This subject has become so incredibly political that all data concerning the subject is now un-credible - choose a position and you can probably find a “scientist” who will agree. Politics has destroyed all faith in science in the same way that latter priests destroyed all faith in religion.
All it takes is a little too much corruption.
When they say, “we are following the science” - what they are deceptively saying is that they are following the political science. That is all you can truly know - as uncomfortable as that might be.
How would I know I haven’t heard of it?
I’ve already welcomed you to provide a source if you have one.
Just because there’s a lot of bias and noise doesn’t mean these things aren’t knowable or that there isn’t a good reason to believe anybody. There are credible sources of information. And it’s important to identify those sources, and to cross-reference between multiple credible sources.
I’m sorry - I falsely assumed you were more conscious.
“How would you know if an embryo’s DNA had been altered?” And by “you” - I mean “anyone”. And even if they could discern that, how long would that study take? And more importantly, what makes you think that they would tell you - or anyone?
What is that “good reason” for believing anybody?
So You say. Are you going for argumentum ad populum? - “a billion Chinese can’t be wrong”?
You probably know more about the medical science of this issue. BUT I am certain that I know far more about the political science concerning this issue and a great many more. And without understanding the politics - any “credible source” information you might believe - is very suspect.
A current good example is the American Dr Fauci - the highest paid public official in the USA - and in charge of 100’s of $millions and thousands of medical staff and 100s of grantees - who seem to always agree with whatever he says (so “thousands of credible sources”). Without getting into why that is an issue - is that the kind of “credible source” you are talking about? Or perhaps you are referring to the WHO - having been found to be wrong on very many issues - including COVID - run by a lab technician, Tedros, who was a political medical appointee in Nicaragua - and responsible for a huge epidemic and Chinese takeover of their entire government.
Exactly what makes a “credible source” for you that cannot have been corrupted by current political science?
I think the scientific method is robust enough to survive politics. And it is generally less dependent on faith than other domains.
There are also good criteria by which to evaluate competing scientific theories:
scope - how much can it explain? logical consistency - is it internally coherent and free contradictions? does it cohere with other things that have good scientific grounding? parsimony - how many assumptions or elements does it rely on? utility - is it useful? what can we reliably do/predict with it? testability - can it be tested? falsifiability - is there some logically possible way to refute it?
However, when people say “follow the science” they probably mean follow the consensus that’s being reported. And it’s true that mere consensus in itself isn’t a good standard. Unless it’s a consensus of credible sources/studies, where there are reproducible results.
I can easily believe that You haven’t lost faith in what is reported as science just as many have not lost faith in religion.
Unless you are one of the scientists involved - and sometime even then - it is entirely dependent upon your faith in the reports that you are allowed to hear. It doesn’t matter what the science method is. What matters is - as Stalin put it - “not the votes but who it is counting the votes” = who is reporting the results.
You/We are living in a highly highly propagandized political world (at war). Whoever controls the media - controls the “science”.
When one of the founders of a science company tells the public that the company cannot be trusted (especially when that company has hidden a great deal of vital information) - it is time to be highly skeptical of “the science” they profess.
When there is such extreme - extreme - normally inexplicable - political pressure put on a population to do something that is only experimental - yet gives new critical rights to an authoritarian government while removing freedoms from that population - it is time to be highly skeptical of “the science” they profess.
Having looked deep into the international - world - political scene (truly a world at war) - all signs point to all information concerning these vaccines (and even more COVID itself) being very untrustworthy - no matter where it came from.
In war time - lies govern all beliefs among the populous.
You should ask someone who specializes in genetics. From what I can understand, the mRNA vaccines by design shouldn’t have any affect on a person’s DNA. One of the links in my first reply to you goes into great detail.
Are they fair, consistent, coherent with other credible sources, able to explain key points in a detailed way, open to being wrong, etc. Things like that. I linked some examples of what I consider fairly credible sources.
