Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Darkpriest

  1. 17 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

    That certainly is homophobic. Objecting to someone else's marriage based on religion is bad. You don't have to marry a man, but you don't need to tell two adults what their marriage needs to look like.

    If someone objects to a bi-racial marriage, would you consider that racist? 

    You might have a whole lot of Africa, South America and Asia to account for and convince. 


    That said, I very much support moves for equal rights and opportunities, but i stop supporting such at the notion of equal outcomes no matter what the input other than some 'assigned' characteristics. 

    I have various friends of a different than majority sexual orientation and even they say, some of the stuff being talked about is ridiculous and outright hurting people like them in their move for equal rights and opportunities (as the more extreme views stick like a **** to a certain image and are used to define majority of the community). 



    • Thanks 1
  2. Sometimes i wish they just stopped putting opinions on the news pieces, but i guess everything revolves around politics nowadays and you need to endure crappy clickbaits

    The underlying issue reported though is a valid observation and indeed it gives more power to China in any economic disputes and attempts at decoupling driven by US. 


  3. 1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

    In all fairness landing on the Darkside of the moon and landing on Mars China is trotting down a well paved road. The process and physics of doing these things has been worked out for over 50 years. Heck even longer. Even Galileo had a pretty good idea of what orbital mathematics would look like.

    but you weren’t far off the mark on one thing. When it component of our society tells us that expecting children to get the right answer in math class is a instance of racist white supremacy you have to figure 50 years from now the ability to put things in orbit will be lost to us all in the US. 

    Knowing and doing are two different things. Physics can be known, but engineering and project coordination are not something you can replicate easily. 


    Also, they were the first to land a vehicle on the far side of the moon. 


    "The Apollo 8 astronauts were the first humans to see the far side in person when they orbited the Moon in 1968. All manned and unmanned soft landings had taken place on the near side of the Moon, until 3 January 2019 when the Chang'e 4 spacecraft made the first landing on the far side."

  4. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/mach-30-wind-tunnel-propels-china-decades-ahead-global-hypersonic-race



     10 to 20years max when China will be a dominant superpower. Meanwhile in US, pronouns and math is racist. 


    EDIT: how long did China take from landing on the darkside of the Moon to Mars landing? 

    • Hmmm 1
  5. Interesting article as it seems to reinforce the perception that heavily tax burdened states are losing people and tax base, which will only accelerate their debt spiral and a fall into a disfunctional state in disrepair. 


    Also, why artificially pushing for higher labor cost (i.e. gov driven) in the times of global and remote workforce are not really good as a policy and has a potential for backfiring





  6. 50 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

    Yeah, nah. That's the same sort of stuff that Orogun linked me in a video a year or so ago, and it hasn't improved with age. My personal favourite there was the 'expert' who said only China had such labs, then talked about her experience in similar US labs five minutes further on in the video. Summed the whole thing up perfectly.

    For 3 and 4, it's a virology lab, that is the research it does. It was established specifically because of SARS1, and did coronavirus research because of SARS1. That's a matter of longstanding public record- can't get much more scientifically public than research papers- and not in any way secret.

    5 isn't unusual at all. It's not unusually resistant to immune response, it's just a novel respiratory virus. Novel viruses are unusually resistant because there's no shared memory/ selection, and respiratory viruses are resistant because of the nature of their environment. And again, you look at the other natural crossover viruses and find... they're more resistant to immune response and considerably more deadly. 'Like HIV' is ludicrous anyway, since HIV was also a natural crossover which phylogenetic evidence suggests happened as many as 20 (!) times. Even if it were 'like HIV' beyond the trivial of both being RNA viruses it would not in itself have been suspicious.

    Well yeah, and you can find multiple papers and such from western sources with similar discussions. As a bioweapon it's... just stupid, it has no sensible utility. It doesn't target the right demographics, it isn't infectious enough or alternatively, is too infectious. As a geopolitical weapon it's stupid too, because the one thing China absolutely does not want is a global recession when its economic growth comes from exporting, and its biggest threat by far is an internal one from failing to deliver expected yearly improvements and growth. You also can't 'target' it effectively to specific countries- as before, it's too infectious to be controllable, but not infectious enough to be really effective- and anyone would know that you can't.

