Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

The Vaccine

1…7576788081…91

Comments

  • #2312
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,154 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    I don’t think you’re aware of how silly your line of argument is coming across

    It’s widely accepted by virtually everyone that due to the way the deaths are reported the 1.7m is people who died with covid, not necessarily from it. Even people as pro lockdown and precautions as Leo varadkar in Ireland have stated just that.

    Then you try to gaslight the posters pointing this out by demanding they show the figures for people who died from it, fully knowing that the way the deaths are being officially recorded it is impossible to do so.

    When you’re being that intellectually dishonest I honestly can’t see why you’d bother posting on the thread

    The current global estimate is 1.7 mm deaths as a result of Covid. If you have alternative figures, please provide, with the methodology

    Posters repeatedly attacking this figure are often promoting disinfo about Covid, other denialism about the virus and conspiracies


  • #2313
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The current global estimate is 1.7 mm deaths as a result of Covid. If you have alternative figures, please provide, with the methodology

    Posters repeatedly attacking this figure are often promoting disinfo about Covid, other denialism about the virus and conspiracies

    Make sure to wipe down your keyboard after typing all that..


  • #2314
    storker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭storker


    Lex Luthor wrote: »
    Imagine thinking the technology isn’t there

    And this is 3yrs old from mr google

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/nanobots-will-live-in-our-brains-in-the-2030s-says-google-boss-1.3259597?mode=amp&fbclid=IwAR18wKzYOy9pq1rHxbJ349nHn0WAg6l_Z3d4efuBWreSyVtG7uEpcKc9xZ4#.X-dhvzFeI-d.facebook

    Instead of getting hung up on the technology, why don't you concentrate on the much more relevant bit; proving that there is an intention to insert it into people against their will using a vaccine as cover?

    What have you got on that? More nudge-nudge, wink-wink innuendo, no doubt...


  • #2315
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    I don’t think you’re aware of how silly your line of argument is coming across

    It’s widely accepted by virtually everyone that due to the way the deaths are reported the 1.7m is people who died with covid, not necessarily from it. Even people as pro lockdown and precautions as Leo varadkar in Ireland have stated just that.
    But it's not widely accepted.
    And that's not true.
    The 1.7 million figure is people who died of covid.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Then you try to gaslight the posters pointing this out by demanding they show the figures for people who died from it, fully knowing that the way the deaths are being officially recorded it is impossible to do so.

    When you’re being that intellectually dishonest I honestly can’t see why you’d bother posting on the thread
    That's not what gaslighting is.

    And yes, I know they can't provide a more accurate number because their conspiracy theories aren't true and they aren't based on facts.

    If anyone can give a better estimate of the numbers based on some actual good sources, then I'm all ears.
    But it's not likely to show that the numbers are the 1000s of times less they'd need to be to make covid less dangerous than vaccines.

    Now, do you believe that the number is being inflated on purpose?

    Do you believe the vaccine is dangerous?


  • #2316
    valor rorghulis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 126 ✭✭valor rorghulis


    King Mob wrote: »
    But it's not widely accepted.
    And that's not true.
    The 1.7 million figure is people who died of covid.


    That's not what gaslighting is.

    And yes, I know they can't provide a more accurate number because their conspiracy theories aren't true and they aren't based on facts.

    If anyone can give a better estimate of the numbers based on some actual good sources, then I'm all ears.
    But it's not likely to show that the numbers are the 1000s of times less they'd need to be to make covid less dangerous than vaccines.

    Now, do you believe that the number is being inflated on purpose?

    Do you believe the vaccine is dangerous?

    The general methodology across the world is that if there’s any ambiguity around the death you put it down as due to covid if they recently tested positive for it. So we have a scenario where people with advanced lung cancer and Alzheimer’s are getting recorded as covid deaths. Most reasonable people know that these people really died of the aforementioned conditions and their deaths certainly shouldn’t be used as a basis to enforce public policy. That’s what we mean by with covid rather than from covid.

    I’d the vaccine dangerous? In the immediate sense I don’t think so though there are concerns around fertility notes by the producers to be acknowledged and it seems it’s causing a lot of Bell’s palsy cases, however I acknowledge that effect hasn’t been demonstrated to be statistically significant yet.

    The “danger” for me is that there is no research on the long term effects, and the government indemnifying big pharma in case of liability really gave me the shudders. They said they were doing it to reassure the public when that indemnity actually takes away any incentive for the vaccine providers to ensure it’s safe.

