The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Kung-fu Hillbilly · Post by **Kung-fu Hillbilly** » Tue May 04, 2021 3:20 pm

COVID is being filmed at Paramount Studios.

Next to the Mars landings.

Post by **Freightdog** » Tue May 04, 2021 3:53 pm

Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pm
SternAAlbifrons wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 12:38 am The covid deniers, anti-vaxers and anti hard effectively conducted containment measures retrogrades are exactly the same as the human induced climate change deniers and those who believe the world cant easily get to 50% carbon reduction by 2030 if we turn our mind to it.

Very small minds.
Ignore the fat comfortable smug fools. They are only dangerous if you give them validity.
Talking science with them is just as pointless as discussing biology or geology with the fundamentalist "the world was created at 10.47am, 4321 days ago " crew.
Hasn't the climate thing taken a step for the better due to COVID? I mean its not like a lot people are flying or driving cars around the entire globe, surely it had a decent dent in achieving any carbon reduction targets? Asking for a friend & all that. Not saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

Speaking for myself, and what I see out there, while I hool’ around the skies in 30year old plus crates, pressed into end of life service as freighters.
The skies, especially noticeable last year, were clearer. From lower altitudes looking up into the sky, higher level cloud had more definition, there was a less uniform, washed out appearance during the day, and at night there was much more clarity to constellations. With so little air traffic, it seemed we had the skies to ourselves.
We’ve become a big used to it, now. We get longer direct routings from ATC with less traffic in the way.

On the subject of deniers, and thinking about climate. There’s another member of a car club to which I belong who is quite firm on the subject of climate change. Firm in his conviction that it’s nothing to do with humans. We have no impact. Anything that happens is as a consequence of climate itself, and whatever we do as humans is of no consequence.
He’s a clever guy, very talented. Generally, not some spaced out foil hatted loon. He and I shall never have a one on one, person to person conversation, because his stance is absolutely rigid, with no room to consider any counter-views. An unreasonable person, offering flawed statements.

Now, I translate that to COVID.
You have the nay sayers. Not all are spaced out, foil hatted loons. There’s a lot of practical, intelligent people in there, too. But, because COVID hasn’t affected them, yet the various precautions have, they’re rigidly against the idea that it’s genuine. Alongside that are the loons, fools and people simply too damned lazy to think. Easily swayed by others opinions, and equally resentful at all the restrictions.

At the other end of the spectrum are the people whose paranoia and fear, fed by a media which does seem to bias things towards apocalyptic, has them go too far. Are a little too rigid in their application of the rules to the point of insanity and hysteria. Their foil hats made from the same materials as their counterparts. The rules say 1m, so they’ll insist on 2m. People whose job it is to interact directly with public, but too fearful of the hidden zombie to actually interact properly.

There was mention early on in flattening the curve. I think they may have flattened the distribution curve of intelligence, too.

Spigzy · Post by **Spigzy** » Tue May 04, 2021 5:11 pm

Freightdog wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:53 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pm
SternAAlbifrons wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 12:38 am The covid deniers, anti-vaxers and anti hard effectively conducted containment measures retrogrades are exactly the same as the human induced climate change deniers and those who believe the world cant easily get to 50% carbon reduction by 2030 if we turn our mind to it.

Very small minds.
Ignore the fat comfortable smug fools. They are only dangerous if you give them validity.
Talking science with them is just as pointless as discussing biology or geology with the fundamentalist "the world was created at 10.47am, 4321 days ago " crew.
Hasn't the climate thing taken a step for the better due to COVID? I mean its not like a lot people are flying or driving cars around the entire globe, surely it had a decent dent in achieving any carbon reduction targets? Asking for a friend & all that. Not saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

Speaking for myself, and what I see out there, while I hool’ around the skies in 30year old plus crates, pressed into end of life service as freighters.
The skies, especially noticeable last year, were clearer. From lower altitudes looking up into the sky, higher level cloud had more definition, there was a less uniform, washed out appearance during the day, and at night there was much more clarity to constellations. With so little air traffic, it seemed we had the skies to ourselves.
We’ve become a big used to it, now. We get longer direct routings from ATC with less traffic in the way.