    If it were part of a bioweapons program they'd also have a parallel program for ameliorating any effects once it inevitably reached China, ie a vaccine or similar ready to roll. As it stands their vaccines are almost all the least effective- and going by 'vaccine ready' it would be a German or British bioweapon since Oxford and BionTech had working vaccines literally weeks after getting a sequence; it took China a fair bit longer and their vaccines apart from being low efficiency are also low tech.

    End of the day nothing could convince me more of Chinese incompetence than it being a bioweapon. Own goal that they'd know would be an own goal, badly designed, stupid stupid stupid. And again, multiple coronaviruses have crossed spontaneously in the last 20 years...

    That's just Xi's China being Xi's China. They suppress anything that makes them look bad, and large scale casualties- whether they caused the outbreak or not- makes them look bad. You only have to glance very briefly at their actions in Xinjiang and Hong Kong to find similar examples of repression for reasons other than a 'bioweapons' leak.

    I'd agree it was not a bioweapon type of virus. I expect somone being not quite lucky and simply failing or skipping some safety protocol, and contaminating oneself with a virus, which they have studied (specifically the bat and its interactions with the corona type viruses). 

    Given the history with SARS, I suspect they just wanted to understand it better. 

    Someone contaminated area, virus caused large number of hospitalizations and was easily transmitted, Chinese gov paniced, overreacted and put tons of red tape on top, to make sure it will not look bad. 

    And since it most likely will never be established, what exactly was the source, there will be a number of people with various opinions and people will argue, their view is better. 


    The wet market theory is weak

    The natural bat/pangplier to human transmitio  is also weak (that type of a bat does not occur naturally in the ground zero region) 


    The more worrying fact is, that even the mere possibility of talking of such scenario, was considered 'Trump' talk and media ridiculed or banned such theories on a research related accident from the discourse. 

    It should be deemed dangerous, because, if such a thing was a source of pandemic, there should be procedures revised and the type of research put in some more transparent constraints for all the labs of this type globally. 


    EDIT: the biggest red flag is lack of transparency and access to the lab, even for the WHO audit. 

  7. 8 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

    The last one is the significant thing. They'll be after sources etc.

    And let's be frank, if he wasn't being run as an asset by (a/ multiple) NATO countries' intelligence service it would be a massive surprise since the Belarussian opposition is getting the buffet support package; so they may well get info on his handler and their Belarus internal sources too. Whether people like it or not, that is Treason so long as the government is run by Lukashenko.

    Not equivalent since there's literally no evidence of it being a lab leak beyond the lab being there and some of its large workforce being ill, something that happens with large workforces. That's not really even much in terms of circumstantial evidence, it has only slightly more evidence than the Chinese 'theory' that US scientists made it and diplomats deliberately spread it to defame China.

    OTOH, we know that every other human coronavirus has a natural origin, and that there have been at least two spontaneous crossovers in the past 20 years- SARS(1), and MERS. SARS came from Civits, iirc, and MERS from camels, and SARS was near identical in terms of how the outbreak happened mechanically to SARS2 ('covid19'). It took ~4 years to identify the intermediate species from which SARS jumped but it was identified, and that species was found a long way from the initial outbreak, because you only notice outbreaks when they hit large population centres. SARS is actually why the Chinese have a virology lab in Wuhan in the first place. There's also no evidence from the RNA sequence of tampering, beyond the facile one of it being effective at infecting humans. Even then, and after multiple mutations during the poandemic it's about 20% as effective as measles.

    It being of natural origin is the default, because it's provably happened multiple times before in a short, relatively speaking, timeframe. At worst, it was an accidental release of a pre-existing virus and there's no actual evidence for even that.

    OTOH, the origin question is clearly being used as a cudgel in the current wave of sinophobia/ sinohysteria. Much like all those EU leaders who couldn't stand the UK having a successful vaccine when they didn't and who made crap up- hello Monsieur Macron- the damage to medical credibility etc is just a side effect of people playing geopolitics. It's like Vladimir Putin having Parkinson's and retiring in January or Russia going bankrupt within in six months in 2014 due to sanctions; you aren't really meant to remember any specifics nor ask any questions, you're just meant to remember the impression it gives. And for the lab story the impression meant to be given is pretty obvious.

    In general I'd agree, however this 'conspiracy' theory has some credibility and certain amount of resemblence to other cover ups from totalitarian regimes. You won't get a proof like in a case of lets say Chernobyl, but there is a significant amount of items, that can create a certain picture. 

