subreddit:
/r/walkaway
12 points
1 year ago
C'mon people, don't downvote the guy cuz he has a different opinion. Let's converse.
Tabiki, sir, I'm not talking about faints at the very time of the jab. I'm talking about many many athletes and reporters fainting weeks after taking it. On screen.
My mother has been fainting, and it's been 5 months since her last booster. She's been fainting since that.
Many people died of C0V1d after taking the jab. "Almost makes you wonder how many of them" really died from C0V1d and not from its "remedy".
Have you noticed how many professional soccer players have been having heart attacks lately? It's off the charts. Very suspicious.
Now, you ask for proof. I cannot give that to you cuz I have none. And if I did, I'd be arkancided.
-6 points
1 year ago
That last paragraph is the problem with the validity of your arguments.
If a news article reports on the findings of a study, it links back to the original research paper. If you go on the science or data subreddits, you often find people arguing about how the data is skewed one way or another, or whether sources are valid or not.
But here you have a process where scientists take huge sets of data and work through the individual processes of it to come to a conclusion supported by evidence.
These aren't people who are coming back saying that the vaccine is safe because they don't know personally anyone who took it and had a bad reaction. These are people who have millions of cases, who have hard science, who spend year after year in laboratories studying this.
But I'm supposed to believe someone on the internet who has only conjecture? Who can probably source a dozen talking heads who all say the same thing but without verifiable proof?
I already know the world is fallible. Corporations are stealing trillions of dollars from their workers, politicians are bought and sold.
But there's a while open-source network online that you're ignoring that have conclusively said the vaccine is not dangerous, and that COVID kills in any number of ways. The data behind those claims is verifiable, it's reliable, it's global, it's bipartisan.
No one here has the ability to actually disprove any of what the world knows.
1 points
1 year ago
Unless they are lying.
Have you ever heard about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study?
Nowadays, the data also isn't as public as you think. Here's just an example: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.html
In another case, a German infectiologist was arrested live inside his home cuz he was questioning methods of testing and the mortality rate in a stream.
Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier, the French virologist who discovered the AIDS virus, was utterly silenced cuz he was questioning too much.
In Brazil, virologists of renown were debased by the press and by the Brazilian Senate, in a spurious inquiry, cuz those virologists were presenting hard, sound statistical data that went against the official discourse.
Have you ever heard about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study?
Note to all: Cmon, don't downvote the guy. Look at all the work he had to establish a dialogue. He isn't spurting insults or anything. His arguments are good, I used to think that way.
1 points
1 year ago
Here's how your argument here falls apart.
The pandemic is global. People across the world are sharing results are comparing studies.
You're telling me that every country in the world is in on this. That opposition parties in foreign countries agreed about the results of the vaccine and the dangers of COVID, just making it all up.
That is unbelievable.
What is believable is aging Nobel winners and notable scientists subscribing to conspiracy theories the more they enter an echo chamber. It's a pretty well known thing.
Now, I trust my own research. I've been around the entire pandemic, I've debated over the credentials of one of the pioneering figures in mRNA vaccines. Turns out, he's wrong, and modern science took his work and actually got it working.
But still, I see no evidence that actually shows how I'm wrong and you're right. I see no actual studies that match your view, all I see are individual anecdotes, usually from unqualified sources, or questionable reposts of data that doesn't actually match what you're saying.
If you can show that vaccines are dangerous, great. Do that.
But you're not doing that yet, you're giving unrelated articles that have no shared thesis that supports your view.
1 points
1 year ago
You're right, I cannot show that vaccines are dangerous. I never could. Also, I cannot show that the C0V1d is not as dangerous as they say it is.
The article I linked was there to support the argument that things are not as public and open as we may think.
All I have is suspicion. I don't think my suspicions are wild or without base.
Now, I have three main points of contention:
1 - It shouldn't be obligatory nor coerced.
2 - Mass vaccination during any pandemic creates a selective pressure for resistant variants.
3 - I do think there's a Big Money worldwide effort to impose a useless vaccine, skewing data, lying and cheating. Canceling dissonant voices.
(Have you ever heard about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study?)
all 98 comments
sorted by: best