Bad News Thread

dad4 said:
I can’t say I’m surprised that all the weasel words come out as soon as it’s time to actually support the policy.

If you supported an indoor mask mandate, you would not phrase it like you do.

Clear eyed supporters of masks are the people who say things like “it is a small thing we can do to help,“ or “the mask alone is not enough, you still need to avoid indoor spaces and crowds.”.

That’s not you. You are one of the ones who says “Yes, I support masks. Just remember that they don’t really work, and all the cdc data to support them is fake.”.
Click to expand...

Your math is great but your reasoning skills are always in short supply.

Again, that's because you misunderstand what I'm all about just as I misunderstood you were preaching instead of advocating for a particular policy. I'm not a supporter of masks. I'm not an opponent of masks. I'm a truth seeker that wants to get to the truth of what it is masks can and can't do (I'm more scientific that way than you are because science cares about getting to the truth, not about being right or moral). But what I do have a problem with is when the ministry of truth lies to the public by saying things like "masks are better than vaccines" or "masks can control the spread". I care about truth, not the stupid mask policy so long as no one (whether anti masker or pro masker) is lying about it. Had Desert Hound come out and said masks do absolutely nothing, he and I would have tangled, and like I've told espola before, whether masks "work" depends in part on what your definition of "work" is. Your definition has consistently oversold it, which doesn't negate the policy, but does make you just flat out wrong.
 
dad4 said:
I can’t say I’m surprised that all the weasel words come out as soon as it’s time to actually support the policy.

If you supported an indoor mask mandate, you would not phrase it like you do.

Clear eyed supporters of masks are the people who say things like “it is a small thing we can do to help,“ or “the mask alone is not enough, you still need to avoid indoor spaces and crowds.”.

That’s not you. You are one of the ones who says “Yes, I support masks. Just remember that they don’t really work, and all the cdc data to support them is fake.”.
Click to expand...

"cleared eyed supporters"....snort....more religion from you....you have to recite the creed faithfully and no deviation will be tolerated. BTW, it's why religions hate apostates more than they hate nonbelievers. You are no exception.
 
Desert Hound said:
reason.com

The CDC's Guidance for Summer Camps Is Insane

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released new guidance to help summer camps mitigate their coronavirus risk. Given that
reason.com reason.com
Click to expand...

I had been considering sending kiddo back to two rivers soccer camp. The fact they are implementing these outdoor guidance made me decide not to, and he came to the same conclusion when we discussed it. The idea of spending an entire week in a mask just was too much for him.
 
Grace T. said:
I had been considering sending kiddo back to two rivers soccer camp. The fact they are implementing these outdoor guidance made me decide not to, and he came to the same conclusion when we discussed it. The idea of spending an entire week in a mask just was too much for him.
Click to expand...

p.s. ....a distinction has to be drawn between sleep away and day camps. For day camps the guidance is especially stupid, if the day camp is taking place outside. For sleep away camps I just don't see how we can get to a place where it's 100% safe. There hasn't been a single camp my kids have attended where one of them hasn't come down with something. Either we accept that there will be outbreaks or we don't and the CDC is trying to thread a needle here which results in just security theatre rather than making a tough recommendation. The reality is if they sleep in the same room together you ain't going to control the masks which are less than worthless in those conditions. So what to do? You could pod and require COVID testing 48 hours before checking in, wellness screenings by the camp nurse upon arrival, as well as move sleep outdoors instead of in cabins....but even with that there will be outbreaks. Be honest about it, treat people like grownups, have them make their own decisions.
 
dad4 said:
I can’t say I’m surprised that all the weasel words come out as soon as it’s time to actually support the policy.

If you supported an indoor mask mandate, you would not phrase it like you do.

Clear eyed supporters of masks are the people who say things like “it is a small thing we can do to help,“ or “the mask alone is not enough, you still need to avoid indoor spaces and crowds.”.

That’s not you. You are one of the ones who says “Yes, I support masks. Just remember that they don’t really work, and all the cdc data to support them is fake.”.
Click to expand...

Grace T. said:
Your math is great but your reasoning skills are always in short supply.

Again, that's because you misunderstand what I'm all about just as I misunderstood you were preaching instead of advocating for a particular policy. I'm not a supporter of masks. I'm not an opponent of masks. I'm a truth seeker that wants to get to the truth of what it is masks can and can't do (I'm more scientific that way than you are because science cares about getting to the truth, not about being right or moral). But what I do have a problem with is when the ministry of truth lies to the public by saying things like "masks are better than vaccines" or "masks can control the spread". I care about truth, not the stupid mask policy so long as no one (whether anti masker or pro masker) is lying about it. Had Desert Hound come out and said masks do absolutely nothing, he and I would have tangled, and like I've told espola before, whether masks "work" depends in part on what your definition of "work" is. Your definition has consistently oversold it, which doesn't negate the policy, but does make you just flat out wrong.
Click to expand...
Can't we all just stipulate to the fact that there is no reliable, convincing and consensus evidence either way that masks work, or don't work, in preventing the spread of the disease? It seems to me if both sides are being intellectually honest that we would agree to that fact. I'll stipulate... Dad4 can you stipulate without a "yeah, but" argument? I'm pretty sure I know Grace's answer.

