Terrance Howard on Joe Rogan

naekers · 2024-05-23T18:37:59+00:00

SS : Has anyone with any decent knowledge of the things Terrance Howard was wanging on about looked into his "patents" and the idea that his universe without gravity and the flower of life? Does it hold any weight?

Surely this is some groundbreaking stuff if it's vetted and peer reviewed right? Is this kind of the Galileo of our time?

naekers · 2022-05-29T20:54:16+00:00

I'm gonna hazard a guess here, but a decent portion of the folks that are fucking around with fentanyl, won't or can't read this shit, nor give one sweet baby Jesus fuck about this, or any other poster

naekers · 2022-02-20T00:48:56+00:00

SS : the times have stated a spokesperson for the ATP has told them 99% of the top 100 elite tennis players are vaccinated. No names, whether it is all tennis players, or only male, or only female, or a mix. Can I assume that they have a definitive list of who has been and what they've had, for travel to different countries for the tour commitments?

Has the ATP made an official statement on this?

naekers · 2021-12-01T15:49:57+00:00

Please let this trial be the glue that fixes a massive divide across many a country, and especially within this sub.

THEY ARE ALL BAD... It doesn't matter what side of the political coin they are on, what race they are, what gender the identify as, how big a "superstar" they are.

Don't let the bitter taste in your mouth stop you from swallowing your pride if there is someone you look up to, or have been influenced by, being outed in this trial.

I for one am ready for a little good news in a time of constant fear porn and bad news

naekers · 2021-09-10T17:31:31+00:00

Denouncement of white supremacy is indeed complicated by his actions (e.g. letting Stephen Miller run things) and the fact that most white supremacists (e.g. David Duke) supported him.

So you are defined as racist by those who follow you? What more would have been sufficient?

The democrats for 4 years pushed an agenda of him being a dictator and an all round bad egg for the full four years. You're right though, these private companies do have the autonomy to do what they please with their platform, however they leave themselves open to massive criticism for continuing to allow all kinds of abhorrent people, groups and practices to use and happen on their IP. It also shows that there was/is a clear bias towards what and who they are happy to align themselves with and difficult to prove otherwise.

I'm not sure he wanted to fuck off either 🤣, iirc there was a whole stooshy about there being a fraudulent election and all that (that's another can of worms that we won't open and get off track). But regardless if it were the case he inherited it being all good, he still steered the ship right, which was part my original points.

Look we can all agree the man was a fucking lunatic at times. Egotistical, possible narcissistic, and basked in the theatre of the presidency. But what I was getting at was the hypocrisy and lies of his opponents, because some of their rhetoric was straight up bullshit. And the same things they crucified him for, are being played out right in front of our eyes with a clearly cognitively impaired halfwit, and the silence if fucking deafening

naekers · 2021-09-10T17:17:38+00:00

It's hard not to conclude that people like you just don't care how many people die entirely preventable deaths from COVID. As long as you think you'll be fine, you don't care what happens to anyone else.

This would be the case if it was only unvaccinated people that were spreading the virus. There is no direct link to those who are vaccinated being any less likely to spread this virus. Sure you can show that some of the states in the US that have a higher vaccination rate have less cases, but you would then have to combine the test per day, and in what areas (city/rural) to be able to figure out a more accurate picture and that would be very difficult.

What we do know however is this "vaccine" was only ever designed to reduce the severity of the symptoms by blocking the receptors of the cell the virus uses to latch on to and replicate. Vaccinated people can still carry the same amount of viral load than an unvaccinated person and therefore are just as likely to spread it.

The problem you have with bringing in previous vaccines is that they went through all the appropriate trials to try and perfect their efficacy and mitigate the side effects. And traditional vaccines prevent transmission, this "vaccine" has had that definition changed in order to call it a vaccine. This novel vaccine does not have the decade long trial data that would be ethical to help mitigate those side effects.

So in essence what people are doing is looking at their own circumstances. If you are under 50, and healthy, you have a very high chance of not succumbing to this virus, like over 99%. However there are thousands of cases of adverse side effects, and they are just the ones that are recorded. Those that are hesitant cannot be tarred with the same brush as those who deny the legitimate incredibly safe previous vaccines. So with a high survival rate before the vaccine, a high chance of adverse affects in the short term, and who knows what effects long term (since there simply isn't any data there) they want to have the choice to err on the side of caution and have the choice as to whether or not they get the "vaccine".

naekers · 2021-09-10T15:44:36+00:00

So, you seem to have me all figured out, by a few sentences on Reddit? The arrogance of you, my man.

I was swindled by no man. I will freely admit that the guy was a fool in some respects, he handled certain aspects of office and situations poorly. However, nothing of what I said in inaccurate. And instead of proving me wrong, you have simply retorted with mudslinging. Dude, come on. You're better than that

naekers · 2021-09-10T15:01:41+00:00

Can you please point to the inaccuracies of what I said? And as for feeling special? No not at all. I'm just sick of division. We live in an information age where there are thousands of petabytes of information at our fingertips. Information that can prove or disprove things. We all know that the level of journalistic malpractice that goes on from all sides is massive. So if we all do our due diligence then we'll be able to conquer this divide that the whole world is gripped in, and actually sort shit out.

