Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 11-30-2020, 12:04 PM   #1
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Crimes Against Humanity, pt. II

Back in early October, around the 7th of the month, I believe, I posted an article about a German lawyer who was assembling an international team of colleagues and scientists for the purpose of filing lawsuits against governments for causing unnecessary harm to citizens of various due to their draconian shutdown measures, etc. I searched the pages of this forum for "Crimes Against Humanity", but the 10th page goes back to only late October. Well, here's a follow up story to that one.

Landmark legal ruling finds that Covid tests are not fit for purpose. So what do the MSM do? They ignore it.

An excerpt:

The deliberation of the Lisbon Appeal Court is comprehensive and fascinating. It ruled that the Azores Regional Health Authority had violated both Portuguese and international law by confining the Germans to the hotel. The judges also said that only a doctor can “diagnose” someone with a disease, and were critical of the fact that they were apparently never assessed by one.

Read more
Immunity for YEARS or DECADES: Covid resistance may last much longer than previously thought, says new research Immunity for YEARS or DECADES: Covid resistance may last much longer than previously thought, says new research

They were also scathing about the reliability of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, the most commonly used check for Covid.

The conclusion of their 34-page ruling included the following: “In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”


https://www.rt.com/op-ed/507937-covid-pcr-test-fail/

So, two courts, thus far, have found that the PCR test is anything but reliable -- which by way of reminder is precisely the claim of the freakin' inventor of the test. It's no wonder everyone is pushing for tests, tests, tests, more tests, many more tests... They're lusting for as many false positives as they can get.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 05:07 AM   #2
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Back in early October, around the 7th of the month, I believe, I posted an article about a German lawyer who was assembling an international team of colleagues and scientists for the purpose of filing lawsuits against governments for causing unnecessary harm to citizens of various due to their draconian shutdown measures, etc. I searched the pages of this forum for "Crimes Against Humanity", but the 10th page goes back to only late October. Well, here's a follow up story to that one.

Landmark legal ruling finds that Covid tests are not fit for purpose. So what do the MSM do? They ignore it.

An excerpt:

The deliberation of the Lisbon Appeal Court is comprehensive and fascinating. It ruled that the Azores Regional Health Authority had violated both Portuguese and international law by confining the Germans to the hotel. The judges also said that only a doctor can “diagnose” someone with a disease, and were critical of the fact that they were apparently never assessed by one.

Read more
Immunity for YEARS or DECADES: Covid resistance may last much longer than previously thought, says new research Immunity for YEARS or DECADES: Covid resistance may last much longer than previously thought, says new research

They were also scathing about the reliability of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, the most commonly used check for Covid.

The conclusion of their 34-page ruling included the following: “In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”


https://www.rt.com/op-ed/507937-covid-pcr-test-fail/

So, two courts, thus far, have found that the PCR test is anything but reliable -- which by way of reminder is precisely the claim of the freakin' inventor of the test. It's no wonder everyone is pushing for tests, tests, tests, more tests, many more tests... They're lusting for as many false positives as they can get.
More boxcarian bullshit.

From your article...

"Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable."

97 % unreliable?

Just how reliable are COVID-19 tests? Experts weigh in
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/507937-covid-pcr-test-fail/

However, there is a chance that you might have gotten a false negative, experts added. The exact accuracy of PCR tests has been tough to pin down. According to Dr. Robert Schmerling reporting in Harvard Health Publishing, "the reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The reported rate of false positives—that is, a test that says you have the virus when you actually do not—is 5% or lower."

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/...-2020081020734

Why should anyone believe anything you say? It appears you are 0 for 100 in your reporting and asinine predictions.


Toot-a-loo.
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 01:23 PM   #3
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
More boxcarian bullshit.

From your article...

"Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable."

97 % unreliable?

Just how reliable are COVID-19 tests? Experts weigh in
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/507937-covid-pcr-test-fail/

However, there is a chance that you might have gotten a false negative, experts added. The exact accuracy of PCR tests has been tough to pin down. According to Dr. Robert Schmerling reporting in Harvard Health Publishing, "the reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The reported rate of false positives—that is, a test that says you have the virus when you actually do not—is 5% or lower."

