[johnforbes]

Why? Because Google helped fund it Daszak, who orchestrated the Lancet letter which for a year steered people away from the lab leak theory.

Daszak was involved in gain of function research.

Google's charity arm, Google.org, has provided financial backing for research and studies carried out by Peter Daszak and his EcoHealth Alliance charity

The financial ties, which were first reported by The National Pulse , are disclosed in various scientific studies dating back to at least 2010

Daszak has faced intense scrutiny since it emerged that his charity previously worked with the Wuhan lab accused of being the source of COVID-19

He has been removed from the COVID-19 commission looking into the origins of the pandemic after it emerged that he tried to gag the Wuhan lab leak theory

It was not immediately clear how much funding Google has provided over the last decade to Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance

[Clownkicker]

Criminy, johnny, no one is forcing you to use google, dimwit. There are a dozen other search engines you and anyone else can use.

What kind of idiot are you anyway?

[johnforbes]

That diversion won't wash.

It is Orwellian to steer search functions, and Google clearly had a conflict of interest.

Sooner or later, some federal judge will realize search engines are common carriers and should not engage in political discrimination.

[Clownkicker]

"It is Orwellian to steer search functions, and Google clearly had a conflict of interest."-johnfoibles

So STOP USING GOOGLE ALREADY, johnny. No one is holding a gun to your head. Criminy.

You keep whining about how bad they are but you keep using them. It's idiotic.

It is also hilarious that you pretend to be so concerned about Orwellian tactics since Trump took his playbook right out of 1984. And the whole time you supported him and Sanders and McEnany in their ubiquitous 'Newspeak' practices. You defended everything they said.


"Sooner or later, some federal judge will realize search engines are common carriers and should not engage in political discrimination."-johnforbes

So you are saying that Twitter and Facebook (that you consider to be common carriers, insisting they are not private businesses that should be able to enforce their rules about speech since they now represent 'the public square') also shouldn't be held responsible for what transpires on their platforms any longer? Will you put that in writing for them, counselor?

[johnforbes]

This has nothing to do with me, but with Big Tech censorship.

Google was steering people away from the lab leak theory when Google was assisting Daszak and helping to fund gain of function research.

[Clownkicker]

But it DOES have to do with you, dimwit. That's all it has to do with.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the CDC who decide what to study. The CDC agenda for research is not set by what google tells them to study.

They study what's important and what interests them. And what interests them isn't what partisan talking heads are saying on the internet or where google is sending lazy minds like yours.

Intellectually-lazy laymen such as yourself not getting a full helping of the day's partisan propaganda isn't the problem with research.

And as I said, you can use another search engine. No one is holding a gun to your head.

[johnforbes]

This has nothing to do with two people chatting on an unimportant forum.

It has to do with Google limiting and steering search results, while at the same time funding Daszak's work on gain of function at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

It relates to discovering the origin of covid-19, a global pandemic.

[Clownkicker]

Dimwit, "steering" searches is google's business model. It's a "search engine" fer cripes sake.

They are a capitalist company out to make the most money they can.

Why are you surprised by the fact that that is what they are doing? I thought you supported corporate capitalism.

Or are you changing your partisanly-hypocritical tune and now agreeing that corporate regulation is a good (even necessary) thing?

[johnforbes]

Yep, a search engine does do search work.

However, steering people away from the lab leak theory, when Google itself had partly funded such research with Daszak, who himself worked with the Wuhan lab, was overtly dishonest.

[Clownkicker]

"overtly dishonest"? Are you serious?

What's "dishonest" about them pursuing their own corporate philosophy and investors' best interests? That sounds like honesty to me.

Sometimes I think you are a closet liberal, johnny, condemning unregulated capitalism like this.

Usually you are on the other side of the issue.

[johnforbes]

Of course, I've always liked the classical liberal view of freedom.

The modern Left wants to censor, delete, and deplatform, but that is cowardice.

The marketplace of ideas is better -- speak your ideas, whatever they are, and others will give their ideas, and society will decide.

[Clownkicker]

"The marketplace of ideas is better -- speak your ideas, whatever they are, and others will give their ideas, and society will decide."

You're cute, johnny.

I thought you were supposed to be educated.


