EBOLA, creeping timebomb?

**yokel** · 20th October 2014, 19:15

well seen this stuff article earlier today and they have edited the title from being tested negative for Ebola to be cleared of Ebola.
and I'm dam sure it mentioned her being test negative for the "alleged" virus

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/america...eared-of-ebola

**flyingcrocodile46** · 20th October 2014, 19:20

Originally Posted by jonbuoy

Worked out those death figures yet? Ask A Liberian health worker if they are afraid of catching Ebola. You would be pissing your pants if you were actually involved in looking after these people. But of course it's not really happening, people aren't really dying - well not that you can see from behind your keyboard.

Build a bridge and get over yourself.

**flyingcrocodile46** · 20th October 2014, 19:21

Originally Posted by yokel

well seen this stuff article earlier today and they have edited the title from being tested negative for Ebola to be cleared of Ebola.
and I'm dam sure it mentioned her being test negative for the "alleged" virus

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/america...eared-of-ebola

It was probably just that time of the month. I think jonbouy knows all about that.

**jonbuoy** · 20th October 2014, 20:08

Originally Posted by flyingcrocodile46

It was probably just that time of the month. I think jonbouy knows all about that.

Can you and Yokel clarify something? Do you believe: A) Ebola is a real disease that is killing people but nothing to worry about in NZ. B) Ebola is real, is killing people but it's been genetically engineered and is being strategically released for a greater purpose. C) Ebola is not real and is purely a government conspiracy.

**flyingcrocodile46** · 20th October 2014, 20:26

Originally Posted by jonbuoy

Can you and Yokel clarify something? Do you believe:

A) Ebola is a real disease that is killing people but nothing to worry about in NZ.

B) Ebola is real, is killing people but it's been genetically engineered and is being strategically released for a greater purpose.

C) Ebola is not real and is purely a government conspiracy.

I can only form my own opinion as to probabilities, and your parameters aren't those I would use to best describe the limited scenarios proposed, but at this stage I'd evaluate the likelihood of those scenarios independently and very approximately as;
A) 60% (on the very conservative side)
B) 50%
C)20%.
However, I think better probabilities lie with a partial blend of those (and other) scenarios, because history tells us that 'nothing is as complicated or simple as we imagine (before history exposes the truth)'.

**jonbuoy** · 20th October 2014, 20:44

Originally Posted by flyingcrocodile46

I can only form my own opinion as to probabilities, and your parameters aren't those I would use to best describe the limited scenarios proposed, but at this stage I'd evaluate the likelihood of those scenarios independently and very approximately as;
A) 60% (on the very conservative side)
B) 50%
C)20%.
However, I think better probabilities lie with a partial blend of those (and other) scenarios, because history tells us that 'nothing is as complicated or simple as we imagine (before history exposes the truth)'.

Ok so go ahead - whats your detailed opinion?

**flyingcrocodile46** · 20th October 2014, 21:08

Originally Posted by jonbuoy

Ok so go ahead - whats your detailed opinion?

I don't have a "detailed" opinion. I have an ever evolving opinion that would take weeks if not months to accurately elucidate, and you have already rejected all attempts to give you any insight as to some of the 'details' that I factor into consideration. It would be a waste of my time.

In any event, you really ought to start doing some independent research and start forming your own opinions around probabilities (that are based only on facts disseminated from the rhetoric and biases that so often accompany them) rather than gambling on those of others. Especially those given to you by the MSM and governments.

**yokel** · 20th October 2014, 21:59

Originally Posted by jonbuoy

Can you and Yokel clarify something? Do you believe:

A) Ebola is a real disease that is killing people but nothing to worry about in NZ.

B) Ebola is real, is killing people but it's been genetically engineered and is being strategically released for a greater purpose.

C) Ebola is not real and is purely a government conspiracy.

Ok let me play haha.

I'm mostly A with some B and C.

It's a minimal event used for maximum political gains fitting their agenda.
words like attack, fight, outbreak, killed and so on tells you all you need to know.

It's almost entertaining the ridiculousness how this Ebola is handled by the authorities and how it is presented by the MSM

**jonbuoy** · 21st October 2014, 02:45

So despite the wild conspiracy and denial theories your both generally agree that Ebola:

Is killing people in Africa
Is contagious by sweat/body fluids
Hasn't been deliberately released.

**jonbuoy** · 21st October 2014, 02:47

Originally Posted by flyingcrocodile46

I don't have a "detailed" opinion. I have an ever evolving opinion that would take weeks if not months to accurately elucidate, and you have already rejected all attempts to give you any insight as to some of the 'details' that I factor into consideration. It would be a waste of my time.

In any event, you really ought to start doing some independent research and start forming your own opinions around probabilities (that are based only on facts disseminated from the rhetoric and biases that so often accompany them) rather than gambling on those of others. Especially those given to you by the MSM and governments.

Please go ahead and explain your whole Ebola theory- I don't think it will take weeks or months - just the bullet points will do.

**yokel** · 21st October 2014, 06:02

Originally Posted by jonbuoy

So despite the wild conspiracy and denial theories your both generally agree that Ebola:

Is killing people in Africa
Is contagious by sweat/body fluids
Hasn't been deliberately released.

That would be my opinion by your very general definition of wild conspiracy theories.
whats actually happing can be hard to tell and its a hell of a lot easier just to believe what the MSM is presenting as whats happening.
were are the facts? how exactly did these so call health workers contract Ebola if indeed they even it in the first place?

my suspicion is that at lest one of the US nurses didnt even have Ebola after showing non Ebola symptoms before being admitted to hospital.

now have they or will they deliberately release Ebola? who knows, but one thing is for sure they are deliberately misleading whats be reported.
eg that stuff article I linked that did not fit the MSM narrative hence being edited so that is does.
if that Spanish nurse has indeed been tested negative for Ebola then that is what should be fucking reported!

**jonbuoy** · 21st October 2014, 06:39

Originally Posted by yokel

That would be my opinion by your very general definition of wild conspiracy theories.
whats actually happing can be hard to tell and its a hell of a lot easier just to believe what the MSM is presenting as whats happening.
were are the facts? how exactly did these so call health workers contract Ebola if indeed they even it in the first place?

my suspicion is that at lest one of the US nurses didnt even have Ebola after showing non Ebola symptoms before being admitted to hospital.

now have they or will they deliberately release Ebola? who knows, but one thing is for sure they are deliberately misleading whats be reported.
eg that stuff article I linked that did not fit the MSM narrative hence being edited so that is does.
if that Spanish nurse has indeed been tested negative for Ebola then that is what should be fucking reported!

I think there might be some confusion with the Spanish nurse - when the say she tests "negative for Ebola" it means its no longer in her system. It doesnt mean she wasnt diagnosed with Ebola in the first place.