Jump to content

fansince88

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,745

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by fansince88

    PPP Under Fire

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    @Deranged Rhino, great points accross the board. I have only been coming here to PPP since March when all the Covid crap started. I have always heard it was a place loaded with villians and scumary the worse the Galaxy hs ever seen. Partly true btw. That said since I visited and have gotten to know the mindsets of many of the posters here I now know who to ignore. Who to put on ignore Also who I can intelligently debate or agree with. Appreciate what it is and what this place in the forum is for.

     

    Finally, here is what I have determined in my heart to do. I will ignore those consistant threads by the same posters day after day. I will put a few more on ignore. I will continue to debate and agree with those whom are responsible enough to keep it real!. 

    • Like (+1) 4
    • Thank you (+1) 1

    Bills cuts toward the 53 man roster -Saturday cuts begin Pg 15

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted · Edited by fansince88

    On 9/4/2020 at 3:23 PM, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

    Wait, what? Are you serious with this? I cant be critical of predictive tweets that Yolo posts on the board? Im stoked he came by, and I changed my tune when he came through, but that was because he was here. That doesn’t mean there was anything wrong with my original comment. 

    Oh, if I was you I would stand your ground and continue to argue your point! 

    • Haha (+1) 4

    Is anyone else less invested in this season than normal?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    15 hours ago, Augie said:

     

    Well Pete, you are indeed Prickly.   :)

     

    I honestly don’t know the answer to this: has the NFL actually sent any money the the organization that is Black Lives Matter? Or have they just supported the obvious philosophy that black lives matter. These are two very different things. 

     

    I happen to believe that an intact nuclear family improves the likelihood of success for children. Marcellus indicates BLM (the organization) disagrees, so there needs to be a distinction between the obvious and the bogus organization which is collecting money from those unaware of the difference. 

     

     

    .

    Great reply. While Im not a fan of the organization I am of the thought of it. I think Im the only diehard Conservative in my family that plans to turn on the tv at kickoff and enjoy the NFL. Im not a boycotter in the grand scheme of things however I do voice my thoughts when companies head in a direction that I disagree with. I am the guy that stands back and looks at stuff like the kneeling and although I am opposed to thst I understand the reason they are doing it. Although I dont like they are doing it I also recognise the majority are using their income to help with many things like children hospitals and school and education initiatives.  Should I boycott that too? We need to realize we are a society of people that love the pendulum swing but truly it isnt always far left or right but often we need to meet in the middle. 

    Finally,  to answer the original question by @Cal, yes....Im pumped about the Bills this year. 

    • Like (+1) 2
    • Thank you (+1) 1

    The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

    Goal posts.  They've officially reached their final destination.  

     

     

     

     

    Also, no its freaking not how we're going to have to live.

     

    We are an embarrassment.  Anyone that looks at this and thinks this is ok....you are one of Lenin's useful idiots.  Which makes sense considering that the reaction to the distance for life rules has been Commies that have never understood math support.....freedom loving people that understand statistics do not.  

    Is RI stuck with her for 2 more years as we are with Cuomo?

    The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    5 hours ago, spartacus said:

    The following discusses the flaws in the PCR test

     

    As I noted, the PCR test range started from 35- 45 replication cycles.  

     

    On June 12, the CDC PCR instructions raised the recommended cycle count to 45- which basically multiplies the genetic material 35 trillion times

     

    From the Times article:

     

    Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina said.

     

    Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said. “

     

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

     

     

     

     

     

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-live-trump-speaks-during-discussion-community-safety-kenosha

     

    by Jon Rappoport                    September 1, 2020

     

    Townhall.com, August 29: “According to The New York Times, potentially 90 percent of those who have tested positive for COVID-19 have such insignificant amounts of the virus present in their bodies that such individuals do not need to isolate nor are they candidates for contact tracing. Leading public health experts are now concerned that overtesting is responsible for misdiagnosing a huge number of people with harmless amounts of the virus in their systems.”

     

    “’Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…’ warns The Times.”

     

    Yes, that’s what the NY Times is confessing (8/29): “Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus. Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…”

     

    “In three sets of testing data…compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.”

     

    Let me break this down for you, because it’s a lot worse than the Times admits. The rabbit hole goes much deeper—and I’ve been reporting on the deeper facts for months.

     

    The issue appears to be the ballooning sensitivity of the PCR test. It’s so sensitive that it picks up inconsequential tiny, tiny amounts of virus that couldn’t harm a flea—and it calls these amounts “positive.”

     

    Therefore, millions of people are labeled “positive/infected” who carry so little virus that no harm would come to them or anyone they come in contact with.

