I’m not making the same arguments against the WEF that the right is making. I was refuting the right’s arguments based on conflating multiple presentations to make a false narrative. But knees have to jerk, so everyone here just assumed that I was making a crazy ‘chips in vaccines’ argument against the WEF or something.
Sure…
“More fascist” is something that you can’t pull back, clearly you accepted the dumb opinions from the right wing and conspiracy sources. Until you finally noticed that was wrong and now you want to pretend that you are not a swallower of right wing and conspiracy media. As pointed already, no such quote was made by a founder and that is not what the WFE is doing.
The sad thing here is that just like in the case of Nitrogen in rivers or Rachel Carson, you will be back with the same right wing trash as if it was not explained many times before how the right is manipulating guys like you.
The above are the same arguments against the WEF that the right is making.
I have never been a member of a ‘right wing conspiracy site’ or even bookmarked one. The only time I see that stuff is by following a link or having it show up in my recommended feed, and almost always I roll my eyes and back out as soon as I see what site it is.
And all the WEF stuff I have seen was the result of just browsing Youtube or having the video come up in my feed.
I have heard the right-wing arguments mostly on Twitter. The farthest to the right my bookmarks go is National Review, and I go there only occasionally. And trust me, the right doesn’t like me much either because I criticise them for exactly this kind of stuff when I do engage.
You guys keep trying to put me in the ‘crazy right winger’ box, and it leads to a lot of miscommunication and noise and pain for the mods and other readers.
The reasonable ones, yes. There is good reason to worry about the WEFs more serious plans. ArriveCan, for example, was almost immediately put to use as a vaccine pasport travel control, when it was originally envisioned as a pilot for the WEF’s digital ID program.
And the good reason to worry about the WEFs more serious plans. ArriveCan, for example, or a vaccine passport travel control, for example, is what?
There was a doper that before claimed that he did not follow Rush Limbaugh because he never did see his show, only to follow months later by unwittingly reporting that he did read his “arguments” from Rush’s website.
Get better sources.
Willfully ignoring how you posted earlier about this issue and then reporting “how silly the right wing is” just shows that you are an incompetent on figuring out how the right’s narrative percolates and pretends to not be coming from the right wing and conspiracy minded sources.
You have no idea what my sources are. You are just projecting. When is the last time you saw a cite from a crazy right wing source from me? Or even from a mainstream one like National Review?
Nope, that is what everybody else can see what you did. You may think that you are immune to right wing and conspiracy propaganda, but showed here and elsewhere that you are glad to be influenced by them.
No one has talked about cites, because you don’t furnish any, only examples of the misleading info that you claim are aware in later posts. That shows that many times you do realize how dumb they are, but the percolated info that you come with has no cite whatsoever. That is worse, since many times it is clear that your claims about doing research are in reality the pits.
You often haven’t read the sources you post. That’s been proven time and time again. As for where you get your information, well, I think that’s pretty obvious.
I have found that many times the ones claiming that they have “better sources” and still fall for right wing/conspiracy trash, get it from feeds from the people that they trust, that the people they trust are being misled all the time is nothing that they wonder about. IIRC the one claiming that he was not influenced by Rush L. got links to the articles in Rusbo’s site because of the feeds he got.
When he did not cite his dumb declarations it was very likely that he was intelligent enough to realize that the cites would be trash. So, no cites for the bad ideas, but usually the cites those feeds point at as evidence for the stupid ideas are valid ones.
That is what is posted from time to time. But, the valid articles in reality do not support what they claimed.
Short video from science writer Peter Hadfield showing how the right wing media (and less accurate ones) copy paste what someone got wrong from a science or news article that does not claim what they report.
Are you talking about me? If so, show me a single time I quoted Rush Limbaugh’s web site. I couldn’t even get his show in Canada. And if not me, why are you bringing it up? Vague guilt through association? “Look, here’s an unnamed rightwinger who I suspected of hiding his source! So Sam is bad.”
By the way, if you think misusing science only happens on the right, you are kidding yourself. I spent decades debunking bullshit anti-nuclear arguments and crazy economic theories from the left, often concocted in the same way - selective quotes, mixing separate arguments together to conflate them, trying to elevate fringe theories to mainstream, etc. It’s what partisans do.
Sheesh you are so dim - you just said you don’t post cites from crazy right wing sources or from mainstream right sources like National Review. The poster you are responding to mentioned the Limbaugh thing because that person was caught lying about using Limbaugh as a source. We all KNOW you get your BS from crazy right wing sources because it’s so OBVIOUS and you are lying on a regular basis.
How you missed that bit but still managed to make the Limbaugh story about you is a perfect illustration of how pathetic you are when it comes to comprehending what you read.
Troll.
Where is the cite for this claim of yours? You were asked to provide one, and the post was not in the pit.
Possibly the ‘socialist’ worry comes from Klaus Schwab himself (founder of the WEF), who is quoted as saying “In the future you will have no privacy, and no property. And you will like it!”
ROFL, you have to love how consistent Sam is. I post a cite showing WEF cautioning about the danger of chipping people and Sam later uses the same cite to support his position about the WEF pushing that.
Yet again, dumbshit doesn’t read his cites. 
Moreover, this quote,
shows that this,
ain’t true.
Now if Sam can provide a cite from other than a crazy right wing source saying the above . . . then I’d be wrong.
But in the absence of said cite I’m feeling pretty good about my conclusion.
So you iust KNOW I’m lying, but you don’t have any actual evidence? It’s just ‘obvious’?
Can you give me some examples of crazy right wing sites? I promise I will honestly tell you if I have read them. The ones I know of (and avoid) are American Greatness, RedState… and now I’m drawing a blank. PJMedia sites, maybe? GatewayPundit?
I have read Instapundit from time to time, just to see what breaking news on the right looks like. I’ve never read the other ones, unless I followed a link to one and the article was interesting. But I don’t browse right-wing sites. I spend most of my online time reading science papers, mostly on astronomy and astrophysics, , AI stuff, and hanging on the Straight Dope. My twitter feed is all science, no politics, to the extent that I can filter it. But of course lots filters through, and some of it is right wing glurge (and some is left-wing glurge).
I’m also interested in ideas, not partisanship. I’ve never been a member of a political party, my voting record is all over the map. I can’t stand Republicans or Democrats, and I’m sure I’ll be disappointed with the CPC once they win the next election.
If I was the close-minded right-wing parrot I am continually accused of being, I wouldn’t be on this message board. I probably wouldn’t have even read the Straight Dope books.
Yes, and I already said I my have misremembered that it was Klaus himself, but the quote DID come from the WEF, in several places. I also explained how the right MISUSED the quote, which you seem to ignore. I didn’t offer it as a criticism of the WEF, but an explanation for the ‘socialist’ label the right gives it.
Protip: people who get their information from right wing conspiracy sites don’t think they’re conspiracy sites.