A purity spiral trend on the right has been emerging for a while now but it has only gotten worse in recent years. Disbelief in the whackiest conspiracy is taken as a sign of disloyalty and anything other then the most retarded take makes you a shill. Examples include:
>you think jews are nepotistic and spiteful to their hosts?
>well I think jews are actually a cult of satanic baby eaters you deradicalization, shill!
>you think the pharmaceutical companies are greedy assholes who pray on the despairation of sick people?
>Well I think everything the pharmaceutical companies sell is poison and I'm taking wormwood extract to cure my cancer, you cuck!
>you think mega companies moved jobs overseas because the CEOs are amoral pieces of shit who care more about money than the future of their country?
>Well I think its all part of a plan to weaken the West and install communism, FED!
>you are worried about 5G because you think it will greatly enhance digital surveillance?
>well I think 5G will cause cancer and mass death, fag!
>you think the covid vaccine was bad because lockdowns were used as an excuse to attack political enemies and side effects were ultimately worse than the disease?
>well I think its all a part of the NWO depopulation agenda, pharmakike!
>you are worried about AI because of job loss, propaganda bots, and surveillance concerns?
>well I think AI is actually a demonic force in computer form, fag!
>you hate Hollywood movies because they are controlled by a few studios who push stale liberal trash?
>well I think Hollywood is putting secret symbols and predictive programming in their films to control the population, tranny!
Ect
It isn't enough to distrust the failing institutions, you need to believe they are part of a satanic plot as well. This has only gotten worse over time and I suspect it will only continue get worse over time. Is there any way this can be stopped before it collapses under the weight of its own bullshit into a flat earth singularity?
And I know many of you will claim that some of the crazier claims are pushed by bad actors, and you are probably right to some extent, but silly shit like germ theory denial and flat earth are becoming more common especially on the right. Is there a way to stop this?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
1748184081.jpg (62.5 KB, 612x612, 445179cb7e0162b822f72d5519a2063f.jpg)
786 replies and 176 files omitted.
Confusing phrasing, allow me to clarify.
On the one hand, you have people in China who are seemingly dying in the streets. Super virulent, right?
Except you also have rioting libtards, who seem to have some sort of immunity.
it's weird right? Almost like someone is lying.
On the one hand, you have people in China who are seemingly dying in the streets. Super virulent, right?
Except you also have rioting libtards, who seem to have some sort of immunity.
it's weird right? Almost like someone is lying.
>>391586
Or RNA viruses evolve fast and the shitlibs were in better health than chinks living in smog.
Or RNA viruses evolve fast and the shitlibs were in better health than chinks living in smog.
>>391585
>The summer of love is when people just over THERE were dropping dead "from Covid". But apparently, Covid is less virulent when niggers are mad about a stupid nigger dying?
What makes you say it was less virulent when the niggers were rioting?
The virus never had more than 0.1% kill rate in the first place. It just looked like it was higher because it infected so many people (99.9% of which only got a cold).
>The summer of love is when people just over THERE were dropping dead "from Covid". But apparently, Covid is less virulent when niggers are mad about a stupid nigger dying?
What makes you say it was less virulent when the niggers were rioting?
The virus never had more than 0.1% kill rate in the first place. It just looked like it was higher because it infected so many people (99.9% of which only got a cold).
What the fuck am I reading anymore.
Not that I want it to stop, it's at least marginally more intriguing that OP's shit that just isn't happening.
Not that I want it to stop, it's at least marginally more intriguing that OP's shit that just isn't happening.
>>391587
You're going to have to substantiate and validate that position with FACTS
... is what I would say if I were some of the interlocutors ITT.
Meanwhile, thats statistically ludicrous. That's like saying "Yeah, covid killed hella people, they were literally falling over in the streets,... but the Chinese absorbed all of the fatal Covid, what we got was the watered-down version".
Is that your argument, or am I misrepresenting your stupidity?
You're going to have to substantiate and validate that position with FACTS
... is what I would say if I were some of the interlocutors ITT.
