Coronavirus: Already In a Neighborhood Near You

[oblong]

35 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

This was my understanding as well.  Then it flipped to you have to do whatever the government tells you too and if you don't, you're a selfish prick people you care more about your freedoms than some persons life.  So if you don't like flock cameras, STFU you selfish prick.  You don't like data centers which could do wonders to help medical research, STFU you selfish prick.  You are good with 65-75mph on the freeway, you selfish prick, demand much lower speed limits.   This may sound ridiculous, but remember there was a time where people couldn't go to the beach and those fighting to go to the beach (even with 6 foot spacing and masks) were labeled crazy MAGAs that cared more about chilling at the beach than a local 90 year old.

People are still dying from Covid today, so why isn't the DNC, which cares about people, not demanding we lock downs again?  

because the ****ing ICU's are not full like they were in 2020/2021.

Frankly, the people "fighting the government" were not doing it out of intelligence or common sense.  They were just being assholes because they are a bunch of whiny cry babies.  Nobody gives a **** about mental health until it allegedly affects them. 

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, Edman85 said:

Do we know for sure children were vectors? I thought some of the stuff that has come out since has shown they  really weren't, but that is admittedly vague and with the benefit of hindsight.

exactly. It was unknown at the time. They did become infected so the 1st assumption would have to be they could also be infectious.

When I used to do safety lectures I would remind 18yr olds that real life is not a video game, you can't screw around with dangerous things, try stuff, get killed and then just reboot. I think the 'well, we should just try it and see what happens' mentality has become much more pervasive culturally because we have in general made our society so safe for so many for so long we've lost the natural level of fear we need to have. 

[ewsieg]

55 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I agree there was an overreaction, but the opposite extreme was worse and they still haven't let go of the conspiracy theories.  

I'm not arguing that MAGA/MAHA got it right and the extreme on the right absolutely are still pretty extreme.  But to go along with Bush's quote "Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples—while judging ourselves by our best intentions", seems like most of this board is alright by saying their side may not have been perfect, but in the end, they were doing it for the best intentions, so don't question it.  In fact if you do, you're a selfish prick. The other side though.... those horrible people, they had the worst intentions, so whatever they got wrong, it's probably because they wanted your grandparents to die.

[pfife]

I think the conservatives do not act in good faith on this issue.   Much like a bummers post 

[chasfh]

Jesus, how much evidence do people need to see to see how dangerous these Trump people are? Or is it that their media is not showing them any evidence at all?

[chasfh]

I think their actual internally-stated goal might be to have Fauci die in a state of disgrace. History will exonerate him eventually, of course, since he contributed to saving millions of lives in this country, including those of so many people relentlessly ****-posting now, but these weasels have no shame. 

 

[oblong]

I define your character by your opinion of Fauci.

 

[Edman85]

Somebody somewhere pointed out Rand and RFK both have books trashing Fauci out and this is a new corrupt way to simply juice those sales. I forget where I saw that but it makes sense.

[ewsieg]

2 hours ago, oblong said:

I define your character by your opinion of Fauci.

Characterize me all you want, but I still don't believe I have enough info to give a full opinion.  His work with AIDS helped countless lives, as did his work how we dealt with Covid.  He should be applauded for that.  

But it's pretty clear he skirted some lines when it came to gain of function and as more and more evidence comes out, there are more and more red flags that this leaked out of the Wuhan lab.  How much did he know is something i'd love to know about.  Both political sides seem to have their own interest on what that answer is yet neither care enough about the truth to try and find out.  In the end, it's possible Fauci played a role in a mass death event.  

If a fireman comes in and saves my families lives, I'm going to be grateful for that.  But if I find out he may have started the fire, well that changes things a bit.

[smr-nj]

This is patently evil.  
 

People just absolutely have lost their minds, and for sure, their moral compass.

Evil.

[smr-nj]

This is so much a theatrical exercise.

Fauci has immunity, so their holding him in contempt is done for one reason only. It’s for their personal Tarzan-like chest beating and continued perpetration of the same ****ing lies they’ve been spewing at the faithful for the last six years.

Personally, I look forward to the day when they all rot in hell because that’s exactly what they deserve.

[chasfh]

9 hours ago, smr-nj said:

This is so much a theatrical exercise.

Fauci has immunity, so their holding him in contempt is done for one reason only. It’s for their personal Tarzan-like chest beating and continued perpetration of the same ****ing lies they’ve been spewing at the faithful for the last six years.

Personally, I look forward to the day when they all rot in hell because that’s exactly what they deserve.

