Covid19 Cases Actually AREN'T Rising - Here's Why

suree wrote:

Not that it should matter, as deaths are largely stable or down, meaning the virus is even less dead than previously thought (and it was never deadly anyway)

But even if we do allow ourselves to become frenzied over the 'rising cases' narrative, that phenomenon too can be explained...

Consider the Covid test itself. This PCR test is often at a ~ 40 cycle threshold...

This is a large reason for the high number of false positives, thus contributing to the reported spike in cases and the subsequent hysteria

This cycle threshold was noted months ago but was labeled a conspiracy theory, although it's now admitted by many labs

Oh, so you're one of them morons.

The Unkle wrote:

Sure.

If you believe the media.

And not your own eyes

You must have incredible vision to be able to see that an invisible virus is not, in fact, spreading across the country.

"The media" is not responsible for the COVID numbers. What you're saying is that you prefer to trust your personal hunches over the official data compiled by government officials and public health experts. Which is demented.

suree wrote:

In case you need a refresher:

https://hereistheevidence.com/

Are you kidding me? This is just links to random news articles, youtube snippets, unsourced or unproven stories from websites like "thegreggjarrett.com", and claims from unverified twitter accounts. None of this is actual evidence, it's just a giant compilation of internet argle bargle.

The Unkle wrote:

UnbiasedOhioVoter wrote:

From the guy who said Trump was re-elected.

Forgive me if I put no stock into your takes.

Never in history has a candidate had an 800,000 vote lead -- as Trump did in PA-- and lost that state. Until 2020 and PA.

Let's pretend there is nothing suspicious there.

So at what point did Biden lead by 800?

I mean, I've seen this number being tossed around after Giuliani mentioned it first, but no one actually bothers to say when this is supposed to have happened.

Trump's lead did pass 700k at one point (Somewhere between late night and early morning the day after the electiion). Can't quite remember how much above 700 it rose, 730 perhaps, but once the mail in ballots was being added to vote total it fell and kept falling.

For me, it seems "Lead by 800k" is just one more of these myths conjured out of thin air...

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

suree wrote:

*garbage link*

Are you kidding me? This is just links to random news articles, youtube snippets, unsourced or unproven stories from websites like "thegreggjarrett.com", and claims from unverified twitter accounts. None of this is actual evidence, it's just a giant compilation of internet argle bargle.

He's not kidding you. He's that lost in the world.

suree wrote:

I can see this a futile effort. We can all find models, metrics, extrapolations, and so on to support our narratives. Heck, we can use the same exact information and still draw totally different conclusions. Confirmation bias is everything.

If you can find models, metrics, extrapolations, and so on to support your narrative, why are you going to the trouble of just making counterfactual stuff up?

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Are you kidding me? This is just links to random news articles, youtube snippets, unsourced or unproven stories from websites like "thegreggjarrett.com", and claims from unverified twitter accounts. None of this is actual evidence, it's just a giant compilation of internet argle bargle.

lol typical c u c k

all the evidence is clearly sourced. In cases of links to news articles, the court reports and documents (primary sources) are linked in those articles.

The truth is, this information has not been officially sanctioned by the corporate media complex, so you automatically reject it. You outright reject 712 entries consisting of primary photos, videos and audio files, legal and court documents, sworn affidavits and rigid statistical analyses.

Just admit it. You're a c u c k

suree wrote:

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Are you kidding me? This is just links to random news articles, youtube snippets, unsourced or unproven stories from websites like "thegreggjarrett.com", and claims from unverified twitter accounts. None of this is actual evidence, it's just a giant compilation of internet argle bargle.

lol typical c u c k

all the evidence is clearly sourced. In cases of links to news articles, the court reports and documents (primary sources) are linked in those articles.

The truth is, this information has not been officially sanctioned by the corporate media complex, so you automatically reject it. You outright reject 712 entries consisting of primary photos, videos and audio files, legal and court documents, sworn affidavits and rigid statistical analyses.

Just admit it. You're a c u c k

Lol

"READ THE AFFIDAVITS"

Always said by someone who has not, in fact, read them.

Enjoy your coping

Where, approximately, do you live?

What you have stated is completely accurate.

There are some here who will refuse to ever challenge their assumptions and look into this.

The fraud of the PCR tests is what keeps the fraud of Covid alive. The case just filed in Germany by Reiner Fullmich (who won cases against Deutsche Bank and Volkswagen) hinges on the PCR tests and particularly what was developed by Christian Drosten on Jan. 13th which was then the protocol accepted all over the world.

If mass PCR testing halted tomorrow this phony pandemic would be over the same day.

Ask yourself why the US media isn't even exploring this. It is due to the fact that they are wholly owned by Big Pharma, Big Tech and Private Equity who all stand to profit ,and are, from these crimes.

“PCR test cannot tell you if you have virus or dead chunk of it. No other virus ever on this planet has been accompanied by so much testing—has created so much nonsense & panic”

—Dr Stadler, Prof Emeritus & Former Dir of Institute for Immunology, Bern Univ

This new paper by Jaafar et al (2020) publish last September shows that the accuracy of PCR tests using 35 cycles of viral RNA amplification is only about 3% meaning that 97% of the positive test results might be FALSE.

CDC recommends using up 40 cycles! All labs in the USA and Europe use 35-44 cycles, which is why positive PCR tests are essentially MEANINGLESS!

https://twitter.com/NikolovScience/status/1330227608206929924

Thank you for bringing much-needed fact, reason and logic to this thread

Unfortunately, other posters are clouded by emotion - manipulated emotion, in most cases ;)

suree wrote:

lol typical c u c k

all the evidence is clearly sourced. In cases of links to news articles, the court reports and documents (primary sources) are linked in those articles.

