Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 4857461" data-attributes="member: 63706">That one hurt your feelings, huh? I never said that's what you were doing. I was making a general statement.Never said any of that, you assumed that's what I meant. I reserve the right to evaluate the data the researchers come up with myself. A lot of times, as with masks, the conclusions the researchers state aren't supported by their own data.Several times more than normal? That proves covid? Why use cremations as the indicating factor? Seems a little odd. It couldn't just be that fewer people can afford burials due to economic restrictions enacted by government? Or that burials have been restricted by the government? Or that cremations are becoming more the norm naturally? I never said that, you're assuming again. I have done my research on the pandemic in general, there is a lot to know and understand. It is well established that the reported cases and deaths are based on fraudulent tests and reporting methods. It is not unreasonable to assume that any time a geograpgic area is said to be "spiking", that it is a continuation of the same fraudulent system.You want me to accept what you have come to accept when you admit you haven't done your due diligence on the very fundamental issues concerning the pandemic. Who has isolated the original sars cov 2 virus? Who has isolated the variants? Are they now using tests that are actually designed to be diagnostic? I haven't seen real evidence of any of this. I keep hearing the same claims with no proof. You want me to accept what you accept, help me out. Give me a reason.There you go. Have you read any of the published literature about what they are "telling us"? Have you listened to any alternative explanations from equally credentialed experts? What is your process for vetting the information you choose to accept as true?I have a high bar for evidence, sorry. You need to explain a lot that you admit to not knowing before I would be willing to change my views. If you think I am being unreasonable in my high level of skepticism, why do you think that? Why aren't you unreasonable in your relatively low level of skepticism?Must everyone who challenges the official narrative necessarily conclude "conspiracy"? Why do you think that? Why is it so hard to believe that people in positions of power might want to lie in order to pursue their interests? Why would you believe that those interests take the average person's well-being into consideration? People work together towards goals all the time, is that conspiracy? Do liberals conspire against conservatives to destroy their way of life? Or are they simply pursuing their own interests because they believe in what they are doing? Why can't bad decisions simply be incompetence, rather than maliciousness? Are you familiar the concept of groupthink? Do you know what the milgram experiment is, and do you understand the implications of the results? The interactions between people are complex at the individual level, but people's decision making processes become more predictable when an authority figure is involved. And behavior becomes even more predictable at the group or societal level. It doesn't require conspiracy to see the results we are seeing, but that fact doesn't preclude conspiracy.</blockquote>

Verification