People Getting The Vacine Will Be A Biological Weapon.

Captain Furball

My Opinion

The flu vaccine everyone is encouraged to get is actually a Biological Weapon designed to transmit the flu to people who have not yet been infected.
If 30% of people get this vaccine, then 70% of the population will die.

And have you anything to support your opinion?

Captain Furball

What do you mean?

Captain Furball

Captain Furball wrote: »

What do you mean?

Like any verifiable evidence to support your figures?
Like any verifiable evidence that the vaccine is designed to transmit the flu to people who have not yet been infected?

meglome

Reads like a novel or a dream.

What will your opinion be when this doesn't actual happen?

bonkey

Captain Furball wrote: »

The flu vaccine everyone is encouraged to get is actually a Biological Weapon designed to transmit the flu to people who have not yet been infected.
If 30% of people get this vaccine, then 70% of the population will die.

So what you're saying, then, is that the current H1N1 strain has a 70% mortality rate, and the only thing keeping it in check is the low rate of transmission.

Ignoring, for a moment, that this is completely at odds with what we know about the virus, its spread, and its effects thus far...

...I take it that you'd also be of the opinion, then, that this strain of flu is perhaps the deadliest virus man has ever seen, and that we couldn't possibly do enough to try and keep ourselves safe from it?

Even if you're saying that the 30% vaccinated will be amongst the dead, you're saying that the flu alone will kill 40% of the planet's population...helped only in transmission by this vaccine.

star-pants

Seems like an awful high percentage of mortality for a flu (swine or otherwise), worse things have hit mankind. And how much of a percentage will really be affected by the flu?
I wouldn't get it, but that's because I get nearly everything I get vaccinated for.
Do you think that 30% will be affected due to accident / wanting to spread the virus / or just people like me who get stuff?

1.7k people are goin to the doctor about this per week.
So I'm guessing a few more have it than are going to the doctor.

2 people have died here so far.
Both had underlying problems.


hmm

Captain Furball

bonkey wrote: »

So what you're saying, then, is that the current H1N1 strain has a 70% mortality rate, and the only thing keeping it in check is the low rate of transmission.

Bad maths mr science.

lol NO, 100% mortality rate anything less is just ridiculous

Even if you're saying that the 30% vaccinated will be amongst the dead, you're saying that the flu alone will kill 40% of the planet's population...helped only in transmission by this vaccine.

The 30% will be the people who are immune carriers, hence the 70% mortality rate.

bonkey

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

1.7k people are goin to the doctor about this per week.
So I'm guessing a few more have it than are going to the doctor.

2 people have died here so far.
Both had underlying problems.

This strikes me as the same type of logic as "Irish weather is fine, so global warming can't be right".

Irish figures (which is what I assume you're using) are not a good yardstick to measure any pandemic by....nor are figures from what could be described as "early days" necessarily a good indication of what is to come.

Captain Furball

bonkey wrote: »

This strikes me as the same type of logic as "Irish weather is fine, so global warming can't be right".

Irish figures (which is what I assume you're using) are not a good yardstick to measure any pandemic by....nor are figures from what could be described as "early days" necessarily a good indication of what is to come.

Logic has a funny way of being incorrect most of the time.But don't let yourself be ruled by frivolous things like that.:)

bonkey

bonkey wrote: »

This strikes me as the same type of logic as "Irish weather is fine, so global warming can't be right".

Irish figures (which is what I assume you're using) are not a good yardstick to measure any pandemic by....nor are figures from what could be described as "early days" necessarily a good indication of what is to come.

So, thousands of people being infected with the h1n1 flu each week, and only one or two dying out of all of them has no impact in this debate at all?

bonkey

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

So, thousands of people being infected with the h1n1 flu each week, and only one or two dying out of all of them has no impact in this debate at all?

The official figures for Ireland are 767 reported cases, with 2 fatalities. Ireland is amongst the nations without laboratory-testing of suspected cases, so the figure for reported cases is an estimate.

Wordwide, there are just shy of 270,000 reported cases, with 2,873 dead.

So wordwide, roughly 1% of reported cases result in death. From memory, something like 1/3 of these have been cases without medical complications.

The worldwide figures play a role, in terms of showing the emerging state of hte pandemic. The Irish figures do not.

