Aliens are real. We have the evidence. Can you see it? Nah.

Some of it will, obviously they’ll redact the parts that say “these sightings here were of our top secret experimental craft codenamed thetruthaintoutthere”.

Wookienopants wrote:

Though I do take issue with the ending

Close Encounters is a car crash of editing - there are several versions of it - including the ill-advised Special edition with in-ship scenes that was dropped in later versions.  The fact the Roy Neary pisses off and leaves his family with no notice is a bizarre ending but one that resonates with Spielberg's feeling of abandon re his absent father which sort of explains it.

davyK wrote:

Wookienopants wrote:

Though I do take issue with the ending

Close Encounters is a car crash of editing - there are several versions of it - including the ill-advised Special edition with in-ship scenes that was dropped in later versions.  The fact the Roy Neary pisses off and leaves his family with no notice is a bizarre ending but one that resonates with Spielberg's feeling of abandon re his absent father which sort of explains it.

Yea. He's married.
He kisses another woman then leaves his family behind with out any consideration for their well-being.
He is a selfish prick at the end and it ruins any feeling of goodwill you might have had for him

He's married sure, but his wife leaves him because of his UFO obsession.

A warning perhaps?

acemuzzy wrote:

Pics or it didn't happen

I'll post some when I get back but here's the news coverage. It really is quite mental when the sun hits it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609040.amp

Yossarian wrote:

WaPo have been briefed on the contents of the report. It says exactly what you’d expect.

Utter fucking horsepiss but our airmen need to make a Bob after they retire and look, this is fucking harmless compared to that Q shite?

bad_hair_day wrote:

monkey wrote:

Just a few more days until the Pentagon tells everyone aliens are real.

They’re only showing those on the select intelligence committee the good stuff.

Believe a badger once said a lawyer should look into the matter. Daniel Sheehan has joined the conversation.

A Weinstein and shermer the sex pest. Surprised they manage to find time to talk about UFOs in between making shit up about covid.

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

WaPo have been briefed on the contents of the report. It says exactly what you’d expect.

Utter fucking horsepiss but our airmen need to make a Bob after they retire and look, this is fucking harmless compared to that Q shite?

It's a gateway drug for some I reckon.

I finally watched that HBO doc on those 12 year old girls that tried to murder their friend to appease the Slenderman.

Thats some weird fucked up shit. An amazing insight into the power of the Internet on susceptible minds, especially when serious, undiagnosed mental health problems are present.

Going to need some context here.

The long and short of that appears to be that it will kill Covid-19 and you. Probably not a great idea.

LivDiv wrote:

The long and short of that appears to be that it will kill Covid-19 and you. Probably not a great idea.

 
I dunno man, it kills Covid, ergo success?

Yossarian wrote:

I found this linked in the references for Kory’s Wikipedia page, it seems to be a pretty comprehensive dismantling: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ivermectin-is-the-new-hydroxychloroquine-take-2/

Good morning oh fellow badgers. First of all, as usual, let me issue my usual disclaimers for those new to the thread. I have no horse in the Ivermectin race, I am getting my first shot of Pfizer vaccine tomorrow. My interest is in hearing some of a Joe Rogan podcast. 
So, with that out of the way!

That article you linked, I've not read it all but immediately I have an observation and a problem.

In the opening sentence of the opening header, the article describes the drug as: the veterinary deworming drug ivermectin.
Why read further right? Lol these quacks are promoting dog pills! 
They do describe its human applications much further down alright, but thats not a great start in my book, its really trying to skew the first perceptions of the reader.

EDIT: Look at Liv's post directly underneath. So ivermectin kills you? If so then Dr Kory and Weinstein need to be taken out and shot. Because according to them ivermectin has been administered to humans over 4 billion times.  Again my dear fellows chomping at the bit, I am not putting forward that Dr. Kory and big W are correct. 

The article gives some context around Weintstein as a  " spreader of disinformation, particularly about the “lab leak theory”"[font=proxima-nova-1, proxima-nova-2,]. [/font]So my dear fellows, I do have an issue with that. Whatever else Weinstein is, the lab leak theory itself isn't disinformation, I mean the clue is in the name.....its a theory. And there has been much questioning about that recently, including a book by Josh Rogin, who seems like a fairly reasonable voice?
From what I remember, at the very least there were many questions to be asked about the original origin investigation. If we dont know where the virus originated, then why is the lab leak origin being dismissed out of hand? Or is there now conclusive proof out there that it wasnt? 
I dont listen to Weinstein's podcast, so I dont know what he is basing his views on, maybe he is claiming that the reptilians have purposefully released the virus or that the inner earthers told him in a dream that the virus came from the lab. Maybe those of you more in the know can explain why this lab leak theory is being labelled as disinformation?  

As to whether there is any substance behind ivermectin's efficacy, I dont know. Im aiming to do a bit of reading about it when I can.

So you're ignoring a comprehensive debunking of ivermectin's use to treat covid in that linked article cos of a bit about Weinstein. IDGAF abut Weinstein or whether he's correct or incorrect about the lab leak, but you asked about ivermectin, so here's that:

You can give ivermectin to people, but the issue with using it to treat COVID is that it appears you need to administer toxic amounts to people before it effects COVID. 

C'mon man, first line of the Wiki article on ivermectin: 

Ivermectin is a medication used to treat many types of parasite infestations.[3] In humans, this includes head lice, scabies, river blindness (onchocerciasis), strongyloidiasis, trichuriasis, ascariasis, and lymphatic filariasis

Fourth paragraph:

During the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation was widely spread claiming that ivermectin was beneficial for treating and preventing COVID-19.[14][15] Such claims are not backed by sound evidence.[16][17][18][19]

Citation 16

Although ivermectin is generally well tolerated at doses authorised for other indications, side effects could increase with the much higher doses that would be needed to obtain concentrations of ivermectin in the lungs that are effective against the virus. Toxicity when ivermectin is used at higher than approved doses therefore cannot be excluded.