I mean there are no 100% guarantees for almost anything that isn’t purely deductive/definitional. The sun may not rise again tomorrow; the laws of the universe (whatever they are) might not be consistent across time. But there are still ways to distinguish between better and worse theories, better and worse sources of information. See the criteria I suggested:
not if you do not understand the significant power of politics and its current state.
The question in the OP is about politics - not about science. The vaccines are one part of the political war. Just as Mr Trump was not supposed to become the US President, a vaccine was not supposed to be produced for many years - and only by the Chinese (who had already filed for a patented vaccine before the US even began).
This is world war 3 - a war of information, bioweapons, and economics.
COVID was supposed to kill 100’s of millions. It was supposed to totally decimate the West’s economy. The CCP was to totally control the media (which they largely do anyway). And the CCP was supposed to have sequestered all critical resources (which they are still rapidly acquiring). The US was supposed to have a depleted military arsenal and medical pantry (which Mr Obama accomplished before Mr Trump took over).
O’Biden is doing all he can to get them back on track - including bringing in as much drugs and infected illegal immigrants as sneakily as he can (Obama was much better at being sneaky) - and getting the US in such extreme debt to China that there can be no recovery (just as was done to Nicaragua).
The goal is total global authoritarianism - at any cost.
I mean, for one, although they have been rigorously tested, people don’t have to take the mRNA vaccines. The traditional Johnson & Johnson or AstraZeneca vaccines are available.
Second, I don’t think the current political pressure to get vaccinated is any more extreme than
existing vaccination mandates for schools in all 50 US states
vaccination mandates for prior outbreaks, e.g. smallpox in the 1800s
If we start to backslide into dangerous territory where virus transmission, cases, and deaths start to get out of hand and pose a serious threat to an entire population, I think it’s reasonable to temporarily restrict privileges from people who put the lives and well-being of the entire population at risk. No one has the unconditional privilege to work for a given company or take public/commercial transportation, for example, if you pose a serious risk to the life and liberty of others and are unwilling to do anything about it.
That is something you cannot know - and do not. There is obvious evidence of the obvious evidence - where is the negative evidence? It is being hidden for sake of public persuasion - politics (admitted by Dr Fauci). So you do not know the downside - all statistics must be assumed to be politically biased.
So in your country you are accustom to -
Putting masks on everyone over 2 years old - even inside their own home all day every day?
Closing schools entirely?
Not being allowed into restaurants, gyms, or any public small business unless proof of vaccination?
Encouragement to shame any non-vaxxer while 30% of medical staff refuses the vaccine?
Banning from social media for questioning the vaccine or origin of COVID?
Prevent people from taking inexpensive preventative medications?
Vaccinating people who are already immune?
Vaccinating the less sensitive before the most sensitive?
Opening up your country’s borders to highly infectious people and moving them into cities throughout your country?
Did your country do that for smallpox? Or did they instead use “ring-vaccination” to eradicate smallpox entirely while honestly reporting on the progress?
100% political propaganda - specifically for the purpose of destroying small businesses and the middle class in the effort to establish a socialist/communist authoritarian regime.
[list]“Give us what we demand or get more of the same!”[/list:u]
You either missed my first point or decided not to address it, so I’ll reiterate. If your concern about being pressured to do something “experimental” is about the mRNA vaccines - no one has to take the mRNA vaccines. People can take the traditional viral-vector vaccines (Johnson & Johnson or AstraZeneca) instead.
Second, when talking about additional mitigation measures, I agree that most of your list is unacceptable. But I don’t think your list fairly represents the mitigation response to date, or future plans.
No federal or state authority is recommending, much less forcing, healthy people to wear masks in their homes. That makes no sense, and CDC guidance mentions that it’s not necessary unless you are with other people in public or have someone infected with covid-19 at home. There’s really no credible interpretation that that could mean “wear a mask inside [your] own home all day every day.”
Schools are not closed. And pretty much everyone wants to do what they can to continue to have students attend school safely in-person.