Neither the worldwide figures nor hte Irish figures are clearly indicative of where the pandemic will go, in terms of transmission or mortality.

So, I stand by what I said. Talking about two deaths from 767 cases is not really meaningful. Talking about 1% mortality worldwide is better, but still has its limitations.

Suggesting that there is significance in the fact that no Irish person has died without additional medical complications is meaningless. Pandemics - and virii in general - don't really care about borders. They don't become more or less fatal because they've crossed a border.

bonkey

Captain Furball wrote: »

Logic has a funny way of being incorrect most of the time.But don't let yourself be ruled by frivolous things like that.:)

I was pointing out that its flawed logic. I'm glad we agree that flawed logic leads to bad conclusions.

meglome

Captain Furball wrote: »

Logic has a funny way of being incorrect most of the time.But don't let yourself be ruled by frivolous things like that.:)

I think I see why we seem to disagree, you ignore logic.

Diogenes

Captain Furball wrote: »

Logic has a funny way of being incorrect most of the time.But don't let yourself be ruled by frivolous things like that.:)

Yeah the concept of logic is basically the underlying principle of all scientific thought. Essentially you're claiming the entire scientific model from Aristole on is mostly wrong.

I'm sure you can provide excellent examples.


As to this idiocy about the vaccine being evil and trying to wipe out humanity. During the 20th century, it is estimated that smallpox was responsible for 300–500 million deaths. In the early 1950s an estimated 50 million cases of smallpox occurred in the world each year. As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year. After successful vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the eradication of smallpox in December 1979. To this day, smallpox is the only human infectious disease to have been completely eradicated.

Thats right that evil ol' NWO and UN actually eradiated a disease that would have killed tens of millions of people, in the last few years.

The idea that they'd wipe out small pox and then spend so much time developing this virus, in order to wipeout huge chunks of humanity is beyond stupid.

Captain Furball

Diogenes wrote: »

Yeah the concept of logic is basically the underlying principle of all scientific thought. Essentially you're claiming the entire scientific model from Aristole on is mostly wrong.

I'm sure you can provide excellent examples.


As to this idiocy about the vaccine being evil and trying to wipe out humanity. During the 20th century, it is estimated that smallpox was responsible for 300–500 million deaths. In the early 1950s an estimated 50 million cases of smallpox occurred in the world each year. As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year. After successful vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the eradication of smallpox in December 1979. To this day, smallpox is the only human infectious disease to have been completely eradicated.

Thats right that evil ol' NWO and UN actually eradiated a disease that would have killed tens of millions of people, in the last few years.

The idea that they'd wipe out small pox and then spend so much time developing this virus, in order to wipeout huge chunks of humanity is beyond stupid.

That's a very valid point you make.Maybe those same people are retired and someone else took their jobs?So the WHO years ago, isn't the WHO now.I myself think the world is over crowded.That is why I came up with my theory of whats going on at present.

sceptre

Captain Furball wrote: »

My Opinion

The flu vaccine everyone is encouraged to get is actually a Biological Weapon designed to transmit the flu to people who have not yet been infected.
If 30% of people get this vaccine, then 70% of the population will die.

So you'll be getting the vaccine then I assume?

Captain Furball

I believe because I'm a Caucasian I am less likely to die from this flu.

macshadow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PelTWCUmTsU

Project camelot interview with jane burgermeister, she is the journalist that filed criminal changes against WHO and Baxter.

4gun

King Mob wrote: »

Like any verifiable evidence to support your figures?
Like any verifiable evidence that the vaccine is designed to transmit the flu to people who have not yet been infected?

not to be stiring the siht up but if ony one could properly verify anything on this board then they wouldn't be any conspiracies THEORIES to mention, THEY BE FACT and we'd all be in a whole lot of crap
constantly looking for absolute proof for somthing on a THEORIES thread is like loogkng for dry land at the bottom of the sea
I would seriously consider looking up the defination of THEORIES if I were you ...Oh God, what a thought
I'll say it again this is a Conspiracy Theories thread, if there wad absolute verifiable proof then it would be a CONSPIRACIY FACT thread...comprende

4gun

4gun wrote: »

not to be stiring the siht up but if ony one could properly verify anything on this board then they wouldn't be any conspiracies THEORIES to mention, THEY BE FACT and we'd all be in a whole lot of crap
constantly looking for absolute proof for somthing on a THEORIES thread is like loogkng for dry land at the bottom of the sea
I would seriously consider looking up the defination of THEORIES if I were you ...Oh God, what a thought
I'll say it again this is a Conspiracy Theories thread, if there wad absolute verifiable proof then it would be a CONSPIRACIY FACT thread...comprende

But I'm not looking for absolute proof.
I'm asking for people to back up their statements with some evidence.

