Lurker > joe40001

Who cares about Trump anymore?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

LordRazziel posted...

It's not just them, it's the concensus of experts. Offhandly acknowledging you could be wrong doesn't mean much when you continue to argue with experts who have tried to make you understand you're out of your depth.

I'm not arguing with any experts in this topic.

You could say the current consensus is that it is not useful, but unfortunately misinformation curing COVID has been high, including false labeling of information as misinformation (such as with lab leak).

There are plenty of interests involved in not wanting an off patent drug to help against covid and very few people who stand to gain by lying that it does work.

The WHO does not say it's ineffective but that they want to wait for the results of clinical trials, other serious clinical trials are underway from plenty of respected places. None of this would be happening if it was "tinfoil doggie pill" nonsense.

There is frankly tons of circumstantial evidence for it, and because I never was one to bend the knee to gatekeeping (particularly when it's showing it's true colors more and more) I think there is plenty of reason to keep an eye on this and feel optimistic about the prospects.

Considering the incredibly low bar something like remdesivir had to pass to get FDA approval I think it's foolish to say ivermectin has no promise.

So it's not this thing of me vs the world. It's me, and a bunch of people who don't swallow talking points at face value, and then those who do, and those who do sometimes are right, but as we've seen with lab leak, sometimes they are both wrong and very bad faith.

IMO it's a mini-war between science itself and gatekeeping institutions. We all more or less acknowledge that healthcare and big pharma in the country is a bit fucked, that if it's patient health vs money we can't trust everybody involved to always care about the patient's health, as such I simply am not on board with going "yep, daddy big pharma/FDA would never ever lie to me about something off patent being ineffective."

Eventually though, science wins out, so if I'm right or if I'm wrong, that's what I'm putting my faith in. Not who has the most gatekeeping points, but good honest science.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

LordRazziel posted...

At what point will y'all realize it's pointless to engage him? He's a legend in his own mind. You can't win against someone that believes what they think is always right. Nothing postive has come from this topic. Let it go.

Between me and DR, I have acknowledged I could be wrong in my current hypothesis, they have not.

It also seems like I'm also more open to truth testing than them.

So make of that what you will.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

Not that I actually care, but attacking my credibility was kind of an arse thing to do

Firstly, you very much did it first.

Secondly, that was because of your conduct in these topics, I cannot speak to your conduct outside these topics, but within these topics you have not be truthful and you have engaged in insulting behavior.

Based on your conduct in these topics, I do not think you are credible, because it does not seem like you provide opinions that are your own, the blog post in particular was very unscientific and it did not even seem like you read it.

By your own words (or the words you are parroting from others) you implied that the Egypt study was so obviously flawed that anybody remotely competent reading it would notice the flaws, yet you yourself didn't notice the flaws and had to wait until somebody else pointed them out.

Thus solidifying that you either think you aren't good at reading, or that you didn't read it.

I'm guessing it's the latter, I'm guessing despite all your posturing you read far less of these things than even me who you look down on. You seem to resort to this kinda pop-faux argument style which is about dunking and quoting blogs rather than anything anchored to reality.

And all of this is after how incredibly wrong you were on lab leak, yeah I don't have much faith in your judgement when it comes to matters like these, at least in the context of online debate.

In my experience, people communicating in good faith state clearly what they believe and their evidence for believing it. You seem to seldom want to take firm definitive stances, and are much more inclined to hint at things like "seems pretty fishy" and "You do know that's an Open Access journal, correct?" without articulating what you are claiming.

I see this as hedging and further evidence you aren't debating in good faith.

I'm not attacking your character, but me personally I do not have faith in your judgement.

But again, time will tell whose judgement is better.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

hockeybub89 posted...

Joe "I Can't Imagine I'm Wrong" Numbers

I acknowledge I could be wrong. DR and others here have not.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

bump

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I have provided evidence, you simply do not recognize it as evidence.

