Have you ever questioned the real use of the latest vaccines?

squatting dog

squatting dog

We don't have as far to go, as we've already been
Location
Arkansas, and also Florida
I have, and I've studied up on it quite extensively. Been accused of being a conspiracy nut because I didn't trust Bill Gates way back at the beginning.
Here's why...
No matter how snopes or any other (cough cough) fact check spins it, Bill Gates did say he wanted to reduce the worlds population.
This is a direct quote:
"First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new VACCINES, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3".

So even though (cough, cough) SNOPES and FactCheck scream this is a hoax, Gates did say it and the Sovereign Independent quoted him accurately. But the defenders of Gates insist it was taken out of context. Ok, so, let's put it into full context.

"I’m going to talk today about energy and climate. And that might seem a bit surprising, because my full-time work at the foundation is mostly about vaccines and seeds, about the things that we need to invent and deliver to help the poorest two billion live better lives.
CO2 is warming the planet, and the equation on CO2 is actually a very straightforward one. If you sum up the CO2 that gets emitted, that leads to a temperature increase, and that temperature increase leads to some very negative effects":

He then identifies his equation that will determine whether or not we get to zero CO2: :eek::unsure: WHOA, we have to pause here for a moment. Let's not forget, that we are a carbon-based lifeform. Seems there are two things you hate Bill: Life and Carbon. CO2 actually leads to the GREENING of the planet. Like in Pre-Historic Times. Have you seen a global map? Have you seen the desert belt? Maybe if we were INCREASING CO2, we'd have something a little more LUSH, But then, that might make too much sense and not enough dollars in certain pocket's.
OK, back to the speech:

"First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. . . .The second factor is the services we use. . . . Now, efficiency, “E,” the energy for each service used... here, finally we have some good news. . . there are a lot of services where you can bring the energy for that service down quite
substantially. Some individual services even bring it down by 90 percent". . . .

So, Bill Gates specifically mentioned vaccines as one factor that would help reduce population. (as taken in context). By the way, That is not how a vaccine is supposed to work. A vaccine is supposed to immunize recipients against disease and make them healthy. Healthy people reproduce. That increases population, at least over the mid-term.

carbon.gif
 

I don't know a single thinking human being who disagrees that human population is excessive, is reaching unsustainable levels and is destroying our planet's resources.

From Reuters:

Fact Check-Bill Gates quote about vaccines and population growth has been taken out of context again  ​

By Reuters Fact Check
3 Min Read

A comment from Bill Gates about vaccines and population growth has again been taken out of context.

On social media, one post asked: “so you’r [sic] telling me , the same guy that said “ we can lower the amount of people on earth with vaccines “is now making a vaccine and the people cant [sic] wait to get injected with it …..” (here)

The misinterpretation stems from a comment Gates made during a TED talk in 2010 about methods for reducing the world’s carbon emissions to zero (here). Crucially, one of the factors pushing carbon emissions to an unsustainable level is population growth.

“First, we’ve got population,” he said during the talk organized by TED, a non-profit organization devoted to spreading ideas. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3.”


However, Gates was not suggesting the global population should be killed off using vaccines. He is instead saying that improving public health using vaccinations can reduce unsustainable population growth in the future – and with it, lower carbon emissions.

The Microsoft co-founder has long been a proponent of population control to target the roots of poverty and unrest (here).

In 2011, he told Forbes magazine that when he first entered public health it was to focus on contraception (here).

When he later saw data suggesting that when mortality rates fall, so, too, do birth rates, Gates shifted his focus from preventing births to saving people already alive.


“We moved pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that,” he told Forbes.

Reuters has previously addressed claims about Gates’ opinions on population control (here , here).

VERDICT​

Missing context. In a talk about reducing CO2 emissions, Gates said improving healthcare through vaccination could bring future population growth to a sustainable level, and with it, carbon emissions.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our work to fact-check social media posts here.
 
Still believing the world is over populated ehhh? Here's a tid-bit for you to mull over.
The world is NOT overpopulated. Everyone can fit in Texas. And if all of the planets people were put in the united states (3.79 million miles) there would only be 1846 people per square mile. Bottom line…there is plenty of room on this planet and there are plenty of resources, and when resources become constrained man will always use his creativity and resourcefulness to solve any problems that may arise.
The only problem I see is people are too lazy to make use of resources, because that takes hard work. Way easier to wring their hands and cry for someone to do something.
Quick question for you StarSong... do you think we need zero CO2?
 