     

    That would be bad enough. But the truth is, the PCR test is not able to produce ANY reliable number that reflects how much virus a person is carrying. A lot, a little, it doesn’t matter.

     

    The test has never been validated, in a large-scale study, for the ability to quantify the amount of virus a person is carrying. I’ve proposed how that study should be done IN THE REAL WORLD, NOT IN THE LAB.

     

    You take 1000 people and remove tissue samples from them. A lab puts these samples through its PCR and announces which virus it found in each case and how much virus it found in each case.

     

    It says: “All right, in patients 23, 46, 76, 89, 265 we found a high amount of virus.”

     

    That should mean these particular patients are visibly sick. They will have obvious clinical symptoms. Why? Because actual illness requires millions of millions of a virus replicating in the body.

     

    So now we unblind these particular patients with high amounts of virus, according to the PCR. Are they, in fact, sick? Or are they running marathons and swimming five miles a day? Let’s see. For real.

     

    THIS VALIDATION OF THE PCR HAS NEVER BEEN DONE.

     

    Therefore, the claim that the PCR can determine how much virus is in a human is completely and utterly unproven. Period.

     

    Therefore, ALL the PCR tests being done on people all over the world reflect NOTHING about illness, infection, contagion, or transmission.

     

    The scam is wall to wall.

     

    But there’s more.

     

    The PCR isn’t even testing for a particular virus in the first place. It’s using a piece of RNA assumed to be part of a virus. The assumption is unproven.

     

    And finally, as I’ve been writing and demonstrating for months, there is no evidence that researchers used proper procedure to discover “a new coronavirus that is causing a pandemic.”

     

    Therefore, the PCR test, as worthless as it already is, aims to show the presence of a germ that has never been shown to exist.

     

    But let’s lock down the planet, destroy economies and untold numbers of lives in the process.

     

    SOURCES:

     

    townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/08/29/it-looks-like-a-lot-of-those-positive-covid-tests-should-have-been-negative-n2575305

     

    nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

     

    This is the most interesting thing I have read in a week. thans for sharing!

    2 hours ago, Magox said:

    Nice drop

     

     

    With what @spartacus just posted.....I really dont care anymore. Im over this!!

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Awesome! (+1) 1

    Are we better off now than we were four years ago?

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    45 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

     

    same here in NYS, or Big Fredoland, the home of gross fiscal mismanagement......max income tax rate is 9.5% versus Cali at 13% (I think)........new taxes added regularly but disguised as "fees".....parasitic "fleas" would be a better description.......FAR to late in my 44+ and ongoing career to bail now before retirement.......

    Thats where I am. Only 31 years but just the same thought process

    Gilliam now listed at TE on roster

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    3 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

    Practice squad at best.   Not sure why he was a favorite to take over for DiMarco this year.  Kyle Juszczyk is a free agent next year, go get him or Alex Armah from the Panthers.   Armah is essentially the same player as DiMarco but five years younger.

    Flexibility as a player. 

    The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

    Comrade Fauci....paging Comrade Fauci....any thoughts here:

     

     

    New research out of China suggests that the level of asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 may be less of a threat than is currently widely believed, findings that could influence mitigation measures such as social distancing rules and mask mandates. 

     

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/new-research-casts-further-doubt-prevalence-asymptomatic-covid-19

     

     

    The CDC said this in June.......a day later, after liberal outr.....I mean upon careful reflection of that statement they kinda sorta walked it back by calling asymptomatic spread inconclusive with still more research needed up until November 3....I mean till more peer reviewed research is done.

     

    And Fauci didn't think masks were necessary until the Karens of America saw on the news that they wear them in "Asia" so should we.  

    Seems the CDC is just as dumbfounded.  Who woulda known. I mean besides Cuomo who killed as many grandparents as possible. https://www.theblaze.com/news/covid-deaths-percent-coronavirus-cdc?utm_source=theblaze-dailyPM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__PM 2020-08-30&utm_term=TheBlaze Daily PM - last 270 days

    Training camp 8/30

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Lurker said:

     

    Thad loves to troll or just doesn't know what he's looking at.

     

    Per the BN:  https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/observations-devin-singletary-shows-burst-as-bills-rb-battle-stays-hot/article_e4e8aa58-eafd-11ea-a0cf-83966aba8151.html

     

    The Allen report: Josh Allen completed 7 of 14 passes as the offense did a lot of situational work, as opposed to running complete drives. Robert Foster dropped one of the incomplete passes, twice the intended receivers slipped and fell. One incompletion was a throwaway prompted by a heavy rush from Jerry Hughes. Allen had a sharp TD throw to Beasley.

    So 3 miscues by Josh?

×
×
  • Create New...