Lurker > ReturnOfFa

@Ozmose May I ask this question?

Was your initial perception of the study you posted informed by your initial reading of it? Or was it informed by an article/social media post that interpreted it before you decided to share it here? I'm curious, but also totally understanding if you don't wish to tell me. Cheers.

Why don't you back up your claim that I posted a 'different study'? Or admit that you were incorrect on that claim? That's the big kid thing to do.

**Edit - Honestly, whether people agree with me or not, I find it shocking that argumentative folks don't bother pre-emptively looking up the most common refutations to their argument. It would definitely prepare them a bit more and show that they've done more than simply react to something that they may or may not understand.

MOOSHOO316 posted...

It dont bother me at all that I voted for Trump the 1st time because I wasnt a fan of Hillary and I also wasnt a fan of Trump either but I voted but this time I didnt care for either Biden or Trump so I didnt vote at all and probably wont vote again either when 2024 comes around

so you're dumb

but also potentially happy, so carry on

If they were smart, DeSantis, even though he's arguably worse. It could go either way at present.

Zareth posted...

Most Christian Conservatives hate Catholicism dude

lol good for them (while they still adhere to certain BS they agree on)

Ozmose posted...

You know what? I think I'm just going to give back the same as I usually get.

What? Won't admit you didn't read something properly? You're suggesting that we all gave you nothing and you'll give back nothing? Congrats. Enter self-victimhood. Enjoy.

@Cacciato
https://youtu.be/TqG1CZTLq70

Cacciato posted...

Whoa, are you accusing Ozmose of saying something stupid?!

Just accusing them of not even scrolling through an entire page before making a claim that is easily seen as false :). Like, feel free to be an ass. At least don't insult yourself by being a lazy fucking idiot about it.

Ozmose posted...

That's not the same study. Did you think I wouldn't notice?

Hm? You seem confused. Did you not scroll down on the link that I posted to view the text that I shared from it? It is 100% the same study.

The study you posted:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/9/0/AAUdByAADkGS.png

The elaboration I posted:
https://www.chop.edu/news/feature-article-no-study-does-not-prove-what-you-think-it-does-part3
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/9/1/AAUdByAADkGT.png

These are the same study by Alden M, Falla FO, Yang D, et al. What's your background on reading scientific papers? Regardless, your basic reading comprehension seems lacking if that slipped by you, or you're trying to claim that I posted a "different study".

I've met a lot of Conservatives that are pleasant enough in public, unless the topic ends up going somewhere they don't like, or they see something they don't like, or something happens that they don't like, or they are in their own homes with their own families.

it's very funny that you find this study 'disturbing' and any real scientist would definitely find your interpretation very hilarious overall

Ozmose posted...

I posted a study that shows there's a potential for an autoimmune disorder, and look at how you defectives respond. I think you just see completely different words when you read something.

hey dude. in science fields, criticism = constant and is part of the job. don't crap your panties and call everyone defective for holding you accountable with a very basic discussion. Your interpretation is dramatic and not does not indicate the same concerns as the studies conclusion.

https://www.chop.edu/news/feature-article-no-study-does-not-prove-what-you-think-it-does-part3
No. This study does not prove that RNA from the COVID-19 vaccine changes DNA.
Study:
Alden M, Falla FO, Yang D, et al. Intracellular reverse transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 in vitro in human liver. Current Issues in Molecular Biology. 2022;44(3):1115-26.

