What's the matter with Donald Trump.

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by RocketyMan

Cheap shots? No. Your ignorance is very telling of your lack of critical thinking--especially in the political realm.

https://nypost.com/2021/08/02/gop-in...an-lab-report/


Wuhan lab admits to having 3 strains with roughly 80% match to C-19 strain. Hmm...must be coincidence. Keep in mind this is all they're admitting to.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/wu.../24/id/968777/

Yet...they got a grant well before C-19 (circa 2014 era) for gain-of-function with strains of nearly 97% match to the genome.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/...-requirements/

Percentage-wise may be irrelevant as these viruses mutate. If you study virology, you'll learn that viruses tend to become less-deadly overtime in order to survive in the host.

The links are theories that have never been proven. Yes, viruses TEND to become less deadly as they mutate. However, that is no always the case. Mutations, until proven otherwise, should initiate the same safety and containment measures as if more deadly.

Assuming something is correct based on theories like those you have posted or only looking at one side of the story is a great way to be mislead. Time spent being critical is time lost thinking clearly.

I see you doubled down. My posts are not challenging your credibility and should not be taken personally. There is no need to get angry of lash out. Our posts are just opinions.

[RocketyMan]

Originally Posted by bcredliner

The links are theories that have never been proven. Yes, viruses TEND to become less deadly as they mutate. However, that is no always the case. Mutations, until proven otherwise, should initiate the same safety and containment measures as if more deadly.

Assuming something is correct based on theories like those you have posted or only looking at one side of the story is a great way to be mislead. Time spent being critical is time lost thinking clearly.

I see you doubled down. My posts are not challenging your credibility and should not be taken personally. There is no need to get angry of lash out. Our posts are just opinions.

Your comment about virology...shows you need to do more research. If the host dies from a more deadly mutation, then the proliferation of the virus will die with it. Clearly you don't understand (or maybe refuse?) what "critical-thinking" is if you view it as a waste of time.

Did you even read any of those articles? Do you even understand the train of thought?

Not doubling down on anything and nothing is personal nor angry. It just amazes me there are sheeple out there that believe only what they're told to believe(or what not to believe). You effectively asked for some articles, and I provided them. What you do with the information is your own prerogative. But turning a blind eye thinking the establishment-govt always has your best interests at heart is pure ignorance. One day you'll see that...maybe.

Good luck to you.

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by RocketyMan

Your comment about virology...shows you need to do more research. If the host dies from a more deadly mutation, then the proliferation of the virus will die with it. Clearly you don't understand (or maybe refuse?) what "critical-thinking" is if you view it as a waste of time.

Only if there is one host for the mutation, meaning no one else has been infected with the mutation will it disappear.

Did you even read any of those articles? Do you even understand the train of thought?

Of course I read the articles and I understand the train of thought. However, based on the rating of independent fact checking/measuring bias sites, they are not dependable sources. One of the most important aspects of critical thinking is checking potential sources with independent evaluations. At least checking the claims with more reputable sites, or professionals that are trained specialists.

Not doubling down on anything and nothing is personal nor angry. It just amazes me there are sheeple out there that believe only what they're told to believe(or what not to believe). You effectively asked for some articles, and I provided them. What you do with the information is your own prerogative. But turning a blind eye thinking the establishment-govt always has your best interests at heart is pure ignorance. One day you'll see that...maybe.

If you don't want to see your remarks as personal and angry you might consider how you respond to posts. As an example, you imply anyone that doesn't agree with you is a sheeple. They believe only what they are told. That I believe the government has my best interests in mind. That I am ignorant and I may or may not see the light someday. Your intentions are clear and extremely transparent---not good to hide from it--suggest you own it.

Good luck to you.

Thanks for wishing me good luck. I choose to believe that it is heartfelt and sincere. I was beginning to think you couldn't play nice or respectful.