I cannot persuade somebody who refuses to acknowledge anything they don't want to hear.

I acknowledge that the egypt study looks bad which likely hurts the case for the meta-analysis, but I do not acknowledge that it invalidates all evidence as there is quite a deal more evidence.

If you refuse the acknowledge the evidence I have provided, and refuse to acknowledge the possibility that you could be wrong, I have no choice but to let reality and science itself prove one of us right or wrong.

I have parameters by which I would change my mind, you do not seem to have any such parameters. So how could I possibly engage with you when you refuse to acknowledge the possibility you could be wrong?

There is no persuading you if you believe that there is no possible evidence that could exist that would persuade you. If so what do you want me to do? Lie and tell you that I believe you are right and that ivermectin is ineffective? I currently believe that is quite likely false, so I won't say it.

If you want to bully me into submission, it won't work, if you are willing to entertain the possibility you could be wrong, we can talk further, if not then there really is nothing but letting reality and science show us who indeed was right.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

metallica846 posted...

Ive read all these topics of yours. I cant wait for the payoff.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

COVxy posted...

Lol, you don't know how science works. Stop pretending you do.

If we are talking about real science which involves skepticism and critical thinking, then yes I do.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

metallica846 posted...

Twilight zone in here ffs

Unlike DR, I acknowledge the possibility that my speculation at this moment could be wrong.

But we'll see in time who was right and who wasn't. Just keep that in mind, met, when the same people insist they know something.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

It's not about who is "right" or "wrong;" that's not how science works.

The bottom line is that there is no good evidence to support your claims. That's it. That's what it boils down to.

Yeah, except that there is and you are just being obtuse. And you are trying to bully me, and gatekeep. And you don't want to hear how you might be wrong, and so when i go "ok then, let's see who turns out to be right" you are intimidated by that because you know I damn well could be right.

If you are as confident as you act you have no business telling me "no we don't let science decide science!".

That is how science works, people make hypothesis and then they are tested and one becomes accepted. And so we'll see whose judgement and reading of the data is more on point.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

I don't want to dig up the quote but it was something to the effect of "you don't know what you are talking about, there is no way the virus could have been altered in a lab".

No, you're straw-manning my argument. I said gain-of-function research isn't what you were implying, and that the lab lacks the necessary technology to literally create GoF viruses via gene editing.

No, you spent near 10 pages misrepresenting my argument. I was saying gain of function and you kept insisting I was saying weird genetic engineering which I never was.

When I brought up "meaningfully altered in a lab" you said "what you are talking about is literally impossible" (or something very close to that)

Those are facts, too.

And that is a lie

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

We'll see who's right then.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

I would be interested to find out more from the meta-analysis without that study, but I frankly do not trust DR to be honest about that because they have not acted in good faith before.

Don't even go there. Literally nothing I've said or done up to this point has been anything other than factual.

You've straight up lied.

I don't want to dig up the quote but it was something to the effect of "you don't know what you are talking about, there is no way the virus could have been altered in a lab".

Which is factually false.

That was lumped with a bunch of insults to my intelligence too, which again, is hard to suggest is "factual".

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DezDroppedFreak posted...

By posting that meta analysis in post #1 you are using the retracted study as one of your key points. It literally does not matter if you agree with that assessment. The assessment is correct, and you are wrong.

There are tons of studies involved in that meta-analysis.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

What_ posted...

Its not effective

there. Done. Shut up. You lost.

DarkRoast posted...

I believe it is likely effective, I have provided evidence. You disagree. Reality, time, and good science will tell us who was right.

You provided RETRACTED evidence. That evidence was fundamentally flawed at very best, and likely straight-up fabricated and plagiarized at worst.

The other two studies you posted didn't even test ivermectin alone. In both cases, ivermectin was tested ALONGSIDE a therapy that was known to have at least some efficacy. They're meaningless.

Cool.

I'm fine leaving it here and seeing who turns out to be right.