Meanwhile, thats statistically ludicrous. That's like saying "Yeah, covid killed hella people, they were literally falling over in the streets,... but the Chinese absorbed all of the fatal Covid, what we got was the watered-down version".
Is that your argument, or am I misrepresenting your stupidity?
Anyone have a quick tally of how many covid "variants" (((they))) announced?
>>391591
>they were literally falling over in the streets
This never happened. The fatality rate was never above 0.1%.
>they were literally falling over in the streets
This never happened. The fatality rate was never above 0.1%.
>>391591
Sorry. I forget that what is common knowledge in a sophomore biology classroom is not common knowledge elsewhere.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6107253/
Why are RNA virus mutation rates so damn high?
>RNA viruses have high mutation rates—up to a million times higher than their hosts—and these high rates are correlated with enhanced virulence and evolvability, traits considered beneficial for viruses. However, their mutation rates are almost disastrously high, and a small increase in mutation rate can cause RNA viruses to go locally extinct. Researchers often assume that natural selection has optimized the mutation rate of RNA viruses, but new data shows that, in poliovirus, selection for faster replication is stronger and faster polymerases make more mistakes. The fabled mutation rates of RNA viruses appear to be partially a consequence of selection on another trait, not because such a high mutation rate is optimal in and of itself.
Sorry. I forget that what is common knowledge in a sophomore biology classroom is not common knowledge elsewhere.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6107253/
Why are RNA virus mutation rates so damn high?
>RNA viruses have high mutation rates—up to a million times higher than their hosts—and these high rates are correlated with enhanced virulence and evolvability, traits considered beneficial for viruses. However, their mutation rates are almost disastrously high, and a small increase in mutation rate can cause RNA viruses to go locally extinct. Researchers often assume that natural selection has optimized the mutation rate of RNA viruses, but new data shows that, in poliovirus, selection for faster replication is stronger and faster polymerases make more mistakes. The fabled mutation rates of RNA viruses appear to be partially a consequence of selection on another trait, not because such a high mutation rate is optimal in and of itself.
>>391591
Yes I am saying chinks initially had a deadlier version of the virus and given that they were the first to do the lockdowns that is supported by what we saw. Now obviously it wasn't black death levels of lethality in the beginning, but it could explain some of the collapses.
>>391592
I like how you admit there were several new strains during the course of the pandemic but the idea that RNA viruses can mutate is just crazy talk.
Yes I am saying chinks initially had a deadlier version of the virus and given that they were the first to do the lockdowns that is supported by what we saw. Now obviously it wasn't black death levels of lethality in the beginning, but it could explain some of the collapses.
>>391592
I like how you admit there were several new strains during the course of the pandemic but the idea that RNA viruses can mutate is just crazy talk.
>>391595
The lethality of the chink variant likely wasn't that severe either. People were just freaking out and spreading rumors because nobody knew how deadly it was in those first couple months. Meanwhile the Chinks were welding people in their homes and and other apocalypse-tier bullshit because that's just what communists do.
The lethality of the chink variant likely wasn't that severe either. People were just freaking out and spreading rumors because nobody knew how deadly it was in those first couple months. Meanwhile the Chinks were welding people in their homes and and other apocalypse-tier bullshit because that's just what communists do.
>>391593
You didn't notice the chinese people falling over in the streets??
This is why you're not taken seriously
You didn't notice the chinese people falling over in the streets??
This is why you're not taken seriously
>>391595
No, I admit (((they))) told you there were various strains, because not enough of you goyim were getting the jab, which they assured you the vaccine would be effective against, even though the 'variant' is newer than the vaccine
No, I admit (((they))) told you there were various strains, because not enough of you goyim were getting the jab, which they assured you the vaccine would be effective against, even though the 'variant' is newer than the vaccine
>>391598
The flu virus is another RNA virus and there are new strains of that all the time. Why is an RNA virus mutating so hard to believe?
