Bad News Thread

[dad4]

Fauci can't explain it......

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1379399850895237124

Not that hard to explain.

How many people in TX actually changed their behavior? For those who did change behavior, how much of their behavior changed?

You probably only saw around 10 or 20% of personal interactions go from a masked to an unmasked state.

Over that same time, vaccinations rose from 14% to 28% in Texas. Given that current vaccines are significantly better than masks*, you’d expect a 14% increase in vaccines to more than offset a 20% decline in mask usage.

( *- I’m currently counting masks at 45% and 2 shot vaccines at 95%. Happy to revise that if someone has a good argument. )

 

[Grace T.]

Not that hard to explain.

How many people in TX actually changed their behavior? For those who did change behavior, how much of their behavior changed?

You probably only saw around 10 or 20% of personal interactions go from a masked to an unmasked state.

Over that same time, vaccinations rose from 14% to 28% in Texas. Given that current vaccines are significantly better than masks*, you’d expect a 14% increase in vaccines to more than offset a 20% decline in mask usage.

( *- I’m currently counting masks at 45% and 2 shot vaccines at 95%. Happy to revise that if someone has a good argument. )

Well, I'll give you this....at least you had the cajones to attempt to make an explanation to defend the truth faith. Fauci couldn't even do that. Guess you are better than Fauci now.

 

[watfly]

You know what else is not hard to explain...that there is no reliable evidence supporting correlation between lockdown mandates and Covid infections and death. However, there is evidence of causation between lockdown mandates and unemployment, mental health and education.

 

[Desert Hound]

Watch this. About 2 min in he gets around to TX.

The Texas ‘Death Warrant’ That Wasn’t | No Masks, No Lockdowns, No Surge

www.mattchristiansenmedia.com For reference material, see the YouTube post of this video: https://youtu.be/BAPSSvZ9Xig

rumble.com

 

[Desert Hound]

Not that hard to explain.

How many people in TX actually changed their behavior? For those who did change behavior, how much of their behavior changed?

You probably only saw around 10 or 20% of personal interactions go from a masked to an unmasked state.

Over that same time, vaccinations rose from 14% to 28% in Texas. Given that current vaccines are significantly better than masks*, you’d expect a 14% increase in vaccines to more than offset a 20% decline in mask usage.

( *- I’m currently counting masks at 45% and 2 shot vaccines at 95%. Happy to revise that if someone has a good argument. )

Well they have been open all year.

But...here you go again.

Now you have your reasoning and are telling us yeah well the result is not surprising. And yet a month ago you thought it was a bad idea. Funny how that works

I stated a month ago that their gov was looking at the data, looking at the vaccine rollout and rightly assumed that removing restrictions on biz and masks would not lead to a rise in case. In other words they were looking at real world data and making a call on that. They got it right.

You and many others would not have done that because you clearly thought this wouldn't happen. Now you act like the result isn't surprising.

I need to get my neck worked on again. More whiplash.

 

[dad4]

Well, I'll give you this....at least you had the cajones to attempt to make an explanation to defend the truth faith. Fauci couldn't even do that. Guess you are better than Fauci now.

Fauci is not going to wing an explanation for a specific state on national TV. To him, ”what is happening in TX” is a perfectly reasonable research paper question.

My willingness to fling half-thoughts is not exactly to my credit. You’ll noticed that I omitted the fact that March is one of the best times to be outside in Texas. And five other things I don’t even know I missed. All those “unknown unknowns”, as Rumsfeld would say.

 

[dad4]

Well they have been open all year.

But...here you go again.

Now you have your reasoning and are telling us yeah well the result is not surprising. And yet a month ago you thought it was a bad idea. Funny how that works

I stated a month ago that their gov was looking at the data, looking at the vaccine rollout and rightly assumed that removing restrictions on biz and masks would not lead to a rise in case. In other words they were looking at real world data and making a call on that. They got it right.

You and many others would not have done that because you clearly thought this wouldn't happen. Now you act like the result isn't surprising.

I need to get my neck worked on again. More whiplash.

No whiplash for you. That would require trying to understand the arguments and numbers behind this.

Your thought goes no further than “I have a bar. Measures against the virus have hurt my bar. Therefore all measures against the virus must be stupid.”.

I am sure you find this to be a nice, consistent worldview. Then you go out on social media, search for things that agree with you, and post them here. That isn’t thought. It’s a simple litmus test filter. Your head is fixed, looking in exactly the same direction, so your neck is quite safe.

