LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Hydroxychoroquine/Azithromycin/Zinc Sulfate

Conager said:
I don't make claims "that I know are fslse."

I'm not uniformed about one of the biggest stories in ABC News his posted in months being completely destroyed by the next day. How did you possibly miss that?

See where you and I differ is I read likely everything you do plus everything that you refuse to read because you're quite sure that those sources are not trustworyhy.

To repeat- you continue to go back to the same sources that have been proved to be regularly disseminate fake news.

The phrase fake news was actually developed by lefttis, legacy media trying to protect their imprimatur of authority. They did this to discredit right wing blogs. The idea was "We're the official news source and they aren't."

Trump tur ed that against them by labeling there false stories as fake news. Every time they lay another one of these eggs he gets more ammunition for the poor me the media is out to get me strategy. At this point, regardless what he says or does nobody that matters to his reelection is going to buy it.

Go read that ABC article objective Lee. Then think about if you were the editor of that paper and your reporter head Layton egg that big would you put a small blurred at the bottom of that same article saying well depending on finally did get back to us and they said that that wasn't quite right. Or would you issue or attraction like a "reputable" news organization.

If you were the editor and that statement had been issued a few hours earlier so that it was available before that story ran would you have run that story with um name sources being completely dispute advice and on the record statement?

Yet, there that article still resides, the headline still reads what it reads and anyone who Google's for that is going to find that Trump ignored intelligence reports that warned him in November.

Something that did not happen.
Click to expand...

Didn't you say that there were only 22,000 hospitalizations due to COVID?
 
Conager said:
I don't make claims "that I know are fslse."

I'm not uniformed about one of the biggest stories in ABC News his posted in months being completely destroyed by the next day. How did you possibly miss that?

See where you and I differ is I read likely everything you do plus everything that you refuse to read because you're quite sure that those sources are not trustworyhy.

To repeat- you continue to go back to the same sources that have been proved to be regularly disseminate fake news.

The phrase fake news was actually developed by lefttis, legacy media trying to protect their imprimatur of authority. They did this to discredit right wing blogs. The idea was "We're the official news source and they aren't."

Trump tur ed that against them by labeling there false stories as fake news. Every time they lay another one of these eggs he gets more ammunition for the poor me the media is out to get me strategy. At this point, regardless what he says or does nobody that matters to his reelection is going to buy it.

Go read that ABC article objective Lee. Then think about if you were the editor of that paper and your reporter head Layton egg that big would you put a small blurred at the bottom of that same article saying well depending on finally did get back to us and they said that that wasn't quite right. Or would you issue or attraction like a "reputable" news organization.

If you were the editor and that statement had been issued a few hours earlier so that it was available before that story ran would you have run that story with um name sources being completely dispute advice and on the record statement?

Yet, there that article still resides, the headline still reads what it reads and anyone who Google's for that is going to find that Trump ignored intelligence reports that warned him in November.

Something that did not happen.
Click to expand...

I have made no claims of anything other then you need to prove what you assert as true and factual. I've given you the reasons for it, yet you keep trying to divert the discussion to something that never happened. Have I in any of my posts quoted a news story or a web site to try to disprove the statement you posted wasn't true? I haven't. It was proven to be true only because Aglaopheme provided me with a link to the story that verified it was true, which you should have done to begin with. I have argued, over and over IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY not mine, or hers for that matter, to prove what you say is true.

And each time you keep trying to deflect the discussion to me trying to prove you're wrong. I haven't any place it this entire exchange attempted to do that. I have expressed my doubts that what you posted was true and stated the reasons why. I have attempted to get the point across to you that it is not my job to do your work, to prove your point for you!

how many times do I need to repeat that before you understand what I'm saying?

I will continue to repeat it and reroute all your deflection attempts back to the base discussion and my point IT IS NOT MY JOB TO PROVE YOUR POINT FOR YOU!

Comshaw
 
I count several liars, simpletons, and perverts in this thread.

You know who you are. Except the simpletons.
 
Comshaw said:
Why are you always insisting that I should do your work for you? Why do you insist I take your word as gospel when you refuse to do the same for me?

It comes down to a simple premise, you claim it, you prove it, otherwise it's unsubstantiated opinion, and as I've said and repeated ad nusium, your opinion holds no water with me.