Brief summary
In the study, the authors infected a human liver cell line with the Pfizer version of the COVID-19 vaccine. They used different concentrations of the vaccine and multiple timepoints to measure:

• Conversion of RNA into DNA in the cells
• The quantity of a genetic tool called LINE-1
• The presence of DNA sequences similar to the vaccine RNA in the nuclei of these cells

Misconception
Some pointed to this paper as proof that COVID-19 vaccines alter DNA. However, this is not an appropriate conclusion from this paper for several reasons:

1. Perhaps most importantly, this experiment was done on cells being grown in a lab. Said another way, it was an in vitro experiment. In vitro experiments are done all the time and they are important for providing information and clues as to what might happen in a person (in vivo). However, to make a conclusion about what is happening in people, one must have some evidence that it is actually happening in people, not just that it might be possible. The authors acknowledged this when they wrote, At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome. Further studies are needed (p. 1122). They go on to suggest two alternative experimental methods for getting more information.
2. The authors used a cancerous liver cell line. This is important for two reasons; both of which were acknowledged by the authors. First, cancerous cell lines replicate, whereas our liver cells typically are not replicating. As such, even if DNA representing the viral RNA was integrated into the cell, no other cells with the altered DNA would be produced. The authors also pointed out that this cell line has been shown to have genetic and protein expression differences specific to RNA metabolism (p. 1123). This means that what is seen in these cells may not be representative of what would happen in non-cancerous liver cells (or even a different line of cancerous liver cells). Second, they measured LINE-1 activity. Importantly, LINE-1 has been associated with various disease-related conditions, including cancer. It has also been shown to affect immune responses. For these reasons, while the changes related to LINE-1 are interesting, we cant be sure the effects would be the same in a non-cancerous cell line. The authors also made this point by stating, The exact regulation of LINE-1 activity in response to BNT162b2 merits further study. (p. 1123).
3. Finally, as the authors pointed out, expression of LINE-1 has been shown to increase during viral infections, including with SARS-CoV-2 virus. In fact, some scientists have suggested that integration of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material into human cells could be why some people still test positive by PCR well after they have recovered from their infection. However, it is important to note that more information would be needed to prove this hypothesis as well. The more likely explanation is that the virus is undergoing an incomplete cycle of replication, where the genetic material (RNA) is produced but whole virus particles are not.

Problem with interpretation
Logical fallacy called hasty generalization (It is important to note in this case, that the misconception was not because of the quality of the science or the messaging of the authors, but rather because others took the findings out of context.)

Ah yes, the classic 'concluding something that the study doesn't actually conclude' situation.

OmegaM posted...

We are all pretty sure that this guy who attacked Salman Rushdie did so due to Islamic extremism, right? I mean, the guy has Arab name and seems to have spent time on Islamic extremist websites, though I don't think we have any direct evidence about his motive.

Some conservatives are saying we need to make clearer that it was an Islamic extremist who attacked Salman Rushdie.

just a tip, not every Muslim has an 'Arab' name, and I kinda doubt you're actually that well versed in "Arab" names.

those Conservatives are just trying to use this as an opportunity to shit on Islam while they stroke the Pope's cock re: Christianity. it was known that this was an Islamic extremist as soon as it was confirmed. they don't want it 'clearer', they want it further emphasized and hammered on so they can act like Christians are better, when they're not.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

clearly the answer is to condemn all religion equally

We don't agree often - on this we do. I just see it as completely braindead to take an event like this and somehow use it to say 'ohhh this religion is worse/better than this other one'. No, they're all shit.

I keep suggesting they're getting less convincing, not that they were to begin with.

Count_Drachma posted...

KODY POSTED...

Oh lawdy... apologism 101. The most visible threats came from one quarter and, as we very quickly learned, so did the attacker. While you could've argued it might have been over anything (which would be true), this is just an absurd statement that aged badly in hours.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/who-is-hadi-matar-nj-man-suspected-in-salman-rushdie-attack/3822984/

Yeah, well, some other people took the chance in this topic to suck off Christianity for no real reason. It wasn't absurd to not pass judgement until we knew, and now we do.

SeahorseCpt89 posted...

Didnt it constantly get hacked or have they fixed that problem by now?

Pretty much every 'conservative' platform has had piss-shit security because they're literally morons.

Jen0125 posted...

Why do you discount the good that Muslims do through Islam? Is it just because you are Islamophobic?

*Sam Harris appears*

Muscles posted...

