Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

Since you're a 'logic' guy you should recognize that at best the virus hypothesis is not disproven.

Okay bro... Again not wanting to sound like a broken record, but please study epistemology.

Go to youtube and just watch some videos on "street epistemology" and "the Socratic method"... That's a good place to start. Pretty entertaining too most of the time.

One of the first topics you'll come across is how to accurately assign the burden of proof and what it really means when it's not met.

Your statement here is an inversion of the burden of proof.

Who cares? The issue is -- has the viral model been replicated via experiment... no... only 'epidemiologically'.

Yes... The viral model gets replicated every time you go to costco healthy, and get sick 3 days later because one of the 2,000 people you were around sneezed near you.

Yes.... It's totally trivial and easy to prove that a viral infection can pass from person to person. You can deny it's a virus causing the illness, but you can not deny that the illness is contagious.

You can do one better. You can give us full blood transfusions! Go ahead -- look into the evidence of your 'experiment'.

I have.... Turns out it's bad for your health to receive HIV blood...

Who would've thought?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_haemophilia_blood_products

17 days ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

Since you're a 'logic' guy you should recognize that at best the virus hypothesis is not disproven.

Okay bro... Again not wanting to sound like a broken record, but please study epistemology.

Go to youtube and just watch some videos on "street epistemology" and "the Socratic method"... That's a good place to start. Pretty entertaining too most of the time.

One of the first topics you'll come across is how to accurately assign the burden of proof and what it really means when it's not met.

Your statement here is an inversion of the burden of proof.

Who cares? The issue is -- has the viral model been replicated via experiment... no... only 'epidemiologically'.

Yes... The viral model gets replicated every time you go to costco healthy, and get sick 3 days later because one of the 2,000 people you were around sneezed near you.

Yes.... It's totally trivial and easy to prove that a viral infection can pass from person to person. You can deny it's a virus causing the illness, but you can not deny that the illness is contagious.

You can do one better. You can give us full blood transfusions! Go ahead -- look into the evidence of your 'experiment'.

I have.... Turns out it's bad for your health to receive HIV blood...

Who would've thought?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_haemophilia_blood_products

17 days ago
1 score
Reason: Original

Since you're a 'logic' guy you should recognize that at best the virus hypothesis is not disproven.

Okay bro... Again not wanting to sound like a broken record, but please study epistemology.

Go to youtube and just watch some videos on "street epistemology" and "the Socratic method"... That's a good place to start. Pretty entertaining too most of the time.

One of the first topics you'll come across is how to accurately assign the burden of proof and what it really means when it's not met.

Your statement here is an inversion of the burden of proof.

Are you religious by any chance? Not trying to be insulting, but my personal opinion is that the vast majority of the population have never actually taken a deep dive into epistemology.

Because as soon as someone does the first thing they usually want to do is examine their religious beliefs from this new framework they are studying, usually intending to prove the religion is true, which is actually a fast track to losing your religion all together.

But in a society where at least 90% of the people claim belief in one supernatural religion or another, I have a hard time believing significant numbers of people have actually studied epistemology.

Who cares? The issue is -- has the viral model been replicated via experiment... no... only 'epidemiologically'.

Yes... The viral model gets replicated every time you go to costco healthy, and get sick 3 days later because one of the 2,000 people you were around sneezed near you.

Yes.... It's totally trivial and easy to prove that a viral infection can pass from person to person. You can deny it's a virus causing the illness, but you can not deny that the illness is contagious.

You can do one better. You can give us full blood transfusions! Go ahead -- look into the evidence of your 'experiment'.

I have.... Turns out it's bad for your health to receive HIV blood...

Who would've thought?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_haemophilia_blood_products

17 days ago
1 score