Comshaw
Click to expand...

You and everyone else on the board that reats that ridiculous mantra are absolutely full of it.

Not one of you ever backs up your own posts unless you were already hotlinking because you lack the confidence or memory to paraphrase what you read or desire to author your own analysis of a given situstion.

You all only insist that everyone else "backs up" their statements. No matter how anything is phrased. if I respond to you I have to prove it, if I make a statement I have to prove it. No matter what, the onus is always on the other person. If you have a position on an issue OWN IT, don't weasel out with, "You made the claim, you PROVE it!" If you have a counter position or a counter claim be a man, state what your differece of opinion is and defend with your own knowledge, not hastily googled citations.

The entire premise is counterproductive. Before the internet existed, human being had exchanges of ideas. Not one person at that time ever insisted that you go to the library, check out of reference book, underline it and come back with "proof." Rhetorical debate still does not work that way. Citations, if you have them from memory are a logical fallacy easily defeated, as an appeal to authority is only as good as the actual substance of the position the authority figure is advancing in your behalf. If your argument is in solid footing, your prosecuting the argument carries the same weight as Steven Hawking's. Steven Hawking's having opinion doesn't make it right. Steven Hawking's opinions are only as valid as any other opinion and either withstands debate, or not.

If you don't personally know what you are talking about on a given subject, then you're in no position to argue anything. If you are well-versed on a given subject, you should be able to argue with what's already in your own head. No citations should ever be needed for discourse..

Do your own homework before you engage in a conversation about any subject. Something doesn't sound right to you you should be able to explain why it doesn't sound right to you. If it doesn't sound right to you and your not sure why it doesn't sound right Google can be your friend. Go educate yourself it's a forum you can come back when you do know what you're talking about. It's not my job to fill your head with the things that you need to know to see my point of view.


Either you at least think you know what you are talking about or you don't. Either you came prepared with your homework already done or you didn't. It's never my job to explain to you how I came to know what I think I know or why I think I know you're wrong. Telling you how you arevwting is sufficient. If I'm wrong, it should be simple to point out where I err.

"Prove it!" is not an arguement, it's a quarrel.

If I am wrong, I'm wrong. It <should> be simple yo point out where I err. If you succeed, it never devolves to a quarrel, because I just picked up information that I didn't previously have. You wouldn't even likely notice I did that, because we are just exchanging information we have gathered, ideas we have had about that, and opinions we have formed.

If you're wrong you're wrong. If you want to listen to why you're wrong, fine maybe you learn something. If you don't want to listen that's fine too, you can remain in your ignorance. It is not my job to educate you.

"I haven't heard that, go dig up a citation" is not helpful. If you hadn't heard something before you are hearing it now. I just told you. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe later in your travels you'll find out that I'm wrong and why I'm wrong and you can have some smug satisfaction that I'm occasionally wrong.

Let's review what happened here specifically.

A poster posted a snide comment that was obviously referring to the ABC story.

I pointed out that tgat story had been refuted.

Phrodeau snipes that it was not refuted, they just had not gou d the report, implying that there may be such a report. They checked. There was nothing like that from that office, period. Full stop.

I gave a close-enough-for-government-work paraphrase. I should not have bothered Phrodeau is the fourth finger member of the you-don't-get-a-cite club. He is lazy, he snarls, and when you bother to cite, he slinks away, line he did here. To your credit, you did not.

You expressed what seemed like genuine wonder at the quote. You wanted the full quote and sore saying which frankly I wouldn't have had any idea where to find. It probably would have been more helpful if I just simply said I recall that being the substance of the quote but I don't know the full quote who said it but I do know it was a defense department official. Good have left at at that probably probably should have.

I teasingly said no, while I looked to see how come person it would be to dig that out. My impetus in doing so was i was going to add that as the 12th lie in the Corona virus lies thread.

Then you wanted where. Who cares? It's a valid quote that no one in their right mind questions was actually said by the dude that said it with the official authority the dude has to say it. You can certainly dis believe that he's telling you the truth as you should with any government official but need pointing you to the actual quote is far above and beyond my job.

I even point it out when I gave it to you that it isn't my job to provide it for you in a reputable news source. It's not my job that decide what's reputable for you or not. I've got a pretty good idea but again not my problem didn't know place that you read happens to have shared this important news item prominently. I went back and looked later and other than that small non retraction retraction at the bottom of the completely (in my view) discredited ABC News article I could not find that anywhere on a left leaning site. Complete radio silence.

