aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 4:18 pm

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.

Your argument is: suspend civil rights on the basis of un-elected unaccountable experts and then see if they were correct or not at some undetermined time in the future?

I’m not here to educate you on how civil societies work but needless to say, tattoo COVID DO TREAT on your and your families forehead and I’ll believe you are walking the WALK!

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/

Spiked is owned by Spiked Limited, which is a company owned by Frank Furedi and Jennie Bristow. Funding has come from the Charles Koch Foundation and currently revenue is generated through donations and onsite advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Spiked publishes news and commentary with a conservative/libertarian bias.
(https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/spiked-magazine/)

Charles Koch Foundation
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... foundation

I guess you could call it an intrepretation.

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 4:39 pm It's not really at odds with it at all.

Maybe I'm making a fine point but..

I gave a possible interpretation of the poll results you posted. No doubt there can be other interpretations.

The Spiked view does not refer to the poll hence I don't see it as directly related nor an interpretation of it. It is a separate view/opinion the way I see it.

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 4:44 pm

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/

Spiked is owned by Spiked Limited, which is a company owned by Frank Furedi and Jennie Bristow. Funding has come from the Charles Koch Foundation and currently revenue is generated through donations and onsite advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Spiked publishes news and commentary with a conservative/libertarian bias.
(https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/spiked-magazine/)

Charles Koch Foundation
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... foundation

I guess you could call it an intrepretation.

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

The valid types of ad hominem arguments are generally only encountered in specialized philosophical usage. These typically refer to the dialectical strategy of using the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 5:01 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 4:44 pm

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/

Spiked is owned by Spiked Limited, which is a company owned by Frank Furedi and Jennie Bristow. Funding has come from the Charles Koch Foundation and currently revenue is generated through donations and onsite advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Spiked publishes news and commentary with a conservative/libertarian bias.
(https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/spiked-magazine/)

Charles Koch Foundation
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... foundation

I guess you could call it an intrepretation.

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

The valid types of ad hominem arguments are generally only encountered in specialized philosophical usage. These typically refer to the dialectical strategy of using the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I have google if I don t know the meanining of a wordI have the ability to search it's meaning. I also am aware of the meaning of Ad Hominem amd do not need to search that particular word. I did not attack you, I simply stated that Spiked is a well known right wing disinformation site funded by US billionaires. Yes they have what could be called an "interpretation" of current affairs. Condescending posts rarely illicit intelligent conversations. I can assure you my command of the English language is sufficient to comprehend what is being posted. Now that you have played your victim card I am more than willing and able to debate the topic.

Your response to the article I posted "used the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments."

In other words, you did not address the content of the article. Rather you just posted something someone says about the article publisher's politics and funding.

This is ad hominem, which is fallacious and avoids genuine debate.

If you'd like to discuss the subject seriously, perhaps you could address what is said by the doctor in the article, rather than telling me who funds the website that published the article.

Thanks.

Apparently some members here believe that government gives value to currency (if it can bail out at a whim by printing a few trillion) rather than productive forces of society. Oh well, i got no time to teach currency devaluation, you will feel it by yourself, especially individuals on a fixed income.

Well, here's the latest from Doctor Soumya Swaminathan, chief scientist of the World Health Organization:

Historically, less than 10 percent of vaccine candidates that go into testing are successful. If some of the vaccines in human clinical trials are effective, they should be available sometime next year. But when exactly is very hard to predict. Very optimistically, the timeline for the first doses would be the first half of 2021.

It is important to note that even with a successful vaccine, there will be a limited number of doses initially. We will not have eight or ten billion doses available to be able to vaccinate the whole world. We might have a few hundred million doses, meaning we would have to prioritise some sections of the population - such as front-line workers, health workers, social care workers and others who are at very high risk. Thereafter, manufacturing can be scaled up, and more vaccine candidates tested. And hopefully, by 2022, we will be in a position to have many more vaccines available.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featu ... 50273.html

That's 2022, hopefully, if everything goes perfectly.

I wouldn't hold my breathe friends.

[Mod edit: reply to off topic]

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 5:39 pm Your response to the article I posted "used the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments."

In other words, you did not address the content of the article. Rather you just posted something someone says about the article publisher's politics and funding.

This is ad hominem, which is fallacious and avoids genuine debate.

If you'd like to discuss the subject seri His claim that"ously, perhaps you could address what is said by the doctor in the article, rather than telling me who funds the website that published the article.

Thanks.

I agree with Dr Brendan Lee when he stated "The fact is that although we know a lot about viruses, we know very little about how they spread in public spaces and the population. " When he refers to the government I assume he refers to the UK government but he fails to be specific. As such any reader would not know which government "in psychological operations"and offers no proof to back up his outrageous assertion. His claim " It takes much more courage to stand up and admit you do not know much about something, and so should not do anything" is proposterous. While it may in his view be corageous to admit that I know little about caring for a stabbing victim the suggestion that i do nothing to help the victim of a knife wound borders on lunacy.
His claim that "Part of the problem with perceptions of the virus is that the public debate, apart from on outlets like spiked the Spectator, has been shut down." appears to very self serving.

The Tories pushed ahead with lifting the lockdown just as the official British death toll rose to over 42,000 and other countries showed signs of another spike...
https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/50250 ... more+death

Extremist groups are beginning to recognise the scale of the Covid-19 pandemic, seeing opportunities to exploit fears, exacerbate tensions and mobilise supporters while governments are occupied with trying to address Covid-19....
Snapshot: How Extremist Groups are Responding to Covid-19 (9 April 2020)

Excellent reads detailing how poorly right wing governments have done in dealing with the covid pandemic and how ultra right wing extremist have spread disinformation about covid 19. I look forward to rebuttal.