Twisted thinking, Squatting Dog. Obviously, Bill Gates was not talking about using anti-Covid vaccines to kill off people. Even if he was the King of the Evil Empire, I very much doubt that he would be that public about doing it, he'd just keep killing people.

He was referring to birth control, and the use of vaccines against disease to prevent people from having enormous numbers of children in order to have a better chance that some of them will live. Why on earth would he be announcing his evil intentions?

But you knew that.
 
StarSong said:
I don't know a single thinking human being who disagrees that human population is excessive, is reaching unsustainable levels and is destroying our planet's resources.

From Reuters:

Fact Check-Bill Gates quote about vaccines and population growth has been taken out of context again  ​

By Reuters Fact Check
3 Min Read

A comment from Bill Gates about vaccines and population growth has again been taken out of context.

On social media, one post asked: “so you’r [sic] telling me , the same guy that said “ we can lower the amount of people on earth with vaccines “is now making a vaccine and the people cant [sic] wait to get injected with it …..” (here)

The misinterpretation stems from a comment Gates made during a TED talk in 2010 about methods for reducing the world’s carbon emissions to zero (here). Crucially, one of the factors pushing carbon emissions to an unsustainable level is population growth.

“First, we’ve got population,” he said during the talk organized by TED, a non-profit organization devoted to spreading ideas. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3.”


However, Gates was not suggesting the global population should be killed off using vaccines. He is instead saying that improving public health using vaccinations can reduce unsustainable population growth in the future – and with it, lower carbon emissions.

The Microsoft co-founder has long been a proponent of population control to target the roots of poverty and unrest (here).

In 2011, he told Forbes magazine that when he first entered public health it was to focus on contraception (here).

When he later saw data suggesting that when mortality rates fall, so, too, do birth rates, Gates shifted his focus from preventing births to saving people already alive.


“We moved pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that,” he told Forbes.

Reuters has previously addressed claims about Gates’ opinions on population control (here , here).

VERDICT​

Missing context. In a talk about reducing CO2 emissions, Gates said improving healthcare through vaccination could bring future population growth to a sustainable level, and with it, carbon emissions.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our work to fact-check social media posts here.
Click to expand...
Okay...I read this three times "He is instead saying that improving public health using vaccinations can reduce unsustainable population growth in the future – and with it, lower carbon emissions." and it still doesn't make sense to me. If vaccines are ostensibly to improve health, how would they reduce an "unsustainable population". Wouldn't they work to do just the opposite, considering people in better health would live longer? I have a friend, and she's not alone, who swears Bill Gates is evil.
 
I'm not going to argue about Bill Gates. People who see conspiracy theories everywhere are welcome to do so. I personally think Elon Musk is far more dangerous to humanity's future than Bill Gates, but that's not the point of this thread.

Entities (whether people, governments or corporations) with too much money and/or power are threats. Big oil is a perfect example. Ditto tobacco.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

@Diva, it may seem counter-intuitive but statistics prove the most effective way to reduce population rates and elevate standards of living is to improve health care, education (particularly of women), childhood mortality (via healthcare and vaccines), women's rights, and income levels.

Countries that limit women's rights and opportunities have very high birth rates. Frankly, there's not a lot else for these women to do than raise children. When other possibilities are open to women, birthing huge broods is a lot less appealing.

When women have access to birth control they almost inevitably use it. They're no fools - fewer children means parents don't have to spread scarce resources so thinly. Better to have 2 children you can feed and educate than 8 in various stages of starvation plus you're pregnant again.

What I'm saying is borne out statistically. Patriarchal countries with poor health care and that limit women have high birth rates. Trends over the past 60 years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_past_fertility_rate
 
squatting dog said:
Still believing the world is over populated ehhh? Here's a tid-bit for you to mull over.
The world is NOT overpopulated. Everyone can fit in Texas. And if all of the planets people were put in the united states (3.79 million miles) there would only be 1846 people per square mile. Bottom line…there is plenty of room on this planet and there are plenty of resources, and when resources become constrained man will always use his creativity and resourcefulness to solve any problems that may arise.
The only problem I see is people are too lazy to make use of resources, because that takes hard work. Way easier to wring their hands and cry for someone to do something.
Quick question for you StarSong... do you think we need zero CO2?
Click to expand...
This is an old saw that is essentially meaningless in the real world. It fails to take into consideration virtually everything humans need for existence (never mind comfort). Mr. Pianka responds well to this:
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/THOC/Texas.html

Let's Put Everybody into Texas

© Eric R. Pianka

"Land, they aren't making any more of it" -- Will Rogers

Humans cannot live without food and water. One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people. People can visit deserts but long-term survival in desert regions is very tenuous. Cities built in deserts like Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Tuscon, cannot exist without importing water or pumping groundwater out of deep aquifers. Indeed, they all face serious water shortages. Similarly, humans cannot sustain themselves for very long in mountains, though we often visit these regions on a temporary basis. Humans have occupied almost all of Earth's habitable lands.

