zlacker

I don't think you have a complete understanding of the larger opposing point of view that you think you do. What you're regurgitating is a media enhanced narrative. You are upset with a caricature.

>>TheBli+(OP)
Nah, I've talked to enough of these types to know the information and reasoning they're relying on. One of my personal quirks is a lifelong fascination with crackpots.

And for what it's worth, I have some heterodox opinions on certain COVID-related topics. For example the case against ivermectin has been greatly overstated, although there is still room for reasonable doubt about its efficacy.

Not everyone with a streak of independent thought on COVID is a fool, but essentially all the vaccine haters are. Drunk on sentimental nonsense and ideological fantasy, with just enough fact mixed in to make the toxic brew superficially plausible. The 1/6 rioters were much the same.

>>civili+x
If you can admit the discourse around Ivermectin is confused, then perhaps you can see why some arrive at the wrong conclusion with respect to mRNA vaccines.

Is it possible that some are not as equipped as you are to discern the signal within the noise?

Is it possible you are incorrect about one or more of your heterodox opinions?

The type of sneering you're engaging in is unbelievably counterproductive. Uncivilized, even.

>>chitow+D2
I wouldn't tell my aunt that it's idiotic to blindly believe spike protein sheds from the vaccinated and harms people, or that VAERS has recorded thousands of vaccine-caused deaths, because she read it on FB. But I do think it's idiotic to believe that, and every once in a while I'm going to say so.

It's not just some innocent difficulty with finding the signal in the noise. It's sentimental, ideological delusion, and it's rotten to the core. And deep down, I believe many of them do know better, even if they stopped caring years ago.

I won't pointlessly anger them by saying so to their faces, but I also won't patronize them by pretending otherwise.