Fauci's "Noble Lies"
- Thread starter ipatent
- Start date
Little guy, your english has improved over the last few years but we have been reading Zerohedge off and on for longer than you were able to understand it's nuances. So fuck off, failed 3rd world shitty physician, failed trader and failed human (thats actually pretty close to a genetic fallacy but its probably accurate). You lack the temperment to do anything properly, always somebody else's fault with you. Weak.
When the writer of "Tyler Durden" left and revealed who the team was, Colin Lokey, he described the editorial style like this and this has been common knowledge for years, you just learned it now:
"I tried to inject as much truth as I could into my posts, but there's no room for it," Lokey told Bloomberg. "Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry= dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft."
That's a pretty good summary of ZH in that time and it did not change.
Last edited:
We are discussing slanted nonsense that caught your attention because you are the type ZH is there to influence. If I were you, I'd have a think about why I am easy prey.
When ZH appeared it was a curiosity and many, including myself read it now and then. Over time however a pattern emerged of it being a Kremlin asset.
Last edited:
as morbid curiosity. No successful trader on wall street takes it seriously beyond some leaked news requiring further vetting. It's 4chan w/o the kiddy porn.
Last edited:
All of this is false. For example here is what Fauci wrote to Burwell, which was correct when he wrote it and so far as anyone knows is still correct. However I might add that ordinary "drug store" face masks may be somewhat more efficient at trapping virus than Fauci realized. Though the pores in these ordinary masks, and in many other masks, such as everyday surgical masks are larger than a virus , virus are normally part of an aerosol, the particles of which are larger than individual viruses. Furthermore the air pathway through ordinary mask materials is torturous (not straight) and aerosol particles do not travel in perfect straight lines. They are small enough to be subject to brownian motion and are propelled in all directions by their thermal, or kT, energy. This gives then a high probability of being intercepted by mask materials. Though some particle will get through, many will not. The result will be that these masks are, just as Fauci pointed out, most effective at reducing exposure of the uninfected when worn by the infected. However they still provide some limited protection when worn by the uninfected. Because among the public it is usually not known who is infected, and who is not, everyone should wear a mask when the infection rate is high.
Here is a copy of Fauci's email to Burwell:
Fauci wrote: "Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection.
"The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you."
This is far from a lie. Taken in total it is other than his claiming "[masks] were of little use" as was falsely attributed to him.
The other "lies" attributed to Fauci are equally false. They illustrate how easy it is to distort, or falsely characterize for nefarious purposes, what someone who speaks carefully and qualified his remarks says.
Last edited:
Exactly. The ones that "care" what the source is are the ones who just want to believe what they want to believe, regardless of facts. The MO is always the same: "anything that confirms what I want to believe is correct and anything that does the opposite I will try to discard with even the weakest argument there is until the very end."
There is nothing wrong with eventually using the source in an argument, but if the person does ONLY that and does not refute what is being asserted, you know that person is full of shit.
As always, "the worst blind man is the one that doesn't want to see."
Exactly. The ones that "care" what the source is are the ones who just want to believe what they want to believe, regardless of facts. The MO is always the same: "anything that confirms what I want to believe is correct and anything that does the opposite I will try to discard with even the weakest argument there is until the very end."
There is nothing wrong with eventually using the source in an argument, but if the person does ONLY that and does not refute what is being asserted, you know that person is full of shit.
As always, "the worst blind man is the one that doesn't want to see."
Just idiots, the perfect ZH consumers doing exactly what they intend you to do.
Because YOU believe you are special and can't be so manipulated to follow a path.
Five years a practicing family physician you say, and then the frustrating socialist system forced you to quit.
You moved to Europe and the socialists were there too to frustrate your career so you are back in Brazil again. Poor NeoTrader, those socialists never let you succeed anywhere!
FFS dumbasses (Wallet too), you have had cases of conspiracy brains and your heads are in the ZH pig trough. Have some self-respect, go on a diet.
Last edited:
Quotes are one thing, paraphrasing is another. It is common to distort a persons words by omitting key context and qualifiers. Paraphrasing can be intentionally used to mislead.