Clear critical analysis of 'woke' culture

[zurew]

38 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

You don't know these things would've happened, because they didn't happen. 

I'm talking about what actually happened, not an imagined scenario that you 'prevented'. Maybe the cure was worse than the disease. 

its pretty clear after 3 years of collecting stats - what worked and what didn't. Social distancing actually worked, vaccines actually works, but if you don't look at the data I guess its still a mystery for you.

"maybe the cure was worse than the disease", but you have nothing to build that argument.

39 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

When they come up with a trick to destroy democracy, you should be skeptical of what they're saying. Because there are very real payoffs to them to destroy democracy. 

if your definition of trick is = to prevent a bunch of people from dying and saveing hospitals from breaking down, then yeah, "they tricked us".

[mr_engineer]

Alright. So, I'm going to tell you why I'm not taking 'the science' at face-value. 

I've spent 3 years of my life as a science-researcher. Day 1, lesson 1 of research is that science is not the absolute fact. It is created by researchers, in fact. As a researcher, your job is to prove a certain hypothesis 'true'. And, to gather the evidence in its favor. This is what you get paid for, this is your 'work'. 

Now, in a world where Pfizer sponsors everything, Pfizer is only going to pay researchers to gather pro-vax evidence!! Anti-vax research will not get paid. And, those people who speak out against the vax, are suppressed by the vax-companies. Their credibility is destroyed and they're labelled 'quacks' and 'conspiracy-theorists' by the government, who the vax-companies have lobbied. 

My request to all of you is to not act ignorant to these realities. Some you knew, some you had a hunch for and I'm probably confirming for you. 

So, what is the actual truth here? The full truth is that if there are ten anti-vax data-points and one pro-vax data-point, the Pfizer scientist will only focus on the one pro-vax data-point and have a blind-spot for the ten anti-vax data-points. So, 'the science' will be pro-vax, even though the truth may be the opposite! And, the reasons for the lack of this data may not be that it's not accessible, it could very well be a lack of funding by a corrupt establishment. Either way, this possibility, coupled with the taking away of democracy, should raise doubts. 

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

its pretty clear after 3 years of collecting stats - what worked and what didn't. Social distancing actually worked, vaccines actually works, but if you don't look at the data I guess its still a mystery for you.

"maybe the cure was worse than the disease", but you have nothing to build that argument.

Their stats. They will only publish pro-vax stats and discredit anti-vax stats. Money is prior to science in today's world. 

And, the 'discrediting' happens purely by appeals to authority, which is deeply corrupt in and of itself. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[zurew]

1 minute ago, mr_engineer said:

My request to all of you is to not act ignorant to these realities. Some you knew, some you had a hunch for and I'm probably confirming for you. 

What you are missing here is that there is and there was not only pfizer vaxx but other vaxx as well, that was produced by other companies and countries than the west. We are talking about for example China who has absolutely all the incentive to find dangerous points about the pfizer vaccine, you have Russia as well but they didn't publish anything that would prove that pfizer is bad or ineffective or dangerous. You have a market where everyone wants to and wanted to build the best vaccine to dominate, so each participant has all the incentive to find holes in the other participants methods and vaccines, but they didn't, now what does that tell you?

[mr_engineer]

Just now, zurew said:

What you are missing here is that there is and there was not only pfizer vaxx but other vaxx as well, that was produced by other companies and countries than the west. We are talking about for example China who has absolutely all the incentive to find dangerous points about the pfizer vaccine, you have Russia as well but they didn't publish anything that would prove that pfizer is bad or ineffective or dangerous. You have a market where everyone wants to and wanted to build the best vaccine to dominate, so each participant has all the incentive to find holes in the other participants methods and vaccines, but they didn't, now what does that tell you?

They prioritize the image of the product over petty competition. They can form an oligopoly in the marketplace, that's mutually beneficial to everyone. And, if they're not divided, they can launch a full-scale war on anti-vaxxers together! 

[mr_engineer]

This reality about science, that it's primarily about survival of the scientists and not about truth, is what made me leave research. Scientists are very, very corruptible people. Heck, you just have to pay off the editor of the right journal and the entire journal will be biased in your favor! 

