Your posting is an opinion piece without any sources. I don't necessarily disagree with you. Just provide some sources that led you to your viewpoint and conclusion.
The original poster is assuming, and rightly so, that the people on this site are aware of the proof that covid is a hoax. He's just venting, and expressing a viewpoint that is shared by the people on this platform.
True. It's a bit reassuring to see the comments on a post like this but at the same time enlightening. Knowing real people are still posting here yet seeing so much cointelpro pushed to the front, just puts it into perspective of how massive a battle this is.
I'm well aware of several sources for his polemic, but I wanted to see where the poster was drawing his conclusion from. In fact, the CDC back in June, 2020 published a document stating this. The inquiry was for my benefit. Otherwise, I don't put much merit on your mind reading though.
Dude. My claim is that not a single shred of evidence exists that covid exists. That's the point of the post. If you have that evidence, share it. If not, I'll proceed to make my valid point.
Try the It is dated July 13, 2020. Buried deep in the document, on page 39, in a section titled, “Performance Characteristics,” we have this: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA…”
There's much more.... and I already have several sources, I just wanted to see what was the basis of this 'conclusion'.
So where is the document I'm asking for? It's like I asking for proof Santa Claus is real and you're telling me there's books on it.
You posted this in the QAnon sub. Can I therefore assume that you are a supporter of Trump and QAnon?
Because Trump has spent billions into the vaccine and recommends everyone especially his followers to get it: https://youtu.be/UM9JvYjPW6o?t=590
One cannot prove a negative. The onus is on those claiming covid does exist to provide evidence.
Think of it like this: I say "you're a faggot". Then I say "prove you aren't!". Your only possible recourse is to say "fuck you nigger, prove it". I made the assertion, it's up to me to back it up. If I don't, then logically others can just say 'fuck you'. It's not up to them to prove me wrong if I can't prove I'm right.
Lol. So people can just say whatever crazy shit they want and you'll believe it simply because they will say "fuck you" if you question them?
No. What I said was if someone makes a claim and provides no evidence to support it, it isn't up to me to prove them wrong if they can't prove themselves right. For a claim to be true it must be backed up by evidence. Here, I'll demonstrate:
Your reading comprehension is shit. My evidence is that retarded shit you just typed to which I am replying
Except you are one single voice. The overwhelming majority of people believe otherwise. Not necessarily me though. I could provide sources for your polemic, except I wanted to see it come from you. Every academic paper draws from sources. Otherwise, its an opinion piece having no merit. Good luck convincing people. I'm not convinced.
appeal to consensus and appeal to authority are both logical fallacies. "academia" is mostly a load of shit and
i honestly dont give a fuck what anyone else thinks, and i live my life as such. People take poison shots for a cold and think faggots are great, why should i care about them at all?
(post is archived)