On the subject of deniers, and thinking about climate. There’s another member of a car club to which I belong who is quite firm on the subject of climate change. Firm in his conviction that it’s nothing to do with humans. We have no impact. Anything that happens is as a consequence of climate itself, and whatever we do as humans is of no consequence.
He’s a clever guy, very talented. Generally, not some spaced out foil hatted loon. He and I shall never have a one on one, person to person conversation, because his stance is absolutely rigid, with no room to consider any counter-views. An unreasonable person, offering flawed statements.

Now, I translate that to COVID.
You have the nay sayers. Not all are spaced out, foil hatted loons. There’s a lot of practical, intelligent people in there, too. But, because COVID hasn’t affected them, yet the various precautions have, they’re rigidly against the idea that it’s genuine. Alongside that are the loons, fools and people simply too damned lazy to think. Easily swayed by others opinions, and equally resentful at all the restrictions.

At the other end of the spectrum are the people whose paranoia and fear, fed by a media which does seem to bias things towards apocalyptic, has them go too far. Are a little too rigid in their application of the rules to the point of insanity and hysteria. Their foil hats made from the same materials as their counterparts. The rules say 1m, so they’ll insist on 2m. People whose job it is to interact directly with public, but too fearful of the hidden zombie to actually interact properly.

There was mention early on in flattening the curve. I think they may have flattened the distribution curve of intelligence, too.

Thanks Freightdog, good 1st hand account

It must be something about guys in car clubs ... being clever, very talented, etc

I'm not a COVID denier, but my stance is still very edged on the side of "don't panic". Not because it isn't lethal, not because it isn't contagious - but simply because it's here, it isn't going away, so at what point do you just accept that there's a deadly virus out there, which mutates, and you've got to get on with life.

For other deadly inectious diseases, take measles for instance, you get a vaccine - you become immune, job done. Like Smallpox vaccine, it is bulletproof apparently - and I'm a big fan of that, got those vaccinations, my kids had them (in MMR format, oh my!). But these COVID vaccines I see whilst genuinely amazing, lifesaving in some cases, I don't think we'll ever see the end of new versions of them. Akin to the flu vaccine (comparing the vaccine, NOT the virus), you're going to need to have a new one every year as this thing mutates over and over. So I'm in a pickle - would I have the current vaccine? Sure, once all the vulnerable are protected & it's my turn in the queue (British you see, I appreciate a good orderly queue!). But if you said to me "and another one next year, and again, and again.." - I'd be inclined to say "sod it, if it's my time, it's my time" - no different to rolling to work on a motorbike when I have a car parked in the garage. Sometimes you just want to live, I think for many it is why we chose Cambodia - freedom, with a bit of edge to it.

Post by **Freightdog** » Tue May 04, 2021 5:34 pm

Spigzy wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 5:11 pm
Thanks Freightdog, good 1st hand account

It must be something about guys in car clubs ... being clever, very talented, etc I'm not a COVID denier, but my stance is still very edged on the side of "don't panic". Not because it isn't lethal, not because it isn't contagious - but simply because it's here, it isn't going away, so at what point do you just accept that there's a deadly virus out there, which mutates, and you've got to get on with life.

This seems to me to be exactly how it should be. No panic, no hysteria. I massively resent many of the hoops that we have to jump through, the crass stupidity that seems to have infected so many. But I need to go to work. The other alternative is not a practical option.
I'd prefer if I didn't have to interact with so much institutionalised idiocy- there's enough with aviation security as it is. Many covid responses are actually in conflict with security practices, which makes heading to work a seriously unpleasant business at times.

John Bingham · Post by **John Bingham** » Tue May 04, 2021 7:21 pm

Spigzy wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 5:11 pm I think for many it is why we chose Cambodia - freedom, with a bit of edge to it.

