Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

hometruths · 12-07-2022 11:37pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329514#Comment_119329514

The fatality rate for the vaccines has not been posted, by you or anybody else.

And no matter how many times you repeat yourself, it doesn't make it true. Once again it's odd that you're prepared to spend time posting again and again that you have already posted the thing that proves me wrong, yet you are unwilling or unable to simply repost the thing that proves me wrong.

And again I'll point out to you I'm not making up any numbers - I was asked by KingMob did I think this figure was plausible and I replied that it was.

You jumped all over it, lecturing about how the CFR for the vaccines proves that this 40k figure is wrong, but amusingly you are actually unable to quote what the CFR is!!

King Mob · 12-07-2022 11:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329511#Comment_119329511

OK. So then your saying that the study is wrong and invalid?

And if you're posting this stuff on other forums and it isn't a conspiracy theory, why here?

bad2thebone · 13-07-2022 9:25am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329013#Comment_119329013

Thats a lot of reading, a lot of calculations and it's very well researched.

Ratios and proportions are all well and good, but it probably comes down to demographics too.

Just in case you're not familiar with what demographics are.

Demographic analysis is the study of a population-based on factors such as age, race, and sex. Demographic data refers to socioeconomic information expressed statistically, including employment, education, income, marriage rates, birth and death rates, and more.

It's probably a bit more advanced than primary school maths.

astrofool · 13-07-2022 9:28am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329558#Comment_119329558

You want others to come on and prove your imaginary anti-vax numbers for you?

Mine have been proven and posted, you have a fantasy in your head that is going nowhere.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 9:52am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330208#Comment_119330208

Also pretty telling that he only seems to care about nitpicking figures that don't look good for the conspiracy.

If it's a figure claimed by an anti-vaxxer though, like say the claim that the vaccine killed 40,000 to 100,000 to possibly several million, he's not interested.

hometruths · 13-07-2022 9:54am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330208#Comment_119330208

I am not asking you to prove my numbers. They are not my numbers. I had made no comment whatsoever on this point, but nonetheless I was asked did I agree if the number was plausible and I said I did.

For whatever reason you chose not to contradict whoever originally posted them, but chose to tell me that my opinion on the plausibility was demonstrably wrong because "The CFR for vaccines is nowhere near your numbers"

But oddly enough you don't appear to know what the CFR for the vaccines actually is.

robinph · 13-07-2022 11:15am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330200#Comment_119330200

Sure you can break it down into different age groups etc if you want, and people have done in tracking who has and hasn't got vaccines and who has and hasn't got ill/ hospitalised/ died.

But the article you posted didn't use any complex maths, it just stated that X thousand was a bigger number than Y hundred and from that claimed that therefore vaccines were killing people. The fact check on that article merely uses the very basic maths of does 2/10 show a bigger risk than 200/10,000 (the numbers themselves are irrelevant to the point).

Is Reuters lying about those calculations? That is all you need to ask yourself regarding which source to believe, don't need to get into anything about demographics, just have they got that very simple maths wrong?

astrofool · 13-07-2022 11:39am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330293#Comment_119330293

Correction, you don't know what the CFR for the vaccines is, thus have no argument to make, as usual :) You must have a reason for it to be plausilbe bar an anti-vax fantasy in your own head.

Where next will you spin to?

(though I see King Mob is also now leading you wherever he wants 🤣)

bad2thebone · 13-07-2022 11:46am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330579#Comment_119330579

Well maybe it's the observation that big numbers are more eye catching than anything else, and that catches people more than brass tacks do.

It's hard to keep up with it all, that Reuter's report was very complex in part's,I downloaded it and read through it, took me age's.

I have a thing where words sometimes jump about and I have a tendency to be more metalogical than the average person when I am trying to figure things out They do seem like they have good fact checkers. As I've been looking at their other fact checking and they're definitely not biased. Actually I ended up looking at them fact checking other stories and it's probably worth staying in touch with Reuter's.

hometruths · 13-07-2022 11:50am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330707#Comment_119330707

Correct, I don't know what the CFR for the vaccine is, which is why I am asking you, as you do claim to know what it is.

But you are not prepared to state what it is. Very odd behaviour.

The obvious explanation is that you don't know what it is and are talking out of your backside. Once again.

robinph · 13-07-2022 11:55am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330737#Comment_119330737

So do you now accept their fact check on the article you linked to?

bad2thebone · 13-07-2022 12:31pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330780#Comment_119330780

I think we'll need further analysis as time goes on, but they're looking good for the moment. But these numbers are interchangeable. So let's give time time.

Get back to me in 6 months time. And we'll see if it's consistency keeps on track.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 12:33pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330759#Comment_119330759

But when you refuse to address questions and points or back up claims, it's totally because you're choosing not to, right?

hometruths · 13-07-2022 12:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330990#Comment_119330990

I have ignored some of your questions either because they are silly or you are deliberately misrepresenting something or somebody.

I have not made a claim and refused to back up that claim when asked. If you think I have, quote the claim I have made and refused to back up, and I will address it. You get annoyed when I do not back up claims that you say other posters have made - that's ridiculous.

astrofool claimed that my opinion that the 40k figure was plausible was demonstrably wrong because "The CFR for vaccines is nowhere near your numbers"

All I am asking is that he shares this knowledge of what the CFR for vaccines is. It does not seem like a big ask, assuming he actually knows what this is and it is not just a figment of his imagination.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 12:53pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331060#Comment_119331060

So what's to stop him from declaring that your question is silly or deliberately misrpresenting something?

