Have any of you gotten a vaccine?

[rogue06]

I'm a net Nanny trying to control threads that aren't mine.

FIFY n/c

[shunyadragon]

FIFY n/c

Sounds and smells like your flatulence, which is the best you can do other than unethically altering some one's post.

[Cow Poke]

Sounds and smells like your flatulence, which is the best you can do other than unethically altering some one's post.

Why do you have your face in by brudder's butt?

[Juvenal]

Why do you have your face in by brudder's butt?

Why are you ignoring the paint peeling from the walls?

[Sparko]

You only have to reject science to hold to your view. I keep providing the links to the studies. It is the studies where the debate should be.

You have to reject the VAERS system and science to uphold your opinion. Why are you so dedicated to shots that are new technology and are in the experimental stages. We have women suffering miscarriages from the shots. We have people dying with weird blood clots but to you this is nothing. You are showing ignorant bias by calling people anti-vaxxers. Your labels allow you to reject stuff without research. I do realize you have done some research, but it all seems to work within your confirmation bias.

No, I only have to reject pseudo-science and a known quack. You are the one ignoring science and looking for evidence that agrees with you, which you accept with question, while rejecting any data that disagrees with your as a "conspiracy"

[Sparko]

Kafkatrapping: a form of argument where a denial is accepted as proof of guilt.

I never said denying it proved you were doing it (confirmation bias) just that people who are engaged in confirmation bias will deny they are doing it. Why would they continue to do it if they realized they were doing it? Just simple logic.

[Mountain Man]

I never said denying it proved you were doing it (confirmation bias) just that people who are engaged in confirmation bias will deny they are doing it. Why would they continue to do it if they realized they were doing it? Just simple logic.

Which just means that if you accuse someone of engaging in confirmation bias, there is literally nothing they can do or say that will convince you otherwise.

[Sparko]

Which just means that if you accuse someone of engaging in confirmation bias, there is literally nothing they can do or say that will convince you otherwise.

Again, wrong.

My comment was merely an observation, it had nothing to do with my thinking that he uses confirmation bias. I can see that just by what he posts as "evidence" and what he ignores as "evidence"
COVID isn't the first medical subject Mike has been a conspiracy nut on. Over and over I see him tossing out "scientific" studies by known pseudo-scientists and just handwaving away anything from mainstream science.

[Mountain Man]

Again, wrong.

My comment was merely an observation, it had nothing to do with my thinking that he uses confirmation bias. I can see that just by what he posts as "evidence" and what he ignores as "evidence"
COVID isn't the first medical subject Mike has been a conspiracy nut on. Over and over I see him tossing out "scientific" studies by known pseudo-scientists and just handwaving away anything from mainstream science.

That's just your confirmation bias talking.

[Sparko]

That's just your confirmation bias talking.

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

[Cow Poke]

Why are you ignoring the paint peeling from the walls?

We never had painted walls when we were kids!


Wait.... is that WHY?

[Cow Poke]

So, my Covid was in January, and I figured I had about 90 days before I made a decision on the vaccine.
My Doctor suggested waiting a few more weeks, as she was looking into this very actively.

[mikewhitney]

No, I only have to reject pseudo-science and a known quack. You are the one ignoring science and looking for evidence that agrees with you, which you accept with question, while rejecting any data that disagrees with your as a "conspiracy"

Maybe you can start by telling me what well-developed science I reject. That will help clarify what you are talking about. Which studies am I rejecting, in your estimation?

I could possibly be too quick on posting some things. However, no one has contested the Ivermetin studies that were done concerning covid-19 recoveries.

[mikewhitney]

Maybe you can start by telling me what well-developed science I reject. That will help clarify what you are talking about. Which studies am I rejecting, in your estimation?

I could possibly be too quick on posting some things. However, no one has contested the Ivermetin studies that were done concerning covid-19 recoveries.

I should add that if someone brings up scientific studies (and what you or others find convincing about them), I would appreciate that.

[mikewhitney]

So, my Covid was in January, and I figured I had about 90 days before I made a decision on the vaccine.
My Doctor suggested waiting a few more weeks, as she was looking into this very actively.

Whew. It is good to hear your doctor is at least doing some research. The blood clotting seems to be a bigger concern for those who had covid-19 before getting the covid shots.