Like if you claim

If 30% of people get this vaccine, then 70% of the population will die.

Surely if this is true and not just made up, then you'd be able to support that claim.

With out solid evidence to back it up a conspiracy theory is no more valid than pure fantasy.

Ostrom

4gun wrote: »

not to be stiring the siht up but if ony one could properly verify anything on this board then they wouldn't be any conspiracies THEORIES to mention, THEY BE FACT and we'd all be in a whole lot of crap
constantly looking for absolute proof for somthing on a THEORIES thread is like loogkng for dry land at the bottom of the sea
I would seriously consider looking up the defination of THEORIES if I were you ...Oh God, what a thought
I'll say it again this is a Conspiracy Theories thread, if there wad absolute verifiable proof then it would be a CONSPIRACIY FACT thread...comprende

No, if it became as you are suggesting, then it would be 'conspiracy stories'.

The function of a theory is to impose order on a set of observations, the substance of those observations being real and objective. A theory attempts to account for various subjective aspects such as their particular ordering, origins, possible future developments etc.

4gun

King Mob wrote: »

But I'm not looking for absolute proof.
I'm asking for people to back up their statements with some evidence

.


agreed but you usually doubt the soarce any way so...
there no real proof to you, total skeptic:D try reading the Sovereign Independant.com... now where they get their info... ask them, I would presume that it would be through research and other media channels, all depends on whose version you believe.. doesn't it...

Like if you claim

ditto

Surely if this is true and not just made up, then you'd be able to support that claim.

lies, damm lies, and statistics:D

With out solid evidence to back it up a conspiracy theory is no more valid than pure fantasy.[/quote

]
in fairness some is and some isn't.
I agree you can't believe all you see and hear but it helps to keep an open mind, but ridiculing all "believers"for the sake of it does not help
You will get some people on this thread who want to "stir it up" from both sides of the fence but others are just trying to pass on information that they might feel is a genuine cause for concern
When I first heard that the Twin Towers had been attacked I didnt believe it (the messenger was often fond of flights of fantasy) I told him to f**k off and not to be talking S**t when it became enevitable that it was trur he said to me who's talking s**t now...dont ridicule the messenger just because his story sounds fantastic......There might be some truth in it after all

4gun

4gun wrote: »

in fairness some is and some isn't.
I agree you can't believe all you see and hear but it helps to keep an open mind, but ridiculing all "believers"for the sake of it does not help
You will get some people on this thread who want to "stir it up" from both sides of the fence but others are just trying to pass on information that they might feel is a genuine cause for concern
When I first heard that the Twin Towers had been attacked I didnt believe it (the messenger was often fond of flights of fantasy) I told him to f**k off and not to be talking S**t when it became enevitable that it was trur he said to me who's talking s**t now...dont ridicule the messenger just because his story sounds fantastic......There might be some truth in it after all

And all I asked was if there actually anything to support the claim:
"If 30% of people get this vaccine, then 70% of the population will die."

There wasn't.

If you make a claim and it isn't just made up you should be able to back it up.

4gun

[quote=

If you make a claim and it isn't just made up you should be able to back it up.[/quote]

and I agree

try reading the paper i mentioned above and then its up to your self whether you "believe it or not " we all know that paper never refuses ink but you will not find alot of this stuff in the regular media not because its unbelievable but most likely it just doesn't sell or because the national enquirer has already covered it or some other rag
the Soverign Independant is given out free and its up to your self if you believe what it says, but just because a paper isnt main streem doesn't make it less credible.
Is there any such thing as absolute truth might that not depend on your perspective, on what your willing to believe or not believe
we all take sides and try to convince the opposition that we are right,when we fail to reach an compromise it ccan often lead to disastrous consequences