China Wuhan Virus Pandemic

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
You know that's the same person who was making those bad science Spike Protein claims right?

Heck... He can't even get the duration of high level immunity for the RNA vaccines right... (Hint... The Israel study he cited put it at 6 months before a slight loss in immunity not 4.5 months for a total loss of immunity like he tried to claim...)

So what, exactly, is his motive for lying then?

What has he gained?

How does that stack up compared to what he has lost?
 

bintananth

behind a desk
So what, exactly, is his motive for lying then?

What has he gained?

How does that stack up compared to what he has lost?
Some people don't know when to quit and will dig ever deeper into a pile of feces with their bare hands after their shovel is taken away or breaks.
 

LindyAF

Well-known member

This is interesting and not something I was previously aware of (assuming it's accurate). The biden "vaccine mandate" doesn't, legally speaking, exist - it's just a press release. But a press release backed by the system is more powerful than an executive order against it. The press release serves as cover for private employers and state governments to have their own mandates while saying that they are required (or may become required), in order to avoid unpopularity or organization against them.

This is something I think at least some right wingers are getting wrong - I've seen people saying stuff like the biden administration is "bullying" private employers. The government might indeed bully small businesses, but the big oligopolies? The neoliberal globalist admin "bullying" neoliberal globalism? Nah. They wanted this, part of the point of "democratic" government is to give people a scapegoat for unpopular policy and a way to direct unrest and dissatisfaction along useless paths.
 
Last edited:

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder

This is interesting and not something I was previously aware of (assuming it's accurate). The biden "vaccine mandate" doesn't, legally speaking, exist - it's just a press release. But a press release backed by the system is more powerful than an executive order against it. The press release serves as cover for private employers and state governments to have their own mandates while saying that they are required (or may become required), in order to avoid unpopularity or organization against them.

This is something I think at least some right wingers are getting wrong - I've seen people saying stuff like the biden administration is "bullying" private employers. The government might indeed bully small businesses, but the big oligopolies? The neoliberal globalist admin "bullying" neoliberal globalism? Nah. They wanted this, part of the point of "democratic" government is to give people a scapegoat for unpopular policy and a way to direct unrest and dissatisfaction along useless paths.
The mandate hasn't been released yet.
Biden announced it, and that he's having OSHA do it. And OSHA hasn't released the guidelines yet.

So as of now, it does not exist, but it's coming once OSHA works out the fine details.

I didn't read past the first couple paragraphs so the article might mention that lol, but I thought that was public knowledge. That's why the lawsuits haven't rolled out yet.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Companies are claiming it as a excuse why they are being "forced" to do mandates when they are choosing to do it themselves. There is nothing forcing anyone at the moment.

That might change later but right now these companies are lying.
Indeed.

What this has done, is given companies who wanted to do it anyways, a bit of an excuse.

Biden has even said this.
 

DarthOne

☦️
HlWCJOmv.jpeg
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
How should I know, but he's known for lying about this issue almost as much as Faucci, so trying to hold him up as any sort of reputable source is kind of laughable.

This is not a meaningful argument. It is nothing more than 'sources say.'

Well, he, as a professional immunologist, is a source, and *he* says otherwise. If you just want to go with 'sources say' and 'people know' things, then this two-sentence paragraph alone is equally valid to your argument.

I took the time to copy the paper over. He makes arguments where he cites his sources, including links. Can you counter those arguments? Can you cite your sources?
 

Vaermina

Well-known member
This is not a meaningful argument. It is nothing more than 'sources say.'

Well, he, as a professional immunologist, is a source, and *he* says otherwise. If you just want to go with 'sources say' and 'people know' things, then this two-sentence paragraph alone is equally valid to your argument.

I took the time to copy the paper over. He makes arguments where he cites his sources, including links. Can you counter those arguments? Can you cite your sources?
He's a professional immunologist... With a proven history of making stuff about this very specific thing up...

Which means at a minimum you need to show credible people separately backing up his claims.
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer.
Founder
Sotnik
Bad news Fauci Fans...




Still... breaking records for sure.


Good news Fauci fans... IMDB Users have given Fauci a rating of 5.8/10 as you can see in this following link:


And for all of you naysayers, I took a screenshot...

IMDB.jpg


See 5.8 by Users. Don't believe the bullshit on RottenTomatoes. Way better then 3% Fresh.
 

Vaermina

Well-known member
Good news Fauci fans... IMDB Users have given Fauci a rating of 5.8/10 as you can see in this following link:


And for all of you naysayers, I took a screenshot...

IMDB.jpg


See 5.8 by Users. Don't believe the bullshit on RottenTomatoes. Way better then 3% Fresh.
Key word there... "Weighted Average"...

IMDb publishes weighted vote averages rather than raw data averages.

The simplest way to explain it is that although we accept and consider all votes received by users, not all votes have the same impact (or ‘weight’) on the final rating.

When unusual voting activity is detected, an alternate weighting calculation may be applied in order to preserve the reliability of our system.

To ensure that our rating mechanism remains effective, we do not disclose the exact method used to generate the rating.
So yes, they are very clearly and openly cooking the books.
 

Sobek

Disgusting Scalie
You forgot to account for the "ignore the votes from anti-science troll russian fake news bots" on the equation.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top