Well, I would wait for an expert's opinion on this, John didn't exactly shine on the ivermectin comparison so I would stick with nursing and general health related posts from him, these are his forte after all.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dude (Old Spike)
Well he is just basing it on the speculations of the epidemiologist, and the professor who said it might be.
But i believe in it, it could mutate to become just another cold, positive thinking
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
For you John is a kook or not depending on what his conclusions are on any particular day. You're a quack man - when are you going to give up on your embarrassing Ivermectin butthurtness: get over it. Pharma wanted to make money - they used quacks like you to leverage a message that would allow them to do that.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
lol, I never called him names. And as shown in the other video he is not an expert on this topic, far from it actually, hence others are more qualified to have an educated opinion on this, imho it is too early for that even for them. But, hey you like people shooting from the hip, especially when what they say matches your bias.
I am just glad someone took the time to debunk the ivermectin bull.
The problem with people like you is that you think there are simple(-ish) explanations to extremely complicated subjects (because this is what you can grasp).
There are not, this is why debunking takes generally way longer than making bold (wrong) statements!
When it goes over your head you switch off and it becomes part of a "conspiracy by them" (whoever they are).
This is why you like crowder, beanyhat, fox, news, dore and all the others on complicated scientific topics. They ask the "right" questions and give simple answers (that actually tell you what you want) that sound plausible but mostly are not correct. Then, in your argumentation you cherrypick the ones that actually may be legit or correct. This is exactly what vulnerable people do with clairvoyant statements, Hillaritoid!
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
You literally called him a kook not just a few days ago. Perhaps you should go see a doctor about these memory issues. Otherwise didn't read your wall of text man but it's nice to see you triggered so thoroughly.
What a painful specimen to behold - you know the fact that he blatently does this shit and then afterwards denies it while demanding proof: There's a reason for this behavior. His problem has got him in trouble in the past, and when he was caught like every specimen of the same sort the response is an immediate demand for proof. Then the denial, if it comes at all.
"We think you did this...."
"Oh yeah, prove it!"
"Okay now we really think you did this...."
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
you couldn't get any lamer and desperate now could you, this was explained to you a felt thousand times: YOU made me think he is a nutter, I NEVER even watched one of his videos before that and simply assumed he is a conspiracy nut because you posted his stuff. So, no I never called HIM anything, you otoh...... different story.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
I bet when you fuck up, you routinely try to blame others or circumstance for your stupidity and ignorance. I've already explained this characteristic is obvious with you. You said you don't call people names - you said you never called this guy a nutter, which is equivalent to a kook, but you did Daft Cunt. I wonder if when you abused those victims a similar machinery of denial was engaged. Your reasons for calling him a nutter are irrelevant, and it's obvious to anyone reading this that you aren't being sincere right now unless you are genuinely stupid.
Look at you - you're willing to accept making yourself look stupid - "I just assume anything you post is by nutters so duh....." - just to avoid admitting you were wrong, both about your opinion and your claim that you don't call people names (LOL how could you even go there - you spent a year calling anyone who disagreed with you alt-right). Right? Boldfart exhibits the exact same behavior, btw. Member when she said the COVID death rate was 25% and you tried to correct her and instead of thanking you publickly she publicly dismissed you and just brushed it off as "missing a decimal"? That's you and your ilk to a tee - God help us if you ever actually gain significant power over others.
This is why you can't go back to Germany, and why you spend your time posting laughing GIF memes in lieu of actual conversation on topics on a website that you, and your family and friends, have managed to all but destroy.
You'd be happy to drive the rest of the world to extinction if it left a tiny slice of hell for you and your ilk to rule over in misery. Desperate is your defensive response my pointing out you lied about a simple fact - you called this guy a name implying he was not rational, a loon, a kook, etc.. If you assume everything I post must be nutter stuff - breaking points, Brand, Dore, Kulisnki, Peterson, Kyle Hill, John Campbell, Joe Rogan, etc,., etc, - then you are either being obviously untruthful again, or you're fucking stupid. Which do you choose, cornered Hegelian? Maybe you should just post another Gervais GIF and go take a nap, eh?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dude (Old Spike)
always angry never satisfied, we are not your parents to argue with, neither are you 15
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Wait a minute - dude are you calling me a malcontent? Honestly, you're too bent for me to be angry at. Daft Cunt is morally bent but is capable of understanding reality and right from wrong and the only thing that angers me is that we haven't evolved to a point where people who think like Daft Cunt are extinct.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dude (Old Spike)
So you did not call the cops after i killed your buddy?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
^
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
I didn't read all your shit here but rest assured I, in contrary to you, am very well capable to admit mistakes or being wrong. I don't have a proble with learnming and adapting.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Who are you trying to convince right now?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dude (Old Spike)
you? was that not clear?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
actually I didn't try to convince anybody, just stating a fact.
Comments
(Old Spike)
Well, I would wait for an expert's opinion on this, John didn't exactly shine on the ivermectin comparison so I would stick with nursing and general health related posts from him, these are his forte after all.
