Jump to content

The Folly of Ignoring Climate Change


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Are you under the misapprehension that vaccines must be 100% effective in preventing one from contracting the virus? Or 100% effective in preventing serious illness or death? That's simply false information.

Nope. You just can't read apparently. 

I said "basically 100%", which is to say that the polio vaccine isn't 100% effective, but it's very close to it.

Contrast that with a covid "vaccination" death rate that matches that of the unvaccinated.

One of those things is a vaccine. One of those things is definitely not a vaccine

I'll leave you to guess which is which.

Quote

Case in point: the flu vaccine. Is that also not "really" a vaccine? How about mumps? Whooping cough? None of these are perfectly effective at the individual level, yet they are beneficial to the individual and even moreso to the community.

They don't actually say "flu vaccine" in Canada, they say "flu shot". At least in that instance they don't play pretend.

With vaccines that work at 80%, it's enough to provide herd immunity. That's not enough to "vaccinate" an individual, per se, but it's enough to stop the spread within a community, which works almost as well at preventing anyone from getting it. 

Quote

Again, not sure where you're getting your information, but it clearly not from medical authorities. Go ask the CDC, WHO, May Clinic, or a real live doctor.

See the charts below. Note the difference in the number of deaths between May 1 and Aug 21. You'll see that 88% of the deaths that occurred between those dates were among the dbl-vaxed, triple-vaxed and quadruple-vaxed. 

Quote

Thanks you Lancet, for doing this:

Quote

A mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission and vaccination was separately fit to reported COVID-19 mortality and all-cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories. The impact of COVID-19 vaccination programmes was determined by estimating the additional lives lost if no vaccines had been distributed. We also estimated the additional deaths that would have been averted had the vaccination coverage targets of 20% set by COVAX and 40% set by WHO been achieved by the end of 2021.

FYI that is not a statistic, it is a projection based upon their estimates, which is based upon lab results. 

Quote

And many more. The point again is that you are disregarding the information provided by every medical body on the planet in favor of some media-brewed heterodoxy. Why? Why ignore what an overwhelming consensus of doctors and scientists are telling you in favor of some poorly mangled stats from the right wing echo chamber?

You're the one who's calling "gossip" stats.

The number of actual people who were fully vaxed and died, compared to the number of actual people who were unvaxed and died, within the exact same country under the exact same conditions, is the statistic that trumps all others. Especially those derived through models which are basic solely on the expectations of the people who are promoting the pseudovax.

I personally don't care what the Lancet "predicts". The Lancet is the same mag that had to retract their bogus HCQ "study" or whatever they called it. FWIW I don't care if HCQ works or not, the lies that were told about it by vax-pushers were completely outrageous. I never saw a group of people so hopeful that a cost effective treatment wouldn't work. It's weird.

Quote

Yowza. You sound like those rapists who defend themselves by saying "Yeah, but she really wanted it!"

Stop equating groping with rape. There are women who don't mind being groped, sorry to say, and they're not hard to spot. 

At least one senator too, apparently.

Quote

I hope you don't walk the walk in this case, and that it's just bluster. Sexual assault is indeed very serious, and it is indeed sexual assault to grab someone's genitals without permission. Please don't do it, and please don't defend others for doing it. It's not excusable.

I've been married since '05. I don't have any need or desire to grope bubbleheads.

Quote

I really have no idea what this Gish gallop is all about. Doesn't seem in any way related to my post, so skipping. I'll take it as confirmation though that you didn't practice the thought experiment. 

You made an idiotic comment to the effect that "fair outcomes" are at an all-time high, and "privileged people are upset" blah, blah, blah. 

Fair outcomes nosedived in 2015. The basic safety of Americans started dropping in 2015. It's just a fact, and the people affected the most by rioting and violent crime are the ones in poorer neighbourhoods. Crime isn't spiking in Pelosiville.

Quote

I'll give you the spoiler alert again though: at no point in time in the history of the world would you have been born into a fairer or more just situation--particularly in the United States. If you knew that you'd be born as a white male then there are times when that would have conferred even greater unfair advantage than it does now, but for literally everybody else today is better. And it is objectively more fair.

I just disproved that BS in my earlier post. America peaked at some point before 2015. Back when politicians didn't cheer for riots, and when media outlets didn't lie to keep them going.

Quote

And yes, I absolutely think that there's a subset of white males are lashing out against the erosion of their unfair advantage. I'm not one who finds it troubling.

Wahh, wahh, waah, no one gives a crap about what you think. We're grounded in reality here. Or at least I'll speak for those of us who are. 

Quote

I can compete on my own merit just fine, thanks. I don't need a head start.

Merits? The only things that you're good at are getting sucked in by propaganda and regurgitating said propaganda from what I can see.  

 

Hint: When you look at the charts below, don't get hung up on the fact that the unvaxed deaths seem so much higher:

1) They started counting on the very first day that anyone in Canada received their first shot, so there were zero fully 'protected' people for several months, and 100% of Canadians were unvaxed on the first day.

2) That data set starts in the middle of a flu season, and covid deaths follow the flu season trends. Basically 100% of Canadians were unvaxed for the first 3 months of the data set, which is the middle-to-end of the 2020/'21 flu season. Fully vaxed people only existed during the 2021/22 flu season. 

