you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]whereswhat 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Nice ad hominem, moss-gatherer. You may not be a stupid person but you definitely latch on to some spectacularly stupid theories.

A quick check of the comment history suggests /u/venisonmerlot has a questioning attitude and doesn't always align with mainstream media. You, on the other hand, need to be more wary of confirmation bias. Calm down and live life. If you are consumed with paranoia, the overloards win.

[–]venisonmerlot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Do you even know what "ad-hominem" means? Tossing around Latin without knowing the context in which it's used doesn't make you sound like a professor. Quite the opposite in fact.

The site you quoted indeed looks like it was cobbled together by some teenager trying to learn to code HTML. There is no verifiable source for the claims posted, and I have zero besides your word and the author's that the information it reports is factual. Furthermore, you haven't anything more than I do to base that assumption on. The article even states that the claims of the vaccine killing kids cannot be confirmed. So why post it?

So... Yes, I'm going to question a ridiculous and poorly researched article that claims that some alleged cure for the Wuhan Flu killed several kids in Africa. You should too rather than spreading disinformation and then trying to discredit those who are skeptical.

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Wow, wow, wow. Read my comment again. I am agreeing with you.

That site is obviously bullshit. I was replying to /u/Tom_Bombadil and called his attack on you ad hominem, which it was. You're welcome.

[–]venisonmerlot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

My apologies. Post deleted.

[–]whereswhat 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well done. I will edit my other response as you are clearly no longer confused.