 

[Grace T.]

[
[/QUOTE]

Fauci is not going to wing an explanation for a specific state on national TV. To him, ”what is happening in TX” is a perfectly reasonable research paper question.

My willingness to fling half-thoughts is not exactly to my credit. You’ll noticed that I omitted the fact that March is one of the best times to be outside in Texas. And five other things I don’t even know I missed. All those “unknown unknowns”, as Rumsfeld would say.

Fauci is not going to wing an explanation for a specific state on national TV. To him, ”what is happening in TX” is a perfectly reasonable research paper question.

My willingness to fling half-thoughts is not exactly to my credit. You’ll noticed that I omitted the fact that March is one of the best times to be outside in Texas. And five other things I don’t even know I missed. All those “unknown unknowns”, as Rumsfeld would say.

so we are back to weather being a more powerful factor than masks and restrictions? Good to know...I’m sure I’ve heard that somewhere before if I could only remember where.

 

[Desert Hound]

No whiplash for you. That would require trying to understand the arguments and numbers behind this.

Your thought goes no further than “I have a bar. Measures against the virus have hurt my bar. Therefore all measures against the virus must be stupid.”.

I am sure you find this to be a nice, consistent worldview. Then you go out on social media, search for things that agree with you, and post them here. That isn’t thought. It’s a simple litmus test filter. Your head is fixed, looking in exactly the same direction, so your neck is quite safe.

Oh I understand the arguments.

I have watched you jump around picking out states you told us would be disasters, then later move on when said predictions didn't come through.

I have watched you argue for testing every team playing in a tournament...without regard to understanding numbers. IE the cost of the testing and the fact that teens/kids have zero risk.

I have watched you be very concerned about schools opening and would cherry pick an article here and there to try to prove a point. Ignoring that around the world millions had gone back to school without issue.

I have watched you argue for killing off biz because you think they shouldn't be open.

And it goes on.

When called on the various above, you conveniently change your argument and move on to the next one.

On of the most recent ones that come to mind is that you argued that (again) restaurants being open is probably the reason for a rise in (I forget which state). When I pointed out lots of other states also opened with no jump and then suddenly you complain you cannot look at one factor (despite the fact that you yourself had just done so).

The policies you have advocated ruin biz, hurt employees, hurt education, etc. And a year out? Turns out you may as well have just been open.

Education. Your preferred solution was online. CA for the longest time had 95% or more kids not in live classes. And yet many other states were fully in person classes without the problems you told us the math said would happen.

And yet you still cling to the idea that gov policy is going to actually control a virus. And you do so without any regard for cost/benefit. On these 2 items you have been remarkably consistent.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

Fauci is not going to wing an explanation for a specific state on national TV. To him, ”what is happening in TX” is a perfectly reasonable research paper question.

Are epidemiologists historians who like to perform correlations? I thought you stated that it was all about prediction. Please correct me if I misstated your position - no intent to do so on my part. Regarding Fauci, how long has the pandemic been going on? How much historical data is available? Yet, he'll wait for a research paper to have an opinion ABOUT WHAT ALREADY HAPPENED. Again, this is why I don't want epidemiologists driving policy. They get a seat at the table, but they just aren't correct enough of the time to be deferred to as they have been.

 

[dad4]

Are epidemiologists historians who like to perform correlations? I thought you stated that it was all about prediction. Please correct me if I misstated your position - no intent to do so on my part. Regarding Fauci, how long has the pandemic been going on? How much historical data is available? Yet, he'll wait for a research paper to have an opinion ABOUT WHAT ALREADY HAPPENED. Again, this is why I don't want epidemiologists driving policy. They get a seat at the table, but they just aren't correct enough of the time to be deferred to as they have been.

Every time someone says "all", they are forgetting something. Including the previous sentence.

Fauci may not have an opinion about why Texas in particular has 2000 cases per day instead of 3000.

Why would you expect that he would?

If Fauci did a deep dive into any one state, it's probably Michigan. More likely, he's not even in the room when that level of analysis happens.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Not that hard to explain.

How many people in TX actually changed their behavior? For those who did change behavior, how much of their behavior changed?

You probably only saw around 10 or 20% of personal interactions go from a masked to an unmasked state.