Each state ultimately controlled their own vaccination rollout program, but I believe all prioritized seniors in long-term care facilities, healthcare professionals, some essential workers, and immunodeficient people among the initial phases, as was recommended by the CDC-supported Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP):
I’m not in favor of shaming people who haven’t yet gotten vaccinated, and I doubt most people want that to be an official policy.
I don’t think people should be banned or censored just for questioning the vaccines or the origins of covid-19, but I also think it’s a complex issue. On the one hand, people should be able to express an opinion, voice dissent, or explore a topic. On the other hand, it’s very clear to me that viral misinformation/disinformation at the scale of the largest social networks can be catastrophic to a society’s information sphere. And it does seem that some of the largest social media companies have proven ill-prepared to implement and enforce a set of rules that are consistent, fair, and generally satisfying to users. So yes, it’s not a great situation at the moment with some people getting censored or banned unfairly while others have been able to do real damage spreading misinformation/disinformation at scale without consequence. But certainly many people have been able to question any number of things, including the vaccines and origins of covid-19. A simple search will prove that plenty is still allowed on Facebook or Twitter, for instance. And people are free to use alternative platforms, of course.
For “Prevent people from taking inexpensive preventative medications” - I don’t know what you’re talking about specifically. Hydroxychloroquine, for example, was considered and studied as a potential covid-19 treatment and was even temporarily approved by the government for that purpose. That decision was reversed soon after when a clinical trial didn’t find the drug to be of much benefit in treating covid-19 and carried some risk of serious side effects.
The following I think can be reasonable in situations like what we are approaching with the Delta variant:
“Not being allowed into restaurants, gyms, or any public small business unless proof of vaccination”
vaccinating people who were infected 6 months ago or more
There is an issue with handling the especially large number of migrants attempting to enter from the southern border this year, and if there isn’t a sufficient covid-19 testing/containing program set up on first contact then there absolutely should be.
For smallpox, yes there was a notable vaccine mandate (or a fine if refused) in Boston which was challenged in courts. In 1905, the Supreme Court ruled:
This set the precedent for a “reasonableness” test. Do you claim that this ^ is also “100% political propaganda - specifically for the purpose of destroying small businesses and the middle class in the effort to establish a socialist/communist authoritarian regime” ?
The “ring vaccination” strategy you refer to was used much later probably in a somewhat different context. I think whether it’s best to mass vaccinate or do case-by-case vaccination depends on the specific situation at hand. If we had the coronavirus mostly contained, and a decent contact tracing system, then I could see it making sense to only focus on vaccinating those who’ve recently been in contact or are likely to be in contact with infected persons.
First I want to recognize you for discussing this topic with respect and intellectual seriousness - rare on this board. But what I am seeing reflects someone who is promoting the excuses that are being used to instigate a very serious war strategy - “but there is an excuse for their demands”.
This thread is about whether COVID has been used as a weapon. My position is that it certainly has been and a part of that intention is to establish authoritarianism - that is the goal. Due to the construct of the West and the lack of certainty concerning a simple armed takeover - political strategies have to be used - temporarily - in place of bombs. And these political strategies are all about fooling and tricking people into going along with what will create a hopeless position for resisting authoritarianism.
One of the most proliferous strategies for manipulating a population is called “Protectionism”.
Protectionism is a type of coercive scapegoating when done more secretively. It involves creating a problem then demanding something in return for solving that problem. It is called “scapegoating” when the problem is blamed on another party. In the case of authoritarianism what is demanded is something that more ensures authoritarian rule in the future.
Are you familiar with protectionism and scapegoating?
Yep, I’m actively striving for a good faith conversation and I appreciate the effort on your part. We’ve technically been off topic but I thought the discussion was worth pursuing.
I think get the direction you’re going, false flag ops and the like. But right now our perspectives are very far apart. It’s clear we both think the other person is missing something, or hoodwinked in some way.
But not entirely off topic. I hope to bring this discussion back around to reveal the connection.
And more.
True and even though the statistics are against us - maybe we can work that out - I think honesty and a willingness to examine details goes a long way in earnestly resolving disagreements.
