Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
bee

Group of doctors claim pandemic is a sham

720 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

OpenMindedSceptic
8 hours ago, Setton said:

By his own admission, @OpenMindedSceptic won't provide his sources because he knows we would dismiss and laugh at them.

Which does not inspire confidence.

Yep, you'd laugh  

Then again the fool raised in the mad House doesn't realise he is mad. 

I'll leave you to your fearful unawareness.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OpenMindedSceptic
8 hours ago, stereologist said:

Again with the incorrect measure of a pandemic. When will your cluelessness end?

You have zero idea what the graph proves. 

You haven't even managed to find it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 hours ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

What are you going on about ? I just admitted some young healthy people die. The numbers are the numbers and can be looked up from a number of sources. Pick your poison.

Healthy people do die. I challenged you and you wanted me to provide a citation to show you were wrong. It has been well known since March that young people and healthy people die of COVID-19.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 hours ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

Your very selective when it comes to my post while you neglect most out of my post. Why is that? You seem very argumentative . I will not carry on a conversation with someone so childish.

That is false. You asked for a citation and you spent the entire post rejecting it. So your claim that most of your post was neglected is not true is it?

You've been pushing false stories which is why I challenge you on those statements.

The childishness is all yours.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

You have zero idea what the graph proves. 

You haven't even managed to find it.

I see that once again you have nothing of value and can't defend the dubious and laughable statements you have made.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
3 hours ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

While some people dont need much to belittle. Ive said this before show some tact while addressing the misinformed. It will help allow the conversation to move faster along aswell as maybe open the ears of the ones you desperately want to correct.

And I've told you before, nobody expects to reach someone so detached from reality.

All we can do is make sure nobody takes your lies at face value.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
1 hour ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Yep, you'd laugh  

Then again the fool raised in the mad House doesn't realise he is mad. 

Apparently not...

Quote

I'll leave you to your fearful unawareness.

Oh how will I cope?

@bee Please come back. All is forgiven. Your posts may seem like utter crap but at least you occasionally tell us where it came from. Then we can confirm it is indeed crap. This is just mindless wittering.

Edited by Setton
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
3 hours ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

Have 

Have you seen the numbers? While I'll admit some young die between the ages 0-50. Its an abnormality. 99.8 percent do not die meaning it is not serious to young people. 

A chance of dying equal to 0.002 is not serious?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
1 hour ago, stereologist said:

That is false. You asked for a citation and you spent the entire post rejecting it. So your claim that most of your post was neglected is not true is it?

You've been pushing false stories which is why I challenge you on those statements.

The childishness is all yours.

It is not my fault that you cant see where I changed my narrative from young people dont die to this virus to where it is not serious enough to be put into lockdown. Again I will say young healthy people that die from this are an abnormality. That is clearly shown in the numbers.

Edited by InconceivableThoughts
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
10 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

A chance of dying equal to 0.002 is not serious?

Not enough to shutdown the economy. I'm sure driving has worse chances then that.

Edited by InconceivableThoughts
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
46 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Quite alarming in fact.

Now you can see that this argument is subjective. I see the numbers as not alarming at all actually. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
4 minutes ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

Not enough to shutdown the economy. I'm sure driving has worse chances then that.

Look up the geometric distribution.  If each day you had a 0.002 chance of dying you could expect to last 500 days.  You'd have a 50 per cent chance of dying within 347 days.

We're talking peoples lives here.  Not wagering a few bucks on a long shot.

And you were the guy talking about risk/reward earlier.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
6 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Look up the geometric distribution.  If each day you had a 0.002 chance of dying you could expect to last 500 days.  You'd have a 50 per cent chance of dying within 347 days.

We're talking peoples lives here.  Not wagering a few bucks on a long shot.

I'm sorry but how your implementing your math is completley wrong. I can not even reply to this. I'll try though so your saying on 347th day you would have a 50 percent chance of dying to virus youve had almost a year?

Edited by InconceivableThoughts
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
9 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Look up the geometric distribution.  If each day you had a 0.002 chance of dying you could expect to last 500 days.  You'd have a 50 per cent chance of dying within 347 days.

We're talking peoples lives here.  Not wagering a few bucks on a long shot.

And you were the guy talking about risk/reward earlier.

Youve must of already made your money . So when talking to me at least address the fact your sitting comfortable at home not needing to work anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts

I'm starting to understand why most of you think the way you do. Your old and have money. So of course your afraid of this virus. Of course you could careless about the economy , you have all your money already. You guys are a bunch of biased over opinionated jokes. You guys are not right . I showed you the numbers. Get over yourselves.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
17 minutes ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

Now you can see that this argument is subjective. I see the numbers as not alarming at all actually. 

How so?

It shows as age increases, risk also does dramatically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

How so?

It shows as age increases, risk also does dramatically.

Even if half the population died I could still say its not that serious. Serious is a subjective word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
3 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

How so?

It shows as age increases, risk also does dramatically.

Also I see all the way up to 45 your pretty much safe...well in my sense of safe. The numbers reflect that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts

I'm also seeing in the numbers for older folks that there are more deaths in other respiratory diseases than covid. Hmmm... Could it be that anything else would of killed these people but covid got them first? Its just amazing when presented with numbers you guys still are fear mongering.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast

superficially

7 minutes ago, InconceivableThoughts said:

Not enough to shutdown the economy. I'm sure driving has worse chances then that.

The economy seems to be your Golden Calf but your understanding of economy is superficially and without the understanding of long-term negative effects.

Sick people need treatment which seems to be a kind of luxury in the US because of the inadequate health system and a lot of people have to pay their hard earned money to get treatment. So, the more people get sick on C19 (in the US), the more people have to spend their money for their health instead of spending their money into consumer goods and services, which is the general trigger, besides foreign trade, of a well running economy.  And this spiral goes down further and further by a steady increase of sick people. At the end, or at the edge to it, there will be no economy anymore which will result to social unrest and the likelyhood of the destabilization of the society.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts
5 minutes ago, toast said:

superficially

The economy seems to be your Golden Calf but your understanding of economy is superficially and without the understanding of long-term negative effects.

Sick people need treatment which seems to be a kind of luxury in the US because of the inadequate health system and a lot of people have to pay their hard earned money to get treatment. So, the more people get sick on C19 (in the US), the more people have to spend their money for their health instead of spending their money into consumer goods and services, which is the general trigger, besides foreign trade, of a well running economy.  And this spiral goes down further and further by a steady increase of sick people. At the end, or at the edge to it, there will be no economy anymore which will result to social unrest and the likelyhood of the destabilization of the society.

For some reason i think what you just said was that economy will turn towards healthcare but when there is no more need for that health care we will be top heavy in that department. Leaving all others bankrupt . Is that basically what you said?

Edited by InconceivableThoughts
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
Just now, InconceivableThoughts said:

I'm starting to understand why most of you think the way you do. Your old and have money. So of course your afraid of this virus. Of course you could careless about the economy , you have all your money already. You guys are a bunch of biased over opinionated jokes. You guys are not right . I showed you the numbers. Get over yourselves.

One doesn't have to be afraid of the virus to be wary of it. Those not at risk pass it to those at high risk because the transmission rate it high. Most people don't want to be responsible for the death of those at risk.

Could you live with it? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
InconceivableThoughts

I just re read through the numbers. Your more likely to die from othe respiratory illnesses than covid. Much more so when your younger then 35.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.