I would have agreed with that until about 2 weeks or so back.

nerdlinger · Post by **nerdlinger** » Tue May 04, 2021 9:33 pm

Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pmNot saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

I find the term “question the science” highly problematic. It implies that the “scientists” are this monolithic entity that haven’t been doing their job properly, and the only ones that can set them straight are an assortment of politicians and social media users.

Scientists are *always* questioning the science, that’s what science *is*.

Kung-fu Hillbilly · Post by **Kung-fu Hillbilly** » Tue May 04, 2021 9:41 pm

nerdlinger wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:33 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pmNot saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

I find the term “question the science” highly problematic. It implies that the “scientists” are this monolithic entity that haven’t been doing their job properly, and the only ones that can set them straight are an assortment of politicians and social media users.

Scientists are *always* questioning the science, that’s what science *is*.

It's rather odd, isn't it? People who have no knowledge whatsoever of the field/science will discard the data, results or predictions from thousands who have dedicated their entire lives working very hard to understand a problem with something akin to "Yep, don't look right to me - something wrong with the science, I reckon."

Jerry Atrick · Post by **Jerry Atrick** » Tue May 04, 2021 9:52 pm

Kung-fu Hillbilly wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:41 pm
nerdlinger wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:33 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pmNot saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

I find the term “question the science” highly problematic. It implies that the “scientists” are this monolithic entity that haven’t been doing their job properly, and the only ones that can set them straight are an assortment of politicians and social media users.

Scientists are *always* questioning the science, that’s what science *is*.
It's rather odd, isn't it? People who have no knowledge whatsoever of the field/science will discard the data, results or predictions from thousands who have dedicated their entire lives working very hard to understand a problem with something akin to "Yep, don't look right to me - something wrong with the science, I reckon."

Similarly, lay people with no knowledge the field/science will accept the first pov that suits their bias in any given way

It's all rather hopeless

Kung-fu Hillbilly · Post by **Kung-fu Hillbilly** » Tue May 04, 2021 9:56 pm

Jerry Atrick wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:52 pm
Kung-fu Hillbilly wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:41 pm
nerdlinger wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:33 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pmNot saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

I find the term “question the science” highly problematic. It implies that the “scientists” are this monolithic entity that haven’t been doing their job properly, and the only ones that can set them straight are an assortment of politicians and social media users.

Scientists are *always* questioning the science, that’s what science *is*.
It's rather odd, isn't it? People who have no knowledge whatsoever of the field/science will discard the data, results or predictions from thousands who have dedicated their entire lives working very hard to understand a problem with something akin to "Yep, don't look right to me - something wrong with the science, I reckon."

Similarly, lay people with no knowledge the field/science will accept the first pov that suits their bias in any given way

It's all rather hopeless

Most informed lay people wanting truth understand the mechanisms of peer review.

Jerry Atrick · Post by **Jerry Atrick** » Tue May 04, 2021 9:58 pm

Kung-fu Hillbilly wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:56 pm
Jerry Atrick wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:52 pm
Kung-fu Hillbilly wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:41 pm
nerdlinger wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:33 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 11:25 pmNot saying we shouldn't still do more (plastic removal, etc), but if those emissions figures haven't change, it is surely time to question the science?

I find the term “question the science” highly problematic. It implies that the “scientists” are this monolithic entity that haven’t been doing their job properly, and the only ones that can set them straight are an assortment of politicians and social media users.

Scientists are *always* questioning the science, that’s what science *is*.
It's rather odd, isn't it? People who have no knowledge whatsoever of the field/science will discard the data, results or predictions from thousands who have dedicated their entire lives working very hard to understand a problem with something akin to "Yep, don't look right to me - something wrong with the science, I reckon."

Similarly, lay people with no knowledge the field/science will accept the first pov that suits their bias in any given way

It's all rather hopeless
Most informed lay people wanting truth understand the mechanisms of peer review.

An optimist

Most lay folk seem to live in fear transmitted through these little devices we all have in our pockets since recently

The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Re: The Covid deniers out there and how to handle them.

Who is online

Register/Login to CEO with your Social Media Account: