02-08-2022Quote:
You smugly post a link to another article with a similar theme but toned down and now four months later, and ignoring his earlier doomsday predictions, and act like that somehow proves your point - again, with smug.
You get called on that (I guess? Still don’t get your point) and your response is to say “well these predictions are hard.” Yet you act like his subsequent predictions are valid and worthy of our unconditional obedience despite all this. Man you want to be right so bad I really believe you will argue anything at this point, no matter how ridiculous.
Are these predictions not hard? Is this not a 100 year event? Is this not a novel virus that we're learning about daily?Originally Posted by skywatch
You are good at redirecting. Antipeter posted something about how wrong Fauci was with his prediction, which a person in possession of all their faculties might conclude makes his future predictions less credible.You smugly post a link to another article with a similar theme but toned down and now four months later, and ignoring his earlier doomsday predictions, and act like that somehow proves your point - again, with smug.
You get called on that (I guess? Still don’t get your point) and your response is to say “well these predictions are hard.” Yet you act like his subsequent predictions are valid and worthy of our unconditional obedience despite all this. Man you want to be right so bad I really believe you will argue anything at this point, no matter how ridiculous.
You obviously lost the argument because you didn't dare touch my point about how warnings affect outcomes.
Your expectations are so unreasonable that it's clear your objective is to discredit the CDC. Any cautionary announcement is an affront to you. And you'll be ready with the pitchforks if it strays in the slightest.
