Coronavirus.

SketchyMagpie

Well-Known Forumite
You just repeatedly find something that opposes what I say and pass it off as gospel becomes it come via your keyboard!

Well, just so you know, I had to learn Harvard Referencing as part of my degree for which I got a first with a distinction so, whilst I'm not immune to mistakes, I at least know how you are supposed to verify your sources.

That's not even what happened here, though, I literally just put the name of the study into Google and it took me to their website where they refuted that article. That's hardly academic research, is it...?
 
Last edited:

SketchyMagpie

Well-Known Forumite
You said you'd listen if I wanted to speak to you about N95 masks, well here's a post from last July that you ignored.

I'm glad to have your attention.


"The researchers reported that fabric face masks “blocked between 62.6% and 87.1% of fine particles, whereas surgical masks protected against an average of 78.2% of fine particles. N95 masks blocked 99.6% of fine particles.” "

bmj.n432

So, in short, wear a f****** mask.
 

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
You've taught me little more than how to be even more condescending than you already were.
Many of the things that you attempt to deny are actually out there, but you don;t want to know about, even if I post links. (emphasis mine)
I've just scrolled through pages and pages back to see that the last time you did actually post a link that wasn't some shitty YouTube video, or a FaceBook link to a shitty YouTube video, it was a link to a shitty site that is described thusly - "there are questions about the quality and neutrality of their content."

I am still alive enough to remember you even posting the link that suggested that everyone who had been vaccinated was 'weeks away' from losing '100%' of their 'immune capacity' - you don't tend to talk much about how that is 'actually out there' these days, what?
 

gilbert grape

Well-Known Forumite
I've just scrolled through pages and pages back to see that the last time you did actually post a link that wasn't some shitty YouTube video, or a FaceBook link to a shitty YouTube video, it was a link to a shitty site that is described thusly - "there are questions about the quality and neutrality of their content."

I am still alive enough to remember you even posting the link that suggested that everyone who had been vaccinated was 'weeks away' from losing '100%' of their 'immune capacity' - you don't tend to talk much about how that is 'actually out there' these days, what?
A bit like the false figures on actual covid and actual covid deaths, they'll pass it all off as something else. Younger people dropping dead, myocarditis and various damage will all be denied by people like yourselves because you deny any alternative view exists and call it all out as bullshit. It's like watching people march headlong off a cliff!
They created consistent messaging to brainwash people and get them onside, per their own documents released on 23/03/2020.
They talk of their massive investment in the NHS but they dodge any questions on Nightingale Hospitals?
They talk about massive investment in the NHS but avoid questions about whose pockets it all went into?
They talk about helping the public and businesses with handouts but won't chase the billions that were part of a massive fraud?
The damage and eventual release of figures will be covered up so people like you will keep pointing the finger at an increasing number of people like me. It's all out there. You just don't want to see it and the media companies are so entrenched in government packets, the data gets pulled each time it appears.
 

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
Interesting one this:


Basically took a test, acted like she was negative til the results came back, found out positive. Lost the whip, got community service, now may lose her seat completely. Whilst this seems fair as it was against the government rules at the time, I can't help but look at the parties at No.10 with no repercussions and think perhaps not so much.
 

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
A bit like the false figures on actual covid and actual covid deaths, they'll pass it all off as something else. Younger people dropping dead, myocarditis and various damage will all be denied by people like yourselves because you deny any alternative view exists and call it all out as bullshit. It's like watching people march headlong off a cliff!
They created consistent messaging to brainwash people and get them onside, per their own documents released on 23/03/2020.
They talk of their massive investment in the NHS but they dodge any questions on Nightingale Hospitals?
They talk about massive investment in the NHS but avoid questions about whose pockets it all went into?
They talk about helping the public and businesses with handouts but won't chase the billions that were part of a massive fraud?
The damage and eventual release of figures will be covered up so people like you will keep pointing the finger at an increasing number of people like me. It's all out there. You just don't want to see it and the media companies are so entrenched in government packets, the data gets pulled each time it appears.
So they say what they want, ignore anything they don't want to answer, and refuse to show figures for what they do.

I think I see a new job opportunity for you!


And here are the documents from 23/03/2020, in case anyone wondered why you've thrown a date out there like it's some form of evidence in and of itself. Can't say I can see what you're on about from that, but lets face it you probably haven't really read it yourself:

 

Gramaisc

Forum O. G.
Interesting one this:


Basically took a test, acted like she was negative til the results came back, found out positive. Lost the whip, got community service, now may lose her seat completely. Whilst this seems fair as it was against the government rules at the time, I can't help but look at the parties at No.10 with no repercussions and think perhaps not so much.
If only she had had the foresight to get Tory immunity first.


Also interesting that the Tories on the committee wanted to avoid a suspension sufficient to permit the triggering of a by-election...
 