How was any of that useful? You initially hadn't heard it I filled you in that should have been the end of it. That could certainly send you scam purring off to read, or we could be something that you just file away and think about and maybe run across later. If you're never going to read a right wing blog and you didn't go back and reread the original ABC article to find out that they had snuck in a non correction at the bottom this is something that you would never know.

Doesn't that bother you?
 
Last edited:
hogjack said:
I count several liars, simpletons, and perverts in this thread.

You know who you are. Except the simpletons.
Click to expand...

Statistically, one half of everyone you meet will be below the median for intelligence and self-perception of one's IQ tends to be inversely proportional.
 
Comshaw said:

I have made no claims of anything other then you need to prove what you assert as true and factual. I've given you the reasons for it, yet you keep trying to divert the discussion to something that never happened. Have I in any of my posts quoted a news story or a web site to try to disprove the statement you posted wasn't true? I haven't. It was proven to be true only because Aglaopheme provided me with a link to the story that verified it was true, which you should have done to begin with. I have argued, over and over IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY not mine, or hers for that matter, to prove what you say is true.

And each time you keep trying to deflect the discussion to me trying to prove you're wrong. I haven't any place it this entire exchange attempted to do that. I have expressed my doubts that what you posted was true and stated the reasons why. I have attempted to get the point across to you that it is not my job to do your work, to prove your point for you!

how many times do I need to repeat that before you understand what I'm saying?

I will continue to repeat it and reroute all your deflection attempts back to the base discussion and my point IT IS NOT MY JOB TO PROVE YOUR POINT FOR YOU!

Comshaw
Click to expand...
When have I ever suggested you need to prove my point? You can go discover for yourself that I'm right or wrong and it makes no difference to me whatsoever.

You can accept it or reject it. It isn't even my job to prove my point to you.
 
Hydrocholoquine needs one of those fancy names they dream up for drugs so we can start making ads.

Without an ad campaign and the right name... this pandemic will never end.

Socialitrex ?
 
Conager said:
You and everyone else on the board that reats that ridiculous mantra are absolutely full of it.

Not one of you ever backs up your own posts unless you were already hotlinking because you lack the confidence or memory to paraphrase what you read or desire to author your own analysis of a given situstion.

You all only insist that everyone else "backs up" their statements. No matter how anything is phrased. if I respond to you I have to prove it, if I make a statement I have to prove it. No matter what, the onus is always on the other person. If you have a position on an issue OWN IT, don't weasel out with, "You made the claim, you PROVE it!" If you have a counter position or a counter claim be a man, state what your differece of opinion is and defend with your own knowledge, not hastily googled citations.

The entire premise is counterproductive. Before the internet existed, human being had exchanges of ideas. Not one person at that time ever insisted that you go to the library, check out of reference book, underline it and come back with "proof." Rhetorical debate still does not work that way. Citations, if you have them from memory are a logical fallacy easily defeated, as an appeal to authority is only as good as the actual substance of the position the authority figure is advancing in your behalf. If your argument is in solid footing, your prosecuting the argument carries the same weight as Steven Hawking's. Steven Hawking's having opinion doesn't make it right. Steven Hawking's opinions are only as valid as any other opinion and either withstands debate, or not.

If you don't personally know what you are talking about on a given subject, then you're in no position to argue anything. If you are well-versed on a given subject, you should be able to argue with what's already in your own head. No citations should ever be needed for discourse..

Do your own homework before you engage in a conversation about any subject. Something doesn't sound right to you you should be able to explain why it doesn't sound right to you. If it doesn't sound right to you and your not sure why it doesn't sound right Google can be your friend. Go educate yourself it's a forum you can come back when you do know what you're talking about. It's not my job to fill your head with the things that you need to know to see my point of view.


Either you at least think you know what you are talking about or you don't. Either you came prepared with your homework already done or you didn't. It's never my job to explain to you how I came to know what I think I know or why I think I know you're wrong. Telling you how you arevwting is sufficient. If I'm wrong, it should be simple to point out where I err.

"Prove it!" is not an arguement, it's a quarrel.

