Masks are Never Coming Off

198,411 Views | 2981 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by Wangchung
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Robert Wilson said:

Jack Bauer said:


It's not about "trusting Joe Rogan." Rogan brings on people and lets them talk long form, rather than cramming them into a narrative with leading questions over a 2-minute span. People don't trust CNN because the way they operate is as an obvious propaganda machine. Rogan is willing to just let the people he is interviewing be heard out fully in context, including nuance and competing considerations and thoughts. It's two completely different forms of communication.

"serious" reporter.



Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is insane.



Y'all, the crowd that gets their rocks off by labeling their political opposition as anti vax is just as insane as what they believe anti vaxxers are.

Cult.
TXBEAR_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What a f. Ing joke! They have had the most draconian rules/mandates and are still struggling to get Covid controlled, what does that tell you? This while UK and other countries are lifting make mandates. This has nothing to do with "the science".
Bear living in the woods of Bend Oregon
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXBEAR_bf said:

What a f. Ing joke! They have had the most draconian rules/mandates and are still struggling to get Covid controlled, what does that tell you? This while UK and other countries are lifting make mandates. This has nothing to do with "the science".
Fear leads to chaos.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on mortality rates of the virus
What did you expect?
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
A Johns Hopkins study says 'ill-founded' lockdowns did little to limit COVID deaths /
The researchers say lockdowns had no noticeable effect on COVID mortality and had a "devastating effect" on economies and social ills.
Researchers at Johns Hopkins University have concluded that lockdowns have done little to reduce COVID deaths but have had "devastating effects" on economies and numerous social ills.
The study, titled "A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality," said lockdowns in Europe and the U.S. reduced COVID-19 deaths by 0.2 percent.
Shelter-in-place orders were also ineffective, reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9%, the study said.
"We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures, and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality," the researchers wrote in the report, issued Monday.
The study concluded that lockdowns "are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument."
"They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy," the report said.
The study was written by Jonas Herby, Lars Jonung and Steve H. Hanke of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health and the Study of Business Enterprise.
https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/health-news-florida/2022-02-02/a-johns-hopkins-study-says-ill-founded-lockdowns-did-little-to-limit-covid-deaths
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I did read the article.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

I did read the article.
apologies
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).
Robert Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:


Rain dancing. Except really expensive rain dancing. So more like passing a bond issuance to pay guy who comes to town to make it rain.
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf



Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Science!!

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf




I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Robert Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cobretti said:


I pity the poor saps who are waiting on the government to tell them they can get back to normal or have joy in their lives. What in the hell.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf




I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.
LOL Democrats have wrapped themselves in the flag of science to set themselves above critique, no matter how obviously wrong-headed their policies might be.*

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives. That mine was only affected in ways I could afford is immaterial. I'm not part of "the poor," who always bear the greatest burden of the damage from bad policies. But, unlike you, I do see their pain and am trying to get them some relief while others continue to virtue posture no matter how much collateral damage it causes. (vaxxes and masks in children & public schools being a great current example.)

Many elite institutions , already groaning under the strain of decades of poorly serving society, have fatally damaged themselves, too. Garcetti saying "i didn't exhale" and the gut-gnawing going on at CNN is just the tip of the iceberg. Local govt and national media....making asses of themselves.

*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.
nein51
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Some of you guys need to watch SouthPark. Go God Go would be a good one. The world is at war debating the one real truth. Science vs God which is really science vs science and the argument about whose science is right.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nein51 said:

Some of you guys need to watch SouthPark. Go God Go would be a good one. The world is at war debating the one real truth. Science vs God which is really science vs science and the argument about whose science is right.
It's not that hard.

Science which admits we don't know everything, and all theories may be debated and considered, with experiment and duplication serving to advance the stronger theories, we can all accept.