    You've mentioned. 

    1) location

    2) some reported early records of a sick staff


    Then there are among the others:

    3) type of conducted research

    4) some lead scientists writing papers on the transmition of coronaviruses and specifically certain characteristis of bats in relation to coronaviruses

    5) very unusual construction of the virus, which looked initially like a merged type of some more common coronaviruses with HIV like characteristics, allowing to bypass some immune responses

    6) governmental reaction, once the outbreak was obvious (including harsh police/military actions, which also saw people being welded in their own homes) 

    7) large number of cell phone usage lost during the pandemic (numbers not conecting to network anymore) 

    and much larger numbers of people on cementaries during the last spring ceremonies to commemorate dead ones. 

    8) papers and interviews in China on weaponizing similar type of bio-agent, to overwhelm health care system and create civil disorder in the targeted countries. 

    9) vanishing whistleblowers


    These are ones i recall from the top of my head. I admit, I have not followed closely each of these and did not dig into sources of that information. I was more interested in governmental responses and for majority of this year I'm looking at economic policies (both monetary and fiscal) to figure out how probable is stagflation vs deflation and crash and if I should be looking to keep Etherum (with 2.0 potential for a real underlying value, unlike Bitcoin) or dump it at a higher value. 



  8. 1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

    nope. is conspiracy. period. if you had evidence, then it wouldn't be conspiracy.

    btw, we work with facts and evidence, and we recognize when people is ignoring the need for such.

    HA! Good Fun!

    I assume you know the term circumstantial evidence or even cases where something was declared true, even without a direct evidence. 

    You know full well, that cases such as this, would never see a direct evidence (or more like with probabilities lower than getting hit by a killer asteroid) , however you can map out actions, events, numbers and apply logical alogirthms with various probabilities to create plausible scenarios from which one can be considered truth. (although it's always better to have hard 'atrifacts'). 

    Can you prove beyond any doubt that is what not a lab leak? 

    Can you prove beyond any doubt that it was a lab leak? 

    In both cases the answer is (currently) a firm NO. 




  9. 11 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

    is just another conspiracy theory from dp and zerohedge. the absence o' proof is what drives the narrative o' deflection. 

    that said, bruce is correct that it don't matter. trump's response to the pandemic were all wrong 'ccording to a majority o' voters and the china stuff did nothing save solidify the nativism o' the trump base.  inevitably somebody will roll the tape where trump were praising china transparency regarding the virus and such don't help trump with independents, educated white women and others who helped make 2020 a loss for trump. china is not a good topic for trump in general 'cause every time there is an uyghur story, some helpful reporter from ap or axios will include links to trump support o' xi and his indifference to the plight o' those the uyghurs. trump "kung flu" bs gets mentioned every time some rando korean american gets attacked by an idiot in florida or texas...  retribution for the pandemic, a pandemic which were never a big deal 'ccording to trump and nobody would talk about the virus after the election anyhow, right? 

    find proof that the virus did indeed escape from the wuhan facility? wouldn't shock us at all, but is also nothing more than conjecture the virus were lab created/enhanced, which is exact what makes the conspiracy theory appealing to folks like dp. as long as the conspiracy theory can't be disproved (HA!) it will be used by zerohedge and trump and the typical rogue's gallery o' nogoodnicks who thrive on deflection. but bruce is correct-- doesn't matter. still ~600k dead americans and is not hard to find science folks say the deaths beyond the first 100k is disproportionate the fault o' trump's incompetent response. make the trump base feel like their nativism were justified won't bring back independents and educated white women in enough numbers to make any kinda difference.

    heck, dp is kinda missing the point o' the conspiracy theory anyways. virus origin theories is not being promoted to change the narrative on china. the point is to undermine trust in medical experts and the media. 

    HA! Good Fun!

    It's conspiracy until proven true ūüėČ


    I do believe that 2020 would look differently, as the blame and anger would have a nice target to be pointed at, and could be used for dealing with the virus outcomes (say the narrative spin  would be: we were told it was a natural occuring, but we should have treated is as a bio-weapon, hence more deaths) 

    I think you are conjuring too many views on me, which I do not have. 

    I work with data and make money out of it.

    Truth does not care about beliefs, behaviors do. 


