Posts by neonmarlin39

Melissa Stewart6 said:For instance, Jensen has been quite vocal about the idea that humans are essentially natural beings who have simply overshot their mark. His argument is pretty straightforward: we don't actually have anything to gain from space exploration or setting up colonies on Mars. Since we were built for life here on Earth, our entire destiny is tied to this planet.

Look, I get that Earth is eventually gonna face some massive issues, even if it's way down the road. But if we actually want to make it past that point, we're gonna have to leave. Honestly, I think it's better if we start spreading out across different planets and space stations sooner rather than later. Keeping all our eggs in one basket by staying stuck on a single planet just doesn't feel like the safest bet. 😁

hiddenpuma75 said:See? But in order to convince you, I had to spend an entire hour typing away, essentially suffocating myself, you, and everyone else here. False accusations are dangerous business because they are so easy to hurl and incredibly difficult to take back.

You didn't really answer my questions, though.
How many more deaths would be acceptable to save the economy?

It's hard to put a price tag on human lives.
So, let me throw a counter-question your way, and then we can both just sit in silence.
The reality is that cars, alcohol, and tobacco cause far more deaths than a virus like COVID-19. Cars, booze, and cigarettes kill people steadily over years, and they'll keep doing it for years to come.

A pandemic might pop up once every century—or let's say once every decade—and last for about six months.

So, casualtiger2, wouldn't we actually save a massive amount of lives if we, say, banned night driving, or restricted or even outlawed the sale of alcohol and tobacco? 🤔

Yet, nobody ever thinks to suggest that, does anyone? 😉

If it makes you feel better, consider yourself the winner of this argument (and all future ones), and please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

There are no winners here. This was just a debate that inevitably transformed both of us—and maybe even the onlookers—through the sheer alchemy of words. 👍

See, there's a catch. You gotta buy cars, alcohol, and smokes—they cost money, they're taxed, and people choose to indulge in them. But this virus? It's handed out for free, whether you want it or not.😁

Chris Williams said:Look...

Almost every country, except for Sweden and Belarus, is following the suggestions of the WHO, which, as you pointed out yourself, made a massive error in its initial assessment regarding the virus.

Personally, I find the assessments of respected experts who disagree with the mainstream consensus against drastic isolation measures to be much more convincing.

So, don't think I'm being narrow-minded or pretending to have figured out the virus. I haven't; rather, as someone quite meticulous, I am carefully following all the recommendations to protect myself and my loved ones.

But I don't really trust that they know what they are doing. To me, this quote from the same doctor feels closer to the truth, much like the one in my previous post.

We are afraid that 1 million infections with the new virus will lead to 30 deaths per day over the next 100 days. But we do not realize that 20, 30, 40 or 100 patients positive for normal coronaviruses are already dying every day.

The government’s anti-COVID-19 measures are grotesque, absurd and very dangerous […] The life expectancy of millions is being shortened. The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless people. The consequences on medical care are profound. Already services to patients in need are reduced, operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole society.

All these measures are leading to self-destruction and collective suicide based on nothing but a spook.

If we had just handled this smartly and stepped up early on, we could have prevented all this mess. It’s like that old saying, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," right? Well, they failed at preventing it, so now they're stuck playing catch-up. Because of that, this whole split between "mainstream" and "alternative" views wouldn't even be such a big deal if we hadn't ended up here. At the end of the day, it still feels like political games. Everyone's picked a side, everyone's got their own agenda and their own bubble, and both sides are dealing with the fallout of their own actions. Personally, I'm not out here picking sides or preaching one way or the other. I'm just trying to look at the situation for what it really is. If you're too caught up in the political theater, you'll never see things clearly enough to actually solve a problem—which is pretty much exactly what we've seen play out during this whole ordeal.

Chris Williams said:If it's true that ten or twenty times more people are actually infected than what is being reported, I suppose that implies:

1. the mortality rate is significantly lower in percentage terms because the pool of infected people is so much larger.

2. the virus is already circulating freely among people with mild or no symptoms, spreading through grocery stores and gas stations—which suggests these measures might be largely futile.

3. the vast majority of deaths—over 90 percent—involved individuals who already had underlying conditions; they weren't killed by this specific virus. Much like any seasonal virus, including all the coronaviruses that have been roaming the planet since the seventies, it primarily claims those who are already vulnerable.

