Conspiracy theorists?

chic said:
Yes, I did see the word false. I fail to see how an "opinion" can be false. It's a personal individual outlook on a subject.
Click to expand...
Seriously? True - some opinions based on "fact" can definitely be "true". Opinion based on falsehoods or misinformation are by their very nature not!
To use an extreme example; suppose you and a friend are out walking and you come across a black colored dog. Your friend states their opinion that the dog is black colored; however you insist that the dog is white. Whose opinion (personal individual outlook) is valid?
 

SeniorBen said:
Conspiracy theorists generally rely on a different set of facts, which originate from unreliable sources. They'll find one professional who twists accurate information to fit their narrative (usually for financial gain) and posts it as fact for people unwilling or unable (due to cognitive shortcomings or laziness) to evaluate the information for themselves. Or they might just be unwilling to be exposed to information that doesn't fit their worldview, such as is the case with many viewers of a certain cable "news" show.

The professionals who spread misinformation are usually located outside of the U.S. for some reason. Perhaps they see the potential for raking in a lot of money by spreading conspiracy theories in the U.S. The careers of scientists in the U.S. who spread misinformation don't last very long.
Click to expand...
Well said, and true.
 
Raddragn said:
Seriously? True - some opinions based on "fact" can definitely be "true". Opinion based on falsehoods or misinformation are by their very nature not!
To use an extreme example; suppose you and a friend are out walking and you come across a black colored dog. Your friend states their opinion that the dog is black colored; however you insist that the dog is white. Whose opinion (personal individual outlook) is valid?
Click to expand...
A lot of the "facts" surrounding covid have turned out to be invalid because they were based on hope and blind faith - not on proven facts and data. Vaxers that refuse to accept that, and still believe that being vaccinated prevented them from transmitting covid, have opinions that were not based on reality.

Perhaps you are the one who can't see the facts now. Perhaps the dog was a zebra.
 

perChance said:
A lot of the "facts" surrounding covid have turned out to be invalid because they were based on hope and blind faith - not on proven facts and data.
Click to expand...
Exactly - and those were the "facts" mostly supported by conspiracy Theorists - just as the projection of what everyone else sees is a dog is projected to be a "Zebra".

Frank from Cleveland said:
I agree Follow the money If the government is pushing something heavily ( like a war) several people stand to make a lot of cash.
Click to expand...
Just because people stand to profit - sometimes substantially - doesn't necessarily mean the product they have on the market is inferior. Look at insulin - for example. Big Pharma has been milking the public for all it can get away with. Does that mean you should reject the use of insulin completely if you are a diiabetic?
 
Raddragn said:
Seriously? True - some opinions based on "fact" can definitely be "true". Opinion based on falsehoods or misinformation are by their very nature not!
To use an extreme example; suppose you and a friend are out walking and you come across a black colored dog. Your friend states their opinion that the dog is black colored; however you insist that the dog is white. Whose opinion (personal individual outlook) is valid?
Click to expand...

Maybe my friend has a problem with their eyesight while I do not. That's another way to look at it.
 
Raddragn said:
Exactly - and those were the "facts" mostly supported by conspiracy Theorists - just as the projection of what everyone else sees is a dog is projected to be a "Zebra".
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point. The 'facts' that turned out to be lies were not pushed by those that questioned the safety of the vaccines. The lie that the vaccine would stop transmission was made by the producers of the vaccines and various governments.

Those that think they saved others by taking the vaccines were lied to, and some are afraid to admit their attacks on those that raised questions were totally unfounded.

Very little in life is so simple as your black and white story.
 
Alligatorob said:
I suppose it is, not a wordsmith here. I meant that we often prefer the simple, but wrong, answer to a more complex right one. The
H L Mencken thing: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
Click to expand...
Oh... "too simple to be right" ... I thought you were quoting Wikipedia. :LOL:

I'll take the right answer every time, or at least one with some good evidence.
 
Raddragn said:
The dog is still black and your friends "opinion" is still incorrect.
Even very sincerely believing in something not fact based does it make it a reality.
Click to expand...

I said maybe my friend has an eyesight problem while I do not and you can interpret that any way you wish.
 

Attachments

  • m k laughing wink.jpg
    m k laughing wink.jpg
    91.5 KB · Views: 1
perChance said:
I think you missed the point. The 'facts' that turned out to be lies were not pushed by those that questioned the safety of the vaccines. The lie that the vaccine would stop transmission was made by the producers of the vaccines and various governments.

Those that think they saved others by taking the vaccines were lied to, and some are afraid to admit their attacks on those that raised questions were totally unfounded.

Very little in life is so simple as your black and white story.
Click to expand...
Your post is the perfect example of one lost in conspiracy theories and disinformation. Thanks for your thread contribution.
 
