🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@icedquinn

No I literally gave multiple solutions... either you arent stupid and therefore capable of proving it through your own expertise and/or ability to evaluate the expertise of others... or you rely on the expert consensus... all of those are valid answers.

You basically said "well what if you arent an expert and dont trust experts"... thats like saying "What if someone os am idiot and beleives stupid things without evidence, what evidence can you provide them to prove it to them"... the answer is, none, if they are stupid enough to not only not be an expert but to think experts are untrustowrthy by virtue of being an expert, then they are too stupid to evaluate facts at that point... let them worry about the flat earth and unicorns they cant be helped.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

I am not suggesting you trust the peer reviewers simply by being peer reviewers... you look at the history of the peer reviewers, the history of the publishers, and the history of the journal, and judge accordingly.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

Well a person cant test it themselves because they arent intelligent to know how even if they had the equipment... even a court case would be trusting experts. If the government said "sure ill prove it to you" and brought a vial of it to the court case, what then? It would require an expert to verify it... you'd still be relying on an expert.

It is literally impossible not to rely on an expert, or be an expert yourself.

But when 100% of credible experts all agree and 0% of them find contradiction, then you either need to accept what the experts say, learn to become an expert yourself, or be an idiot who believes in unfounded conspiracy theories... there isnt a 4th option.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

Link to the case your talking about. If they actively tried to isolate it and found they couldnt, then lied, that would be damning.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

You look for both, we already have countless proof positives in all the credibly written papers that have isolated it independently. The lack of a single paper failing to do so also gives a lack of negative proof.

@kayden @bluejay

@bluejay

isolate implies it is not in vivo.. you cant isolate it if its in the body, its only isolated when you have it in a test tube seperate from the body and concentrated.

@icedquinn @kayden

@icedquinn

Review the journals where isolation was attempted and see if there are any credible publications from established experts where they concluding that the COVID virus could not be isolated.

Hint: While you will find countless experiments successfully isolating COVID you wont find a single one that concluded they were unable to isolate COVID.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

It is only "weird" if you watch some concervative conspiracy theory discredited media that describes the case in a way that isnt remotely accurate.

When you actually review the case there is nothing remotely weird about it. The man wasnt suing the government and demanding an isolate, he was being fined and when he attempted to demand an isolate that had no relevance to the case in question of any kind, the court threw out his request as not being relevant to the case.

So it makes perfect sense and nothing remotely odd about it. So anyone who actually bothers to think there is some legitimacy to it is either watching conspiracy theory nonsense and repeating it or just is clueless himself.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn If you mean the king case in alberta it did not go down at all like you described... Which is the only case I could think you might mean.

@icedquinn

Are you talking about the Alberta court decision?

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

National health authorities, depending on whom you are refering, dont necceseraly have isolates on hand. Nor would they necceseraly be obligated to provide it, depending on the reasoning.

Who exactly was sued, and under what conditions was it refused.. be specific cite the situation and we can discuss.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

Can you list even a single case where a scientist who claimed to isolate it was required under subponea to provide proof od isolation and couldnt?

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

The government has nothing to do with it. Countless of scientists, non government related, have isolated covid and produced reports about it. The fact that the government isnt cooperative in any respect is hardly evidence of that.

So yea that one is completely absurd.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

If its a real serious question that has credible evidence, then it wouldnt be "conspiracy BS" by definition.

The only thing that is debatable is if something has evidence to support considering it, which we may disagree on and thats fine.

@kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

I'm not really sure it is. Every conservative and their mother has so little trust right now half of them dont even think COVID exists and are so deep int he conspiracy theory BS its getting absurd. This is a relatively new thing and it is the direct result of how the liberals are trying to strong-arm people who disagree with them, it has caused this resistance in the first place.

I can guarantee you if the liberals actually tried to play nice there would be far less resistance to a vaccine.

@kayden @bluejay

@kayden

Yes, that is my problem to. But as frustrating as it is that doesnt give us the right to try to strong arm them. The solution is education, not force.

I would argue that force is far less effective as well. There was a lot of resistance to vaccines at various times in history that was overcome effectively with education. But when you use force you loose trust and ultimately increase the resistance to it rather than fixing the problem.

You will never win an argument or convince someone of the truth by punching them in the face repeatedly until they agree.

@icedquinn @bluejay

@kayden

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

@icedquinn @Lumeinshin @bluejay

@icedquinn

Sure it exists, its just whatever the political opinion at the moment says it is :) The law has all the finality of a holy text like the bible.. it says whatever you pretend it says.

@kayden @bluejay

@Lumeinshin

really "its just school children, and anyone who wants a job, and the military, oh yea and if you want to enter a store or restaurant.... in fact anywhere that feels like it at this point shy of public spaces..."

@icedquinn @kayden @bluejay

@icedquinn

Agreed, and frankly its one of the disgusting patterns the liberal government tends to repeat over and over again in so many categories, and I say that as someone who leans slightly liberal myself.

They do it with guns too, the second amendment clearly states "shall not be infringed", but since they cant get the amendment changed since they cant get enough support they just violate it all together and try to get enough leverage in the supreme court they can bypass it.

When they cant do it the way the law requires they will use any underhanded methods they want to get their way. Its very childish of them (not that conservatives are any better, but they have entirely different issues).

@kayden @bluejay