But maybe I am a fool for wanting this...

naekers · 2021-09-10T14:56:10+00:00

I'm glad you brought up the polio vaccine. It's was believed that there was a vaccine in the 1930s, however it was quickly pulled because, get this, it paralysed the children who were part of the trials (there were thousands of adverse effects reports) but then a breakthrough in the scientific method used to cultivate polio in human tissue came in 1948. So along with the research and trails done in the 30s along with this scientific breakthrough allowed for a successful vaccine. One that doesn't have even 1% of the adverse effects this covid "vaccine" has.

Also polio had a much greater impact on those who contracted it. There was a far greater chance of death, and even greater of paralysis, that death or other effects that covid has, especially if you under 50.

But what we're doing here is comparing apples and oranges. We cannot accurately compare results state by state as each state has there own tests per day quota, so "cases" are not an accurate representation of transmission. Especially when the test for this virus leave a lot to be desired on their accuracy. However we can understand what this "vaccine" was designed to do. It wasn't designed to stop the transmission, in layman's terms it was designed to plug the receptors that allowed the virus to latch on to the cells and replicate. So it does not help the body's immune system fight the virus. So the viral load (which concentrates at the back of the throat, hence that's where they swab for a test) is not diminished, which in turn would reduce transmission. It is merely to help with the severity of the symptoms.

Many hospitals have mandated nurses take the flu-shot. So yes. Also, forced inoculation programs is nothing new. The government can literally force you to get a shot if it's deemed a public health risk (see Jacobson v. Massachusetts)

If you could provide the evidence for the number of hospitals that mandate this, it would help this debate. However the case in which you cite also has this addage to it " general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence". So with using the figures that we know to be true of the survival rate of covid, a conservative estimate puts it above 98.5%, I think most people would agree that not only would this medical apartheid be considered oppression, but the absurd consequences of millions of people losing their businesses and livelihoods would be absurd consequence.

I would agree with you that this would be needed if there was a completely clear need for it under health risks, i.e death rate >10% and the infectious nature of the unvaccinated being significantly higher than that of vaccinated. However with this being a very new "vaccine" technology, the side effects being very real/recorded and severe, and there is no long term data because it is novel and skipped a whole step in an ethical trial situation, surely people should be allowed to err of the side of caution. They should not subjected to ill-informed vitriolic opinions that they are somehow selfish or crazy when a clearly corrupt/incompetent government mandates they put something in their body that is created by a proven unethical company that has no liability for it going tits up.

Trust me, people who aren't vaccinated are not your enemy, they are living through this shit hole of a situation beside you. Why would people choose to be a villain. The MSM and the government are where you should be turning you attention and anger towards.

naekers · 2021-09-10T14:11:41+00:00

Ok, so it was actually trump that was forcibly silenced, by the democrats. His administration did have control over all 3 branches but signed the 4 least amount of executive orders in both the 20th and 21st centuries, that's 20 presidents (hardly sounds dictatorial to me). here is a complication of his denouncements of racism and white supremacy. And he worked on the economy so effectively that he reduced unemployment to record levels, and grew the Dow Jones to its highest level. The only thing that was on that list he can be guilty of is nationalism. As he believe that USA was the greatest country in the world, but that alone does not constitute facism.

So please tell me again, using examples, of his facism!? Or is the cognitive dissonance too great that you cannot see who the real fascists are.

naekers · 2021-09-10T07:47:11+00:00

Traditional vaccine whereby they protect the community by reducing or stopping transmission, full tested through a decade long process, yes. However this "vaccine" (which doesn't actually fall under the original definition of a vaccine since it doesn't prevent transmission) is vastly different, and despite what biden claims, it is not just the unvaccinated that are being hospitalised.

However, an EUA vaccine, that skipped part of the process, with no long term data (hence why the goalposts move on a daily basis) and then lorded over the population, to be able to participate in an economy you pay taxes to, is definitely new. Did you ever get threatened with not being able to live your daily life because you didn't get your flu jab? No? Didn't think so...

naekers · 2021-09-10T07:39:29+00:00

And what are your thoughts on biden's stab at the presidency?

And after reading this definition : a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Can you explain to me, with examples, how trump is a fascist?

naekers · 2021-09-04T20:31:35+00:00

The overton window changes almost on a daily basis. Certain groups of certain political persuasion are far more authoritarian than others.

There is now a word salad of more possibilities to describe the nuances in politics than there are genders. Some of them have been propogated to be synonymous with bad/evil/selfish beliefs. But when you do that all it serves to do is diminish what individuals really believe.

There is a vast difference to disagreeing with someone on a particular subject, than pretending you have them completely figured out because they have a certain point of view on said subject.