4. regarding the idea that hospitals won't be able to handle everyone needing a ventilator... we are all being judged by the horror of the triage situations seen in Italy, where there weren't enough ventilators for everyone. We're told this happened because the response was too slow.

Perhaps the reason for this doomsday scenario is something else entirely.

For instance, consider this: below is a quote from a letter sent to Merkel in early April by Sucharit Bhakdi, the head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene at the University of Mainz.

The terrifying scenario in Italy is being used as a benchmark. However, the actual consequences of the virus in that country remain completely unclear for several reasons. There are also specific local factors that make that region particularly vulnerable.

Among these is the severe air pollution in northern Italy. According to a 2006 WHO estimate, air pollution causes an "excess" of 8,000 deaths annually across Italy's 13 largest cities. That hasn't changed much since then. It is well-documented that poor air quality significantly increases the risk of respiratory issues caused by viruses in both young and old populations.

Furthermore, roughly 27.4% of the vulnerable population in Italy lives in multi-generational households, and in Spain, that figure hits 33.5%. For comparison, in Germany, it's only 7%.

Additionally, according to Reinhard Busse, head of health management at the Technical University of Berlin, Germany's intensive care units are equipped 2.5 times better than those in Italy.

I wonder: what efforts are being made to bridge these fundamental differences for the public, and how are we supposed to understand that the scenarios playing out in Italy or Spain aren't actually realistic here?

It seems unlikely they aren't realistic here either, I guess...

Look, let's just wait a few years and then we'll have a much clearer picture of the stats. You're pulling numbers based on a pretty tiny window of time, which is wrong from the jump. The reality is, looser restrictions lead to more infections and higher mortality—we've already seen that happen.

Chris Williams said:If it's true that ten or twenty times more people are actually infected than what is being reported, I suppose that implies:

1. the mortality rate is significantly lower in percentage terms because the pool of infected people is so much larger.

2. the virus is already circulating freely among people with mild or no symptoms, spreading through grocery stores and gas stations—which suggests these measures might be largely futile.

3. the vast majority of deaths—over 90 percent—involved individuals who already had underlying conditions; they weren't killed by this specific virus. Much like any seasonal virus, including all the coronaviruses that have been roaming the planet since the seventies, it primarily claims those who are already vulnerable.

4. regarding the idea that hospitals won't be able to handle everyone needing a ventilator... we are all being judged by the horror of the triage situations seen in Italy, where there weren't enough ventilators for everyone. We're told this happened because the response was too slow.

Perhaps the reason for this doomsday scenario is something else entirely.

For instance, consider this: below is a quote from a letter sent to Merkel in early April by Sucharit Bhakdi, the head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene at the University of Mainz.

The terrifying scenario in Italy is being used as a benchmark. However, the actual consequences of the virus in that country remain completely unclear for several reasons. There are also specific local factors that make that region particularly vulnerable.

Among these is the severe air pollution in northern Italy. According to a 2006 WHO estimate, air pollution causes an "excess" of 8,000 deaths annually across Italy's 13 largest cities. That hasn't changed much since then. It is well-documented that poor air quality significantly increases the risk of respiratory issues caused by viruses in both young and old populations.

Furthermore, roughly 27.4% of the vulnerable population in Italy lives in multi-generational households, and in Spain, that figure hits 33.5%. For comparison, in Germany, it's only 7%.

Additionally, according to Reinhard Busse, head of health management at the Technical University of Berlin, Germany's intensive care units are equipped 2.5 times better than those in Italy.

I wonder: what efforts are being made to bridge these fundamental differences for the public, and how are we supposed to understand that the scenarios playing out in Italy or Spain aren't actually realistic here?

It seems unlikely they aren't realistic here either, I guess...

That mostly just shows the measures weren't handled well to begin with. In a perfect world, you'd test everyone and isolate every single infected person so they couldn't spread it, keeping healthy people safe without forcing them into quarantine or tanking the economy. Or even better, those strict measures should have been hit hard right at the start before the virus went global. That would've worked best and prevented this whole mess. But the timing was totally botched because of politics and weak institutions that should've jumped on it immediately. Instead, they reacted way too late, covering things up and downplaying the situation while the virus was still contained in a relatively small area—like if they had just locked down that specific area in China to stop it from spreading further.

