First a trickle....Now a flood

[User]

4 hours ago, Goddess said:

 

Yeah... except it is not anywhere close to that obvious. 

It is more like that picture of stick figures and you are sitting here saying:

"Look, OMG, when everyone is dressed in black on a white background, they die!"

or

"Look, OMG, those hardwood floors caused the wallpaper to fall off!"

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, User said:

LOL, sure... the last couple of pages show otherwise. 

So, now you go back to the beginning. OK, once again, I already showed you how the government warned people about the risks. Then you cried that it was the media who didn't... then I showed you they did. Every step of the way, I have responded to your BS with actual facts. I challenge your assertions, ask you to back up your meaningless subjective drivel, and you run like a coward. 

This was the post where I showed you the government website as well as an official government statement early on:
 

Then, after you cried about it not being the media, here is the post where I showed you a quote from the media:

 

 

The last couple of pages show you're being a twat   I've been constant from beginning to end 

What the fcuk exactly is the matter with you this week?

You're normally a decent enough thinker.  And you don't normally play these stupid delusional games. 

Now you're denying you made quotes you made yourself, you're lying your ass off trying to desperately defend the stupidity of your position and making robosmith look like a credible debater. 

I don't know what's gotten into you but smarten the hell up. 

As i have said in literally every single step of the way, the gov't did not warn people substantially about the risks and they have not stood beside those people who got sick as a result and that's bad. 

That message hasn't waivered a single millimeter and you need to stop channeling AOC or whatever the hell you're doing here. It's pathetic.  

[User]

54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The last couple of pages show you're being a twat   I've been constant from beginning to end 

What the fcuk exactly is the matter with you this week?

You're normally a decent enough thinker.  And you don't normally play these stupid delusional games. 

Now you're denying you made quotes you made yourself, you're lying your ass off trying to desperately defend the stupidity of your position and making robosmith look like a credible debater. 

I don't know what's gotten into you but smarten the hell up. 

As i have said in literally every single step of the way, the gov't did not warn people substantially about the risks and they have not stood beside those people who got sick as a result and that's bad. 

That message hasn't waivered a single millimeter and you need to stop channeling AOC or whatever the hell you're doing here. It's pathetic.  

So... instead of responding directly to anything I said, you go off on another of your childish rants. 

I show up with links, the facts, and receipts for what I say. You act like a child. 

[Goddess]

4 hours ago, User said:

What vaccinations have you gotten?

Contrary to what you vax radicals think, I don't believe either yourself or the waitress at a restaurant has a right to my medical information.  I told you I got shots and other meds for my world travels.  You're not entitled to a list.

4 hours ago, User said:

how you are not anti-vax?

All of those statements mean I believe people should have the knowledge to research what they inject into their bodies and that they SHOULD do the research.

Just because I don't believe vaccines are like Pokemons - "Gotta get 'em all !!" - doesn't mean I'm anti-vax.  I've been very clear about understanding individual risk factors and making decisions based on that.

[Goddess]

 

The slur "anti-vaxxer" and the hatred directed at the unvaccinated was never really about the unvaccinated.

Jung spent his career studying what happens when human beings cannot face what lives inside them. The answer is always the same. They find someone to put it in.

Jung called this projection.

The unconscious transfer of an internal psychological content, a fear, a weakness, an unacknowledged doubt, onto an external figure who then carries it for the group. It is one of the oldest and most reliable mechanisms in human psychology. And in 2021, it ran at civilizational scale.

Think about what the pandemic had actually produced in the compliant majority:

• Genuine fear of death.
• Deep uncertainty about whether the interventions they had accepted were truly safe.
• Suppressed grief over lost time, lost connection, lost autonomy, lost careers.
• Unexamined anxiety about whether they had thought critically enough before complying.

None of that could be faced directly.

Facing it would mean confronting the possibility that the certainty was false, that the compliance had costs, that the authority was imperfect. So it was projected.

