Is this all you got after all these years? Oh Husker Du and that old, bitter and resentful Grandpa Espola. I sit back and lurk now and just read what you and your sidekick spew on here. What you wrote yesterday was disgusting by the way and you should be ashamed of yourself. Seriously, seek help man. Both of you have issues towards women. I hope you both figure out that we need the ladies on earth and we need to love them.
Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
@Everyone. Let's all get back on topic and get this thread to a million views. Let's have serious debate about the last two years and what we see for our future. If you have 17 minutes to spare, please watch this Vax Failure Video from 17,000 Docs from around the world. The WHO is voting soon to makes us all Global Guinea Pigs and their Global Slaves 
www.bitchute.com
VAX FAILURE: Drs Malone, McCullough, Yeadon & Cole Sound Alarm About Vaccines & Govt Tyranny
Join the leading researchers on https://GroupDiscover.com to find the best videos from across the censorship-resistant internet platforms like Odysee, Rumble, LBRY, Bitchute & Brighteon. Add me on these great platforms: https://rokfin.com/timtr…
www.bitchute.com
If you got the chops to take 9 seconds out of your life, you need to take a hard look at what is inside of these mask that Dad wants us all to wear, it will scare you as did me I dare you to watch a crush video.....lol. The one for 17 minutes is 100% important.
www.bitchute.com
I dare you to watch a crush video.....lol. The one for 17 minutes is 100% important.
Terrifying...
✶ ✯ ► ► FEARLESS NATION ◄ ◄ ✯ ✶ We are all explorers trying to find ourselves... Some people around you will not understand your journey. They don’t need to; it’s not for them. Odysee ▶ https://odysee.com/$/invite/@FEARLESS_ONE:8 - https://od…
www.bitchute.com
Which is why the results of science, especially new science, shouldn't be mandated for the general public. Regardless, science isn't fact, science is simply a process and in many cases what we heard during the pandemic hadn't gone through the scientific process and was just "ivory tower" opinion. Science also isn't monolithic, it's rare that there is consensus in science.
All true. I had a debate with a crazy Science Teacher back in grade school days. Her breath was gnarly, that's all I can about her in those regards. The class called her, "Smelly." She was a known atheist, in love with Darwin, lived by herself and studied rocks and the earth for a living. 100% for abortion and called babies in the womb a fetus and one big clump of cells in our class. "No she didn't," I said to myself at first and then I went off on her in front of the class and I aksed her a few questions that she couldn't answer. I told her in front of the class that she was wrong and that a baby in the womb is a living and a breathing baby and not a clump of cells like she is proposing to the class. With cameras and Ultra Sound of today, we now know that crush was right and the smelly Science Teacher was 100% wrong. I also told her that God the Creator created all this life and we are not suppose to end the life before it comes out of mama. No animal does that. Black Widow, yes
This is basic Human Science 101 I told her watfly. She got so mad and all red in the face and had a loss of words that to this day it makes me smile in my heart. After that day, she had it out for me the rest of the Semester. I got a D in her Earth Science class and she even tried to pin me for smoking weed before her 8am class. I got sent to the Principle office early am because she smelt weed or something on me. I talked to the man in charge and it was no harm no foul and I went back to class and just smiled at her. It was at this time I knew for sure we were all being brainwashed in the system. I told my pals and they told me I made a good argument on life in the womb Not too far off. There was a time when dietitians were trained to just count calories. They thought you could lose weight on a chocolate cake diet, as long as your portions are small enough.
Then the science changed. They figured out that the tiny portion chocolate cake diet will never work, because it will leave you hungry. No one can keep to it.
Which is where we are now. The chocolate cake diet doesn’t work. We know it doesn‘t work. But people keep posting chocolate cake diet videos because they think kale is yucky.
Watch the video from the 17,000 Docs, daddy man of 4 kids. You are spewing false information and it needs to stop and stop now. Just stop it!!!
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
I like both - my kale with some vinaigrette and my chocolate cake in moderation.
Your answer to this is interesting. In general, calorie counting does work. You (and science) are saying that people are not self-disciplined enough to handle the hunger associated with eating sugar and non-whole grains to stick to their calorie count. It's not even worth asking/expecting them to accept some feelings of hunger and not satiating that hunger until the next meal time. So, science says you can't lose weight on the chocolate cake diet because individuals aren't self-disciplined enough to do so. However, science appears to treat the use of masks quite differently despite the fact that there is much less correlation between masking and virus containment than there is between calories and weight control. Why is that? Calorie counting has many more benefits than wearing a mask when you consider both. It improves survival on multiple fronts, including surviving a virus. Weight control also improves your quality of life. Hard to make that argument for a mask. Weight control improves appearance, whereas a mask only does that in some cases. The approach science takes here is inconsistent.
It’s pretty much the same logic, and the same style of experiment.
For food, take a large group of people who want to lose weight. Teach all of them to calorie count. Advise half of them to try the chocolate cake diet, and advise the other half try the kale and vinaigrette diet. Measure how they do.