(Old Spike)
Well he is just basing it on the speculations of the epidemiologist, and the professor who said it might be.
But i believe in it, it could mutate to become just another cold, positive thinking
(Old Spike)
For you John is a kook or not depending on what his conclusions are on any particular day. You're a quack man - when are you going to give up on your embarrassing Ivermectin butthurtness: get over it. Pharma wanted to make money - they used quacks like you to leverage a message that would allow them to do that.
(Old Spike)
lol, I never called him names. And as shown in the other video he is not an expert on this topic, far from it actually, hence others are more qualified to have an educated opinion on this, imho it is too early for that even for them. But, hey you like people shooting from the hip, especially when what they say matches your bias.
I am just glad someone took the time to debunk the ivermectin bull.
The problem with people like you is that you think there are simple(-ish) explanations to extremely complicated subjects (because this is what you can grasp).
There are not, this is why debunking takes generally way longer than making bold (wrong) statements!
When it goes over your head you switch off and it becomes part of a "conspiracy by them" (whoever they are).
This is why you like crowder, beanyhat, fox, news, dore and all the others on complicated scientific topics. They ask the "right" questions and give simple answers (that actually tell you what you want) that sound plausible but mostly are not correct. Then, in your argumentation you cherrypick the ones that actually may be legit or correct. This is exactly what vulnerable people do with clairvoyant statements, Hillaritoid!
(Old Spike)
You literally called him a kook not just a few days ago. Perhaps you should go see a doctor about these memory issues. Otherwise didn't read your wall of text man but it's nice to see you triggered so thoroughly.
(Old Spike)
Please provide a quote, liar....
(Old Spike)
"So this guy is not a nutter after all."
https://www.spikednation.com/videos/292-times-more-protection-vaccinated
What a painful specimen to behold - you know the fact that he blatently does this shit and then afterwards denies it while demanding proof: There's a reason for this behavior. His problem has got him in trouble in the past, and when he was caught like every specimen of the same sort the response is an immediate demand for proof. Then the denial, if it comes at all.
"We think you did this...."
"Oh yeah, prove it!"
"Okay now we really think you did this...."
(Old Spike)
you couldn't get any lamer and desperate now could you, this was explained to you a felt thousand times: YOU made me think he is a nutter, I NEVER even watched one of his videos before that and simply assumed he is a conspiracy nut because you posted his stuff. So, no I never called HIM anything, you otoh...... different story.
(Old Spike)
I bet when you fuck up, you routinely try to blame others or circumstance for your stupidity and ignorance. I've already explained this characteristic is obvious with you. You said you don't call people names - you said you never called this guy a nutter, which is equivalent to a kook, but you did Daft Cunt. I wonder if when you abused those victims a similar machinery of denial was engaged. Your reasons for calling him a nutter are irrelevant, and it's obvious to anyone reading this that you aren't being sincere right now unless you are genuinely stupid.
Look at you - you're willing to accept making yourself look stupid - "I just assume anything you post is by nutters so duh....." - just to avoid admitting you were wrong, both about your opinion and your claim that you don't call people names (LOL how could you even go there - you spent a year calling anyone who disagreed with you alt-right). Right? Boldfart exhibits the exact same behavior, btw. Member when she said the COVID death rate was 25% and you tried to correct her and instead of thanking you publickly she publicly dismissed you and just brushed it off as "missing a decimal"? That's you and your ilk to a tee - God help us if you ever actually gain significant power over others.
This is why you can't go back to Germany, and why you spend your time posting laughing GIF memes in lieu of actual conversation on topics on a website that you, and your family and friends, have managed to all but destroy.
You'd be happy to drive the rest of the world to extinction if it left a tiny slice of hell for you and your ilk to rule over in misery. Desperate is your defensive response my pointing out you lied about a simple fact - you called this guy a name implying he was not rational, a loon, a kook, etc.. If you assume everything I post must be nutter stuff - breaking points, Brand, Dore, Kulisnki, Peterson, Kyle Hill, John Campbell, Joe Rogan, etc,., etc, - then you are either being obviously untruthful again, or you're fucking stupid. Which do you choose, cornered Hegelian? Maybe you should just post another Gervais GIF and go take a nap, eh?
(Old Spike)
always angry never satisfied, we are not your parents to argue with, neither are you 15
(Old Spike)
Wait a minute - dude are you calling me a malcontent? Honestly, you're too bent for me to be angry at. Daft Cunt is morally bent but is capable of understanding reality and right from wrong and the only thing that angers me is that we haven't evolved to a point where people who think like Daft Cunt are extinct.
(Old Spike)
So you did not call the cops after i killed your buddy?
(Old Spike)
^
(Old Spike)
I didn't read all your shit here but rest assured I, in contrary to you, am very well capable to admit mistakes or being wrong. I don't have a proble with learnming and adapting.
(Old Spike)
Who are you trying to convince right now?
(Old Spike)
you? was that not clear?
(Old Spike)
actually I didn't try to convince anybody, just stating a fact.