Jump to content

Coronavirus - Part Two.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, SheffieldBricky said:

-lauCan't be bothered. Twitter has more polite pseudo intellectuals, at least they'll provide links to their opinions.

Opinions?

I have not shared an opinion with you.

If I had, my opinions are my own and I do not publish them, therefore there are no links to my opinions.

 

You were seeking factual information I showed you how to get that information without relying on others.

However you "Can't be bothered."

 

As there are lots of "...polite pseudo intellectuals..." on Twitter who will "...provide links to their opinions" I am sure they will keep you entertained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Opinions?

I have not shared an opinion with you.

If I had, my opinions are my own and I do not publish them, therefore there are no links to my opinions.

 

You were seeking factual information I showed you how to get that information without relying on others.

However you "Can't be bothered."

 

As there are lots of "...polite pseudo intellectuals..." on Twitter who will "...provide links to their opinions" I am sure they will keep you entertained.

You've just admitted your opinions are not based on facts. Not a smart move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

Not here to make noise, I'm just reacting how your side of the argument acts. You won't believe alternative evidence and ridicule sources. 

Please provide sources and evident for your claims. You can't expect people to see your point of view if you can't provide alternative evidence.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Delayed said:

Please provide sources and evident for your claims. You can't expect people to see your point of view if you can't provide alternative evidence.

 

 

I've just had to deal with a long tantrum from Annie because I asked her to provide evidence. She shouldn't ever be a Barrister.

 

It's up to you to research my evidence (apparently)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SheffieldBricky said:

I've just had to deal with a long tantrum from Annie because I asked her to provide evidence. She shouldn't ever be a Barrister.

 

It's up to you to research my evidence (apparently)

I'm asking not her. 

 

I'll provide evidence for what's in the vaccine, lessened effects and lessened transmission rates as more people get the vaccine.

 

Please reciprocate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Delayed said:

I'm asking not her. 

 

I'll provide evidence for what's in the vaccine, lessened effects and lessened transmission rates as more people get the vaccine.

 

Please reciprocate

Nobody knows. It depends on the age and health of those with bad symptoms. Younger people are more likely to get the vax now. Those still unvaxed are determined not to have it, many are older. Young people do have less symptoms, so if they're vaxxed they will have less symptoms. If someone is unvaxxed and older the symptoms would be worse. They would have to provide all those complex calculations, but they won't. If the do I'll accept the findings. 

Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

Nobody knows. It depends on the age and health of those with bad symptoms. Younger people are more likely to get the vax now. Those still unvaxed are determined not to have it, many are older. Young people do have less symptoms, so if they're vaxxed they will have less symptoms. If someone is unvaxxed and older the symptoms would be worse. They would have to provide all those complex calculations, but they won't. If the do I'll accept the findings. 

We've had a long sequence of assertions from you and the only evidence (ie with a source) is the standard conspiraloon misinformation confusing side-effects with adverse events.

 

How about postng some evidence for your assertions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

We've had a long sequence of assertions from you and the only evidence (ie with a source) is the standard conspiraloon misinformation confusing side-effects with adverse events.

 

How about postng some evidence for your assertions?

Why would you think a report from the Australian Parliament's website is a conspiracy theory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.