For masks, take a large group of people who would rather not get covid. Teach them all to socially distance. Advise half the villages to wear surgical masks. The other half of the villages get a lecture with no masks. Measure how they do.
You will find out that kale is better than chocolate cake for losing weight, and that surgical masks are better than no masks for reducing covid transmission.
The approach is the same.
The response is also roughly the same.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
You are saying the science "changed" for the chocolate cake diet because people didn't lose weight. I'm saying the same failure occurred with mask mandates, but most media experts don't say the science changed. Maybe masks (calorie counting) do work, but mask mandates are like chocolate cake because people don't wear them correctly, people take more risks because they are wearing a mask, etc. There is little evidence to the contrary - unlike vaccines.
Desert Hound
DA
They have been studying respiratory viruses for years.
You know what we are finding out though? They sure do get a lot of royalties from various companies. That couldn't possibly influence whether suddenly the people telling us for years that masks don't work, now say take a shot from a company that donates to them and oh by the way wear a mask.
After reading this I realize I made a poor career choice. I should have been a "scientist" pursuing the truth at the NIH.
NIH scientists received estimated $350 million in royalties since 2009: Report - Washington Examiner
The National Institutes of Health received verified royalties amounting to $134 million from 2009-2014, with more yet to be revealed. The NIH is in the midst of fulfilling a Freedom of Information Act request detailing the royalty payments of its various leaders since 2010. BIDEN...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
We found agency leadership and top scientists at NIH receiving royalty payments. Well-known scientists receiving payments during the period included:
"Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the highest-paid federal bureaucrat, received 23 royalty payments. (Fauci's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $456,028 ).
Francis Collins, NIH director from 2009-2021, received 14 payments. (Collins' 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $203,500)
Clifford Lane, Fauci's deputy at NIAID, received 8 payments. (Lane's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $325,287)"
Substack Investigation: Faucis Royalties And The $350 Million Royalty Payment Stream HIDDEN By NIH
Its the first time since 2005 that the NIH royalty payments receive oversight.
Just highlighting this:
While we at least know about that one -- because it was publicly awarded, instead of secretly insinuated into Fauci's bank accounts -- civil servants should not be allowed to accept "prizes" which amount to, in essence, a cash bounty (or bribe) awarded by a partisan organization for taking a political position for or against the president.
Fauci's been a government bureaucrat all his life. He joined in 1968, straight after his medical residency.
Why would he have royalties in any private company's patents?*
Remember, Anthony Fauci has previously lied under oath, or, let us say, made false statements while testifying to Congress. He claimed that all of his financial records were publicly available.
"Today, NIH is a revolving door of tens of billions of dollars in government grant-making coupled with hundreds of millions of dollars in private -- non-transparent -- royalty payments.
There needs to be a lot more sunshine on this potentially unholy alliance.
When a federal bureaucrat pops up on television giving us health instructions, who has paid them and for what research and technology? When a patient agrees to a clinical trial or experimental treatment, what financial interests are involved?
Rather than relentless redactions and prolonged court battles, it's past time for the government to disclose royalty payments as a matter of routine."
In fact, they're almost entirely redacted.
Wow!!They have been studying respiratory viruses for years.
You know what we are finding out though? They sure do get a lot of royalties from various companies. That couldn't possibly influence whether suddenly the people telling us for years that masks don't work, now say take a shot from a company that donates to them and oh by the way wear a mask.
After reading this I realize I made a poor career choice. I should have been a "scientist" pursuing the truth at the NIH.
NIH scientists received estimated $350 million in royalties since 2009: Report - Washington Examiner
The National Institutes of Health received verified royalties amounting to $134 million from 2009-2014, with more yet to be revealed. The NIH is in the midst of fulfilling a Freedom of Information Act request detailing the royalty payments of its various leaders since 2010. BIDEN...
We found agency leadership and top scientists at NIH receiving royalty payments. Well-known scientists receiving payments during the period included:
"Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the highest-paid federal bureaucrat, received 23 royalty payments. (Fauci's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $456,028 ).
Francis Collins, NIH director from 2009-2021, received 14 payments. (Collins' 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $203,500)
Clifford Lane, Fauci's deputy at NIAID, received 8 payments. (Lane's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $325,287)"
Substack Investigation: Faucis Royalties And The $350 Million Royalty Payment Stream HIDDEN By NIH
Its the first time since 2005 that the NIH royalty payments receive oversight.www.openthebooks.com
Just highlighting this:
While we at least know about that one -- because it was publicly awarded, instead of secretly insinuated into Fauci's bank accounts -- civil servants should not be allowed to accept "prizes" which amount to, in essence, a cash bounty (or bribe) awarded by a partisan organization for taking a political position for or against the president.
Fauci's been a government bureaucrat all his life. He joined in 1968, straight after his medical residency.
Why would he have royalties in any private company's patents?*
Remember, Anthony Fauci has previously lied under oath, or, let us say, made false statements while testifying to Congress. He claimed that all of his financial records were publicly available.