The flu virus is another RNA virus and there are new strains of that all the time. Why is an RNA virus mutating so hard to believe?
>>391600
So, you now have the burden of proof to explain how people literally collapsing in the streets, to how "it's just like the flu".
Go on, explain how THAT level of viral depletion makes sense.
So, you now have the burden of proof to explain how people literally collapsing in the streets, to how "it's just like the flu".
Go on, explain how THAT level of viral depletion makes sense.
>>391601
It's "just like the flu" in the sense that it is an RNA virus. There are several RNA viruses influenza, covid, HIV, ebola, rabies, ect. I just linked you a paper on how these frequently mutate. You understand that some viruses store their information in DNA and other in RNA, right?
It's "just like the flu" in the sense that it is an RNA virus. There are several RNA viruses influenza, covid, HIV, ebola, rabies, ect. I just linked you a paper on how these frequently mutate. You understand that some viruses store their information in DNA and other in RNA, right?
Was it you or another one who was crying about citations?
The reason I (and many others) don't care for citations is because it's not about proof, it's about plausibility in a realistic sense (not some "they wouldn't do that!" sort of naivete).
Most people don't have the time or care to exhaustively research anything outside their immediate field (and many, not even that).
So, for a realistic anon who ISN'T shilling dysfunctional negativity (back to that in a moment), (you) have an obligation to read and assimilate all the things.
Quit your crying, we all volunteered for this when we decided to think rationally.
Once you have read all the things, it is your DUTY to engage in NEGATIVITY and begin to prune the things that "simply aren't possible".
I know, you're new at this, but it becomes reflexive over time.
The reason I (and many others) don't care for citations is because it's not about proof, it's about plausibility in a realistic sense (not some "they wouldn't do that!" sort of naivete).
Most people don't have the time or care to exhaustively research anything outside their immediate field (and many, not even that).
So, for a realistic anon who ISN'T shilling dysfunctional negativity (back to that in a moment), (you) have an obligation to read and assimilate all the things.
Quit your crying, we all volunteered for this when we decided to think rationally.
Once you have read all the things, it is your DUTY to engage in NEGATIVITY and begin to prune the things that "simply aren't possible".
I know, you're new at this, but it becomes reflexive over time.
>>391601
>So, you now have the burden of proof to explain how people literally collapsing in the streets, to how "it's just like the flu".
The people with the strongest strain died before they could pass it on. It can happen very quickly, at least as quickly as the virus kills people.
>So, you now have the burden of proof to explain how people literally collapsing in the streets, to how "it's just like the flu".
The people with the strongest strain died before they could pass it on. It can happen very quickly, at least as quickly as the virus kills people.
>>391602
For the record, I'm not trying to "win" this debate, I'm just making you make more and more idiotic statements
For the record, I'm not trying to "win" this debate, I'm just making you make more and more idiotic statements
>>391603
>it's not about proof, it's about plausibility in a realistic sense
This is Facebook-schizo logic. Back up your claims.
>Most people don't have the time or care to exhaustively research anything outside their immediate field
Which is why they're all such easily-fooled idiots.
Learn to read.
>it's not about proof, it's about plausibility in a realistic sense
This is Facebook-schizo logic. Back up your claims.
>Most people don't have the time or care to exhaustively research anything outside their immediate field
Which is why they're all such easily-fooled idiots.
Learn to read.
>>391610
>yes
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a confirmed ignorant idiot who DOESN'T know (cuz he didn't read the covid threads) that the Covid molecule has NEVER been identified, and the molecule that's been presented was created as a theoretical model of something that remains unseen, even though the molecular size is reported to be large enough to be seen in your average high-school microscope.
Does that sound plausible to you? If so, you're I was gonna say plausibly, but at this point it's illustrative retarded
>yes
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a confirmed ignorant idiot who DOESN'T know (cuz he didn't read the covid threads) that the Covid molecule has NEVER been identified, and the molecule that's been presented was created as a theoretical model of something that remains unseen, even though the molecular size is reported to be large enough to be seen in your average high-school microscope.
