Falko wrote on 23.02.2023 at 16:08 clock: Just I read that the 42 year old doctor, biologist and non-fiction author Clemens G. Arvey took his life the day before yesterday. Very frightening if one considers that he became a father only a few years ago and also his wealth could not stop him. The media have probably driven him to death, because they have showered him with a lot of hate and agitation in Corona times, because he has written vaccine-critical books. But that was his field of work and a lot of it came true in retrospect. Rest in peace for a while.
Excuse me, of course every suicide is a tragic fate, but to judge this suicide as a result of agitation and defamation by the media and by vaccination supporters is absurd.
Arvey was an impostor who liked to give himself the scientific veneer of "biologist," which was not accurate. His statements on the COVID vaccines were consistently scientifically unfounded nonsense, a "scientific expert" in the field of immunology, virology or human biology he was not. And those who know his videos know that he was the one who ranted most aggressively.
In the meantime it is known anyway that his swearing was not at all the reason for his suicide, on his FB page he announced shortly before (even if indirectly) this act and hints that the reason is more likely to be found in his private environment. Can be found easily if you want.
Sorry, of course every suicide is a tragic fate, but to judge this suicide as a result of agitation and defamation by the media and by vaccination advocates is absurd.
Arvey was an impostor who liked to give himself the scientific veneer of "biologist," which was not accurate. His statements on the COVID vaccines were consistently scientifically unfounded nonsense, a "scientific expert" in the field of immunology, virology or human biology he was not. And those who know his videos know that he was the one who ranted most aggressively.
In the meantime it is known anyway that his swearing was not at all the reason for his suicide, on his FB page he announced shortly before (even if indirectly) this act and hints that the reason is more likely to be found in his private environment. Can be found easily if you want.
You just don't realize that you yourself are pouring a lot of oil on the fire. His environment, who had direct contact with him, said that he suffered a lot from the attacks. But yes, the exact circumstances are not known and probably the trigger was determined by several factors. However, there is no question that the coverage of him certainly did not do him any good. You're welcome to disagree with him, but why do you have to go after the person every time instead of the arguments?
As soon as you disagree with an opinion, you move away from the matter at hand and go straight for the person. He's come to his opinion and you've just come to yours. That's why you don't have to make him look completely ridiculous, deny him any competence, etc.
People have simply forgotten to discuss normally and not immediately feel attacked in their own ego, just because someone does not share their own opinion. My God, people are more than just an opinion they have on a particular subject. There's no need to constantly disparage people with different opinions and call them "wafflers" or the like. You also don't have to declare these people the enemy just because they haven't come to the same conclusions as you have. Just come down three levels again.
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
verified
Former Member
Chatterbox
24th Feb. 2023, at 09:20 am CET#7889
1 Like
Liked this post: Anonym
Falcon wrote on 02/24/2023 at 03:55 PM:
You just do not realize that you yourself again pour quite a lot of oil on the fire. His environment, who had direct contact with him, said that he suffered a lot from the attacks. But yes, the exact circumstances are not known and probably the trigger was determined by several factors. However, there is no question that the coverage of him certainly did not do him any good. You're welcome to disagree with him, but why do you have to go after the person every time instead of the arguments?
As soon as you disagree with an opinion, you move away from the matter at hand and go straight for the person. He's come to his opinion and you've just come to yours. That's why you don't have to make him look completely ridiculous, deny him any competence, etc.
People have simply forgotten to discuss normally and not immediately feel attacked in their own ego, just because someone does not share their own opinion. My God, people are more than just an opinion they have on a particular subject. There's no need to constantly disparage people with different opinions and call them "wafflers" or the like. You also don't have to declare these people the enemy just because they haven't come to the same conclusions as you have. Just come down three levels again.
Of course, everybody can and should form his own opinion, no matter if it is about vaccination or the question if Santa Claus exists. I am absolutely not interested in whether person A or B wants to be vaccinated, chooses chlorine bleach as the method of choice for Corona, or perhaps directly denies the existence of viruses.