    So I won’t be taking it, and I think it’s morally wrong for there to be any service or travel restrictions to be placed on anyone who refuses


  • Advertisement
  • #2317
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    The general methodology across the world is that if there’s any ambiguity around the death you put it down as due to covid if they recently tested positive for it. So we have a scenario where people with advanced lung cancer and Alzheimer’s are getting recorded as covid deaths. Most reasonable people know that these people really died of the aforementioned conditions and their deaths certainly shouldn’t be used as a basis to enforce public policy. That’s what we mean by with covid rather than from covid.
    But that's all simply not true.
    That is not how the 1.7 million figure has been calculated.

    You dodged my question. I find people doing that to be very very intellectually dishonest.
    Do you believe that the number is being inflated on purpose?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    The “danger” for me is that there is no research on the long term effects,
    But this is also not true.
    Vaccines that do have side effects in the vast vast majority of cases have their side effects show up inside a few months.
    There isn't many (if any) examples of any vaccines causing side effects to appear out of nowhere years down the line.

    What long term effects are you concerned about?

    Several conspiracy theorists have claimed that the vaccine will be used to depopulate the world. Do you believe that this is a rational thing to claim?
    How about the claim that the vaccine will alter our Dna?
    Or the claim that the vaccine contains nanotech tracking devices?


  • #2318
    valor rorghulis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 126 ✭✭valor rorghulis


    King Mob wrote: »
    But that's all simply not true.
    That is not how the 1.7 million figure has been calculated.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/covid-19-deaths-ireland-hiqa-5140490-Jul2020/

    So Varadkar said this in response to a study which showed inflation of covid deaths:

    “In Ireland we counted all deaths, in all settings, suspected cases even when no lab test was done, and included people with underlying terminal illnesses who died with Covid but not of it.”

    Varadkar added that this was the “right approach but skewed the numbers”, saying the priority was “to save lives, not look good in league tables”.”

    So it’s not exactly sinister, but it’s same approach in many countries and why I don’t accept the 1.7mil figure as caused *by* covid deaths. Many of those folks sadly would have died anyway, and I think from this reporting method you can see why we can only estimate the real death level
    You dodged my question. I find people doing that to be very very intellectually dishonest.
    Do you believe that the number is being inflated on purpose?

    Sorry bru, genuinely didn’t see it first time around.
    Hard to say, I mean seems illogical to me to report deaths the way Varadkar has described, and you’d wonder why.
    But this is also not true.
    Vaccines that do have side effects in the vast vast majority of cases have their side effects show up inside a few months.
    There isn't many (if any) examples of any vaccines causing side effects to appear out of nowhere years down the line.

    What long term effects are you concerned about?

    The narcolepsy cases emerging in those who took swine flu alone is enough to outweigh the potential risks for a long term unstudied vaccine compared to covid 19 risks for me. To give context if it was airborne Ebola I’d take it or highly transmissible MERS I’d think carefully about it. I’ve taken MMR as a child and voluntarily taken hep A/B vaccines as an adult

    For covid I feel quitting smoking, improving lifestyle and supplementing with vitamin D, Zinc and a few other things is sufficient.
    Several conspiracy theorists have claimed that the vaccine will be used to depopulate the world. Do you believe that this is a rational thing to claim?
    How about the claim that the vaccine will alter our Dna?
    Or the claim that the vaccine contains nanotech tracking devices?

    No to all of these. The only conspiracy I’d entertain around it is big pharma collusion with media and governments to make shed loads of cash


  • #2319
    Lex Luthor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭Lex Luthor


    storker wrote: »
    Instead of getting hung up on the technology, why don't you concentrate on the much more relevant bit; proving that there is an intention to insert it into people against their will using a vaccine as cover?

    What have you got on that? More nudge-nudge, wink-wink innuendo, no doubt...

    who says that it will be against peoples will

    you will be chipped one day to prove you got a vaccine


  • #2320
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,522 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Lex Luthor wrote: »
    who says that it will be against peoples will

    you will be chipped one day to prove you got a vaccine

    Why chipped? You could add it to people's DSP profile right now with minimal work.


  • #2321
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,154 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Lex Luthor wrote: »
    who says that it will be against peoples will

    you will be chipped one day to prove you got a vaccine

    You're back again. Did you watch that video you posted?

