I got in a vaccine debate with ChatGPT, and ChatGPT confirmed for me, what I had long suspected, which is that nobody in the entire history of the world has ever successfully been able to use a "study" to find any vaccine problem.

posted 316 days ago by VaccinesCauseSIDS 316 days ago by VaccinesCauseSIDS +64 / -0

I started out asking about the CDC whistleblower, Dr William Thompson,

and then moved onto Thompson's co-author Frank DeStefano.

I asked ChatGPT to provide me with examples of DeStefano demonstrating competence and/or proficiency in using studies to find vaccine problems.

ChatGPT's answer was basically that the consensus among scientists is that vaccines are safe.

When i pressed on, ChatGPT basically took the position that because vaccines are so safe, its highly improbable, if not impossible, to ever find any safety issues with any vaccines.

Now bear in mind, this ChatGPT bot is just spitting out whatever a consensus of scientists have already said,

And so that consensus of scientists is that every vaccine is 100% safe, which is why its very reasonable to never find any vaccine problem.

GIGO: Garbage In, Garbage Out

You see where this line of reasoning is heading?

These "studies" are a mere formality. a pesky technicality.

They rationalize NOT doing safety studies, because it deprives some poor kid in the control group of his vaccine, which is essential to his survival.

https://i.redd.it/lzu8gjm61dbz.jpg

They already know what the conclusion of their study will be, before the study even begins.

They are merely going thru the motions.

So then i pressed on, and asked ChatGPT for a NAME of anyone who had successfully used a study to find any vaccine problem.

ChatGPT replied with Andrew Wakefield!

I asked ChatGPT what Andrew Wakefield had found...

ChatGPT went on about how Andrew Wakefield fabricated this vaccine-autism link, which has been thoroughly debunked by every scientist in the world, and how Wakefield was stricken off the record...

So then I said to ChatGPT...

Can you name anyone OTHER THAN Andrew Wakefield who has successfully used a study to find a vaccine problem?

and ChatGPT could not name one single person.

These vaccine studies aren't designed TO find vaccine problems,

These vaccine studies are designed to NOT find vaccine problems.

PS. i should mention that ChatGPT version is only up to date until 2022, and supposedly in the meantime Frank DeStefano has finally been able to demonstrate that studies can find problems, by finding a problem with COVID 19 vaccine, long after everyone else knew it was a problem (like blood clots, etc)

10 comments

10 comments share save hide report block hide replies

To The Great Awakening

We are researchers who deal in open-source information, reasoned argument, and dank memes. We do battle in the sphere of ideas and ideas only. We neither need nor condone the use of force in our work here. WE ARE THE PUBLIC FACE OF Q. OUR MISSION IS TO RED-PILL NORMIES.

This is a pro-Q community. Please read and respect our rules below before contributing.

WHY Q?

"Those who cannot understand that we cannot simply start arresting w/o first: ensuring the safety & well-being of the population shifting the narrative removing those in DC through resignation to ensure success defeating ISIS/MS13 to prevent fail-safes freezing assets to remove network-to-network abilities kill off COC to prevent top-down comms/org, etc. etc. should not be participating in discussions." Q

Comments (10)

sorted by:

▲ 1 ▼

– VaccinesCauseSIDS [S] 1 point 316 days ago +1 / -0

So, the first link is to Brian Deer dot com…

https://www.ageofautism.com/2011/01/keeping-anderson-cooper-honest-is-brian-deer-the-fraud.html

Brian Deer is a sketchy dude… he spent 12 years bird-dogging Wakefield, and ultimately was the man most responsible for Wakefields undo’ing

But the question is, who paid Deer’s bills while he was stalking Wakefield for 12 years.

Deer is a paid hatchet man…

Which is fine…

At least now we know they exist, and what they do.

Deer tracked down many of the Wakefield study participants, and “interviewed” them, looking for any discrepancies.

But heres the thing about that…

WE aren’t allowed to scrutinize pro-vaccine studies, because of a phony concern about study participants privacy.

BULLSHIT.

What Brian Deer did, was probably what should be done one every study.

Someone needs to scrutinize the data.

Otherwise, they could just make up whatever synthetic data they want, and then claim that we aren’t allowed to harass their study participants.

These f’ers think of every angle.

But we gotta turn it around on them,

Pull the rug out from under house of cards.

Here’s how we start:

we demand to be shown the actual math that they use to come up with 5% statistical significance.

I can already tell you that 5% is completely made up number, with exactly zero relevance in the real world.

Study authors select 5%SS because of things like tradition, habit, emotion, opinion,

But mostly so they can get the result they want,

Which is “the vaccine is safe”

These studies are specifically designed NOT to “find the evidence”, and its HIGH TIME we call them out on their bullshit.

Vaccines are pseudoscience

Statistics is pseudoscience

So its really no surprise that vaccine pseudoscience is propped up with statistical pseudoscience

https://i.redd.it/1rb482xb9ty41.png

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– merf 2 points 316 days ago +2 / -0

Thanks for the background on Deer. I was wondering why the result popped up so readily...

It's maddening that we're blocked from accessing nation-level data on vaccine harm but this Deer character is encouraged to harass individual study participants w/no repercussions...