Does that sound plausible to you? If so, you're I was gonna say plausibly, but at this point it's illustrative retarded
>>391610
>people died, that's why people stopped dying
Viruses don't just go from killing everyone to killing only the elderly and whoever is convenient.
>8 years
Okay, that's a lie, cuz otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. You would know all the links and sources, you would have at LEAST been PRESENT for the discussions, none of this would have been necessary.
>whataboutism
You mean like your insistance on concepts that viruses can degrade? Yes, it's medically established. Is there any reason - aside from conjecture - that this is the case? Because without evidence, your conjecture has as much weight as mine
>people died, that's why people stopped dying
Viruses don't just go from killing everyone to killing only the elderly and whoever is convenient.
>8 years
Okay, that's a lie, cuz otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. You would know all the links and sources, you would have at LEAST been PRESENT for the discussions, none of this would have been necessary.
>whataboutism
You mean like your insistance on concepts that viruses can degrade? Yes, it's medically established. Is there any reason - aside from conjecture - that this is the case? Because without evidence, your conjecture has as much weight as mine
>>391603
>we all volunteered for this when we decided to think rationally.
You didn't start thinking rationally though. You just gulped down whatever retarded conspiracy made you feel the most special. I've seen these threads propose mechanism that don't really make a lot of sense for how the vax will cause everyone to drop dead x amount of years later. Reverse transcription through LINE1 doesn't make a lot of sense when LINE1 is heavily suppressed or outright turned off in normal cells. Very active in cancer cells though, in which the study was done.
>we all volunteered for this when we decided to think rationally.
You didn't start thinking rationally though. You just gulped down whatever retarded conspiracy made you feel the most special. I've seen these threads propose mechanism that don't really make a lot of sense for how the vax will cause everyone to drop dead x amount of years later. Reverse transcription through LINE1 doesn't make a lot of sense when LINE1 is heavily suppressed or outright turned off in normal cells. Very active in cancer cells though, in which the study was done.
>>391614
Here I'm going to do you a favor, ninja. This is an entry level biology textbook from before pandemic. I would recommend the most recent version, but somehow I doubt you would be willing to look at anything published after covid. It's a great resource for learning the basics. It has sections on cells, viruses, and basic genetics. It even goes over retrotransposons.
https://annas-archive.org/md5/42f6cd8c7ba386007bc87b29e3b9c1b0
Here I'm going to do you a favor, ninja. This is an entry level biology textbook from before pandemic. I would recommend the most recent version, but somehow I doubt you would be willing to look at anything published after covid. It's a great resource for learning the basics. It has sections on cells, viruses, and basic genetics. It even goes over retrotransposons.
https://annas-archive.org/md5/42f6cd8c7ba386007bc87b29e3b9c1b0
>>391611
They have identified several RNA strains. Idk what else you expect.
>Viruses don't just go from killing everyone to killing only the elderly
Yes they do. Did you read that study? Deadly viruses burn themselves out, so weaker strains become endemic annoyances.
>That's a lie
I don't really care if you believe me.
>You would know all the links and sources, you would have at LEAST been PRESENT for the discussions
I was present for all of those discussions, although I did begin to tune them out a couple years back when you and the with your circular shitposting.
I used to make at least three threads a week on this board, but these days I find it hard to even bother because I know that retards like you are going to derail it while driving off all of the other users with interesting things to say.
>You mean like your insistance on concepts that viruses can degrade?
That's not what whataboutism means.
Also, viruses don't "degrade", they become more efficient. A virus's only goal is to spread itself, and killing its host too quickly is contrary to that goal, so they trend towards optimal virulence to achieve endemic status.
>Is there any reason - aside from conjecture - that this is the case?
Read the 2009 study and check the citations. It's well documented.
[Read more] They have identified several RNA strains. Idk what else you expect.
>Viruses don't just go from killing everyone to killing only the elderly
Yes they do. Did you read that study? Deadly viruses burn themselves out, so weaker strains become endemic annoyances.
