The official COVID-19/Coronavirus Discussion Thread...aka I hope I don't get the Rona

[TheNightKing]

You’re missing the entire argument because you got caught up in politics. Paul is saying there was suppose to be NO funding from the NIH and this is his proof that they did fund gain of function. That’s it.


They are arguing over technicalities. Clearly they funded something, but what they consider gain of function is the issue.

Ah, now you're onto something. I do agree they are arguing over technicalities. Rand Paul is using the paper to assert that the lab was doing some foul shit. And he's drawing the conclusion that the foul shit was the direct result of funding from the NIH and by proxy at the direction of Fauci and the NIH.

Fauci is saying that it is impossible that the foul shit was at their direction or due to their funding. He also mentioned that it was scientifically impossible because whatever they were doing could not have become Covid-19 due to issues at the molecular level.

So people that want to look at that paper to see if it's Fauci's fault are just falling in line with Rand Paul.

 

[TheNightKing]

How dare he want to draw his own conclusion. :tuh:

What type of nigga thinks for himself?

Context matters. Include my entire post next time.

 

[King Freeman]

Cite your sources bc I've still yet to see this paper. Also I didnt draw any conclusions. The ppl who conducted the study did.

I was wondering when you were gonna break the news lol.

I don't think these guys understand why the paper is important.

Just focused on who's waving the paper instead of what's on the paper.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

Ok first let's stop making generalizations about me. I'm not getting lost in political theater.

You're being disingenuous because you've made a few statements that just aren't true, the main one being that the academic paper Rand Paul referenced drew the conclusion that Fauci and the NIH are responsible for Covid-19. That's just not true. He or someone he knows used that paper to draw that conclusion.

And now you want to see that paper and draw your own conclusion. And the only reason you even know about the paper is because of Rand Paul, even though you say it's not about him.

How do u know it's not true? I'm saying I don't know whether or not it is. You're saying it's definitely not bc rand Paul brought it to light. How do u know? After u honestly answer that, tell me who's be disengenuous

 

[BlackRain]

I was wondering when you were gonna break the news lol.

I don't think these guys understand why the paper is important.

Just focused on who's waving the paper instead of what's on the paper.

Well if the person whose waving the paper has proven themselves to be untrustworthy wouldn't you be skeptical of any information they provide? That doesn't mean you don't still read it but to say you don't need to be aware of who you're getting information from is why people out here believing memes as medical information now

 

[ChicagoFigure]

I was wondering when you were gonna break the news lol.

I don't think these guys understand why the paper is important.

Just focused on who's waving the paper instead of what's on the paper.

Lol I try to form an opinion and read a lil before I jump to conclusions

 

[ChicagoFigure]

Ok first let's stop making generalizations about me. I'm not getting lost in political theater.

You're being disingenuous because you've made a few statements that just aren't true, the main one being that the academic paper Rand Paul referenced drew the conclusion that Fauci and the NIH are responsible for Covid-19. That's just not true. He or someone he knows used that paper to draw that conclusion.

And now you want to see that paper and draw your own conclusion. And the only reason you even know about the paper is because of Rand Paul, even though you say it's not about him.

Lol what's wrong with wanting to form my own opinion?

Versus a guy who didn't see the paper and already seems to have it all figured out?

And I'm disingenuous?

Wild

 

[TheNightKing]

How do u know it's not true? I'm saying I don't know whether or not it is. You're saying it's definitely not bc rand Paul brought it to light. How do u know? After u honestly answer that, tell me who's be disengenuous

I don't know. But I also don't know how chemo treats cancer. Does that mean I don't listen to my doctor, the expert? Or do I read all of the literature around chemo and form my own conclusion before getting it.

