COVID-19/Coronavirus Talk - Part II

[simon IC]

Let's try and make our points without attacking each other. Flaming and trolling will not be tolerated in this thread just like in any other.

 

[BlueOil]

Oh boy...
Biden will force ALL federal workers to be vaccinated with NO testing options | Daily Mail Online

i bet he made some of them take a drug test too just to get those jobs. unbelievable.

in all seriousness, good.

 

[EastonBlues22]

This is the essence of the point of my entire post. Governments are involved in the decision-making process and it is distorting the scientific process.

Whether or not my examples are individually true, I think we agree that political interference into scientific research and advice is a dangerous thing.

We live in a community where science, religion, and politics must co-exist (or at least reach a functional equilibrium). It is impossible to keep the three separate from each other.

There are those who would act as emulsifiers to help the three mix to the best of their abilities (as imperfect humans), and those who would do the exact opposite, and/or who are actively working to disrupt any sense of equilibrium.

It's usually fairly easy to tell when a person is taking on one role vs the other.

 

[Evestay]

We live in a community where science, religion, and politics must co-exist (or at least reach a functional equilibrium). It is impossible to keep the three separate from each other.

There are those who would act as emulsifiers to help the three mix to the best of their abilities (as imperfect humans), and those who would do the exact opposite, and/or who are actively working to disrupt any sense of equilibrium.

It's usually fairly easy to tell when a person is taking on one role vs the other.

Fair way to frame it. I think it is getting harder to tell and I am losing trust in institutions, but I see your point.

 

[EastonBlues22]

If me being unvaxed is a danger to you, then your vax isn’t working.

That's just not true, on multiple levels.

For one, vaccines are not "proof" against infection. They significantly reduce bad outcomes, and significantly reduce transmission rates. That is the vaccine "working." The more unvaccinated people there are, the more likely one is to be exposed to a viral load that transmits the virus, and the more likely one is to be placed in a situation where they might suffer from or transmit the virus to others themselves...thus increasing the danger to you as a vaccinated person, and to others, beyond what it would be if you were surrounded instead by only vaccinated people.

On top of that, there is a resource opportunity cost in play here as well. If, for example, you're suffering from an acute malady and can't be seen at the ER because all the beds are currently full due to the pandemic (fueled largely by unvaccinated Covid patients taking up beds, as is actually happening in many areas right now), that is a danger to you that being vaccinated clearly cannot protect against.

On top of that, there are further societal repercussions. Supply chains, basic services, housing, cost of living inflation...all things that might "threaten" a person in some way that are currently being affected by the pandemic, which is of course itself affected in some way by vaccination rates (both here and elsewhere).

Etc.

You have a responsibility to do what you think is best for yourself, or your family, but this is not a decision where the effects on others can simply be dismissed as nonexistent. There is a greater effect, and a greater cost.

 

[Oh Baby!]

If me being unvaxed is a danger to you, then your vax isn’t working.

What if you have 3 kids that aren't eligible?

What if your wife went to the ER in July with abdominal pain, was given an IV, sent home and told "you're probably fine, and frankly we need the space anyway" and then develops acute diverticulitis and peritonitis and now has a poo bag?

Try to think bigger?

 

[simon IC]

Oh boy...
Biden will force ALL federal workers to be vaccinated with NO testing options | Daily Mail Online

You might want to investigate this story using a different source. I suggest a variety. This source is a bit suspect.
Daily Mail

 

[Mike Liut]

Keep taking your vax and all it’s boosters. I’ll be happy staying unvaxed and healthy. I’ve already had Covid. It was no biggie

 

[simon IC]

Huh?

Again, a suspect source. This one is highly questionable.
Disclose TV

 

[PocketNines]

That's just not true, on multiple levels.

For one, vaccines are not "proof" against infection. They significantly reduce bad outcomes, and significantly reduce transmission rates. That is the vaccine "working." The more unvaccinated people there are, the more likely one is to be exposed to a viral load that transmits the virus, and the more likely one is to be placed in a situation where they might suffer from or transmit the virus to others themselves...thus increasing the danger to you as a vaccinated person, and to others, beyond what it would be if you were surrounded instead by only vaccinated people.