>That's a lie
I don't really care if you believe me.
>You would know all the links and sources, you would have at LEAST been PRESENT for the discussions
I was present for all of those discussions, although I did begin to tune them out a couple years back when you and the with your circular shitposting.
I used to make at least three threads a week on this board, but these days I find it hard to even bother because I know that retards like you are going to derail it while driving off all of the other users with interesting things to say.
>You mean like your insistance on concepts that viruses can degrade?
That's not what whataboutism means.
Also, viruses don't "degrade", they become more efficient. A virus's only goal is to spread itself, and killing its host too quickly is contrary to that goal, so they trend towards optimal virulence to achieve endemic status.
>Is there any reason - aside from conjecture - that this is the case?
Read the 2009 study and check the citations. It's well documented.
>>391616
>I used to make at least three threads a week on this board, but these days I find it hard to even bother because I know that retards like you are going to derail it while driving off all of the other users with interesting things to say.
It's ninjas, boom boom, and shart schizo. Everyone who disagrees with their retardation is a SHILL!
>I used to make at least three threads a week on this board, but these days I find it hard to even bother because I know that retards like you are going to derail it while driving off all of the other users with interesting things to say.
It's ninjas, boom boom, and shart schizo. Everyone who disagrees with their retardation is a SHILL!
>>391617
Ikr. We used to have a good thing going on here, but retards decided to chase out everyone through sheer volume of shitposting just so that they could feel like king of the trash pile.
Ikr. We used to have a good thing going on here, but retards decided to chase out everyone through sheer volume of shitposting just so that they could feel like king of the trash pile.
>>391618
And it's only like 3 people. Funny thing is I'm sure these retards tell themselves they are saving the site by shouting shill at every other post. If mods simply enforced honest debates and banned thought terminating clichés this place would have become something a lot more lively.
And it's only like 3 people. Funny thing is I'm sure these retards tell themselves they are saving the site by shouting shill at every other post. If mods simply enforced honest debates and banned thought terminating clichés this place would have become something a lot more lively.
>>391619
>And it's only like 3 people.
It's painfully obvious too, so obvious that any infrequent poster would get the feeling that they're just arguing with the same three retards over and over, and promptly conclude that /mlpol/ has little to offer them over any other site.
>If mods simply enforced honest debates and banned thought terminating clichés this place would have become something a lot more lively.
There should at least be a writ against derailing threads.
>And it's only like 3 people.
It's painfully obvious too, so obvious that any infrequent poster would get the feeling that they're just arguing with the same three retards over and over, and promptly conclude that /mlpol/ has little to offer them over any other site.
>If mods simply enforced honest debates and banned thought terminating clichés this place would have become something a lot more lively.
There should at least be a writ against derailing threads.
>>391616
>they identified several strains
Funny, the evidence is not forthcoming
.deadly viruses burn out
That fast? That would be impressive if you could indicate it. Should be easy, since there's been a number of precedented cases.
>I was present
X
>it's ur fault I don't
X
>that's not what whataboutism means
What do you think it means, other than "What about this example/thing/other"?
>read the 2009 study
>muh pwecious study
Is as I've said, one - admittedly plausible - explanation for what happened during Covid that I find to be equal parts laughable and unconvincing. Are you required to agree? No! Am I required to convince you? No! Am I required to convince you, because - coming from me - you're insufferable, NO.
[Read more] >they identified several strains
Funny, the evidence is not forthcoming
.deadly viruses burn out
That fast? That would be impressive if you could indicate it. Should be easy, since there's been a number of precedented cases.
>I was present
X
>it's ur fault I don't
X
>that's not what whataboutism means
What do you think it means, other than "What about this example/thing/other"?
>read the 2009 study
>muh pwecious study
Is as I've said, one - admittedly plausible - explanation for what happened during Covid that I find to be equal parts laughable and unconvincing. Are you required to agree? No! Am I required to convince you? No! Am I required to convince you, because - coming from me - you're insufferable, NO.
