Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FallingAwake

  1. Yeah, it was just adults who were subjected to this completely non-experimental vaccine and who subsequently died.
  2. I wonder how many adults can do that (understand what the treatment entails), let alone 12 year old children. (I'm talking about the average person in the street. Most people on this forum are probably much better informed about how the vaccines work.)
  3. Hmm, so AstraZeneca was removed after people die. This is why vaccines normally take much longer to test, and aren't normally rushed out in a matter of months. We're only hearing about Lisa Shaw because she was a BBC radio presenter. Think of the many hundreds (or thousands?) of victims who are going unreported (in the sense of, just being a number in a database.) Anyway, "safe and effective". Carry on. Now time to line up the 12 year olds...
  4. Yeah, this is pretty appalling in my opinion, and no doubt schools will add to the pressure for children to be injected with a vaccine that has been tested for... months, with the clinical trials for approval still ongoing.
  5. It sounds nice in theory, like communism. In practice, it sounds like a totalitarian's wet dream. Also like communism.
  6. I doubt what you're saying is true, since Facebook were directly challenging the report's claims. I don't especially trust Facebook either, but I'd say Facebook have a much better idea of what people are doing on its platform, given that it... owns the platform? Also, the report authors have a very fuzzy and crude definition of "disinformation" if you look at the memes and messages they include. My final point is... who funded the authors of the report, and are there any conflicts of interest in their funding? And why did you believe the authors of the report over Facebook? Just wondering.
  7. Well, like I said, I didn't know much about it at the time (this was 10-20 years ago). I read a BMJ article on it last night, and I agree it sounds like the Wakefield research was pretty crooked, to be used as leverage in a lawsuit. Interesting though that it took the Lancet ten years to retract his paper. That's probably a story in itself. Maybe these things weren't as clear, and cut and dried, at the time? Hindsight bias, and all? Anyway, I take your point about 'sceptic, contrarian, dichotomist'.
  8. I don't know much about the MMR thing, but I do remember at the time thinking, hmm, are we sure he's not right? I remember thinking it seemed like they were basically trying to suppress his research. But I didn't really follow it up because I don't have any skin in the MMR game. Autism is an interesting one, since it's been going up and up in the US, from 1 in 150 children in 2000, to 1 in 54 in 2020. The US seems to be 3rd in the world, after Hong Kong and South Korea. (I'm not sure why the UK isn't on here.) https://www.statista.com/statistics/676354/autism-rate-among-children-select-countries-worldwide/ It's also interesting that the Top 10 countries are all highly industrialized... and the autism rate drops off significantly below Canada, which is 7th. Anyway, I think this goes along with a point I made earlier. I don't think we'll connect any long term effects of the vaccine with the vaccine. If we still don't know why autism has gone from 1 in 150, to 1 in 54 in the last 20 years (in the US), or seems to afflict the wealthiest nations... then I doubt we're going to care about long term effects of a vaccine. Besides, if you inject every child with a vaccine, you no longer have a control group to compare with.
  9. That's funny, I came to a different conclusion. Based on your mentioning of "brexiteers" three times in three paragraphs. On a thread about Afghanistan...
  10. "In fact, these 12 people are responsible for about just 0.05% of all views of vaccine-related content on Facebook. This includes all vaccine-related posts they’ve shared, whether true or false, as well as URLs associated with these people." Oops 😮
  11. Thanks. Here's the original Facebook report: https://about.fb.com/news/2021/08/taking-action-against-vaccine-misinformation-superspreaders/
  12. I don't see information purely in terms of 'sides'. However, a lot of information sources do take sides. You know that. You weren't born yesterday. You know that the Guardian is going to see certain political issues in a different way to, say, the Daily Mail. However, it's better to think in terms of angles, narratives, vested interests, consensus thinking... things like that. Anyway, to answer your question in relation to the 3 samples I highlighted from the hysterical report... - Do I believe Bill Gates is secretly microchipping us? Nah. There's no money in doing stuff like that secretly. If they want to control you, they'll do it in your face. Kind of like they're doing in France and Australia, and soon here in a more polite and British way. - Do I believe "a debunked story which claims that the Covid vaccine is responsible for several deaths in Senegal"? Probably not, assuming the debunkers can't be debunked. Who guards the guards, and all that... - Do I believe 'the US Presidential election was 'stolen'? I have no idea. They were conducting audits. But is it a crime to be wrong on the Internet? - Do I believe Rizza Islam "recovered from COVID in 48 hours by following a special diet"? Sure, why not? The report is a bit ridiculous, in my opinion.
  13. Also, how is this disinformation? - Rizza Islam recently tweeted that he recovered from COVID in 48 hours by following a special diet. (They then quote the tweet, in which he gives the list of ingredients he used // p21) And? If he recovered from covid using what he said, good for him. How on earth is that disinformation? Also, where can I find a full list of who is behind the report, their funding sources and potential conflicts of interest please?
