Incorrect.  I did not offer CDC numbers in response specifically to your conversation about the military.

 What I said was the numbers You are presenting are too high to not have already made a substantial and fully realizable impact to the US Military.

 If thousands per-day... every single day, are being disabled, we would surely see signs of it.  We don't need official Government documents to see, according to the math you provided, 1,460,000 disabled soldiers in one year.  Maybe they are all over with the millions of dead kids from heart attacks.

 As for providing more evidence, when you post the exact same numbers you aren't providing more evidence, you are providing the same evidence, just in a different post.

So, the dearth of data about the damage in the military was my fault?

 When you post it, wont read it, then argue and complain about the people that actually read your information and did the math, then yeah, Your response is Yours to own.

 So when I ask why we don't see more evidence if 2000 soldiers per day, every single day, are diagnosed with neurological disabilities, you by my interpretation over-react and claim I am saying the military would never lie.

 The issues are substantially lower in volume than what your source claims.  And to me, whenever somebody needs to exaggerate that much maybe they aren't all that honest either.  When a website constantly retracts statements, I start to approach that website with more and more scrutiny.


"Now we are seeing reports, that made me correct."

 Now we are seeing unverified reports that have numbers that are contradictory to the stated claims.  This shows that maybe a portion of what you claim is correct, but why are the numbers so far off from each other?  In the information you provided, the reference shows a percentage of .0356% while the article claims it says over 300%.  You are ok with that?

"Potato potato,... it's close enough... "

 Yeah it definitely comes across that way.

 2 dead soldiers is equal to two hundred thousand, bad is bad.

 Yep there's the "discussion" right there that will encourage people to participate.  Just pull out the predictable "bullsh!t" if people have different opinions.

 So you provide evidence you don't read, then tell people that read it for you that they are wrong.  It's Your evidence.  You provided those numbers, you won't look at them, how do you know?  Why not just answer the questions about the information You provided?

 Your evidence was "wrong" by millions.  Think maybe some of that is lies, or inflated to get people riled up?  Only the bad guys would do that?

 Have you observed anything that indicates to you that hundreds of thousands of soldiers are disabled by the vaccine?  Ft Hood should be operating on mission critical status and recruitment to replace the thousands of discharged or dead should be rampant.  Are you seeing anything like that?  Maybe you are, I haven't been in TX since we ran reefers to Houston.

 I am not seeing any evidence at Ft Carson, Panzer Kaserne or Geilinkirchin where I have been recently.  Nothing that even remotely comes close to those numbers.  

"You can pretend it's all good,
But it's bullshit."

 Here we go again acting like I said anything was good.

 Just because I can show the math You provided, from your article's math that is your evidence is incorrect doesn't mean anything more than the numbers are incorrect.  What the article tells you is entirely different from the math they provide.

 Have you seen any evidence of the level of military shortages or dead kids that Your evidence that You provide to prove Your stance exists?  Does your observed reality line up with the math you use to say you are correct?  How many kids died in your town in 2021?