Blood clots, strings, metals and mystery objects in the blood of the vaxxed

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Ironclad1964

If people choose to believe the vaccines contain graphene oxide then the onus lies with them to produce the proof.

You see the burden of proof lies with the person who brings the claim to a dispute or argument.

"The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

If someone is going to rebut a chain then it’s on them to provide their own proof. You cannot just say, “oh it’s been proven”!!!!!

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

How exactly does one provide proof against something that hasn't been proven?

a reply to: Anon234807

Holy crap. Seeing is believing.

a reply to: Ironclad1964

Racist Harry Potter terminology aside.

What's in the vaccines are listed.

So if you are looking for proof that there is no Graphene Oxide in there.

Probably best to start with those.

You wish to prove something mate its up to you to provide the evidence, good luck proving that negative.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Ironclad1964

If people choose to believe the vaccines contain graphene oxide then the onus lies with them to produce the proof.

You see the burden of proof lies with the person who brings the claim to a dispute or argument.

"The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

If someone is going to rebut a chain then it’s on them to provide their own proof. You cannot just say, “oh it’s been proven”!!!!!

I have unicorns in my garden. Prove me wrong.

See, that's not how it works....

Well, certainly not proof, in the classical sense of the word. But how about interesting circumstantial evidence?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

isnt the creation of graphene oxide a trade secret and therefore doesnt need to legally be listed in ingredients etc

as stated by the FDA

originally posted by: sapien82
isnt the creation of graphene oxide a trade secret and therefore doesnt need to legally be listed in ingredients etc

as stated by the FDA

No it's a cheap, very simple process that can be done at home using some pencils and three/four different items from a 'home cleaning'isle of a supermarket.

Most routes of creating/extracting it are highly explosive though so probably censored in the UK under anti-terror law.

originally posted by: nonspecific
We roll the dice every single day.

I rolled the dice with a vaccine, you chose to gamble on no vaccine so what's the difference?

If I want to point out some of the absurdity in all of this I am entitled to just as you are right?

There's perfectly valid reasons to decide not to vaccinate so why do so many go around making stuff up or exaggerating? Why the need for the doom porn projections of mass deaths of the vaccinated with absolutely no proof it will happen whatsoever?



a reply to: sapien82

I guess we are all gambling.

You are gambling with an unproved and not-fully tested vaccine.

Other unvaxxed people are gambling with their immune system.

I guess we all gon die!

Why is approval such a big issue to some people?

It's just paperwork really.

And history can clearly show us that not all approved medicines are safe and not all unapproved ones are dangerous doesn't it.





a reply to: Jaellma