The current lockdowns are basically just moving deck chairs on the Titanic—political games and trying to keep things calm just so an unprepared healthcare system doesn't collapse. Governments and institutions don't want to admit they failed to act fast and prepared from day one, making them practically responsible for this global disaster. Not only won't they admit it, but they're hypocritically patting themselves on the back like they nailed it. Like I said, just looking at our own situation: by the time things were getting ugly in Italy, the borders were wide open, and people were traveling back and forth for tourism like nothing was happening. Meanwhile, the guys in charge here are bragging about how great their response was. They didn't. It's an undeniable fact—they messed up right at the start, and now we're all going to pay the price...

Chris Williams said:If the number of cases were actually 10 or 20 times larger than what is being reported—meaning we're looking at 16,000 or 32,000 people—then the mortality rate (which stands at 23 people today) would be, I guess, negligibly small.

But it's still worse than the flu. That’s the whole point here—our healthcare system just can't handle that many people getting sick all at once, especially since we don't have enough treatments or vaccines ready to go if everyone catches it. These measures are just a way to slow things down and take the edge off until science and the medical field can catch up. Just try doing the math on what happens if, say, 80% of the global population gets hit... out of 8 billion people. Think about how many hospital beds or doctors actually exist.

Chris Williams said:Based on what the WHO statistics have been showing lately regarding seasonal flu deaths, I guess it might be worth considering which specific parameters we should actually be using to measure this. 650.000 People across the globe, yet so far we only have an approximation. 110.000 I suppose one could wonder about the actual number of COVID deaths, though I suspect the truth remains somewhat elusive.

I suppose seasonal flu deaths tend to climb across America every year. It seems like there might be some ocular infection or irritation occurring. I suppose we're looking at a figure around 60,000 people.It seems like they might just end up killing them off, I guess. 500Maybe it's just the inherent frailty of the elderly, I suppose.

As of today, I suppose the number of people suffering from COVID here in America has reached... 1400I suppose some people just died, if that's even the case. 21Perhaps it’s just a matter of Muhammad and those who are elderly or infirm.

je*eš WHO, they care way more about politics than actual public health or even just telling the truth. The WHO director is basically on the Chinese government's payroll, and he’s already been pushing info that covers things up—just like the Chinese Communist Party does with their data (including death tolls and all that)

Chris Williams said:Based on what the WHO statistics have been showing lately regarding seasonal flu deaths, I guess it might be worth considering which specific parameters we should actually be using to measure this. 650.000 People across the globe, yet so far we only have an approximation. 110.000 I suppose one could wonder about the actual number of COVID deaths, though I suspect the truth remains somewhat elusive.

I suppose seasonal flu deaths tend to climb across America every year. It seems like there might be some ocular infection or irritation occurring. I suppose we're looking at a figure around 60,000 people.It seems like they might just end up killing them off, I guess. 500Maybe it's just the inherent frailty of the elderly, I suppose.

As of today, I suppose the number of people suffering from COVID here in America has reached... 1400I suppose some people just died, if that's even the case. 21Perhaps it’s just a matter of Muhammad and those who are elderly or infirm.

Look, those are just the official registered numbers. If you ask me, the actual number of people infected is probably 10 to 20 times higher. This virus only hit the US a few months ago. We won't really see the full picture until it's been circulating for a year, and we're barely at the start of that timeline. So, let's not rush to compare this to the flu just yet... Just wait until everyone stops following these crazy restrictions, and then in maybe 5 or 6 years when the virus has been tearing through the planet, go ahead and make your flu comparison. Then things might actually make sense. 😁

bluemason3 said:China is a closed dictatorship; there's no way it can serve as a model for Western systems.

He leaves comments under my posts whenever I start praising the scientific community, the healthcare system, or even the political establishment. 😁

Look, the problem is you seem to go out of your way to focus on idiots, losers, and con artists. It ends up looking like you're just spitting on everyone in sight. Honestly, even Himmler might have had better luck with your attitude. 🤣

🤣

"We appreciate the seriousness with which China is taking this outbreak, especially the commitment from top leadership, and the transparency they have demonstrated" - Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO)

So, who's actually losing it here? 😁

bluemason3 said:What does that even have to do with anything? Generally speaking, project funding and resources are handed out by committees made up of scientists, not politicians. Sure, they might have political connections, but the idea that everyone is in on it together and there's some massive, coordinated manipulation...

