Cont: Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories Part IV

[Hans]

. You can stop worry about this new world order as it didn't work out.

No its his go to bugbear. THEY are behind everything, no matter how silly or contradicting or illogical.

In his world the fact that they control banking and can make up all the money they want they still need to gather up chump change from vaccines?

It's like a theist claiming the Devil or God is behind everything that happens.

It's his go to 'evidence' when he had none.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Sanitation is certainly a significant contributing factor in modern life expectancy, at least in the more affluent parts of the world. But the idea that modern, science based medicine is a useless scam is pathetically ignorant.

I know at least three people who are alive today because of appendectomy.

I have a friend who's daughter was born with a heart defect that was successfully treated with surgery. She plays tennis competitively and just started college.

Another friend was seriously injured in a horrible car accident. One of the reasons he's alive today is because of blood typing and transfusion.

A good friend of mine died of cancer two years ago at age seventy. But if not for medical science he would have died of cancer in his mid fifties. Even when fighting the cancer a second time, he said he was deeply grateful to his doctors that he got another decade and a half of good health to spend with his wife, kids, grandkids and friends.

My own wife is with me and our children now because medical science made possible the identification of her own thyroid gland as the thing that was slowly trying to kill her. And it made possible the surgery to remove it and the medication to make it possible for her to live without it.

My mother also had a thyroidectomy at the age of 47, returning her to good health.

After I suffered a hernia while doing landscaping work, I was able to have a routine surgical procedure to repair it, which sure beats walking around with my guts in my nut sack.

 

[Tippit]

Yeah so why would your believing in something totally goofy make your opinions more believable?

What you, and people like you find believable, is the least of my concerns.

I will believe what I think is true, and most likely, above all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Here, I'll explain it to you as simply as I can. Unless we're in a world war, there's always a world order. Prior to World War I, there was a world order based on balance of power. Between the wars, there was the first real attempt to create a rules-based world order. That's where the major nations agree on a set of rules that govern their interactions, particularly military. After World War II there was a world order based on spheres of influence.

The "New World Order" that you incorrectly associate with you having to get a shot or whatever that George Bush talked about in his famous speech was an attempt to move to again try a rules based world order. Specifically, he was referring to the major nations putting together coalitions to enforce the rules (like no invading). You can stop worry about this new world order as it didn't work out.

The *new world order* that has the conspiracy hypothesists (there is no coherent theory) shaking in their boots has been a concern of theirs and their predecessors since the 60's. Most of the current crop were not even born when the idea was first proposed. Either those involved in creating this new world order are so tremendously inefficient in showing no results after nearly 60 years which means that there is little to be concerned about, or it is no longer anything "new" and is already operating efficiently, in which case Vogons were correct and resistance is useless. It is merely the world order. In any case there is no possible serious use of the phrase, comedic purposes excepted, that does not immediately identify the proponent as stark raving bonkers.

 

[Tippit]

In his world the fact that they control banking and can make up all the money they want they still need to gather up chump change from vaccines?

Is it a fact that the world runs on fiat money systems, or is that just my imagination? If it’s true, then what are the limits for gaming these systems?

Are you claiming that the same people who control the fiat money system are necessarily the same people who need to profit from the “vaccines”? Because that would be pretty stupid. Obviously there are hierarchies in power, with different agendas, right down to a middle class shareholder in a pharma company.

It's like a theist claiming the Devil or God is behind everything that happens.

It's his go to 'evidence' when he had none.

I never made any such claim. That’s just a ******** characterization of yours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[threadworm]

I’m going to go with “Not necessarily peer reviewed medical science” for $1000, Alex.

What you're going for is handwaving dismissal of things that don't fall in lline with your bias.

peer reviewed science doesn’t give a **** about the efficacy of fixing Zinc sulfate deficiencies, zinc ionophores, or ascorbic acid megadosing as effective antivirals.

Peer reviewed citation required.

In fact, it has a direct conflict of interest in suppressing this information so it can sell you proprietary patented pharmaceuticals with side effects that not only generate revenue, but increase the likelihood that you will be sick and even more dependent on them in the future. This doesn’t even require a conspiracy, it’s an artifact of basic capitalist incentives and human nature. This bias, plus the RCT bias that michaelsuede observed, and the examples above are just the tip of the iceberg.

If it doesn’t generate revenue, “medical scientists” aren’t interested in it.

Cute little rant, but none of it negates the point that you replied to, or the one that you didn't. The only reason you know about how illnesses work, and which ones would be fixed by sanitation and nutrition and which ones can be prevented, is by using science. The reason you get to rail against all these facts and figures is because science gave you them.

