I really look forward to him and Bo. Both are stocky boys . Pearson might still be a line mate which I also see as a good fit.
- VANTEL

Sounds like an amazing 3rd line and the role I see Podz in(and perhaps Horvat if another skilled C is drafted or obtained).

He did not address the part I presented to him.

The expert didnt write it. It was a MSN report. Funny how people confuse something that obvious.

I went and researched who he was and his credentials though. Something that Codes didnt do before he mocked him being an expert.

I also followed up and decided to see what WHO had to say. They say they see no evidence of this. So it sounds doubtful.

I posted this for discussion but Codes once again started with the "believe what you want narrative" and projections without actually knowing my opinion. He did this last time I posted a BCTV report. Even though I was informing someone that BC expert was not backtracking. I stayed polite but not a second time... (frank) that. He's been doing this to people lately.
- boonerbuck

I didn't see the point since they showed no evidence nor linked any studies.

Also, since the expert said it wasn't scientifically proven but there was a huge likely hood it all seemed like theory to me.

Feel free to research more of his work and post some results though. I'd find reading that more compelling if there was evidence attached. To me at least at this point it's a non-story and should be treated as such.

Will this be in your book?
- Marwood

I've written, but only considered what a couple friends who have published books suggested. So "my book" isnt even something I've seriously considered.

I've written, but only considered what a couple friends who have published books suggested. So "my book" isnt even something I've seriously considered.



- boonerbuck

I already have the title for mine.

I didn't see the point since they showed no evidence nor linked any studies.

Also, since the expert said it wasn't scientifically proven but there was a huge likely hood it all seemed like theory to me.

Feel free to research more of his work and post some results though. I'd find reading that more compelling if there was evidence attached. To me at least at this point it's a non-story and should be treated as such.
- golfingsince

The very next paragraph I say this: "I also followed up and decided to see what WHO had to say. They say they see no evidence of this. So it sounds doubtful."

I was looking for discussion. Funny how I am the only one to research who the expert was(and his credentials) and what the WHO had to say about it, then discredit the opinion out of Italy myself. I guess that is pure ignorance on my behalf. Of course the narrative monkeys jump into action without actually knowing if I had an opinion on it or not. I only challenged Codes dismissal of him being an expert. Its just a fact and he sprung into projections from there.

The very next paragraph I say this: "I also followed up and decided to see what WHO had to say. They say they see no evidence of this. So it sounds doubtful."

I was looking for discussion. Funny how I am the only one to research who the expert was(and his credentials) and what the WHO had to say about it, then discredit the opinion out of Italy myself. I guess that is pure ignorance on my behalf. Of course the narrative monkeys jump into action without actually knowing if I had an opinion on it or not. I only challenged Codes dismissal of him being an expert. Its just a fact and he sprung into projections from there.

- boonerbuck

You got plenty of discussion. I guess most of us didn't have to see his credentials or the WHO's opinion to discredit the article for lacking any substance.

I guess you're either a hero or an idiot. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

You got plenty of discussion. I guess most of us didn't have to see his credentials or the WHO's opinion to discredit the article for lacking any substance.

I guess you're either a hero or an idiot. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
- golfingsince

posters must spend a minimum of 25 minutes researching other articles posted to fact check and check credentials of people involved or else.

posters must spend a minimum of 25 minutes researching other articles posted to fact check and check credentials of people involved or else.
- Codes1087

The story said nothing other than he was a professor that had a theory. It used what we call trigger words..........they're the rage!

The story said nothing other than he was a professor that had a theory. It used what we call trigger words..........they're the rage!
- golfingsince

thats pretty much what I got from it. Then I got called a plethora of different things for saying exactly what you said

I wonder what Benning thinks of Leivo?

I know it is a who cares topic, but a third liner that can score 15 g 45 pts?
- VANTEL

Except his career high is 24 points in a season

He did not address the part I presented to him.

The expert didnt write it. It was a MSN report. Funny how people confuse something that obvious.

I went and researched who he was and his credentials though. Something that Codes didnt do before he mocked him being an expert.

I also followed up and decided to see what WHO had to say. They say they see no evidence of this. So it sounds doubtful.

I posted this for discussion but Codes once again started with the "believe what you want narrative" and projections without actually knowing my opinion. He did this last time I posted a BCTV report. Even though I was informing someone that BC expert was not backtracking. I stayed polite but not a second time... (frank) that. He's been doing this to people lately.
- boonerbuck

Even though what you posted was credible...it goes against certain narratives here. I like both you and Codes a lot great posters on here. But the bottom line is no one agrees on everything and there are different view angles to every topic especially political ones or such surrounding the virus. Is what it is.

Even though what you posted was credible...it goes against certain narratives here. I like both you and Codes a lot great posters on here. But the bottom line is no one agrees on everything and there are different view angles to every topic especially political ones or such surrounding the virus. Is what it is.
- LordHumungous

You might want to skip ahead.

He realizes there's absolutely no evidence to support a month plus old article with no data.

Even though what you posted was credible...it goes against certain narratives here. I like both you and Codes a lot great posters on here. But the bottom line is no one agrees on everything and there are different view angles to every topic especially political ones or such surrounding the virus. Is what it is.
- LordHumungous

Funny thing is I didnt post an opinion. Codes repeated a number of times believe what you want... but there was no disagreement on my behalf. Now the narratives are stacked one on top of the other about what I think.

You might want to skip ahead.

He realizes there's absolutely no evidence to support a month plus old article with no data.
- golfingsince

I was the only one that looked into it so I was the one who informed you guys whether there was anything to it... That was the first time I posted what I thought as well. I'm sorry to contradict the opinion you guys projected on me. You'll have to try harder next time.

