Jump to content

Comedy Time

Members
  • Posts

    794
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Comedy Time

  1. 31 minutes ago, zarkov said:

    Surely for the rtPCR to be valid form of detection then a complete, pure & intact pathogenic virus particle has to be isolated, photographed & characterised. Then has to be replicated in healthy cells to prove pathogenicity free frmo contamination from adjuncts such as antibiotics or any other adulterant.

     

    Where did you get all that from? The virologists say they have isolated it, conspiracy theorists who are not virologists suggest lots of things but the bottom line is the claim must be that they are lying. Prove it.

     

    31 minutes ago, zarkov said:

    The only test required at this stage  is a competency test for governement.

     

    You could have that as a daily test. But again Hanlon's razor.

     

  2. 15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    The PCR test is a fraud,

     

    Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist.  No it isn't.

     

    15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    there is no doubt that test should not be used to determine whether people are infected with a virus.

     

    Ditto. The PCR test is probably as accurate as you can get without the test taking longer than the bloody recovery!

     

    15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    This has been discussed at length and to act like you have not seen all those articles is disingenuous. 

     

    Bullshit! I'm not "acting" like anything. I just don't hold the same faith as you do in "alternative" websites! I've seen enough of them to get the gist and I simply don't have time or the inclination to go through and waste my time showing why they are not accurate.....only to have the recipient of my response to ignore it.

     

    15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    The misrepresentation of the cause of death has also been discussed at length and to ignore that is also disingenuous. 

     

    Who said I was ignoring that ? And your pissy attitude is quite something. I don't recall it being raised in any post I have responded to. The same issues here are almost identical to those raised decades ago for HIV it works both ways. 

     

    Hanlon's razor. Google it.

     

    15 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

    To then continue to claim that there is a covid-19 related out break is incorrect when acknowledging that the PCR test is a fraud and the death certificates are a fraud. 

     

    Look this one up as well...

     

    "Circular reasoning"

     

    I don't acknowledge the PCR test is a fraud, YOU do. I don't claim the death certificates are a fraud, YOU do. It is just as likely that there are many deaths not attributed to this virus that are caused by it.

     

    All those people suddenly dying is faaake is it? All those crazily overworked NHS nurses were complaining about nothing huh?

     

    https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/the-covid-19-empty-hospital-conspiracies/

    https://bylinetimes.com/2020/10/01/myths-misinformation-nhs-coronavirus/

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  3. Just now, SimonTV said:

    Proving a virus exists doesn't prove that there is an epidemic. 

     

    I agree. I don't think there IS an epidemic or pandemic yet. It is a very bad flu virus that hasn't gone out of control.  Yet.

     

    I don't understand the blanket denial of this virus rather than the more realistic one of those who claim it's ferocity is exaggerated. I have no problem with the latter - kind of, but the former is a bit daft.

     

     

  4. 2 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


    Your post was the first on page 330.
    And knowing your fascination for coincidences and recurring number themes l just had to point it out..
    You replied to WingWang exactly 33 minutes after he posted it as my picture shows.
    BC  :O)

     

    NO I DID NOT. I replied x number of minutes after he posted - when YOU looked at my post, that was how long ago it was. Unless you clicked it the split second I posted it.

     

    We ain't on page 330 yet, so no idea what you are talking about. Is this some daft obscure freemasonry shite?

     

    329.jpg

  5. 11 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


    Your timing is impeccable...... 🤨 
     

     

    timing.jpg

     

    No, yours is (but what for I have no idea). It said "33 minutes ago" when YOU looked at my reply - go look now!  Page number 330? Again I don't know what you are talking about, it's 329 at the moment isn't it? 

     

    329.jpg

  6. 1 minute ago, greatdayforfreedom said:

     

    A  vaccine for a virus that doesn't exist.  Will you take the vaccine for it? (rhetorical question).

     

    Listen. YOU are the one claiming it doesn't exist. People who work on viruses say it does. They have isolated it and there are numerous places stating the same thing. All you are doing is saying they are lying.

     

    Take the fast tracked untested vaccine for this? I'd rather inject putrid pisswater into my veins. Does that clarify my position?

  7. 35 minutes ago, wingwang said:

    The virus still hasn't been isolated, not today, yesterday, or in 2019! Burden of proof is a wonderful thing. Those who say there's a virus should prove it, shouldn't they? You can't prove a negative, after all.

     

     

    There are numerous study teams telling the world they have isolated it and are working on a vaccine for it. If they are lying YOU need to prove that. It's hardly a realistic request that they stuff it out for you to look at to verify they have done it. YOU are claiming it is a negative, you need to show why they are lying and more importantly why. I mean, why is is so unlikely that they can isolate another coronavirus?

     

    We've moved the goalposts slightly. You said it hadn't been isolated, I gave you links that it had, you claimed they weren't valid methods and failed to demonstrate why. 

