implement what they conspired to do. Curriculae teaching what was one radical feminist doctrine. Laws based on what was once extreme radical feminist theory, etc etc…
That’s just one random example. But back 15-20 years ago when we were warning about the strides feminists are making, if you were around back then, you would have been like: “well well if there’s this feminist conspiracy to do this, how come they allowed a paper in this one journal to come out that disproves their claims!!! GOTCHA, feminists aren’t conspiring and controlling everything!!!” ?♂️
VAERS is also a good case in point because reports of vaxx deaths have indeed been deleted. In Uber’s world, this disproves the conspiracy claim because some shadowy evil genius would just prevent data entry in the first place. Yet, in reality, there are some doctors who report vaxx deaths, and once the numbers get too big, people like Fauci who want to push a narrative may get concerned and move the levers. What really happens is irrelevant, though. Instead, it matters that the data is being messed with.
@ManualS: As I said, if he was sarcastic, still the only thing his message shows, is that he is not qualified to judge the danger of the covid situation.
His message was basically: “the median life expectation of the covid victims is higher than the median life expectation of all people who die”
And then he made this sarcastic remark.
In any case, he thinks the above sentence is evidence that the virus is not dangerous.
Which is bullshit, as we would expect this pattern for many viruses.
Most people who die young die from accidents. The sample of “all people who die” includes those people.
So if you remove those people from the sample, the median life expectation of the remaining people will be higher.
So if anything, the quote that Alek posted does support my theory more: Politicians are mostly not qualified to judge the situation.
Your autism is off the charts, Uber.
“See, this strawman is part of that moronization process we were talking about. Nobody is saying that there’s a perfectly orchestrated global conspiracy where every single aspect is perfectly controlled.”
Just wrong. You are maybe not claiming this. But I did not ask you this question.
And Aaron did in fact claim in the last thread, I think it was #146, that there is a big conspiracy going on, with government and companies colluding
Yes, a big, loose, conspiracy. You know, the kind that pushes vaxx passports onto people and so on, with collaboration between Google and the European Union. Is that what you are looking for?
This was the original post by Aaron:
“Dude, every scientist and doctor who questions the official narrative gets silenced or de-platformed. Are you even aware that the inventor of the PCR test came out, telling that it’s bullshit to use it for detecting Covid, or that the inventor of mRNA-based “vaccines”, Robert Malone, got hounded off the Internet for pointing out that this is highly experimental and risky technology? We are not following a bunch of crackheads online. Yes, there is a global conspiracy going on and at the core there are maybe a few hundred or a few thousand families who control banking and the media. This is how the world works. Oh, right, I guess the fact that institutions like the Trilateral Commission, the Council of Foreign Relations, the WEF, or Bilderberg exist is a totally kooky conspiracy theory.
The powers that be have been caught red-handed so many times that I find it hard to believe anything in the mainstream media these days. For starters, the CDC uses different PCR cycle counts for the vaxxed and unvaxxed, and due to the unreliability of this test, you can get any incident rate you want. It’s a giant kabuki theater.”
So basically he believes all the major institutions in society collude here, but the VAERS database, is not involved in this collusion.
Now you can tell me if that is rational thinking or not.
Are you aware that the VAERS database is not known to the average Joe? If it had been a big target, activists would have tried to get to those levers of power, just like they have been doing in politics and academia.
Also, it does not escape my attention that you completely ignore all counter-arguments we present. Instead, you are obsessed with certain caricatures that are far from what anybody on here claims.
So they can silence literally 1000s of scientists, but they cannot pay a few IT database admins to remove some records from a database?
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
VARES records have been removed.
“Your autism is off the charts, Uber.”
😀
When in doubt, there is always ad hominem.
What will be next, will you blame me for being a crypto-Jew ?
How about you address the points we bring up? Let’s start with your obsession about Boris Johnson’s remark: Is it really completely inconceivable that he was joking? Also, if your interpretation is correct and he really believed that getting Covid makes you live longer, then why the heck didn’t he push for mass infections with Covid? You are so obsessed about being right on this point that you fail to see how utterly ludicrous your position is.
I wasn’t using an ad hominem. I genuinely believe that you are on the autism spectrum, based on your recent performance on here.
“VARES records have been removed.”
LOL.
ok so they did actually manipulate the data, but they left in enough so that the vaccine still looks dangerous? When they actually want it to not look dangerous?
This is bordering on fundamentalist religious level conspiracy talk now.
You could spend a minute or two looking for evidence of VAERS records getting deleted. This can be proven because the case IDs remain, yet the information is gone. That you don’t bother doing that is clear evidence that you are completely biased in this regard and think that your IQ250 is enough to poke holes in my position.