Christianity does a lot of terrible things, Islam is still worse though

you put it quite plainly. both suck and trying to act like one is better is falling for one of them, even if you have milquetoast critique for it

Muscles posted...

The topic is about Muslim violence towards an author so I'm not sure how that's whataboutism. And for the 2nd part, just because I'm a former Christian that thinks they do a lot of stupid things and hold stupid beliefs doesn't mean I discount the good they do. Your general Joe shmoe Christian isn't a bad guy in my experience. It's when you start getting into televangelists and big corrupt churches that problems arise.

Uh no, the topic is about Salman Rushdie getting stabbed. You decided to claim that Muslims do less violence than Christians as a little add-on.

You did discount Christian violence by suggesting that they're mainly concerned with minor things like warning labels. Now, that's kinda discounting Christian violence by omission, so I get it if you're not that aware of it. Maybe you're not aware you do/did this. You should absolutely acknowledge that Christian extremists are just as violent, just as reactive, and just as plentiful (if not way more in the USA) as Islamic extremists.

Yeah, I know that a "joe shmoe Christian" isn't a bad guy, generally. Although, the way Christians vote in America, I could see why people start to see them as 'bad guys'. My mom would probably be dead under the weird Christian influenced abortion laws in many of the US states.

How it started:
Muscles posted...

Is any group as sensitive as Islam? It's like they don't understand the concept of just not reading/watching/listening to something you don't like

You brought it up. You started the whataboutism with 'whatabout muslims'.

Then you made this claim:
Muscles posted...

Killing artists is worse than whatever stupid whining Christians do, they just want to bitch and put warning labels on art in modern times (still stupid censorship but not as bad as literally killing them or threatening to)

Like, this stabbing very well could be Islamic violence. But it's objectively hilarious that a former Christian would take the opportunity to minimize Christian violence this hard. Like bruh, I just posted a 3 hour compilation of Christian violence that definitely isn't 'just bitching about warning labels' lmfao

HarbingerofHope posted...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/news/news-nnj9fypacy0

Lmao, he's having a PotD style meltdown.

lol did he now

Zareth posted...

Yeah you're probably right they all suck. Atheists and agnostics don't kill people purely because they're atheists or agnostic.

Oddly I think most of them realize it's not the best way to convince people.

Zareth posted...

Buddhism is pretty cool in general

eh, somewhat by modern standards. still been a lot of violence from them, there still is in myanmar, and I feel like it's one of the most appropriated religions for the new-age idiots, who detach themselves from reality.

or would it be comforting for me to just shut up and agree with the people that claim that Muslims are definitively more reactive that Christians lol

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Muslces is auto-assigning blame to a specific group and claiming that they're definitely more violent. Not trying to say which religious sect is worse, just pointing out they all bad, so don't use one to cover for the other.

All events were perpetrated by Christians and/or they quoted Christian scripture:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburgh_synagogue_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Knight_(murderer)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Rudolph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller (killing of)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Charles_Kopp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs_Planned_Parenthood_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Gary_Matson_and_Winfield_Mowder
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Priesthood
https://www.courthousenews.com/tennessee-man-who-plotted-to-burn-down-a-mosque-resentenced/

Anyone defending Christianity over Islam has their head in the sand.

I know that not all of these are Christians, but many are. I think it's odd how little we compile all of the American right-wing terrorism that occurs, much of it Christian-committed or inspired. The KKK may be opposed to Catholics, but they are an explicitly Protestant Christian organization, so good luck separating White Nationalist terrorism from Christianity. If you're going to paint Muslims as extremists for their terrorists, then at least give the same judgement to all of these extreme Christian orgs.

https://youtu.be/_OFudWnMJSU

https://youtu.be/Fkn4ugYO6uc

https://youtu.be/AQvqfS2kvFw

CynicalZealot posted...

To be fair, I'm not sure I've ever heard of any Evangelist Christians murdering cartoonists for drawing pictures of Jesus.

You've never heard of Christians murdering people over things?

