Anthony Fauci is ‘not convinced’ COVID-19 developed naturall
kraftiekortie wrote:
At the same time, many “conspiracy theories” do not reflect what is true.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
Well, there's some interesting sections included via images in the article as a teaser...
One thing that has always seemed strange is the repeated denials (presented as absolute certantity) that it could have come from a lab, while providing minimal evidence to support this assertion... There were, of course, many claims that it had to have come from bats sold at the market (when bats were not sold there), or from bats (or other animals elsewhere), but no-one was able to identify where, whilst a lab that did research on the type of virus, situated close to the first outbreak (and known to have issues with biosecurity) was determined to have had absolutely nothing to do with it. Common sense (as well as the scientific method) would suggest you do not rule out an idea without overwhelming evidence - You may state that something is unlikely, but not (as occurred here) claim that it wasn't possible.
If it is found to have come from the lab, how many people will have died as a result of those researching cures being actively prevented from finding the source...
Pepe wrote:
The_Znof wrote:
heres some evidence. I dont twit so had to take a screen.
Also:
NoClearMind53 has no credibility, in my eyes, if he doesn't understand how people in politics obfuscate and misrepresent the truth to suit their own political agenda. Both sides of politics do this. How can anyone with a modicum of life experience not know this?
Hence, the need for critical thinking.
You only post really dumb simple-minded memes and far-right BS from Sky News, so you have less than zero credibility. The point is outside of crazy conspiracy nonsense (almost exclusively right-wing these days), most political debate is over moral values, not facts. If the quote from AOC is real, that is what she was trying to say. Combatting climate change and promoting an economic order that benefits everyone, not just the already wealthy... that is a moral priority to some and not others.
Pepe wrote:
f*****g politics and butt-covering.
3.5 million and counting.
God I hate humanity.
3.5 million and counting.
God I hate humanity.
Ummm... Trump also called the virus a "hoax" multiple times. He lies constantly. Why would you expect people to believe a broken clock? We also still don't know and may never know where the virus came from. They're merely investigating.
Misslizard wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Mikah wrote:
"Conspiracy Theories" can be correct, btw.
Please Note:
The virus escaping from the Wuhan virological lab is *still* **only** a theory, but it can't be ignored/dismissed.
The purpose, of the investigation, is to prevent a potentially even bigger human tragedy in the future.
Anyone who can't see this is a fool.
FYI:
I have had some caffeine.
Is it obvious?
Silly me.
Since you like conspiracy theories then acknowledge me as your supreme reptilian ruler.I am the Lizard Queen.
I demand tribute.
I’ve also had caffeine.It’s my primary fuel.
The cheque is in the mail, my liege.
Pepe wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Mikah wrote:
"Conspiracy Theories" can be correct, btw.
Please Note:
The virus escaping from the Wuhan virological lab is *still* **only** a theory, but it can't be ignored/dismissed.
The purpose, of the investigation, is to prevent a potentially even bigger human tragedy in the future.
Anyone who can't see this is a fool.
FYI:
I have had some caffeine.
Is it obvious?
Silly me.
Since you like conspiracy theories then acknowledge me as your supreme reptilian ruler.I am the Lizard Queen.
I demand tribute.
I’ve also had caffeine.It’s my primary fuel.
The cheque is in the mail, my liege.
Good, I expect one weekly.
_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi
Brictoria wrote:
COVID-19 'has NO credible natural ancestor' and WAS created by Chinese scientists who then tried to cover their tracks with 'retro-engineering' to make it seem like it naturally arose from bats, explosive new study claims
Well within the possibility of human perversity.
kraftiekortie wrote:
At the same time, many “conspiracy theories” do not reflect what is true.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
NoClearMind53 wrote:
Pepe wrote:
f*****g politics and butt-covering.
3.5 million and counting.
God I hate humanity.
3.5 million and counting.
God I hate humanity.
Ummm... Trump also called the virus a "hoax" multiple times. He lies constantly. Why would you expect people to believe a broken clock? We also still don't know and may never know where the virus came from. They're merely investigating.
That is where reason and life experience comes into it.
People who are not capable of critical thinking, or are hostage to hyperpartisanship, have low credibility.
People should focus on the Truth, rather than servicing a political agenda.
Brictoria wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
At the same time, many “conspiracy theories” do not reflect what is true.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
One example is that Jews, as a collective, “ratted on” Jesus. Judas was a Jew, of course.....but he wasn’t ALL Jews.