Someone paying you to find a cure doesn't stop it being a cure when you find it. By all means don't take advantage of the things medical science offers, but be prepared to suffer the consequences of that choice. Suffer is the operative word. Your noble sacrifice on the altar of principle wlil go largely unnoticed.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

I’m going to go with “Not necessarily peer reviewed medical science” for $1000, Alex.

Peer reviewed science doesn’t give a **** about the efficacy of fixing Zinc sulfate deficiencies, zinc ionophores, or ascorbic acid megadosing as effective antivirals. In fact, it has a direct conflict of interest in suppressing this information so it can sell you proprietary patented pharmaceuticals with side effects that not only generate revenue, but increase the likelihood that you will be sick and even more dependent on them in the future. This doesn’t even require a conspiracy, it’s an artifact of basic capitalist incentives and human nature. This bias, plus the RCT bias that michaelsuede observed, and the examples above are just the tip of the iceberg.

If it doesn’t generate revenue, “medical scientists” aren’t interested in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You excused the extra expenses incurred by the conned convicts who were given Ivermectin and had to have the ensuing side effects treated, as 'nothing to do with Ivermectin'.
By the same logic, the side effects of all other pharmaceuticals are nothing to do with those pharmaceuticals either, and so your entire claim debunks itself.

 

[Tippit]

Sanitation is certainly a significant contributing factor in modern life expectancy, at least in the more affluent parts of the world. But the idea that modern, science based medicine is a useless scam is pathetically ignorant.

I never claimed this. Science, and medical science in particular has made amazing discoveries that have been immensely beneficial to society at large. The issue is that there are some huge limitations, and conflicts of interest in peer reviewed medical science which are clearly not beneficial, and rest on the misrepresentation of science.

A good friend of mine died of cancer two years ago at age seventy. But if not for medical science he would have died of cancer in his mid fifties. Even when fighting the cancer a second time, he said he was deeply grateful to his doctors that he got another decade and a half of good health to spend with his wife, kids, grandkids and friends.

Cancer treatment and research are probably one of the most dubious aspects of medical science. There is a lot of evidence that some cancers are mostly nutritional deficiencies. Pharmaceutical conglomerates can’t benefit financially from your improved nutrition, so the myopic focus is on patentable drugs and expensive surgeries and treatments.

Are the cancer charities and societies really interested in cures? They will lose mountains of recurring revenue the day those happen. There is, without exception, vastly more money in treatments than cures.

So “treatments” you will get, and you will grovel for them, because you don’t know any better.

My own wife is with me and our children now because medical science made possible the identification of her own thyroid gland as the thing that was slowly trying to kill her. And it made possible the surgery to remove it and the medication to make it possible for her to live without it.

The thyroid which governs your metabolism, is one of the most important glands in your body. Ultimately it regulates your hormones. Your wife’s thyroid wasn’t slowly trying to kill her, she probably had an autoimmune issue which caused her immune system to attack her thyroid. This is treatable without a thyroidectomy, but she had the surgery and is now dependent on synthetic T4 for the rest of her life. This kneejerk reaction to remove this crucial organ and create a drug dependency is an example of a failure of peer-reviewed medical science, not a success, but you will never be convinced of this because there is no money in the alternatives, and because it would be difficult to accept the fact that you took bad advice. More post-purchase rationalization.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Is it a fact that the world runs on fiat money systems, or is that just my imagination?

Take a deep breath. The world uses a lot of fiat currency, but this is not the dreadful evil you imagine it to be.

I never made any such claim. That’s just a ******** characterization of yours.

You never claimed the NWO control everything? I think you did.
Of course, if you've looked at the evidence (or lack thereof) for this idea, and changed your mind, then I'm happy for you.
Which is it?

 

[Tippit]

Someone paying you to find a cure doesn't stop it being a cure when you find it. By all means don't take advantage of the things medical science offers, but be prepared to suffer the consequences of that choice. Suffer is the operative word. Your noble sacrifice on the altar of principle wlil go largely unnoticed.

What I actually will do, is pick and choose among the benefits that medical science offers, while being fully aware of its limitations and conflicts of interest and being skeptical all the while.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Paul2]

. . . . I have zero trust of, and absolute cynicism for medical “science”, and It’s hard for me to even ponder how others don’t have the same cynicism.

Science, and medical science in particular has made amazing discoveries that have been immensely beneficial to society at large.

Are you going with both of these, and just how, exactly? At first glance (and successive glances, too), those two statement seem contradictory.

 

[Hans]

Is it a fact that the world runs on fiat money systems, or is that just my imagination?

Yes in many cases but there is no massive evil conspiracy doing this. One truth does not support a vague childish fantasy.

