WOULD YOU VACCINATE TO BE ABLE TO WATCH SPORTS

[Tiger5150]

In fact in one post you suggest that people “may take ivermetcin” but then say vaccines are rushed. Where is the Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) study? Both drugs are assessed by the same criteria, by the same organisations, must meet the same burdens of proof. If Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) could mount a case as strong as the Pfizer vaccine, the FDA and TGA would approve it!!! My mind boggles!!!

It astounds me as well. I posted a meta-analysis on ivermetcin recently.

Mate you are hilarious!!!!!!

You did post a meta analysis on Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective). It was the Tess Lawrie Meta Analysis. The exact same Meta Analysis that I posted in the first week of July. Your response?

Earl: *"Don’t listen to @Tiger5150. No offense but he is basically making stuff up. It’s just as bad. His problem is that he is right on the edge of science. The edge of science is consistently wrong. Sure they get it right every so often but a broken clock gets the time right twice per day."*

You are hilarious, the levels of hypocrisy, arrogance . You continually deride me and others for posting information actually backed by real science and then you post the EXACT SAME information..... minimal self awareness.

How is your "bat in the wet market" theory standing up?

 

[Tiger5150]

I raised alcohol and smoking in the context of Earls assertion that non vaccinated people should be excluded from the health care system. I merely pointed out that alcohol and smoking contributes to a MUCH higher strain on the health care system and these people are not excluded.

I agree with you very much but we have to consider that smokers and drinkers are very heavily taxed, and part of that tax is to recover the medical burden on society.

Add to that the cost of life and possibly health insurance (Im not sure of the second)


Furthermore, an epidemic of heavy smoking probably does not put acute pressure on the health system. Acute drinkers maybe, after all Concord Hospital does get fairly bombarded after dance concerts at Homebush.

Chronic smoking and drinking are the burden on health care. Orders of magnitude higher than COVID.

 

[dazza65]

Guys, If you are confused or are on the fence surrounding the vaccine go and see your GP. Voice your concerns about it. Then make a decision.

My GP said no wait to after stage 4 trials finished it's to dangerous yet and doesn't stop you from getting or passing it on I trust him smart guy

I would be surprised if a doctor said this.

Deal with a few GPs through work.
Approximately 5.

All are very in favour of vaccination.
All 5 refused to do mask exemptions also.

Seems like this would be the baseline.

If you shop wide enough you will find those that sign vaccine exemptions and deal out opiates at the drop of a hat.

So @Radoush may well be telling the truth

Yes because if your gp is selling exemptions and dealing opiates inappropriately you’ll listen ton their vaccine advice……. Seriously

@Radoush may be unaware of any sideline his GP may or may not have

He may be.
He may not be.

Doesn’t support the liar conclusion then

As usual, getting your lines crossed. I never said he was a liar…..

 

[Pascoes_barber]

But drinking is **way** more enjoyable. 🙂

Also, nobody is being treated with Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) or Hydroxychloroquine (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is ineffective as has danger side-effects) should they contract Covid19 here.

Aside from not being approved (and one of them likely to cause serious harm) the thought process that leads anyone to believe that they're going to have some kind of choice ('menu' style) should they end up in ICU is completely and utterly ridiculous.

 

[CocaCola]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

 

[jadtiger]

I would post some but they won’t be from a mainstream media site, a government site, nor a sufficiently science based site for most here

Well that should tell you something about the sources you are considering quoting.

Seriously; anything that "won't make mainstream media, or be recommended by the government, or be from a reputable science website"... what value do those resources have?

If I was to choose any other topic - politics, gun control, diet, space travel, rugby league, pets, raising children - and told you I could only provide you references from the real fringe channels, wouldn't you be at all concerned about the information I was peddling? If it can't even gain traction in mainstream media? I mean Murdoch will publish almost anything, if News Ltd won't even put their name to it?

Space travel please..

