4
ThisIsNotMyName 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ok, I might have missed something here. I thought that we just got the names on the list. What else happened?

What happened to make everyone start posting about it like this? It has to be more than just the names being revealed.

Because everyone knew the lists already existed. No one was denying that. What did learning the names change, or what else happened that I'm missing?

1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

I completely understand. I think sometimes it is a better idea to just not engage.

But everyone doesn't have the same opinion on that and are insistent on having arguments about it. So hopefully those people can at least be better prepared if they absolutely have to argue with people about it.

Thanks for the response.

2
ThisIsNotMyName 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, these seem to be the main talking points of pro-vaccine people.

I was hoping that if I could get people aware of them, they could prepare a response in advance and make better arguments.

2
ThisIsNotMyName 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm not criticizing the anonymity of the person saying that as much as I'm criticizing the fact that there is zero actual evidence presented to support his claim.

5
ThisIsNotMyName 5 points ago +5 / -0

Fair warning: This is an obnoxiously long post, sorry about that. I'm going to play devil's advocate here, because I'm seeing many Anons engaging in arguments with normies over vaccines, and, frankly, they aren't doing too well at it.

I want to clarify that I'm not arguing in favor of the vaccines. I'm trying to show some of the arguing points that Anons are struggling with. So if anyone reading this is going to talk to their normie friends and relatives about the dangers of vaccines, they'll have an idea of the pushback they're going to receive. Then they'll be able to come up with responses to that before they engage with normies.

-Toxicity is dose-related. The amounts of those otherwise "dangerous" chemicals found in vaccines are not high enough to cause harm.

-Combined vaccines like VAXELIS are safer than giving the child single vaccines for each of those diseases coveredx. The ingredients thought to be dangerous in vaccines are the preservatives. Combo vaxes use the same amount of preservatives found in just one of those single vaccines. So if the child were to get single vaccines for all those diseases covered in the combo vax, they would get 6x the amount of preservatives in comparison to the combo vax.

-Mercury, the most commonly referenced "toxic" ingredient in vaccines, is no longer found in any of the vaccines formulated for children. It was phased out many years ago.

-Correlation does not equal causation. It's a logical fallacy. It means that just because Event A (Autism in this case) happened after Event V (Vaccines in this case) does not mean Event A caused Event V.

-The argument is that autism rates increased dramatically after the new pediatric vaccine schedule that was introduced in the late 90s or early 00s (I forget which), so the vaccines caused those increased cases.

This is an example of "correlation does not equal causation" I mentioned earlier. Normies will point out that the DSM (the manual that the medical field uses for diagnosing mental illnesses) was updated around the same time as the increased vaccine schedule was initiated. The new DSM eliminated several separate diagnoses, like Asperger's, and made the new "autism spectrum" an umbrella term that absorbed all the symptoms found in those separate diagnoses. So autism cases increased because the children who would have previously been diagnosed as one of those eliminated diagnoses, like Aspergers, are now diagnosed with autism. Notice that cases of mild mental retardation fell at the same time autism cases rose. Does this mean that the vaccines decrease rates of mental retardation? No, it means that all those children that were formerly diagnosed as mildly mentally retarded are now diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum.

-The new DSM also resulted in the medical field, and elementary teachers to an extent, becoming more aware of autism and they started actively looking for it. Increased observance naturally leads to an increase in cases found.

Ok, I think that's enough for now. Please remember I was playing devil's advocate here hoping to help Anons make better arguments against vaccines to normies.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wasn't commenting to you, or about you. You're so vain, you probably thought that conversation was about you.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

I guess you save money that way. You get the same result as being drunk, for free.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

I like calling helicopters "whirlybirds". It makes me feel more aloof.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

Day drinking generally doesn't bode well for the drinker.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

What the hell are you talking about? You're just posting non sequiturs all over this post.

by skytlrh
2
ThisIsNotMyName 2 points ago +2 / -0

Excellent post, excellent advice. I wish more people would do this. It's sad that people have to be reminded of these things, which should be second nature because it's just basic common sense.

People jumping to conclusions based on headlines is something that happens waaaaaaay too often. How hard is it to actually read the article included?

1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'd be interested in seeing if he ever follows through with that.

But if this is a routine thing then they shouldn't have any trouble verifying it. There would be an office where these people went to get this stuff. There would be an office full of employees who could verify this actually happens. There would be all sorts of financial and business papers filed on behalf of the people getting the benefits. It shouldn't be difficult at all to confirm this is happening...if it's true.

But yet no one spreading these rumors are capable of getting any of that evidence to support what they claim? Odd.

This is what I think is going on:

There is a program for refugees and asylum seekers that gives them $2,200 to help them get housed and started up in life over here.

These are not illegal immigrants, but refugees and asylum seekers, people who are here legally. Who have sometimes spent years trying to set up sponsors and jobs and get all the paperwork and red tape completed to get here. Again, legally.

I think someone is taking that one piece of info, $2,200 going to foreigners coming here, and twisted it into something to get people angry about. Most likely they do this to get clicks and views from posting about it.

And for those getting their panties in a wad, thinking we shouldn't be helping refugees and/or asylum seekers, here's a reminder of why it's important that we do:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2015/november/heres-where-americas-338000-christian-refugees-have-come.html

https://apnews.com/article/china-house-church-thailand-texas-e8f193fa733d279176ef845f42a0bb35

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/02/07/most-refugees-who-enter-the-u-s-as-religious-minorities-are-christians/

by skytlrh
6
ThisIsNotMyName 6 points ago +6 / -0

God, yes. It feels amazing to be right. Maybe one day you'll be right about something and you'll get to experience that feeling for yourself.

by skytlrh
3
ThisIsNotMyName 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not all of them are shills. At least a few are long-time regulars here. You're just wrong on this.

by skytlrh
1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is NanaQ45 one of the feisty ones looking to stir up some violence in the name of Trump?

by skytlrh
7
ThisIsNotMyName 7 points ago +7 / -0

Taking a look through the mod logs, and seeing all the comments they deleted that were talking about lynching and hanging people, and shooting people, and running them over with cars, and encouraging others to use violence in all manner of situations, I'm going to go out on a limb and say, no, everybody here doesn't already know this.

3
ThisIsNotMyName 3 points ago +3 / -0

What is this Q decode accomplishing? I mean, what are we supposed to do with that information now?

This is one of the things that confuses me the most here. What exactly are we supposed to do with all of these "comms" people are spending so much time decoding?

What's the point? Or is it just supposed to be entertaining?

2
ThisIsNotMyName 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, there was a documentary about drug use in Russia and they spent a lot of time on Krokodil. It's just mind-numbing thinking about how anyone could live like that.

1
ThisIsNotMyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

So we're supposed to believe this, why, exactly? Because some random person typed it up and posted it?

If it's true, we should all just learn Spanish, ditch our IDs, and pretend to be illegals. Surely there's some Anon here who is fluent in Spanish and could go do some undercover work. I'm amazed no one has thought to do this already.

4
ThisIsNotMyName 4 points ago +4 / -0

So how does this work with the whole "military is the only way" thing?

All this time it's been implied that White Hats are in charge of the military, but now hundreds of military leaders should be court martialed?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›