However, it is a difference whether someone has an opinion - how and on the basis of which previous education he has formed it, that is left aside - or whether someone stands up and makes opinions in an area of which he unfortunately has at most lay knowledge. To then also subliminally present oneself as an "expert", although one has no scientific training (or degree) is - with respect - at least dishonest.
None of his agitation topics and theses he could prove in any form evidence-based, his findings he has spread in a cheap Austrian Schwurblerblatt, which offers, among other things, such greats as Daniele Ganser a platform.
With all love, if I represent the view that scientificity and opinion making are two pairs of shoes, and, that one has to prove his allegedly scientific theses, then that is not pouring oil on the fire; and last but not least: I did not in any way "go after the person or the person", I merely mentioned the facts about his scientific background - which can be found generally and without much effort on the Internet - and denied him the competence to comment on the subject of immunoligy and vaccinations. Unfortunately, these are things that an impostor has to be told. His knowledge and skills in the field of "the healing power of the forest" and "forest bathing" I would of course never question.
Antiheld1335 wrote on 24.02.2023 at 09:20:
Of course, everyone can and should form his own opinion, whether on the subject of vaccination, or on the question of whether Santa Claus exists. I am absolutely not interested in whether person A or B wants to be vaccinated, chooses chlorine bleach as a means of choice for Corona, or perhaps directly denies the existence of viruses.
However, it is a difference whether someone has an opinion - how and on the basis of which previous education he has formed it, that is left aside - or whether someone stands up and makes opinions in an area of which he unfortunately has at most lay knowledge. To then also subliminally present oneself as an "expert", although one has no scientific training (or degree) is - with respect - at least dishonest.
None of his agitation topics and theses he could prove in any form evidence-based, his findings he has spread in a cheap Austrian Schwurblerblatt, which offers, among other things, such greats as Daniele Ganser a platform.
With all love, if I represent the view that scientificity and opinion making are two pairs of shoes, and, that one has to prove his allegedly scientific theses, then that is not pouring oil on the fire; and last but not least: I did not in any way "go after the person or the person", I merely mentioned the facts about his scientific background - which can be found generally and without much effort on the Internet - and denied him the competence to comment on the subject of immunoligy and vaccinations. Unfortunately, these are things that an impostor has to be told. His knowledge and skills in the field of "the healing power of the forest" and "forest bathing" I would of course never question.
Thanks for the info It's always nice to hear both sides.
The corona thread was closed for a reason, so no idea why they are trying to continue it in this thread (although I can actually guess).
Falko wrote on 23.02.2023 at 16:08 clock: Just I read that the 42 year old doctor, biologist and non-fiction author Clemens G. Arvey took his life the day before yesterday. Very frightening if one considers that he became a father only a few years ago and also his wealth could not stop him. The media have probably driven him to death, because they have showered him with a lot of hate and agitation in Corona times, because he has written vaccine-critical books. But that was his field of work and a lot of it came true in retrospect. While in peace.
Is there evidence of suicide? xD Maybe also died so that the pharma can continue their brainwashing and manipulation. Who knows ^^
Yes, both very tragic cases. Incitement and defamation should be completely stopped, no matter from which side. But there is a small difference in that the vaccinator was attacked by a few nutcases (which is no less tragic) and Arvey by the entire media landscape. In addition, at the University of Vienna, obstacles were put in his way and he was denied the doctorate there, on Wikipedia he was repeatedly misrepresented and when he tried to put it right with his account, it was blocked.
Can we agree that agitation is never ok and should never happen, especially from the state and the media?
yes, agitation and discrimination are very bad, you are so right.
Every person is equal and no one has the right to attack and insult and threaten anyone
I won 100€ from No Deposit Spins, should deposit 10€ afterwards to be able to cash out, then I cashed out 100€ and made another 100€ with the remaining 10€ afterwards.
Can I withdraw the 200€ now at once or should I make 100/100 so that there are no problems, since the maximum withdrawal from the No Deposit is 100€.
DiamondDonut wrote on 02/25/2023 at 14:41: I won 100€ from No Deposit Spins, should deposit 10€ afterwards to cash out, after that I cashed out 100€ and made another 100€ with the remaining 10€ afterwards.