    If so, what does it claim? (and yes I've watched it, but you seem to be taking something else away from it..)


  • Advertisement
  • #2322
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    https://www.thejournal.ie/covid-19-deaths-ireland-hiqa-5140490-Jul2020/
    From the article:
    Hiqa found that the official number of reported Covid-19 deaths likely “overestimates the true burden of excess deaths caused by the virus”.

    The report states that this could be due to the inclusion within official figures of people who were infected with the virus at the time of death whose cause of death may have been predominantly due to other factors.

    Speaking to RTɒs News at One, Teljeur said the official figure of 1,709 is likely “an accurate estimate”.

    “It may be a slight overestimate, but it is likely to be an accurate estimate.     Excess mortality, it has a limitation that doesn’t necessarily fully state the burden of Covid-19 on mortality.

    “So excess mortality is trying to contrast the number of deaths that were observed with the number that were expected. And as some of these people were expected to have died during that period, then they don’t count towards the excess mortality.

    “But the reality is, they did die because of Covid-19, and it therefore contributes to the overall mortality and we need to count that correctly.”
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    So it’s not exactly sinister, but it’s same approach in many countries and why I don’t accept the 1.7mil figure as caused *by* covid deaths. Many of those folks sadly would have died anyway, and I think from this reporting method you can see why we can only estimate the real death level
    Ok. What's the estimate for the real death level?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Sorry bru, genuinely didn’t see it first time around.
    Hard to say, I mean seems illogical to me to report deaths the way Varadkar has described, and you’d wonder why.
    Why is it illogical? Are you a statistician? A virologist? Have you had any training in a relevant field?

    Just because it doesn't make sense to you personally after having done nothing to look into it or understand it, it doesn't mean it's illogical. And it doesn't mean a giant global conspiracy is a viable alternative.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    The narcolepsy cases emerging in those who took swine flu alone is enough to outweigh the potential risks for a long term unstudied vaccine compared to covid 19 risks for me
    Ok. How long after the vaccine did these cases of narcolepsy appear? Days? Months? Years?
    Also, how many cases where there compared to the number of vaccines given?
    How does this percentage compare to the percentage of people who die due to covid?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    For covid I feel quitting smoking, improving lifestyle and supplementing with vitamin D, Zinc and a few other things is sufficient.
    And this is based on the research you did as a medical doctor?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    No to all of these.
    Why do you not believe them?
    Why do you think others do?


  • #2323
    valor rorghulis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 126 ✭✭valor rorghulis


    Ok mate, that was seriously disingenuous. I put in the link to quote Varadkar and how Ireland recorded the deaths and how that links to my interpretation of the with/from argument.

    You just chose not to respond or mention that whatsoever, so I gotta ask, are you interested in a proper discussion or you just wanna be the big man who wins the argument?
    King Mob wrote: »
    From the article:



    Ok. What's the estimate for the real death level?

    I already pointed out this is difficult to estimate due to the methodology in reporting of deaths. The idea that I haven’t ran a study to determine the true level somehow invalidates considerations on the reported deaths is asinine
    Why is it illogical? Are you a statistician? A virologist? Have you had any training in a relevant field?

    Just because it doesn't make sense to you personally after having done nothing to look into it or understand it, it doesn't mean it's illogical. And it doesn't mean a giant global conspiracy is a viable alternative.

    It’s illogical because it’s over egging the pudding. It’s a follow on from what I said about how the death recording method Varadkar referenced shouldn’t influence public policy because sadly those people would have died anyway, and many more would have died in a short period after. The rest of society shouldn’t go through upheaval over that.

    And sorry, you don’t have any right to demand personal information about my occupation like that.

    Ok. How long after the vaccine did these cases of narcolepsy appear? Days? Months? Years?
    Also, how many cases where there compared to the number of vaccines given?
    How does this percentage compare to the percentage of people who die due to covid?

    Took longer to appear than covid 19 has existed.

    Over 80 cases in Irish courts so far, the cases/vaccine ratio and comparison with covid deaths are irrelevant because I was justifying my reason for me not taking it; it was clearly not an argument against the vaccine in general. Hence references to Ebola and MERS. Are you even reading the posts?

    And this is based on the research you did as a medical doctor?

    Seriously this is neurotic. I’d suggest you chill out for 30 minutes before responding.

