Nah, I've just gotten tired of dealing with the nastiness on this site. I mistakenly thought you were above it.
The coronavirus scam
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
You should read more charitably. I'm not being nasty, I'm just describing the kind of person you are.
Really, you should be more stoic and respond to possibility "C".
This doesn't make it less nasty
This is a variation on B. You've got somebody to blame, but still need to deal with the real pandemic. You claim that the real pandemic isn't so bad, and that governments are overreacting, but it remains real, and being able to blame somebody isn't relevant.
Your analysis of whether I care more or less than you basically boils down to: "My analysis of the pandemic situation and how to handle it is correct, yours is wrong. THEREFORE I care and you don't."
This is ridiculous. My analysis (and the common one that most governments follow) leads me to think that less harm is caused by the shutdowns than by the pandemic spreading uncontrolled. That is not because I don't care- it's because I analyze the information differently.
Only because the truth hurts.
The variation on B highlights an important difference. The "then what?" includes restrictions on the government so that it does not have the authority to mandate masks, lockdowns, social distancing, vaccines. vaccine passports, or whatever other totalitarian control they think they are granted by a medical emergency on healthy people. They can only allow people to be free to protect themselves, and they are allowed to lockdown people that are sick. Sure, we still had to deal with the pandemic, but we now know that the free healthy people did that by getting a better understanding of the pandemic than their leaders, including the medical ones. It turns out medical leaders were happy to ignore the little people and promoted government action that hurt them. Why do you support people medical leaders that do that to you? Do you consider yourself one of the elite, or candidate for the elite ranks, and someday you'll be above the little people?
Said another way: Freedom for healthy people will be the best response going into the future, as shown by the problems created in this current pandemic. In retrospect we can see this has been the best response in the past. That's the big take-away from this event that the best response we've always had is still the best response today. It is important that we blame the government for the mistakes that were made so they don't do this again.
If only we knew who was healthy and who was sick, this would make some sense. But we often don't, as you well know. If you really cared for people or for truth, you wouldn't ignore inconvenient facts like that.
But the numbers say otherwise. The pandemic got about as bad as it could get - masks and lockdowns didn't matter much to the pandemic, but they sure mattered to death and despair in all other areas of living, to the tune of killing an excess 140,000 people.
That's why it matters that we care about people. Sure, you could look at the information differently if you don't care about people, but I care about people which causes me to be curious about why those 140,000 people died.
Why do you see government leaders as your protectors after they lied to you? I don't understand why you think they have your best interest in mind.
Right Divider
Body part
Why do you continue to push this retarded idea?
As was borne out even by the CDC, asymptomatic spread never drives an aerosolized viral disease. And the charts add powerful evidence to that truth.
So you are wrong, scientifically, that we don't know who is healthy and who is sick.
I realize that what I'm implying should be more direct. You actually do care about certain people - your government overlords. When I say I care about people I mean the little people. The ones that aren't in the government leadership elite. The ones that are powerless when the government attacks them.
For those who do care about facts:
https://www.advisory.com/en/daily-briefing/2021/01/11/asymptomatic-spread
jamanetwork.com
https://www.advisory.com/en/daily-briefing/2021/01/11/asymptomatic-spread
SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms
This decision analytical model assesses the proportion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions in the community that likely occur from persons without symptoms.
Right Divider
Body part
And you complain about nasty comments. Hypocrite!
There you go. A great example of projection. You accuse me of being a nasty name caller when in reality I describe you while you do the name calling.
Stick to the reality of the situation. Read the charts and understand them. Have curiosity about why those extra 140,000 young people died. Don't automatically trust your government overlords and dismiss a little person's concerns. Have empathy enough to understand what the other side is saying. Doing things like this will allow you to ignore name calling, and since it's good behavior you wouldn't have to face the truth of being shown your bad behavior.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
You're too late to keep spreading that lie. Fauci already admitted that asymptomatic spread never drives an aerosol borne illness before he needed asymptomatic spread to be the main driver, conveniently, for COVID. So, just like masks, suddenly new papers came out to support the narrative where the narrative had never been supported before even with a great deal of study before COVID.For those who do care about facts:
https://www.advisory.com/en/daily-briefing/2021/01/11/asymptomatic-spread
SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms
This decision analytical model assesses the proportion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions in the community that likely occur from persons without symptoms.
Because it was so convenient, we were forced to look at all the data instead of just relying on some paper that very well may have had the kind of pressure the support letter that Peter Daszak generated. And the rest of the data says what? The charts provide the answer that this aerosol spread virus is just like all the previous ones. That of all the "super spreader" events that asymptomatic spread should have shined at never panned out like the scare mongers claimed... not a single one. That should have made you curious enough to look into it further, to check on the alarmist's claims - but you'd have to have enough concern for the little people to have the motivation to do that.
Right Divider
Body part
Such a shock and surprise...
If all information from standard sources is suspect, anything goes. As it does, apparently. So the Real Thinkers among us have to cherry pick data to fit The Truth.
Fine. I'm not playing.
Oh, but you are playing. You are playing the part exactly the way your overlords want you to play. They only need good people to do nothing in order for them to succeed.
Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, work to understand both sides of the argument. I understand your side, but you don't understand mine, which is typical of the people on the left and right (as Haidt has shown, people on the right can argue the left's positions, but not visa versa). I've read most of the papers that were available to me on mask wearing. I don't throw out what they say, I balance it against all the previous papers that were written on the subject, and that allows me to come to a correct conclusion instead of the "no conclusion" that you are claiming is the logical end to looking at both sides. So be a Real Thinker and don't assume The Truth until you look at both sides.