Remember when smallpox required a vaccine to be cured? How about polio?
But apparently, all that's required to cure Covid is people in China keeling over, while niggers riot in the US.
Does that sound plausible to you?
But apparently, all that's required to cure Covid is people in China keeling over, while niggers riot in the US.
Does that sound plausible to you?
>>391621
I bet we are insufferable. We just told you that you aren't a special boy. You wanna read the biology textbook it's available at the link I provided.
I bet we are insufferable. We just told you that you aren't a special boy. You wanna read the biology textbook it's available at the link I provided.
>>391620
I really like the idea of banning thought terminating clichés because the most retarded people rely on them for winning arguments. Not to mention the previously mentioned retards were all permanently banned at one point. Just enforcing a rule like that would keep them out.
I really like the idea of banning thought terminating clichés because the most retarded people rely on them for winning arguments. Not to mention the previously mentioned retards were all permanently banned at one point. Just enforcing a rule like that would keep them out.
>>391621
>the evidence is not forthcoming
It's literally genetically sequenced. Look it up.
>That fast?
If it kills quickly, yes.
>indicate it. Should be easy, since there's been a number of precedented cases.
Have you read the 2009 study yet?
>X
Don't care.
>What do you think it means, other than "What about this example/thing/other"?
It means
>the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue.
In that is basically distracts from an argument by bringing up an irrelevant argument, or just accusing the other side of hypocrisy without addressing the criticism itself.
>>muh pwecious study
So you didn't read it. Cool.
That is the example/evidence you keep asking people for. Finish reading it before you ask for additional examples.
Or read the biology textbook anon posted. Quit asking for evidence of you won't even read the evidence we give you.
>Remember when smallpox required a vaccine to be cured? How about polio?
Polio and smallpox were not "cured", they were eradicated. A vaccine alone isn't enough to eradicate a disease, it requires drastic long term planning to track down and isolate infected people.
>But apparently, all that's required to cure Covid is people in China keeling over, while niggers riot in the US.
It wasn't cured, nor was it eradicated.
And it was still around when the niggers were rioting.
Optimal Vitality has nothing to do with "curing".
[Read more] >the evidence is not forthcoming
It's literally genetically sequenced. Look it up.
>That fast?
If it kills quickly, yes.
>indicate it. Should be easy, since there's been a number of precedented cases.
Have you read the 2009 study yet?
>X
Don't care.
>What do you think it means, other than "What about this example/thing/other"?
It means
>the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue.
In that is basically distracts from an argument by bringing up an irrelevant argument, or just accusing the other side of hypocrisy without addressing the criticism itself.
>>muh pwecious study
So you didn't read it. Cool.
That is the example/evidence you keep asking people for. Finish reading it before you ask for additional examples.
Or read the biology textbook anon posted. Quit asking for evidence of you won't even read the evidence we give you.
>Remember when smallpox required a vaccine to be cured? How about polio?
Polio and smallpox were not "cured", they were eradicated. A vaccine alone isn't enough to eradicate a disease, it requires drastic long term planning to track down and isolate infected people.
>But apparently, all that's required to cure Covid is people in China keeling over, while niggers riot in the US.
It wasn't cured, nor was it eradicated.
And it was still around when the niggers were rioting.
Optimal Vitality has nothing to do with "curing".
>>391625
>Quit asking for evidence of you won't even read the evidence we give you.
This is probably the most infuriating part of dealing with retards especially with the vaxx debate is the retards never read the studies that they link let alone the ones presenting counter arguments. I have had times where people would link papers supporting my argument.
>Quit asking for evidence of you won't even read the evidence we give you.
This is probably the most infuriating part of dealing with retards especially with the vaxx debate is the retards never read the studies that they link let alone the ones presenting counter arguments. I have had times where people would link papers supporting my argument.