WestTexas.jpg

Some like to assert that everybody on Earth could be fit into the State of Texas, using logic as follows. The area of Texas is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human population of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m. Sounds plausible enough, right? Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?

TexasSplit.JPG
earthmap.gif








Let's do the math again, but this time for the entire planet. The total land surface area of Earth is about 57,308,738 square miles, of which about 24% is mountainous and about 33% is desert. Subtracting this uninhabitable 57% (32,665,981 mi2) from the total land area leaves 24,642,757 square miles or 15.77 billion acres of habitable land.

Divide this figure by the current human population of 7 billion (that's 7,000 million people!) and you get just under one hectare (2.3 acres) per person. If all the habitable land on Earth were equally distributed among all human beings present on Earth, this is the per capita share of good land per person. Again, however, we have not allowed for any nice amenities such as roads, schools, hospitals, shopping malls, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, parks, golf courses, etc. Even so, could you live on 2.3 acres?

Efforts have been made to estimate the amount of land needed to sustain an average individual human (link). A person living the lifestyle of an average American requires almost 24 acres, ten times the world per capita share. The Shrinking Planet

Bottom Line: For everyone presently on this planet to enjoy the lifestyle of an average American, we would need about ten planet Earths. We have only one. For everyone to live like an American, Earth can only support about one-tenth as many people. To increase the average quality of life, the number of people on Earth must be reduced.
 
squatting dog said:
I have, and I've studied up on it quite extensively. Been accused of being a conspiracy nut because I didn't trust Bill Gates way back at the beginning.
Here's why...
No matter how snopes or any other (cough cough) fact check spins it, Bill Gates did say he wanted to reduce the worlds population.
This is a direct quote:
"First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new VACCINES, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3".

So even though (cough, cough) SNOPES and FactCheck scream this is a hoax, Gates did say it and the Sovereign Independent quoted him accurately. But the defenders of Gates insist it was taken out of context. Ok, so, let's put it into full context.

"I’m going to talk today about energy and climate. And that might seem a bit surprising, because my full-time work at the foundation is mostly about vaccines and seeds, about the things that we need to invent and deliver to help the poorest two billion live better lives.
CO2 is warming the planet, and the equation on CO2 is actually a very straightforward one. If you sum up the CO2 that gets emitted, that leads to a temperature increase, and that temperature increase leads to some very negative effects":

He then identifies his equation that will determine whether or not we get to zero CO2: :eek::unsure: WHOA, we have to pause here for a moment. Let's not forget, that we are a carbon-based lifeform. Seems there are two things you hate Bill: Life and Carbon. CO2 actually leads to the GREENING of the planet. Like in Pre-Historic Times. Have you seen a global map? Have you seen the desert belt? Maybe if we were INCREASING CO2, we'd have something a little more LUSH, But then, that might make too much sense and not enough dollars in certain pocket's.
OK, back to the speech:

"First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. . . .The second factor is the services we use. . . . Now, efficiency, “E,” the energy for each service used... here, finally we have some good news. . . there are a lot of services where you can bring the energy for that service down quite
substantially. Some individual services even bring it down by 90 percent". . . .

So, Bill Gates specifically mentioned vaccines as one factor that would help reduce population. (as taken in context). By the way, That is not how a vaccine is supposed to work. A vaccine is supposed to immunize recipients against disease and make them healthy. Healthy people reproduce. That increases population, at least over the mid-term.

View attachment 201375
Click to expand...
My grandchildren got vaccinated by planned parenthood so they could not get pregnant so he may have just misused the word vaccine as my grandchild do, to mean a manner of birth control. Even the rich, famous, and educated can misuse words.

I do not hate Bill Gates. Like all humans he has done bad things and good things. God will judge us all.
 