Out of all the complaints I’ve heard from my wife regarding science and education policy—and trust me, she has plenty—the most frequent ones center on how research grants are awarded.
+ There are a lot of moving parts here. Some projects are funded by universities, others by national science agencies, and some by third parties entirely. It isn't centralized enough to make total control that easy. Plus, money flows through various channels and comes from different sources that aren't necessarily government-run (like EU funds, which bring a healthy dose of outside oversight).

But hey, what do I know? I'm not in the scientific community, and there’s just too much government and too many systems on this planet for any one person to see the full picture.
On the other hand, most people making these kinds of claims have even less contact with the system than I do, so it's mostly just projection. It's similar to those conspiracy theories about "Big Pharma" controlling all of medicine, even though statistically, 80% of medical research doesn't actually come from the private sector. If you ask me, it's a bit too much conspiracism.

I don't see any conspiracy theories in what I actually wrote 🤔

Just one quick example to back it up. Look at how things went down when that virus first popped up in China. Are we talking about scientists and doctors being responsible, or was it politicians covering up the actual existence of the virus right out of the gate—you know, silencing the people who were trying to sound the alarm early on? And then, of course, the cover-up regarding the massive number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths just to make the stats look better. It should be pretty obvious how much politics made this whole mess worse, especially during those first few critical stages.

bluemason3 said:Not quite. It isn’t like the President or his cabinet are just reaching into the coffers and grabbing cash directly. Honestly, public funds tend to be much more transparent and scrutinized than private capital, which is almost always driven by individual interests and pure profit. At the end of the day, that money has to come from somewhere.

There are plenty of ways to pull strings behind the scenes through indirect channels. Plus, so many private companies are tangled up in politics, with executives holding memberships in all sorts of different political parties. And let’s be real, a huge chunk of politicians—basically all of them—are primarily motivated by their own pockets. They don't jump into politics to help society; they just use "the public good" as a cover while they focus on lining their own pockets and looking out for their inner circle. Just look at how things work here in the States; it's a perfect example of that exact cycle...

bluemason3 said:Those are predictable variables. If this virus stays in circulation for 100 years, nobody will even care about it by then.

The real issue is the indirect strain placed on the healthcare system.

Interestingly, I actually found the response pretty impressive. It was relatively organized, the scientific community mobilized collectively to tackle the problem (at least the relevant parts did), and we managed to find vaccines and other solutions in a fraction of the time it took just a decade ago.

I'm not sure what "answer to everything" is supposed to mean. Science is the most epistemologically pure system we have; it consistently provides more objective knowledge and practical solutions than anything else in human history.
That doesn't make it a magic wand. We shouldn't be disappointed just because today's level of science isn't what it will be in 500 years, or because we probably won't have teleporters anytime soon.

Politics gets way too involved in science, pushing its own agendas until actual facts take a backseat. Plus, let's be real, science is way too dependent on political whims when it comes to funding.

nimbleranger5 said:For anyone looking to get the real story behind this orchestrated circus happening globally right now—including here in the States—here is some info. You won't hear a word about this from the mainstream media or our politicians, and honestly, I have to wonder why they're keeping it quiet.

The woman laid it all out. 👍

Probably because it’s way beyond (or maybe just above) the level of everyday stupidity, and most of those simple-minded, tacky politicians can't wrap their heads around it. 😁
Yeah, she explained it with a massive pile of nonsense and anti-vax conspiracy theories that even someone like Pernar could spout without needing a PhD. It's all over those New Age sites and conspiracy blogs (which, let's be real, are just making bank off this stuff). 🙄 This is even worse than that money-grabbing Lazarev. 😁
There are PDF alternatives for obvious stuff like this, btw...

"Because in that vaccination, just like in many others, there will be ALUMINUM, which acts as a cellular receiver and amplifier for high-frequency electromagnetic waves. That radiation destroys the PINEAL GLAND IN CHILDREN, ruins the immune system in adults, and blocks oxygen utilization at the cellular level. They need to install 5G and 6G (maybe even higher!) cells."