On top of that, there is a resource opportunity cost in play here as well. If, for example, you're suffering from an acute malady and can't be seen at the ER because all the beds are currently full due to the pandemic (fueled largely by unvaccinated Covid patients taking up beds, as is actually happening in many areas right now), that is a danger to you that being vaccinated clearly cannot protect against.

On top of that, there are further societal repercussions. Supply chains, basic services, housing, cost of living inflation...all things that might "threaten" a person in some way that are currently being affected by the pandemic, which is of course itself affected in some way by vaccination rates (both here and elsewhere).

Etc.

You have a responsibility to do what you think is best for yourself, or your family, but this is not a decision where the effects on others can simply be dismissed as nonexistent. There is a greater effect, and a greater cost.

There are dozens of millions of Americans who could not be paid enough to care about those costs. You could offer 1 trillion dollars to him and he would not care, like he boasted, so macho is the identity. They all want to "BE KILLERS, BE KILLERS, BE KILLERS." It's so small, empty and broken.

I guess one day we'll read in the paper how some smart scientist invented a global warming reversing gizmo which will be implemented worldwide. Fusion. The idea that human beings are going to act in concert in time to do what is needed is laughable. We want to get to the bottom of it with "the enemy."

In the five summers we've lived in northern California, four have featured major nearby fires, each year the intensity increases and now we bake in unbreathable 150+ AQI haze for weeks at a time. Massive droughts. That is the norm now. Having a go bag packed at all times. Waiting for the gizmo.

 

[BlueOil]

Keep taking your vax and all it’s boosters. I’ll be happy staying unvaxed and healthy. I’ve already had Covid. It was no biggie

what would it take for you to take things seriously? since you seem immune to all logic

 

[AjaxManifesto]

You might want to investigate this story using a different source. I suggest a variety. This source is a bit suspect.
Daily Mail

Are you modding or is this a personal post?

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Again, a suspect source. This one is highly questionable.
Disclose TV

It's a video of the woman speaking. Are you suggesting this is a deep fake and someone did some CGI here or force words into her mouth?

And who is fact checking your chosen fact checker?

Again, is this a personal post or part of your mod duties?

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Per the mod ...

Other sources...I didn't have time to run them through the approved fact checker...

President Biden to deliver remarks outlining new six-step strategy to curb spread of COVID-19

Biden to lay out six-step plan to tackle the coronavirus pandemic

Biden to set vaccine requirements for federal workers, private companies

Etc.


Google "Biden 6 steps"...a lot comes up...

I think this is the WH priming the pump, we find out more tonight...

 

[simon IC]

Are you modding or is this a personal post?

Not modding at all. I was just pointing out that those particular sources are unreliable. The subject matter is certainly important and newsworthy, so I was suggesting you investigate using some other sources. Personally, I like to look at a subject from a variety of sources, and I always make myself aware of every sources bias. I was just making a suggestion, not criticizing you, although I did feel compelled to point out the questionability of the sources you posted.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Not modding at all. I was just pointing out that those particular sources are unreliable. The subject matter is certainly important and newsworthy, so I was suggesting you investigate using some other sources. Personally, I like to look at a subject from a variety of sources, and I always make myself aware of every sources bias. I was just making a suggestion, not criticizing you, although I did feel compelled to point out the questionability of the sources you posted.

Questionable to who?

Who is checking your fact checkers?

Personally, I don't trust ANY fact checkers. I read a variety of sources on all sides and make my own determination. Fact checking has just become another political weapon.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Not modding at all. I was just pointing out that those particular sources are unreliable. The subject matter is certainly important and newsworthy, so I was suggesting you investigate using some other sources. Personally, I like to look at a subject from a variety of sources, and I always make myself aware of every sources bias. I was just making a suggestion, not criticizing you, although I did feel compelled to point out the questionability of the sources you posted.

BTW, what a world we live in. A video of a government official speaking their own words (no editorial comments, no video editing) and our first instinct is to see if it was posted by a news site we might not like.

What a world.

Those who hold the moniker of "trusted news" or "fact checker" approved will control very much in our future. They will be the only ones with the "truth". What power.