If I am wrong, I'm wrong. It <should> be simple yo point out where I err. If you succeed, it never devolves to a quarrel, because I just picked up information that I didn't previously have. You wouldn't even likely notice I did that, because we are just exchanging information we have gathered, ideas we have had about that, and opinions we have formed.

If you're wrong you're wrong. If you want to listen to why you're wrong, fine maybe you learn something. If you don't want to listen that's fine too, you can remain in your ignorance. It is not my job to educate you.

"I haven't heard that, go dig up a citation" is not helpful. If you hadn't heard something before you are hearing it now. I just told you. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe later in your travels you'll find out that I'm wrong and why I'm wrong and you can have some smug satisfaction that I'm occasionally wrong.

Let's review what happened here specifically.

A poster posted a snide comment that was obviously referring to the ABC story.

I pointed out that tgat story had been refuted.

Phrodeau snipes that it was not refuted, they just had not gou d the report, implying that there may be such a report. They checked. There was nothing like that from that office, period. Full stop.

I gave a close-enough-for-government-work paraphrase. I should not have bothered Phrodeau is the fourth finger member of the you-don't-get-a-cite club. He is lazy, he snarls, and when you bother to cite, he slinks away, line he did here. To your credit, you did not.

You expressed what seemed like genuine wonder at the quote. You wanted the full quote and sore saying which frankly I wouldn't have had any idea where to find. It probably would have been more helpful if I just simply said I recall that being the substance of the quote but I don't know the full quote who said it but I do know it was a defense department official. Good have left at at that probably probably should have.

I teasingly said no, while I looked to see how come person it would be to dig that out. My impetus in doing so was i was going to add that as the 12th lie in the Corona virus lies thread.

Then you wanted where. Who cares? It's a valid quote that no one in their right mind questions was actually said by the dude that said it with the official authority the dude has to say it. You can certainly dis believe that he's telling you the truth as you should with any government official but need pointing you to the actual quote is far above and beyond my job.

I even point it out when I gave it to you that it isn't my job to provide it for you in a reputable news source. It's not my job that decide what's reputable for you or not. I've got a pretty good idea but again not my problem didn't know place that you read happens to have shared this important news item prominently. I went back and looked later and other than that small non retraction retraction at the bottom of the completely (in my view) discredited ABC News article I could not find that anywhere on a left leaning site. Complete radio silence.

How was any of that useful? You initially hadn't heard it I filled you in that should have been the end of it. That could certainly send you scam purring off to read, or we could be something that you just file away and think about and maybe run across later. If you're never going to read a right wing blog and you didn't go back and reread the original ABC article to find out that they had snuck in a non correction at the bottom this is something that you would never know.

Doesn't that bother you?
Click to expand...

After your long rambling close to incoherent post filed with off topic things that have nothing to do with what is being discussed and charges that have no basis, we are still right where we were.

What I've said has nothing to do with opinion. I don't expect nor do I insist anyone "verify" what their opinion is. An opinion is a persons view, their interpretation of what is. The only reference I've made to opinions in this exchange is the fact that you do not see mine as reliable and I see yours as the same. My point always has been that you make claims of fact and refuse to provide where you got those "facts". Sometimes, as with the statement in discussion, you are correct. Sometimes what you claim is so far from the truth and fact as to be classified as fantasy. I will not try to differentiate between the ones that are factual and the ones that aren't. As I've insisted from the beginning, that is your job to prove up your claims.

You also made the statement that I never provide accompanying verification for facts I claim and where I got them. That my dear sir is a total falsehood. I've been here for a very long time. I've discussed and argued with many who are much better at it then you are. Because of that I make it a habit to provide a link to where my information comes from. You may be able to find a post by me, way, way back that does not have that, but in the last 10 years I always follow that policy. So what you claim, I know is false. That is why my insistence on you providing factual backup for what you claim, because you have a habit of ascribing facts not in evidence or not verifiable.

I know you will go on and never provide any type of factual backup for what you claim. That's fine. I'll go on discounting anything you do claim until such time as it's verified. Since you are to lazy or to arrogant to do so, I will not go out of my way to prove your point for you.


Comshaw
 
Conager said:
When have I ever suggested you need to prove my point? You can go discover for yourself that I'm right or wrong and it makes no difference to me whatsoever.