  14. I'm looking through the report now. It seems a bit... uhh... hysterical, if I'm honest Examples... - "The Bollingers have promoted the conspiracy theory that Bill Gates plans to inject everyone with microchips as part of a vaccination program." Oh nooooo... hound them from the Internet! - "Promoting a debunked story which claims that the Covid vaccine is responsible for several deaths in Senegal." Oh nooooo... somebody is WRONG on the Internet! EXTERMINATE! - "This post falsely claims the US Presidential election was “stolen” and promotes the rally the Bollingers spoke at on 6 January." Oh noooooooo! It's no longer opinion (no matter how crazy), it's DIS-INFORMATION. And this is just "Ty & Charlene Bollinger". Look, half of the Internet contains stuff like this. The report reads like someone who has just discovered the Internet. A lot of the posts they highlight are basically just opinions. Probably wrong in many cases, but still opinions. This whole "disinformation" language is something out of the Soviet Union. I miss the old days when people were just wrong on the Internet.
  15. Well, I try and question everything, and not just take things at face value. But I appreciate, most people need shortcuts by which to operate in everyday life, like simplifying things down to black and white. Tell us who the goodies and baddies are, so I can cheer the goodies and boo the baddies. (By the way, I'm not answering your question because it's a ridiculous generalisation.)
  16. Loaded question is loaded. Mercola, for example, had 25 years worth of articles on his site. Fine, up until the point where he challenged the vaccine narrative. Then... poof. If something they're saying is provably wrong, they should be vigorously challenged, debated, and debunked where appropriate with proper arguments and science. In short, I have to be able to hear their "bullsh1t" as you put it, before I can even agree or disagree with it. Look, I appreciate that as human beings we prefer life to be relatively simple. We want... - Our politicians to lead us benevolently. - Our doctors to heal us and have our best interests at heart. - Our news sources to tell us only the truth. etc. Well, tough. We know that ain't always the case. We need to hear "the other side"... even if they turn out to be wrong. Or maybe there is some shade of grey in-between. The US government has more money than any so-called "Russian social media farm." If it really wanted to counter the "misinformation" with provable facts and science, I believe it could quite easily. (And I don't mean Fauci popping up on CNN and saying a few soundbites.) But maybe, just maybe they can't with some of it, because it's not all "misinformation"?
  17. Mainly because this short-termist echo chamber of Brexshiteers gets a bit tedious to read at times. Eight MONTHS into Brexit, and you've judged it a colossal failure. I wonder, did you judge membership of the EEC the same way after eight MONTHS?
  18. This article should terrify a lot of people in its lust for censorship. "The CCDH is now calling on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube to de-platform every member of the disinformation dozen with haste. The most effective and efficient way to stop the dissemination of harmful information is to de-platform the most highly visible repeat offenders, who we term the disinformation dozen," the study said. "This should also include the organizations these individuals control or fund, as well as any backup accounts they have established to evade removal." This is partly why I'm a sceptic in this whole area. Look, putting aside whatever these people believe or are saying, once you censor people who hold views contrary to the established one, then you literally allow the establishment to tell you what to believe. It also means people are much more likely to be sheared like sheep if and when a genuine conspiracy arises, since people who might raise alarm bells are hounded, de-platformed, labeled "disinformation agents" etc. Two quick examples: (1) Jimmy Saville. Why wasn't he caught after his first one or two victims? How many people were silenced before the truth finally came out? How many victims had to suffer? (2) The Cladding Scandal. Apparently the cladding was fine until suddenly it wasn't and lots of people died. Might there have been whistleblowers or people who could have warned about this earlier, but got shut down? George W Bush, in unleashing his endless war on terror, said that "you're either for us, or you're against us." The state managed to shut down enough dissenters that it was able to lead the American people by the nose (with the British not far behind) into not one but two wars. And now, here we are again with the "disinformation dozen." I don't buy it. I'm going to call it for what it is: propaganda. Ooh, the Russian boogeyman that got Trump elected due to their vast social media reach, right? 🙄 We had to listen to FOUR YEARS of that nonsense, before it turned out to be a big, juicy nothingburger.
  19. UK Approves Use of COVID-19 Drug Regeneron to Prevent and Treat Symptomatic Coronavirus https://techround.co.uk/news/new-covid-19-drug-claimed-to-stop-symptomatic-infections/ Sounds interesting (although I wish the article writer used their spell checker a bit more).
  20. So what I'm hearing is... vaccine goooood, anything that challenges the vaccine... baaaaaad. Maybe a fair approach is to be critical and questioning of both sides? To not treat authorities like they were infallible and impartial gods with no vested interests whatsoever, and to not treat people who challenge the mainstream as idiots with nothing useful to say? Remember it was Pfizer who had to pay out over $3 billion in fines fairly recently, for their misinformation. And where did Tony Blair get his intelligence about Saddam Hussein's missiles being 45 minutes away from us? Oh, that's right... the official intelligence agencies. But nowadays, "misinformation" has become a loaded word which currently tends to mean, "anything against the vaccine".
  21. I agree, but the quoted article didn't make that finer distinction... almost like it was trying to engage in point-scoring or something.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.