Not saying that we can't debate how we develop policy based on that fact, but it seems fair that we acknowledge that we don't know either way whether masks are effective, or not.
 
At least we're getting a new buzzword out of this shit show. If I took a shot every time I read "Virtue signaling", well... I'd be 21 again.
 
Grace T. said:
"cleared eyed supporters"....snort....more religion from you....you have to recite the creed faithfully and no deviation will be tolerated. BTW, it's why religions hate apostates more than they hate nonbelievers. You are no exception.
Click to expand...
No. I am just calling your bull shit when you say you have always supported a policy you have spent 13 months opposing.

This is not some subtle question of how to write the details on a mask mandate law.

You post dozens of times claiming that masks don’t really work. Just yesterday you were claiming that the cdc data supporting them is no better than what you get from a twitter troll. Now you want to say that you have always supported making them mandatory.

If you want to change your mind on something, then grow enough of a spine to say so. But stop trying to have it both ways, where you support Texas repealing their indoor mask mandate, then six weeks later claim that you think indoor mask mandates are a good idea.
 
dad4 said:
No. I am just calling your bull shit when you say you have always supported a policy you have spent 13 months opposing.

This is not some subtle question of how to write the details on a mask mandate law.

You post dozens of times claiming that masks don’t really work. Just yesterday you were claiming that the cdc data supporting them is no better than what you get from a twitter troll. Now you want to say that you have always supported making them mandatory.

If you want to change your mind on something, then grow enough of a spine to say so. But stop trying to have it both ways, where you support Texas repealing their indoor mask mandate, then six weeks later claim that you think indoor mask mandates are a good idea.
Click to expand...

Now you are just a damn liar and I really resent that, especially coming from you given your record of hypocrisy. I have always said I supported an indoor mask mandate subject to the caveats up above. Not the first time I've written it in response to your question. I just think you are damn wrong about what you think they can do and you and your kind have done a great disservice to people for overselling them.

I know what my position is and has been and don't need someone like you casting aspersions or lying about it so STFU Buzz.

They always come after the apostates the hardest.
 
watfly said:
Can't we all just stipulate to the fact that there is no reliable, convincing and consensus evidence either way that masks work, or don't work, in preventing the spread of the disease? It seems to me if both sides are being intellectually honest that we would agree to that fact. I'll stipulate... Dad4 can you stipulate without a "yeah, but" argument? I'm pretty sure I know Grace's answer.

Not saying that we can't debate how we develop policy based on that fact, but it seems fair that we acknowledge that we don't know either way whether masks are effective, or not.
Click to expand...

Yes. I'd even go so far as to say they probably do, especially on a micro analysis level, just not very much, as seen by the real world evidence.
 
Glitterhater said:
At least we're getting a new buzzword out of this shit show. If I took a shot every time I read "Virtue signaling", well... I'd be 21 again.
Click to expand...
Don't forget, "Cohort" and "New Normal"

Not a buzzword, but my kids call me out for saying "arbitrary" all the time. I've said it x times more in the last year than I have my previous 54 years.
 
Grace T. said:
Your math is great but your reasoning skills are always in short supply.

Again, that's because you misunderstand what I'm all about just as I misunderstood you were preaching instead of advocating for a particular policy. I'm not a supporter of masks. I'm not an opponent of masks. I'm a truth seeker that wants to get to the truth of what it is masks can and can't do (I'm more scientific that way than you are because science cares about getting to the truth, not about being right or moral). But what I do have a problem with is when the ministry of truth lies to the public by saying things like "masks are better than vaccines" or "masks can control the spread". I care about truth, not the stupid mask policy so long as no one (whether anti masker or pro masker) is lying about it. Had Desert Hound come out and said masks do absolutely nothing, he and I would have tangled, and like I've told espola before, whether masks "work" depends in part on what your definition of "work" is. Your definition has consistently oversold it, which doesn't negate the policy, but does make you just flat out wrong.
Click to expand...

You're a seeker of truth, but the mask policy is stupid.
 
watfly said:
Can't we all just stipulate to the fact that there is no reliable, convincing and consensus evidence either way that masks work, or don't work, in preventing the spread of the disease? It seems to me if both sides are being intellectually honest that we would agree to that fact. I'll stipulate... Dad4 can you stipulate without a "yeah, but" argument? I'm pretty sure I know Grace's answer.

Not saying that we can't debate how we develop policy based on that fact, but it seems fair that we acknowledge that we don't know either way whether masks are effective, or not.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone "stipulate" to an obvious falsehood?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top