I wanted to clarify a point. A previous thread closed and I couldn’t do so there.

anybody wrote:

“So, Steve, are you saying the whole thing is a hoax or a plot so "Big Pharma" could make gigabucks off the goverment by making everyone get injections of a make-believe vaccine when you could just get infected and recover on your own so you'll have "natural immunity" — thus making any vaccine redundant?”

scmd1 replied:

“I share office space and a clerical staff with a pulmonary medicine practice and have seen the first- and second-hand effects from a very close vantage point. You're painfully off the mark on this.”

I responded:

“Your expert opinion is appreciated, Dr.”

Lot's Wife said:

“Anybody isn't adopting that argument. She's pointing out its absurdity, as you are.”


I wanted to say that I knew anybody wasn’t making that argument but was speaking to azsteve and summarizing his argument in her comment. I assumed that scmd1 also knew that and his comment was also addressed to azsteve.

That is the “expert opinion” I meant – scmd1’s experience as a physician.

Sorry for a boring OP but it’s important to me to correct any misunderstandings as far as it's within my power so to do.

Hi NG,

I didn't notice your post and was certainly not replying to it. Given the placement of scmd's post I thought he might be responding to anybody and wanted to make sure he knew she was not assuming the position she was summarizing.

I know you, scmd, and anybody are all in agreement on at least the basics; I flatter myself that I am in your company. I may have misunderstood something, but I'm confident that in our collective naivete we are all similarly believers in "science" and hence on the same page regarding the facts of COVID and the vaccines.

Now I've got to get out my Saran Wrap. I've used up all the tinfoil in the house and for the moment celluloid is the best I can do. Thank heaven I have my microchip to lead me even without the better reception provided by the traditional metallic hijab.

Thanks, LW, and Nightingale.

P.S. The insulation in my home is coated with aluminum. Some others here might be wise to invest in similar insulation. They would only need their tinfoil hats when they left home if they had it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/18/2021 11:34PM by scmd1.

You'd be safer if you didn't weigh the same as a duck.

I weighed 181 [lbs.] before I worked out this morning.

That’s heavy for a duck.

I'm one of the larger ducks around.

Since he's trying to get the other thread zapped, I will add this here. It does, incidentally, appear that he misunderstood anybody's cryptic post. So to SCMD. . .

You'll have to wait until EOD finishes crafting the gold-plated version of the Whoosh. He's usually pretty quick but right now he says he's on strike until he gets more Diet Coke.

I'll send my gardener on a road trip with his damned Diet Coke if he'll just get the #%&*#*% award into production.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/18/2021 11:45PM by scmd1.

I'm getting (more) confused. :)

Since the Admins have said that they will delete conspiracy theory posts, a new trend here by some individuals seems to be to accuse others here who they disagree with, of making conspiracy theory posts, in hopes of getting those posts deleted. This tactic itself is not a conspiracy theory, just the actions of a few individuals. To be clear here, I am not claiming that there are any kind of conspiracy theories.

Another ploy is to pose questions framed to be attacks, to get the posts of others deleted. So rather than asking an honest question to gain a better understanding of what someone else said, they say something like "...so are you saying that...", and then they state something crazy that is clearly not what the other person said. One post even claimed that I said that the CDC is lieing. Really? I was linking to a document that was from the CDC. And there was no claim that they were lieing. The document from the CDC was my source.

The purpose of my posts in the other thread was to display (using US government provided sources), that there is clearly risk involved for the vaccine manufacturers, the government, and for the individuals who take the vaccine. An honest person would read that documentation and agree that many people and even the manufacturer and the government do not want to take that risk. They all clearly want someone else to take the risks (which is what the indemnifications are about). There is no conspiracy involved. What the mainstream media says is irrelevant if they do not report on this issue while also leaving out such critical details. This is not a conspiracy theory either. Everyone acts independently to further their own personal interests. A conspiracy theory would involve collaboration. We see no evidence that anyone has collaborated with anyone else to deceive others. Meanwhile the real issue is about who should bare the risk. If you don't understand the risks here, just read that PDF file at Congress.gov that I sent the link to.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 08/19/2021 01:56AM by azsteve.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since the Admins have said that they will delete
> conspiracy theory posts, a new trend here by some
> individuals seems to be to accuse others here who
> they disagree with, of making conspiracy theory
> posts, in hopes of getting those posts deleted.

Alternatively you keep posting conspiracy theories.


-------------
> I am not claiming that there are any kind of
> conspiracy theories.

Of course you aren't. Those who succumb to conspiracy theories never recognize them as such.


--------------
> Another ploy is to pose questions framed to be
> attacks, to get the posts of others deleted. So
> rather than asking an honest question to gain a
> better understanding of what someone else said,
> they say something like "...so are you saying
> that...", and then they state something crazy that
> is clearly not what the other person said.

Questions have many purposes, including identifying absurd propositions. That you don't like that usage is neither here nor there.

By the way, you should feel free to go back to the other thread and answer my questions--if you can.


--------------
> An honest person
> would read that documentation and agree that no
> one seems to want to take that risk.

Using your very words, your definition of "honest" is "agreeing" with your conclusions. Does that strike you as reasonable?


------------------
> What the mainstream says is
> irrelevant if they do not report on this issue
> honestly.

And by "honestly" you mean, as you said above, "agreeing" with you.


----------------
> A conspiracy theory would
> involve collaboration. We see no evidence that
> anyone has collaborated with anyone to deceive
> others.

You should look up the definition of "conspiracy theory." I warn you, however, that the dictionary definitions will not align with your preferences, so you may need to denounce the reference books as dishonest.


--------------
You have a simple egocentric vision of what truth and and honesty are. Pity the rest of us who think that our opinions should accord with facts rather than vice versa.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/19/2021 02:19AM by Lot's Wife.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One
> post even claimed that I said that the CDC is
> lieing.

Prove that assertion, azsteve. Evidence or it didn't happen.

We are the ploy boys (and girls) of the western world.

Can’t you just be happy that you’re right and we’re wrong? Whether or not we’ll agree with you doesn’t change anything; be happy!

Don’t be sisyphusing around with our hearts.