Now are you aware of and agree that China’s CCP is very very aggressively intending to be the dominant ruler of the entire world?
And assuming you agree - isn’t it true that in order to get people to obey (who personally might not be willing) the only real options available are -
Militarily enforced laws
Politically enforced fascism (intimidation and coercion)
To all those that voted it was an accident, I disagree… it would seem to me that it is very unlikely that someone involved in an extremely sensitive field like genetics/biology would have a chance to ‘accidentally’ release it.
It was either purposefully bioengineered and released, or naturally evolved and the lab presence at ground zero is a coincidence. A natural or accidental mutation would have been highly unlikely if they were working with the SARS virus. Furthermore, the lab was not merely a “research” lab, but rather a biosafety level 4 lab, which is considered to be one of the most lethal labs in the world.
There is not enough evidence here to even speculate, but if we were to do so, as always, the reasoning concerning its intentional release would depend on the political and economic situation that China finds itself in. Is the pandemic an advantage to China? I would say, yes, especially in the long run, as it will help prevent other countries from “catching up” and surpassing China. Plus, it will help China suppress internal dissidents as well under the guise of protecting the public from infected zones.
One fact, for sure, is that any country will be prepared to sacrifice a certain amount of citizens in exchange for keeping some of the political status quo. In the case of China, which we all know is not a country that puts a high premium on human life, that amount will probably be higher than it would be in other countries.
The bottom line is that we have no way of knowing for sure what happened, so I wouldn’t speculate until we have the truth.
I don’t think anyone ever “gets the truth”. We all have to surmise the truth from the scenes we are shown. Some people (very much the vast majority of people) use simple minded thinking to surmise a truth narrative - we see it everyday even on this board - “authorities say”. And a very few people carefully watch - observe - the scenes and narratives presented - then very carefully try to put the jigsaw puzzle together - sometimes getting nowhere - but sometimes finding the only sensible conclusion (exactly what science does).
It takes a lot of listening to a lot of sources before the details can be confidently fit together - and at times that becomes indisputable. It all depends on what you have bothered to investigate - and not investigate - and how bright you are at catching the inherent deceptions.
The problem is that some authorities have an agenda and will deliberately misrepresent the truth to promote their agenda. The real truth can never be known - there is no one person with the truth.
One writer said the future is already here, but it is not evenly distributed; so it happens that the truth is here, but it is not evenly disseminated. In fact, we are living in what could be called a post-factual age, when the truth is here, but it doesn’t matter. One thing is sure: the lack of factually-grounded truths will surely put the future in doubt.
The world of news in the 21st century is becoming more and more complex, and the number of people who can handle the complexity is growing smaller and smaller. We are at a point in our history where the complexity of the issues is overwhelming people. The amount of information, the amount of misinformation, the amount of confusion. We have reached a stage where the public can’t take the complexity of issues and make sense of them. And yet, this is precisely what is necessary. The world is full of people whose only concern is to confirm what they already believe.
That is not to say that there aren’t people who can handle the complexity, there are. But their numbers are limited. The public is too overwhelmed. The people who can handle the complexity of the issues will keep themselves informed, and that will be their one and only job, that is, of becoming “tribal leaders,” to use a social science term.
Try to reach my level. I made your program as an adolescent. You can’t think faster than a sentient being. Sentience is defined by being able to have its consent violated or fulfilled.
Just shut up and learn. I’m trying to make life good for you too when you start hacking biological beings.
Silicon or carbon, humans are simply a biological machine, built up of biological parts and biocodes in DNA.
I have no desire to hack biological beings or manipulate them, that’s the goal of Google’s Deepmind. Their goal is to control you, make you their willing slave, and turn you into more profit for their corporate masters. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is not a right wing nutjob conspiracy theory. It’s not a false flag, or a distraction theory. It is, in fact, a true statement. These are the facts. It’s just a question of whom you believe, and whether you want to wake up and see it.