The trouble with your naive view is that a general consensus on ideas can take years. Some ideas are never settled. Meanwhile, a Trump-supporter insurrection can take just days. And garden-variety riots can take mere hours based purely on disinformation from liars like Trump and Giuliani; all taking place in minutes long before competing ideas in your nutty "marketplace of ideas" can even BEGIN to be processed. The lies about the 2020 election being stolen is a perfect example. There has been one riot already and if you clowns had your way, we would still not have a president in the White House. But the idea of the truth that the election was one of the most secure in American history is still in "the marketplace."

Have you seen a single Trump supporter who stops to listen to a rational argument? Do you really believe that the Jan. 6th Capitol riot was merely the result of just another idea winning out in the 'marketplace'? (That's a trick question, dummy. Watch out before you answer it. But more likely you will simply ignore it because you can't process the idea rationally, as usual.)

You know all this, but you are dishonestly pretending lies and disinformation are not dangerous. Why would you do that?

The only possible reason I can see for it is that you hate America and want to see it destroyed.

Well, your plan seems to be working.

[divermouse]

John - " classical views of liberalism" .. like what distorted view john , smokin', braless babes in tie die shirts, reading " steal this book", while waiting lustfully for your "prize" ayn rand mini sausage? what an juxtaposition of technicolor sparkle vomit.

Clown - "You know all this, but you are dishonestly pretending lies and disinformation are not dangerous. Why would you do that?'

it is apparently what he gets paid to do from k street weasels and putin lovers,. spread his sparkle pollution all over any fool to listen. which begs what are they going to do when all the slaves are free - bada?

[brandon]

Lol so in other words so what, they can do what they want, use another search engine.

Good thread

[Clownkicker]

brandon, google is a tool, nothing more. It is not the god of scientific research and ultimate truth.

If you rely on google to not use their algorithm to make as much money as they can, then you're a fool. They own and sell information at your expense. Everyone knows it.

And if you think scientists at the CDC rely on google search engine results to decide what to research, then you're as big an idiot as johnforbes.

And if you think google searches giving any other results than they did would have changed the course of the pandemic response in any way, then that tells me you must be a gullible Trump supporter slopping at the same propaganda trough as johnforbes, because it wouldn't have. Every epidemiologist in the world can do their research without using google.

So yeah, "good thread." Google can do what it wants until Republicans get behind properly regulating corporate capitalism, and you and everyone else SHOULD use another search engine. I'm glad you picked up on that.

This "good thread" does a good job of revealing just how stupid and partisan johnforbes is when any other time he is a Republican firmly against regulating corporations while simultaneously being a vocal supporter of Trump when Trump actually and literally censored science research. But johnny doesn't care about that. He has yet to call Trump an "intellectual coward" as he has called all sorts of other people for not censoring anyone at all.

[johnforbes]

Nobody suggested there were no alternatives to Google, Twitter, and YouTube, but they are widely used and thus should be viewed as common carriers.

Your electric company cannot censor your political views, and Big Tech leftists shouldn't be able to turn the First Amendment into a dead letter eitherl

[Clownkicker]

Now johnforbes is dishonestly conflating Google, Twitter, and YouTube with the U.S. Congress.

Of course, they are not Congress and so are not forbidden from censoring anyone. (But, unlike Trump, they didn't censor anyone, so who cares?)

It will take corporate regulation to change that, but Republicans are adamantly against it. Democrats have been trying to tell you for a century that corporate regulation is necessary. And if Democrats offered up such a bill today, Republicans would squash it along with us having to listen to johnforbes whine incessantly about how 'totalitarian' it is.

As always, johnforbes wants to have his partisan turds and eat them too.

[johnforbes]

Outrageous.”
@BillMaher
railed against Facebook and Google for banning and suppressing content about lab leak. “You were wrong, Google and Facebook....The CDC’s been wrong about a lot shit, this is outrageous that I can’t look this information up.” #RealTime

[Clownkicker]

johnny "Bill Maher" is not a fact, he is a comedian. That you seriously conflate Google, Twitter, and Youtube with Congress is just an embarrassing fact.

Why do you care what Bill Maher thinks, dimwit? You're such a useful tool, dutifully regurgitating pointless talking points from your partisan handlers.

When you can't argue your point, you hold up meaningless distractions hoping to hide your pathetic impotence in yet another intellectual argument.