    I looked at the epidemiological studies on vitamin D and the age/health profiles of those who died with Covid 19 and decided based on that I don’t need the vaccine and lifestyle changes were enough. In fact probably unnecessary but worthwhile anyway. If I was 15 years older and obese I’d probably take the vaccine.
    Why do you not believe them?
    Why do you think others do?

    Why are you asking me this?


  • #2324
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,398 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Quiner wrote: »
    I don't wish to answer for Lex, but an additional 130 million people 'could be on the brink of starvation' by the end of this year as a result of the lockdowns: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-n-warns-hunger-pandemic-amid-threats-coronavirus-economic-downturn-n1189326

    Of course the UN says it's because of the 'coronavirus outbreak and the subsequent economic ramifications', but the lockdowns are causing the economic ramifications.

    And what's causing the lockdowns?

    Some serious mental gymnastics going on here.


    You could blame the deaths of millions every year on various decisions and spending priorities but such is the world.


  • #2325
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Ok mate, that was seriously disingenuous. I put in the link to quote Varadkar and how Ireland recorded the deaths and how that links to my interpretation of the with/from argument.

    You just chose not to respond or mention that whatsoever, so I gotta ask, are you interested in a proper discussion or you just wanna be the big man who wins the argument?

    I think anyone who frequents this forum is aware that he's not interested in a proper discussion..
    Pretty much just call you an idiot and throw questions at you until you give up..


  • #2326
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,522 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I think anyone who frequents this forum is aware that he's not interested in a proper discussion..
    Pretty much just call you an idiot and throw questions at you until you give up..

    I hate when people ask questions about illogical claims. Damn sheep not believing stuff without questioning it.


  • #2327
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,154 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think anyone who frequents this forum is aware that he's not interested in a proper discussion..
    Pretty much just call you an idiot and throw questions at you until you give up..
    Make sure to wipe down your keyboard after typing all that..

    Anything of substance to add?

    Which conspiracy in this thread do you support, or are you just here for snide quips :)


  • #2328
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ye are the ones claiming a vaccine developed in a few months for a virus discovered this year is fine..


  • #2329
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Ok mate, that was seriously disingenuous. I put in the link to quote Varadkar and how Ireland recorded the deaths and how that links to my interpretation of the with/from argument.

    You just chose not to respond or mention that whatsoever, so I gotta ask, are you interested in a proper discussion or you just wanna be the big man who wins the argument?
    Because your article also states:
    “It may be a slight overestimate, but it is likely to be an accurate estimate."
    So even if your argument held and this was how the 1.7 million number was reached (it isn't) the number must still be accurate.

    You are arguing that the official number is not accurate, yet the article you posted does not say that. The article states that it is accurate.

    This leads me to believe that you didn't read it very closely.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    I already pointed out this is difficult to estimate due to the methodology in reporting of deaths. The idea that I haven’t ran a study to determine the true level somehow invalidates considerations on the reported deaths is asinine
    It's not asinine to point out how your claims aren't really backed up by much.
    You keep claiming the death number is inaccurate, yet you can't produce even an estimate for the true number.

    If you can't produce a number, maybe you can explain by how much the death number is off? 5%? 10%

    According to the expert in the article you linked to the estimate is accurate.
    Do you now disagree with this expert?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    It’s illogical because it’s over egging the pudding.

    And sorry, you don’t have any right to demand personal information about my occupation like that.
    I'm not asking your occupation, I'm pointing out that you most likely are not a statistician or a virologist nor trained in any relevant field.
    So the fact you personally think it's illogical is irrelevant.

    There is factors and considerations in complex topics like this that make it not readily understood by lay people, especially those like yourself make no effort in trying to understand why things are done how they are.

    And again, just because you personally don't understand it, it doesn't mean a global conspiracy is a viable option.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Took longer to appear than covid 19 has existed.
    Simply not true.
    The cases appeared between one and two months after vaccination.
    The vaccine trials have been going on for 6 months and longer.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Over 80 cases in Irish courts so far, the cases/vaccine ratio and comparison with covid deaths are irrelevant because I was justifying my reason for me not taking it
    No, it's very very relevant.
    The chances of getting narcolepsy from the swine flu vaccine were 0.0005%.
    The covid vaccines have not shown any such side effect.

    The chances of dying from covid after catching it are between 2% and 1%

    So it makes no sense for you to be more afraid of side effect that 1. does not occur in the covid vaccines and 2. has a much much lower chance of affecting you than covid does of killing you.

