Why make a conspiracy theory up when you can use it as a vehicle for your racismI’m just waiting for a conspiracy theory regarding the Euro 2020 final match last night.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
That’s awful! Similar has been said about some school shootings in America, I think the Sandy hook one? And also 911. So disrespectfulI’m fairly certain the stuff on the Sarah case was that Sarah wasn’t even a real personit was disgusting, I remember reading at the time in disbelief
Sandy Hook is one of the worst as far as CTs go. Claiming that the grieving parents are paid actors. I can honestly see why and how some theories start, I've posted before about how my husband is invested in a lot of them (after 20 years we agree to disagree) but these are on another level of insensitivity and crassness.
Great minds, go see my last few tweets on that threadI’m just waiting for a conspiracy theory regarding the Euro 2020 final match last night.
They probably could have squeezed out a theory if it was the black players who had scored and the white players had missedWhy make a conspiracy theory up when you can use it as a vehicle for your racism
Anyone seen a report of an alien/Nessie/Big Foot sighting recently?
I miss them.
I miss them.
I did. Cannot see them.Great minds, go see my last few tweets on that thread
Nah, but I have a big foot story! Some of my family lived in the Canadian Rockies when I was a kid. Uncle J always told us there was a big foot roaming their property at night. Anyway, my oldest brother and our cousin decided to sleep in the barn that night so the rest of us sat around making noises into an old Sony tape recorder ( this was mid-70s) and crept up to the barn and pressed 'play'.
Next morning brother and cousin had a great story about how a giant hairy man burst in screaming then ran back out really fast. Of course they stayed the night because they were big, brave boys with bad teenage moustaches. Bloody idiots.
I did. Cannot see them.
Thanks for posting here!
I think they lost because 5G went down and it interfered with their mind, which then caused a malfunction in their goal scoring abilities.
I think the ones who missed penalties did it on purpose so they don't have to get Phil Foden's hairI’m just waiting for a conspiracy theory regarding the Euro 2020 final match last night.
I can only hope that this theory is due to the fact they find it incomprehensible that someone could do such a thing and claiming it’s fake therefore protects them from the true reality, because to literally trash and disrespect the lives, death and memory of those babies is just disgusting.
That's at the heart of almost all CT's. Refusing to accept the fact that the world is a random, chaotic place on which horrendous, weird, tragic and shocking things just happen and we can't control it.
Far more comforting to think none of these messed up things would happen only for some dark elite controlling everything.
Actually there was one that was started by the ItaliansI’m just waiting for a conspiracy theory regarding the Euro 2020 final match last night.
They said that England had only got to where we did because Boris was being paid back by Uefa for halting the super league by saying England wouldn't play in it.
The new conspiracy should be that the Italians paid off the Ref as he was clearly the 12th player on their side last night
Bitter? YUP!
Complaints about things not covered on the BBC news site, half of that is fixed by selecting 'uk' and the other half fixed by clicking 'world' - the third half 
of the problem is that there's only so much space on the front page and a lot of articles are only briefly featured there and yes, inevitably - some not at all.
Though I do think that if millions really had been had been hit by tear gas at a protest then even the BBC might have given it a mention.
( actually thinking about this I charitably suggest it may be the result of some unchecked crap translation from something along the lines of 'thousands at protest, tear gas used' )
It is of course annoying when a story I want to see is stuck a couple of pages away but not everyone has the same view of what should get the priority space. The front page of a news site changes a lot and a favoured story's presence there may be short-lived.
of the problem is that there's only so much space on the front page and a lot of articles are only briefly featured there and yes, inevitably - some not at all. Though I do think that if millions really had been had been hit by tear gas at a protest then even the BBC might have given it a mention.
( actually thinking about this I charitably suggest it may be the result of some unchecked crap translation from something along the lines of 'thousands at protest, tear gas used' )
It is of course annoying when a story I want to see is stuck a couple of pages away but not everyone has the same view of what should get the priority space. The front page of a news site changes a lot and a favoured story's presence there may be short-lived.
The thing that gets me is we “unbelievers” get called for being sucked in by the “MSM” as if you have to be stupid to watch it. CT followers make out they avoid it like the plague but are very quick to complain when it’s not featuring the stories they want!
Their 'MSM' is twitter and facebook, that makes me laugh. They seem to spend their lives on their to avoid the rest of the sheepie world.
The scientists and doctors tons of them follow or listen to as well all have agendas that they never address when posting their articles or tweets. There was one a while ago from an anti vax doc who was quoting incredibly incorrect statistics - low and behold he had hugely invested in the one of the producers of ivermectin!
There was an interesting episode of More or Less on R4 a week or two back about Ivermectin. It seems there is very conflicting data about its effectiveness, but there is a clinical trial going on being run by Oxford at the moment.
I also read this paper a few days ago about ivermectin:
https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678
"An important controversial point to consider in any rationale is the 5 µM required concentration to reach the anti-SARS-CoV-2 action of ivermectin observed in vitro, which is much higher than 0.28 µM, the maximum reported plasma concentration achieved in vivo with a dose of approximately 1700 µg/kg (about nine times the FDA-approved dosification). In this sense, basic fundamentals for assessing ivermectin in COVID-19 at a clinical level appear to be insufficient."
I can't fathom why some of the very same people who refuse to take the vaccine because it's "experimental" (even though there is very good safety data) are so keen for ivermectin to be used at concentrations much higher than those that have been tested and deemed safe in clinical trials to treat other illnesses.
It may be that ivermectin is effective against covid, but there simply isn't enough good quality data at the moment so say either way.
I also read this paper a few days ago about ivermectin:
https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678
"An important controversial point to consider in any rationale is the 5 µM required concentration to reach the anti-SARS-CoV-2 action of ivermectin observed in vitro, which is much higher than 0.28 µM, the maximum reported plasma concentration achieved in vivo with a dose of approximately 1700 µg/kg (about nine times the FDA-approved dosification). In this sense, basic fundamentals for assessing ivermectin in COVID-19 at a clinical level appear to be insufficient."
I can't fathom why some of the very same people who refuse to take the vaccine because it's "experimental" (even though there is very good safety data) are so keen for ivermectin to be used at concentrations much higher than those that have been tested and deemed safe in clinical trials to treat other illnesses.
It may be that ivermectin is effective against covid, but there simply isn't enough good quality data at the moment so say either way.
And yet Ive seen it referred to in those threads as a "safe and reliable" treatment of covid19.
I think they don't realise how much the vaccine has actually been tested compared to some drugs currently on the market too. There are many, many treatments pushed out that have had nowhere near the level of testing the vaccine has.
One of the hot new terms as well seems to be talking about informed consent. Its literally the most talked about medical issue, the vaccine, of the last how many years. Information is available in abundance. They hand out leaflets on it at every opportunity. I dont know how much more informed your consent can be.
- Status