On a related note, what does it tell you that mainstream sources like Reuters engage in “fact checking” random posts? Here, check this out:
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-deaths-idUSL1N2MZ2H8
Everything is cool, guys, because there is no “causal link” between getting vaxxed and dying.
“I wasn’t using an ad hominem. I genuinely believe that you are on the autism spectrum, based on your recent performance on here.”
I already know what you believe, there is a big conspiracy going on, Jews want to genocide the white race, and everyone who disagrees has autism 😀
They are very powerful and clever, but on the other side too stupid to manipulate a single database to cover up their conspiracy business.
Or wait no, they actually did manipulated the database, they just fucked up the SQL statement.
😀
Again, you’re just ridiculing my position by putting up strawmen. I can’t take this seriously.
“Let’s start with your obsession about Boris Johnson’s remark: Is it really completely inconceivable that he was joking?”
Maybe it is you who has autism?
To repeat: It DOES NOT matter if he was sarcastic or not. The content of his statement shows that he does not have the required skills in statistics to judge the danger of the covid situation. Exactly what I would expect from a politician
Oh, so he concludes that you live longer with Covid and this is supposed to have no consequences? I’m curious to hear your theory for this. Did you now join the tinfoil-hat crowd that believes that politicians are just puppets. On a related note, you have completely ignored out points about the massive wealth transfer to the elites, probably because a ten-second online search showed you that your position was nonsensical (here, I charitably assume that you were arguing in good faith, which I am not sure of). Care to elaborate on that issue?
Food for thought:
– How often do you think average life expectancy is calculated, and how?
– How often do you think the average age of Covid deaths has been calculated?
– How many young people die of accidents?
– Is it possible that your statistical argument is not tenable because, in reality, we only look at Covid deaths of the existing population? (It is a fact that only the very old die, and if Covid was really an issue, then we’d see lower average ages of death.)
I’ll let you fill in the blanks and you’ll probably find other problems with your argument if you only tried a bit harder. One issue with autism is the inability to take into account context and nuance. I did not want to make this comment when you were boasting with your basic knowledge in statistics, but since you just can’t stop, I may as well slam you on this question as well.
“Uber, I find your stance almost comical, to be quite frank. Nobody claims that there is a totalitarian, all-encompassing conspiracy with some ultra-evil Jew on top with an IQ of 2000 who directly taps into all the brains of his 666 henchmen. Instead, organizations conspire, i.e. collaborate, to achieve a certain goal that furthers their own interests.”
LOL how you backpedal on your claims now.
Where is the backpedaling? Context and nuance, bro! Besides, as a long-term reader of my blog, you are surely aware that I use hyperbole for added effect rather liberally at times. For instance, when I write that I have no interest in “getting vaxxed to death” I obviously, don’t mean that people die the moment they get the jab or that it will invariably kill anyone. Maybe you really should read up on autism.
“Oh, so he concludes that you live longer with Covid and this is supposed to have no consequences? I’m curious to hear your theory for this. Did you now join the tinfoil-hat crowd that believes that politicians are just puppets. On a related note, you have completely ignored out points about the massive wealth transfer to the elites, probably because a ten-second online search showed you that your position was nonsensical (here, I charitably assume that you were arguing in good faith, which I am not sure of). Care to elaborate on that issue?”
He presented a fact. This fact DOES NOT indicate if the virus is dangerous or not. In fact, it is probably true for most major viruses. From this fact alone we cannot know much.
That he presented this fact, tells me in some level he thinks it is relevant to judging the danger of covid. And this gets me to the conclusion that he is a moron. (in the context of judging the pandemic situation)
His sarcastic statement at the end, does not change anything here.
Wealth transfer: Yes, wealth transfer happens. But this would happen without covid as well. And of course rich people will try to exploit the situation to enrich themselves. Duh.
The problem of your theory is, that there are many other rich people, who have interests who are not aligned with this. For example everyone who has a stake in the tourism or airline industry.
Then there are insurance companies. Those companies certainly don’t want people to die earlier.
There are politicians who want to get voters, and they know that lockdowns are unpopular with some part of the population.
Your theory does not just require the existence of rich and powerful people. It requires nearly all of them to be aligned on their goals
I think you are deliberately being obtuse. Here, I found a mainstream resource for you, MSNBC stating that Covid led to “one of the greatest wealth transfers in history”:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/04/cramer-the-pandemic-led-to-a-great-wealth-transfer.html
Your future comments will go into moderation as I see little evidence that you are arguing in good faith.
“Where is the backpedaling? Context and nuance, bro! Besides, as a long-term reader of my blog, you are surely aware that I use hyperbole for added effect rather liberally at times. For instance, when I write that I have no interest in “getting vaxxed to death” I obviously, don’t mean that people die the moment they get the jab or that it will invariably kill anyone. Maybe you really should read up on autism.”
backpedaling again?