Also, why do you not show similar curiosity about the claims being made by your fellow conspiracy theorists.

Like for example, why have you not asked for the evidence or reasoning to support the figure of 40,000 to 100,000 or possibly millions of deaths?

Igotadose · 13-07-2022 12:54pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329071#Comment_119329071

But, it wasn't a 'red flag.' It was unrelated to vaccination and was immediately refuted.

Do you just want to believe the vaccines are risky? Not based on data, or science, just want? Because that makes you a conspiracy theorist.

hometruths · 13-07-2022 1:06pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331088#Comment_119331088

So what's to stop him from declaring that your question is silly or deliberately misrpresenting something?

He directly contradicted my post, offering the specific counterargument "The CFR for vaccines is nowhere near your numbers"

I presume common sense is stopping him from declaring that my question in response "OK, what is the CFR for vaccines?" is silly or deliberately misrepresenting something.

If it is not common sense, it could be the forum charter.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 1:10pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331134#Comment_119331134

Again, you're in the conspiracy forum. Your fellows have claimed things like the vaccine makes people magnetic and that space travel doesn't exist.

Really weird for you to be concerned about common sense now.

You've also dodged my question about why you are not asking your fellows about the source for their number. By your own argument...

astrofool · 13-07-2022 1:23pm

I sense an obsession starting again :)

Anything to avoid posting numbers that prove their fantasies wrong again.

Remember that the theorist is the one who needs to bring their numbers to refute the science (even if they've been posted multiple times already, just like the proven severity data).

hometruths, just so it's clear, you need to bring the numbers and reasoning, no one can do that for you as when they have you never ever understand them anyway. This means you need to stand by what you bring and concede when they are inevitably proven wrong by everyone else.

Or you can just go with your feelings or abandon science like your compatriots.

Everyone was more than patient with your craziness before and you learned 0 and still haven't picked up the most simple facts and data.

hometruths · 13-07-2022 1:29pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331155#Comment_119331155

You've also dodged my question about why you are not asking your fellows about the source for their number.

I haven't dodged your question because I cannot answer it or whatever else you think I am up to. I ignored it because it is silly.

It is a silly question because the only reason I ever commented on the 40k figure was when you asked me did I think it was plausible. As far as my participation in this discussion goes you are the source of this figure. I don't really care where you got it from, you asked me a simple question and I gave you a simple answer.

That simple answer was I think it is plausible. If you'd asked me 50k or 60k, the answer would have been the same. The source of whatever number you asked me is irrelevant.

Getting shirty now that I am not interested in the source of this number is just silly, and a total waste of time - mine and yours.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 1:45pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331226#Comment_119331226

Lol. I'm asking you now why you aren't interested in the source of the 40000+ figure.

Why would that be not relevant?

Why do you then thinK a source for another number is relevant?

I think it's clear that you didn't ask and weren't interested because as always, you're not willing to challenge or disagree with your fellow conspiracy theorists.

So you believe that 40,000 to millions is a plausible figure.

How about less than that?

10,000?

2,000?

Also plausible?

patnor1011 · 13-07-2022 2:32pm

Excess mortality connected to rollout of boosters is being studied.

https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/waieconwp/22_2f11.htm

https://expose-news.com/2022/07/07/study-10-rise-in-excess-mortality-after-boosters/

robinph · 13-07-2022 2:33pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330978#Comment_119330978

No the maths won't change over time. It has always been the same, and will always be the same.

King Mob · 13-07-2022 2:39pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331659#Comment_119331659

Yup. A paper in an economy jounral that's been glombed onto by the grifter media.

"Expose news" is not a reliable source.

Meanwhile, you guys ignore things published in medical journals and claim that they are fraudulent based on nothing at all.

bad2thebone · 13-07-2022 2:51pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331671#Comment_119331671

Yeah ok if you say so:)

Fighting Tao · 13-07-2022 2:52pm

This thread is now “I don’t understand, therefore the vaccines are dangerous.”

Ye conspiracy theorists are hilarious

astrofool · 13-07-2022 3:00pm

I sense an obsession starting again :)

Anything to avoid posting numbers that prove their fantasies wrong again.

Remember that the theorist is the one who needs to bring their numbers to refute the science (even if they've been posted multiple times already, just like the proven severity data).

hometruths, just so it's clear, you need to bring the numbers and reasoning, no one can do that for you as when they have you never ever understand them anyway. This means you need to stand by what you bring and concede when they are inevitably proven wrong by everyone else.

Or you can just go with your feelings or abandon science like your compatriots.

Everyone was more than patient with your craziness before and you learned 0 and still haven't picked up the most simple facts and data.

robinph · 13-07-2022 3:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331808#Comment_119331808

Nothing to do with my opinion. 1+1=2 isn't changing,and the way you calculate the ratio of the risks between two groups of population isn't ever going to change.

Whilst the numbers you input into the equation may change over time, the equation doesn't. The numbers that were in the link you provided show very clearly that the higher risk group was those who were unvaccinated, just the article that your source wrote around those numbers was deliberately misinterpreting them.

Do you accept that they misinterpreted the numbers?

King Mob · 13-07-2022 3:29pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331819#Comment_119331819

It's always been that.

bad2thebone · 13-07-2022 3:38pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119331962#Comment_119331962

You'll have to accept that we're finished the discussion.

We're done now, and you'll just have to find someone else to keep asking questions.

Bye bye

@hometruths

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

Comments

https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/waieconwp/22_2f11.htm