[johnforbes]

Why do I care what Bill thinks?

Because of my relentless fairness, I listen to all views, and so I welcomed any shred of common sense from him.

[Clownkicker]

So you think Maher shows "common sense" because he said (in a comedy schtick) that he can't "look this information up" when he still can?

All of the information you and Stewart are claiming people can't look up is still on the CDC website. ANYONE can simply look it up whenever they choose, even if they do use google.

Your silly partisan foolishness about someone being censored just doesn't make common sense, dummy.

[johnforbes]

It is silly, partisan, and foolish to favor censorship.

Even leftist Maher is against it.

[Clownkicker]

It is silly, partisan, and foolish to insist there was censorship when there wasn't any.

Even johnfibs knows this.

[johnforbes]

Yes, Google did censor any theory other than the foolish Vacationing Bat Theory.

But AI and the **** and Google may wane anyhow, just as TV did, and a blockchain economy may emerge.

Still, a blockhead such as Clown would not comprehend blockchain.

Phrased differently, Clown is the weakest link.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, Facebook and Twitter didn't delete a single website from existence. It also didn't edit or alter a single website other than their own, according to their own published agreement with posters, as is their right, agreed to by those posters. All research published by scientists is still on the internet, unchanged and unedited by Facebook or Twitter, exactly how they wanted it presented, for anyone to read. It has not been suppressed in any way.

If you could actually read, all you need to do is go to their websites and read what they have to tell you instead of relying on second hand gossip from your handlers about information (possibly edited or even fictional) posted on other gossip sites.

I can't urge you enough not to get your scientific information from Facebook and Twitter, johnny.

[johnforbes]

Not true.

FB and Twitter and YouTube relentlessly censored and deplatformed anybody who dared furnish perspective on the vaccine or the 2020 debacle of an election.

They blamed it on a guy named Al Gorithym, but we both name that is a cyber nom de plume.

[Clownkicker]

Believe it or not, johnny, the country and free speech can survive just fine without another corporate gossip site for advertisers.

You don't use them and I don't use them, and I kick your ass just fine over political and medical speech.

Q.E.D.

[johnforbes]

The only thing Clown ever kicked was a barstool as he staggered out of yet another seedy, sleazy gin mill.

[elklindo69]

Apparently Trump supporters like Johnnie are gullible enough to attend a victory rally for the loser.

[johnforbes]

Joe could only draw 10k to a live feed, and Trump can hold a rally any time and fill the place.

YouTube is stepping in to censor and delete down votes to Joe's vids to limit the bad appearance.

To be fair, there isn't much Elkin can do to limit his own bad appearance....

[Clownkicker]

"Joe could only draw 10k to a live feed, and Trump can hold a rally any time and fill the place."-johnflubs

So did Hitler and Mussolini, johnny, but you're making the idiotic case that Hitler, Mussolini, and Trump are better leaders than Joe Biden because they drew big crowds.

Criminy, the Right isn't even trying to hide their admiration for fascism any longer, whether you're a white supremacist or your typical Republican johnforbes.

[johnforbes]

But the suggestion from the media was that charismatic Joe drew more votes than anybody in US history.

But he campaigned from his basement, had 20 or so people at tiny media events, and was elderly, boring, and a partisan hack with 48 years in The Swamp of DC.

Yet, on Election Day, he turned into JFK -- young, strong, popular, charismatic, dashing, and 80 million voters legit voted for him.

Come on, that just doesn't pass the smell test.

[Clownkicker]

Like your typical Trump supporter, jonforbes simply can't grasp how much Trump is reviled in America.

No one (other than you, dimwit) ever called Biden "charismatic". And he didn't need to be because Trump's personality and leadership style is just so toxic.

Voters chose sanity over mental illness, literacy over a TV watcher, order over chaos, freedom over authoritarianism, the Constitution over armed rebellion. They care THAT much about America that even those who normally don't vote decided they had better stand up and be counted.

That you don't 'smell' it only proves how out of touch with America you really are. It stinks out here with all the Republicans spewing white supremacy and Neo-Nazism, not to mention their all-out assault on voting rights and the democratic process. They know the only way they can win is if they make voting impossible for their opponents. Republicans can only thrive when there is chaos around them, so they make sure it is always chaotic.