 

[EastonBlues22]

BTW, what a world we live in. A video of a government official speaking their own words (no editorial comments, no video editing) and our first instinct is to see if it was posted by a new site we might not like.

What a world.

Those who hold the moniker of "trusted news" or "fact checker" approved will control very much in our future. They will be the only ones with the "truth". What power.

Our first instinct should always be to question the source. A worthy source can withstand being questioned, and does not fear it.

You act like gatekeeping knowledge is something new, as if those in power (political leaders, historians, religious leaders, etc.) have not been the arbiters of "truth" for thousands of years. As if some of those "truths" have not been used to justify some of the worst atrocities in human history...things completely incomparable to the context of our current discussion.

Let's keep some sense of perspective here.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

More White House priming of the pump....more mandates coming...

Unnamed WH reporter asks Jen Psaki about expanding vaccine mandates...

I didn't have time to fact check the source, but it looks like the Republicans put this video out there. I don't believe they deep faked this or put words in Jen Psaki's mouth. It looks like video from today's WH press briefing.

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

"If humans destroyed it, humans will obviously undestroy it."

It's pathetic to assume this, much less smugly assume it. However I do see its value to you in self-serving tautology. On the one side of a smoothbrain, science can be smugly dismissed as a "distraction" when it screams from the rooftops that climate change is man-made, irreversible and code red for the species survival.

On the other side of the smoothbrain, science is NOT to be dismissed. Actually it's what will save us, you assume with contempt. You just assume an exceptionally rapid unbroken path from proving the theoretical concept of fusion to massive project funding to timely worldwide practical application via global infrastructure revolution. All the entrenched interests will make way so we can save ourselves? That's how humans behave, eh? Your vote suddenly depends on who takes climate change seriously, does it? No Manchins in any human government willing to sell out every other human because he wants coal lobbying dollars? Your thought process is so excruciatingly dishonest that it borders on degeneracy.

Your thought process is so annoyingly biased it borders on absurdity. You stand on an altar preaching and upholding science with sarcasm and insults when your actually just doing the opposite.
Science isn’t prefect, One way not to defend science is to pretend it is perfect. The myth that science should rely on proof or certainty -- or that there is some sort of "scientific method" that even flawed human beings can follow to produce guaranteed results -- is a view so harmful to scientific understanding that it only gives aid and comfort to its enemies. Science deniers, and supposed Science lovers, love to exploit uncertainty and certainty and use it as a cudgel. The scientific attitude is the idea that scientists care about evidence and are willing to change their views based on new evidence. It is a community standard of transparency, skepticism and willingness to test one another's work that has proven itself through time as the best means of understanding the empirical world. Scientists understand this and recognize that although they may aim at the goal of "truth," this can never be reached in practice. Instead science is founded on the idea of "warrant," which is the justification of belief based on fit with the evidence. Still, no matter how strong one's evidence, it is always theoretically possible for some future fact to come along and overthrow a theory. That is just how inductive reasoning works.

You stand on your altar of science saying it can never be dismissed. When, that is actually one of the most exciting things in science! Being wrong!

"If humans destroyed it, humans will obviously undestroy it."

I never inferred this. I mean a better inference would be “ if humans made it, they can unmake it” but to take that as a maxim would be folly.

You also smugly assume I’m a climate change denier. Hey congratulation you can link to an article which makes every sensational prediction of doom for the future of the planet. Here is one for you. What Five Graphs from the U.N. Climate Report Reveal About Our Path to Halting Climate Change

“The scenarios aren’t predictions; they can’t determine the fate of global warming. Instead, they provide road maps. The scenarios often underpin international policy, research, and activism for years to come.
The new report has five scenarios: two with low emissions, one with intermediate emissions, and two with high emissions. The very low emissions scenario meets the 1.5°C Paris Agreement goal with likely warming of 1.4°C by 2100—but it overshoots the target to just above 1.5°C midcentury before decreasing to 1.4°C. The low emissions scenario reaches 1.8°C by 2100, just skirting under the high bounds of the Paris Agreement. Midlevel emissions hit 2.7°C, high emissions clock in at 3.6°C, and very high emissions extend to 4.4°C in 2100.
Climate scientist and IPCC Working Group I cochair Valérie Masson-Delmotte said that the midlevel emissions scenario most closely resembles the pledges made by countries to plateau emissions until around 2030. The highest emissions scenarios represent futures without any climate mitigation.
The last IPCC assessment in 2013 included just one low emissions scenario that kept warming under 2°C.”

