The Black Pill

#270

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:02 pm



So unlike quietvoice, Candid is not using the amount of money a person makes to determine what is true. Fair enough.

Instead, Candid is using how much money a person is offering to determine truth. If a person that believes in a flat earth offers to pay $1 million to anyone that can prove the earth is round, that is proof that the earth must be flat. The implication, is that truth is determined by the reward being offered, not by the evidence presented.

Of course motive makes a difference!


I agree. Motive can help us understand why a person might do something. It doesn’t determine what is true. We can understand why a person might lie about being a witch to avoid being burned at the stake. It doesn’t make them a witch.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11709
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1222


#271

Postby quietvoice » Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:11 pm

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:So unlike quietvoice, Candid is not using the amount of money a person makes to determine what is true.

That is not a determination of truth. I never, ever said that. Stop with putting that bs on me. It speaks to motive to lie. That is all I said. I asked a couple of questions. Seems that no one is brave enough to answer the questions.
User avatar
quietvoice
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2752
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:14 pm
Likes Received: 282

#272

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:25 pm

quietvoice wrote:That is not a determination of truth. I never, ever said that. Stop with putting that bs on me.


Yes you did. You said it. In fact recently you doubled down. You think how truth is determined is by the amount of money a virologist makes.

If multiple virologists tell you that symptoms A, B, and C are caused by virus X, you think they are liars because they get paid a lot of money.

That is how you have said you determine truth.

Either own it, or maybe think twice about what actually makes something true.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11709
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1222

#273

Postby quietvoice » Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:32 pm

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:Yes you did. You said it..

Provide quote and reply#, please.

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:If multiple virologists tell you that symptoms A, B, and C are caused by virus X,

They tell me. So what. What proof are they showing to me? Point to proof, please.
User avatar
quietvoice
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2752
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:14 pm
Likes Received: 282

#274

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:39 pm

quietvoice wrote:They tell me. So what. What proof are they showing to me? Point to proof, please.


They hand deliver 27 double blind, controlled, peer reviewed studies published in top tier journals with over 10,000 participants across studies.

Is it proof? It’s the best available at the time. Another 20 studies are in process, trying to prove the initial 27 studies wrong. That is how science works. That is one way truth is determined. It isn’t based on how much money the virologists are paid.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11709
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1222

#275

Postby tokeless » Mon Sep 27, 2021 5:09 pm

This is bordering on the ridiculous. Even if you were provided with proof, it would be judged as fake, rigged and part of the conspiracy to hide the truth that there isn't a virus. You can't rationalise a delusion or argue one away.
tokeless
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2596
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 5:17 pm
Likes Received: 364

#276

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Sep 27, 2021 6:41 pm

tokeless wrote:This is bordering on the ridiculous.


Better than ridiculous, we have reached nonsensical.

One one hand, big money paid to virologists is considered to be definitive proof that whatever they say is a lie, ie not true. (quietvoice)

On the other hand, big money offered to prove the virus does not actually exist is considered an act of truth seeking. (candid)

So which is it? It can’t be both. That is nonsensical. It can’t be that big money motivates all people to be liars yet at the same time the offer of big money brings forth the truth.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11709
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1222

#277

Postby tokeless » Mon Sep 27, 2021 7:03 pm

The criteria for success in that million prize is quite hard to achieve, making it near impossible to actually win. If I was rich enough I could offer 5 million to disprove the existence of alien life. I would only offer that for the impact I was after, not to give away my money.... that would be foolish. Offering that amount of money is the bait to lure those I want to view me as seeking the truth.
tokeless
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2596
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 5:17 pm
Likes Received: 364

#278

Postby Richard@DecisionSkills » Mon Sep 27, 2021 7:13 pm

tokeless wrote:The criteria for success in that million prize is quite hard to achieve, making it near impossible to actually win. If I was rich enough I could offer 5 million to disprove the existence of alien life. I would only offer that for the impact I was after, not to give away my money.... that would be foolish. Offering that amount of money is the bait to lure those I want to view me as seeking the truth.


Exactly my point with the flat earther offering “big money” to anyone that can provide proof that the earth is round. It doesn’t matter the proof provided, that money isn’t ever going to be paid. It’s a fools errand…much like this very thread, lol.
Richard@DecisionSkills
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 11709
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:25 am
Likes Received: 1222

#279

Postby Candid » Tue Sep 28, 2021 5:28 am

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:Candid is not using the amount of money a person makes to determine what is true. Fair enough.

Instead, Candid is using how much money a person is offering to determine truth.

Not at all. The person offering $1.2m is not making any statement about what's true or what's false. Like many of us, he's questioning the existence of a new virus laying waste to millions around the globe.

A reward is not a statement, it's an offer. If there's a new virus, as opposed to an old one that's been deliberately messed with and deliberately released, let's see it.

I'm not seeing a new virus, just as I didn't see any excess mortality in any country before the "vaccine" rollout. The second it's sighted, I'm sure the whole world will be informed.

Bit late now, though, don't you think?
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 483

#280

Postby Candid » Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:00 am

"Physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments."
https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 483

#281

Postby Candid » Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:08 am

People are having jabs because they're being coerced. They just want it to be over,
https://www.rebelnews.com/police_move_i ... e=therebel
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 483

#282

Postby Candid » Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:20 am

It's not as if they're aren't any good and safe ways of treating WuFlu. https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/4200 ... intrusion/
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 483

#283

Postby tokeless » Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:30 am

Candid wrote:"Physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments."
https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/


Mmm, theres just been a report suggesting that 10% of medications prescribed aren't needed or aren't effective. It raised the question, do some doctors prescribe for profit over patient care. If you look at the US health system this was highlighted with oxycontin prescribing which caused huge levels of opiate addiction because doctors were 'paid or induced' to offer it as a first choice treatment.
tokeless
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2596
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 5:17 pm
Likes Received: 364

#284

Postby Candid » Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:37 am

Biden placed all the blame for the ongoing plandemic on the unpricked, even though federal health officials admit that fully "vaccinated" people can still get infected and transmit The Virus to others
> even though breakthrough infections, hospitalizations and deaths in "vaccinated" people are on the rise
> even though evidence shows individuals who have recovered naturally from flu have stronger immunity than those who have been jabbed
> and even though officials at the World Health Organization say SARS-COV-2 is, just like influenza, likely to become prevalent in every county—no matter how high the jab rate.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/arti ... 1276813019
Candid
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:00 am
Likes Received: 483


PreviousNext

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to Psychology

cron