    Your justification makes no sense.
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    I looked at the epidemiological studies on vitamin D and the age/health profiles of those who died with Covid 19 and decided based on that I don’t need the vaccine and lifestyle changes were enough. In fact probably unnecessary but worthwhile anyway. If I was 15 years older and obese I’d probably take the vaccine.
    Cool. And why are doctors saying otherwise?
    valor rorghulis wrote: »
    Why are you asking me this?
    Because I'm interested in why some people believe some conspiracy theories, but not others.


  • #2330
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ye are the ones claiming a vaccine developed in a few months for a virus discovered this year is fine..

    You've been asked repeatedly to outline what the dangers are from the vaccine.
    But you dodged and ignored and ran away every time.


  • #2331
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    King Mob wrote: »
    You've been asked repeatedly to outline what the dangers are from the vaccine.
    But you dodged and ignored and ran away every time.

    What sort of a question is that though?..If such a thing isn't right there are many ways in which it could be extremely harmful..


  • Advertisement
  • #2332
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What sort of a question is that though?..If such a thing isn't right there are many ways in which it could be extremely harmful..
    It's a very direct question you've been running away from and ignoring repeatedly.
    The answer is "You can't point to any dangers because you don't know any that exist."

    What about the vaccine do you believe is "not right"? Please be specific.


  • #2333
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    King Mob wrote: »
    It's a very direct question you've been running away from and ignoring repeatedly.
    The answer is "You can't point to any dangers because you don't know any that exist."

    What about the vaccine do you believe is "not right"? Please be specific.

    It was rushed out..what are you talking about?..
    You do know these things can cause people problems?.. it's why you can't sue over issues caused by vaccines anymore..


  • #2334
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,522 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    It was rushed out..what are you talking about?..
    You do know these things can cause people problems?.. it's why you can't sue over issues caused by vaccines anymore..

    Of course you can sue.

    It wasn't rushed, it was expedited. It went through the required testing periods.


  • #2335
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    Of course you can sue.

    No, you can't..


  • #2336
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,154 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ye are the ones claiming a vaccine developed in a few months for a virus discovered this year is fine..

    Nothing is 100% safe. It's all about relative safety. International regulators and bodies of experts have and are deciding that Covid vaccines are safe enough for the public. Vaccines in general are among the safest medical products ever developed.

    A bunch of anti-vaxxers and people who believe in conspiracies like biblical prophecies on an internet conspiracy forum aren't exactly people anyone should take medical information from. If you want to, that's cool. If you want to skip the vaccine, cool also.


  • #2337
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,714 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Nothing is 100% safe. It's all about relative safety. International regulators and bodies of experts have and are deciding that Covid vaccines are safe enough for the public. Vaccines in general are among the safest medical products ever developed.

    A bunch of anti-vaxxers and people who believe in conspiracies like biblical prophecies on an internet conspiracy forum aren't exactly people anyone should take medical information from. If you want to, that's cool. If you want to skip the vaccine, cool also.

    Yeah..and covid is a bad cold for 99.99% of people..
    It's all relative..


  • #2338
    Lex Luthor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭Lex Luthor


    King Mob wrote: »
    You've been asked repeatedly to outline what the dangers are from the vaccine.
    But you dodged and ignored and ran away every time.

    Where’s the evidence to show it’s safe?
    And don’t just dodge the question by saying it’s out there
    There’s other evidence out there that says otherwise

    Are we still also looking at the vaccine as the silver bullet to save us from a virus that is based on a test that has still not been proven to be accurate?

    I mean we have had a can of coke, honey and a kiwi has tested positive?

    And we have a new variant that has somehow covered the globe in 10 days since it was discovered?


  • #2339
    Lex Luthor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭Lex Luthor


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    Of course you can sue.

    It wasn't rushed, it was expedited. It went through the required testing periods.

    No it didn’t
    They skipped phase 4 live animal trials which are the gold standard for vaccine trials


  • #2340
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,154 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Lex Luthor wrote: »
    And don’t just dodge the question by saying it’s out there

    3rd or 4th time asking

    Did you watch that video you posted?

    If so, what does it claim? (and yes I've watched it, but you seem to be taking something else away from it..)


  • Advertisement
  • #2341
    aido79
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,374 ✭✭✭aido79


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    No, you can't..

    Why not?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement