381–390 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the potential downsides are greater than the upside, I would classify it as useless if not outright dangerous.
You seem to be one of those drivers of "popular narrative"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What specifically did you say that got you banned?
Posting public data from the county Covid dashboard. “It’s dangerous” I was told.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...
It's fine because you didn't intend to harm anyone, but now that you know it's dangerous, if you kept spreading that public data, we would know you intended harm and your behaviour would be rightly considered malinformation. That would be double plus bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that is a complete overreaction. You can still call out "aliens did it" or other obvious nonsense.
Framing the dissenting opinion as equivalent to "aliens did it" is exactly the problem. When the opinion turns out correct are you going to continue making those categorization errors? What lead to that mistake in the first place?
You made a category error by somehow replacing "opinions which are obvious nonsense" with "any dissenting opinion whatsoever".
Nobody but you suggested that. The claim was that you cannot say anything at all about any "dissenting opinion" unless you are 100% sure you are correct. That is nonsense. You can obviously say something about some of them, while not being confident enough to rule out some others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The evidence wasn't perfect, but you have to operate using the best working evidence you have. It's logical that face coverings reduce spread of a virus spread primarily through respiratory droplets. You're making two mistakes here, that mask advocates frequently make: 1. At the time this decision was made there was no evidence that masks would have any effect. That's why public health officials around the world we…
> This isn't how it works. COVID spreads like a gas Nonsense. The virus spreads primarily through salivary droplets. Please don't peddle this rubbish. There is some aerosol transmission, but most infections happen at short range. Masks aren't perfectly effective but they do help, and that has saved lives. If you don't even understand the basic science then educate yourself before commenting.
If you want more evidence, try:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16696450/
SARS-1 spread through an apartment building by using drain pipes. No droplet transmission is capable of that. For SARS-CoV-2 the same thing happened on the Diamond Princess cruise ship. People were locked in their cabins, yet, the virus still spread through the ship without difficulty. This was very early evidence the spread-through-droplets theory couldn't be correct, but was ignored by public health.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be one of those drivers of "popular narrative"
It truly is easier to fool someone than convince them they have been fooled. Best of luck to you lad.
Consider me crucified.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think anybody with a feeling to go with the words 'exponential growth' could tell that this virus was going to be a huge problem from very early on. That turned out to be a surprisingly small minority.
Except they don’t spread exponentially like some startup hockey stick growth chart. They might start exponentially but eventually it gets harder and harder to find the next host to the spread peaks and eventually declines. The chart of a virus spread is not really exponential at all. Way too many people took “exponential growth” way to literally, causing panic and mayhem.
I've had some relatives die, I've spent large portions of the pandemic cooped up inside with kids, I've missed funerals, etc - and I think earlier in the pandemic, I was probably about as emotionally engaged as you are, except, in the other direction. Now, I don't really have much of an opinion about it. Why do you continue to care?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This isn't how it works. COVID spreads like a gas Nonsense. The virus spreads primarily through salivary droplets. Please don't peddle this rubbish. There is some aerosol transmission, but most infections happen at short range. Masks aren't perfectly effective but they do help, and that has saved lives. If you don't even understand the basic science then educate yourself before commenting.
That was the belief at the start of the pandemic. Oddly so because it was inconsistent with how things like SARS-1 spread. Very few people believe the droplet theory now, because it's inconsistent with the evidence. For example if it was really spreading this way, then masks would have an immediate and visible impact on case curves, but they don't. If you want more evidence, try: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16696…
Again, absolute nonsense.
World Health Organisation:
"Current evidence suggests that the virus spreads mainly between people who are in close contact with each other, for example at a conversational distance. The virus can spread from an infected person’s mouth or nose in small liquid particles when they cough, sneeze, speak, sing or breathe."[0]
> People were locked in their cabins, yet, the virus still spread through the ship without difficulty.
No one is disputing that the virus spreads through aerosol distribution. The majority of spread is through salivary droplets. Is your argument seriously that because there is some aerosol spread, that somehow disproves the model that spread is mainly through salivary droplets?
If you are unable to understand the argument I don't see how we can continue the conversation.
[0] https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cor...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Framing the dissenting opinion as equivalent to "aliens did it" is exactly the problem. When the opinion turns out correct are you going to continue making those categorization errors? What lead to that mistake in the first place?
> Framing the dissenting opinion as equivalent to "aliens did it" is exactly the problem. You made a category error by somehow replacing "opinions which are obvious nonsense" with "any dissenting opinion whatsoever". Nobody but you suggested that. The claim was that you cannot say anything at all about any "dissenting opinion" unless you are 100% sure you are correct. That is nonsense. You can obviously say something…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are adults. You tell them the truth. Lies don’t work as well now that we have access to so much information. We now have a sizable percentage of people who not only don’t care what the WHO has to say, but also want to outright cut funding to the organization. Great outcome. Panick avoided.
> People are adults. No, not really. Not all, at least. I vividly recall from the start of the very first lockdown, when the only people expected to be outside were those attending pressing matters like restocking provisions on supermarket, the local police caught a middle age man who was avoiding the lockdown by strolling around repeatedly with the same days-old loaf of bread under his arm. He didn't even bothered t…
Why are you a fascist?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was never any valid justification for the police to harass a man going for a stroll. Real adults actively resist overbearing authoritarian governments instead of meekly submitting.
> There was never any valid justification for the police to harass a man going for a stroll. Have you been living under a rock for the past two years? There was a pandemic killing hundreds of people per day, and the only effective way to stop it from continue growing exponentially was to ensure everyone stayed put for a few days. How is that "not a valid justification" ? I mean, think about it for a second: law enfor…
...it didn't stop it. Lockdowns didn't do anything. We had 14 days to stop the spread, and that was roughly 700 days ago. There isn't any evidence that lockdowns work at all.