The other thing to remember is that by trying to get him to testify, they’re hoping to get him on a perjury charge. And it doesn’t even have to be for an actual lie. You know how these people are: all they want is to charge him publicly, give him the appearance of guilt, and then bankrupt him by having to defend himself. But even if that doesn’t go so far, his reputation gets cemented as being at least questionable among less-than-well-informed people, which make up the majority of people, by the appearance of impropriety from merely being charged.

[gehringer_2]

33 minutes ago, chasfh said:

The other thing to remember is that by trying to get him to testify, they’re hoping to get him on a perjury charge. And it doesn’t even have to be for an actual lie. You know how these people are: all they want is to charge him publicly, give him the appearance of guilt, and then bankrupt him by having to defend himself. But even if that doesn’t go so far, his reputation gets cemented as being at least questionable among less-than-well-informed people, which make up the majority of people, by the appearance of impropriety from merely being charged.

He's playing it just right. He's retired, out of the game. He's not responsible for anyone else now. He needs nothing from them so he's free to do just what he is doing, which is don't play. Give them nothing.

Edited August 7 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

He's playing it just right. He's retired, out of the game. He's not responsible for anyone else now. He needs nothing from them so he's free to do just what he is doing, which is don't play. Give them nothing.

And sure, that’s fine, although the cost to him is not nothing. At the very least it’s the spending of his time and energy, something an octogenarian doesn’t benefit from.

[oblong]

When in human history have the people who go after the scientists ever been the good guys?

 

[gehringer_2]

10 minutes ago, oblong said:

When in human history have the people who go after the scientists ever been the good guys?

 

Galileo says 'Hi'

[chasfh]

 

[Netnerd]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

 

The Rug Doctor.

[VegasTiger]

I have to throw in DR. Robert.

[chasfh]

36 minutes ago, VegasTiger said:

I have to throw in DR. Robert.

Well well well, you're feeling fine ...

[Tiger337]

Scientists are the type of nerds that leave their small home towns, go away to fancy colleges and then become elitists.  I think that is the basis of the anti-science movement.  It's mostly jealousy, but it's dangerous.  

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

Scientists are the type of nerds that leave their small home towns, go away to fancy colleges and then become elitists.  I think that is the basis of the anti-science movement.  It's mostly jealousy, but it's dangerous.  

this, and more. I think it also has something to do with the way science has evolved. When modern science started in the Enlightenment era with guys like Newton, they could talk in terms of simple certainties: F = ma. Simple, easy. certain. The world was described as a place that behaved.

But all the simple stuff was done by the middle of the 20th century. Most new science is at deep levels of complexity - esp in medicine, where only the charlatans are willing to talk in simple absolutes. But the public always wants certainties, and no-one that won't supply them is going to be a popular messenger.

There is also the rise in conflict between science and the Bible literalists, which is also a fairly modern phenomenon. It's always been there to some degree - remember the Scopes trial and "Inherit the Wind", but the until 2nd half of the 20th century both the RCC and the dominant mainstream Protestant sects were all ok with modern science and Genesis as allegory. The rise of evangelical fundamentalist Christianity and bible literalism elevated the level of conflict between Science and American religion way beyond where it had been.

Edited Sunday at 11:11 PM by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

this, and more. I think it also has something to do with the way science has evolved. When modern science started in the Enlightenment era with guys like Newton, they could talk in terms of simple certainties: F = ma. Simple, easy. certain. The world was described as a place that behaved.

But all the simple stuff was done by the middle of the 20th century. Most new science is at deep levels of complexity - esp in medicine, where only the charlatans are willing to talk in simple absolutes. But the public always wants certainties, and no-one that won't supply them is going to be a popular messenger.

There is also the rise in conflict between science and the Bible literalists, which is also a fairly modern phenomenon. It's always been there to some degree - remember the Scopes trial and "Inherit the Wind", but the until 2nd half of the 20th century both the RCC and the dominant mainstream Protestant sects were all ok with modern science and Genesis as allegory. The rise of evangelical fundamentalist Christianity and bible literalism elevated the level of conflict between Science and American religion way beyond where it had been.

To your point about the public wanting certainties, I have found that most people, even a lot of smart ones, have a difficult time with the concept of probability.  I am not talking about mathematical probability, but just the concept of probably versus maybe or certainly. The vast majority of debates I have had with people over the years have involved people not able or not willing to deal with probability.  Most people tend to think either in terms of yes or no or just possibilities.  That is OK in sports, but not in anything involving science or any of the important issues of the day.    

[Tigeraholic1]

How could he be guilty?

 

 

[romad1]