|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Banned
Originally Posted by Life's a Hillary
The third line from the bottom applies directly to you! "To those who are participating in this disgusting farce without any understanding of what they are doing, we have one word for you. Stop. You are causing irreparable harm to your country and to your fellow citizens."
Member
Yeah I could, but I actually have a real job doing real work and trying to convince a bunch of conspiracy theorists isn’t worth my time. Go back and read Will’s comments with actual scientific information in it because everything I’ve seen has already been debunked on here. I know you won’t because you don’t want to believe anything with real scientific rigor.
According to your profile you’re an auto tech. Thanks but I don’t think I’ll be taking my medical advice from you.
Banned
Well look, I'm sorry you got duped into taking the Clot shot.
Senior Member
Oh wait, the "fact checkers" say it's all false. Good enough for me. They've been so good so far. I think they actually got one right back in the late 80s...
"Why "zombies"? Because calling it 'training to stop a rioting, starving, panicking, desperate mob after a complete governmental financial collapse apocalypse' is just too wordy." or in light of current events: training to stop a rioting, looting, molotov cocktail throwing, skinny jeans wearing, uneducated bunch of lemmings duped by, or working directly for, a marxist organization attempting to tear down America while hiding behind a race-based name
Site Sponsor
Actually I like learning and you seem to be claiming expertise. I also feel safe in saying there are others here with similar thoughts on the matter in liking all the facts, so have at it..
I will be the first to say I don't have access to lab equipment to verify one way or the other, but there is enough dishonesty on the surface of the last year and half(and the old faces of that segment of time have long careers with deception as a recurring theme) that I don't put a lot of faith in deeper investigation finding anything other than more dishonesty.
Similar to being told by a seller of a house, car, or other item is immaculate, mint, or other hyperbolic positive description and a casual review finds evidence of damage along with an attempt to conceal it.
Now obviously the seller isn't going to like the train of thought that someone that pulls that crap typically doesn't stop at half measures, but it is my experience that the stuff I can't see is going to be at least as bad as what I easily can.
Last edited by jsbhike; 09-28-21 at 13:43.
Member
Do you know how to interpret a scientific study? Do you know how the design of the experiment can impact the statistics and determine if something is relevant? Do you even understand statistical inference? Do you know what a meta analysis is? Do you know what to look for in a meta to understand if it has pitfalls? Do you know how to look at a meta to determine if the statistics were calculated properly?
No? Then stop acting like you actually understand how scientific research works and go back to changing someone’s oil.
Site Sponsor
Had statistics based courses in college and always had the impression they were most meaningful for quality control in a factory and the more that "human" criteria factored in to it the less the output became cut and dried and more subjective.
Another thing was honesty because it sure is easy to lie with numbers.
On that note, what would you call a person that tells a large group of people to wear a purple pimp hat on their head every time they leave home or they will die, they will kill their granny, kill kids, kill whoever, but then you see film footage of the person who issued that decree out running around without a purple pimp hat on?
Senior Member
Helen Keller could see this whole Vaccine deal is horse shit. It's a hundred miles away from passing a mild common sense whiff test. I came back to this site expecting this to be deleted by Zuckerstein some how.
"What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v
Member
No offense but it’s clear you do not understand statistics and how it relates to scientific studies. That’s fine, most people on this planet do not understand it because they don’t need to. It is INCREDIBLY important to scientific research though and can take the result of a study saying one thing and completely nullify it if done incorrectly. Just the design of an experiment without proper statistical considerations in mind can make it utterly worthless. Then doing a meta analysis without a proper understanding of statistics, or the ability to construct a proper meta analysis including understanding when to include/exclude studies, can produce results that are completely the opposite of reality.
This is why there are bad studies out there that produce misinformation. People read the abstract, ignore the methods, results, and discussion because they can’t understand them, and then act like they have newfound knowledge. Yes you can certainly lie with data but when you have to publish your data and your methods you can’t hide from people who actually understand statistics and scientific research.
With proper research you can easily prove or disprove your purple pimp hat example. If you just use anecdotes or bad research then you might be able to make a nonsensical argument like you outlined.
This is the problem with scientific misinformation like the OP is riddled with. Whoever wrote that is obviously targeting a scientific illiterate audience that thrives on conspiracy theories and a mistrust of the establishment and uses enough big words to sound scientific. Other people read it with no ability of interpret research and make false conclusions.
Senior Member
Scientific rigor like the fake HCQ study published in the Lancet?
https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/04...k-trump-inbox/
Scientific rigor like the source "investigation" conducted by the WHO where they claimed no Wuhan lab leak?
How about the Ivermectin study that was retracted purportedly showing it as ineffective? Is that the Science you want us to trust?
I know, it MUST be the science behind the false narrative claiming Ivermectin doses are too high to be effective and safe?
I'm betting its NOT the science behind the reports that Ivermectin is Horse medicine and stupid people take it because they are too stupid to know better.
Want me to continue?
Your "science" argument is complete bullshit at this point, the sad truth is that it always has been as its only as good as the money funding it.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks