Doc and Xpro's Debate Thread.

Honestly what is the point of this thread anymore. Obv Xpro has no interest and every time someone comments you're just flexing your big word muscle trying to sound intelligent.

 

Oh and for the "misleading" part is bullshit. I was there in sb when you 2 were originally debating the subject and you wanted to move to the forums and he didnt. So idk how that's misleading cause that's what started it.

 

i s2g the only ones with autism are the ones who are against vaccines

 

Due to multiple complaints, this thread is now LOCKED.

 

Once again, I cannot say I did not expect a reply of this nature. Little disappointing, but inevitable.

The social ineptitude is you failing to present a decent reply. The social ineptitude is your swearing. If your argument was able to stand on its own merit, it wouldn't need profanities to give it superficial credibility. And something without merit would at least be receivable if it was at least decent. As to being upset, it is understandable that a decent person may utter vulgarities in a time of distress; assuming you are one of those, you can see why one would say you might be upset.

If you had been paying any attention at all, as in reading my first post, which you claim you did, you would know the purpose of the thread. And the purpose of my statement to @Shelbutt was to draw attention to the fact that, even though it is one topic we have been discussing, vaccines were not the subject of my initial conflict with @Xproplayer , and certainly not the primary impetus behind this thread's creation. Again, pay attention.

On your partaking of this thread, for the third time, if you had been paying attention, you would have seen where I acknowledged the very point you make, that I can't deny you the right to come here and say what you like. And my main reason in doing so was to clearly state my purpose for the thread, and how that may not be exactly appealing to the broader audience. Hence, if you dislike this, or you don't understand it, or you take issue with it, then don't get involved, or at least be polite when inquiring about it.

As to your last statement, if you don't want to debate me, fine. That is your choice and you are welcome to it. However, it only serves to betray the fragility of your position.

On "enforcing them is communism", there is no better description of wanting to force the whole to subject to something of, at the very best, dubious good, to please an ignorant minority.

Also, I wear my seatbelt everytime I step into my vehicle. They do save lives, while doing no harm, save maybe slight discomfort. Anyone who wouldn't wear one would be monumentally stupid, not unlike your analogy of two completely and fundamentally different things.

Cheers.

 

I repeat, if you really think so, then why are you here replying? Based on your statement, it would seem you want the thread to die, so let it then!

 

I SAID THREAD LOCKED

 

Little levity should help.

 

Man this guy has to be the best troll ever.

Oh also, mr. I can't talk like a normal human being:

 

Ever heard of nuances, my friend? Also, where did you learn to draw...

I will admit, good catch though, not that it is of any import. Just shows how you clearly are grasping. Thank you!

 

Hey there, @Jabba the Slut , thanks for your reply. Apologies that my response has been so delayed, for some reason I didn't see your post come in, even though it was posted before my last entry to this thread. I will also apologize for the length of the below reply, but it was necessary to do yours justice.

Spoiler: Reply to Jabba, Part 1

You make a number of interesting, actually more humorous, but interesting statements. I am opening myself up to ridicule saying it again, but I fear, for the most part you are again not paying close attention to what you are reading.

First off, I accept what you say about "condescending" as a valid point. I would counter with that the nature of this type of communication certainly lends itself to creating that impression, and that those are not my true intentions. That being said, I will point out you have not been the most charitable person here yourself.

As to the "vulgarities": I make no denial of the fact that my own behavior in the past has been far from model. I acknowledge this, I apologize for it, and I regret it. If I could go back and refrain from that behavior I would do so. I recognize it had no productive purpose, and only served to make a fool out of me. The point now, I would say, is that I have here owned my past mistakes, I have apologized for them, and I have told and shown you how I am changing my behavior for the better. Can you say the same, Jabba? And I say this only in the context of this one subject; you may be a better person than I in every other way, I don't know. Again, talking about this one, specific habit.

As to "social, cultural, and geographical norms", I assume you say this in terms of these being the reasons someone would behave in a certain manner. While it is true that such outside factors may, as in the case of many, many things, install certain proclivities, or likelihoods in a person, they are no excuse. You and I, every individual, are responsible for our own actions. To say that it is the fault of some outside factor, or some event in your past, is nothing more than a poor excuse. They do not matter; no matter what the outside influences, you and I are beholden to choose right over wrong. Again, maybe I misinterpret your meaning; just from the way you threw that in there, this is how I believe you meant it.

As to "decency" and this:

There is a certain, understandable room for the use of expletives for emphasis, but that is to be used carefully with discretion. Here again you, without good reason, fling around vulgarities. There isn't good cause here for their use, and, speaking in terms of "decency", a "decent" person would make that judgement wisely, hence how I applied it. And, keeping that in mind, going back to "temper", when you come into a thread, complaining about how you don't understand it, using such language, it would seem to denote a state of lost control over one's emotions because of the situation, hence, a "lost temper".

Which brings me to this:

Once more, you can readily find the subject of this thread, even as easily as reading only the title! In addition, I devoted my opening few paragraphs to making this even more clear. Honestly, it is somewhat hilarious and ridiculous that you are still stuck on this. As to what I said to @Shelbutt , which I addressed in my last reply to you, apparently to no avail, it was not an insult, only a statement of how her reply, only telling a part of the story and still presenting it as the whole, would be misleading.

