@kellyjay said
You didn't bother listening to him, so you have a stinking clue what he has said, not sure what or why you are crowing over that.

Quit using a YouTube video as a ballistic shield. State herein why dear Dr. Tour is still relevant to your case. Is there something else besides his assertions that organic molecules cannot form in space?

@metal-brain said
What is your source of information?

Russian deployment and tactical strategies during the first several weeks of the war. They were textbook exemplars of actions that a military high command expecting a quick victory would undertake.

@metal-brain said
If a woman I didn't know well sat down on a couch with me and started to cuddle up with me I would just roll with it. If a man did that to a woman she would probably be offended. Is that innate or learned behavior?

You would really "just roll with it"? I mean, presumably you are not hitched with anyone, but even still, this may be part of your problem.

@kevcvs57 said
Liar liar pants on fire comrade.
Putin badly wanted that war to bolster his hard man image at home.
He simply miscalculated.
He overestimated the prowess of the Russian military.
He underestimated the prowess of the Ukrainian military.
He underestimated the resolve of the Ukrainian people to be free of the Russian yolk.
And very importantly he underestimated the resol ...[text shortened]... rself as a leader and nobody dares to disagree with you these miscalculations are almost inevitable.

Putin thought he could flatten Ukraine in a matter of weeks. It's like the German Schlieffen Plan at the outset of World War 1 all over again.

@metal-brain said
The USA did everything they could to get Russia to invade Ukraine.
The USA wanted that war badly.

https://rumble.com/v1p90r5-proof-zelensky-rejected-peace-with-russia.html

So, does Putin ever allow you to be on top between the satin sheets?

@athousandyoung said
You really should not equate “economic freedom” with freedom in general.

This really needs to be tattooed in mirror-writing on the forehead of every right-winger here.

@metal-brain said
" Everyone who gets a vaccine must understand that there is a small risk, accept that risk, and also accept any possible consequences."

But not the vaccine makers? They are largely immune from lawsuits, so they do not accept the risk in the form of liability. The taxpayer pays for it though government tax money funding the vaccine court. That removes the incentive for ...[text shortened]... e National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 must be repealed. Criminals are making our vaccines.

Vaccines must undergo rigorous testing and several stages of successful clinical trials before being approved by the FDA for use. Same in the UK. Same in Germany. Same in France, and so on. That's the incentive for vaccine developers and manufacturers to make reasonably safe vaccines.

Under these conditions, to also subject vaccine developers to the whims of juries every single time someone has an adverse reaction to a vaccine would undoubtedly become a disincentive to develop or manufacture vaccines. Polio would come back. Measles, too, and things far worse. The harm done to society were this to happen would be incalculably worse than the current regime.

As usual you allow for no shades of gray, and give no thought to balance or compromise. With you it's all or nothing, whereas in reality life is imperfect and risk always present.

@metal-brain said
So the vaccine caused autism. You are just adding another cause while trying to deny the vaccine cause. You basically just said both the vaccine and a genetic abnormality caused the autism. That hardly lets the vaccine off the hook, which explains why the vaccine court paid out money for the injury.

*facepalm*

@metal-brain said
No, because you have not proven he lied about Dominion voting machines. You merely assume he did because you falsely believe he was fired. He was not fired because he is still under contract with FOX NEWS and getting paid to do nothing.

Tucker was not the person Dominion took main issue with in their defamation lawsuit. That was Pirro. She was the main liar according ...[text shortened]... Tucker is not complaining.

https://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/21/phil_donahue_on_his_2003_firing

Uh huh.

Say, since you're so far down that rabbit hole, do you think you could fetch me something spicy from a Szechuan street vendor?

@shavixmir said
That is fukked up.

'Murica! 🥴🍔 🍟

@metal-brain said
How many other people are out there with underlying conditions?
It is nice to know all those people get autism as a result of the vaccine instead of caused by it. I got high as a result of smoking cannabis, but it did not cause my high. I have an underlying condition of wanting to get high. 😆

It is certainly false that all underlying conditions have the potential of causing autism. You again reveal an irrational prejudice against vaccines, and a deep-seated intellectual dishonesty.

