Conspiracy Theory Addiction Is Real

[Brass]

you are incapable of answering your own question. 49 times.

Oh I see where your confusion lies. You think that when someone asks a question, they're obliged to also answer it. But no. You were asked why you believe that taking something that doesn't prevent infection or transmission will keep you from passing the virus on to those around you. That's the question TO YOU!

And we're still waiting for your answer. Only you can tell what's on your mind, not us.

 

[Kev45]

Oh I see where your confusion lies. You think that when someone asks a question, they're obliged to also answer

Yes I do, that's how science works, stupid.

 

[Brass]

Yes I do, that's how science works, stupid.

But I'm not asking you about anything except your belief that you can protect those around you by being injected with something that doesn't prevent infection or transmission. Science says you're wrong because the experimental injection doesn't prevent infection or transmission. So what's with your continued belief that it does?

 

[Kev45]

You still don't get it, even after I took the time yesterday to explain it. You keep accusing me of typing words that I didn't actually type, angrily shouting at me what my own opinion is, although I have not given you one, and then petulantly demanding that I reply to claims YOU are making.

That's not how science works, stupid.

 

[Brass]

. . . angrily shouting at me what my own opinion is . . .

Perhaps if you would state your opinion as to the wisdom of accepting an experimental injection that doesn't prevent infection or transmission, no one would have to guess. So what's your excuse this time for not answering that question?

Does the experimental injection prevent infection or transmission? If you're going to stick around, you need to take a position. So far, you've refused to do that. So we'll just have to guess at what your position is.

 

[Kev45]

You fired the first shots, Barry, in your initial post to me a few days ago. I am not going to share my opinion with you, you angry shouty rude assumption making know it all.

 

[Brass]

You fired the first shots, Barry, in your initial post to me a few days ago. I am not going to share my opinion with you, you angry shouty rude assumption making know it all.

I rest my case. No one can help you with your thoughts if you don't share.

You might start by explaining how is that you've come to accept the notion that an experimental injection that doesn't prevent infection or transmission will protect those around you; that is, unless you actually don't accept that notion.

Do everyone favor and tell us what you believe. Otherwise, people are going to know you're not taking a position because that's the best way to avoid being wrong. But that's a child's trick. Are you a child?

 

[Kev45]

I rest my case. No one can help you with your thoughts if you don't share.

Your thoughts you mean, you made the assumptions, and then you asked the question based on those assumptions, 51 times.

 

[Brass]

Your thoughts you mean, you made the assumptions, and then you asked the question based on those assumptions, 51 times.

Well, unless you take a position, then my point stands.

The experimental injection does not prevent infection or transmission, and therefore will not protect those around you, which begs the question of why you got one, er, I mean two--er, three, etc.

Does my contention that the experimental injection fails to stop infection and transmission go against your beliefs?

 

[Kev45]

Well, unless you take a position, then my point stands.

You can stand on your own point to your heart's content, Barry. You can make all the assumptions you like, Barry, 52 times and counting, but you also don't understand science. For you people, in your Bill Gates rabbit hole, there is only right or wrong, black and white and that is not how science works.

 

[Brass]

So here we have another poster driven to take the 5th when asked a simple yes or no question.

And that will do just fine.

 

[Kev45]

So here we have another poster driven to take the 5th when asked a simple yes or no question.

And that will do just fine.

The "complex" question, which is plainly very simple to you because you don't understand science and which you have not backed up with any scientific evidence? That simple "question"?

 

[Kev45]

So your science, as YOU see it, is that the question of whether YOU believe the jab prevents contagion and transmission cannot be a simple yes/no answer? Are you standing by that claim?

We have already had this conversation on multiple occasions, previously Christopher. My informed advice is to stop drinking like a camel because it has clearly affected your cognitive function. You get pissed, forget what you typed a few days earlier, rinse and repeat for the past three years, 10,000+ posts and counting.

 

[Brass]

The "complex" question, which is plainly very simple to you because you don't understand science and which you have not backed up with any scientific evidence? That simple "question"?

It either prevents infection and transmission, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then how is it going to protect you or those around you?

Your idea of complex is anything that proves the opposite of what you believe. And the best way to overcome that tendency is to go ahead and at least try to explain the wisdom of taking an experimental injection that doesn't prevent infection or transmission in order to be safe and keep others safe.

See, it's not as complicated as you need to believe it is.

 

[Kev45]

Let me know when the Chuckle Brothers provide scientific evidence to support claims they, and only they, are making.

I'd love to continue, but my intelligent, financially independent, beautiful partner is due, and I have to backcomb my perm and splash on the Hai Karate.


Ta ra for now.

 

[Brass]

Let me know when the Chuckle Brothers provide scientific evidence to support claims they, and only they, are making.

In May 2021, fauci said that vaccinated individuals were “dead ends” for the virus. That was a lie.

Later, he said: Notably, Fauci et. al. appear to argue that, if natural immunity alone is insufficient to prevent reinfection with respiratory viruses, then there is little hope for existing vaccines to prevent it:

“This observation raises a question of fundamental importance: if natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines, to do so?”

What a change of tune, eh?

Fauci and his co-authors go on to note that different vaccines have different objectives. Unlike others that may be aimed at preventing infection entirely or at preventing transmission, the COVID-19 vaccines were meant for “only preventing severe disease,” they wrote.

Now, what part of doesn't prevent infection or transmission don't you understand? Fauci lied at the beginning and then decides to get honest way later. You poor soul. You don't know what to believe anymore.

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[Brass]

I feel sorry for him.

I didn't at first. But I kinda do now.