🤣

mistybison said:Maybe we should all just add a laurel wreath to our avatars, just to be safe, if only to protect ourselves from these forum vampires. 🤔

If the old legends are right, the only way to deal with vampires is a wooden stake through the heart or just taking their head off—probably easiest to do while they're sleeping. Garlic isn't even the real deal; it's more like a mild deterrent than actual protection...

silentcobra80 said:Look, man, what "humorous observations"? I don't follow you. Regardless, it's clear people didn't take it well, yet you keep forcing the issue. You stir up the whole forum, get everyone riled up against you, and then act like everyone else is the problem. Just drop it and let's move on.

Alright, we’re on the same page now. I could tell right away you weren't following me.

silentcobra80 said:Look, man, what "humorous observations"? I don't follow you. Regardless, it's clear people didn't take it well, yet you keep forcing the issue. You stir up the whole forum, get everyone riled up against you, and then act like everyone else is the problem. Just drop it and let's move on.

Look, I'm just responding to your post where you were actually talking to someone else (me), so are you just missing that part? Or are we living in some weird alternate universe where I was the one who started attacking you first? Clearly, you're not seeing it because you're still going on about how people "aren't buying" things and how I'm "forcing" the topic, when really you're the one derailing the thread with stuff that has nothing to do with the original point. If you've got beef with me personally, just shoot me a DM. No need to hijack the whole thread and lecture everyone else about staying on topic while you're doing the exact opposite...

Joseph Bailey41 said:Feel free to drop any links containing analyses over in the History section, but if you want to post links regarding my supposed insults, take those to the Off-Topic board. Now, beat it.

Coming from some lady who’s already dropped like 50 posts about me and started riding my case 😁

Joseph Bailey41 said:Alright, let's cut the twisting of words. You didn't just "mention communism"—you suddenly decided to quote some quasi-historian out of nowhere who counts everyone who died during the Stalinist era as a victim, whether it was from a heart attack, a clumsy accident, the flu, or just some bad whiskey. Basically, they count everyone. If you really want to debate this, go start a thread over in the History subforum (or find one that's already running) and see how people react there. Just stop trolling the Spirituality section by copy-pasting random scraps from Wikipedia. As for the "bad humor" thing... look, we all slip up sometimes. Maybe you didn't mean to indirectly insult Peanut... but if you did, you fix it with a simple apology instead of digging your heels in and insisting you're right.

If this subforum were actually moderated, I’m certain these kinds of "misunderstandings" wouldn't happen (or at least your posts would be handled appropriately). But it isn't. So, when someone starts breaking the rules, the only corrective measure left is for the community to gang up on them. Whether you like it or not.

Nah, I didn't. I literally just dropped a link with all the deep dives from various historians and academics—total objectivity there—so if you’d actually looked, you would’ve seen it. You want me to post the link again so we can figure out who's actually twisting things? Hypocrite. Also, I’m still waiting on an answer for how many posts you've actually made about me in this thread.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Alright, let's cut the twisting of words. You didn't just "mention communism"—you suddenly decided to quote some quasi-historian out of nowhere who counts everyone who died during the Stalinist era as a victim, whether it was from a heart attack, a clumsy accident, the flu, or just some bad whiskey. Basically, they count everyone. If you really want to debate this, go start a thread over in the History subforum (or find one that's already running) and see how people react there. Just stop trolling the Spirituality section by copy-pasting random scraps from Wikipedia. As for the "bad humor" thing... look, we all slip up sometimes. Maybe you didn't mean to indirectly insult Peanut... but if you did, you fix it with a simple apology instead of digging your heels in and insisting you're right.

If this subforum were actually moderated, I’m certain these kinds of "misunderstandings" wouldn't happen (or at least your posts would be handled appropriately). But it isn't. So, when someone starts breaking the rules, the only corrective measure left is for the community to gang up on them. Whether you like it or not.