     

    35 minutes ago, wingwang said:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7361438/

     

    "It is crucial to evaluate diagnostic accuracy studies, analytical validity, and testing for agreement in CT, RT‐PCR, and antibodies tests at the different clinical stages. For the moment, whenever possible, it is more useful in clinical practice to evaluate tests by several methods because there is no generally accepted reference standard nor is there a gold test for the diagnosis of COVID‐19"

     

     

    You need to reread that. It says there is no gold standard for diagnosis. It doesn't say what you claimed, that the actual methodology for isolating the virus was not a gold standard. You said "RT-PCR is not considered the gold standard by virologists. "

     

    Edit: detecting something (diagnosis) is not the same as isolating it for further testing.

     

    A test to isolate RNA when Sars-2 is RNA - now either show a reason why that is not valid or accept that the method works and they have isolated the virus. Or prove they are lying.

     

     

  8. 43 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

    MMGW is pseudo bollocks,

     

    I also dont hold much faith in Rockefeller allopathic poisons either..

     

    & im more a herbalist.

     

    No it isn't.

     

    Some of them are fine for people who haven't time to go hunting for shrubbery.

     

    Cool, I have a friend who took some herbal remedies for cancer and one who took them for period pains and nodules on their ovaries. Both cured. But sadly it doesn't work for everyone.

    43 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

    Your 'fact checker' site, doesn't impress.

     

     

    Fine. No problem. Your "alternative" site didn't impress.

     

    43 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

    Why are you so called sceptics always attacking alternative opinions & calling out "conspiracy pseudo science" but then ignoring obvious fake news..like HCQ has no medical benefit?

     

    I don't know, why not go ask one? I'm just pointing out THIS one and as for HCQ I await proof to the contrary and will NOT dismiss it if it stands up to scrutiny.

     

    43 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

    I never see you talking about fastracked experimental vaccines either & their manufacturers having zero liability.🦆

     

     

    I can't debate everything dude. I hate vaccines, not because they don't work to create herd immunity, because they do in general. The concept that they offer immunity is often misunderstood - they work by raising the protection against infection percentage overall and lowering the R number. However I have long since wondered about the long term genetic effects on the immune system down through multiple generations. So slow tracked vaccines bother me for that reason. Imagine what I think of the implications for fast tracked ones that cannot possibly have been tested adequately.

     

    Fast tracked anything is asking for trouble. Thalidomide was probably the nastiest bastard drug ever approved.

    • Like 1
  9. 24 minutes ago, wingwang said:

    That did make me giggle! "Sorry, Sir, you can't have any covid today, I'm sorry to say we ran out during this pandemic!"

     

    You didn't address the point I made. Why would they admit this? And the reference you pointed to was for the original 2019 batch isolates. It makes more sense to work with original strains of a virus rather than potentially mutating versions of it.

     

    24 minutes ago, wingwang said:

    RT-PCR is not considered the gold standard by virologists. 

     

    Citation please.

     

    24 minutes ago, wingwang said:

    Where's the virus? It's still not proven to exist.

    Why do you repeat your claim already addressed? The virus has been proven to exist and saying it hasn't is very much a King Canute statement.

  10. Just now, Mr H said:

    Good ol Occam's razor!

     

    That isn't Occam as such.

     

    If the claim is that these people are fabricating and lying, then why would they admit something they didn't need to and why devise a test that any virologist would be able to identify as not valid?

     

    I would like someone to answer that if possible, because so many conspiracies crop up without considering truly obvious things.

  11. 19 minutes ago, wingwang said:

     

    There's a whole load of twisting right there!

     

    RT-PCR uses RNA as a template and does not isolate.

     

    The fourth citation I quoted is from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaotolaryngology/fullarticle/2768620

     

    The CDC release I quoted was from July, the same month this article you posted was released: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaotolaryngology/fullarticle/2768620

     

    But it's interesting. In May "SARS-CoV-2 strains supplied by CDC and other researchers can be requested, free" then in July the CDC has none available!

     

     

     

    Why would they admit they have none when they could just lie? Is there not the possibility that they just used them all?

     

    If you think the method invalid, why don't virologists? And why don't they just lie about that too?

     

    It makes no sense to frame your argument around things that have a logical alternative and where the supposed perpetrators can simply deceive a bit better. It isn't difficult for either of those 2.

     

    Sars-2 is a single stranded RNA betacoronavirus and as such using a method specifically designed for RNA is not invalid. Why do you think it so?

     

     

     

  12. 33 minutes ago, wingwang said:

     

    They didn't isolate, they used RT-PCR. Here's the full paper:

     

    https://jvi.asm.org/content/jvi/94/11/e00543-20.full.pdf

     

     

     

    Again, they didn't isolate, they used RT-PCR. Look at the fourth citation on that link:

     

    CDC-RT-PCR.png

     

    The same CDC who, I quote,

     

    "Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen." 

     

    From page 39: https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

     

    It's all looking very fishy, don't you think? The isolated virus that hasn't truly been isolated. Hmmmm...

     

    I could go on with the other links you posted, however...