SeniorBen said:
The problem isn't that people have opinions that deviate from that of the mainstream; it's that they use "facts" that aren't consistent with reality that they get from unreliable sources and they often insult those who don't agree with them and then play the victim.
Click to expand...
As soon as I read the OP, it was clear to see this was a poor me, victim thread. Your post is spot on.
 
perChance said:
I think you missed the point.
Click to expand...
No. I did not! No two humans are completely genetically the same; therefore their reactions differ. Where vaccines are concerned, some will have good reactions and some will have poor reaction and a very few will have no reaction at all. No vaccine (or medication) is perfect or works for all and this has been true in medicine since the beginning of time. There is always a risk when you accept a new treatment - medicine - or vaccine!
In most instances, it is against the manufacturer's best interests to lie about the effects as they do not gain in the long run when they deliberately "lie". They can be mistaken, however. Vaccine Manufacture is not a cut and dried procedure - it takes many failures to come anywhere near a successful. result.
These people were dealing with a new virus about which there was not a good deal of information and a lot of people were dying from it. There was tremendous pressure and little time to find some form of amelioration for it. Were there dishonest and greedy people trying to make some type of profit monetarily or status - wise involved - yep! There are always those types involved.
Cancer treatment has been struggling with a desire for successful treatment for centuries and still hasn't come up with a "cure" for all cancers for everyone and probably won't for decades more. Does that mean all should refuse the chance for a cure because it might not work?
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-vaccine-transmission-idUSL1N31F20E
 
perChance said:
I think you missed the point. The 'facts' that turned out to be lies were not pushed by those that questioned the safety of the vaccines. The lie that the vaccine would stop transmission was made by the producers of the vaccines and various governments.

Those that think they saved others by taking the vaccines were lied to, and some are afraid to admit their attacks on those that raised questions were totally unfounded.

Very little in life is so simple as your black and white story.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's a lie that drug companies claimed that the vaccine would prevent transmission. We've been through that over and over for years, and yet, some people don't seem to be able to learn, probably because the pundits on Fox "news" keep repeating the lies.

Here are the facts about transmission of COVID-19:

The COVID-19 vaccine does help to prevent transmission, but it is not 100% effective. Studies have shown that vaccinated people are less likely to get infected with COVID-19, and if they do get infected, they are less likely to spread the virus to others.

A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that fully vaccinated people were 66% less likely to test positive for COVID-19 than unvaccinated people. The study also found that vaccinated people who did test positive for COVID-19 were 70% less likely to transmit the virus to their household contacts.

Another study, published in the journal Science, found that vaccinated people who were infected with the Delta variant of COVID-19 had lower viral loads than unvaccinated people. This means that vaccinated people who are infected with COVID-19 are less likely to spread the virus to others.
 
SeaBreeze said:
Your post is the perfect example of one lost in conspiracy theories and disinformation. Thanks for your thread contribution.
Click to expand...
What is the disinformation? The drug company has admitted they didn't know whether or not the vaccines would stop transmission.

You bought into that misinformation and continue to pretend you know what is or isn't a conspiracy. Perhaps you are afraid to admit you fell for the lie.

Oh, and you are welcome. Your post sounds like a broken record - It's a conspiracy theory! It's a conspiracy theory! ;)
 
perChance said:
What is the disinformation? The drug company has admitted they didn't know whether or not the vaccines would stop transmission.

You bought into that misinformation and continue to pretend you know what is or isn't a conspiracy. Perhaps you are afraid to admit you fell for the lie.

Oh, and you are welcome. Your post sounds like a broken record - It's a conspiracy theory! It's a conspiracy theory! ;)
Click to expand...
They never said the vaccine would stop transmission or stop the deadly infection of Covid. They said that those who took the vaccination would more likely have a mild case if infected and not be killed by the virus or end up in the hospital on a ventilator.

Common sense will tell you that the more people who were vaccinated, the less likelihood of rampant transmission. Only the willfully blind will deny all those Americans who lost their lives to this deadly pandemic. Too many people are still mourning their dead family members. It is a conspiracy theory, and you are too far down the rabbit hole to realize it.
 
Last edited:
perChance said:
The drug company has admitted they didn't know whether or not the vaccines would stop transmission.
Click to expand...
I assume you are talking about Pfizer and their Covid vaccine. I believe what Pfizer said is that the testing they did and were required to do was to evaluate effectiveness in preventing infection, not transmission.

Claims that Pfizer didn't know if COVID vaccine prevented transmission before rollout are missing context
https://www.verifythis.com/article/...heck/536-aaf563f5-2286-44d4-ae0b-2c71812b84e4
 
SeniorBen said:
Actually, it's a lie that drug companies claimed that the vaccine would prevent transmission. We've been through that over and over for years, and yet, some people don't seem to be able to learn, probably because the pundits on Fox "news" keep repeating the lies.
Click to expand...
This nonsense gets old, doesn't it? These people will continue to post threads playing the victim and denying reality as long as they can. They are very gullible and easily brainwashed.
 

Back
Top