'Science' which is just an opinion shoved by media onto the public with no room for other opinions or possibilities, which demands acceptance in absence of evidence and punishes honest doubt, is really just fascism and is not real Science any more than Eugenics and the Green New Deal have anything to do with Science beyond pretense.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf




I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.
LOL Democrats have wrapped themselves in the flag of science to set themselves above critique, no matter how obviously wrong-headed their policies might be.*

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives. That mine was only affected in ways I could afford is immaterial. I'm not part of "the poor," who always bear the greatest burden of the damage from bad policies. But, unlike you, I do see their pain and am trying to get them some relief while others continue to virtue posture no matter how much collateral damage it causes. (vaxxes and masks in children & public schools being a great current example.)

Many elite institutions , already groaning under the strain of decades of poorly serving society, have fatally damaged themselves, too. Garcetti saying "i didn't exhale" and the gut-gnawing going on at CNN is just the tip of the iceberg. Local govt and national media....making asses of themselves.

*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.


LOLOLOLOLOL! Sam will never admit he was obviously wrong about everything because he was terrified. It won't change the fact that he was obviously wrong about everything because he was terrified.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
These are the self-righteous ****heads who force kids to wear masks all day in school

quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?

"Nobody believes experts anymore."

Some do, as they gasp their last breath apologizing for spreading the lie that Covid was a hoax.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Look at these smug politicians LAUGHING at having to follow the rules they set for your kids.

Robert Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:




*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.
A little reasonable skepticism about everyone who calls themselves an expert, not to mention the limits of human efforts re: grand scale predictions and the ability to intentionally micromanage our way to grand scale events, would be a great result to get out of this.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We can always count on quash to fear-monger.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

These are the self-righteous ****heads who force kids to wear masks all day in school


But they held their breath…
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf




I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.
LOL Democrats have wrapped themselves in the flag of science to set themselves above critique, no matter how obviously wrong-headed their policies might be.*

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives. That mine was only affected in ways I could afford is immaterial. I'm not part of "the poor," who always bear the greatest burden of the damage from bad policies. But, unlike you, I do see their pain and am trying to get them some relief while others continue to virtue posture no matter how much collateral damage it causes. (vaxxes and masks in children & public schools being a great current example.)

Many elite institutions , already groaning under the strain of decades of poorly serving society, have fatally damaged themselves, too. Garcetti saying "i didn't exhale" and the gut-gnawing going on at CNN is just the tip of the iceberg. Local govt and national media....making asses of themselves.

*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.
I can't speak for leftists or Democrats. I do see the pain, and I also see the facts. The two are not mutually exclusive, as many of you seem to believe.

The idea that the right has lost faith in experts as a result of the pandemic is less than honest. I was here when the conversation started a couple of years ago, and you all were howling with resentment and disdain for experts from day one.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

D. C. Bear said:

Sam Lowry said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

D. C. Bear said:

Osodecentx said:

Cobretti said:


This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising


What makes it "surprising?"
I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?


At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."
I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).


Yes, that makes sense.
the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf




I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.
LOL Democrats have wrapped themselves in the flag of science to set themselves above critique, no matter how obviously wrong-headed their policies might be.*

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives. That mine was only affected in ways I could afford is immaterial. I'm not part of "the poor," who always bear the greatest burden of the damage from bad policies. But, unlike you, I do see their pain and am trying to get them some relief while others continue to virtue posture no matter how much collateral damage it causes. (vaxxes and masks in children & public schools being a great current example.)

Many elite institutions , already groaning under the strain of decades of poorly serving society, have fatally damaged themselves, too. Garcetti saying "i didn't exhale" and the gut-gnawing going on at CNN is just the tip of the iceberg. Local govt and national media....making asses of themselves.

*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.
I can't speak for leftists or Democrats. I do see the pain, and I also see the facts. The two are not mutually exclusive, as many of you seem to believe.

The idea that the right has lost faith in experts as a result of the pandemic is less than honest. I was here when the conversation started a couple of years ago, and you all were howling with resentment and disdain for experts from day one.


And they have proven to have been worthy of the respect I afforded them.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.