So far, nobody prominent wants to debate us in a recorded, fair, moderated debate. But we put together the rules just in case. The rules are designed for a lively discussion.
I agree with what Gin says.. at least try to find some kind of debate format that gets the points out and makes it easy to digest. I was reading through what GVC said and points that were made.. honestly it's hard keeping track. I'm not sure people want to dig through the rebuttals and all the studies to get straight to the points.
Why not have a virtual debate with their pre-canned answers that you then refute? It would take a lot of editing but we know what they’re going to say already, so it’s more important that your message gets out. To make it real, you must not take anything out of context so it really relates to the subject matter being discussed. You could debate a whole lot of people that way. I think it would get a lot of attention. You could quote or take the footage put a date on it so we know exactly when they said it. As long as this is for literary and scientific purposes, which it is, you would be allowed to use their footage under the fair use laws of the copyright act.
Ok so I watched the NIH debate. Only 1777 people watched it so far which means even most NIH employees thought it wasn't worth their time.
It was just three PPT presentations, basically each side picking the studies they liked. No actual real debate aside from that. The pro-vax lady said VAERS is overreported by at least half, tho her numbers actually imply 90% overreporting. Of course she relies on secret databases like VSD etc to determine this and we are supposed to trust her.
The lawyer argued we should have vax mandates but everyone should be able to get an exemption if they "go through hoops". She compared the mandate to seat belt laws. Kind of a bad analogy but on the other hand those types of laws are a precedent for government mandating your health choices.
Ultimately nobody really cares. You pick your beliefs and that's that. Protest all you want. Makes no difference. The elites are aiming to destroy society so they can build it back in the transhumanist way.
Steve: Since you can't come to terms for an oral debate with me or anyone else, please join me in written debate here: https://gvc169.substack.com/publish/post/44948009 . My first question, to which you have never responded with anything more that "you're wrong," is posted there: Do you agree that VAERS reporting requirements are different for COVID and previously established vaccines?
Yes! Good having a debate. Only that I know of some ‘smarter’ guys will be saying….”we don’t want to waste time with what is already known- world wide! And so, the push to vaccinate will continue with lie after lie. And we can say, “Don’t say you were not warned”.
Two more cases from Japan of myocarditis following Pfizer-BioNTech jabs
A 27-year-old man was admitted with chest pain 4 days after the second vaccination. An electrocardiogram (ECG) did not reveal any significant abnormalities. The second patient, a 37-year-old man, was admitted with chest pain 9 days after the first vaccination. His ECG exhibited ST-elevation in multiple leads. In both cases, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging findings were consistent with myocarditis.
I have been an expert witness on vaccine injury in a number of court cases, and have been warning about specific COVID vaccine hazards since February, including in a number of my substack articles, and including peer-reviewed. I would also volunteer to participate.
In a world where the vax-mandaters really "followed" science, rather than relying on fascism, this would happen. The fact that it won't happen tells you just how scientifically bankrupt they all are. Its like "the dog that didn't bark" - the debate that didn't happen.
#4 sounds good as long as the ones who do the ejecting are professional bouncers from the roughest beer joints in Texas, not the moderators. Hire some real hardasses among the professional bouncers and tell them to "make it sting" when they eject a violator.
I agree with what Gin says.. at least try to find some kind of debate format that gets the points out and makes it easy to digest. I was reading through what GVC said and points that were made.. honestly it's hard keeping track. I'm not sure people want to dig through the rebuttals and all the studies to get straight to the points.
Why not have a virtual debate with their pre-canned answers that you then refute? It would take a lot of editing but we know what they’re going to say already, so it’s more important that your message gets out. To make it real, you must not take anything out of context so it really relates to the subject matter being discussed. You could debate a whole lot of people that way. I think it would get a lot of attention. You could quote or take the footage put a date on it so we know exactly when they said it. As long as this is for literary and scientific purposes, which it is, you would be allowed to use their footage under the fair use laws of the copyright act.
Your rules seem fair to me . I hope someone takes your debate challenge..... I am not holding my breath. Too many loudmouthed cowards.
Ok so I watched the NIH debate. Only 1777 people watched it so far which means even most NIH employees thought it wasn't worth their time.
It was just three PPT presentations, basically each side picking the studies they liked. No actual real debate aside from that. The pro-vax lady said VAERS is overreported by at least half, tho her numbers actually imply 90% overreporting. Of course she relies on secret databases like VSD etc to determine this and we are supposed to trust her.
The lawyer argued we should have vax mandates but everyone should be able to get an exemption if they "go through hoops". She compared the mandate to seat belt laws. Kind of a bad analogy but on the other hand those types of laws are a precedent for government mandating your health choices.
Ultimately nobody really cares. You pick your beliefs and that's that. Protest all you want. Makes no difference. The elites are aiming to destroy society so they can build it back in the transhumanist way.
Steve: Since you can't come to terms for an oral debate with me or anyone else, please join me in written debate here: https://gvc169.substack.com/publish/post/44948009 . My first question, to which you have never responded with anything more that "you're wrong," is posted there: Do you agree that VAERS reporting requirements are different for COVID and previously established vaccines?
What did people think of the NIH debate? I haven't found any reporting about it. https://www.videocast.nih.gov/watch=44165
Yes! Good having a debate. Only that I know of some ‘smarter’ guys will be saying….”we don’t want to waste time with what is already known- world wide! And so, the push to vaccinate will continue with lie after lie. And we can say, “Don’t say you were not warned”.
Two more cases from Japan of myocarditis following Pfizer-BioNTech jabs
A 27-year-old man was admitted with chest pain 4 days after the second vaccination. An electrocardiogram (ECG) did not reveal any significant abnormalities. The second patient, a 37-year-old man, was admitted with chest pain 9 days after the first vaccination. His ECG exhibited ST-elevation in multiple leads. In both cases, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging findings were consistent with myocarditis.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/internalmedicine/advpub/0/advpub_8731-21/_article
Steve, you seem to have forgotten: https://cormack.uwaterloo.ca/kirschoffer.pdf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664883/
Ivermectin versus NAFLD too!!!! That's some big news,.
2015 paper. Thought I'd drop it off here.
Maybe you can debate Juan Cole of common dreams
He ha a piece claiming 9 out of 1000 fetuses of unvaxxed moms are being lost when mom dies .
Didn't see any study cited, I must have missed that
I have been an expert witness on vaccine injury in a number of court cases, and have been warning about specific COVID vaccine hazards since February, including in a number of my substack articles, and including peer-reviewed. I would also volunteer to participate.
In a world where the vax-mandaters really "followed" science, rather than relying on fascism, this would happen. The fact that it won't happen tells you just how scientifically bankrupt they all are. Its like "the dog that didn't bark" - the debate that didn't happen.
#4 sounds good as long as the ones who do the ejecting are professional bouncers from the roughest beer joints in Texas, not the moderators. Hire some real hardasses among the professional bouncers and tell them to "make it sting" when they eject a violator.
We all know who will be most likely to interrupt.
“Sudden Deaths” of Children Under the Age of 12 Start Surfacing After COVID-19 Shots Approved for This Age Group
https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/sudden-deaths-of-children-under-the-age-of-12-start-surfacing-after-covid-19-shots-approved-for-this-age-group/
Would be great if you can get Dr. Byram Bridle if possible, that man has been itching for a debate.