It is clear to me you are very emotional about this entire issue. Your choice of language is not that of a rational person who is unaffected by the entire situation and sees it from a detached perspective.
Which of course, is impossible, as everyone is affected to some degree.
Why do I think this? Because I know that even before covid happened, you were already heavily biased to hold certain beliefs.
That you attack me for being autistic, when you clearly don’t have enough data to make this observation, as you don’t know how I operate in real life, further proves my point here. You have to invalidate my views who show some contradictions in your worldview, by labeling me basically as a retard.
“Food for thought:
– How often do you think average life expectancy is calculated, and how?
– How often do you think the average age of Covid deaths has been calculated?
– How many young people die of accidents?”
Ok, now we are playing the definition semantics game, to save the argument?
A single question Aaron:
Do you think most political leaders got an extensive training in statistics?
Do you think most political leaders got an extensive training in virology?
If you answer no & no, how much significance has any statement of any politician, on this situation?
And to remind you: It was not me who posted this quote, it was Alek. So he thinks, it must have a lot of significance, otherwise why did he post it?
No, I’m not playing a semantic argument at all. Instead, I am pointing out that your reasoning is limited. Also, I don’t quite see why it is relevant who posted this. You attempted to shoot it down, and I’ve now attempted, apparently with limited success, to point out why your sense of superiority here is not justified.
Classic, now I’m shadow banned 😀
Reason: “I don’t like your argument, you don’t agree with me”
Anyways, you clearly want to just talk to people here who tell you what you already believe.
Have fun with your conspiracy theorist circle jerk.
You have shown, over and over, that you are not interested in properly debating your point. Your insistence that Covid has not led to a massive wealth transfer to the 1%, despite even the mainstream reporting on it, is a perfect example.
Also, “shadow banning” means that your comments are only visible to yourself. In contrast, I’m merely putting your comments on moderation. As you can see, I approved both. There is the effect that putting someone on moderation improves their behavior, so even though it is a drastic measure, it is sometimes justified.
EDIT: Of course, if you get shadow-banned on some site, you don’t get told about it as that is precisely the point.
@AlekNovy, thanks for that. I suspect it will help me to organize my talking points when I’m discussing this with the “there’s no way they can pull off a hoax this big” crowd.
Yeah, absolutely a false dichotomy. There’s also plenty of crazy hoaxes that aren’t controversial at all that couldn’t have been achieved without some amount of coordination. The prevalence of circumcision and its view that it’s medically beneficial, weapons of mass distruction, the holocaust, gulf of tonkin, the view that the Nazis were hyper aggressive maniacs who would bring their war machine to a city near you when in truth they were just reclaiming stolen lands, etc
I wanted to expand on that feminist example because it is a really good example of how global conspiracies function.
About 40 years ago feminists started conspiring to accomplish exactly what they have accomplished as of 2020. That includes among other things complete control of academia when it comes to the topic of gender, globally.
An uber-like person 20 years would have said something like:
But that’s the thing. To conspire means that you’re conspiring to get ahold of the levels of power (i.e. ability to censor papers, prevent papers being published, control every institution etc).
To conspire doesn’t mean you already have all the power and control everything ffs ?♂️ Why would you conspire to get power and control, if you already have all the power and control everything. ?♀️
Out of retarded arguments, this one probably takes the cake as being the most retarded because the sheer circularity and tautology.
– Feminists can’t possibly be conspiring to take over control of academia. Why? Because there was this thing yesterday that was out of their control, so they can’t possibly be conspiring ?♂️
So in order to conspire to get power, you need to already have it? ?♂️
Recently, the White House stated that they “work with” social media companies to censor unwelcome posts, maybe it was just Facebook. This is quite astonishing. Yet, it probably does not mean what you and I think it does. You can bet that fact-checking website Snopes would state that claims of WH censorship is fake news because they don’t censor “all” social media, we don’t have a full list of the content they censor, or because there is still content they don’t censor, or maybe the issue will be that there is no fag-ademic textbook by some libtard professor that repeats that claim.
Specifically, when it comes to using crisis as an excuse to power-grab, specific examples include things like:
– Giving yourself the power to control what can and cannot be said
– Taking away financial rights and self-ownership from individuals and giving it to a limited group of already wealthy individuals
The way it works is that there is a crisis. Actors conspire to use this crisis as an excuse to give themselves censor powers (for example). “Let us decide what can or cannot be said to protect people during this crisis”.
According to the retarded circular monstrosity above, you cannot be conspiring to take over control of what is said… because you don’t already control what can be said ?♂️?♀️?♂️?♀️
So if anyone is allowed to say things you don’t want said, this is proof that you don’t control everything (yet). And if you don’t control anything yet, you can’t possibly be conspiring to get control of what people say ?♀️?♂️?♀️?♂️
I’ve seen some circular arguments, but this one is the definitely the most retarded yet.