You can accept it or reject it. It isn't even my job to prove my point to you.
Click to expand...

Really?

Originally Posted by Comshaw View Post
I'm sorry, but after doing a dozen differently worded searches using half a dozen different search sites, I can not find that quote any where. Would you be so kind as to point me to where you acquired it?

Thanks

Comshaw
Click to expand...

Originally posted by Conager:
No.

Call the public information office for the DIA if you doubt it.

Again, the problem is not "reputable" news sites the problem is that Google knows what flavor of bullshit you prefer.

Try a different search engine, if you do not want to go to the source at DIA.mil
Click to expand...

Is this not you telling me you will not even attempt to verify the quote you posted?


Comshaw
 
Lancecastor19 said:
I would have recommended Malaria to get rid of Nicaragua.
Click to expand...

Used to be that an awful lot of Nicaraguans died from Malaria... I don’t know if it’ still the case. Probably. Nicaragua is beautiful, though. Gorgeous beaches, fantastic weather, mangoes and avocados everywhere... practically paradise apart from the violence, riots and poverty.
 
SusanHaack said:
It seems they've had some success with hydroxychloroquine, consequently research labs and hospitals are testing it. Should you take it before it's approved? No, that would be retarded.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-drug-covid-hydroxychloroquine-tests-1.5525690
Click to expand...
sweden's been trying it out on their covid19-ers and have now told all their hospitals and doctors NOT to use it since it's not showing to have any benefit but IS creating side-effects ranging from loss of peripheral vision to severely worsening heart issues in patients. no one has yet died because of it but they have nothing to show benefits outweigh side effects.

Richard_C said:
700 people in New York are glad they took it. They're alive now! So, does that make them retarded???
Click to expand...
there's no evidence it was the drug that made them survive

silver gurl said:
I take it every day. I have for years. I am still here. I also have not caught the covid, yet.
Click to expand...
i don't take it and haven't caught it either!

dp4shelly said:
This showcases the degree that the left is making it political. The amount of empirical evidence that it is safe and effective is massive at this point. But if there is light at the end of the tunnel and Trump highlighted this treatment as promising then things will not land the way the left wants. So they wind-up the fake news boys and girls to block a life saving treatment. What kind of human garbage would do such a thing for political reasons? I have been disgusted with them for years but now the stench is unbearable.
Click to expand...
it's nothing to do with left and right, but the fucking lives of people, you shithead. what he's done is push for something without the appropriate warnings, looking for a cheap, glitzy magic wand to wave and say 'hey, look at me!'
i wish he'd been right, but his approach was inexcusable and not backed up by any science or scientific advisor.

sweden's trials using it on covid patients (on a far greater number than the french study) have results that show it's not effective and can be dangerous above and beyond just inconvenience.

more recent studies in china and in france both have their scientists saying the early french and chinese reported test results were not able to be confirmed and, in fact, the larger-scale testing shows evidence to the contrary.
 
Last edited:
Lancecastor19 said:
I think of it as a hydroponic javex lab bitch, maybe zumi’s occasional het dalliance.

She’s Hydro Chloro Queen, there has to be a twist.
Click to expand...

Free roll of toilet paper to anyone that can decipher who the fuck Rapeboi is referencing here. :confused:

Unlike Flameout's daily piss-spraying acrimony, he's making a real effort to belong back into Lit's community again despite a legacy of past fails, so a sleuthing prize deserves no less than top shelf Cottonelle with aloe & e.

https://i.insider.com/5db1ef78dee01965754faca5?width=600&format=jpeg&auto=webp
 
Let's see, who has the most posts in a thread about quack cures?
Yup, no surprise there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Cruise passenger fumes after learning raunchy reason women were flirting with him
Replies
1
Views
513
TheGxForum
TheGxForum
Penus_Flytrap
Being an adult is harder than I thought.
Replies
14
Views
824
strongnsensual
S
DoctorSmith8
Please chime in with some ideas on how to proceed with this sci-fi story...
Replies
7
Views
754
Shaglus_Ziegler
Shaglus_Ziegler
sumptuouscove
Mom son incest romance story
Replies
16
Views
2K
lustychimera
lustychimera
lovecraft68
Why you should always watch how much you share here.
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
M_K_Babalon
M_K_Babalon
Back
Top