StarSong said:
This is an old saw that is essentially meaningless in the real world. It fails to take into consideration virtually everything humans need for existence (never mind comfort). Mr. Pianka responds well to this:
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/THOC/Texas.html

Let's Put Everybody into Texas

© Eric R. Pianka

"Land, they aren't making any more of it" -- Will Rogers

Humans cannot live without food and water. One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people. People can visit deserts but long-term survival in desert regions is very tenuous. Cities built in deserts like Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Tuscon, cannot exist without importing water or pumping groundwater out of deep aquifers. Indeed, they all face serious water shortages. Similarly, humans cannot sustain themselves for very long in mountains, though we often visit these regions on a temporary basis. Humans have occupied almost all of Earth's habitable lands.

WestTexas.jpg

Some like to assert that everybody on Earth could be fit into the State of Texas, using logic as follows. The area of Texas is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human population of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m. Sounds plausible enough, right? Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?

TexasSplit.JPG
earthmap.gif








Let's do the math again, but this time for the entire planet. The total land surface area of Earth is about 57,308,738 square miles, of which about 24% is mountainous and about 33% is desert. Subtracting this uninhabitable 57% (32,665,981 mi2) from the total land area leaves 24,642,757 square miles or 15.77 billion acres of habitable land.

Divide this figure by the current human population of 7 billion (that's 7,000 million people!) and you get just under one hectare (2.3 acres) per person. If all the habitable land on Earth were equally distributed among all human beings present on Earth, this is the per capita share of good land per person. Again, however, we have not allowed for any nice amenities such as roads, schools, hospitals, shopping malls, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, parks, golf courses, etc. Even so, could you live on 2.3 acres?

Efforts have been made to estimate the amount of land needed to sustain an average individual human (link). A person living the lifestyle of an average American requires almost 24 acres, ten times the world per capita share. The Shrinking Planet

Bottom Line: For everyone presently on this planet to enjoy the lifestyle of an average American, we would need about ten planet Earths. We have only one. For everyone to live like an American, Earth can only support about one-tenth as many people. To increase the average quality of life, the number of people on Earth must be reduced.
Click to expand...
Yikes and not to mention our garbage.
 
squatting dog said:
Still believing the world is over populated ehhh? Here's a tid-bit for you to mull over.
The world is NOT overpopulated. Everyone can fit in Texas. And if all of the planets people were put in the united states (3.79 million miles) there would only be 1846 people per square mile. Bottom line…there is plenty of room on this planet and there are plenty of resources, and when resources become constrained man will always use his creativity and resourcefulness to solve any problems that may arise.
The only problem I see is people are too lazy to make use of resources, because that takes hard work. Way easier to wring their hands and cry for someone to do something.
Quick question for you StarSong... do you think we need zero CO2?
Click to expand...
But I don’t want to live in Texas. It’s too hot. It has fire ants.
 
The 'opinions" about Covid and the vaccines have reached ridiculous levels. I can't recall anything in recent years that has been so "swamped" with conspiracy theories.

The one's that crack me up are the articles about all the "poisons" contained in these vaccines. Like nearly every other vaccine, or drug, these vaccines DO contain dangerous ingredients....if taken in large quantities. But then, if we were to avoid all substances that are dangerous to our health, we would be relegated to breathing filtered air, and drinking distilled water...and NO food items.
 
Geezerette said:
Many people who have fame and notoriety make pronouncements on topics they really don’t tknow anything in depth about. Bill Gates is one of them.
Agreeing with StarSong about the role that suppression of women has.
Click to expand...
Bill Gates is well versed in health issues and the role of vaccines. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is focused on healthcare and the reduction of worldwide extreme poverty.

I'm not a Bill Gates apologist but have always given credit where it's due - even to people I don't particularly like or agree with.
 
Don M. said:
The 'opinions" about Covid and the vaccines have reached ridiculous levels. I can't recall anything in recent years that has been so "swamped" with conspiracy theories.

The one's that crack me up are the articles about all the "poisons" contained in these vaccines. Like nearly every other vaccine, or drug, these vaccines DO contain dangerous ingredients....if taken in large quantities. But then, if we were to avoid all substances that are dangerous to our health, we would be relegated to breathing filtered air, and drinking distilled water...and NO food items.
Click to expand...
You can not actually drink distilled water, I think it might be poisonous 😂
 
Last edited:
chic said:
Ditto!

The greatest trick ever pulled off was grooming people to believe they are smart for not questioning anything while the truth is staring them in the face. :unsure:
Click to expand...
Agreed. Many have been groomed to believe some of the greatest lies ever perpetrated on the public by conspiracy theorists. They do indeed have difficulty parsing out the truth despite mountains of world-wide scientific and epidemiological evidence.

