odanny
Diamond Member
OK, there are some outliers out there, that's cool.I reject the human experimental vaxxes, but agree with global warming by humans.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
OK, there are some outliers out there, that's cool.I reject the human experimental vaxxes, but agree with global warming by humans.
Thanks for the latter, but the EUA approved vaccines are NOT experimental. The experiments were the trials with tens of thousands of subjects over a period of several months. The rate of adverse reactions to any of them has been absolutely microscopic and far, far less of a hazard than the virus.I reject the human experimental vaxxes, but agree with global warming by humans.
I was wondering if there is any correlation between accepting or denying man-made global warming and accepting or denying the value of COVID-19 vaccination. It's unlikely we will see enough responses for much statistical validity, but you never know.
There are mountains of evidence to back up anthropogenicity.Global climate change is real .....man is causing it is just a whacked out conspiracy theory with no solid science to back it up
Nothing in life comes without risks, but the risks of the vaccine are enormously less than the risks of the disease they prevent.And the vaccines are completely safe .....make sure to get your boosters
There are mountains of evidence to back up anthropogenicity.
Actually, regular trials take years, which is where we are right now, meaning that you're part of the trial, so am I, I'm what's called part of the Control Group, which is essential to any drug trial.Thanks for the latter, but the EUA approved vaccines are NOT experimental. The experiments were the trials with tens of thousands of subjects over a period of several months. The rate of adverse reactions to any of them has been absolutely microscopic and far, far less of a hazard than the virus.
Who dictates that they take years? The exact same people that approved the EUA.Actually, regular trials take years, which is where we are right now, meaning that you're part of the trial, so am I, I'm what's called part of the Control Group, which is essential to any drug trial.
Safety dictates that it can take years.Who dictates that they take years? The exact same people that approved the EUA.
Given its life-saving potential, safety also 'dictates' that it be distributed and used as quickly as possible. Again, the FDA sets the rules you want to take as gospel and it is the FDA that has authorized its use under these circumstances. The results clearly show they did not err.Safety dictates that it can take years.
Sunset Tommy and Bob Blaylock,There are mountains of evidence to back up anthropogenicity.
I can guarantee that a thorough search of your body would find yersinia pestis, the bacteria that caused the Black Death plague of the Middle Ages. And despite the vaccinations you received as a child, It would also find examples of the variola virus that causes smallpox, the poliovirus, morbilivirus that causes measles, paramyxovirus that causes mumps, hepatitis A and B and so forth. A thorough search would find those organisms and more in my body and those of anyone else we wished to search. Their numbers would be limited, due to the efficiency of our immune systems, enhanced by the vaccines we have received and - this is the important part - in the vast majority of individuals we would not be found to be AFFECTED by the presence of these organisms. We would be completely asymptomatic. We would not be ill. THAT is the situation with 99,997 out of 100,000 recipients of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines against the COV-SARS2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
The lie flitting around this exchange is that our current vaccines are ineffective against the Delta variant. They ARE effective. But the Delta variant is a potent beast and it does differ slightly from the original virus for which our current vaccines were designed. And even in the bodies of the roughly half of this country that have been vaccinated, it is able to reproduce to an extent sufficient to be sloughed - to be expelled by coughs and sneezes and forceful breathing and kissing and licking and sex and any other activity that exchanges or exposes us to the bodily fluids of others. If I am vaccinated and then thoroughly exposed to someone with a full-on COVID-19 infection - say a member of my household who refused the vaccine - I could carry enough particles in my body that, though completely asymptomatic, I could infect someone else who has not been vaccinated. I realize that this differs from much of our common historical experience with vaccines but there are valid and sensible reasons for this situation.
Virtually 100% of the population is vaccinated against a number of infamous childhood diseases. We do not have 50% or more of the population unvaccinated against polio, measles or mumps in the midst of an ongoing pandemic of those diseases including the rise of multiple variant strains. If we did, we would also see asymptomatic, vaccinated individuals able to spread disease to the unvaccinated.
Your selective acceptance of facts has led you to a faulty conclusion. You emphasize this transmissibility but ignore the lack of symptoms - illness - in the vaccinated. That such a high percentage of COVID-19 hospital admissions and even higher percentage of COVID-19 fatalities are UNvaccinated individuals - percentages that do NOT reflect actual vaccination rates among the general population - is an irrefutable piece of evidence that the vaccines are effective, so far, against all strains extant. And, as hundreds of millions of vaccinations have been delivered to individuals around the world with virtually microscopic numbers of adverse reactions and breakthrough infections requiring ICU treatment taking place, refusing the shots, putting your loved ones and the general public at risk, providing a breeding ground for even newer and more deadly variants, is simply irresponsible. I suppose I should apologize for my hostility at those who, in my view, are exercising flawed and irresponsible reasoning. It is not unreasonable to be concerned about the vaccine's side effects. It is not unreasonable to be concerned about the vaccine's efficaciousness. It is, however, unreasonable to apply faulty reasoning to the evidence available to us. It is unreasonable to fail to consider the risk in which your decisions can place others. I urge all who have not gotten the vaccine to do so as quickly as possible. Lives matter.
Sunset Tommy and Bob Blaylock,
Have you looked at the references in any of the six IPCC Assessment Reports?
Thanks for the latter, but the EUA approved vaccines are NOT experimental. The experiments were the trials with tens of thousands of subjects over a period of several months. The rate of adverse reactions to any of them has been absolutely microscopic and far, far less of a hazard than the virus.
I guess the amount of people killed or hurt by the vaccine (my mother-in-law had a stroke 2 weeks after her first shot) is acceptable, or within parameters. But you're for sure part of the trial, make no mistake, and the medium to long term effects of these vaccines are unknown at this point, and your part of that trial.Given its life-saving potential, safety also 'dictates' that it be distributed and used as quickly as possible. Again, the FDA sets the rules you want to take as gospel and it is the FDA that has authorized its use under these circumstances. The results clearly show they did not err.
I guess the amount of people killed or hurt by the vaccine (my mother-in-law had a stroke 2 weeks after her first shot) is acceptable, or within parameters. But you're for sure part of the trial, make no mistake, and the medium to long term effects of these vaccines are unknown at this point, and your part of that trial.
How can you possibly state that? What evidence do you have for that statement? Have you proof that Tyndall's experiment was wrong? That Arrhenius's estimates were in error? That we are not producing billions of tons of CO2 annually? That this rapid change did not start until the industrial revolution. In fact, until then on the long term we had been in a 6000 year cooling period.Global climate change is real .....man is causing it is just a whacked out conspiracy theory with no solid science to back it up