Point is, we have experts for a reason. And if no other expert is saying that it can be concluded from that paper that Fauci is responsible for Covid-19, why the hell am I going to think it does? And why do I need to read it myself if no other credible person is drawing that conclusion? Because Rand Paul thinks so? You can go on that fools errand if you want to but I won't.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

I never said I came to a conclusion. You just assumed that and I literally said no I didn't. You're still assuming that simply because I won't ignore who is disseminating the information means I will ultimately ignore what's being said which I never said. I just said that the who part matters more than you want to give it credit for and you can't fault people for being skeptical of receiving information from people who've been lying literally since day 1 of this entire pandemic

You're first post to me was asking if someone who isn't an expert can come to a conclusion.

I believe if all your sources are coming from experts that yes u can come to your own conclusion. If u think ppl are too stupid to understand that may be more projection than anything else

 

[TheNightKing]

Lol what's wrong with wanting to form my own opinion?

Versus a guy who didn't see the paper and already seems to have it all figured out?

And I'm disingenuous?

Wild

No credible person has drawn the conclusion from that paper that Fauci is responsible for Covid-19! You reading it and drawing a conclusion is even less useful than Rand Paul doing it.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

I don't know. But I also don't know how chemo treats cancer. Does that mean I don't listen to my doctor, the expert? Or do I read all of the literature around chemo and form my own conclusion before getting it.

Point is, we have experts for a reason. And if no other expert is saying that it can be concluded from that paper that Fauci is responsible for Covid-19, why the hell am I going to think it does? And why do I need to read it myself if no other credible person is drawing that conclusion? Because Rand Paul thinks so? You can go on that fools errand if you want to but I won't.

Lol an expert, along with others who partook in the study, say it's true.

Your idea of expert goes against the experts that contradicts the message u accept, so u blindly dismiss it

 

[TheNightKing]

Lol an expert, along with others who partook in the study, say it's true.

Your idea of expert goes against the experts that contradicts the message u accept, so u blindly dismiss it

They say Fauci is responsible for Covid-19? Cause that's what Rand Paul is saying and that's what I'm disputing.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

No credible person has drawn the conclusion from that paper that Fauci is responsible for Covid-19! You reading it and drawing a conclusion is even less useful than Rand Paul doing it.

So the people that conducted the study, even with 30+ years experience, arent to be trusted?

 

[TheNightKing]

So the people that conducted the study, even with 30+ years experience, arent to be trusted?

They paper does not draw the conclusion that Fauci was responsible for Covid-19.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

They say Fauci is responsible for Covid-19? Cause that's what Rand Paul is saying and that's what I'm disputing.

According to rand Paul, the study states that gain of function research led to the pandemic. Of which fauci supported and was happy to resume in 2017, who is now distancing himself from such an idea.

Countless scientists have pushed, through decades of experience in genome sequencing, that this virus is a result of lab manipulation. Which is how lab leak finally came to be plausible.

Fuck all them though right?

 

[ChicagoFigure]

They paper does not draw the conclusion that Fauci was responsible for Covid-19.

The paper draws evidence of genomic recombination. Which is supposedly evidence of lab manipulation which in turn means gain of function research

 

[TheNightKing]

According to rand Paul, the study states that gain of function research led to the pandemic. Of which fauci supported and was happy to resume in 2017, who is now distancing himself from such an idea.

Countless scientists have pushed, through decades of experience in genome sequencing, that this virus is a result of lab manipulation. Which is how lab leak finally came to be plausible.

Fuck all them though right?

According to Rand Paul, not to the paper. Got it.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

According to Rand Paul, not to the paper. Got it.

No according to the paper lol

 

[TheNightKing]

According to Rand Paul, not to the paper. Got it.

No according to the paper lol

According to rand Paul, the study states...

Going to bed on this note. Catch y'all in the AM.

 

[Marc123]

Well if the person whose waving the paper has proven themselves to be untrustworthy wouldn't you be skeptical of any information they provide? That doesn't mean you don't still read it but to say you don't need to be aware of who you're getting information from is why people out here believing memes as medical information now

Bolded...