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

I'm a little stunned by that comment, I know a couple of members of your family and consider them quite intelligent and knowledgeable people. I would think it would be quite difficult to find 2 people who don't know about the Space Station, let alone 2 in your family lol

Tell me about it. And they turn it around on me, call me some kind of "space nerd".

I always tell my brothers I got all the best genes and that they were left with the leftovers.

I can see why you would be populat at family gatherings

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Guys, If you are confused or are on the fence surrounding the vaccine go and see your GP. Voice your concerns about it. Then make a decision.

My GP said no wait to after stage 4 trials finished it's to dangerous yet and doesn't stop you from getting or passing it on I trust him smart guy

My GP would beat your GP in a fight.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Hahahaha, you're one of those huh?

How are the Flat Earth Society meeting at the moment? Via Zoom, or is it on hiatus?

 

[TheDaBoss]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Hahahaha, you're one of those huh?

How are the Flat Earth Society meeting at the moment? Via Zoom, or is it on hiatus?

The flat earth society have people all around the globe... oh wait

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Hahahaha, you're one of those huh?

How are the Flat Earth Society meeting at the moment? Via Zoom, or is it on hiatus?

The flat earth society have people all around the globe... oh wait

The ISS is green screen and CGI lmao.

You can literally see the bloody thing in orbit it's that big haha. I have a tracker app on my phone where it sets alerts for me to go out and see it.

This is your brain on 12 hours of deepdiving Youtube conspiracy theory videos folks.

 

[mike]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Hahahaha, you're one of those huh?

How are the Flat Earth Society meeting at the moment? Via Zoom, or is it on hiatus?

The flat earth society have people all around the globe... oh wait

The ISS is green screen and CGI lmao.

You can literally see the bloody thing in orbit it's that big haha. I have a tracker app on my phone where it sets alerts for me to go out and see it.

This is your brain on 12 hours of deepdiving Youtube conspiracy theory videos folks.

The people who think the moon landings or the iss are fake have never done project management. It’s impossible for such a coverup on that scale to occur.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Hahahaha, you're one of those huh?

How are the Flat Earth Society meeting at the moment? Via Zoom, or is it on hiatus?

The flat earth society have people all around the globe... oh wait

The ISS is green screen and CGI lmao.

You can literally see the bloody thing in orbit it's that big haha. I have a tracker app on my phone where it sets alerts for me to go out and see it.

This is your brain on 12 hours of deepdiving Youtube conspiracy theory videos folks.

The people who think the moon landings or the iss are fake have never done project management. It’s impossible for such a coverup on that scale to occur.

Or government conspiracy theories. The only government that would be competent enough to engage in successful conspiracy would be China. And even then I doubt they'd keep it under wraps forever.

 

[Honkylips]

I was speaking to my sister last year, and I was talking about the International Space Station. She said "what's that?" I looked at her puzzled.

I said "there's a large space station orbiting the Earth right now, with different parts built by different countries, and it's permanently inhabited at all times; it has been for 20 years. What do you mean "what's that"?"

My sister isn't boneheaded but obviously her general knowledge has some gaps. I said "I can't believe you've never heard of the International Space Station. I mean, no offence, but I thought most people would be aware that there's a space station orbiting the Earth, with astronauts in it".

So I interrupt my other sister in the middle of her conversation with my Dad, I say "please tell me you have heard of the International Space Station". And my *other* sister goes "no, what's that?"

Unbelievable.

As believable as the Moon landing..
ISS is produced with CGI & green screen..

The NASA hoax continues. They can't change their story after all the years & why would they when they receive 50 million/day in funding..

This post sponsored by Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson.. 21st century pioneers of space travel.

As Elon Musk would say: "You can tell it's real because it looks so fake."

Im pretty sure you must be joking?? If not, if you live in Sydney get up and go outside at 4:59am. Look up towards the SE. You will see a very bright moving object moving across the sky (weather permitting). It will be as bright as the brightest star out at that time. It will not be twinkling as satellites don't. It will put your ridiculous CGI & green screen rubbish to bed.