I was depressed for a long time after seeing this reality about science. Which is why I'm so passionate about changing science-education, where I advocate that students think for themselves. When you stop being dogmatic as a scientist, you will have a conscience that stops you from being corruptible and blindly defending your conditioning from your education. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[zurew]

5 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

They prioritize the image of the product over petty competition. They can form an oligopoly in the marketplace, that's mutually beneficial to everyone. And, if they're not divided, they can launch a full-scale war on anti-vaxxers together! 

So you are telling me that Russia or China wouldn't  have published the holes about pfizer even if they would had the opportunity to paint west even more as the bad guy + they could have totally dominated the market and could have earned a bunch of money doing so? 

Edited January 11, 2023 by zurew

[Sucuk Ekmek]

Viruses are imagination. They don't even recognizee your being. Microbiome is just exchanging information, that's it and we say this one is attacking or that one is defending. It's just your imagination getting  abused. You are abondoning the knowledge of your body for the sake of rationalism or certain narrative and you do it  because you don't have required techicality. You depend on them and they know it.

 

[mr_engineer]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

So you are telling me that Russia or China wouldn't  have published the holes about pfizer even if they would had the opportunity to paint west even more as the bad guy + they could have totally dominated the market and could have earned a bunch of money doing so? 

Ultimately, money is what rules these people. It's not even nationalism. And they don't want to piss off the West too much either, they want to be seen as the good guys in their country too. 

[Consept]

3 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

They prioritize the image of the product over petty competition. They can form an oligopoly in the marketplace, that's mutually beneficial to everyone. And, if they're not divided, they can launch a full-scale war on anti-vaxxers together! 

Why would they act differently in terms of capitalism just because its a vaccine? Theres no allegiance to a vaccine, russia is literally at war for much less than a vaccine, guaranteed if they could find something wrong with pfizer vaccine and promote their own, 100% they would do it. China are not getting paid from the vaccine but theyre still using it and paying for it, even though them doing that enriches a US company. It sounds like your trying to shoehorn your already established position into a reality that cant sustain it.

[zurew]

13 minutes ago, Sucuk Ekmek said:

Viruses are imagination.

Such as bullets coming from a pistol towards a human head. Is that a good argument to not avoid any danger?

Edited January 11, 2023 by zurew

[mr_engineer]

16 minutes ago, Consept said:

Why would they act differently in terms of capitalism just because its a vaccine? Theres no allegiance to a vaccine, russia is literally at war for much less than a vaccine, guaranteed if they could find something wrong with pfizer vaccine and promote their own, 100% they would do it. China are not getting paid from the vaccine but theyre still using it and paying for it, even though them doing that enriches a US company. It sounds like your trying to shoehorn your already established position into a reality that cant sustain it.

It's just not smart to find something wrong with a competing company who's as big or bigger than you. The smarter thing to do is to make friends with the few big players in your industry and to collectively target the smaller companies, defame them with way bigger marketing-campaigns than theirs and most especially, target anti-vaxxers. That way, everyone's rich and happy and powerful. 

For a Russian or Chinese company to do what you're saying, they would have to have nationalistic motivations that are bigger than money. And, I don't think that's the case. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[Rafael Thundercat]

I will not say in what part of the video below you will get a Insigth revelant to this talk but I can see that what we are doing here is not different than Forums in Athens were doing. And I belive we can with time become much better in it 

The Whole series from Jonh are amazing. 

 

[zurew]

11 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

t's just not smart to find something wrong with a competing company who's as big or bigger than you. The smarter thing to do is to make friends with the few big players in your industry and to collectively target the smaller companies, defame them with way bigger marketing-campaigns than theirs and most especially, target anti-vaxxers. That way, everyone's rich and happy and powerful. 

Its incredible what mental gymnastics you need to go through to maintain your narrative. So again you are trying to defend a position where you say that nor China nor Russia would have jumped on the opportunity to expose the west, even if they would have had hard evidence to prove their point and dominate the market and they could have made America look really really bad - which would have ended up in Russia or China gaining more political power.

"Its not smart to dominate the market and make everyone rely on your service/product, its smarter to stay quiet and let them to dominate the market"- because the west ended up dominating the market, and nor Russia nor China published anything that would prove that the Pfizer vaccine is unsafe.

[mr_engineer]

@zurew They did not want to give anti-vaxxers a single foothold. They wanted to present all vaccines as 'safe and effective'. As I said, they would want to maintain the image of the product way more than competing against the West. 