I really hope I don't get a big "But I never said it was ineffective" from DR after all this though.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Your key evidence was just shot down and this is like the third or fourth time youve sidestepped criticism of that one study you keep posting over and over

I've posted multiple studies.

I never said that egypt one was my key "evidence". I never singled out that study at all. DR insisted it was, I don't agree with that assessment, largely because I don't think DR has investigated this themself as they seem to just be parroting what a couple blogs have said.

I would be interested to find out more from the meta-analysis without that study, but I frankly do not trust DR to be honest about that because they have not acted in good faith before.

Others don't get to tell me what my evidence is. DR has insisted the Egypt thing was important, not me.

What is the criticism of the study I've posted?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I think if there was a video of tricking lesbians to kiss men, most people would consider it quite "problematic".

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

To say he engages in disingenuous attempts to appear "academic" is an understatement. The foundation of his entire argument imploded under scrutiny, the key study that resulted in the outcome he believed was retracted, yet his response is that the point still stands unless we can prove a negative. It's classic anti-Evolutionist logical fallacies.

I'm not asking you to prove a negative.

I believe it is likely effective, I have provided evidence. You disagree. Reality, time, and good science will tell us who was right.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

MeUs posted...

If it's one thing people can count on, it's Joe thinking he knows what he's talking about and refusing to ever admit to being wrong about anything.

What do you think I'm wrong about?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

BECAUSE THERE'S NO GOOD EVIDENCE IT IS

Right, which is why you'd admit you think it's ineffective.

I'm willing to just let time play out and have reality/science itself determine who was right and who was wrong.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

Neither of those studies used ivermectin as monotherapies. Both were combined with medications with known efficacy (Ivermectin - Iota- Carrageenan / Ivermectin - Doxycycline)

They have zero value

Then why not admit that you don't think Ivermectin is likely to be effective?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

I'll take this as a declaration that you're incapable of admitting you're wrong. You don't have evidence of efficacy. That's objective fact.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04701710
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8127799/

Those are both evidence of efficacy, and there are plenty more.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

You're wrong.

You're wrong. And wrong. And wrong.

Even the evidence that gives you "confidence" has been retracted, for being bullshit.

That was one of only a handful of studies considered "high quality" and given more "weight" in the meta analysis. And most of the others did not favor ivermectin.

I'll take this as a declaration that you believe it is ineffective.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I think tricking anybody into kissing somebody under false pretenses is wrong.

Though I generally don't approve of these kinds of things anyway. People shouldn't be kissing strangers.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4pikerUu6o

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

There are plenty of other studies showing it's efficacy other than that one.

If you are confident that ivermectin is ineffective, why not say as much?

If you aren't confident it is ineffective why are on you on this crusade?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

There were only two studies in that meta-analysis that shifted the results towards Ivermectin. One was just retracted.

I don't agree with this characterization. There are a great deal of studies that point towards it's efficacy.

Are you claiming you believe it to be ineffective?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

Pity that evidence was retracted

https://amp.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

I never posted that study

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

teep_ posted...

Didn't get the quote 100% correct unfortunately, but since I quoted the original post I feel that's a forgiveable sin

I will do a mea culpa on this. I should have left when I said I would. I just had this need to post that one last study that feels like a slam dunk.

But from here on out I'm only going to post if it's a direct response to somebody else's post.

That was my bad though.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

MeUs posted...

@joe40001 You gonna respond to this or did you eject from this shitshow that you tried to defend with absolutely no actual knowledge of how studies and research work?

That's not any of the studies I posted.

If you believe Ivermectin is ineffective you should say as much.

I remain convinced that it is highly likely to be effective, as suggested by the evidence I provided.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

jumi posted...

How did that bet go you made with someone about a study coming out by a certain date? Is that study, or was it too late?

There are multiple studies that fulfill that criteria, including the one posted in the OP.

To be fair I did know at least 1 study was already out when initially trying to make the bet, seeing as if somebody took the bet without even reading the OP, it would suggest they were being quite foolish.

