Translation : "I know I lied when I said that, and I don't want to take responsibility for it"

I know exactly what "your style of discussion" is - and that is why I am calling you out on it.

And there was no answer provided - because you don't want to add an additional lie on top of your already extensive list of misinformation and disinformation.

No, but I realize that has no bearing on your preferred style of engagement.

My "style of engagement" is a direct result of your intellectually dishonest "style of discussion".

Let's try that again:

Are you claiming that you never implied that unvaccinated people were barred from getting tested in beaverland?

Yes or no answer please.

If you do not provide an answer, you can't really call me out for "making up stories".

I'm still seeing people wear masks. There's pheggets at my work wearing masks and it's like 100° in that place. The coof never ended for these guys, like those Japanese soldiers still fighting WWII 30 years later...

We're incompatible discussants

Even though there isn't much testing or reporting anymore, incidence rates are still higher than negligible.

Seeing as how you refuse to answer the question, it stands to reason that when I say that you made a claim that the unvaccinated are barred from getting tested in beaverland, it is not a "made up story".

You conceded fudging the numbers by two decimal points a couple of days ago, now this...

It almost seems like your claim of me "making up stories" about you, is the actual made up story.

Edit : To anyone just joining in now, there is a reason why Slow Creep refuses to answer the question. If he answers "yes", it adds a lie onto his long list of lies. If he answer "no", then he concedes his claim of me "making up stories".

That's how you reason because it seems you seek to attack the person rather than the position or argument put forth by the person.

I made no such concession. But I realize that's irrelevant to you.

It's just not something I'm interested in. Sorry.

I'm not attacking the person, I'm disputing what you claimed.

Now, when you say I am "making stories up", you're attacking the person.

You first invent a claim, then attribute it to me. You don't dispute the invented claim, you just call me names based on the invented claim.

You've said absolutely nothing about the study in the OP. I don't expect you will.

We are incompatible discussants.

How many apologized for claiming the unvaccinated were a threat to the vaccinated? Did Fauci ever apologize for his fear mongering with the "Doomsday" variant that was allegedly around the corner?

You're still making excuses for people wearing them??? The fact that someone needs to take a test every time they get the sniffles, shows how weak the variant has become.

Dunno.

I've never watched him speak. I don't imagine he's held an apology press conference.

I didn't "invent the claim".

You saying that I did, is attacking the person instead of the argument.

We're "incompatible discussants" because you prefer to be in an echo chamber where no one disputes your fudged numbers, your mathematically impossible "data", and your flat out lies.

It's appears it's how you entertain yourself, and presumably others, on here.

Enjoy yourself

Learning the truth can be a painful experience, especially for J.L.C, but that's not the point of this post. The point is that you shouldn't let yourself be flummoxed by J.L.C.'s fast talk and air of self-confidence. The rest of this post is focused exclusively on J.L.C., not because I harbor any ill-will towards him but because he has been known to say that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. That notion is so rapacious, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. He says that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. Yet he also wants to add insult to injury. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask because my love for people necessitates that I champion the force of goodness against the greed of the most unbalanced publishers of hate literature you'll ever see. Yes, I face opposition from J.L.C.; However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder. I like to say that I think that J.L.C. should take more responsibility for his actions. He never directly acknowledges such truisms but instead tries to turn them around to make it sound like I'm saying that he's renowned for his racial and cultural sensitivity. I guess that version better fits his style—or should I say, "agenda"? He pompously claims that linguacious menaces should be given absolute authority to funnel significant amounts of money to disrespectful wretches. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. I once overheard J.L.C. say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? J.L.C. said that our unalienable rights are merely privileges that he can dole out or retract. Can you believe that? At least his statement made me realize that he has blood on his hands. Naturally, J.L.C. pretends to be an innocent lamb who has our best interests at heart. We all know the reality: If he really had our best interests at heart, he wouldn't destroy the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism. Sometimes it seems eccentric egotists are like a farmer who, in the spring, would work the ground, plant seeds, fertilize, and cultivate the ground for a period of time. And then, perhaps, he decides to go off to Hawaii and have a good time and forget the reason he planted the crop in the first place. Well, a farmer wouldn't do that. But J.L.C. would advocate measures that others criticize for being excessively vengeful if he got the chance. His asseverations are one part cannibalism, two parts privatism. That's probably obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse. Nevertheless, I suspect that few people reading this letter are aware that J.L.C's scare tactics have proven to be a complete disaster in both theory and practice. Yes, I could add that his brain must work very different from mine, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that if a cogent, logical argument entered J.L.C.'s brain, no doubt a concussion would result. It is high time for someone to lend a helping hand. Will that someone be you?

I mean, you added another lie to your list of lies when you claimed I "invented the claim" the you actually made.

I wonder why you won't own up to it.

Maybe because I called you out on it then, and didn't let you get away with the misinformation.

Wow strong ChatGPT

Repped