The unvaccinated became a container for everything the vaccinated could not hold. They were selfish, carrying the projection of the resentment people felt but couldn’t express toward the institutions that had restricted their lives and destroyed the economy. They were dangerous, carrying the projection of the fear that the vaccinated still felt despite their compliance. They were irrational, carrying the projection of the doubt that had been suppressed rather than examined. The intensity of the hostility was not proportional to the actual epidemiological risk the unvaccinated posed. It was proportional to the size of the shadow being projected.

Jung’s diagnosis of this dynamic was precise: the more violently a person or group insists on the evil of the other, the more certain you can be that they are encountering their own rejected contents in the mirror.

The way out is not more argument. You cannot reason with a projection. You can only withdraw it. Which means the most radical thing any of us can do, now, and in whatever comes next, is look honestly at what we are projecting and why.

[User]

42 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Contrary to what you vax radicals think, I don't believe either yourself or the waitress at a restaurant has a right to my medical information.  I told you I got shots and other meds for my world travels.  You're not entitled to a list.

LOL, you are the one who brought up this information to prove you are not anti-vax. You also ignored the other question:

So, what vaccines do you support then? 

You didn't have to reveal any personal information to answer that. You ignored it.

44 minutes ago, Goddess said:

All of those statements mean I believe people should have the knowledge to research what they inject into their bodies and that they SHOULD do the research.

No, you were arguing against vaccines. Nowhere did you simply say for folks to do the research. 

 

45 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Just because I don't believe vaccines are like Pokemons - "Gotta get 'em all !!" - doesn't mean I'm anti-vax.  I've been very clear about understanding individual risk factors and making decisions based on that.

So... which vaccines do you support then? Which ones are good, and which ones do you recommend?

 

[User]

28 minutes ago, Goddess said:

The slur "anti-vaxxer" and the hatred directed at the unvaccinated was never really about the unvaccinated.

But... you are vaccinated, so you claim. You are not the "unvaccinated."

You support vaccines, so you claim. So why are you defending anti-vaxxers?

31 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Jung spent his career studying what happens when human beings cannot face what lives inside them. The answer is always the same. They find someone to put it in.

Jung called this projection.

Once again, you are stealing other people's words and not putting quotes around them, to show you did not say it, nor giving credit with a link or citation to the source. 

The term anti-vaxxer is said with disdain and a mocking tone to accurately describe people as being anti-vax. 

You have spent years and pages and who knows how many posts on this forum to be against vaccines. I call you an anti-vaxxer because you are one. 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, User said:

So... instead of responding directly to anything I said, you go off on another of your childish rants. 

Replied to you well over a dozen times, you just put your fingers in your ears and cry like a baby because you don't like it. 

The gov't did not substantially advise of the risks, they aren't standing behind those who have suffered, that's bad. 

Cry  harder little boy.  Unless you're going to threaten to take your ball and go home. Absolutely shameful. 

[User]

28 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Replied to you well over a dozen times, you just put your fingers in your ears and cry like a baby because you don't like it. 

The gov't did not substantially advise of the risks, they aren't standing behind those who have suffered, that's bad. 

Cry  harder little boy.  Unless you're going to threaten to take your ball and go home. Absolutely shameful. 

Here is me, pointing out where I already addressed this with facts and sources, showing you were wrong:

 

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, User said:

Here is me, pointing out where I already addressed this with facts and sources, showing you were wrong:

 

No that's you lying like a cheap Rug and crying your eyes out because you know you're wrong

I pointed out over a dozen times that Your own quote shows the government saying it's no different than any other vaccine which wasn't true.

And you know that. So now you're just lying

On top of it I also posted quotes from the government down playing it even further

You're embarrassing yourself and you're disappointing me. It should be beneath you to try such cheap and pathetic left-wing tactics to "win" A discussion that you're on the wrong side of

[User]

30 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No that's you lying like a cheap Rug and crying your eyes out because you know you're wrong

I pointed out over a dozen times that Your own quote shows the government saying it's no different than any other vaccine which wasn't true.

