Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Basing any conclusion on mistrust is, to me, a conclusion based on inference and not data.

I may not trust a source of information very often, but usually they will be correct on occasion.  I'm not going the other way just because I don't trust them.

Basing any conclusion on mistrust is, to me, a conclusion based on inference and not data.

I may not trust a source of information very often, but usually they will be correct on occasion.  I'm not going the other way just because I don't trust them.

forming an opinion is very much based on trust if you dont trust your source that will have an affect on your opinion

the source you used is funded by the US government which is the same folks who said if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor

I disagree were were lied to, but if we were, the person or entity that lied could be telling the truth later on.  I see this as an unresolved situation simply because there is no compelling evidence either way.  Anyway, it has no impact that I can see in real terms. 

Countless emails among top NIH officials beg to differ.

Anything that went against a natural occurrence was suppressed and even penalized. People lost jobs for questioning "THE SCIENCE".

We were told that "THE SCIENCE" was settled. Clearly it was not, but if you questioned anything, you were a right-wing conspiracy theorist.

Knowing that you've been lied to by a person/entity in the past is not reason to automatically believe that the truth is always the direct opposite of what that person/entity tells you now.

and here is where I post......


"A scorpion asks a frog to carry him over a river. The frog is afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, both would sink and the scorpion would drown. The frog then agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is its nature."

I've yet to see where "we" were lied to by anyone in real authority.  They made mistakes no doubt.

At any rate, if someone did lie, it hardly means they aren't being truthful now.  I'd need to see the specifics to form a conclusion.  Based on what I read, the origins of COVID are still unknown with any certainty, no matter if someone lied or not.

Others have looked into and I've known one was an actuall detective. AndCindy used to do product and personnel research and has followed the whole viris and vax developmen.tBelieve what you will the conversation and information is quite extensive and I'm not typing up their dissertations to convince anyone on the internet

hah, the Fox news thing going on a week ago or currently.....

supposedly, big shots at Fox news admitted to lying about election stuff or something

my question is..... if they lied about election theories, why would you believe their admission that they lied?

folks just believe what they want to believe

I stand by the idea that after the entire run of the COVID pandemic, We've learned NOTHING!

now, some people here and some above average rational thinking individuals have learned some things.
but, as a whole, the nation has learned nothing

we don't know if masks make much difference, we don't know if the vaccine makes much difference, we don't know the origin of the virus, we sure as hell don't know who to trust next time this happens