If they published something against Pfizer-vaccine, would Pfizer stay silent about their vaccine?! Pfizer would pay anti-vax researchers to publish something on the Chinese and Russian vaccine! And, everyone would suffer as a result of it. They understand this, which is why they don't engage in this competitive behavior. 

The elite-class protects their own. This is not unique to the elite-class, even the middle-class and working-class protect their own. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[zurew]

6 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

They did not want to give anti-vaxxers a single foothold. They wanted to present all vaccines as 'safe and effective'. As I said, they would want to maintain the image of the product way more than competing against the West. 

If they published something against Pfizer-vaccine, would Pfizer stay silent about their vaccine?! Pfizer would pay anti-vax researchers to publish something on the Chinese and Russian vaccine! And, everyone would suffer as a result of it. They understand this, which is why they don't engage in this competitive behavior. 

But they didn't present all vaccines as safe and effective. China's vaxx wasn't effective and the west and other countries started to shit on the effectiveness of China's vaccine + there was the astrazeneca vaccine and there was a lot of bad news about that one as well. So the idea, that there wasn't any war this time on the market and in the news field about the vaccines is simply not true and not aligned with your narrative. Also, why is that, that after all this time they still don't publish anything bad about pfizer vaccine even though they basically lost the war on the vaccine market?

The idea that suddenly only this one time there was a big collaboration between these countries and all the other times they shit on each other and spend millions and billions on war and on other gepolitical stuff and on narrative warfare is just a ridiculous narrative to me and requires big mental gymnastics and a lot of assumptions.

[mr_engineer]

@zurew

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/safety-of-covid-19-vaccines

WHO says that 'Vaccines have been found to be safe and effective in people with various underlying medical conditions that are associated with increased risk of severe disease.' This is the disclaimer that all of the social-media giants give when anyone talks about the vax. They're talking about all the vaccines here. Not just Pfizer-vaccine. 

Why?! Because they don't want to overtly promote the brand, saying that 'It's our vaccine, not their vaccine'. Even if they're the market-leaders. Why? Because the priority is the image of the 'vaccine', as a product. They know that there are conspiracy-theories floating around and they feel the need to give out this disclaimer to people who are skeptical or 'vaccine-hesitant', as they call it. This is how they branded their product in this marketing-environment. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[zurew]

 

@mr_engineer Waiting for your response to address my points. https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-urges-under-vaccinated-china-to-include-mrna-vaccines-as-it-battles-omicron-surge/. I could find many other articles like this, its very easy, but it doesn't really matter, because you won't change your position even if I post 1000 articles that goes against and disproves your narrative.

Edited January 11, 2023 by zurew

[mr_engineer]

14 minutes ago, zurew said:

 

@mr_engineer Waiting for your response to address my points. https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-urges-under-vaccinated-china-to-include-mrna-vaccines-as-it-battles-omicron-surge/

They didn't call the Chinese vaccine total trash. This is not something that anti-vaxxers can work with, honestly. It's surface-level tussles, it's not an all-out war to crush the competition. 

The people they really want to crush, are the anti-vaxxers. Cuz if the anti-vaxxers are proven right, that's an existential threat to their business. So, you do everything in your power to cancel anti-vaxxers. 

This is not just for this specific industry, this specific crisis or even this specific class of people. In any business competition, an unwritten rule is that you protect the fundamental image of the product itself first. Then, you compete based on your quality vs their quality, your price vs their price. You try to give a better deal than your competitors, but you don't attack the fundamental image of your product just to destroy competition. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by mr_engineer

[zurew]

1 minute ago, mr_engineer said:

They didn't call the Chinese vaccine total trash. This is not something that anti-vaxxers can work with, honestly. It's surface-level tussles, it's not an all-out war to crush the competition. 

You are being dishonest again. Firstly your narrative was that there wasn't or that there would be no fight for the net benefit of all these companies (because they would fear other participants will do and how they will fire back and they would create their own disinformation campaing), and now you are changing your position, and now you are demanding some of these countries and companies to actually say disinformation about other vaccines in order to win the competition. What effects do you think the saying of  "Chinese vaccines are ineffective" causes on the market?

You didn't adress any of my points in my previous posts, I think you are dishonest and very obtuse and you are unwilling to change any of your positions, because you are ideologically driven and you are wasting everyone's time here.

[Sucuk Ekmek]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

Such as bullets coming from a pistol towards a human head. Is that a good argument to not avoid any danger?

Depends on danger and context.

In case of war things can be different.