dualstow wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:27 pm
I don't know if it's disingenuous, but its a lot of Rickards with no commentary. An embarrassment of Rickards.
yankees60 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 10:13 amCapture.JPG
Do you have a take on the above?
Generally not a concern of mine. But it seems like this type of thing would be of concern to more than a few here. But maybe I've misread those people.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
pp4me wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:03 pm
Just finished reading this free PDF called "COVID Charts CNN Forgot" by Tom Woods. You have to provide your email address to download it but you can unsubscribe at any time from future mailings....
If only you hadn't eaten in that restaurant, or hadn't allowed 11 people at your father's funeral instead of 10, or hadn't acted even slightly like a human being, the numbers would have declined.
Time to smash this as the b.s. it obviously is.
The "blame people for the virus" strategy is a way for public officials who have no idea what they're doing to transfer the blame for their catastrophic failures onto normal people.
This free eBook by New York Times bestselling author Tom Woods smashes the "numbers go up because you refuse to stay home and wear two masks" argument to smithereens.
Click the button below to get your free copy!
Ivor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
Basically, smashing those arguments is like shooting fish in a barrel. It's ridiculously easy to debunk, especially with virtually all published studies in the medical literature finding no benefit for lockdowns. And very few finding any benefit from mask-wearing.
It makes me very concerned that a highly placed NIH institute director (i.e. Fauci) should be so disingenuous and ill-informed about science. And, interested to see just how the media will punish Texas and Mississippi for reopening. I'm sure they have a plan.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 amIvor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 am
And, interested to see just how the media will punish Texas and Mississippi for reopening. I'm sure they have a plan.
Finally, a real, somewhat controlled, not half assed measures experiment. I look forward, hopefully, to not seeing any spike in deaths or cases in Texas and seeing the gyrations made to explain it away. CNN (of which, like other news sources, I cannot watch for more than about 3 minutes at a time) had every prime time anchor lead with the death and destruction Texas is going to unleash on their citizens by doing this.
Conversely, if there is a rise, that's valuable info too.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 amIvor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 amIvor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 amIvor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
Yes, it's super simplified. I think he includes masking is part of the lockdown mentality. His goal here is to go after the high yield stuff. Masking is a barrier to going outside that adds to the stress & negative effects of lockdowns, and it most certainly has negative effects on people who don't do well breathing in a lot of CO2, but that's about it. Although, health effects from long-term mask wearing could end up being quite significant. No one's studying it though.
WiseOne wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:57 amIvor Cummins videos do the same thing, but you don't have to sign up for anything. He's also put out a whitepaper on the topic - you can download from his website.
Cummins had this statement in the PDF, which I believe was limited to Ireland: Apart from the very short, fast spike in Covid19 deaths in April when the virus was new, overall mortality for the year 2020 has not been any higher than previous years
--Do you agree or disagree that was not the case for the US? That the CDC excess mortality graph absolutely shows excess deaths, and the latest finding from this is US life expectancy went down because of it as well?
And I am just trying to compare apples to apples here -- his chart which shows similar death rates to previous years (below) specifically says only through Sept. I assume previous years are full year's worth of data? Or do you think he pulled 3 months worth of deaths out of the previous years? Otherwise he is comparing 100% full year data to 75% for 2020, which would be BS if done on purpose, and I assume he is not that sloppy.
WiseOne, do you not have data to answer the graph question, or do you have me on ignore? Just wondering
I'm not saying you do, all I am trying to get across is I take ALL stuff Covid with a grain of salt, both the ok to open 100% and the we have to be masked for 2 more years.
It's somewhere in the middle. Everyone gets vested in their positions, esp. when they are well known.
Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 1:05 pm
WiseOne, do you not have data to answer the graph question, or do you have me on ignore? Just wondering
I'm not saying you do, all I am trying to get across is I take ALL stuff Covid with a grain of salt, both the ok to open 100% and the we have to be masked for 2 more years.
It's somewhere in the middle. Everyone gets vested in their positions, esp. when they are well known.
No time to do a deep dive into data except as part of one of my 3 jobs (as a professor, Alzheimer's caregiver, and business manager for a commercial real estate holding).
I really can't do much more than make somewhat thoughtful comments these days. Sorry.
CDC: Easing mask mandates led to higher COVID cases and deaths
That's the headline but read the whole story and follow the links and you will discover that they are talking about a 1% difference - and according to the actual report there is a 5% margin of error - in other words no statistical difference.
Yes I read it that lifting of mask mandates caused a 1 to 2 percent increase in cases, and the same for in person dining. And they are reporting that as “significant”.
I actually hoped masking was reasonably worthwhile.
Do not put a mask on pets. Masks could harm your pet
I don't even know what to make of this. It has to be a joke.
This sounds so absurd.100? Really? Can't be true cases. There would be at least 1 million if it was real. They probably would have had more positives from pinecones.
If people believe this, then the next thing is digital covid tests.
Your bank account received a penny that came in close contact. Your account must be quarantined for two weeks or maybe even extinguished completely to stop the spread.
Seriously. 100 pets? That's easily explained by even the most conservative estimate of false positives from a COVID test. Clinically....there is not a lot known about pet diseases already, so how could anyone know what COVID infection might look like in a cat?
Anyone who actually thinks that "normal" will be restored anytime soon is kidding themselves. The narrative has gained a life of its own. 1% with a +/- 5% margin of error is significant when it comes to COVID? The false positive rate of the tests alone will give you that.
Right now, COVID is excellent cover for the Democrats to push through their legislative agenda, given what the COVID19 relief bill actually consists of (hint: >90% of it has nothing to do with COVID). They won't be in a hurry to give up that advantage.