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/...-2020081020734

Why should anyone believe anything you say? It appears you are 0 for 100 in your reporting and asinine predictions.


Toot-a-loo.
Yeah, the inventor of the PCR test admitted that the test would produce unreliable results because it was far too sensitive. He knew it would produce many false positives.

That was in my original article that I posted early in October under the title of "Crimes Against Humanity". In fact, other public health officials (including the CDC) knew this, as well, and there were also quotes by them in that article.

Now, mask up and crawl back under your rock.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 01:45 PM   #4
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Yeah, the inventor of the PCR test admitted that the test would produce unreliable results because it was far too sensitive. He knew it would produce many false positives.

That was in my original article that I posted early in October under the title of "Crimes Against Humanity". In fact, other public health officials (including the CDC) knew this, as well, and there were also quotes by them in that article.

Now, mask up and crawl back under your rock.
You just said tortal nonsense that PCR testing was 97% wrong.

"Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable."

I responded....

"According to Dr. Robert Schmerling reporting in Harvard Health Publishing, "the reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The reported rate of false positives—that is, a test that says you have the virus when you actually do not—is 5% or lower."

Which means false negatives outweigh false positives. Or PCR testing underestimates the number of cases, not exaggerates them. And if you read the article I linked, repeated testing helps reduce both types of false errors.

No, not perfect but damn good enough until testing gets better. A metric of epidemiological surveillance that is vital. Look it up bunky.

"The only crimes against humanity" here is you, totally misunderstanding biology, infectious diseases and everything about viruses and the pandemic.

Repeatedly denying it even exists, and honest scientific attempts to control and mitigate it.


When are you leaving? You are running out of time to apologize
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.

Last edited by hcap; 12-02-2020 at 01:50 PM.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 03:21 PM   #5
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
You just said tortal nonsense that PCR testing was 97% wrong.

"Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable."

I responded....

"According to Dr. Robert Schmerling reporting in Harvard Health Publishing, "the reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The reported rate of false positives—that is, a test that says you have the virus when you actually do not—is 5% or lower."

Which means false negatives outweigh false positives. Or PCR testing underestimates the number of cases, not exaggerates them. And if you read the article I linked, repeated testing helps reduce both types of false errors.

No, not perfect but damn good enough until testing gets better. A metric of epidemiological surveillance that is vital. Look it up bunky.

"The only crimes against humanity" here is you, totally misunderstanding biology, infectious diseases and everything about viruses and the pandemic.

Repeatedly denying it even exists, and honest scientific attempts to control and mitigate it.


When are you leaving? You are running out of time to apologize
Well, Doc Robert must have improved on the inventor's test because the guy who came up with the test knew beforehand that it was not designed for covid! This guy admitted it.

By the way, just as interesting aside, there was was a recent story about a guy who who was tested twice in one sitting: One swab was taken from one nostril and the other from the second nostril. One test came back positive; the other negative.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 06:38 PM   #6
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Well, Doc Robert must have improved on the inventor's test because the guy who came up with the test knew beforehand that it was not designed for covid! This guy admitted it.

By the way, just as interesting aside, there was was a recent story about a guy who who was tested twice in one sitting: One swab was taken from one nostril and the other from the second nostril. One test came back positive; the other negative.
You have been lied to. Confused by people who know even less than you do. If that is at all possible.

You fell for another dumbass POS garbage false whopper. Which you bought sight unseen , posting it here as though you discovered anti-gravity.

Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say it can’t be used in virus detection
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN24420X

By Reuters Staff

Social media users have been sharing a quote attributed to the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test, currently being used to detect COVID-19, which says “PCR tests cannot detect free infectious viruses at all”. This quote appears not to be a direct quote from the inventor, Kary Mullis, has lost some context and does not mean COVID-19 testing is fraudulent, as suggested by some social media posts.

The posts have been shared over 1,000 times on Facebook (here , here , here).

The post begins with the words “COVID-19 TEST a FRAUD?”, then introduces the alleged quote from Mullis, who invented the PCR method in 1985 and was recognized for this achievement by being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993 (here).

However, the quote is actually from an article written by John Lauritsen in December 1996 about HIV and AIDS, not COVID-19 (here).

Please leave and take your blatant bullshit with you. Science is not religion. You cannot make it up as you go along.