     

     

     

    I actually had to read your post a few times to understand what you are claiming here. It's almost as though you think the method used to isolate the virus is invalid because of some odd reason. RT-PCR is a method to isolate RNA.

     

    Why did you highlight the reference when it is not used in the paper. These are not citing references they are external links for corroboration. Your example shows  reference is number 5...not 4.

     

    Why did you reference an early CDC release?

     

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/grows-virus-cell-culture.html

    SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.

     

     

     

  13. 23 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

     

    Right there is what you are doing. Nothing can reach you.

     

    You claim verifiable and repeatable science is a lie, but espouse the daftest claims on the planet. Have you ever looked through a powerful telescope? 

     

    Explain this picture......

    ibr-1608172.jpg

     

    @alexa And the dishonest evasion continues. When can we expect you to "cover" this or tell us why it doesn't count?

  14. 13 minutes ago, alexa said:

     Why ?  when I can just ask you.

     

    Because in going to look for the words "geosynchronous orbit" you might actually learn something instead of blundering through life with a complete absence of knowledge.

     

    13 minutes ago, alexa said:

    What kind of an answer is this ?

     

    One that somebody with poor understanding should get. Pick two points. One is below the target speed - ISS 93 minutes. One is above it - the Moon 27.32 days.

     

    The target is one day, it lies between the two distances. Duhhhhhhh.

     

     

     

     

  15. 11 hours ago, wideawake said:

    Joking aside, if the government wants to hide anything then it's secret because of National Security even though there was ZERO security that day. NATO fighter plane pilots were too busy playing games pretending to defend the nation from a terrorist attack by planes. 😮 

     

    It was a plane. 

     

     

  16. 8 hours ago, Diesel said:

    As a satellite orbits the earth I have never understood how dishes tune into to a static position. please explain

     

    Very good question.

     

    The higher up the satellite orbits the slower it moves....that is just orbital mechanics. For example the Moon has a speed of 2,300 mph, whilst the ISS moves around at 17,500 mph.

     

    There is a point where this orbital period matches Earth's rotation. Geosynchronous orbits. BUT, these appear to move too because they simply come back to the same point daily , so a specialist type of geosynchronous orbit is needed.

     

    Geostationary. A geosynchronous orbit parked on the equator, It appear in the same spot all the time.

     

    https://www.n2yo.com/satellites/?c=34

     

    05-Geostationary%20Sat-Ani.gif

     

  17. 2 hours ago, Macnamara said:

    The pentagon is the most CCTV'd building on the planet and a clear video was also taken from the hotel across the road but this video was swiped by FBI on the day of the attack

     

    Yet the only clip that has been released of the pentagon attack appears to show a missile rather than a plane striking the pentagon

     

    Why won't they just release a video of a plane hitting the pentagon?

     

    So if you actually do a reductive comparison of two frames on the CCTV footage you get a plane and you dude are ignoring the big obvious list!

     

    The plane had 3 times more kinetic energy than a Tomahawk.

     

     

  18. 4 minutes ago, Golden Retriever said:

    Do you accept the number of cases on the whole is accurate?The test was never meant to stand alone as a diagnostic tool.

     

    I accept nothing really. It all seems so very vague.

     

    4 minutes ago, Golden Retriever said:

    The false positive rate quoted by Dominic Raab, Foreign Secretary is said to be a whopping 93%

     

    Said by whom? It could just as easily be way worse with many just quickly recovering. All very vague as I said.

     

    4 minutes ago, Golden Retriever said:

    The virus hasn't been isolated, so how can a test detect it?

     

    https://www.icgeb.org/the-sars-cov-2-virus-has-been-isolated-and-the-full-genome-sequenced-at-icgeb-trieste-italy/

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaotolaryngology/fullarticle/2768620

    https://www.virology.ws/2020/05/07/there-is-one-and-only-one-strain-of-sars-cov-2/

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32080990/

     

  19. 4 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

     

     

    Its not irrelevant..Gates funds the corporate media, Bruce Lee is a paid mouthpiece like the rest.

     

    Peru had the most draconian lockdown policy on the planet & the highest amount of deaths per capita.

    Plus all this long covid is pseudo bollocks. No different from any other flu. For a virus that 99.8% fully recover & has only killed around 300 people in the Uk without underlying health conditions under the age of 60.

     

    You can find tons of videos of Sweden if you look..

     

    Ejv8BEsXsAEIUHR?format=jpg&name=large

     

    Also Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan..or the places without lockdown

    Odd that.

     

     

    I'm not going to dig my heels in here. If evidence is convincing I will take it on board. BUT If this is some sort of fakery.....it has convinced a whole lot of doctors and the horror of the swamped NHS was not imaginary. I know people who dealt with it.

     

    The way it is being dealt with is clumsy and badly thought out....but I didn't vote for Bozza so .... I accept no blame. 

     

     

    It IS irrelevant in terms of you dismissing well thought out objections because you think they are from evil.com. Address the content....even evil arseholes can sometimes be accurate.

×
×
  • Create New...