>>391623
Oh, I'm infamously insufferable
>>391624
>I really like the idea of banning thought
I know where you were GOING with that, but I still fixed it for you
>Finish reading it
Is precisely what I said about the previous discussion threads that "you were around for"
>It wasn't cured, nor was it eradicated
It was the fucking flu, you ponce
Oh, I'm infamously insufferable
>>391624
>I really like the idea of banning thought
I know where you were GOING with that, but I still fixed it for you
>Finish reading it
Is precisely what I said about the previous discussion threads that "you were around for"
>It wasn't cured, nor was it eradicated
It was the fucking flu, you ponce
>>391629
>Is precisely what I said about the previous discussion threads that "you were around for"
Okay, now do the same. Read the evidence posters gave you after you asked for it.
>It was the fucking flu, you ponce
I never said it was anything but a flu. It's a corona virus, aka a flu/cold.
>Is precisely what I said about the previous discussion threads that "you were around for"
Okay, now do the same. Read the evidence posters gave you after you asked for it.
>It was the fucking flu, you ponce
I never said it was anything but a flu. It's a corona virus, aka a flu/cold.
>>391629
>Oh, I'm infamously insufferable
Because you have the downs.
>I know where you were GOING with that, but I still fixed it for you
How does screaming shill/racist/sexist/fed/xphobe/heretic add anything to a discussion?
>Oh, I'm infamously insufferable
Because you have the downs.
>I know where you were GOING with that, but I still fixed it for you
How does screaming shill/racist/sexist/fed/xphobe/heretic add anything to a discussion?
Let me guess
>people die from the flu all the time
NOT WHILE WALKING IN THE STREETS
>people die from the flu all the time
NOT WHILE WALKING IN THE STREETS
>>391634
>I don't get how you can declare that covid is enough to make people drop dead, while at the same time being the cold/flu
1. I never claimed it was making people drop dead. You claimed that
2. I also did not claim that it was happening at the same time. I claimed the opposite of that, agreeing with the other Anon's explanation of optimal virulence making diseases less deadly overtime.
3. It is literally a cold/flu. It is in the same category of viruses.
>Why is that?
Just curious, were you beaten, or abused, or molested or neglected as a child? Or any other factors that would contribute to your infantile, damaged, troon-esque behavior?
>>391635
What is even the source of this "walking in streets" claim?
>I don't get how you can declare that covid is enough to make people drop dead, while at the same time being the cold/flu
1. I never claimed it was making people drop dead. You claimed that
2. I also did not claim that it was happening at the same time. I claimed the opposite of that, agreeing with the other Anon's explanation of optimal virulence making diseases less deadly overtime.
3. It is literally a cold/flu. It is in the same category of viruses.
>Why is that?
Just curious, were you beaten, or abused, or molested or neglected as a child? Or any other factors that would contribute to your infantile, damaged, troon-esque behavior?
>>391635
What is even the source of this "walking in streets" claim?
>>391597
This. When confronted with that, all covidians got suddenly silent and switch to another angle and convoluted mental gymnastics to demonstrate they are right.
>>391607
>Has the covid molecule even been identified?
Same shit. Covidians won't touch this with a 20 feet pole.
>>391610
>I've been here for 8 years, idiot.
And you learnt nothing.
-----
Pic dedicated to all educated and smart covidians.
This. When confronted with that, all covidians got suddenly silent and switch to another angle and convoluted mental gymnastics to demonstrate they are right.
>>391607
>Has the covid molecule even been identified?
Same shit. Covidians won't touch this with a 20 feet pole.
>>391610
>I've been here for 8 years, idiot.
And you learnt nothing.
-----
Pic dedicated to all educated and smart covidians.
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-50] [51-100] [101-150] [151-200] [201-250] [251-300] [301-350] [351-400] [401-450] [451-500] [501-550] [551-600] [601-650] [651-700] [701-750] [751-800] [801-836] [Next] [Live (last 50 replies)]
836 replies | 179 files | 130 UUIDs | Page 5
[Add to Thread Watcher]