If it’s true, then what are the limits for gaming these systems?

Its your fantasy why do you want me to explain your fantastical thinking to you?

Try reading something other than conspiracy clap trap and you would know how fiat money works.

There are not tens of millions of people doing this and every government and agenda in the world ignoring it...

Are you claiming that the same people who control the fiat money system are necessarily the same people who need to profit from the “vaccines”? Because that would be pretty stupid. Obviously there are hierarchies in power, with different agendas, right down to a middle class shareholder in a pharma company.

I see so the folks who control the world in your imaginary world view, allow lesser 'people' to control parts of the world?

LOL

I never made any such claim.

So you are saying the people who control fiat banking DON'T control the world? Don't control all the governments and agencies?

You sure about that? LOL

 

[sackett]

To brush the dust and ash off my mind a bit, I've been fossicking around in Germanic and Norse mythology -- nothing scholarly, just summaries and discussions for interested laymen. It's a field that's always intrigued me far more than the classical stuff. The northern beliefs were never codified or rigidified; they remained in the hands of unlettered oafs, and their chaotic nature is the result.

So I find that I can recognize a living mythology. NWO! Enwo the Devourer! Worm of the World! His mill grinds ever the bones of Christian maidens! None but a few heroes -- pureboods and athletes all, and Sons of the Guns -- know the lair of Enwo, or his infinite plottings!

Sure, any of us could make this stuff up, and damn tedious it is. But I think that incoherent yelling is the normal form of internal dialog for CTers. It's what they do in default of thinking. Contradictions, inconsistencies, lies, fragmented logic, staggering ignorance -- all perfectly okay, because intelligence is not the point. Religious ecstasy is all that matters.

I wonder: Will the CTers begin to exhibit actual shamanism? Do they already?

I don't like those questions.

 

[Hans]

Are you going with both of these, and just how, exactly? At first glance (and successive glances, too), those two statement seem contradictory.

Contradiction and irrationally are the sauce in which conspiracy thinking is best dipped in for a deeper taste of crazy.

 

[Paul2]

I don't like those questions.

You're gonna absolutely hate the answers, then.

 

[Hans]

What I actually will do, is pick and choose among the benefits that medical science offers, while being fully aware of its limitations and conflicts of interest and being skeptical all the while.

Okay so is 'medical science' controlled and directed by a sinister secret and evil cabal who direct its every claim, decision and methodology?

 

[Hans]

You never claimed the NWO control everything? I think you did.
Of course, if you've looked at the evidence (or lack thereof) for this idea, and changed your mind, then I'm happy for you.
Which is it?

In my experience they often believe both aspects at the same time. It fully controls all the levers of power but, and important but, but are vastly incompetent - unlike real bad folks like in the Soviet Union, present day China, NK, Iran where the forces that be crush any internal enemies easily. In their world they can decry the evil force but IT TOTALLY LEAVES THEM ALONE. While they seem to know every aspect of their plans.

However in knowing all their operational secrets they cannot name the leaders, the administration HQ, or why there are no dissenters or splinter groups.

 

[Tippit]

Take a deep breath. The world uses a lot of fiat currency, but this is not the dreadful evil you imagine it to be.

You know nothing. Read some of the posts in the economics subforum before you can claim to have a clue about this topic.

You never claimed the NWO control everything? I think you did.
Of course, if you've looked at the evidence (or lack thereof) for this idea, and changed your mind, then I'm happy for you.
Which is it?

I claimed that the NWO exists, and is influencing virtually every substantial issue facing the modern world. It doesn't mean they're omnipotent, but it does mean that they're perpetually trying to set up a world in which they are.

 

[Tippit]

Are you going with both of these, and just how, exactly? At first glance (and successive glances, too), those two statement seem contradictory.

There is a difference between contemporary, experimental, for-profit allopathic medical science, and well-accepted medical science. Not everything that masquerades as science, is science. In fact, I can't think of a time before now when science has been so politicized.

 

[Tippit]

Its your fantasy why do you want me to explain your fantastical thinking to you?

I asked you a very specific question regarding how the fiat money system could possibly be gamed, and you apparently aren't capable of answering it. Would you like to try again?

I see so the folks who control the world in your imaginary world view, allow lesser 'people' to control parts of the world?

More or less, yes. I realize this is a difficult concept for you to comprehend, and requires some "imagination". But the only alternative to some ridiculous idea of a top down method of global control by a huge network of psychopaths, is the idea of compartmentalization, and not so much people at the top giving direct orders, but using monetary influence to select people who are already predetermined to serve their agenda without even knowing it.

Kind of like you are doing right now by defending them, and discrediting the notion that any of this is even possible.