 

[FinestTigers]

Mainstream science is correct the vast majority of the time. If you stick to the mainstream view you will be correct 99.9% of the time. It’s not you either. It’s the way science requires proof to verify facts. Science is reality. No single persons opinion matters.

Also, in the 0.01% where current theory is proven wrong, science adopts an improved theory. It's intentionally transparent. It's the search for truth above all else. It's driven by testing and re-testing, and the delivery of data that must bear the weight of scrutiny from peers (experts).

I think we need to careful with this. Although I certainly agree with the sentiment here. How long is it before something becomes mainstream? If something becomes mainstream, does all research need to stop? It would seem to be a huge waste of resources for smart people to be researching something that is correct 99.9% of the time. Is this number true across all scientific disciplines? ie. math and sociology.

How do we tell if empirical research is correct? It might be intuitive to think scientific Journals, but there are issues here, such as p-hacking and publication bias. Journals tend to publish positive findings, but not report insignificant results. Which can create issues when aggregating results as in meta analysis. If there is a publication bias, this will bias what we consider to be mainstream

There is has also been a crisis in scientific research with many results unable to be replicated. See for example
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

I love science and research in general, so I don't want to be overly critical. But I think we need to be careful with statements like mainstream science is 99.9% accurate.

Although, it could just be about semantics. It might be true that mainstream science is actually 99.9% accurate, but something like 10% of science could be considered mainstream.

Put that big brain of yours to the COVID discussion. I don't disagree with you here but also I don't think we need to debate what the scientific principle is.

Thanks for the compliment. I wasn't debating the scientific principal though, just the level of confidence on the scientific output.

It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with. Like democracy. The day someone invents a better system, I'd be interested to learn about it.

I must say, i also appreciate your comments like so many others do here but @jirskyr i'm a little confused about your recent comments and just asking now if you could clarify your position, when you said this.
"I again challenge anyone on this forum: who here has the qualifications and expertise to determine what is an “appropriate” or “acceptable” level of testing of any compound for human consumption? "

Does this challenge still stand? because then you said this,
"It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with,"
Could you please confirm your position on your challenge?

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Mainstream science is correct the vast majority of the time. If you stick to the mainstream view you will be correct 99.9% of the time. It’s not you either. It’s the way science requires proof to verify facts. Science is reality. No single persons opinion matters.

Also, in the 0.01% where current theory is proven wrong, science adopts an improved theory. It's intentionally transparent. It's the search for truth above all else. It's driven by testing and re-testing, and the delivery of data that must bear the weight of scrutiny from peers (experts).

I think we need to careful with this. Although I certainly agree with the sentiment here. How long is it before something becomes mainstream? If something becomes mainstream, does all research need to stop? It would seem to be a huge waste of resources for smart people to be researching something that is correct 99.9% of the time. Is this number true across all scientific disciplines? ie. math and sociology.

How do we tell if empirical research is correct? It might be intuitive to think scientific Journals, but there are issues here, such as p-hacking and publication bias. Journals tend to publish positive findings, but not report insignificant results. Which can create issues when aggregating results as in meta analysis. If there is a publication bias, this will bias what we consider to be mainstream

There is has also been a crisis in scientific research with many results unable to be replicated. See for example
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

I love science and research in general, so I don't want to be overly critical. But I think we need to be careful with statements like mainstream science is 99.9% accurate.

Although, it could just be about semantics. It might be true that mainstream science is actually 99.9% accurate, but something like 10% of science could be considered mainstream.

Put that big brain of yours to the COVID discussion. I don't disagree with you here but also I don't think we need to debate what the scientific principle is.

Thanks for the compliment. I wasn't debating the scientific principal though, just the level of confidence on the scientific output.

It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with. Like democracy. The day someone invents a better system, I'd be interested to learn about it.


I must say, i also appreciate your comments like so many others do here but @jirskyr i'm a little confused about your recent comments and just asking now if you could clarify your position, when you said this.
"I again challenge anyone on this forum: who here has the qualifications and expertise to determine what is an “appropriate” or “acceptable” level of testing of any compound for human consumption? "

Does this challenge still stand? because then you said this,
"It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with,"
Could you please confirm your position on your challenge?