And you know that. So now you're just lying

On top of it I also posted quotes from the government down playing it even further

You're embarrassing yourself and you're disappointing me. It should be beneath you to try such cheap and pathetic left-wing tactics to "win" A discussion that you're on the wrong side of

Here you go again, with the BS about no different. 

 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

No that's you lying like a cheap Rug and crying your eyes out because you know you're wrong

I pointed out over a dozen times that Your own quote shows the government saying it's no different than any other vaccine which wasn't true.

And you know that. So now you're just lying

On top of it I also posted quotes from the government down playing it even further

You're embarrassing yourself and you're disappointing me. It should be beneath you to try such cheap and pathetic left-wing tactics to "win" A discussion that you're on the wrong side of

So… are you just gonna keep running around in circles?

We already had this discussion. You already have responses to this same stupid assertion of yours. 
 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, User said:

Here you go again, with the BS about no different. 

 

So… are you just gonna keep running around in circles?

We already had this discussion. You already have responses to this same stupid assertion of yours. 
 

 

Yawn. Lie lie lie, that's all you do at this point. 

There's been no running, there's been no circles, you're just too much of an emotional wimp to cope. 

The gov't did not substantially advise people of the risks, then didn't stand behind those who got sick, that's bad.  Same thing every single post. 

You:

[User]

42 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The gov't did not substantially advise people of the risks, then didn't stand behind those who got sick, that's bad.  Same thing every single post. 

Here you go again:

 

 

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, User said:

Here you go again:

 

 

I get it, you're one of those people who thinks if he repeats a lie it'll somehow be true.

It was a lie the first time you said it, it's been a lie ever since you repeated it. 

You didn't address it with facts or anything.

The government indicated that the risks were similar to other vaccines. That was an untrue statement. Therefore they didn't adequately or substantially inform the public as to the risk.

Sorry this simple fact causes you so much brain damage but all you're doing is repeating the proof that I'm right

 You:

[User]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You didn't address it with facts or anything.

And again…

 

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, User said:

And again…

 

OH MY GOD!!!  Are you actually copying EXFLYER NOW?!!?  LOLOLOL!!!!!

You're just reposting the same lie over and over because i've broken you teeny tiny little mind and you can't cope?  hoy SHIT kid   i used to respect you a bit  

LOL ok well now that you're basically my biatch and i'm living rent free in your head, lets see how long you can go for.     LOL   Go ahead, post it again!  Don't let exflyer beat you! 

[User]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

OH MY GOD!!!  Are you actually copying EXFLYER NOW?!!?  LOLOLOL!!!!!

You're just reposting the same lie over and over because i've broken you teeny tiny little mind and you can't cope?  hoy SHIT kid   i used to respect you a bit  

LOL ok well now that you're basically my biatch and i'm living rent free in your head, lets see how long you can go for.     LOL   Go ahead, post it again!  Don't let exflyer beat you! 

What makes it a lie?

Let’s see you actually put forth a logical coherent thought down beyond your petulant child routine. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, User said:

What makes it a lie?

Let’s see you actually put forth a logical coherent thought down beyond your petulant child routine. 

No no no, you're supposed to just keep repetatively posting your last post over and over, that's the level of debate you're at now 😆😆😆😆

The fact that you posted knowing it's untrue makes it a lie.

A better question i'd have is WHY are you lying? 

This was a very simple and easily verified statement "the gov't didn't properly warn the public, now they're failing those who got sick'. 

Those really aren't debatable, as you yourself proved in your 'cite' the gov't made it sound like the risk to the mNRA vaccine was no different than any other vaccine and sometimes (my cite) they went even further than that and they knew the testing wasn't there to make that cliam. And the story i posted was of the gov't failing to support someone who'd suffered.  And it's from that day, which is why i posted it. It's not some old article. 

So why did you freak out? You immediately went into an emotional tailspin. You freaked out and became irrational and desperate, and made a terrible argument and have now embarrassed yourself desperately trying to cling to it beyond reason.