3) If you add the dbl-, triple- and quadruple-jabbed deaths, they're approaching equality with the unvaxed now. 9,100 vs 10,600.

 

Cheers Hodad ?

5 May 1 2022.png

9 Aug 21 2022.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

Well sure but it's not like we're hoping for it. The theists OTOH will have you believe our world is transitory to the point where it really doesn't matter given God has made us another world up in heaven - where we'll persist for eternity.  I can't think of anything that would make it easier to ignore climate change.  Hell, the more hard-boiled Christians can't seem to wait for the End.

Pat Robertson says heaven will be just like Sunday School except it'll last forever.  I can't imagine a worse fate myself.

 The atheist or Darwinist universe is far worse the believer's world.  The Darwinist universe tells us we came from nothing, by nothing, for nothing, and survival for nothing.   According to Darwinism and your ideology, we are nothing more than meaningless blobs of chemicals.  In that case, there really is no hope.  Life is just an accident and after it is over, there is no hope or future for anything.  You and other atheist's universe is a one-way ticket into ultimate meaninglessness and despair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, robosmith said:

God was invented by MAN. There is NO EVIDENCE proving the contrary.

You don't even understand WHY man invented god despite being told a reasonable explanation which you've not even addressed let alone refuted.

You must have a sad existence.  No meaning, no hope, no future.  Just an accident in the cosmos.  That leads to a life of ultimate meaninglessness and despair.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 The atheist or Darwinist universe is far worse the believer's world.  The Darwinist universe tells us we came from nothing, by nothing, for nothing, and survival for nothing.   According to Darwinism and your ideology, we are nothing more than meaningless blobs of chemicals.  In that case, there really is no hope.  Life is just an accident and after it is over, there is no hope or future for anything.  You and other atheist's universe is a one-way ticket into ultimate meaninglessness and despair.

Of course. The existence of a supernatural being cannot be proven through scientific experiments. That doesn’t mean science is wrong and it doesn’t mean there is no God. You just make up your own stupid nonsense on the subject.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Of course. The existence of a supernatural being cannot be proven through scientific experiments. That doesn’t mean science is wrong and it doesn’t mean there is no God. You just make up your own stupid nonsense on the subject.  

The evidence of the existence of a supernatural being we call God is overwhelming.  It is all around you in the creation.  All you have to do is open your eyes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The evidence of the existence of a supernatural being we call God is overwhelming.  It is all around you in the creation.  All you have to do is open your eyes.  

Either you have faith or you don't.

If you think that science needs to have 'overwhelming evidence' of God then clearly you don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Either you have faith or you don't.

If you think that science needs to have 'overwhelming evidence' of God then clearly you don't.

You're just assuming that Bbird is trying to convince himself of something and that's not necessarily the case. 

Also, if Bbird doesn't want to run on blind faith alone, and wants to see how it stacks up with science, that's fine too. 

We're all creatures of faith at some level. Whether we believe in science that we don't understand, or love, or certain people or news stations, a lot of that is faith-based. Not a lot of people check up on the legitimacy their faith with due diligence (or no one would watch CTV and CNN).  

You knew that last part was coming, didn't you? That's because you have faith in me ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Let's assess the article.

First, the article says gas prices rose because of inflation. It goes on to say, "if we’re going to blame the entities that caused inflation, they are, in order, the Federal Reserve, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden." However, the article does not address that there are two components of inflation, not one: It is too much money chasing too few goods. We have a major problem with "too few goods" right now, but the article ignores that. Second, the article ignores that inflation is a worldwide phenomenon right now. The US Dollar, in fact, is at its strongest that I ever remember. Both the British Pound and the Euro are worth $1.00. That's the strongest dollar I ever remember, at least against those two currencies.  The US Dollar is also strong against the Chinese RMB, trading at $1 to 7.2 RMB. It was about 1 to 6.5 before. So by those accounts, inflation is weaker in the US than in Europe, the UK and China, correct?

So inflation doesn't make much sense as the reason for oil prices increasing, and your article says that!  "The major cause of gasoline price increases, as the earlier data show, has not been inflation."

"Between the first quarter of 2021 and the fourth quarter of 2021, worldwide consumption rose from 93.9 million barrels per day (mbd) to 99.2 mbd."

Also, they add, "One factor is Biden’s and many European governments’ response in the oil market to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. They have colluded to keep Russian oil off the market."  Personally, I agree with this policy. Paying more for gasoline as my part in checking Russian expansion is a positive thing.

FINALLY, the article addresses Biden's executive policies: "Longer term, Biden will contribute to higher oil prices."

 

SO there we are: All your bullshit, all your lies, all your stupid YouTube links, your childish insults, and what's the result: YOU PROVED THAT YOU ARE WRONG. Yes, maybe in two or three years, oil prices will be higher because of the Keystone pipeline. I doubt it; I think it's more likely the drilling moratoriums. But that's only if the alternative energy plants aren't launched. And the US has been held hostage by oil companies long enough. Remember this one simple fact: America has petroleum energy independence. And that means, the higher oil prices we pay right now is nothing but pure profit in oil companies' pockets. 

