Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Have any of you gotten a vaccine?
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 2 likes
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
Sounds and smells like your flatulence, which is the best you can do other than unethically altering some one's post.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
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.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
Kafkatrapping: a form of argument where a denial is accepted as proof of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
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.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
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.
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
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.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
Why are you ignoring the paint peeling from the walls?
Wait.... is that WHY?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
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"
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.Last edited by mikewhitney; 04-20-2021, 11:24 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostSo, 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.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seanD, Today, 04:10 AM
|
16 responses
88 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 01:13 PM | ||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 04:44 AM
|
13 responses
84 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 05:15 AM
|
||
Started by Ronson, 04-30-2024, 03:40 PM
|
10 responses
72 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 04:58 AM
|
||
Started by Sparko, 04-30-2024, 09:33 AM
|
16 responses
81 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 12:27 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-30-2024, 09:11 AM
|
82 responses
428 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 03:26 PM
|
Comment