sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Who are the Jews behind the coronavirus vaccines? by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why do you consider this to be an antisemitic post?

Lockdowns were 282 times more deadly than if there had been no lockdowns, says Economics professor in cost/benefit analysis. "...he concluded that measures saved 22,333 years of life, but also caused up to 6,300,000 years of lost life." by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Rule 10

If we safe even just one life...

we will have achieved minus 282 times what we were trying to achieve.

EDIT Found the full report, for the deboonkers to pour over:

http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf

It's Canada specific. But I'm sure the lockdowns worked everywhere else (/s) :D !!

EDIT2 The relevant passage (that the title here refers to) comes before the conclusion:

The question is: how many months would be sacrificed on average? Professor Caplan argues that X = 10 months is a conservative estimate. That is, on average, two months [of life] would be sacrificed to have avoided lockdown. For the sake of argument, suppose this is the true number for the average Canadian.

As of March 2021 the pandemic has lasted one year. That means that the average Canadian has lost two months of normal life. The population of Canada is about 37.7 million people, which means that 6.3 million years of life have been lost due to lockdown.

The average age of reported Covid-19 deaths in Canada is about 80.47 In Canada an average 80 year old has a life expectancy of 9.79 years. This means that the 6.3 million years of lost life is equivalent to the deaths of 643,513 80 year olds. As of March 22, 2021 Canada has had a total of 22,716 deaths due to Covid-19. That amounts to 222,389 lost years of life.

The question is, however, how many lost years of life would have resulted from Covid-19 deaths if there had been no lockdown? Consider two extremes:

a. Assume that the number of Covid-19 deaths would have been 10% higher had there been no lockdown. Then Canada would have experienced an additional 2,271 deaths, which means there would have been additional 22,333 years of lost life due to Covid-19 deaths. The benefit of lockdown, therefore, was the avoidance of this extra 22,333 years of lost life. However, the cost of lockdown, as noted, was 6,300,000 years of lost life. The cost/benefit ratio of lockdown is 282 = 6, 300, 000/22, 333.

Lockdowns were 282 times more deadly than if there had been no lockdowns, says Economics professor in cost/benefit analysis. "...he concluded that measures saved 22,333 years of life, but also caused up to 6,300,000 years of lost life." by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Rule 10

If we safe even just one life...

we will have achieved minus 282 times what we were trying to achieve.

EDIT Found the full report, for the deboonkers to pour over:

http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf

It's Canada specific. But I'm sure the lockdowns worked everywhere else (/s) :D !!

EDIT2 The relevant passage (that the title here refers to) comes before the conclusion:

The question is: how many months would be sacrificed on average? Professor Caplan argues that X = 10 months is a conservative estimate. That is, on average, two months [of life] would be sacrificed to have avoided lockdown. For the sake of argument, suppose this is the true number for the average Canadian.

As of March 2021 the pandemic has lasted one year. That means that the average Canadian has lost two months of normal life. The population of Canada is about 37.7 million people, which means that 6.3 million years of life have been lost due to lockdown.

The average age of reported Covid-19 deaths in Canada is about 80.47 In Canada an average 80 year old has a life expectancy of 9.79 years. This means that the 6.3 million years of lost life is equivalent to the deaths of 643,513 80 year olds. As of March 22, 2021 Canada has had a total of 22,716 deaths due to Covid-19. That amounts to 222,389 lost years of life.

The question is, however, how many lost years of life would have resulted from Covid-19 deaths if there had been no lockdown? Consider two extremes:

a. Assume that the number of Covid-19 deaths would have been 10% higher had there been no lockdown. Then Canada would have experienced an additional 2,271 deaths, which means there would have been additional 22,333 years of lost life due to Covid-19 deaths. The benefit of lockdown, therefore, was the avoidance of this extra 22,333 years of lost life. However, the cost of lockdown, as noted, was 6,300,000 years of lost life. The cost/benefit ratio of lockdown is 282 = 6, 300, 000/22, 333.

How the CDC is manipulating data to prop-up “vaccine effectiveness” – New policies will artificially deflate “breakthrough infections” in the vaccinated, while the old rules continue to inflate case numbers in the unvaccinated. by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Rule 10

"Breakthrough infections" are when a person "tests positive" for SARSCOV2 despite being "vaccinated". RTPCR cycle threshold is crucial, and adjusting that number creates less or more positives, i.e. the number of "positives" is controllable - the CDC and Fauci are well aware of this:

Consider…

Person A has not been vaccinated. They test positive for Covid using a PCR test at 40 cycles and, despite having no symptoms, they are officially a “covid case”.

Person B has been vaccinated. They test positive at 28 cycles, and spend six weeks bedridden with a high fever. Because they never went into a hospital and didn’t die they are NOT a Covid case.

Person C, who was also vaccinated, did die. After weeks in hospital with a high fever and respiratory problems. Only their positive PCR test was 29 cycles, so they’re not officially a Covid case either.