  10. 1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

    Okay I see your argument but how much did Trumps view of the origin of the virus hurt his reelection campaign?

    What did hurt his reelection was the mismanagement of the pandemic within the USA ....not so much the real and unfair misinformation from his campaign

    And I support Trumps criticism of China on most issues and the trade war....but I dont support how he blamed the spread of the virus within the USA on China. That was because of failed policy 

    Narrative matters, it would be spinned as a foreign hostile action against america's citizens and economy. That people on purpose concealed information, including misinformation from WHO on the origin, and various chinese money funded think tanks, etc.  


    Remember that it was a close call in elections and mostly due to issues created by covid. 



    • Thanks 1
  11. 1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

    But Gorthfuscious we getting distracted by this debate in the sense why spend resources and time on something that is irrelevant and we will never be able to confirm

    I say irrelevant because the virus came from China irrespective  if it came from a lab or the Wuhan animal market.

    And I say we will never be able to confirm the truth because the CCP has already started denying it came from China and they will always restrict full access to their labs and obfuscate pertinent virus source  information anyway?

    All that matters is stopping the pandemic globally and getting vaccines to everyone

    I am sorry ZeroHedge is aggrieved but this is just theater to me and doesnt matter to the real objective of ending the pandemic 

    It's a matter of accountability, and also a matter that the pandemic's narrative was driven politically and spwcifically denied narrative about a lab leak etc to harm Trumps chances of re-ellection. 

    Imagine if the narrative was, that Trump was right about China's fault and that it was a bio-engineered agent, which harmed lives of american citizens  and he was right going strong arm in relation with them. 

    You might have seen a vastly different political labdscape throughout the 2020-2021

    • Thanks 1
  12. 2 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

    This is really just standard 'back in my day, things were better' rubbish. Back in what day, exactly? Do you really think the 60's and 70's had less promiscuity and self gratification? 

    People are definitely waiting longer to have kids in the US. It has way more to do with financial implications than any hokey 'cultural decline'. Wake up sheeple, kids are expensive and the middle class is shrinking! :p 

    How sustainable demographically is a system, when you have people in labor force for about 40-45y, while outside of labor force expanded from ca 15-20y to 40-50y and at the same time generation replacement happens every 30y instead of 20y and it is usually below the 2.0 kids per couple? 

    The old days had subcultures being more promiscous, and it still was not entirely risk free. The advancments in medicine enabled more promiscous life style as the biggest risk of an adventorous intercourse (a child) has been mitigated to extremely low levels. 

    This factor enabled women to go early in the workforce and made them more masculine as they got drawn into corporate cogs. Now however you start seeing an outpour of a generation of unfullfilled expectations, where creating a family went into a backlog of things to do somewhere in the future, but now there are few men interested in pair bonding via marriage (see falling marrige rates), and there is an abundance of free, cheap sexual experiences, as long as you are somewhat tall and can make a 100k  per year. You removed incentives for men to get married and have families, you told women that its unfashionable and weak to have family and kids early, and put them through emasculating, highly competitive and time consuming corporate culture , made men and women compete for jobs, which historiaclly were better paid, but now they stagnated in salary growth due to oversupply of workforce (also, women rarely date down status/financially wise) , and you wonder why people have no money while they live 'single' lives? 

    • Hmmm 1
  13. 3 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

    Dark how many women  in Poland are brick layers or work in construction?

    If its like SA then very few, this is SEXIST and another example of the patriarchy !!! We need to pass laws to ensure we see proper representation and transformation in this sector :teehee:

    Not many, although there is a load of them going into architecture and interior design (they overrepresent there) 

  14. 12 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

    That is not happening, as societies get richer and more stable overall, people just stop wanting to have that many kids. In Europe this has been happening for like 40 or 50 years. The internet or "the promotion of dumb behavior" has nothing to do with it. I mean you either are so poor that you need extra kids as a work force, or you are rich enough that having kids stops being a financial and emotional burden. If you are in between (read "almost everyone in advanced economies"), you just aren't going to have that many kids. The fact of the matter is that the entrance of women into the work force has not increased families purchasing power as much as it should, especially considering that during the 20th century in advanced economies, kids went from being potential family income to dead weights (this is a good thing, in case you are wondering).