Far too many who put their critical thinking skills on vacation and followed charlatans have have paid with their lives for their foolishness.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-many-vaccinated-people-getting-050338384.html

I try to keep an open mind but as the messages seem to remind me of a child changing a story as they go to try to stay out of trouble.

One of my sons always played this when asked about something first he knew nothing...... then he knew a little..... finally after going to another witness or video the confession finally comes.
My husband always told the kids and perhaps media should be told being honest UP front will go better then clinging to a story..



Why is it we pretend that general public is at fault........ not that the faulty message.......
Remember how breakthrough cases were so Rare why pretend they are rare if the shot is mainly designed to make things mild after you get it.
NOT the same message at all.

"People might mistakenly think the COVID-19 vaccines will completely block infection, but the shots are mainly designed to prevent severe illness, says Louis Mansky, a virus researcher at the University of Minnesota.

And the vaccines are still doing their job on that front, particularly for people who've gotten boosters.'

"Advice for staying safe hasn't changed. Doctors say to wear masks indoors, avoid crowds and get vaccinated and boosted. Even though the shots won’t always keep you from catching the virus, they'll make it much more likely you stay alive and out of the hospital."



Vaccine preventing people from getting was widely promoted and repeated many times.
Again the goal post moved and instead of saying it is not doing what we hoped but may help .... they accuse the public of being wrong

If we EVER want division eased or ended some folks media and politicians are going to need to admit were problems in their assessment ....
i informally polled my circle of vaccinated and they found the quote i copied and pasted insulting as that is NOT was was sold to people.

Advice is constantly changing...... and if questioned people are called names...

Elon Musk is right "science not QUESTIONED is propaganda"
 
Last edited:
I
Jeni said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-many-vaccinated-people-getting-050338384.html

I tried to keep mind open but if anyone reads this article it is this sort of thing that gets me questioning more...

"People might mistakenly think the COVID-19 vaccines will completely block infection, but the shots are mainly designed to prevent severe illness, says Louis Mansky, a virus researcher at the University of Minnesota.

And the vaccines are still doing their job on that front, particularly for people who've gotten boosters.'

Mistakenly think .... no that is what was promoted and repeated many times. Again the goal post moved and instead of saying it is not doing what we hoped but may help .... they accuse the public of being wrong

If we EVER want division eased or ended some folks are going to need to admit there is issues.... i informally polled my circle of vaccinated and they found the quote i copied and pasted insulting as that is NOT was was sold to people.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on who you listened to in the beginning. It was always my understanding that the vaccine was not to stop you from getting Covid, but help you survive it if you got it-that has not changed except the vaccine did not last as long as docs thought it would.

Its a new disease. It’s always changing. So, no. The human race can not keep up, yet. That is not the fault of the doctors or scientists, it’s just that way it is. But you believe what you wa t to believe, I’ll believe what I want to believe; and neither opinion really matters. 😂
 
Aneeda72 said:
I

I guess it depends on who you listened to in the beginning. It was always my understanding that the vaccine was not to stop you from getting Covid, but help you survive it if you got it-that has not changed except the vaccine did not last as long as docs thought it would.

Its a new disease. It’s always changing. So, no. The human race can not keep up, yet. That is not the fault of the doctors or scientists, it’s just that way it is. But you believe what you wa t to believe, I’ll believe what I want to believe; and neither opinion really matters. 😂
Click to expand...
some repeated same lines over and over then when they did not match they tweeked a bit and told public oh no you did not hear us right
I would be more impressed if they said ... we are still in learning mode what we thought or said before may not be solid...
 
Don M. said:
Perhaps when the 10th Booster is made available, this Covid thing will largely be under control. In the meantime, even the most knowledgeable doctors and scientists are still in "learning mode" as this virus continues to mutate and spread. All the majority of the people can do is adhere to the recommendations.
Click to expand...
Yup and if there are 10 boosters or a million, I will get each and every one.
 
Jeni said:
some repeated same lines over and over then when they did not match they tweeked a bit and told public oh no you did not hear us right
I would be more impressed if they said ... we are still in learning mode what we thought or said before may not be solid...
Click to expand...

The problem is that they're not in learning mode, because they always knew the harmful effects from the shots.
They're in cover up the truth mode, and they've been in that mode from the very beginning.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top