Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

FallingAwake

Members
  • Posts

    986
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FallingAwake

  1. More of the "surreal" (see note 2)... 'The View' Sent Into Chaos After Two Hosts Test Positive For COVID Mid-Show; Kamala Interview Upended https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/view-sent-chaos-after-two-hosts-test-positive-covid-mid-show-kamala-interview-upended - Friday's episode of The View was a complete meltdown, after two hosts tested positive for Covid-19 mid-show, forcing producers to change Vice President Kamala Harris' planned in-person visit into a virtual interview. - "Just before the segment featuring Navarro and Hostin being led offstage, the panel opened the show complaining about the unvaccinated, with a chyron which read, โ€œExperts: vaccinated not as likely to spread COVID.โ€" I wonder if coronavirus is becoming sentient? ๐Ÿ‘€ (Just kidding. Or... probably?)
  2. I suspect they're not the only things that will be sharpened, in the US at least.
  3. New Zealandโ€™s strategy to eliminate Covid-19 faces defeat by Delta strain, admits health chief https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-zealands-strategy-to-eliminate-coronavirus-faces-defeat-by-delta-strain-admits-health-chief-qq3wh2zdw "New modelling released in New Zealand today showed that even if 90 per cent of the population were fully vaccinated, there would be 171,000 infections, 6,000 hospital admissions and just over 600 deaths in a year." (Archive Backup: https://archive.is/GbCeL )
  4. Did you read some of the other ones listed on that page? All of them mocking those who chose not to take a vaccine. All of them dead shortly afterwards. What's worse is, half (?) of them won't even be counted in the "adverse effects" databases, since they died outside the 28 day cut-off point. They just, well, died, even though none of them were particularly old. To think, we're barely at the 3rd shot...
  5. Although this part should scare us all (from the above link): "The 1918 H1N1 flu virus caused the deadliest pandemic of the 20th century. To better understand this deadly virus, an expert group of researchers and virus hunters set out to search for the lost 1918 virus, sequence its genome, recreate the virus in a highly safe and regulated laboratory setting at CDC, and ultimately study its secrets to better prepare for future pandemics." I'm sure it's as safe as a Wuhan lab.
  6. You're right. The Spanish flu took out 50 million people. "Mortality was high in people younger than 5 years old, 20-40 years old, and 65 years and older. The high mortality in healthy people, including those in the 20-40 year age group, was a unique feature of this pandemic." -https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html Corona v2 has taken out 5 million people, barely touching the young and heavily skewed to the boomers and upwards, those with a comorbidity or two. While it's nasty for some, many don't even know they had it. So you're right, a comparison to the Spanish Flu would be inappropriate.
  7. I'm a little sceptical, but it's kind of a win-win for Big Pharma if true. - No liability for the vaccines. $$$ - Create more illness, which they can then come along and treat. $$$ That's assuming it's only about money. I wonder if Japan knows what's going on, which is why the vaccine companies have been called out several times over there now?
  8. Nope. If you don't have the other functions I listed, there is nothing to "reduce". True. Now make them pass on data in a stable enough manner to the next generation. This is where most origin of life researchers are stuck. Most of the RNA sequences they generate get mutated away after a small number of replications. Hence the need for "error correcting". What evidence would you accept? Slartibartfast's signature on the glacier? Faked Let me put it differently. what evidence would you accept that you wouldn't automatically dismiss out of hand?
  9. Just in case you haven't read what Dame Sarah Gilbert, the lead scientist behind the Oxford vaccine, says... โ€œThe virus canโ€™t completely mutate because its spike protein has to interact with the ACE2 receptor on the surface of the human cell, in order to get inside that cell. โ€œIf it changes its spike protein so much that it canโ€™t interact with that receptor, then itโ€™s not going to be able to get inside the cell. So there arenโ€™t very many places for the virus to go to have something that will evade immunity but still be a really infectious virus.โ€ https://archive.is/FkFTG It's hit the limits of what it can do. An evolutionary barrier. Mutation can only do so much.
  10. Are you sure about that? https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths Take a look at "Weekly deaths with COVID-19 on the death certificate by date registered". Put your mouse over 4 September 2020: 92 deaths. Then look at 3 September 2021: 781. 11 September 2020: 120 deaths. 10 September 2021: 994 deaths. Yes, the vaccines and wearing masks have led to an increase from 120 deaths for WC 11 Sept 2020, to 994 deaths WC 10 Sept 2021 That sounds like a fail to me.