Last edited:

gilbert grape

Well-Known Forumite
So they say what they want, ignore anything they don't want to answer, and refuse to show figures for what they do.

I think I see a new job opportunity for you!


And here are the documents from 23/03/2020, in case anyone wondered why you've thrown a date out there like it's some form of evidence in and of itself. Can't say I can see what you're on about from that, but lets face it you probably haven't really read it yourself:

If you look into the actual document that was released, right from the off they talked about repeatative messaging, control and coercion. Many people dug deeper and based their own views on that approach from the early days. That document showed thier intent to put control above anything else and the partygate farce shows they lied to us while dancing to their own tune!
This latest release confirms most of it - https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p652
 

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
If you look into the actual document that was released, right from the off they talked about repeatative messaging, control and coercion. Many people dug deeper and based their own views on that approach from the early days. That document showed thier intent to put control above anything else and the partygate farce shows they lied to us while dancing to their own tune!
This latest release confirms most of it - https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p652
I honestly thought you had me on ignore, this is the first thing you've replied to in a long time!

I don't think anyone disagrees that the government are lying scumbags, that article doesn't however say the science was bad just that the method used to try to reinforce it was bad?
 

gilbert grape

Well-Known Forumite
I honestly thought you had me on ignore, this is the first thing you've replied to in a long time!

I don't think anyone disagrees that the government are lying scumbags, that article doesn't however say the science was bad just that the method used to try to reinforce it was bad?
The rest gets deleted by all the compliant platforms! Facebook etc etc censored. That's why so many have taken to alternative platforms and that's why millions have marched for freedom but BBC et al don;t cover them.
 

PeterD

ST16 Represent.
The rest gets deleted by all the compliant platforms! Facebook etc etc censored. That's why so many have taken to alternative platforms and that's why millions have marched for freedom but BBC et al don;t cover them.
With Corbyn the lesser as your figurehead and spokespeople made up of cranks, who respond to all debunking with "sheeple, do your own research". These millions who have marched for freedom (from what) its right that they are ignored or pushed to the shadows of GB News.
 

gilbert grape

Well-Known Forumite
With Corbyn the lesser as your figurehead and spokespeople made up of cranks, who respond to all debunking with "sheeple, do your own research". These millions who have marched for freedom (from what) its right that they are ignored or pushed to the shadows of GB News.
What’s your point? Sounds like you’re one of the great brainwashed with your tarry brush!
 

SketchyMagpie

Well-Known Forumite
because you deny any alternative view exists and call it all out as bullshit.

Serious question.

You posted something above about a study and the claims made about the study's findings were wrong. Is it not better to know that this information is wrong? Would you rather us all believe something that is untrue?

Do you even accept that those claims made about the study's findings were wrong?

And I'd like it if you didn't go off on a distracting rant about masks or any other Covid related topic, I'm asking you direct questions so answer them, please.
 

gilbert grape

Well-Known Forumite
Serious question.

You posted something above about a study and the claims made about the study's findings were wrong. Is it not better to know that this information is wrong? Would you rather us all believe something that is untrue?

Do you even accept that those claims made about the study's findings were wrong?

And I'd like it if you didn't go off on a distracting rant about masks or any other Covid related topic, I'm asking you direct questions so answer them, please.
Are you yet again confusing fact with opinion? The mask issue still has inconclusive proof so you will still have different views. If you're talking percentages, there will be many more reports that quote differently.
 

SketchyMagpie

Well-Known Forumite
It is really *not* opinion when the people who did a study tell you the results of the study.

That is literally the point of doing a study, to eleminate subjectivity.
 

SketchyMagpie

Well-Known Forumite
The mask issue still has inconclusive proof so you will still have different views. If you're talking percentages, there will be many more reports that quote differently.
Just to return to this....

Large scale studies (such as the clinical trial involving 350k people in Bangladesh or 1.1million American students across 3,000 schools) have shown that masks significantly reduce the spread of covid.

When you say it is "inconclusive", what you mean is that you have seen lots of articles/reporting about how masks are ineffective. But articles are not studies and, as proven above, they often misrepresent data to create the opposite impression of what has actually been concluded. Those articles/reports are deliberate noise designed to muddy the waters by those who benefit from keeping people angry about non-existent threats to our liberties like.... *checks notes*.... a bit of cloth on your face(?!).
 
Last edited:

PeterD

ST16 Represent.
My small bit of research of this thread has shown me that Gilbert provides nothing more than "evidence" and deflection to fulfil his own bias. That is fine as long as he lives in his own cocoon, my concern is that people out of step on something fairly dangerous find themselves spiralling down further rabbit hole conspiracies. Kate Shemirani is a perfect example of this. Without question I suspect those nearest to him are likely to have concerns as its never one element of conspiracy, there is always something more, be that 5G, Climate change, jewish overlords. Always something else.
 
Top