Let’s see what evidence Dalgleish and Sorensen actually came up with.
Well, there's some interesting sections included via images in the article as a teaser...
One thing that has always seemed strange is the repeated denials (presented as absolute certantity) that it could have come from a lab, while providing minimal evidence to support this assertion... There were, of course, many claims that it had to have come from bats sold at the market (when bats were not sold there), or from bats (or other animals elsewhere), but no-one was able to identify where, whilst a lab that did research on the type of virus, situated close to the first outbreak (and known to have issues with biosecurity) was determined to have had absolutely nothing to do with it. Common sense (as well as the scientific method) would suggest you do not rule out an idea without overwhelming evidence - You may state that something is unlikely, but not (as occurred here) claim that it wasn't possible.
If it is found to have come from the lab, how many people will have died as a result of those researching cures being actively prevented from finding the source...
It is an example of criminal political interference.
3.5 and counting.
Why do so many people refuse to engage with critical thinking and simply unquestioningly adopt hyperpartisan rhetoric?
It is damn well embarrassing.
Pepe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
COVID-19 'has NO credible natural ancestor' and WAS created by Chinese scientists who then tried to cover their tracks with 'retro-engineering' to make it seem like it naturally arose from bats, explosive new study claims
Well within the possibility of human perversity.
Life immitating art?
Quote:
Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.
Dr. Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park
Dr. Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park
Source: https://www.quotes.net/mquote/49960
Pepe wrote:
That is where reason and life experience comes into it.
People who are not capable of critical thinking, or are hostage to hyperpartisanship, have low credibility.
People should focus on the Truth, rather than servicing a political agenda.
People who are not capable of critical thinking, or are hostage to hyperpartisanship, have low credibility.
People should focus on the Truth, rather than servicing a political agenda.
I don't think very many people are capable of true critical thinking. It's easy to think that because "two sides" who appear to viciously oppose each other are presented in the widely consumed media, that "the truth" may lie somewhere in the middle. The problem is there is no linear spectrum and there are mistruths shared by both apparent "sides". The "truth" may not be "in the middle" so much as out on an entirely different plane. Political "truth" these days is extremely distorted by media that is almost exclusively owned and dictated by extremely wealthy individuals. There are apparent fighting factions, but there are also ideas and issues that are avoided like the plague by both apparent "sides". This is especially true in the US media.
Pepe wrote:
NoClearMind53 wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
One of the negative side-effects of the post-Trump era is that anyone who defied their president in the end is a hero -- regardless of their crimes.
QFT.
Also, the quotes are fake.
Evidence.
QFT - really?
Simplistic political memes can be twisted into misrepresenting anything and, unsurprisingly, the quote from AOC is fake.
Why am I doing your critical thinking for you?
Anderson Cooper/AOC interview wrote:
Anderson Cooper: One of the criticisms of you is that— that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios—
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Oh my goodness—
Anderson Cooper: —for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they're missing the forest for the trees. I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.
Anderson Cooper: But being factually correct is important—
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: It's absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, "Okay, this was clumsy." and then I restate what my point was. But it's— it's not the same thing as— as the president lying about immigrants. It's not the same thing, at all.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Oh my goodness—
Anderson Cooper: —for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they're missing the forest for the trees. I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.
Anderson Cooper: But being factually correct is important—
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: It's absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, "Okay, this was clumsy." and then I restate what my point was. But it's— it's not the same thing as— as the president lying about immigrants. It's not the same thing, at all.
The full transcript from 2019: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria ... 019-01-06/
Video of the quoted part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-LZeklv9lQ
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.
Deliberately fake or paraphrased?
Is the factually wrong memer morally correct?
Speaking of that moral devil, there is a Fauci quote on gain of function floating around, and while it does not look good for Fauci, it is being stripped of context to make it look worse than it really is for Fauci
Edit- this link doesn’t really deal much with the issue I’m bringing up, but still is an interesting read
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... b-funding/
Cornflake wrote:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they're missing the forest for the trees. I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.
To be fair to the meme maker, what is paraphrased is heavily implied in what she says in the word-for-word quote.
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Facebook no longer treating 'man-made' Covid as a crackpot idea
Quote:
Facebook will no longer take down posts claiming that Covid-19 was man-made or manufactured, a company spokesperson told POLITICO on Wednesday, a move that acknowledges the renewed debate about the virus’ origins.