@metal-brain said
"The autism was an effect of the very rare mitochondrial defect, not the vaccine itself."

Then why did the vaccine court pay for something that was not caused by the "vaccine itself". Do the vaccine courts now pay for rare mitochondrial defects? Are you are saying a rare mitochondrial defect is the cause or it is both a rare mitochondrial defect and the vaccine?

I will add that, really, I don't think huge cash payouts are owed to everyone who gets an adverse reaction to a vaccine. Everyone who gets a vaccine must understand that there is a small risk, accept that risk, and also accept any possible consequences.

Americans are notoriously lawsuit-happy. It is part of what makes US healthcare so damned expensive now, to the detriment of all.

There was a recent case where a kid somehow got a Chicken McNugget stuck between her bare thigh and a seat belt for two freaking minutes, and got badly burned. The family sued both McDonald's and the franchise owner and won, and now is going to get a load of money. Somehow, for some reason, the family had a recording of the child screaming while being burned, which they played for the jurors in the court. Really screwed up.

@metal-brain said
"The autism was an effect of the very rare mitochondrial defect, not the vaccine itself."

Then why did the vaccine court pay for something that was not caused by the "vaccine itself". Do the vaccine courts now pay for rare mitochondrial defects? Are you are saying a rare mitochondrial defect is the cause or it is both a rare mitochondrial defect and the vaccine?

The vaccine, in this case, caused harm. That's why. It's just that it was determined that the vaccine caused harm by triggering primarily the genetic abnormality, which in turn triggered secondary problems. If you had a lick of intellectual honesty in your bones you'd see that that is all that can be gleaned from this case.

The plaintiff's case was that the vaccine caused harm specifically by "causing" autism. The settlement acknowledges that harm may have been caused by the vaccine, but it was a direct consequence of the genetic defect. M'kay?

@metal-brain said
Childish wordplay is exactly what started this whole thing. Replacing the word cause with result is just wordplay to deny cause.

Cocaine use does not cause heart attacks. Cocaine just results in heart attacks (in rare cases because of an underlying heart condition). Did I use those terms the way you would?

No, let's thresh this out. I was in haste last night.

Scenario A):
MB's preconceived assumption: Fox News is a fount of truth.
Circumstance: Fox News caves and settles out of court to the tune of $800 million with Dominion Voting Systems to avert a trial in which Fox News would have to defend Tucker Carlson's unfounded claptrap about Dominion's voting machines being employed in a (also unproven) conspiracy to steal the presidency from Trump in the 2020 election. A classic libel suit, and Fox News' surrender was all the more striking given that the overwhelming majority of Fox News viewers believed what Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and others have been saying about the voting machines.
MB's conclusion: The defendant still wins, and its grounds for losing is ignored. There is no proof Carlson has ever lied about anything. Fox News is still a fount of truth.

Scenario B):
MB's preconceived assumption: Vaccines cause autism.
Circumstance: The government settles a dispute with parents who claimed vaccines caused their child's autism. But the child happens to have an extremely exotic genetic defect which, it was determined, the vaccines exacerbated, causing a physiological reaction that in turn was adjudged likely to have given rise to an autistic condition. The autism was an effect of the very rare mitochondrial defect, not the vaccine itself.
MB's conclusion: This time the plaintiff wins, but its grounds for winning is ignored. Vaccines still cause autism.

Do you never weary of being led around by your preconceived assumptions? Can you not be made to see how you time and again warp the facts to fit your theories?

@metal-brain said
If vaccines did not cause autism why did the vaccine court pay out to Hannah Poling?

Funny double standard here. When Fox News settled with Dominion Voting Systems to the tune of almost $800 million recently, you did not accept that as proof that Tucker Carlson lied about anything. You started a whole flippin' thread about it, or maybe seven.

Anyway, hide behind the apron of childish wordplay, why don't you, by pretending not to know the difference between a "cause" and a "result" (also known as an effect).