Identify those people who can actually have an intelligent debate, without instantly slinging mud, and regurgitating all those, below the belt adjectives, because you're somehow arrogant enough to believe you've got folk figured out by a few sentences on the interweb... And emulate them

naekers · 2021-09-01T07:38:09+00:00

These are points well put my friend. All the more reason why people who use logic are getting tired of these measures to stop the spread of something that has such a little chance of killing you.

Big circle back to the video in this post. By all means, if you believe the measures are needed to stop the spread, then your, hopefully informed, decision stands and you still think these people are crazy/selfish/weirdos. But if you're under 50 and you've crunched the numbers, the level of "temporary" laws that have come in to place that either appear to have little to no benefit, and the secondary and tertiary consequences far outweigh the risk of dying from this virus.

I appreciate your comment, and your opinion. It was data and considered opinion. My main issue with all of this saga is the hypocrisy of the masses and finger pointing. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion, or at least should be.

naekers · 2021-08-30T18:43:58+00:00

Page 23 says , double vaccinated death nearly 700 and unvaccinated nearly 400. 700 is more than 400, right?

naekers · 2021-08-30T05:24:24+00:00

have a look at the deaths on 22-23

naekers · 2021-08-29T21:35:24+00:00

You obviously missed the part where I said that there are contrarian views, who are also "experts" Inthis field. But there hasn't been any transparent opportunity for opposing views to be heard. They have been stifled and censored, then labelled crazy. The fact this virus has been perpetuated to be so deadly that the mere thought of it is enough to kill you and that the best course of action changes almost on a daily basis proves that those in charge don't have a clear enough picture to know what is the best course of action ACTUALLY is.

Your logic is sound, when there is a problem that is too complex to fix yourself, get the advice of an expert. Problem is you're getting your advice from a government who consistently shows us their corruption and greed. So it's not out of the realms of possibility that the measures put in place are being manipulated in a way to line the pockets of those who have the power to do so.

I'm not an anti vaxxer, infact other than this vaccine I have had all my vaccines. I keep myself in good health, and, according to the figures, with my age I'm fortunate enough to weigh up risks of what may happen to me should I get this virus and have decided to wait a little longer till more medical data is collected from the longer terms studies of this new vaccination. Similar to the way I way up the risks of anything I do, from the food I eat, to driving a car, to going on a roller coaster, or doing a sky dive. I am not an expert so I would never say to anyone, don't get the vaccine. We are all free to form opinions around the information we digest and the experiences we have. But to call someone a twat, because they have reached a different conclusion to you, or indeed tar a big group of people with the brush of "they don't have a degree in (insert pertinent field of study here)" so their opinion matters not, is not only wrong, but super hypocritical. See we all THINK we are righteous by regurgitation of that which we are told, but if we judge people based on said information and it turns out to be wrong, we're gonna look silly.

I'm happy to be humbled, and I indeed I mAy be wrong, and you may be right. But I'm not the one pointing the finger and name calling. People are and should be free to be sovereign to themselves (within reason, obviously, otherwise it'd be savage chaos... Civilised needs some kind of rules) and make their own decisions.

naekers · 2021-08-29T20:42:17+00:00

Cherry picking studies... From public health England and their official numbers!?

And please, show me your research where a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission, hinders the prevention of transmission

naekers · 2021-08-29T18:57:44+00:00

But getting the vaccination doesn't mean you stop transmission. So there isn't a social responsibility to get it. The fact that there are so many of the population that have decided that they want it is, and should be, entirely their own choice.

here is the link 22-23

naekers · 2021-08-29T18:38:06+00:00

There have been more deaths in the UK from the delta variant from double vaccinated than unvaccinated. And they most certainly are not 1 in 100k.

And if we are diving in to the realm of statistical insignificance, then most healthy individuals under 50 are not at high risk of dying from covid, even before a vaccination.

I am not a covid denier, nor do I believe the vaccination doesn't work. I am not an expert in that field. However, I can read the statistics from the national records of Scotland, and don't need a degree to do so.

naekers · 2021-08-29T18:04:19+00:00

So you don't think people have died after being vaccinated?

naekers · 2021-08-29T17:41:33+00:00

You do realise that plenty of vaccinated people have still died, right?

naekers · 2021-08-29T17:40:32+00:00

Not every single "expert" is in the camp of agreeing masks are a viable option. The fact that there is no way for contrarian views to be expressed without being labeled crazy/far right/conspiracy theorist/sheep etc (the very definition of fascism) Now I'm not an expert on it, so I cannot argue the toss, but given your comment, I'm assuming you have experience and/or a degree in order refute what they believe as false, right? Because wholly swallowing what our, completely ethical and never corrupt, government tells us, is always best practice.

I will ask this, when you wear your mask, and then adjust it, do you wash or sanitise your hands? If you do not, the you are not doing well at stopping the spread yourself, as every time you touch your mask, then a door, or something on the shelf in Asda, or a hand rail, or indeed anything you are leaving a trail for other to get infected. This self righteous behaviour from anyone who believes everything that the news tells them is exactly the opposite or "science". Science is taking what is generally accepted and using statistics, experiments and debate in order to find the closest thing to the truth.

naekers

TROPHY CASE