It is also odd how you are still hung up on this whole subject of "being invited" to the thread. True, I did not specifically invite you to partake of this discussion, though my creation of a public thread constitutes a wider invite by its nature. Also, true, my purpose with the thread was not one that was intended for engagement by the wider community, but as a venue of debate between two persons. That being said, as I acknowledge in one of my opening paragraphs, I cannot exclude you from joining in here, and you are welcome to do so. I also reiterated how the purpose of the thread and its subject may not be readily accessible or "engageable" by the wider audience, because it was not my intentions for it to be so! So, that is why, if you do not understand the purpose of the thread, I asked that you either refrain from joining in it, or at least you could be polite in inquiring about it, which you failed to do. If you don't understand the thread, it could possibly be because it wasn't created with you understanding it in mind, despite the fact that I spent several paragraphs acknowledging just that and providing an explanation of the thread's purpose. Just as I cannot order you, "Don't reply here, you won't understand it.", I have no obligation to explain it to you, yet I have made efforts to do so, having anticipated this.

Going even further in explaining this, which, as stated above, I am not required to do for you, my reason, concisely, for making this a thread and not a conversation was this: the nature of my original conversation in the SB with @Xproplayer , and particularly the note upon which it ended, had I pursued further debate with him in a conversation, would have left me open to having my words taken radically out of context or having my intentions otherwise misconstrued or misrepresented. By making my attempt at debate with him public from the get-go, I was able to mitigate the chances of that happening. To be crude about it, you could say I was covering my ass, but it was the smart thing to do.

You're welcome.

 

Spoiler: Reply to Jabba, Part 2

Moving on:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and as to the time spent, I find it strange how when, given the opportunity to exchange opinions and beliefs in debate in the hopes of finding the truth, most people here have taken advantage of this cop out. Hence, why I would term your position "fragile", that you, and others, fail to even commit to explaining or defending it.

As to the medical professionals, yes, there are countless out there doing immense good and giving their all in order for other people to have better lives. As to the last part of your statement, what I will say is this: the system of modern, Western medicine, and subsequently the training of its "professionals" consists, largely, of diagnosis of specific illness and textbook treatment of a specific problem, and more often than that, symptomatic treatment, a system which is seriously flawed.

Now, obviously, to start with, the diagnosis part needs a lot of work, as evidenced by the large amount of undiagnosed illness, misdiagnosed illness, and malpractice. Second, the "treatment" consists, outside of surgical procedures, for the vast majority, of the prescription of pharmaceuticals. And I say "textbook", because it involves little more than the "professional" reaching his diagnosis and prescribing the corresponding pharmaceutical out of his manual, a drug that in most cases, is only a symptomatic treatment of a specific problem, and not the overall health crisis.

And guess who writes the manual from which the pharmaceuticals are prescribed? The pharmaceutical manufacturer, who's lineup also includes these vaccines you speak so highly of. That is a highly convenient conflict of interest, wouldn't you say?

And all of that doesn't even scratch the surface of how these treatments don't even create a healthier patient, i.e, they don't really work.

On to your next statement:

Now, it is truly hilarious, utterly ridiculous, and unfortunate that you resort to this type of nonsense. Without even pointing to evidence in a discussion on vaccines, because we haven't really had that yet, this logic of yours could instantly be turned around on you! In the same manner that you obviously imply that I am a paranoid "conspiracy theorist", who thinks the government is out to kill people with vaccines, you could be viewed as a "sheeple", the guinea pig, that unquestioningly submits to and buys everything he is told! This is no way productive and really a stupid statement on your part. I am sure you could come up with a real argument, which would do you much more credit, if only you applied the effort.

And to your last words:

First, once again, you are comparing apples to oranges. Seatbelts do no direct harm and are a proven safety device, the only way to keep you from flying out of your seat in a collision. As to their enforcement, aside from reducing deaths on the roadway by their function, you could see it as a requisite, a rule, that comes with the privilege of driving on a taxpayer founded roadway. You are free to not use your seatbelt on your own private road, if you wish.

Vaccines are not in the same league as seatbelts, being, for the most part, of no proven safety, having extensive evidence and a large history of direct harm, and not being founded on good science. It is only reasonable to be a skeptic of something like that, and the screaming push to force everyone to subject to these dangers, by those who simply are ignorant and perceive those who would appeal to reason as a threat, is a good definition of communism. I'm sure that all the many millions of dead Russians and Chinese thought Stalin and Mao had brilliant ideas at the start. I wonder what they would say now, in retrospect, if only you could ask them.

Cheers.



P.s Though I am more than happy to have a discussion with anyone who wishes to in this thread, I do want to reiterate that I am still available for the main purpose of this thread, @Xproplayer , and willing to discuss here the many topics we touched on, even though I have been doing so with others instead. Like I said, ball is in your court. I'll be here.

 

Its not worth my time at this point. I'll use you to see inside the mind of the other side, you are my dimension B glasses. Also stop @ing people, just say their name ffs

 

pertaining doc's response to jabba

 

Stop tagging me plz thx

 

can someone please lock this dumb thread

 

Dam this thread is so toasty it burned my popcorn!

 

Yo doc what even kicked this whole thing off? What was the disagreement about

 

https://paste.ee/p/dQjaz

God have mercy on your soul for reading that