"Today, NIH is a revolving door of tens of billions of dollars in government grant-making coupled with hundreds of millions of dollars in private -- non-transparent -- royalty payments.
There needs to be a lot more sunshine on this potentially unholy alliance.
When a federal bureaucrat pops up on television giving us health instructions, who has paid them and for what research and technology? When a patient agrees to a clinical trial or experimental treatment, what financial interests are involved?
Rather than relentless redactions and prolonged court battles, it's past time for the government to disclose royalty payments as a matter of routine."
In fact, they're almost entirely redacted.
Also...lets not confuse science with some expert, like an epidemiologist, speculating or talking out their ass. Ya know, like someone who says surfing is dangerous because sea air carries the virus hundred of yards. Unfortunately, during the pandemic their were alleged experts that were trying to stay relevant and spewed nonsense on tv, social media etc. If it were business you would have been fired, but since it science, you can't be held accountable because "science changes".
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
I was told on good authority that the only thing he did to impune his credibility was that he took his mask off once.They have been studying respiratory viruses for years.
You know what we are finding out though? They sure do get a lot of royalties from various companies. That couldn't possibly influence whether suddenly the people telling us for years that masks don't work, now say take a shot from a company that donates to them and oh by the way wear a mask.
After reading this I realize I made a poor career choice. I should have been a "scientist" pursuing the truth at the NIH.
NIH scientists received estimated $350 million in royalties since 2009: Report - Washington Examiner
The National Institutes of Health received verified royalties amounting to $134 million from 2009-2014, with more yet to be revealed. The NIH is in the midst of fulfilling a Freedom of Information Act request detailing the royalty payments of its various leaders since 2010. BIDEN...
We found agency leadership and top scientists at NIH receiving royalty payments. Well-known scientists receiving payments during the period included:
"Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the highest-paid federal bureaucrat, received 23 royalty payments. (Fauci's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $456,028 ).
Francis Collins, NIH director from 2009-2021, received 14 payments. (Collins' 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $203,500)
Clifford Lane, Fauci's deputy at NIAID, received 8 payments. (Lane's 2021 taxpayer-funded salary: $325,287)"
Substack Investigation: Faucis Royalties And The $350 Million Royalty Payment Stream HIDDEN By NIH
Its the first time since 2005 that the NIH royalty payments receive oversight.
Just highlighting this:
While we at least know about that one -- because it was publicly awarded, instead of secretly insinuated into Fauci's bank accounts -- civil servants should not be allowed to accept "prizes" which amount to, in essence, a cash bounty (or bribe) awarded by a partisan organization for taking a political position for or against the president.
Fauci's been a government bureaucrat all his life. He joined in 1968, straight after his medical residency.
Why would he have royalties in any private company's patents?*
Remember, Anthony Fauci has previously lied under oath, or, let us say, made false statements while testifying to Congress. He claimed that all of his financial records were publicly available.
"Today, NIH is a revolving door of tens of billions of dollars in government grant-making coupled with hundreds of millions of dollars in private -- non-transparent -- royalty payments.
There needs to be a lot more sunshine on this potentially unholy alliance.
When a federal bureaucrat pops up on television giving us health instructions, who has paid them and for what research and technology? When a patient agrees to a clinical trial or experimental treatment, what financial interests are involved?
Rather than relentless redactions and prolonged court battles, it's past time for the government to disclose royalty payments as a matter of routine."
In fact, they're almost entirely redacted.
You seem to want to make it a personal question.
Suppose Fauci is caught tomorrow with three prostitutes and a briefcase of renminbi. Would that, in any way, change whether mRNA vaccines are effective?
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Am I missing something? Isn’t individual credibility “personal”?
The post by @Desert Hound indicated potential financial incentives associated with certain opinions. If true, those incentives should be considered when determining how much credibility should be given to his opinions - especially opinions that have changed.
Chinese prostitutes employed by BYD would make me question his opinion on masks. If they were employed by the Chinese government, I’d question his opinions on the origins of COVID.
BTW, Fauci’s (or Trump’s, or Biden’s, or Rogan’s) opinion of vaccines had zero effect on my choice to get the vaccine. It was the trial results of many thousands of individuals in a country where individuals are able to freely and openly communicate their experiences. Come to think of it, after he obviously lied about masks, there’s nothing he said that changed anything I believed. But that’s more of a timing issue. Even if he hadn’t lied, I’m not sure anything he said would have made a material difference in my behavior. In terms of his opinions, I’m firmly in the “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”category.
Hüsker Dü
DA
So sensitive, but of course this whole distrust of authority thing is new to you. Many of the rest of us have been that way since the 60’s back when “conservatives” were the ones blindly following “the establishment” . . . now it’s just one guy.
If you were asking how best to run the NIH and CDC, I’d understand a focus on financial ties to Pharma companies.
Mostly, this is the thread against having to have rules to deal with covid. For that, the attacks on Fauci, or any other individual, are pretty much irrelevant. You have actual data.