I'm so bad at watching TV. I should try and finish Loki.

AoE II DE used to have hilarious auto-censor.

Revelation34 posted...

No blue checkmark.

just confirm it yourself lazybones
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/giuliani-fulton-county-grand-jury-b2141515.html

I will both be 'woke' and insult people with 'anti-woke' insults. Cheers.

"Your father killed my father!"

"Wasn't me!" -Rev

"Well, can you admit it was your father?"

"Who cares, it wasn't me!" -Rev

I know you'll point to this as an oversimplification, but can you at least see how that would come across as a form of denial? Or at least just being a bit of an ass?

Like I said, my family arrived in Canada only during the last 3 generations of my family. They didn't murder or steal Native babies, but they...didn't care that this happened, and badmouthed Natives as lazy alcoholics when children were literally still being forcibly removed from their families. Then...sexually assaulted in many cases. Yeah, I didn't do those things, but I'm not going to be like 'WHOA WHOA, LEAVE ME OUT OF THIS' when discussing it with Native friends. That'd be a fucking dick move.

Same with the whole 'WHOA WHOA, I DIDN'T ENSLAVE YOUR GRANDPA' vibe. Yeah...we know buddy. Sounds like you don't give a shit, and it sounds like your semi-recently arrived European family didn't give a shit either lmao.

Revelation34 posted...

Wouldn't matter since I didn't do anything personally.

XD

KodyKeir posted...

Fundamentalists from many major religions have made threats against him for his writings, so let's not jump to conclusions as to which radical extremist group the attacker identified with.

agreed

Muscles posted...

Is any group as sensitive as Islam? It's like they don't understand the concept of just not reading/watching/listening to something you don't like

Evangelist Christians. But yes, the more Conservative segments of Islam are outrageous.

Far-Queue posted...

He's not even a "true" redneck. His parents owned a bunch of car dealerships and he grew up wealthy. He's spoiled rich kid who probably never worked a real job, which would be fine if he didn't hitch his wagon to the blue collar crowd and try to co-opt their experience for his own in order to sell his brand. Makes him a massive hypocrite and poseur

part of why people falling for any rich shill is embarrassing. Trump...Jimmy Dore...Alex Jones...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/9/4/AAUdByAADjj-.jpg

HornedLion posted...

What exactly is Kid Rocks gimmick?

being a hick

because I'm going to tell people that Harry Potter is bad

I'm busy poopin' but feel free to stop by!!

Was it hard?

VampireCoyote posted...

we are all the same people

there is no your peoples

I am definitely descended from Northern Europeans. To disassociate yourself from the past of your people is to be in denial.

Yes, of course we are 'all one' - and I can celebrate this with friends of all colours. However, using this to deflect from historical truths shows navety and an unwillingness to grapple with truths.

Metalsonic66 posted...

Because only American white people have ever done anything wrong

imagine being told of your people's historical wrongs and deflecting to the historical wrongs of others instead of just owning it lmfao

papercup posted...

Does anyone have single clue what Skard is talking about?

I mean, I know what perspective they have, yep. It's the turds that fall out of some youtuber's mouth that they're scarfing.

Revelation34 posted...

Neither sides of my family were even in North America when slavery was around.

When did your family come to North America? Mine ranged between the 1890s-1920s generally. I know I'm coming from a Canadian perspective, so I'm definitely emphasizing Natives more, but we both live on a land with that legacy. Yeah, you can make the claim that lands were just conquered back then, people murdered. I think it's the scale that's important to reflect on in regards to the Americas, and all the broken promises.

Your family still benefits from something built on the backs of slaves, and being like 'whoa I came here later' is still somewhat of a deflection. Where did your family come from? Somewhere white majority? Elsewhere? When?

Their history across GameFAQs

just seeing u being upset about literally one headline here

no valuable 'roadmap', just equivalent ire to that which is being complained about

your roommate is still in love with you, is a weirdo, and is trying to act normal but is woefully unequipped