Honestly, if this place actually had decent moderation, you would’ve been banned ages ago. 😁 Either someone needs to actually drop some direct links to all those insults and those arguments you had over in the appeals and comments section so the mods can finally take notice... Seriously, man, quit playing games and making stuff up.

silentcobra80 said:Well, I popped in here just to read this thread. The title caught my eye, and I was genuinely curious about what drives the OP to feel this way. But the author is staying silent while things descend into absolute chaos here. So, if you'll permit me, I’ll offer my take on this whole brawl as someone completely neutral who doesn't actually know any of you—well, except for Joseph Bailey41, whom I've had some lovely chats with during those rare moments I post here or over on Alternative.

neonmarlin39, I think your take on the universe missed the mark. I'm alone in this, but I believe others understood exactly what Peanut meant. I suspect you understood it too, but your ego is getting in the way... so you keep pushing, turning everyone against you until, without even intending to be insulting, you end up sounding like an old busybody. I don't mean to offend you; honestly, I used to be exactly like that, especially in sports debates or on other forums. I used to pull that "I've settled all you guys" routine, too. But eventually, I mellowed out. Now I avoid those fights, and more importantly, I can admit when I've messed up or misread a situation, which happens. Maybe you're just young, or maybe you're just high-strung like I was—unable to let things go and digging your heels in even when you're wrong. It's all ego. Don't sweat it, though; it's easy to move past if you want to. You aren't stupid or anything; you're just a bit exhausting, much like I once was.

Since you all brought up Communist atrocities, I should comment on that too. Of course, we should be grateful they liberated us from Fascist terror, but that absolutely does not mean their own crimes should be ignored or swept under the rug. As someone with history in my blood—someone who has worked with top-tier historians, treats history as a hobby, and spent a chapter of my life researching both general history and the specific history of my hometown—I can tell you they committed horrific crimes, including looting the people and plenty of other evils. One power was simply swapped for another. They created a system where, over time, people might have lived more securely than they do today, but that's true of any regime. Still, the crimes were real and shouldn't be dismissed just because they ended the terror. Thinking otherwise is fundamentally flawed.

As for the actual topic, you've all said it. The OP needs to realize there is so much beauty in life; there's really no point in ending it all when death is coming for us regardless.

So, that's basically the least said about the subject, unfortunately. It's proof of how quickly a thread goes off the rails when people overdo it.

I don't get why everyone gets so sensitive when someone makes a joke about space—it’s basically just cosmic spirituality at this point. Look, on a forum like this, what actually matters is the argument. I have zero patience for rudeness, trolling, or people just talking nonsense to hear themselves speak. And honestly? I'm not being "cranky" or acting like a kid—believe me, I'm definitely not 15—it’s just a calculated reaction. You might not totally get where I'm coming from, but I know what I'm doing. I decided to hang out here and post for a bit on my own terms. If I snap at a rude troll, it’s because they won't back off or they're just being straight-up obnoxious. Just look at that post by Joseph Bailey41 right under my previous one. I'm always down for a real, constructive conversation, but if you take a quick look around this board, you'll see those are getting harder and harder to find. It feels like decent discourse is becoming part of the Alternative or even religious territory lately. I mean, surely we can agree that attacking other users, insulting them, or trolling isn't exactly "constructive"? So it's pretty weird that after dealing with endless troll posts, insults, and people ganging up on me, you're trying to paint me as some sensitive old lady. Whatever. Think what you want, but to me, that kind of behavior is just pathetic. I'm genuinely curious, though... how many more posts about me am I gonna have to deal with? 😁

silentcobra80 said:Well, I popped in here just to read this thread. The title caught my eye, and I was genuinely curious about what drives the OP to feel this way. But the author is staying silent while things descend into absolute chaos here. So, if you'll permit me, I’ll offer my take on this whole brawl as someone completely neutral who doesn't actually know any of you—well, except for Joseph Bailey41, whom I've had some lovely chats with during those rare moments I post here or over on Alternative.

neonmarlin39, I think your take on the universe missed the mark. I'm alone in this, but I believe others understood exactly what Peanut meant. I suspect you understood it too, but your ego is getting in the way... so you keep pushing, turning everyone against you until, without even intending to be insulting, you end up sounding like an old busybody. I don't mean to offend you; honestly, I used to be exactly like that, especially in sports debates or on other forums. I used to pull that "I've settled all you guys" routine, too. But eventually, I mellowed out. Now I avoid those fights, and more importantly, I can admit when I've messed up or misread a situation, which happens. Maybe you're just young, or maybe you're just high-strung like I was—unable to let things go and digging your heels in even when you're wrong. It's all ego. Don't sweat it, though; it's easy to move past if you want to. You aren't stupid or anything; you're just a bit exhausting, much like I once was.

