zurew

No way. Starting from a position where there is a mass scale conspiracy against people ,where all institutions on a multinational scale can collaborate in an organized, mallicious way - thats a position where its impossible to move that person even 1mm - its like saying you are in a matrix where everyone is against you.

If you seriously think that institutions are corrupt to the core (like there is a mass scale maliciousness towards people and or you can't trust any data that comes from any institution lets be it scientific or anything else), then I have no idea how to begin to have a productive conversation with you or how to ground any conversation with you or how to move you even a little from that position.

I don't know if he has a claim that hits that level (maybe his claims about 5G ), the point was to demonsrate how hard it is to debate people, who have different epistemic standards compared to you and he in fact has and had a different epistemic standard comapred to the scientific consensus based on the claims he provided for instance: If you read those through above you will find claims, that are contradictory to the scientific consensus and conspiratiorial or at the very best is not suggested to be true by the scientific consensus - which means he used an epistemic method that doesn't involve the scientific consensus to reach his conclusions - which also means that you can't convince him using scientific studies, therefore the debate is either impossible because you can't use studies to move his position on those matters or you will be debating with anecdotes which is a waste of time. When you check one of his claims about covid19 vaccines that "the vaccine clearly killed x thousand number of people" and if you investigate what epistemic process he used to make that claim, you will see how dishonest he is: He used the VAERS database to make that claim, and if you look up the VAERS database, there they will tell you that the reports there shouldn't be taken as fact. Now if your own source tells you how unreliable the data is and you still use that for your arguments - that shows either that you haven't done any serious reading on the subject and haven't even read even on a surface level your own data (which also shows a lack of commitment and standard to try to be as true as possbile) or it shows that you are dishonest or it shows that you are so far removed epistemically from reality that you need to paint big pictures in order to hold up your delusional reality. If you look at the LondonReal video that I sent you above you will see that he hits almost all the points that a conspiratorial nut says and how a conspiratorial nut thinks - always assuming some mass conspiracy and malice towards people. Now the question becomes how the fuck can you even start having a conversation let alone a debate with a person like that?

1) Its clear that you have never had a debate with a person who has completely different epistemic standards and axioms compared to you. Lets see you debunk a claim like this: Lizard people are running the world from behind the scenes. Good luck having an easy debunk! 2) Many people have offered to debate RFK, but Joe is yet to choose from one of them.

This was a painful debate. The amount of rambling and lack of engagement the two women displayed was fascinating. Those 200 dollar donations where they said "77777777777777777" were also fascinating. Who the fuck spends 200$ to say that? ? this edit ? : https://streamable.com/7rrqvb

Dont worry, Im out. Enjoy your thread.

What Tate doing anything wrong???? Are you out of your mind?? Our God - that we should all devote our whole life to defend and follow and of course worship - cannot do anything wrong , and even if he could, who cares bro, he speaks the truth. Who cares if he does any unlawful or immoral thing - he is our God therefore he is the one who defines what is moral, and he is the one who tell us what we should think and how we should think about things Bless and follow our lord top G -and if you didnt know - G stands for God with a capital G

Sure, lets see how others will interpret your message.

@Carl-Richard You are a treadmill guy aren't you? (and this whole thread is just a rationalization so that you don't need to go outside for a run) just jking

If you think the above is just a regular follower behaviour, then I don't know what to tell you.

True, I just cant handle the amount of truth he speaks. Maybe one day I could become a devoted follower of his, so I will be able to overlook all the wrong things that he does, because only the truth matters nothing else.

This is not a fight, I just descriptively stated the facts based on how devoted you are towards him. If i would see any fan that goes this hard lets be it a Leo or a Jesus fan or whatever, I would point out how concerning that kind of admiration is.

Ohh please stop. Don't act like he will be inprisoned (if he will be, we will see), because he said some truth that the current justice system can't currently recognize/stomach. If you really think that is the case I would like you to list all those "truths" that he said that violates the law. You act like a crazy fanboy who is totally blinded by his leader and you won't give a single fuck what you leader does as long as he will spout out some truth that you care about. Even if it would be the case, that he would reveal some big Truth, you should still be able to call him out on his bullshit. Your mind seem to be totally captured by the dude, which is super scary that even on this forum we can see a clear example of a crazy fan.

Peter Hotez is not a good debater and he doesn't even know how to deal with a person like RFK. You need plenty of debate and rhetorical skills to be able to deal with all the steamrolling and gish-galloping that some of these guys do. RFK can spit out a bunch of wrong claims confidently, without having anything at stake at all (because he is not a doctor). On the other side Peter has everything to lose if he can't properly debunk each and every one of RFK's claims. There are very smart doctors out there who have good debate skills who can represent Hotez side reallly well, so if Joe actually cares about the truth proposition of the debate rather than humiliating Hotez, then he would accept the offer of another doctor who actual ly has good debate skills.

No problem.

you use so much morally loaded words like "This fact speaks louder than distracting words" and " for exercising your free will to protect your body" like there is someone malicious trying to catch you. Do you think the state should never ever have the power to hardcore motivate people to take some kind of action (in the context of trying to prevent certain diseases from escalating to an unmanagable level or escalating to a level where there is a ton of health and material damage is caused)?

Who said you did?

You know when you need to create and use grand-scale conspiracies to defend your guy or your ideology, that you are probably in so much denial its insane. Its a complete brainrot. Their foundational assumption is that it must be the matrix and nothing can change that assumption therefore its impossible for the Tate's to do anything bad or wrong. Before they didn't get charged there were only two options for them: 1) If they get charged its the matrix 2) If they don't get charged, they are obviously innocent 1) If they get convicted its the matrix 2) If they won't , then they were obviously innocent from the very beginning Everything is a conspiracy against their idol: daddy Tate.

Again this doesn't tell you or anyone anything about the safetiness or efficacy. For you to know how safety or effective it is , you need to look at the studies. What does "unnecessary vaccine" even means here? Why would they spend billions of dollars to make a vaccine that is unnecessary?

Yeah its a brainrot and the complete shutdown of any kind of thinking.

Sadghuru is an incredibly exceptional person, but even him would be probably 2-3x more developed if he wouldn't care about helping humanity and would just purely focus on his own development. Most people probably won't reach his level even if they start their spiritual work from their childhood.

Lol "your bankaccount is a joke" says the girl who feels entitled enough to demand her friend's boyfriend to pay for her shit.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65959097

Its possible but you need to be extremely driven and resisilient(especially mentally) and you will need to sacrifice a lot to pull it off. But in most cases quality work is not possible if you push yourself that hard and most people are not really built for that kind of lifestyle. In most cases when you work that much, you don't really work, but half of your time and energy is just being spent on you trying to cope with the stress that coming from your work + from the fact that all the other parts of your life (outside of you work) is shit and not maintained and or underdeveloped. + sometimes you have to wonder whether you are doing that much work because you actually want to do it vs you are using it as a coping mechanism to not have to deal with all the other issues in your life that you can't necessarily solve or that are really hard to solve and maintain (ie relationships).

This doesn't speak anything about efficacy or about safetiness. Lets say you own a vaccine company and you create a vaccine that has 0.0001 chance to give you very serious health complications. Now your vaccine gets approved and you give this vaccine to a 1 billion people, which means you have 100 000 people with serious injuries and each of them can now sue you for millions of dollars. So you basically completely disincentivise all vaccine companies to produce anything (especially for mass use) because they are determined to be destroyed and sued to the dust (if they can't produce a 100% safe vaccine - which is an incredibly absurd standard to have).