If there was anyone on this forum whose opinions I would put stock in, it's his as he is involved in the industry.

 

[tig_prmz]

Mainstream science is correct the vast majority of the time. If you stick to the mainstream view you will be correct 99.9% of the time. It’s not you either. It’s the way science requires proof to verify facts. Science is reality. No single persons opinion matters.

Also, in the 0.01% where current theory is proven wrong, science adopts an improved theory. It's intentionally transparent. It's the search for truth above all else. It's driven by testing and re-testing, and the delivery of data that must bear the weight of scrutiny from peers (experts).

I think we need to careful with this. Although I certainly agree with the sentiment here. How long is it before something becomes mainstream? If something becomes mainstream, does all research need to stop? It would seem to be a huge waste of resources for smart people to be researching something that is correct 99.9% of the time. Is this number true across all scientific disciplines? ie. math and sociology.

How do we tell if empirical research is correct? It might be intuitive to think scientific Journals, but there are issues here, such as p-hacking and publication bias. Journals tend to publish positive findings, but not report insignificant results. Which can create issues when aggregating results as in meta analysis. If there is a publication bias, this will bias what we consider to be mainstream

There is has also been a crisis in scientific research with many results unable to be replicated. See for example
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

I love science and research in general, so I don't want to be overly critical. But I think we need to be careful with statements like mainstream science is 99.9% accurate.

Although, it could just be about semantics. It might be true that mainstream science is actually 99.9% accurate, but something like 10% of science could be considered mainstream.

Put that big brain of yours to the COVID discussion. I don't disagree with you here but also I don't think we need to debate what the scientific principle is.

Thanks for the compliment. I wasn't debating the scientific principal though, just the level of confidence on the scientific output.

It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with. Like democracy. The day someone invents a better system, I'd be interested to learn about it.


I must say, i also appreciate your comments like so many others do here but @jirskyr i'm a little confused about your recent comments and just asking now if you could clarify your position, when you said this.
"I again challenge anyone on this forum: who here has the qualifications and expertise to determine what is an “appropriate” or “acceptable” level of testing of any compound for human consumption? "

Does this challenge still stand? because then you said this,
"It's a flawed system but it's the best one we've come up with,"
Could you please confirm your position on your challenge?

Not to speak on behalf of @jirskyr but it is a flawed system because it is constantly changing. The system we will have in place in 50 years will be better, but still be flawed. However, without a doubt, this is the best system we have in place.

I'd like to think that science is independent to political or cultural biases. If there is anything you want to believe in life, it is science.

 

[supercoach]

Surly the person who drove from Sydney to Byron bay with COVID who told police he did not believe in COVID and any of the regulations associated with COVID, and refused to assist police should face jail time. Now Byron bay faces a lockdown that could have been avoided.

 

[Snake]

Surly the person who drove from Sydney to Byron bay with COVID who told police he did not believe in COVID and any of the regulations associated with COVID, and refused to assist police should face jail time. Now Byron bay faces a lockdown that could have been avoided.

Gladys says thanks for coming forward , I never thought I would see a lefty being the Premier of a Conservative party weak as !

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

Surly the person who drove from Sydney to Byron bay with COVID who told police he did not believe in COVID and any of the regulations associated with COVID, and refused to assist police should face jail time. Now Byron bay faces a lockdown that could have been avoided.

It's a shame people like this exist in society they are a danger to everyone not just them self lock him up for a dose of reality.

 

[jadtiger]

Surly the person who drove from Sydney to Byron bay with COVID who told police he did not believe in COVID and any of the regulations associated with COVID, and refused to assist police should face jail time. Now Byron bay faces a lockdown that could have been avoided.

Gladys says thanks for coming forward , I never thought I would see a lefty being the Premier of a Conservative party weak as !

Gladys is not even close to being a "lefty".She is just as bad as the fraud in Canberra, right wing and a compulsive liar