Notice the 5 to 95 percent confidence threshold? That is “Real Science”. Not headline science for a low information voter. Also Notice, that there is an added scenario for lower emissions since 2013. Man stop the presses! How is the BBC going to get clicks with titles like “Global Warming Still Threatens Humanity But There Is More Hope”

Dismiss? Distraction? Im not the one equating Chinese Lab Leak Theory's with xenophobic anti-science rednecks who deny climate change and cant cope with the world where there isn't a bad guy. I mean it’s not like a lab leak would have political ramifications here at home and geo-political ramifications abroad that will effect your life sooner than climate change and maybe more drastically! No way that is absurd!

The next thing you will say is I’m a flat earthier but guess what a flat eather understand science better than you. Unfortunate, understanding science doesn’t make them anymore right than someone who say you can’t dismiss science.



Don’t bother watching the video. It’s not like she is an acclaimed scientist. Just call her a hack and move on. I mean a low information brain can’t handle facts that don’t fit with thier world view.

I know you loathe low information voters, they helped some orange man take over a country, but who is the opposite side of that same coin? Here is a nice article for you to help make sure that doesn’t happen again.

Are Democrats the Party of Science? Not Really.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Our first instinct should always be to question the source. A worthy source can withstand being questioned, and does not fear it.

You act like gatekeeping knowledge is something new, as if those in power (political leaders, historians, religious leaders, etc.) have not been the arbiters of "truth" for thousands of years. As if some of those "truths" have not been used to justify some of the worst atrocities in human history...things completely incomparable to the context of our current discussion.

Let's keep some sense of perspective here.

Oh I am.

I've been posting all kinds of stuff. But when your fellow mod asks me to fact check twice in a row, it leads me to believe you are doing some curating here. The last one was a bit much. A video of an Australian government official speaking her own words. No editorial. No video tricks. My only comment was "Huh?"

I guess my perspective is that you all don't request fact checks on other links do you? Funny how it happened here twice in short order.

 

[Celtic Note]

This is the essence of the point of my entire post. Governments are involved in the decision-making process and it is distorting the scientific process.

Whether or not my examples are individually true, I think we agree that political interference into scientific research and advice is a dangerous thing.

You can choose to look at the research and make your own hypothesis.

Politics mixing with public health is bound to happen since the reasons many governments exist is to protect health, safety and welfare. Whether it’s done well or could be better is another massive collection of topics.

 

[BlueOil]

Oh I am.

I've been posting all kinds of stuff. But when your fellow mod asks me to fact check twice in a row, it leads me to believe you are doing some curating here. The last one was a bit much. A video of an Australian government official speaking her own words. No editorial. No video tricks. My only comment was "Huh?"

I guess my perspective is that you all don't request fact checks on other links do you? Funny how it happened here twice in short order.

it doesn't have to be a deep fake or a modded video to be a bad source, bud. taking things out of context is one of the easiest things most of these sources do and the video you posted is a great example. in the tweet "New World Order" is capitalized, but does it need to be? capitalizing it suggests there's a group of people taking over, not capitalizing it makes it a typical phrase used to describe changing times. although if they don't capitalize that, the whole conspiracy angle goes away...

 

[Xerloris]

Then reference the scientists. Don't quote global warming. "According to an article in Scientific American in 2006, humanity should be extinct from global warming" is a lot different than "according to global warming, we should all be dead". The reason you didn't is because you were making a strawman, and strawman don't meed to be based in reality. I doubt many modern scientists have predicted extinction by 2021. They have predicted we are nearing the point of no return, but not that it should be over.

Even if there were examples of a scientist making an incorrect preditcion, we are unable to compare and contrast how that example was different from Covid because you refuse to give examples and instead make a blanket statement. Yes, scientists can be wrong. That is why science can never prove anything. It can only make hypotheses bases on known data and current scientific knowledge. While that is not perfect, it is much better than "I don't want to get a shot that will make my arm hurt and mainly help other people, so I am casting doubt on the science....oh science says I can take horse tranquilizer to make my penis grow bigger. That's easy. Sign me up!!!!"