The bet I floated about the WHO has not yet come to pass, but it remains on the table to anybody who is confident Ivermectin is completely infective. To me the chance that ivermectin is ineffective is extremely low in my estimation, however I acknowledge that the WHO acknowledging it's efficacy in the next year isn't a sure thing. Probably like 9:1 odds in my favor (in my estimation).

However, some people have told me I should not offer bets, even if it is risking reputation rather than money. I feel like getting people to go on the record about truth claims helps make people less likely to make bogus claims in the future. I saw it was effective when this guy on reddit made monetary bets with his QAnon mom, and she was wrong about everything and was no longer willing to make monetary bets about QAnon claims.

My thinking was if I make these bets and i'm wrong, I learn a valuable lesson, but if I make these bets and the other person is wrong, they learn a valuable lesson, and moreover, the people who take their word as gospel do as well.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

DarkRoast posted...

Joe shut the hell up

That's rude.

If you disagree just say specifically what you disagree about.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I don't see how anybody could see the healthcare worker study and not think ivermectin works.

I think it's this one:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04701710

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

link?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

HashBrownCobraKai

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

dj1200 posted...

Yeah, those lists are most likely made by white people.

By white people, for white people

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Like if the world is doing this tough guys don't cry thing, I can play that, but I don't think it's beneficial.

Crying isn't weakness, lack of control of your emotions is.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I think completely suppressing your feelings is likely bad.

Like it's cool to not cry unless you are engaging your feelings, but to be unable to access them is bad.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Wii_Shaker posted...

Not even close.

The mass shooting and 10 dead gave it away.

Oh is that a number most of the other mass shootings don't have?

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Wii_Shaker posted...

Do you live in Boulder, CO?

Yep!

The best city must have given it away.

I don't think the mass shooting would narrow it down enough.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Yet another reason to never have kids

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

We had a mass shooting at a grocery store that left 10 people dead.

Kinda says something about America.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Diamond Pickaxe, obviously

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

HHH is the game posted...

Im sure this is misconstrued but what's scary is the people that are willing to say YEAH AS LONG AS IT SCREWS WITH THE RIGHT SO BE IT. No. We shouldn't use tribalism to allow us to support things we would despise on the other side. Luckily, this isnt even whats really happening but its scary people would be ok to support it if it was just because it was done against republicans

What we have to go on right now is:
"Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages."

What you make of that is up to you. Personally I do not think they would mention such a thing if they simply mean they are going to do a text message blast of some kind.

And I agree, there are far too many people here who would burn down the country as long as they believed the people in the other political party would burn more.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

metallica846 posted...

Dammit Joe!

I'll respond to you because I respect you.

I'm not posting misinformation. I am posting a paragraph from a politico article as it is written.

Be careful who around here you take at face value. There are many who are effectively gaslighters. If there is something I have said that you believe to be false let me know. If not, don't defer your judgements/opinions on things to some CE trolls, make up your mind for yourself.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Bee-held my taluntzz


---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

I is artust





---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Xethuminra posted...

I wonder if a Really Advanced Deep Fake filter could be used on games to simulate photorealism.

As a game dev hobbyist, I've thought about this too.

I've frequently toyed with the idea of using this kind of thing in a game jam game.

Like I think there has to be a super badass way to integrate something like this into a game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW1_Sidq3m8

That's the main one that I've had my eye on to turn into a relatively easy to make crazy looking game.

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9

Xethuminra posted...

These ALGorythm are sick.

I guess this is what came from digital de-aging technology. Thanks for sharing ^.^

Sometimes they bad guys win. Or cheat. And buy ads on the network TV...
What I can promise is that we will always look out for you, the consumer XD

lol, no problem.
Yeah I'm pretty in the loop on AI stuff if you ever have questions, but it is crazy

---

"joe is attractive and quite the brilliant poster" - Seiichi Omori
https://imgur.com/TheGsZ9