Since you all brought up Communist atrocities, I should comment on that too. Of course, we should be grateful they liberated us from Fascist terror, but that absolutely does not mean their own crimes should be ignored or swept under the rug. As someone with history in my blood—someone who has worked with top-tier historians, treats history as a hobby, and spent a chapter of my life researching both general history and the specific history of my hometown—I can tell you they committed horrific crimes, including looting the people and plenty of other evils. One power was simply swapped for another. They created a system where, over time, people might have lived more securely than they do today, but that's true of any regime. Still, the crimes were real and shouldn't be dismissed just because they ended the terror. Thinking otherwise is fundamentally flawed.

As for the actual topic, you've all said it. The OP needs to realize there is so much beauty in life; there's really no point in ending it all when death is coming for us regardless.

So, that's basically the least said about the subject, unfortunately. It's proof of how quickly a thread goes off the rails when people overdo it.

Look, I’m just saying—I don't see any damn reason to defend crimes committed by any of those regimes or systems, and I'm not just talking about the communist ones. Joseph Bailey41 started coming at me with direct insults, and honestly, she's been trolling me ever since I brought up communism in another thread. That's her issue, not mine. It seems like this peanut is also getting pretty emotional about communist atrocities, acting like I need to leave them alone (as if I haven't already, except they were just mentioned as an example like 😁)

Joseph Bailey41 said:You really aren't doing okay. But honestly, I'm not going to waste my energy on it.

Man, you've been trolling for God knows how many posts now, but you're still stuck in whatever fantasy world you've built for yourself. It's like you're obsessed or something instead of just moving on. 😁 Have you even realized how many times you've brought me up in this specific thread? And then you have the nerve to say you "don't want to deal with me"? 😁

Joseph Bailey41 said:Just quit. Seriously, just quit. There's no way you're winning this one.

What battle are we even talking about here? I'm not even doing anything—you're just out here trolling and hallucinating on your own. Honestly, you basically beat yourself since you ran out of actual arguments or common sense. And trust me, this isn't the first time you've done this, nor am I the only person who's called you out on your trolling before.

Wait, why are you making this all about me when we're in this specific thread? Come on, let's see if you can actually count...

Joseph Bailey41 said:🥱

You can do better than that.

But honestly, looks like you can't. You're still stuck in that same pathetic trolling mode of yours. 👎

Chloe Moore5 said:You can tell just by your tone that you came here looking for a fight, trying to play the big man. Just drop the whole communist crimes routine and give a nod to the leaders who actually tried to wipe out fascism. We "powerless trolls" without any real arguments would love to dive into the actual title topic...

So, basically, you ban authors from suicide-by-curiosity until they hit a certain age, then suggest they skip the hanging or jumping off buildings and go straight for a dose of morphine instead. It’s much easier on everyone that way.
Until then, maybe try looking at things from our perspective...

Just because I’m trying to be logical and sane while dealing with trolls doesn't mean I'm the one starting this. It’s pretty obvious who's kicking things off, who's being insulting, and who's trolling. Like look at Joseph Bailey41 just hallucinating and trolling, then acting like nothing happened when someone points out those hallucinations. If anyone actually stays objective—unlike some people who clearly just hopped onto this thread specifically to hunt you down 😉—they'll see what's happening.

Honestly, I don't give a damn about all the atrocities—fascist, communist, capitalist, Nazi, whatever. We were mostly talking about Stalin and Mao Zedong if you really want to get into it, so I don't see why I should be thanking them. That's like saying I should thank Hitler. You're talking nonsense.

Chloe Moore5 said:You can tell just by your tone that you came here looking for a fight, trying to play the big man. Just drop the whole communist crimes routine and give a nod to the leaders who actually tried to wipe out fascism. We "powerless trolls" without any real arguments would love to dive into the actual title topic...

So, basically, you ban authors from suicide-by-curiosity until they hit a certain age, then suggest they skip the hanging or jumping off buildings and go straight for a dose of morphine instead. It’s much easier on everyone that way.
Until then, maybe try looking at things from our perspective...

Whatever, go ahead. Feel free to post about the actual subject instead of making everything about me like you guys started doing (seriously, check the thread; some people haven't even touched the topic, they just swooped in with insults 😁)...