    People aren't having kids later because feminism is promoting it. People are leaving their parents' houses later and later because they can't afford it, they aren't having kids earlier because they can't afford it, and they aren't having more kids because they can't afford it. Real wages haven't kept pace with the growth of advanced economies in the past 50 years. That's it. If you want people to have more kids they have to make more money. Big companies across the board are making loads and loads more money every year, but that money isn't entering the economy in a real way.

    The Swedish government has been promoting having more kids for years, by the way. More money paid to families with more kids, more time at home with newborns, free child dental care, free college.  Anecdotally, I can say that upper middle class families appear have more kids now. It is not uncommon for me to see 3+ kids families around. Still, they are not having 6+ kids, which I imagine would be necessary to offset all the families that have between 0 and 2 kids. There's only so much one can do if wages are low.

    This will be a bit unpopular, but the whole point of enabling women into the workforce, was to keep the wages low. Suddenly you have more people competing for various level white collar jobs. You will notice that it in the white collar, most post uni jobs stall in growth of wages (you can see this now as more and more people are entering stem/tech jobs, the pace of money making is stalling) 

    On the other hand, jobs with vast overrepresentation of men (construction, plumber, electrician, truck driver, mariner) are keeping up with cost growths if not even outpacing them, and they have no burden of debt. 

    The guy, who was placing tiles in my house was earning much more than some asaociates or even senior associates of simple desk jobs in a bank. Heck, he was making more than supervisors and junior managers. 


    EDIT: and unfortunately social media do matter, if the current high schooler girls select their profession of choice to be an "influencer". They don't get that most of those 'careers' have a hard expiration date and often do not bring much money other than a season or two of novelty. 

    People are urged to go in debt, consume and not delay any gratifications. 

    I do agree, that we probably should not grow in numbers and more likely even contract to give some breathing space to mother earth, however our debt driven economy model, which requires continous growth of consumption and by extension populace, would simply collapse on its face if we cannot keep up minimal growth at or slightly above the replacement rate. 

    People should have kids in mid 20s at the latest, but hook up cultures, 'self-gratification' and destruction of a family unit as a base line unit in the society make the future really bleak. 

    Fun fact - China, which empowered women the most in the past and had one child policy is now figjtining 'feminism' and is urging people to couple up and have 2 childre per family

  15. 4 hours ago, Pidesco said:


    Extreme right wing parties were already on the rise since, at the very least, the 2009 crisis. I don't think this rise was significantly affected by the actual intake of refugees, given that the growth continued, more or less unabated, in almost all European countries, regardless of whether they took in a significant number of refugees or not. Racists going to racist, basically, and it is really easy to appeal to them, as they were feeling disenfranchised for a long time.

    The problem wasn't Germany accepting refugees, but rather almost all other countries balking at even the idea of it, thus putting too much pressure on Germany's resources in a very short time. In any case, Europe's population replacement rate isn't high enough to maintain populations without immigration, so it is actually necessary for the European economy. Severely limiting the intake of people from outside Europe is essentially condemning Europe to dying a slow death.


    Perhaps change the mind of natives and promote having families and kids? One thing that i hold a distain for a modern feminism is that from going for equal rights and opportunitiea, they made it 'unfashionable', 'weak', 'servile' to be a mother in a regular family unit, and that it promotes promiscuity among women (have fun, you have plenty of time), when in fact the one thing that women don't have, is time as the biology does not care about what you believe in. 


    The second nail in the coffin is the rise of social media and promoting shalow and dumb behavior. Dumb things on the internet get more clicks and views and likes and you get rewarded for that with money. This means that responsibility and family life are not rewarding for the 'me me me' braindeads

  16. 8 hours ago, Gorth said:

    Got a similar anecdote to share... I doubt i would be able to get a mortgage in Australia, as I don't have any debt (to prove I can pay back debt) and not having had a credit card for 8 years, not making the banks any money. Doesn't matter I make a decent living, if they don't have it on print that you are a profitable customer for them.

    I have a CC with like 2k limit, which i pay off regularly, sometimes leaving some used balance after a minimal payment for a mibth or two. Used for some streaming service and occasional purchase via interwebs. 

    I also have like a 10k limit within my debit account, in case of some unspeakable emergency, where I could not pull my savings due to some liquidity issue. 

    Just work on your credit scores from early years. 

    • Like 1
  • Create New...