-
• #11002
Inane indeed.
-
• #11003
Yes, the Singapore government response to Covid-19 has been effective. They’ve had 11 deaths.
-
• #11004
There is actually a decent argument that the negative personal consequences of the lockdown haven't really been publicly aired.
I keep hearing this.
But not the argument :)
-
• #11005
I think there's another conspiracy going on here - if both the main antagonist and the sockpuppet account were set up years ago, that's clear evidence that they knew the pandemic was coming well in advance. From this we can determine they had an active role in spreading the disease using 5G chemtrails also.
-
• #11006
I am not saying engineered viruses are impossible, just not convinced of the "proof" provided. They actually did create a virus from scratch.
Well, I didn't call you any names or whatever, try to create some common ground we may agree on, but if no then no.
If you are convinced it is part of a conspiracy so be it. Just be sensible and stick to all the safety rules, stay in and all that.
-
• #11007
@haremscarem you may wish to step back from the keyboard. I grant that you have all the time in the world, but this forum right now is here to support people and your mood isn't constructive to that end. I don't really wish to set a precedent of banning for people on such basis but if it's in the wider interest of the forum I will.
Everyone is going through something hard to handle right now, and disinformation is rife, it's a weird time... but the one thing long established communities have going for them is offering stability and known interactions... with less of the anger, rage, and dissastisfaction but more of the collaboration and support.
Your account may be able, but you've seldom used it and now become seemingly obsessed with this thread and trolling everyone.
Maybe go ground yourself? ( https://www.healthline.com/health/grounding-techniques .) Step back from the keyboard, go for a walk, remind yourself that there's more to life than arguing online.
If you want to engage like you have, give Twitter a try. Alternatively you get out of this what you give.
-
• #11008
There's a 5G tower near me, good that they set it on fire already. We are safe now.
Praise be Icke ;)
-
• #11010
It's a troll account
-
• #11011
Ah, then let me nuke both with prejudice.
-
• #11012
Done
-
• #11013
But what about your conversation about audio plugins?! How will we know how that pans out?
-
• #11014
It’s ridiculous because you don’t want to acknowledge that there are any issues with lockdown and or the economic impacts, if you can’t begin to identify any yourself what hope does anyone else have?
Added; that’s not meant to sound shouty if it does sorry!
-
• #11015
Don’t be daft. I’ve never denied there are costs to a lockdown. Most of us are aware, we’re directly effected.
You asked why we are locked down and not open now. It’s a fair question ‘because there is capacity’. I suggest you re-engage with current affairs and you’ll get a view of what’s actually happening.
-
• #11016
Ok apologies.
-
• #11017
So who do we reckon that was, Hambini?
-
• #11018
Dubtap winning again
-
• #11019
One of his earlier posts claimed he was in a courier video from Canada.
-
• #11021
Sorry, for not having read you ideas on the subject.... what's your meaningful contribution to this conversation ?
Or are you just too busy trying to "no platform" people who don't share your myopic view of the world !
-
• #11023
Lol.
-
• #11024
This government couldn't run a bath, but the civil service isn't covering itself in glory either. We are a nation of incompetents.
-
• #11025
I think that too much discussion of the the costs of the lockdown are along the lines of "But what about the economy?!!!" to which, people quite reasonably respond, "people's lives are more important." When it's all couched in terms of "the economy" then it comes over as a plea not to imperil the profits of shareholders and business owners, which is not exactly compassionate.
However, there are a whole load of other impacts, which are much more directly deleterious on everyone's wellbeing. Not just the loss of livelihood for those who are already struggling, but mental and physical health issues, loss of school time for kids etc. etc. I don't think the cumulative effect of these across an entire population of 65 million has really been weighed up against the threat to the sections of the population who are more vulnerable to the virus.
To put it another way, I was discussing this the other day with one of my more pragmatic acquaintances. I put to her the twitter-friendly rebuttal to the Trumpian message (that it's ok to let a few old people die to keep things going), which is "ok, choose which 2% of the people you know you'd choose to die." Her response was basically "if it came right down to it, that's actually an easy decision to make." In a way she's right; it's a decision that we should put off for as long as we possibly can and find every way to avoid making, but if we absolutely have to choose between losing some of the elderly vs. a potential lifetime of mental health problems and educational delay for children across the entire country, it wouldn't be a coin-flip, we know what we'd chose.
"most likely", and the evidence being the rest of the peer-reviewed paper, modelling, and sources it draws on.
I can't see anywhere in the article or the paper that states 'it came from bats in the market' - more that bats were likely the species it originated in, and that it was first spread at the market (likely via an intermediary species). Even in the case of sloppy editing elsewhere in the media connecting bats directly to the market - I don't think that negates the theory.
To be honest, the fact that you'll so easily dismiss this, and the general scientific consensus, based on semantic 'gotcha!'s, whilst at the same time accepting Montagnier's theory stinks of confirmation bias.