The vaccine did NOT give him Covid. He most likely was exposed without knowing it the day before. He had 3 comorbidities. The virus took advantage of his health issues, not the vaccine.
The vaccine did NOT give him Covid.
***Given the casing that is generated by Occham’s Razor, the most likely reality is that all the tests were correct. So you canNOT say so EMPHATICALLY what you just said. It goes against standard inductive reasoning. But I can see through your other postings that you’re no inductive reasoner.
He most likely
***See now, here you are really TRYING to think inductively. The problem is, you’re simply imposing your own viewpoint on the facts. That is the REVERSE of inductive reasoning.
was exposed without knowing it the day before.
***It is a likelihood. The stronger likelihood is that he was exposed to it after those negative tests. A lesser likelihood is that the vaccine killed him. I know this is hard for you, but try to keep up, engage that there inductive thinking cap you’re so desperately trying to fit on.
He had 3 comorbidities.
***Immaterial to the timing of when he got the virus. He seems to have died from Covid, very likely. He also seems to have been vaccinated and then tested negative so it is very likely he was negative for Covid until he tested positive. See how facts work?
The virus took advantage of his health issues, not the vaccine.
***Not material to our discussion, but it was a real nice attempt at deflection. So while I’ve been criticizing your lack of inductive reasoning skills, it shows up that you are engaging in classic fallacies as well. You should take a critical thinking class.