It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: Hecate666
The Science is very different from science. My analysis of the situation was always based on science, but I very much doubt either that will play a very significant role in any justice that comes for those responsible. Like most of the pandemic, the response will likely be for show and used to further some agenda. I'd be happy to be surprised, but doubt it will happen.
a reply to: AaarghZombies
You'll have to be colicky elsewhere. The teat of negative attention has run dry.
I note that you're no longer including any links, statistics, or names in your comments.
You give opinions but never quantify them or give examples to demonstrate them.
It looks to me like you're being very careful never to include anything that could be fact checked, could this be because you don't want to include anything that could be disproved?
You've even included a mention of an "agenda" but haven't said what you think this agenda is?
I invite you to write down the science that you used and the conclusions that you've reached. Open them up to scrutiny and we can discuss thing in a calm and rational manner.
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: anonentity
we have a vaccine that has caused great disruption,
We can calculate the loss of productivity from people getting sick with covid based on the number of lost man hours from sickness.
We can calculate the loss of productivity from people being quarantined simply because they've been near to somebody who was sick with covid.
We can calculate the loss of productivity from being locked down and not being allowed to be productive due to businesses being inactive.
We can similarly calculate the loss of productivity due to people being sick from the vax.
Would you care to provide what you believe the numbers are for each of the above, and what you based those numbers on?
If so, we can compare each of them and build a comparative scale to determine which has had the most significant effect.
It is you who doesn't include any statistics in your comments and you actually pull out numbers from hour head without any reading of any links provided.
our arguments about herd immunity, safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, and everything else you have claimed, have even repeatedly refuted, taken apart and dismantled.
Strawman arguments and red herrings don't work either.
It's only you who doesn't see the links provided by everyone else here and makes false claims about others not providing any links. How disingenuous your claims are. But this is nothing new.
I recall a few days ago when you couldn't figure out how did we get that mRNA vaccines have an serious adverse reaction rate of 1 in every 800 vaccinees.
If it wasn't for the mandates we wouldn't have noticed the deaths, debilitating conditions, and a range of every serious adverse reactions people had and still have, such a myocarditis, pericarditis, heart failure, heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, allergies, autoimmune disorders, etc.
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Asmodeus3
It is you who doesn't include any statistics in your comments and you actually pull out numbers from hour head without any reading of any links provided.
My sources are in my signature, so literally every number that I've used can be verified.
If you want to dispute a particular number then by all means tell me what it is and why you thing that it's wrong and I will debate it with you.
our arguments about herd immunity, safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, and everything else you have claimed, have even repeatedly refuted, taken apart and dismantled.
And yet none of them have ever been able to actually back up their claims.
My sources are in my signature. I've provided my date, will you do likewise?
Strawman arguments and red herrings don't work either.
You're making a statement, but aren't saying what it applies to. Where is this supposed strawman, feel free to use the quote function and explain why you feel this way.
It's only you who doesn't see the links provided by everyone else here and makes false claims about others not providing any links. How disingenuous your claims are. But this is nothing new.
Feel free to include some of these links and I will debate them with you.
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Asmodeus3
I recall a few days ago when you couldn't figure out how did we get that mRNA vaccines have an serious adverse reaction rate of 1 in every 800 vaccinees.
And I was right, that number wasn't anywhere in the original document. Someone on this forum rounded it up from another number. They however forgot to factor in that 1 in 4 of those people were actually in the placebo group, and that some of them turned out to simply have covid.
So, the actual number was less than 1 tenth of a percent of people.
I also notice that you failed to provide a link to the original comment so that people could see that I the one highlighting these issues. It's considered basic manners to quote people rather than paraphrase them.
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Asmodeus3
If it wasn't for the mandates we wouldn't have noticed the deaths, debilitating conditions, and a range of every serious adverse reactions people had and still have, such a myocarditis, pericarditis, heart failure, heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, allergies, autoimmune disorders, etc.
You do realize that things like this would be tracked by the CDC as standard, regardless of mandates?
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
I note that you're no longer including any links, statistics, or names in your comments.