  11. Well, you kind of made the point I was making to zugzwang earlier. You take this as an article of faith. OK, a protocell can store data. Now what? How does it read "the data"? How does it translate the data into useful stuff? How does it preserve the data, without the error correcting processes that cells use to preserve information? That's assuming your protocells can even replicate in the first place to allow for natural selection. How does it replicate? We probably shouldn't pursue this conversation, because it's off-topic. My only point is, your statement is just as much an article of faith as any so-called "sky fairy" narrative.
  12. Very well though-out post. I'd say, however, that the general public have never been particularly into 'reason'. Emotions, biases, vested interests... these play an equal or bigger part as human drivers. Well, Dawkins is simply a product of the philosophy of naturalism. He just took it to its logical conclusion. My point is that the whole philosophical foundation is spurious. If you start with the premise that everything has to be explained in some 'natural' way, then by definition you eliminate the 'supernatural.' He can create all the theoretical protocells he wants (as he does in The Blind Watchmaker), but that doesn't actually explain how the pieces come together to replicate, store data, read data, do something useful with the data, error correct etc (the stuff you need even to begin Darwinian evolution). Intelligent design can. The only reason this is rejected is for philosophical reasons, i.e. it violates the principle of naturalism. But even if one day they invent a protocell that does exactly what Dawkins suggests, does it prove life therefore came about in that manner? No. At best, it proves you can intelligently design a protocell
  13. I think creationists argue animals were vegetarian until afterwards. As for the notion of, say, some kind of species-preserving "Ark" for mammals, there aren't all that many types of them: This includes creatures like whales. Anyway, if we work on the assumption that the Ark was about preserving samples from each land animal group, either by twos or sevens... 6,495 x 7 is about 45,000. (Or maybe just "genera" or even just "family".) Given that the Smithsonian article says it could hold about 2 million sheep, 45,000 would leave lots of room. In other words, it's plausible. Many cultures of the world have a universal flood mythology. Only the Hebrew one contains an object that can actually float, despite its weight. The Gilgamesh Epic version of the Ark was a cube that, as far as I know, nobody can actually get to float. Anyway, [something about coronavirus] to make this relevant
  14. False. They wanted to, but were denied permission. If you're going to "debunk" something, at least make the effort to know about what you're debunking ๐Ÿ‘“ If it's an "accidental escape" then it's not a biological weapon, by definition. It's an accident. If you're talking about a deliberate leak, then why assume killing people is their aim? I agree, if they're trying to kill they've been largely unsuccessful (although the 5 million people dead might disagree). If their aim has been for more control over the population, I'd say they've had partial to good success - what with lockdowns, vaccine passports, and whatever else is to come as we cycle through further variants. The UK and US have further extended their nations debts, putting them even further over the edge. (The US debt is now at nearly $30 TRILLION, up from $6T in 2001 before the "war on terror", war on Afghanistan, war in Iraq, bailing out banks etc.) Plus, 90% of the adult population of the UK, and large parts of the world, have been convinced of the need to be injected with a pharmaceutical product which needs topping up every 6 months or so. At a minimum, that's a huge moneymaker for the pharmaceutical industry.
  15. I agree that science isn't a religion. But it does have its dogmas, naturalism being one of them. (See below). Well, the Smithsonian kind of disagree with you. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/could-noahs-ark-float-theory-yes-180950385/ Sure, if you think Noah had to go round collecting millions of species, then yes it's impossible. But that's not what the story says. I remember watching a video of Bill Nye, debunking Noah's ark because he said he (Nye) came from a family of boat builders, and building a boat to navigate across the sea was hard. That was literally his argument. Yes, Bill... but Noah's ark wasn't a boat. It literally just had to float. ๐Ÿ‘“ Anyway, this highlights the kind of circular reasoning I was talking about with Dawkins. The current assumption is: speciation is slow, ergo all the species we currently have couldn't have evolved so quickly, from such a small sample selection. But Science (tm) now shows us how speciation can happen incredibly rapidly, through genetic recombinations. Science also says there was a genetic bottleneck a while back, which most species passed through. This surprised them so much, they had to issue a disclaimer later on, because people were accusing them of being creationists when they most definitely weren't ๐Ÿคฃ Again, this highlights the circular reasoning of people who adhere to naturalism. This line of reasoning isn't used elsewhere. Japanese car manufacturers design exquisite processes to make cars, and nobody bats an eyelid. But if anything so exquisite appears in nature, according to naturalism it must be explained 'naturally', no exceptions. Take error correcting. This is done by computers and other communications equipment. Communicating or copying code occasionally contains errors, but these errors are accounted for by various well-designed processes. As we know, it's also done when the genome gets copied, where a wrong nucleotide gets cut out and replaced, and also by the two strands of DNA being compared. Without error correcting processes, you can't have a stable genetic code passed on to the next generation. Mutations would occur at a disastrously high rate. Yet for error correcting systems to evolve, you need a pretty stable genetic code in the first place. Human beings use the science of error correcting intelligently, and by design - i.e. intelligent design. Only in the science of trying to explain origins do they insist on the opposite, i.e. there cannot be an intelligent agency involved, because of the dogma of naturalism. This is the point I was making about Dawkins. Adherents to naturalism have set themselves up for the most epic circular reasoning.
