What's the matter with Donald Trump.

[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.

[crystalworks]

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.

I also believe it came for the Wuhan lab originally. No other theory seems as likely/plausible. We'll never know where it came from for sure because China can disappear any people or documents necessary. But for my money, the Wuhan Lab theory has enough supporting evidence to be most likely.

[Happy]

You mean, it wasn’t the bowl of bat soup sold at the food court?

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by crystalworks

I also believe it came for the Wuhan lab originally. No other theory seems as likely/plausible. We'll never know where it came from for sure because China can disappear any people or documents necessary. But for my money, the Wuhan Lab theory has enough supporting evidence to be most likely.

The key word is theory. It is a theory it can from the Wuhan lab. We don't know. It could also be that it developed as other virus do. What supporting evidence are you referencing?

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by crystalworks

Then change the word "feelings" in their posts to belief or opinion. No need for harping on the semantics.

I don't personally believe the election was stolen, but that doesn't mean that I'm correct. With the lack of transparency in US politics we'll never know. Facts don't come out anymore. We get dribbled just enough info on either side of the aisle to keep us quibbling with each other as I see in this thread. Each side thinks there dribble carries more weight than the other, and so here we are.

Example: There is a near zero chance Epstein killed himself. But we'll never know what actually happened.

One can only respond to words that are posted and shouldn't assume the writer means something different that what was written.

There is no proof the election was stolen unless someone has a new theory. All of the theories have been debunked several times over. It's not subjective.

I don't see it as quibbling but that's fine. I find it entertaining and one can drop out any time they get tired of it.

[crystalworks]

Originally Posted by bcredliner

The key word is theory. It is a theory it can from the Wuhan lab. We don't know. It could also be that it developed as other virus do. What supporting evidence are you referencing?

When you start asking about evidence, we end up in a circular discussion about how your evidence is superior, and thus your conclusion is superior. I won't be drawn into that again.

ALL ORIGINS OF CV19 ARE THEORIES. The Wuhan lab theory is the most plausible/likely, in my opinion. That's after reviewing the evidence presented for the most plausible theories, "wet market theory," natural origin theory, and "Wuhan lab theory." If YOU have evidence I may have not seen, please present it, and perhaps I'll change my mind.

[EODguy]

In the same vein....

Strange how getting award payments or having a different view makes people ignore their own work.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

[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.

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by crystalworks

When you start asking about evidence, we end up in a circular discussion about how your evidence is superior, and thus your conclusion is superior. I won't be drawn into that again.

ALL ORIGINS OF CV19 ARE THEORIES. The Wuhan lab theory is the most plausible/likely, in my opinion. That's after reviewing the evidence presented for the most plausible theories, "wet market theory," natural origin theory, and "Wuhan lab theory." If YOU have evidence I may have not seen, please present it, and perhaps I'll change my mind.

Best way to stay out of this is not get in it. Especially if you jump in with criticism. When someone presents what they claim is factual evidence, I should not respond if I disagree?

I don't feel superior to anyone nor do I think anything I post is superior or the last word. I think threads like this are primarily for entertainment purposes. It is funny to me how quickly some folks turn to defensive insults as if it discredits another persons opinions. When that is the norm of anyone I do feel somehow they missed one of lifes' most important lessons. Insults are never productive or appropriate. If that sounds like I think I am superior then I am fine owning it.

I've posted my sources when this has come up in the past. Check the COVID thread. I don't think there is anything here that is new information. I am much more concerned about how we botched the opportunities to reduce the number affected by COVID, especially the number that died, in order to better our response in the future. We did an unforgivable disgusting job from the very beginning.

[crystalworks]

You totally missed the point of my post. Or chose to ignore it, and focused on the personal in my second post. My first post stated MY belief with no mention of you. Once more:

"ALL ORIGINS OF CV19 ARE THEORIES. The Wuhan lab theory is the most plausible/likely, in my opinion. That's after reviewing the evidence presented for the most plausible theories, "wet market theory," natural origin theory, and "Wuhan lab theory." If YOU have evidence I may have not seen, please present it, and perhaps I'll change my mind."

Okay, so I've seen the evidence you are referring to since it was posted previously. Once again, I believe the most likely origin was the Wuhan lab theory, you are obviously free to believe different. But like I can't post any 100% definitive evidence, nor can you. We are each choosing a theory.

As for how it was handled. Hindsight is 20/20, and there were certainly things that should have been done differently. Once vaccines became available the country should have 100% opened up. No restrictions. Masks totally voluntary, etc.

Self admittedly, you enjoy frustrating others in your conversation, and some of those people turn to insults (even I might have at some point and I'm fairly even tempered). Insults, though not the most productive form of conversation, don't make anyone wrong either. I'm sure you perceive it as debate skill superiority frustrating others, and that's fine. I perceive it as others just not believing you have a genuine interest in back and forth discussion.

Originally Posted by bcredliner

Best way to stay out of this is not get in it. Especially if you jump in with criticism. When someone presents what they claim is factual evidence, I should not respond if I disagree?

I don't feel superior to anyone nor do I think anything I post is superior or the last word. I think threads like this are primarily for entertainment purposes. It is funny to me how quickly some folks turn to defensive insults as if it discredits another persons opinions. When that is the norm of anyone I do feel somehow they missed one of lifes' most important lessons. Insults are never productive or appropriate. If that sounds like I think I am superior then I am fine owning it.

I've posted my sources when this has come up in the past. Check the COVID thread. I don't think there is anything here that is new information. I am much more concerned about how we botched the opportunities to reduce the number affected by COVID, especially the number that died, in order to better our response in the future. We did an unforgivable disgusting job from the very beginning.