Replies

I’m pointing out this:

When the story came out that the Hospitals were swamped with people that overdosed on Ivermectin……I never commented, I smell something was wrong with that. Then when it was reported to be a totally fake story, I didnt need to backtrack, cover myself, or make excuses.
My credibility didn’t take a hit on that.

When a story comes out that 45,000 people died in the U.S. from the vaccines in one month, (one of many huge amount of death claims) everyone that is anti-Covid- vaccine jumps on it like flies on crap.
Of course it turned out to be another fake story/claim.

Both brought to us by Twitter, just an added thought there.

But those people don’t seem to understand why their credibility takes a hit.
Instead, they get furious if someone challenges them on it.

This thread, the article makes negative claims about Ivermectin.
I believe the story is false. I think the study was botched and it wasn’t even performed under ideal circumstances.

But, here in the the thread, the anti-Covid-vaccine people sound exactly like the pro-vaccine people did when a claim was made that 45,000 dropped dead in one month.

The difference and there really is just one major difference, one of the “sides” become angry when opposed no matter what side they’re on.

When defending a fake story/claim they’re angry.
When attacking a story or claim they’re angry and cruel.
Even calling people murderers.

Why is that do you suppose?

Sometimes the message is wrong, sometimes the messenger is also wrong in their comments or editorial. Sometimes both are wrong.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter.

But, thank you for a calm demeanor and polite conversation.

Yes, I’m dizzy from vaccine threads.

Except for today, I’m commenting less and less about them.
Seems to cure dizziness.