  16. Modern science is a mix of methodologies combined with a philosophy, namely naturalism (i.e. that everything in 'nature' must be explained 'naturally'.) But it's a bit of a Catch 22 for people like Dawkins, because then everything can (and must) be explained away as 'natural', even if that explanation turns out to be wrong. This is also why they have a problem with "intelligent design". They claim it's just 'creationism in a tuxedo', but their real beef is that it competes with naturalism. Of course, hardcore believers in naturalism such as Dawkins will deny that intelligent design is competition in any way, because they'll say it's not 'science'. They will say this while completely not recognizing the dilemma they have set up for themselves
  17. Is there a Core Dogma? Yes. "These vaccines are safe and effective." CHECK. Are there founding prophets / profits? Yes. Pfizer, Moderna, Fauci. CHECK. Are there institutions and/or people deciding orthodoxy / heresy? Yes. FDA, CDC, Fauci, Biden. CHECK. Is there a High Priest? Yes. Fauci. CHECK. Do people put faith in vaccines? Yes. (They have no idea of the long-term effects and believe in the Core Dogma.) CHECK. Is there persecution of the nonbelievers? Yes. CHECK. This whole vaccine thing sounds like religion masquerading as science. The only thing that's missing is a holy book, but that's not strictly necessary for a religion.
  18. Give Pfizer another 6 months or so. They should have a product for you by then.
  19. Just in case anyone thinks the Military World Games are made up... Opening ceremony of 2019 Military World Games in Wuhan, China Shame we can't have the world's armies just doing this stuff all of the time. (Also shame a worldwide pandemic followed.)
  20. Good catch. So they basically wanted to release the spike protein into bats in 2018. How novel, eh ๐Ÿ˜ฎ At least the bats could claim to be "fully vaccinated". Oh wait. They didn't keep up with their boosters.
  21. Also worth noting, for anyone who cares... the last Military World Games was in 2019, October 18 โ€“ 27. Guess where? Wuhan, China ๐Ÿคฃ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_World_Games Amazing how much was going on right before the worldwide pandemic that emanated from Wuhan, China.
  22. Wuhan Scientists Submitted Plans to Release Coronaviruses into Bat Caves in 2018 https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/21/wuhan-scientists-submitted-plans-to-release-coronaviruses-into-bat-caves-in-2018/ Source article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/21/wuhan-scientists-planned-releaseskin-penetrating-nanoparticles/ (paywalled) "The bid was submitted by British zoologist Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, the U.S.-based organisation, which has worked closely with the WIV researching bat coronaviruses. Team members included Dr. Shi Zhengli, the WIV researcher dubbed โ€œbat womanโ€, as well as U.S. researchers from the University of North Carolina and the United States Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Centre." These people are arguably nuts.... But anyway, just pure coincidence that, about a year later, a worldwide pandemic emanated from Wuhan.
  23. Could be, but somehow I don't think that's what the World Economic Forum Director had in mind. I'll have to re-skim his book. It was a bit boring, to be honest (I was looking for the infamous "you'll own nothing and be happy" statement, which I couldn't find.)
  24. "๐“๐ก๐ž๐ซ๐ž ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ง๐จ ๐ฐ๐š๐ฒ ๐›๐š๐œ๐ค ๐ญ๐จ ๐จ๐ฅ๐ ๐ง๐จ๐ซ๐ฆ๐š๐ฅ." - ๐š†๐™ด๐™ต-๐™ณ๐š’๐š›๐šŽ๐šŒ๐š๐š˜๐š› ๐™บ๐š•๐šŠ๐šž๐šœ ๐š‚๐šŒ๐š‘๐š ๐šŠ๐š‹ Your digits are in order. You may proceed. ๐Ÿ‘
×
×
  • 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.