But the focus of late has been on the notion that the virus may have accidentally escaped from the lab, not that it was man-made or purposely released — theories that could now propagate on Facebook.
Facebook announced in February it had expanded the list of misleading health claims that it would remove from its platforms to include those asserting that "COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured." The tech giant has updated its policies against false and misleading coronavirus information, including its running list of debunked claims, over the course of the pandemic in consultation with global health officials.
But a Facebook spokesperson said Wednesday that the origin language had been stricken from that list due to the renewed debate about the virus’ roots.
“In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
Other platforms including Twitter have said that misleading claims about the virus’ roots may also violate its policies. But Facebook’s move marks the first major sign prominent social media companies are revisiting those rules as the Wuhan lab-leak theory gains attention.
Asked whether Twitter plans to revisit its own rules on Covid-19 origin claims, a company spokesperson said late Wednesday they had no updates to share at this time.
A YouTube spokesperson confirmed in a statement Thursday that claims that the virus was man-made or originated in a lab accident do not violate the platform's policies because "there has not been consensus" on its origins. So the company's policy remains unchanged.
But the focus of late has been on the notion that the virus may have accidentally escaped from the lab, not that it was man-made or purposely released — theories that could now propagate on Facebook.
Facebook announced in February it had expanded the list of misleading health claims that it would remove from its platforms to include those asserting that "COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured." The tech giant has updated its policies against false and misleading coronavirus information, including its running list of debunked claims, over the course of the pandemic in consultation with global health officials.
But a Facebook spokesperson said Wednesday that the origin language had been stricken from that list due to the renewed debate about the virus’ roots.
“In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
Other platforms including Twitter have said that misleading claims about the virus’ roots may also violate its policies. But Facebook’s move marks the first major sign prominent social media companies are revisiting those rules as the Wuhan lab-leak theory gains attention.
Asked whether Twitter plans to revisit its own rules on Covid-19 origin claims, a company spokesperson said late Wednesday they had no updates to share at this time.
A YouTube spokesperson confirmed in a statement Thursday that claims that the virus was man-made or originated in a lab accident do not violate the platform's policies because "there has not been consensus" on its origins. So the company's policy remains unchanged.
Soon followed by:
Quote:
MENLO PARK, CA—Facebook has updated its community standards today, declaring that anyone who says the COVID-19 virus wasn't developed in the lab in Wuhan will be banned for sharing fake news.
Mark Zuckerberg, may he live forever, announced the change from his royal throne today to a group of reporters gathered in his royal throne room.
"Hear ye, hear ye!" Zuckerberg announced. "From henceforth, anyone saying the virus wasn't created in a lab shall be banned! While previously, those who said the virus was created in a lab were hanged, this royal decree hereby reverses the order, and now, those who deny the obvious truth that it was created in a lab shall be declared anathema and sentenced to die!"
Zuckerberg's royal scribes then began scrubbing the old rule from the giant Community Standards tablets displayed in the throne room and chiseling the updated rule on top.
"So it is written, and so it is done!" announced Zuckerberg.
And the people rejoiced and began feasting upon the lamb, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies.
Mark Zuckerberg, may he live forever, announced the change from his royal throne today to a group of reporters gathered in his royal throne room.
"Hear ye, hear ye!" Zuckerberg announced. "From henceforth, anyone saying the virus wasn't created in a lab shall be banned! While previously, those who said the virus was created in a lab were hanged, this royal decree hereby reverses the order, and now, those who deny the obvious truth that it was created in a lab shall be declared anathema and sentenced to die!"
Zuckerberg's royal scribes then began scrubbing the old rule from the giant Community Standards tablets displayed in the throne room and chiseling the updated rule on top.
"So it is written, and so it is done!" announced Zuckerberg.
And the people rejoiced and began feasting upon the lamb, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies.
Source: https://babylonbee.com/news/facebook-now-banning-anyone-who-says-virus-wasnt-developed-in-wuhan-lab
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
The REAL reason why I have developed feelings for SpongeBob! |
08 Mar 2024, 6:36 pm |
The CDC may be reconsidering its COVID isolation guidance |
18 Feb 2024, 11:33 pm |
New Chinese COVID experiment 100% fatal |
18 Feb 2024, 4:33 am |
Study shows heart damage from COVID-19 |
23 Mar 2024, 10:44 am |