Funny thing is I didnt post an opinion. Codes repeated a number of times believe what you want... but there was no disagreement on my behalf. Now the narratives are stacked one on top of the other about what I think.

- boonerbuck

The thing is that many don't care what you think. I believe that's what was said in the first response......you took it personally. You attacked someone and they tried to disengage multiple times. You persisted, yet you're the victim.


Again, you post a BS statement and link then attack someone for dismissing it. Then you dismiss it yourself and claim victory for doing research. Everyone else from the beginning is "where's the research?". How are you the hero?

You have some kind of complex where you imagine you're both smarter on the streets and in the books than anyone else here. It's pretty much impossible.

I was the only one that looked into it so I was the one who informed you guys whether there was anything to it... That was the first time I posted what I thought as well. I'm sorry to contradict the opinion you guys projected on me. You'll have to try harder next time.
- boonerbuck

No you idiot, you had to back and check. Holy (frank) are you daft.

No you idiot, you had to back and check. Holy (frank) are you daft.
- golfingsince

You guys never checked. You never do. You just spew. Priceless.

You guys never checked. You never do. You just spew. Priceless.
- boonerbuck

At least you checked to verify our opinions. Thankfully, we're not wrong now. Well, we still are but just on our detective work.

At least you checked to verify our opinions. Thankfully, we're not wrong now. Well, we still are but just on our detective work.
- golfingsince

Show me where I said his opinion was wrong about the claim? I posted the person's credentials. He definitely isnt a quak. I asked Code's opinion about something he said and he refused to address it. I then went and looked for myself after he started to project his usual condescending crap. I provided an opinion at that point. Whats so strange about checking instead of assuming? i think you are confused.

Try and frame it how ever you want. It's easy to see you guys hate not being able to control what people post. Please let us know our opinions so we dont have to go through this again.

Show me where I said his opinion was wrong about the claim? I posted the person's credentials. He definitely isnt a quak. I asked Code's opinion about something he said and he refused to address it. I then went and looked for myself after he started to project his usual condescending crap. I provided an opinion at that point. Whats so strange about checking instead of assuming? i think you are confused.

Try and frame it how ever you want. It's easy to see you guys hate not being able to control what people post. Please let us know our opinions so we dont have to go through this again.
- boonerbuck

Post whatever the (frank) you want.

Codes didn't want to get into it. You took offense to believe what you want being the female dog you are. He twice afterwards tried to back out of it but here we are 6-7 hours later still talking about it.

It's not about controlling you. It's about redirecting your bullpoop. You want to post theory as fact or opinion then when called out on it pretend you're the only one that really knows what's going on due to your research? Again, we all came to the same conclusion well before you did your research. What supports this?

Then you come back and say i've done my research and nothing supports this, i'm better than you because you didn't do your research. Cool, you wasted more of your time arriving at the same place. Congrats?

Show me where I said his opinion was wrong about the claim? I posted the person's credentials. He definitely isnt a quak. I asked Code's opinion about something he said and he refused to address it. I then went and looked for myself after he started to project his usual condescending crap. I provided an opinion at that point. Whats so strange about checking instead of assuming? i think you are confused.

Try and frame it how ever you want. It's easy to see you guys hate not being able to control what people post. Please let us know our opinions so we dont have to go through this again.
- boonerbuck

You discredited Codes opinion because the doctor was an expert and knew more than Codes. How the (frank) do you go on about years ago when you can't remember hours ago?


Codes never really wanted to get into it because that's his nature. He SPECIFICALLY did not want to hijack Carol's blog. I don't care as much because much like you i'm an bumhole. The difference between us is that I can recognize it.

Post whatever the (frank) you want.

Codes didn't want to get into it. You took offense to believe what you want being the female dog you are. He twice afterwards tried to back out of it but here we are 6-7 hours later still talking about it.

It's not about controlling you. It's about redirecting your bullpoop. You want to post theory as fact or opinion then when called out on it pretend you're the only one that really knows what's going on due to your research? Again, we all came to the same conclusion well before you did your research. What supports this?

Then you come back and say i've done my research and nothing supports this, i'm better than you because you didn't do your research. Cool, you wasted more of your time arriving at the same place. Congrats?
- golfingsince

Blah blah blah... seen the spin a hundred times today. It still is unconvincing as the first time. Get over people having discussions you have no control over.

Here you are still talking about something that had nothing to do with you 7 hours later. Not letting go of someone else's beef. Refreshing it in an old thread over and over. Now you guys bring the insanity from the politics thread into Carols new blog.... something you always accuse me of. Something Codes is saying doesnt belong there. can you guys get your lies on the same tune for once?

Keep spinning. You suck at it. Oblivious to how you contradict it all.

Blah blah blah... seen the spin a hundred times today. It still is unconvincing as the first time. Get over people having discussions you have no control over.

Here you are still talking about something that had nothing to do with you 7 hours later. Not letting go of someone else's beef. Refreshing it in an old thread over and over. Now you guys bring the insanity from the politics thread into Carols new blog.... something you always accuse me of. Something Codes is saying doesnt belong there. can you guys get your lies on the same tune for once?

Keep spinning. You suck at it. Oblivious to how you contradict it all.
- boonerbuck

Yeah, I hijacked Carol's thread not you.

It's an old thread, not nearly as important as a new one where active discussion is going on.

I'm done. You clearly know where the sub forums are so no need to bring it here.

Yeah, I hijacked Carol's thread not you.

It's an old thread, not nearly as important as a new one where active discussion is going on.

I'm done. You clearly know where the sub forums are so no need to bring it here.
- golfingsince

You guys brought it into the new thread actually.

Now if you could only practice what you preach, we can let this thread die.