Toot-a-loo loser.
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2020, 09:00 PM   #7
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
You have been lied to. Confused by people who know even less than you do. If that is at all possible.

You fell for another dumbass POS garbage false whopper. Which you bought sight unseen , posting it here as though you discovered anti-gravity.

Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say it can’t be used in virus detection
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN24420X

By Reuters Staff

Social media users have been sharing a quote attributed to the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test, currently being used to detect COVID-19, which says “PCR tests cannot detect free infectious viruses at all”. This quote appears not to be a direct quote from the inventor, Kary Mullis, has lost some context and does not mean COVID-19 testing is fraudulent, as suggested by some social media posts.

The posts have been shared over 1,000 times on Facebook (here , here , here).

The post begins with the words “COVID-19 TEST a FRAUD?”, then introduces the alleged quote from Mullis, who invented the PCR method in 1985 and was recognized for this achievement by being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993 (here).

However, the quote is actually from an article written by John Lauritsen in December 1996 about HIV and AIDS, not COVID-19 (here).

Please leave and take your blatant bullshit with you. Science is not religion. You cannot make it up as you go along.

Toot-a-loo loser.
That's not what the inventor said originally. Furthermore, the "test for covid" that he invented was a lot later than 1985. And other scientists agree with him.

Why COVID-19 Tests Are Inaccurate and the Role Dead Viral Cells Play

In just a matter of months, coronavirus research has become abundant as scientists continue to study the viral infection and work on developing treatments and vaccines. A review from the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine sheds some light on just how effective tests really are.

The standard PCR swab test is so sensitive, said scientists, that it can detect old infections by picking up fragments of dead viral cells. In reality, people infected with the coronavirus are only infectious for about a week, but could still test positive after several weeks.

This may have led to an inaccurate count of cases, and current figures of positive patients may be an over-estimate. Professor Carl Heneghan suggested that instead of a positive or negative result on tests, there should be a cut-off point indicating the amount of viral load.


https://www.sciencetimes.com/article...s-accurate.htm

And the inventor of the PCR test knew it was far too sensitive for covid-19.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2020, 04:24 AM   #8
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
That's not what the inventor said originally. Furthermore, the "test for covid" that he invented was a lot later than 1985. And other scientists agree with him.
Really? Post that later quote.
Sorry it was bullshit you fell for.

I will address your latest article and determine if they agree with the original scam as you claim
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2020, 10:59 AM   #9
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
Really? Post that later quote.
Sorry it was bullshit you fell for.

I will address your latest article and determine if they agree with the original scam as you claim
It was posted on the original topic. Why do you think a team of international lawyers and medical scientists are contemplating lawsuits against various governments?

And you don't believe the medical scientists at Oxford?
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2020, 12:24 PM   #10
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Original Article "Crimes Against Humanity"

Lawyers Prepare to Sue WHO for ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ Over COVID Lockdowns

Fuellmich’s legal team claim that PCR tests, as promoted by the WHO and numerous public health bodies worldwide, are to blame for the lockdowns.

Contrary to assertions by the WHO, German virologist Christian Drosten and Lothar Wieler of the German Robert Koch-Institut (roughly equivalent to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), PCR tests “do not give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-CoV-2,” Fuellmich said.

“Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly emphasized,” he continued. “Instead, they are simply incapable of diagnosing any disease.”


“Contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR test result does not mean that an infection is present,” Fuellmich emphasized. “If someone tests positive, it does not mean that they are infected with anything, let alone with a contagious SARS-CoV-2 virus.” (emphasis mine)

https://newspunch.com/lawyers-prepar...vid-lockdowns/

As far as the PCR disclaimer goes:

PCR tests are FOR RESEARCH ONLY. They are not designated for Diagnostic purposes.

Intended Use

This product is intended for the detection of 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The detection result of this product is only for clinical reference, and it should not be used as the only evidence for clinical diagnosis and treatment.

https://www.marktaliano.net/pcr-test...stic-purposes/
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2020, 01:09 PM   #11
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
I already told you you fell for a scam, and I gave you experts opinion that PCR testing is a good enough metric to gauge the pandemic.

