General Corona virus updates

[member 1013]

Just going to throw this out there. If we stopped hating on the "extreme" left, we coud have voted in non-corrupt progressives a long time ago

- we would be getting monthly checks like other nations, instead of the past rescue packages which were wealth transfers to the top
- we would have universal healthcare like other nations, and thus, a better system in place to disseminate the vaccines

Just saying

Stop trolling

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

they balked at a hypothetical, did they balk at the science?

I believe @MMAHAWK is referring to them laughing (literally) at "a vaccine being announced in the next few weeks" the vaccine was then announced in the next few weeks. So you decide if they were balking at science.

Granted, I'm also watching you point to anecdotal evidence as a cornerstone of your argument so who know what whacky direction this conversation is going to go.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

Stop trolling

He's gonna get here and find out we've got no vaccines, don't get any checks and head back to Jersey.

 

[kaladin stormblessed]

He's gonna get here and find out we've got no vaccines, don't get any checks and head back to Jersey.

In jersey, we prioritize smokers for the vaccine lol #keepitclassyjersey

 

[Filthy]

I believe @MMAHAWK is referring to them laughing (literally) at "a vaccine being announced in the next few weeks" the vaccine was then announced in the next few weeks. So you decide if they were balking at science.

Granted, I'm also watching you point to anecdotal evidence as a cornerstone of your argument so who know what whacky direction this conversation is going to go.

so you think they had access to information that a vaccine was going to be available in a couple weeks, and were dismissive for political reasons? Unless you can show the science that was available that they should have been aware of...the question had nothing to do with "science" when it was asked. So clearly they did not balk at the science.

what anecdotal information am I using, other than case studies which confirm generally assumed premise (this virus is really infectious and spread through respiratory contact)

 

[Filthy]

In jersey, we prioritize smokers for the vaccine lol #keepitclassyjersey

smoking is cornerstone of the Jersey economy.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

In jersey, we prioritize smokers for the vaccine lol #keepitclassyjersey

We're projected to get vaccines in September.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

so you think they had access to information that a vaccine was going to be available in a couple weeks, and were dismissive for political reasons? Unless you can show the science that was available that they should have been aware of...the question had nothing to do with "science" when it was asked. So clearly they did not balk at the science.

what anecdotal information am I using, other than case studies which confirm generally assumed premise (this virus is really infectious and spread through respiratory contact)

I think they didn't have access to information whole another party did. They chose to dismiss that other party. I don't care to question their motives as to why, but they lost definitely were denying science.

Case studies are by definition anecdotal and they're also most of what is being used to support policies. Any more than a couple of minutes reading about them and they become incredibly flimsy. There was a "wedding super spreader event" here last year. 30 people indoors became 50 some cases within 6 weeks. No chain of custody in terms of whether people went to the wedding with covid or what those people did during the in between time. But they were at a wedding so that Must be where they all got covid. California is using last March's China restaurant event as their evidence that outdoor dining is unsafe.

 

[gangsterkathryn]

We're projected to get vaccines in September.

You’re not too far behind New York.

 

[MMAHAWK]

they balked at a hypothetical, did they balk at the science?

Trump is an issue because you claimed that science isn't being followed, but that's been the case from the beginning. Obviously you're able to see the situation for what it is, but the science never had a chance. I don't think the recommendations of science have changed much, especially if you recognized that neither the WHO, CDC, or NHS (Fauci) were ever doing science.

But what data are you looking for to support my claim?...the data that proves that SARS-COV2 is highly infectious and spread through respiratory contact?
I explained the false equivalencies of your examples, what are you looking for?

How about the science that says a beer with food is safe but just a beer after work is dangerous.

All I’m looking for is the evidence that the leaders are using to put their mandates in place.
You know why we have outdoor dining again in California? Because there is no evidence it caused anything.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

You’re not too far behind New York.

Biden said everyone by May.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

smoking is cornerstone of the Jersey economy.

11/10 Jerseyans agree.

 

[Filthy]

Biden said everyone by May.

said we would have enough vaccines, yet to see the deployment plan that accomplishes vaccinations by then.

 

[member 1013]

In jersey, we prioritize smokers for the vaccine lol #keepitclassyjersey

Are they an at risk population? Yes they chose to be smokers, but you can extend that argument to fatties too

 

[Filthy]

How about the science that says a beer with food is safe but just a beer after work is dangerous.

All I’m looking for is the evidence that the leaders are using to put their mandates in place.
You know why we have outdoor dining again in California? Because there is no evidence it caused anything.

if you want science to lead, you should have put me in charge. I have no idea what these dumbasses are basing their policies on, other than they think they should be in charge of everything and this pandemic is just God telling them to take the wheel.

 

[Filthy]

Are they an at risk population? Yes they chose to be smokers, but you can extend that argument to fatties too

i bet you'd have a different opinion of you were a chain-smoking Jersey fatty.

 

[member 1013]

i bet you'd have a different opinion of you were a chain-smoking Jersey fatty.

It’s glandular!

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

said we would have enough vaccines, yet to see the deployment plan that accomplishes vaccinations by then.

For contrast Canada is "enough vaccines by end of September" so yeah a solid distance behind.

 

[member 1013]

For contrast Canada is "enough vaccines by end of September" so yeah a solid distance behind.

Lol like that’s gonna happen

 

[MMAHAWK]

if you want science to lead, you should have put me in charge. I have no idea what these dumbasses are basing their policies on, other than they think they should be in charge of everything and this pandemic is just God telling them to take the wheel.

I don’t want it to lead, I expect it to.
My issue is the go to “it’s science “ when we know what they should say is “this is what I want”.

Everyone quick to say it’s science but real slow to prove it.

 

[member 1013]

I think “science” is a crock of shit. Everybody knows it’s a dark art.

 

[Rambo John J]

I think “science” is a crock of shit. Everybody knows it’s a dark art.

Scientism

 

[MMAHAWK]

This isn't true.




You've been sold a dichotomy that you have to choose everything one direction or another. The hypocrisy and shortcomings of your governor should it be misconstrued as what I'm advocating. Again I shouldn't even have to say that since this whole line of questioning is a bit in bad faith...I began highlighting that I've been calling for heterogeneous reopenings for a year.




That isn't how you do this.
Case count versus resources versus economic penalty.
You're framing the question all wrong from a misunderstanding of the epidemiology intentions.

there are activities that are higher in lower risk than others. There are interventions that are more effective than others. There are interventions that cost more harm than others.

Once you step out of the idea of all or none, you can then see which interventions have minimal harm that is minimal cost for maximum benefit.
The exact same thing can happen for higher risk and lower risk activities. That's what the science says.

Reopening should have been federalized based on case counts county level resources. Levels of interventions starting from the least harmful to the most harmful should have been applied.

again this whole conversation is a bit in bad faith since you and I have already had a conversation about California doing quite the opposite of what I've suggested All the way to linking large geographic areas together that don't have much in common with case counts resources or population density.

All I’m asking is for the actual data and proof of all this.

Also I don’t think I’ve been sold anything. I wear a mask, I leave a mothafucker at distance when possible and got the vaccine . I’ve also traveled, attended sporting event, and worked for 90% of this. I’m honestly not sure how I could be more down the center.

 

[member 1013]

Scientism

You ever looked inside a satellite?

It’s all pentagrams and the blood of virgins

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

Lol like that’s gonna happen

You hear the latest? Apparently we're just going to ignore the manufacturer's recommendations and vaccine people 40-some days apart instead of 21. Our JT appointed group decided es bes, bro.