chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:02 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:49 pm

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

Lockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.

It is a crime against humanity to force everyone to not have a life because of some senior and/or obese citizens who may or may not (and most are not) be at risk.

The enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.

And to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.

Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.

Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.

This common sense transcends politics.

That settles it! All those years of pandemic research and hundreds of millions of dollars wasted! If only they would have listened to you!? Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..? Maybe if we impaled you’d begin to empathize? Anyway there’s a new forum group for you and your friends ...cambodiaexpatsonline.com/forums/iknoweverthing.asp

I am allowed to have an opinion and express my values. They are every bit as correct and deserve the same consideration as any "expert" opinion. Epidemiologists are not gods. The respect they deserve is a consequence of providing genuine, falsifiable science. That is not what these lockdowns are. There is no falsifiable science involved. This is all about personal values and beliefs.

Your apparent intolerance of any opinion that differs from your own says more about you than it does about me.

Did you click the link to find your friends? Alternatively, tattoo on your forehead COVID DO NOT TREAT! Also get your family to do likewise. I’ll then grovel on here that I respect your opinion! Alternatively, go and hit by a car, lie on the operating table and start a discussion with the surgeon on whether he know better than you? Again I’ll grovel. Pls post pics!!!

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:10 pm

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:02 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:49 pm

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pm

And to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.

Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.

Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.

This common sense transcends politics.

That settles it! All those years of pandemic research and hundreds of millions of dollars wasted! If only they would have listened to you!? Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..? Maybe if we impaled you’d begin to empathize? Anyway there’s a new forum group for you and your friends ...cambodiaexpatsonline.com/forums/iknoweverthing.asp

I am allowed to have an opinion and express my values. They are every bit as correct and deserve the same consideration as any "expert" opinion. Epidemiologists are not gods. The respect they deserve is a consequence of providing genuine, falsifiable science. That is not what these lockdowns are. There is no falsifiable science involved. This is all about personal values and beliefs.

Your apparent intolerance of any opinion that differs from your own says more about you than it does about me.

Did you click the link to find your friends? Alternatively, tattoo on your forehead COVID DO NOT TREAT! Also get your family to do likewise. I’ll then grovel on here that I respect your opinion! Alternatively, go and hit by a car, lie on the operating table and start a discussion with the surgeon on whether he know better than you? Again I’ll grovel. Pls post pics!!!

Why on earth would you think that disagreeing with lockdowns means I don't want to be treated if I become infected with a virus? That is totally nonsensical.

And I have no problem with anything based on genuine, falsifiable science. Surgery after a car accident can be falsifiably shown to help. Therefore, there is no area for disagreement. However, when a doctor or any other "expert" expresses his opinion in the absence of falsifiable science, such as whether or not lockdowns are worth the cost, it is simply his opinion. And I have my opinion, which is at least as valid as his.

You can continue to disparage anyone who disagrees with you, or accept that those with differing opinions have as much right to them as you do to yours.

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:18 pm To be clear... I disagreed with your opinion essentially saying experts know better. You disagree that I can have an opinion in disagreeing with you because you’re allowed to have an opinion in peddling shit but I’m not allowed to defend science.

Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..?

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:30 pm

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:18 pm To be clear... I disagreed with your opinion essentially saying experts know better. You disagree that I can have an opinion in disagreeing with you because you’re allowed to have an opinion in peddling shit but I’m not allowed to defend science.

Yes, it's one thing to disagree and put an alternative view but another if you denigrate, rubbish that opinion and/or poster.

Also here:

Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..?

I suggest we move on with the topic.

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:51 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:32 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pm

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

Depends who you ask.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.

And to me it shows the number of people in America that care about more than only their personal wellbeing is greater than those whocould give a shit about anything other than themslves.

Huh, so businesses that pay into the national coffers care less than those who leech from those coffers. Caring with deeds is inferior to caring with empty words. I don’t know what twisted logic brought you to this conclusion.

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:44 pmEssentially, armchair scientists are dangerous and no more so than in the middle of a pandemic. Just like we wouldn’t question a brain surgeons training if we were lying on the table, questioning the experts at this time is far from helpful, moreover counterproductive. We need to follow the advice. Pubic inquiries into the response should come later. Pandemic research is no less complex than any other science and yet we would hardly have a discussion here regarding the qualifications of particle physicists to understand quantum entanglement or the question posed by the double slit quantum eraser paradox.

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:32 pmOne interpretation from this could be that the number of deaths (currently 1,000 per day and rising) is turning the tide of public opinion in the US about how to control the infection and the associated impacts that can be tolerated ie weighing up the number of deaths of fellow citizens against how their own lives are being compromised and the costs to the economy.

This is probably a horrible thing to do because imo it essentially means considering..what is the price of a life? I can't speak for the US but in Australia there seems to be a 'save lives at all cost' notion when dealing with restrictions. Not making any judgement whether it's right or wrong..just saying these are the difficult issues.

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 4:23 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:32 pmOne interpretation from this could be that the number of deaths (currently 1,000 per day and rising) is turning the tide of public opinion in the US about how to control the infection and the associated impacts that can be tolerated ie weighing up the number of deaths of fellow citizens against how their own lives are being compromised and the costs to the economy.

This is probably a horrible thing to do because imo it essentially means considering..what is the price of a life? I can't speak for the US but in Australia there seems to be a 'save lives at all cost' notion when dealing with restrictions. Not making any judgement whether it's right or wrong..just saying these are the difficult issues.

Here's another interpretation: https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/08/0 ... an-states/

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.