If you’re vaxxed, you’re more likely to be killed by lightning than die of COVID

Let's turn this around:

you’re more likely to be killed by lightning than die of HIV/AIDS: study

Do you now how silly that sounds? Turd Gatherers are just gathering more turds to eat.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Your trust is authority is beginning to make you look like a joke.

Are you sure that you want to go this way?
Click to expand...

Do you have ANY links to ANY evidence to dispell the CDC's numbers?

Yes or no?

Instead of spending all day, getting drunk, throwing more ad hominem's around and telling us all we are doomed?

Why don't you try doing something, fucking constructive FOR ONCE?
 
McRocket said:
Do you have ANY links to ANY evidence to dispell the CDC's numbers?

Yes or no?

Instead of spending all day, getting drunk, throwing more ad hominem's around and telling us all we are doomed?

Why don't you try doing something, fucking constructive FOR ONCE?
Click to expand...

The CDC in two years has completely shredded their reputation through shit quality work.

You must come to terms with this.
 
AProudLefty said:
I think you know why.

If you’re vaxxed, you’re more likely to be killed by lightning than die of COVID: study

It's dramatic.
Click to expand...

So what?

He did not write the headline.
He was only quoting it.

You want to condemn the headline - fine.
But what the heck does the guy's IQ have to do with posting an article?

I thought you were better than that.

BTW - here is the original article the NY Post article is based on:

https://www.city-journal.org/understanding-the-covid-odds
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The CDC in two years has completely shredded their reputation through shit quality work.

You must come to terms with this.
Click to expand...

And where is your fucking link to fucking evidence of what you are saying?
I have seen no firm evidence that the statistics the CDC puts out are erroneous.
I do NOT agree with their policies.
But their data seems alright.

You never EVER post one, shred of proof of ANYTHING, you EVER claim (that I recall).

You just tell us all we are doomed.
Insult some of us.
And talk about how powerful China is.

Let's start with this?

Where the fuck do you live?

America? China? Antarctica?

Where...just generally?

I live in America, BTW.
 
McRocket said:
And where is your fucking link to fucking evidence of what you are saying?
I have seen no firm evidence that the statistics the CDC puts out are erroneous.
I do NOT agree with their policies.
But their data seems alright.

You never EVER post one fucking shred of proof of ANYTHING, you EVER claim.

You just tell us all we are doomed.
And how wonderful China is.

Let's start with this?

Where the fuck do you live?

America? China? Antarctica?

Where...just generally?

I live in America, BTW.
Click to expand...

At this point appeals to authority mark you as a CHUMP.

Notice your flailing.
 
McRocket said:
I looked.
Nothing to do with my question.

I will ask again:

You want to condemn the headline - fine.
But what the heck does the guy's IQ have to do with posting an article?
Click to expand...

Well clearly you do not know his history of posting. It's a beautiful sight to behold. Let's start with the first example in his OP.

"As I have stated all along, with time, the truth and facts will finally come out proving what a lying farce Fauci and the cabal of shills for big Pharma really are."

Where in the article does it talk about Dr. Fauci?
 
AProudLefty said:
Well clearly you do not know his history of posting. It's a beautiful sight to behold. Let's start with the first example in his OP.

"As I have stated all along, with time, the truth and facts will finally come out proving what a lying farce Fauci and the cabal of shills for big Pharma really are."

Where in the article does it talk about Dr. Fauci?
Click to expand...

I understand.

But my point is that you are - technically - just trolling him.
'4. To post inflammatory or irrelevant material on (an electronic forum) to provoke responses.'
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/trolling

If that is what you want to be known as to others?
Your choice.

And frankly, it's not cool to just insult someone because of an article whose data is from a well-respected source.
I don't care whom they are - except maybe racist boy-text dude, whatever his/her name is.


It's not a huge deal.

But if you are going to jump on a guy/gal?
At least attack the article first before you start ad homineming them.

Frankly, you struck me as a bit above this.

Later.
 
McRocket said:
I understand.

But my point is that you are - technically - just trolling him.
'4. To post inflammatory or irrelevant material on (an electronic forum) to provoke responses.'
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/trolling

If that is what you want to be known as to others?
Your choice.

And frankly, it's not cool to just insult someone because of an article whose data is from a well-respected source.
I don't care whom they are - except maybe racist boy-text dude, whatever his/her name is.


It's not a huge deal.

But if you are going to jump on a guy/gal?
At least attack the article first before you start ad homineming them.

Frankly, you struck me as a bit above this.

Later.
Click to expand...

Well when I first joined JPP, he was already trolling me and when I pointed it out, he just shut up. Never replied to me because he knows that I know who he is.
 
AProudLefty said:
Well when I first joined JPP, he was already trolling me and when I pointed it out, he just shut up. Never replied to me because he knows that I know who he is.
Click to expand...

Fine.
It's your life.
I do not know your history with him.

All I am saying is if you don't want to look like a troll?
At least make an attempt to attack the OP first.
And if he/she attacks your reply - then go for his/her throat.

Later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top