The truth is, this information has not been officially sanctioned by the corporate media complex, so you automatically reject it. You outright reject 712 entries consisting of primary photos, videos and audio files, legal and court documents, sworn affidavits and rigid statistical analyses.

Just admit it. You're a c u c k

Your obsession with cuckolding is really bizarre and reeks of small peen energy. I didn't automatically reject it. I read it myself and ascertained that it was not real evidence. You say there is plenty of evidence. "Photos, videos, and audio files, legal and court documents."... of what? You don't have any idea what you're talking about.

But okay, let's play this game. Let's look at the first entry under "Illegal Votes." The claim: "40,000 mail-in ballots were cast in the names of deceased voters in PA." This is sourced to this page, on the same website:

This page includes a list of "facts." Most are not unrelated to this claim and some are contradictory. (e.g., fact 5: "According to election experts, votes cast by a spouse of the deceased is exceedingly rare in Pennsylvania.") Fact 4 makes the same claim about 40k mail-in ballots being cast by dead voters and links to this page:

In other words, no evidence. More accurately: a lie.

Let's look at the next claim: "32.6% of 1706 sample received absentee ballots without their request"

This is sourced to a twitter thread created by one Matt Braynard, Former Data Chief and Strategist for Trump For President. (Clearly an unbiased source!) Matt provides no sourcing for his claims. This does not count as evidence.

On to the next claim: "Rejected absentee ballots: 3.5% in 2018 to 0.3% in 2020 despite 500% more votes."

This is a statistic included in a letter that Doug Collins, a butthurt failure of a senate candidate, sent to Georgia's Secretary of State to whine about the validity of the voting process. He was mad that more people's requests for mail-in ballots were not rejected. He had no proof of fraud. The Secretary of State is an avowed Republican who has since called Collins a liar and certified the election results. No evidence!

Okay, moving on. Surely the next entry will have some actual evidence, right? The claim: "66% of dead registered voters, born between 1800 and 1899, voted."

This claim, which does not even seem to be about the current election, is sourced to the sign-in page for a government data portal hosted by the state of PA. No evidence! Incredible!

Okay, I'm getting bored. This next claim is your last chance. What do we have?

"3,000 instances of alleged voter fraud filed with AG by Nevada GOP."

This is sourced to thegreggjarrett.com with a write-up on a lawsuit by the Nevada GOP (obviously at the Trump campaign's request), which claims they have evidence that 3,000 dead people voted. (Trump lost by 343,600, FYI.) The party has not provided any evidence for these claims and it's been almost three weeks since they were made. Oh, Nevada just certified their election results, too. It's over.

Learn to read, Suree. You idiot.

jinja wrote:

runnER/DR wrote:

I do believe my eyes. I am a frontline worker. I myself have seen 2 massive waves of people coming to my ER with shortness of breath, fevers, body aches, diarrhea, low oxygen levels. Both waves I have seen with my eyes have corresponded with data released by the state on COVID19.

I've practiced emergency medicine for over 10 years. I've never seen anything like this. I was there for swine flu, I was there for the really bad flu season 2 years ago. There is no comparison. This is the worst outbreak I've ever seen. I work with docs that have been around since the 1980s, and they've never seen anything like this.

Where, approximately, do you live?

Arizona.

The hospitalizations, deaths and diagnoses posted on the AZ dashboard exactly mirror my experience at work over the same periods of time.

Allen53 wrote:

https://twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1328494006767063042

Your chart is two weeks out of date and deaths have blown through the blue line by a good margin both of those weeks. Also the blue line is set too high, apparently using an unrealistic population growth rate adjustment. Finally the orange line doesn't actually match the ONS data from the latest release even in early summer.

Looking forward to your re-post with an updated version.

Yeah that graph is a lot of sh*te. This whole thread is full of lies (or "fake news" as you call it) . I'm not sure what thee education system is like over there but you need some basic GCSEs asap.

Listen - you're getting a 9/11 death count every couple of days. And these guys aren't dying immediately in an explosion or building collapse - they're slowly perishing over 2-3 weeks, gasping for air. It's not just blacks now whose last words are "I can't breathe".

You don't get it both ways - you can't have a grief-wank every year over 9/11, yet ignore the Coronavirus .

According to Glenn Greenwald, Trump led by 800k votes in PA at one point.

Wed AM when I got up his led was still over 700k.

With 2/3rds of the vote counted.'

Never in history has any candidate with that kind of lead not won the state.

Nothing even close to that ever happened.

if your argument is that the lead was 700k not 800k, it is a loser. Makes no material difference

The Unkle wrote:

According to Glenn Greenwald, Trump led by 800k votes in PA at one point.

Wed AM when I got up his led was still over 700k.

With 2/3rds of the vote counted.'

Never in history has any candidate with that kind of lead not won the state.

Nothing even close to that ever happened.

if your argument is that the lead was 700k not 800k, it is a loser. Makes no material difference

You’re surprised that the last 2-3 million votes, which mostly came from dense blue cities, flipped the state?

Anyway, my favorite part of all this is watching you squirm despite you saying “I’m not a trump supporter” 20 times before the election. Seems like you are actually quite invested in him ??

Do you think it's possible, even if extremely improbable, that the PA election result is real, even though this type of comeback has never occurred in the back (not sure if this is true)?

The Unkle wrote:

According to Glenn Greenwald, Trump led by 800k votes in PA at one point.

Wed AM when I got up his led was still over 700k.

With 2/3rds of the vote counted.'

Never in history has any candidate with that kind of lead not won the state.

Nothing even close to that ever happened.

if your argument is that the lead was 700k not 800k, it is a loser. Makes no material difference