And I can prove it. This is from a comprehensive data source that is becoming a major player. The set of graphs show as daily cases, which are determined by PCR tests increase, so do hospitalizations and death. In that order. Hospitalizations and death are lagging indicators. Takes some time for the changes to ripple thru.

Look at the correspondence of cases with hospitalizations. You can also see as testing goes up, so does cases and the others. Coincidence, or a vast conspiracy to prove you wrong?

https://covidtracking.com/data/chart...ll-key-metrics

Attached Images
File Type: png Screenshot_2020-12-03 US All Key Metrics.png (56.7 KB, 2 views)
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.

Last edited by hcap; 12-03-2020 at 01:11 PM.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2020, 01:41 PM   #12
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
I already told you you fell for a scam, and I gave you experts opinion that PCR testing is a good enough metric to gauge the pandemic.

And I can prove it. This is from a comprehensive data source that is becoming a major player. The set of graphs show as daily cases, which are determined by PCR tests increase, so do hospitalizations and death. In that order. Hospitalizations and death are lagging indicators. Takes some time for the changes to ripple thru.

Look at the correspondence of cases with hospitalizations. You can also see as testing goes up, so does cases and the others. Coincidence, or a vast conspiracy to prove you wrong?

https://covidtracking.com/data/chart...ll-key-metrics
There's no scam. Other doctors and scientists see the scam that PCR testing is. Again, I ask: You don't like the medical science research done at Oxford? Is Oxford University a scam?

And what part of the labeling on the PCR test kit, didn't you understand?

And what part of the inventor's quote didn't you get?

The freaking test is way too sensitive to be used reliably for covid-19.

Even a foreign court recently reached the same decision.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-04-2020, 05:05 AM   #13
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
There's no scam. Other doctors and scientists see the scam that PCR testing is. Again, I ask: You don't like the medical science research done at Oxford? Is Oxford University a scam?

And what part of the labeling on the PCR test kit, didn't you understand?

And what part of the inventor's quote didn't you get?

The freaking test is way too sensitive to be used reliably for covid-19.

Even a foreign court recently reached the same decision.
What about the numbers I gave you from the Covid Tracking Project? Are they making up
the data to fool you? And why has PCR testing become the premier test to use?

Are all epidemiologists, medical journals, all universities, infectious disease experts wrong and you a non scientists who cherry picks articles without a thorough study of the field correct?

You have been 100% wrong about everything covid. From hydroxychloroquine,
masks, herd immunity as preached by economists, not epidemiologists to your latest totally false claim of "crimes against humanity"

Not to mention your insistence your inept lame duck schmuck would win the presidency. The odds of you being wrong all the time must be astronomical.
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.

Last edited by hcap; 12-04-2020 at 05:06 AM.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-04-2020, 09:52 AM   #14
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
What about the numbers I gave you from the Covid Tracking Project? Are they making up
the data to fool you? And why has PCR testing become the premier test to use?

Are all epidemiologists, medical journals, all universities, infectious disease experts wrong and you a non scientists who cherry picks articles without a thorough study of the field correct?

You have been 100% wrong about everything covid. From hydroxychloroquine,
masks, herd immunity as preached by economists, not epidemiologists to your latest totally false claim of "crimes against humanity"

Not to mention your insistence your inept lame duck schmuck would win the presidency. The odds of you being wrong all the time must be astronomical.
So, you're saying you don't believe the medical scientists at Oxford? You don't believe the inventor's quote. You don't believe the disclaimer on the boxes of covid-19 test kits? You don't believe the ruling of a European court?
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-05-2020, 04:59 AM   #15
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
So, you're saying you don't believe the medical scientists at Oxford? You don't believe the inventor's quote. You don't believe the disclaimer on the boxes of covid-19 test kits? You don't believe the ruling of a European court?
I am saying just as in climate science and other fields, there are always contrarian opinions. Mainstream is usually correct. Contrarian not so much until verified by other experts.

Just like you post over and over again, paranoia everyone is lying to you. And you are swayed by viewpoints of your fellow conspiracy nuts.

For instance when you dramatically announced the CDC said masks don't work, not reading the summary of the article, specifying while eating in restaurants, when masks are removed


You can not analyses data being scared shitless, Satan is always lying to you Trumpites about everything
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.