Why? It's like you've got some weird attachment to the trueau gov't's covid response, like it hurts you personally that Trudeau may have been less than honest with the public.  Lemme tell ya kiddo, if you're going to try to pretend trudeau was an honest politician this is going to get a lot worse for you before it gets better  LOL

 

[User]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The fact that you posted knowing it's untrue makes it a lie.

Ah yes, an illogical circular argument at its best. I lied because it was a lie and I knew it was a lie!

And yet... you still did not explain what the lie was. 

 

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, User said:

Ah yes, an illogical circular argument at its best. I lied because it was a lie

 

No, it's a lie because you knowingly told something that wasn't true.  That's kind of how definitions work  

And you know what the lie is, you're just trying to change the channel from the real issue at this point. 

WHY you lied is the million dollar question. I asked you why this caused you to have such an emotional break down in the first place. Notice you ran away from that one. Did you want to try again or will you be cowardly running away from it another time?

[User]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No, it's a lie because you knowingly told something that wasn't true.  That's kind of how definitions work  

And you know what the lie is, you're just trying to change the channel from the real issue at this point. 

WHY you lied is the million dollar question. I asked you why this caused you to have such an emotional break down in the first place. Notice you ran away from that one. Did you want to try again or will you be cowardly running away from it another time?

What did I knowingly say that was not true?

What did I know the lie was?

This is more of your typical BS. You assert something, then refuse to back it up. 

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, User said:

What did I knowingly say that was not true?

What did I know the lie was?

This is more of your typical BS. You assert something, then refuse to back it up. 

Why are you scared of the question I asked you? Why don't you just answer it? You're dodging like an expert coward. I've answered every single one of your questions including that one previously.

Why are you so afraid?

[User]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Why are you scared of the question I asked you? Why don't you just answer it? You're dodging like an expert coward. I've answered every single one of your questions including that one previously.

Why are you so afraid?

The fact that I responded answered your question. I also responded to your BS assertion about lying. 
 

 

[Goddess]

Every obedience experiment in history had the same overlooked finding.

Not everyone complied.

In Milgram’s lab, 35% refused to deliver the final shock. In Asch’s line experiments, 25% never conformed, not once, across any trial. In Zimbardo’s prison, at least one guard refused to dehumanize. One prisoner demanded a lawyer instead of a doctor and broke the psychological frame entirely.

We spent decades studying the ones who obeyed.

We barely asked what made the others different.

That question matters more now than it ever has.

The resisters in the COVID era were not difficult to find. Physicians who filed exemptions and lost their licenses. Nurses who walked away from careers rather than mandate patients into decisions they hadn’t genuinely chosen. Scientists who published contrary data knowing what it would cost them. Parents who stood alone at school board meetings. Ordinary people who simply said, quietly, without drama , no.

What made them different?

Research consistently identifies a cluster of factors. Not personality traits you either have or don’t. Situational and cognitive patterns that can be cultivated.

First: prior reflection on authority. The resisters had usually thought, before the crisis, about the limits of institutional trust. They weren’t cynics. They were people who had already asked the question “under what conditions would I refuse?” before anyone was asking them to comply.

Second: a concrete reference point outside the consensus. A value, a principle, an oath, a relationship that existed independently of the institutional structure demanding compliance. Something the system couldn’t reach.

Third: at least one other person. Milgram found that a single dissenting confederate reduced compliance dramatically. The resisters rarely stood entirely alone. They found each other. Sustained each other. Gave each other permission.

Fourth: the willingness to tolerate social pain. Not immunity to it. Tolerance of it. They felt the pressure. They felt the exclusion. They chose the discomfort of integrity over the comfort of belonging. None of this is innate. All of it is learnable.

The most important thing Milgram, Asch, and Zimbardo taught us is not how fragile conscience is.

It’s that conscience can hold, if you’ve trained it, named its limits, and found even one other person willing to hold theirs beside you.

Build that now.

Because the experiment is always running.

[User]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Every obedience experiment in history had the same overlooked finding.

Not everyone complied.

I see you are still stealing other people's work without quotes or citing it.