I also find it ironic that one of your points was that science says half of America should be underwater. Just a week ago, a large portion of it was underwater due to Ida. The increased frequency and severity of hurricanes is caused in part by climate change. So whoever predicted that half of America should be underwater by September 2021 wasn't too far off. Yes, I know, its easier to stick your head in the sand then deal with the fact we are killing our world. Just be sure to take your head out of the sand before the next flood rolls in.

I mean there's 50+ years of scientific "predictions" about how the earth is going to kill us all and none of them have come true. I also find it humorous that you refer to "modern scientists" as if that matters. At one point or another in history all scientists were modern. In 20 years today's scientists are going to be proven wrong about all of their predictions and we're going to laugh at people that believed them, just like we do to people of 50 years ago. Oh before I forget, a week ago hurricane IDA made it RAIN, it did not raise the level of the ocean by 10 feet to drown coastal cities. Science gets proven wrong daily so is it really so hard to understand why some people want to wait and see what science might say about it a year from now?

Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions - Competitive Enterprise Institute
https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-y...c-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-50/

i'm not going to dive in to each "gotcha journalism" picture or tweet you compiled here, but here's an article an article in response to this one.

COVID Vaccines Show No Signs of Harming Fertility or Sexual Function

the NY post article linked here uses quotes from LAST spring and suggests this issue is being ignored to activate all of your worry receptors at once, which isn't true. the article describes the progression of this issue as occurring at "breakneck speed", but you took it somehow to mean if we're not omniscient, science isn't real. i am not sure if you read the article based on your less than serious posting format, but even if you did, it's a poorly written one and something you can expect from NY Post reporting at times.

If you read the CDC data it clearly shows a correlation.

CDC manipulated study data to show the Covid-19 Vaccines are safe for Pregnant Women when in reality 4 in 5 suffered a miscarriage

Quote from the article

"However, when reading the small print of table 4, in which they claim just 104 / 12.6% of 827 completed pregnancies resulted in miscarriage (spontaneous abortion), we can see that the numbers they have presented are extremely misleading.
This is because of the 827 completed pregnancies, 700 / 86% of the women had received a dose of either the Pfizer or Moderna Covid-19 vaccine during the third trimester of pregnancy. The third trimester of pregnancy is from week 27 – 40, and it is therefore impossible to suffer a miscarriage due to the fact they are considered as occurring prior to week 20 of a pregnancy.
This means just 127 women received either the Pfizer or Moderna Covid-19 vaccine during the first / second trimester, with 104 of the woman sadly losing their baby.
Therefore the rate of incidence of miscarriage is 82%, not 12.6% as presented in the findings of the study."

 

[BlueOil]

If you read the CDC data it clearly shows a correlation.

CDC manipulated study data to show the Covid-19 Vaccines are safe for Pregnant Women when in reality 4 in 5 suffered a miscarriage

Quote from the article

"However, when reading the small print of table 4, in which they claim just 104 / 12.6% of 827 completed pregnancies resulted in miscarriage (spontaneous abortion), we can see that the numbers they have presented are extremely misleading.
This is because of the 827 completed pregnancies, 700 / 86% of the women had received a dose of either the Pfizer or Moderna Covid-19 vaccine during the third trimester of pregnancy. The third trimester of pregnancy is from week 27 – 40, and it is therefore impossible to suffer a miscarriage due to the fact they are considered as occurring prior to week 20 of a pregnancy.
This means just 127 women received either the Pfizer or Moderna Covid-19 vaccine during the first / second trimester, with 104 of the woman sadly losing their baby.
Therefore the rate of incidence of miscarriage is 82%, not 12.6% as presented in the findings of the study."

i appreciate you copied this math error straight from the website. do yourself a favor and read some of the comments on the article. you'll find plenty pumping their own agenda and findings, but you'll see a few who point out how this article is getting it wrong despite claiming to have it right. more importantly read the paper it's citing, as this is clearly not a summary and just "gotcha" reporting.