Super Immunity Anyone?

[EFLImpudence]

It's another misnomer. Let's call it protection just so you're not confused.

How does pointing out an error make me confused?

A bit like someone who called me a racist for pointing out something was not racist; now, there's a thing.

 

[Justin Passing]

I wonder if it'll ever be possible to get a vaccine to prevent people behaving in a way which, if they saw it in others, they would find ridiculous.
A good half the people on this forum would be well advised to go for such a thing.

Maybe the pandemic is natural selection in action. All the low grade people will be evolved out?

 

[noseall]

the pandemic is natural selection in action.

Correct. I'm sure not all of them are gullible thickos, but the world will be rid of a lot more morons, for sure.

 

[fillyboy]

 

[ajohn]

wonder if it'll ever be possible to get a vaccine to prevent people behaving in a way which, if they saw it in others, they would find ridiculous.

Some day education about how people are influenced and smoking gun aspect people find attractive spread might achieve something but it would cause politicians and all kinds of influencers serious problems if it did.

 

[denso13]

but the overall death figures show it to be nothing unusual

Liar liar pants on fire.

 

[Deleted member 292770]

covid is a

 

[AngleEyes]

How does pointing out an error make me confused?

You didn't point out an error, a misnomer.
You relied on a misnomer to try to denigrate the vaccine.
It's a false premise to rely on misnomers on which to base an argument.

A bit like someone who called me a racist for pointing out something was not racist; now, there's a thing.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, perhaps you could remind me.
But if you have argued that a racist act or comment could not be racist, because it was not based on a disparity of races, then it's a similar false premise on which to base an argument.
Because as I've just said 'racism' is a misnomer because their is no disparity of races. Bit it's merely a term that everyone has become accustomed to, and understands the semantics entailed with the word.

 

[AngleEyes]

BS. Nobody gets "constant boosters" for anything. Flu sort of an exception, but mostly because new strains are evolving all the time

Some diseases do need boosters, such as tetanus, hepatitis. I'm sure there are others.
But, yes, they're not 'constant boosters'.
And after a certain number of boosters, it assumed that you have lifelong immunity, oops, sorry I meant 'protection', in case anyone is confused.

 

[EFLImpudence]

You didn't point out an error, a misnomer.

Therefore a mistake; hence misnomer.

You relied on a misnomer to try to denigrate the vaccine.

Where do you see all these things that do not exist or is it a deliberate ploy to confuse and browbeat the unwary into submission and acceptance of modern left wing dogma where the truth doesn't matter?

I didn't say anything about the vaccine; merely pointed out that what was being talked about was not immunity.

It's a false premise to rely on misnomers on which to base an argument.

Then why do you do it?
You had better tell the writer of the "super-immunity" article.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, perhaps you could remind me.

Oh, it was just an absolute utter tosspot who used to be on the forum but he's gone now.

He used to say ludicrous things like:
"But if you have argued that a racist act or comment could not be racist, because it was not based on a disparity of races, then it's a similar false premise on which to base an argument.
Because as I've just said 'racism' is a misnomer because their is no disparity of races. Bit it's merely a term that everyone has become accustomed to, and understands the semantics entailed with the word."

Oh, wait a minute.

 

[AngleEyes]

View attachment 255023
Therefore a mistake; hence misnomer.

Where do you see all these things that do not exist or is it a deliberate ploy to confuse and browbeat the unwary into submission and acceptance of modern left wing dogma where the truth doesn't matter?

I didn't say anything about the vaccine; merely pointed out that what was being talked about was not immunity.

Then why do you do it?
You had better tell the writer of the "super-immunity" article.

Oh here we go a long and protracted excuse from you designed to allow to swivel from your original mistake.
A misnomer is not a mistake.
A star being so many light-years away is not a mistake.
A Koala bear is not a mistake.
A firefly is not a mistake.

It's words that have been accepted but when analysed suggest the wrong word has been adopted. But that idea encapsulated by the misnomer is not the mistake. The mistake is to take the literal meaning of the misnomer and assume that the analysed word encapsulates the meaning of it perfectly, like racism, like firefly, like Koala Bear, etc.
Immunity in the context of vaccines does not literally mean immunity, it is accepted that it suggests protection. Only a fool would adopt the literal meaning and assume it applies literally.
And only an utter tosspot would then build a fallacious argument on that misnomer.

Oh, wait a minute.

Oh, it was just an absolute utter tosspot who used to be on the forum but he's gone now.

He used to say ludicrous things like:
"But if you have argued that a racist act or comment could not be racist, because it was not based on a disparity of races, then it's a similar false premise on which to base an argument.
Because as I've just said 'racism' is a misnomer because their is no disparity of races. Bit it's merely a term that everyone has become accustomed to, and understands the semantics entailed with the word."

Oh, wait a minute.

And now you're resorting to insults, the final resort of someone without a sensible argument.