Can I withdraw the 200€ now at once or should I make 100/100 so that there are no problems, since the maximum withdrawal from No Deposit is 100€.
Chatterbox
Liked this post:
Arschi, 
palme7777
Excuse me, of course every suicide is a tragic fate, but to judge this suicide as a result of agitation and defamation by the media and by vaccination supporters is absurd.
Arvey was an impostor who liked to give himself the scientific veneer of "biologist," which was not accurate. His statements on the COVID vaccines were consistently scientifically unfounded nonsense, a "scientific expert" in the field of immunology, virology or human biology he was not. And those who know his videos know that he was the one who ranted most aggressively.
In the meantime it is known anyway that his swearing was not at all the reason for his suicide, on his FB page he announced shortly before (even if indirectly) this act and hints that the reason is more likely to be found in his private environment. Can be found easily if you want.
https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Clemens_G._Arvay
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Liked this post: Anonym,
Saphira
You just don't realize that you yourself are pouring a lot of oil on the fire. His environment, who had direct contact with him, said that he suffered a lot from the attacks. But yes, the exact circumstances are not known and probably the trigger was determined by several factors. However, there is no question that the coverage of him certainly did not do him any good. You're welcome to disagree with him, but why do you have to go after the person every time instead of the arguments?
As soon as you disagree with an opinion, you move away from the matter at hand and go straight for the person. He's come to his opinion and you've just come to yours. That's why you don't have to make him look completely ridiculous, deny him any competence, etc.
People have simply forgotten to discuss normally and not immediately feel attacked in their own ego, just because someone does not share their own opinion. My God, people are more than just an opinion they have on a particular subject. There's no need to constantly disparage people with different opinions and call them "wafflers" or the like. You also don't have to declare these people the enemy just because they haven't come to the same conclusions as you have. Just come down three levels again.
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Liked this post: Anonym
Of course, everybody can and should form his own opinion, no matter if it is about vaccination or the question if Santa Claus exists. I am absolutely not interested in whether person A or B wants to be vaccinated, chooses chlorine bleach as the method of choice for Corona, or perhaps directly denies the existence of viruses.
However, it is a difference whether someone has an opinion - how and on the basis of which previous education he has formed it, that is left aside - or whether someone stands up and makes opinions in an area of which he unfortunately has at most lay knowledge. To then also subliminally present oneself as an "expert", although one has no scientific training (or degree) is - with respect - at least dishonest.
None of his agitation topics and theses he could prove in any form evidence-based, his findings he has spread in a cheap Austrian Schwurblerblatt, which offers, among other things, such greats as Daniele Ganser a platform.
With all love, if I represent the view that scientificity and opinion making are two pairs of shoes, and, that one has to prove his allegedly scientific theses, then that is not pouring oil on the fire; and last but not least: I did not in any way "go after the person or the person", I merely mentioned the facts about his scientific background - which can be found generally and without much effort on the Internet - and denied him the competence to comment on the subject of immunoligy and vaccinations. Unfortunately, these are things that an impostor has to be told. His knowledge and skills in the field of "the healing power of the forest" and "forest bathing" I would of course never question.
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Liked this post:
Butterbrezel
Thanks for the info It's always nice to hear both sides.
The corona thread was closed for a reason, so no idea why they are trying to continue it in this thread (although I can actually guess).
Have a great weekend.
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Nobody has liked this post so far
Is there evidence of suicide? xD Maybe also died so that the pharma can continue their brainwashing and manipulation. Who knows ^^
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Nobody has liked this post so far
yes, agitation and discrimination are very bad, you are so right.
Every person is equal and no one has the right to attack and insult and threaten anyone
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Liked this post:
Hanshanshans
Nesting Phrase Day 2023
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Nobody has liked this post so far
Can I withdraw the 200€ now at once or should I make 100/100 so that there are no problems, since the maximum withdrawal from the No Deposit is 100€.
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Liked this post:
Max_Bet
This post has been translated automatically
Chatterbox
Nobody has liked this post so far
Name of the casino would not be bad^^
This post has been translated automatically