Or Communists in Tyrone's case.
You make a simple statement about apparent missing data points in the analysis of scientists, and the libs lose their shit. They can't provide a reasonable explanation for the supposed missing data and they just insist that you are an idiot for not blindly "following science". And I would welcome a reasonable explanation. I'm open to changing my opinion.
It's like they are afraid that ANY questions asked of the scientists risks people dying. Questioning scientists is strictly forbidden.
And I'm a guy who was happy to be vaccinated and encourage others to get vaccinated. There's no pleasing some people.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
I'd encourage anyone to ask their primary care doctor as many questions about the vaccine as they can think of. I would also encourage them to do what their doctors say (ie, get the fucking shot) after they get the answers to those questions.
The internet has created a lot of armchair experts that use "questioning" as a way to delegitimize science.
(no message)
been fantastic. On the other hand this thing was called the novel corona virus for a reason, no one had dealt with it before. At the end of the day though, I have to go with the consensus of the infectious disease experts unless there is an extremely compelling reason not to do so. In this regard Birx, Fauci, and Collins have been considered our best minds in this area at NIH and CDC. They weren’t put in their jobs through some deep state leftist cabal. They got them through their talents. They have been in the forefront of the fight against AIDS, Zika, and Ebola. They are trying to do what’s right, not what’s politically expedient.
Many of their critics have zero of their training and experience and an ulterior political motive to pander to a certain base of people. They include the former guy and his merry men. All they cared about was what they thought would re elect him, nothing else. I give them zero credibility.
As I've said before though, all sides screwed the pooch on this pandemic. Left, Right and the scientists. The messaging and actions were wrong-headed all around.
no one had dealt with this virus before, but then there is you making claims which aren't genuine or honest.
Yes, Fauci and others assumed information before they had definite or more defined information.
Lets not forget the mongrel in office who made outrageous claims and gave out false information almost on a minute by minute basis
that Birx, Fauci and other scientists were forced to clean up.
You're inventing an argument to assail those who worked diligently to find the answers - and you're supporting the fake tanned mongrel
and his minions who worked tirelessly to create division, descension and fealty in the gov't he was in office to keep precocious for this country.
(no message)
(no message)
As noted below - you suffer from cognitive dissonance.
nice ring to it.
you seem to do with aplomb and regularity?...maybe it's just me, but if you'd provide some measure of evidence to your claims, it would really help.
BTW, I have no idea how or why you wove in the "Communist" ad hominem, but we've already addressed that, more than once. This whole topic is about a medical problem and how best to deal with it.
My 'Mantra' is simply "TRUST" in those who do this for a living, and have the CV of successes to back it up.
Provide an actual argument, drafted by you.
1) Premise 1
2) Premise 2
3) Intermediate Conclusion 1
4) Premise 3
5) Final Conclusion
You tend to post a link, and then let the reader try to discern what your argument is for themselves. That is a homework assignment, and it is not very convincing. I usually assume if the poster can't summarize the link, the link does not actually support their position. You would be surprised how often that happens. Links are great, but they do not provide a legitimate excuse for you to avoid presenting a cogent argument. Personally, if someone just posts a link, and expects me to go read it and figure out their point, I won't do it. It is just not worth it. If your goal is to convince, then try to convince. I have a lot of interests vying for my time. I gave up "reading homework assignments from others that typically don't show what they think they show" a long time ago.
Also, don't get so high and mighty. You got a little uppity on me, and I fired back (mostly because I was already annoyed with a series of "here, do some homework" posts from you). My fault. I will back off a bit.
I'm willing to reset if you are.
it is for me, so thanks. (also thanks for 'reminding me' to try out the text coloring ;-)).
What I'm hearing from you is...I tend to append links without a sufficient 'Abstract' to help you decide whether or not you should delve into it, and given your time constraints that puts you off...am I getting "warm"? If that is the case, I'll try to provide more "Clift Notes" regarding those reports, but don't forget that they typically have their own (Abstracts)...
That being said, it is totally up to you as to whether you avail yourself of the material, plus you can quit reading anytime you wish...there is literally no way I could force compliance...While I did take the time to seek-out helpful - and credible - documentation, hoping that it adds clarity and believability, I know some will not take the time as I do, to read it. This notion of "Homework Assignments" is beginning to look like a well-worn "trope", but it's your call on that.
BTW, in the technical world I was brought up in (e.g. Nuclear Reactors), any device or system changes that I wanted to implement needed to be presented to a Review Board of experts within the company in the various fields of structures, heat transfer, nuclear physics, manufacturing, quality control, licensing, etc....so just having an "opinion" was never my "go to" strategy for approval...I always brought data...perhaps that approach has stayed with me and partly explains why I append so many journal articles...they may sound like "Assignments", but I'm just trying to provide more than a simple opinion.
Let me know if you see any progress here.
You: "What I'm hearing from you is...I tend to append links without a sufficient 'Abstract' to help you decide whether or not you should delve into it, and given your time constraints that puts you off...am I getting "warm"? ...
I get it. But, I see a lot of headlines, and click bait, that I ignore on a regular basis. I'm really good at it. A mildly interesting headline will not lead me to click.
And here is the thing: A failure to click on an emotional link does not mean a general lack of empathy for the issue. Granted, I only have a certain amount of concern to dole out, so I do pick my issues. I long ago decided I can't solve all the world's problems. And, I recently realized I can't solve the nation's problems. I vote. That is all. How upset do I need to get about issues over which I have no control? I just don't think that is healthy. So, I worry about problems closer to home now. You shouldn't assume that means I have no empathy.
You: ...it is totally up to you as to whether you avail yourself of the material, plus you can quit reading anytime you wish... This notion of "Homework Assignments" is beginning to look like a well-worn "trope", but it's your call on that.
Yeah...there is a lot of stuff on the Internet to read. I don't get through my own reading materials. I often close tabs that I myself opened, because I don't have time to read them. Why would I spend energy and time on a tab someone else suggests to me if they can't spend the energy and time to try to make it sound interesting or useful to me? It just feels like I would be caring more about it than they do.
You: ...I always brought data...perhaps that approach has stayed with me and partly explains why I append so many journal articles...they may sound like "Assignments", but I'm just trying to provide more than a simple opinion.
Attaching appendices to a report, and then not providing the report...that is the problem. If you are to give a presentation, or argue for a point, you should do it. Don't just show up to the meeting, and handout the raw materials that led to your conclusion, then accuse people not caring like you do when they get up to leave the room. That's not good advocacy. Weave the data into your cogent argument. Take the time to distill your position to key principles so people can say, "Hmmm. That may be interesting. Maybe I will look further into that."
This is, after all, an internet forum, not a nuclear reactor design team meeting...and it is not even primarily a political forum...although I know it seems like it is.
You: Let me know if you see any progress here.
So far.... :-)
should have left that off the earlier post.
I’ve tried to get this message across to Roney Rone too, but to avail.
(no message)
(no message)
I'm above using this same tactic towards you.
(no message)
All you've done is parrot the "trust the experts" line.
I have no interest in debating "T-Cells", etc.,just your personal assertion being taken as Fact without any other evidence. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just that you refuse to provide any...at this time...but I'll wait.
This is the least surprising revelation of the day...
(no message)
Link: T Cells and COVID
Someone posted an article referencing T cells below. I'll look for a specific article that mentions the H1N1 issue.
(no message)
(no message)
And the affects on society take more nuanced thinking to appreciate.