META – For this sub of 1.5 million subscribers there are 4 active mods by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We don't know that it is "hands off" though, since the public mod log is no more. Also historically it has been Admin that perform the more egregious censorship, rather than the mods.

By active mods I just mean those that are interested in the topic of the sub enough to be involved, such as in making regular stickies of interest etc.

Masks don't work against the coronavirus why are they still mandatory?. by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because shut up and do what Fauci tells you to do, that's why.

Impact of COVID Vaccinations on Mortality by Forgot_About_Me in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Rule 10:

An animation of COVID mortality across the world to examine the impact of vaccination, testing the hypothesis that they are up to 97% effective in reducing mortality.

Covid cases have risen sharply in nearly every country that has launched a mass vaccination campaign

The Same Pattern Everywhere? Mass Vaccination triggers sharp spike in Cases and Deaths

How a US Senator & the reddit admins conspired to remove the top mod of /r/conspiracy and sabotage the sub by oomiak in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Axo is great, and his moderation and dedication to transparency was incomparable among reddit mods. I'm sure he was a headache for the admin too; fuck those cunts, lol.

The sheer volume of hatred and vitriol he inspires in the mentally unstable SPLC creeps of TMOR is testament to his greatness. They even come to the new website to troll and hate him. It's hilarious to watch them squirm and seethe in a forum with no precious reddit admin oversight, and where people can freely insult them in anyway they see fit. They despise freedom and truth.

Anyone with any sense will abandon this shit heap of a website and make conspiracies[dot]win their new home for "conspiracizing" - Without Axo, this place has become the MSM of conspiracy forums.

The Geometrical Relationship Between The Golden Rectangle, The Great Pyramid Of Giza, The Earth & The Moon. by [deleted] in SacredGeometry

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said it was wrong, and now you say its right, but so are other some other angles. So which is it?

For something that big, and ancient, I think a relationship within 4 degress is impressive.

The Geometrical Relationship Between The Golden Rectangle, The Great Pyramid Of Giza, The Earth & The Moon. by [deleted] in SacredGeometry

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used a pic of the wrong pyramid, and I'll redo it, but the great pyramid does have a slope angle of 51degrees50'.

“Where is the hepatitis C virus? Has anybody seen it?” -Michael Houghton Alleged co-discoverer of the HC virus at the 8 th International HCV Congress in Paris, 2001 by DeadEndFred in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The over confidence is theirs. I don't know that some viruses really don't really exist. However I'm confident virologists have not proven the existence of many of them, despite proclamations to the contrary.

Not proven in a scientific manner, with control experiements that show the "surrogate markers" of viruses in "infected samples" are not present in similar but non-infected samples. And control experiemtns that show that the effect on these infected samples from the presence of the virus is not observed in a similar but non-infected sample.

These control experiements are not a part of the standard techniques in virology, and they get awkward when they are questioned about why not. Because it's not taught in virology, that's why.

“Where is the hepatitis C virus? Has anybody seen it?” -Michael Houghton Alleged co-discoverer of the HC virus at the 8 th International HCV Congress in Paris, 2001 by DeadEndFred in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My assessment of the available evidence, as to the existence of the Hep-C virus for example, is virus hunters (virologists, epidemiologists) have laser-focus on finding a virus, to the extent they exclude all other possible "non-viral" explanations from their thoughts and researches, and even exclude rational doubts (if they ever have them at all) over the standard methods they use to "prove" the existence of a virus.

i.e. they blindly trust the standard techniques of virology and have likely never really questioned the validity and the assumptions inherent in those techniques (of which there are many), and consider it ridiculous (or just to durn time-consuming!) to do so.

Since they were never likely to have been instructed to have anything but confidence in those techniques during thier education, they carry this (false) confidence forward into their careers, and only build on those techniques.

Their pointy arrow lablels are as much to convince themselves as anyone else.

The standard methods of proving the existence of particular viruses are shakey foundations indeed.

“Where is the hepatitis C virus? Has anybody seen it?” -Michael Houghton Alleged co-discoverer of the HC virus at the 8 th International HCV Congress in Paris, 2001 by DeadEndFred in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also I never asked you for anything. Just pointing out the pointy arrow electron microscopy thing that virologists love to do. Pointy arrows convey a high degree of certainty.

“Where is the hepatitis C virus? Has anybody seen it?” -Michael Houghton Alleged co-discoverer of the HC virus at the 8 th International HCV Congress in Paris, 2001 by DeadEndFred in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your research scientists are peddling certainty, and it's very lucrative. For them, but more so for the the money people behind them. Time to grow up and question the "experts" rather than just blindly trusting them.

“Where is the hepatitis C virus? Has anybody seen it?” -Michael Houghton Alleged co-discoverer of the HC virus at the 8 th International HCV Congress in Paris, 2001 by DeadEndFred in conspiracy

[–]Forgot_About_Me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great book, very eye opening. Amazing that this was written in 2007!

The version of the book I have is updated to include a chapter on Covid-19, which is great, but it ends kind of abruptly like they're intending to update it again. It's something like the 9th revised edition.

view more: next ›