[johnforbes]

Come on, Clown, you are equating your own political opinions with intelligence and literacy.

That is flaw number 1 in all political discussion -- your naive assumption that your views are tantamount to universal wisdom.

You should read even the first few chapters of Lippmann's classic book Public Opinins.

[Clownkicker]

Come on, johnny, you are equating your own made up stupid shit with facts.

That is flaw number 1 in all political discussion -- your naive assumption that your views are tantamount to universal truth.

You should read ANYTHING that isn't merely partisan propaganda from your handlers.


If you notice, nothing I posted above is my "opinion". It is all factual.

It is not merely my "opinion" that there was a riot at the Capitol. It is a fact.

It is not merely my "opinion" that Trump is widely reviled by America. It is a fact. Look at any popularity poll. (even one from FOX)

It is not merely my "opinion" that Trump's style of leadership is to cause chaos among all who work for him. It is a fact. Ask anyone who worked in the White House. There are a dozen books about it by people who were there.

It is not my "opinion" that Trump didn't read intelligence reports or his daily Presidential briefing, or that he watched a lot of TV. It's a fact.

Everything I wrote is factual, it is not just my "opinion".

But perhaps this reveals one of your fundamental intellectual problems--you conflate "facts" and "opinions". You don't know the difference. They are not the same thing, johnny. One reflects reality. The other is the result of your partisan brainwashing, which, like any child, you have become convinced is true because someone in authority told you so.

But it isn't. Your handlers are not your friends, dummy, and rather than address a single point I made, (after I directly addressed your points) you write non sequitur bullshit to avoid any actual discussion.

[johnforbes]

Clown, you are absolutely welcome to your opinions, and I will defend your right to have them and disperse them.

But read Lippman's great book, Public Opinion.

Don't be afraid; he was a classic liberal.

And think about epistemology, what Hume and Kant and others taught us.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, I already perceive your sorry ass as a big patch of red.


I noticed that you couldn't refute any of my facts (which are not just my "opinions") and so once again you try to divert attention from your embarrassing unsupported partisan opinions.

[johnforbes]

No, I'm serious.

It doesn't happen often, but now and again.

Read Lippmann's book Public Opinion, and its many valid epistemological points about translating the existential buzz of the world outside into the pictures in our heads.

You'll never think about a newspaper article or TV show or Internet presentation the same way afterward.

It won't change your mind about socialism -- Lippmann was, after all, an intellectual from the classic liberal pro-Left position -- but it will equip you to understand that your opinions, like mine, are merely opinions.

We are entitled to them, but not to the delusion that they are tantamount to cosmic truth.

[Clownkicker]

I didn't state my opinions, johnny, because I never confuse my opinions with cosmic truth as you do. I only stated facts.

You are pretending that there was no objective riot at the Capitol, but there was, regardless of how anyone 'perceives' what happened that day. 150 injured police officers are proof of the riot, whether you perceived the riot or not.

You are pretending there are no objective facts at all, and if that's what you believe, then it is pointless to talk to you or anyone like you. I couldn't care less what your opinions are. I only care about the crimes and destruction you and your ilk perpetrate because of them, which go contrary to all facts placed before you and to the text of the Constitution.

Just because you believe there are no facts doesn't mean that you can riot and commit offenses against that Constitution with impunity. You can't, as the hundreds of prosecutions and plea deals against the rioters will prove to you.

[johnforbes]

Of course, there was a riot there, and eventually we'll find out how many Antifa members, agents, and confidential informants were there and whether they helped at all to catalyze it.

It isn't me saying anything, but one main part of philosophy called epistemology.

It involves the study of the nature -- and limits -- of knowledge.

Godel and Skolem found limits in math, and Heisenberg and others in microphysics.

Hume and Kant and many others dug into this in logic and philosophy.

Epimenides the Cretan said all Cretans were liars, so was he telliing the truth?

It is a v ery serious question to ask: What can humans know, and what can we count on as objectively true such as whether the sun will rise tomorrow and where.

Plato's cave myth was all about this issue, and the questions he raised were (are) profound.

You seem to be suggesting we simply can't take flight into total solipsism, and that is true.

But most of the political opinions here fall into the category of the person making them confusing his viewpoints with cosmic wisdom or universal truth, and those are flaws born of hubris.