Over that same time, vaccinations rose from 14% to 28% in Texas. Given that current vaccines are significantly better than masks*, you’d expect a 14% increase in vaccines to more than offset a 20% decline in mask usage.

( *- I’m currently counting masks at 45% and 2 shot vaccines at 95%. Happy to revise that if someone has a good argument. )

You're babbling again.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

You know what else is not hard to explain...that there is no reliable evidence supporting correlation between lockdown mandates and Covid infections and death. However, there is evidence of causation between lockdown mandates and unemployment, mental health and education.

Please don't ask Dad4 to explain correlation. He's all about P-values and PCR test results that have no precedence for lockdown mandates. Damned be R-squared. Not that you need R-squared to tell you what's obvious without it.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Fauci is not going to wing an explanation for a specific state on national TV. To him, ”what is happening in TX” is a perfectly reasonable research paper question.

My willingness to fling half-thoughts is not exactly to my credit. You’ll noticed that I omitted the fact that March is one of the best times to be outside in Texas. And five other things I don’t even know I missed. All those “unknown unknowns”, as Rumsfeld would say.

Don't forget the Known, Knowns. You've been flinging Unknown unknowns from the beginning.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

No whiplash for you. That would require trying to understand the arguments and numbers behind this.

Your thought goes no further than “I have a bar. Measures against the virus have hurt my bar. Therefore all measures against the virus must be stupid.”.

I am sure you find this to be a nice, consistent worldview. Then you go out on social media, search for things that agree with you, and post them here. That isn’t thought. It’s a simple litmus test filter. Your head is fixed, looking in exactly the same direction, so your neck is quite safe.

Waiting for you to post some historical PCR data from SAR's-1 and our last lockdown.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

California Gov. Gavin Newsom On MLB Pulling All-Star Game Out Of Georgia: ‘Give Us A Call’

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Not that hard to explain.

How many people in TX actually changed their behavior? For those who did change behavior, how much of their behavior changed?

You probably only saw around 10 or 20% of personal interactions go from a masked to an unmasked state.

Over that same time, vaccinations rose from 14% to 28% in Texas. Given that current vaccines are significantly better than masks*, you’d expect a 14% increase in vaccines to more than offset a 20% decline in mask usage.

( *- I’m currently counting masks at 45% and 2 shot vaccines at 95%. Happy to revise that if someone has a good argument. )

There are those who rebelled against masks and still do and those who wore masks and still do . . . not a lot of converts between the two groups.

 

[Grace T.]

There are those who rebelled against masks and still do and those who wore masks and still do . . . not a lot of converts between the two groups.

That's a very overly simplistic way of looking at things. On the pro mask side you have those who though masks were better than vaccines, those who thought masks could control curves, and those who thought masks might make the curves a little less severe. The religion ranges from the strict bible thumping evangelicals to strict ritualistic Catholicisms to mainline Methodists. On the antimasks side you had us lapsed Catholics that thought while they might be mildly helpful they were being oversold and shouldn't be put on screaming 2 years olds on planes, to skeptical agnostics, to hard core antimask atheists.

 

[dad4]

That's a very overly simplistic way of looking at things. On the pro mask side you have those who though masks were better than vaccines, those who thought masks could control curves, and those who thought masks might make the curves a little less severe. The religion ranges from the strict bible thumping evangelicals to strict ritualistic Catholicisms to mainline Methodists. On the antimasks side you had us lapsed Catholics that thought while they might be mildly helpful they were being oversold and shouldn't be put on screaming 2 years olds on planes, to skeptical agnostics, to hard core antimask atheists.

Screaming 2 year olds should not be put on planes.

No wonder we can't get this under control. We assume that the nation's 2 year olds have pressing business 1000 miles away, and are discussing what they should wear on the plane.

The 2 year old should be outside, eating sand, at the playground. No plane required.

 

[Desert Hound]

Screaming 2 year olds should not be put on planes.

No wonder we can't get this under control. We assume that the nation's 2 year olds have pressing business 1000 miles away, and are discussing what they should wear on the plane.

There you go again. Mr Authoritarian.

There are lots of reasons parents take their kids somewhere.

The main reason is it is their right. They don't need to check with you or anyone else to see if it is "approved".

Your instinct time and time again is to tell people they can't work, can't send their kids to school, etc.

And yet a yr after watching heavy restrictions fail, you advocate for the same.

Says a lot about you.