Pogo
Well-Known Member
Some of us understand the science and what the various statements mean rather than misreading them as absolutes. At this point, you believe without understanding, so be it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Suppression of Free Speech on Covid
- Thread starter Kenny
- Start date
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
An hominems are a loser's argument.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Yes you deny evolution and you don't understand how vaccines work so be happy in your ignorance.Joe Biden
stated on July 21, 2021 in a CNN town hall:
“You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
CDC - COVID-19 vaccine can prevent COVID-19 disease. (2024 - then it says… well… it won’t stop it)
It is very interesting that the internet won’t provide what was said in 2021
That wasn’t the initial sell
Of course it did. If you naturally got COVID - it also lessened symptoms. At the same time there were those who went to the hospital even after vaccine.
After it was recommended… as I said, it was a process of evolution.
But we want to stop transmission and we want to keep people from getting any form of infection. So boosters are going to be recommended for everyone.
What you need to know about COVID-19 booster shots - Mayo Clinic News Network
Health officials are developing a plan to begin offering COVID-19 booster shots to all people in the U.S. as soon as this fall to maximize vaccine protection. But before booster shots can be offered, two things will need to happen: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will need to conduct an...newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org
So… continue your magic my man
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Well the point was the author is a crank and the study he was referring to did not say what he implied which is the mark of a crank.
Very creative and a great attempt at moving the goal post.
Are three doses of polio vaccines almost 100% effective?
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Yep
So you say, so it must be true.
It's not the ad hominem fallacy when a
personal characterization is followed by
supporting analysis...which I provided.
I notice that you neither quoted nor
addressed that part of my post.
So who's the loser now, bub!
You should read the things you quote.
Your link doesn't support your theme.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
You're being dishonest here. The claim I was responding to was "1) Stay six feet away, don’t touch anyone and wear a mask and you will prevent to spreading of Covid. It didn’t stop it."
No one said staying six feet away, not touching anyone and wearing a mask will prevent the spread of Covid, just that it would mitigate it. Biden's comment there was about the vaccine, not those other measures. And I addressed that when you made that claim in this next section.
Yes, it was. It was always the "sell".
The claim I made that you're responding to is: "it wasn't the reason subsequent strains were less severe." Immunity from contraction of the virus didn't affect the subsequent strains of the virus.
Right, as I said, no one said what you claimed.After it was recommended… as I said, it was a process of evolution.
But we want to stop transmission and we want to keep people from getting any form of infection. So boosters are going to be recommended for everyone.
What you need to know about COVID-19 booster shots - Mayo Clinic News Network
Health officials are developing a plan to begin offering COVID-19 booster shots to all people in the U.S. as soon as this fall to maximize vaccine protection. But before booster shots can be offered, two things will need to happen: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will need to conduct an...
If by "magic", you mean correcting your intentionally inaccurate claims that attempt to push the right-wing agenda, will do!
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
No, you heard what is actual reality, which is why we accept it. Again, why do you keep posting, if you're sick and tired of this topic?
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
No, so reality says, so it must be true. Stop painting this as something other people believe because they were told to. We accept the science because it has loads of evidence. You accept what the right-wing outlets tell you because it reinforces your worldview that they also told you to believe.
I don't consider interacting with unreasonable people on RF a waste of my time. As I've stated a few times before, one can learn two ways here, and I value both. We can learn from the intelligent, insightful, and informed people who post, but also by examining how other people tend to think. Especially interesting to me is faith-based thought, which is not limited to creationists. The anti-vaxxers are faith-based thinkers doing the same thing the creationists do - making tendentious arguments to defend beliefs contradicted by evidence. MAGA are also in this category as they try to push their narrative the election was stolen and now that Trump is being unfairly persecuted for political reasons. They all do the same thing. They all argue the same way.
I like to call these two groups of people the lecture and lab sections of RF 101.
It's reminiscent of Karaoke. I like the best singers and the worst singers the best. Here on RF, I enjoy and benefit from the best thinkers and the worst thinkers equally.
You wrote that in response to, "Jon Fleetwood....how much more fringe can one get, eh. Chemtrail conspiracies, contributor to InfoWars"
That wasn't an ad hominem fallacy. It's closer to a genetic fallacy, but it's not that, either. Fleetwood belongs in that second category I just described - the faith-based thinkers. We don't go to such people for information, and that is not a fallacious argument nor any argument at all against the man's claims. It's a statement that his opinions are valueless to a critical thinker.
Perhaps you're familiar with the concept of ethos in public discourse. It refers to the meta-messages a speaker or writer sends his audience in addition to the explicit meaning of his words, such as does he seem knowledgeable, does he seem sincere, does he seem credible, does he seem trustworthy, does he seem competent, does he show good judgment, does he seem to be a sound thinker, does he seem to have a hidden agenda, is he more interested in convincing with sound impartial argument or persuading with emotive language or specious argumentation, is he emotionally secure, and the like.
People like Fleetwood are simply not listened to by critical thinkers. Their agenda, values, and methods are antithetical to those of critical analysis. The reason that this is not the genetic fallacy, which "occurs when we argue that the origin of a belief, practice, or idea is a sufficient reason for rejecting (or accepting) it." That definition doesn't distinguish between calling an argument invalid because of its origin, which would be a logical fallacy, and calling a source untrustworthy before even seeing the argument, which is not.
Maybe it's akin to somebody that you know is a bad cook. You choose to not try one his or her dishes because of a bad reputation - food tastes bad, known to not wash adequately, kitchen filthy, etc.. When one rejects a helping of that dish, he is not saying that the food is bad tasting or unhealthful. He's saying that he doesn't want to find out because he doesn't trust the source.
Still, one's time isn't unlimited.
So tis best to seek more productive opportunities.
I see no fallacy in describing someone thus,
& then showing the error of the belief.
Mein Gott!
That is a lot to read.
I guess there's no benefit for you in interacting with the irrational. As you saw, I value what I learn when "tapping the glass" so to speak, or what I called the lab section of RF 101.
Hopefully, you read it and considered it worth your while. That relatively brief yet thorough discussion of ethos and the genetic fallacy was an example of what I meant by the lecture portion of RF 101.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
LOL I don't accept anything that I'm fed. And I don't watch right wing outlets.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Call it a compulsion. Or I'm bored. Or both. Yeah, I'm definitely bored, especially with this particular topic, so quit quoting me and I'll quit responding.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
All of your talking points here (and in a couple other threads) are right-wing talking points. The whole downplaying the impact of Covid is very much a right-wing narrative. Your post about supposedly confusing information is straight from right-wing outlets. Somehow you're getting those talking points, either directly or indirectly.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
You can't keep making comments and then expect people not to respond. If you don't want to talk about it, just stop posting about it.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
But the quotes show up, so you can quit quoting me if I bother you, or put me on ignore, or whatever.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
I'm not the one complaining about being sick and tired of this topic. You don't have to reply. You can put me on ignore or whatever. If you want to stop talking about something, it's up to you to stop posting about it, not others to stop replying to the posts you're making.