It also says...

Quote

But that’s the problem for these companies. These companies are saying, you know, “you’re asking me to do more now, invest more now, when in fact five or ten years from now we don’t think that demand will be there, and the administration doesn’t even necessarily want it to be there.”

You might think that because oil prices are determined in a world market, US government actions that discourage domestic US production don’t matter much. But that’s not true. Because oil demand worldwide is fairly inelastic, small changes in supply can cause large changes in price.

Which is exactly what I was saying. Biden's and indeed most of the western leaders, are telling the fossil fuel industry to shove it. They see the righting on the wall and the result? Higher fuel prices and less of it.

These insane people are actively trying to dump our primary source of energy.

Quote

Oil company executives would have to think long and hard before applying for permission to build a new refinery or putting serious resources into expanding a refinery. You can bet that all of them heard, loud and clear, Granholm’s statement about not wanting so much oil in five or ten years. 

Then there's the REAL conclusion of the article...

Quote

Conclusion

As I noted earlier, I’m not a fan of violating the property rights of gasoline station owners and so I would never put an uninvited sticker on a gasoline pump. But if I were to do so, the sticker would have a picture of Joe Biden saying, “I did some of that, and I’ll do more.”

As I said...Biden's actions have forced all fossil fuels to escalate...artificially...in price. NONE of that has been necessary except perhaps because of some backroom deal the blithering idiot may have made with Bernie Sanders.

So...you remember this...your lying to yourself and anyone else you try to sell your green little fable to. This push to dispose of our primary source of fuel and energy, is causing the entire world and is stupid...stupid...stupid!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Either you have faith or you don't.

If you think that science needs to have 'overwhelming evidence' of God then clearly you don't.

Empirical science support faith in the existence of God.  False science like evolution is not really science.  Read my post again.  I said the evidence of God is all around in the creation.  Why try to just be contrary?  Faith is based on reason and evidence.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 The atheist or Darwinist universe is far worse the believer's world.  The Darwinist universe tells us we came from nothing, by nothing, for nothing, and survival for nothing.   According to Darwinism and your ideology, we are nothing more than meaningless blobs of chemicals.  In that case, there really is no hope.  Life is just an accident and after it is over, there is no hope or future for anything.  You and other atheist's universe is a one-way ticket into ultimate meaninglessness and despair.

The Christian perspective is so bleak and unforgiving.  Being alive and aware provides the universe a means to appreciate itself. I find that comforting myself. The quantum physicist says there's more to reality than meets the eye and evolution and creation is still expanding all around us.  There's always hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The Christian perspective is so bleak and unforgiving.  Being alive and aware provides the universe a means to appreciate itself. I find that comforting myself. The quantum physicist says there's more to reality than meets the eye and evolution and creation is still expanding all around us.  There's always hope.

Actually the Christian perspective (the Bible) is not bleak and unforgiving because it teaches the reality is there is a God who cares, who can be personally known and does forgive those who believe (in Jesus Christ).  Their transgressions and sins are forgiven.  They are the only ones who have a real hope and assurance. Darwinism and atheism offer no hope, no forgiveness and no future.   You contradict yourself when you say there is hope because evolution denies there is hope.  Evolution says everything is just a cosmic accident and we are here for nothing.  That is not hope my friend.  You are in denial or confusion.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

The evidence of the existence of a supernatural being we call God is overwhelming.  It is all around you in the creation.  All you have to do is open your eyes.  

The reality that you are the universe is within you and all you need to do is realize it. There's nothing supernatural or mystical about it.

.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Actually the Christian perspective (the Bible) is not bleak and unforgiving because it teaches the reality is there is a God who cares, who can be personally known and does forgive those who believe (in Jesus Christ).  Their transgressions and sins are forgiven.  They are the only ones who have a real hope and assurance. Darwinism and atheism offer no hope, no forgiveness and no future.   You contradict yourself when you say there is hope because evolution denies there is hope.  Evolution says everything is just a cosmic accident and we are here for nothing.  That is not hope my friend.  You are in denial or confusion.

Correct.

Life is meaningless. So we can assign our own meaning. I celebrate existence by making the world better and enriching the lives of the people I know. You do it by pretending there’s a supernatural great pumpkin who will reward you for all of eternity if you correctly decode the rules he wrote in a book 4,000 years ago, as amended by the opinions of some men who showed up later on. 
I’d say you’re the one with the meaningless life. 

The history of Christianity is sadly the history of brutality. It’s been used for nearly 2,000 years as a justification for dictators to stay in power and start wars against innocent people. 
So I think it’s quite important that people who choose to follow the Bible do so within the context of the historical nature of that book.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

"Fossil fuel plants are closing faster than green alternatives can replace them. Producers of oil and gas can’t keep up with a surge in demand."

WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-new-energy-crisis-11659153633

How does closing FF plants create a surge in demand for FF PRODUCTION? Makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hodad said:

88% you say? This is what is called a specious argument. It's meant to appear reasonable and to fool folks who aren't paying attention. Someone may have gotten one over on you. I suspect you're tapped into some bad media.

To explain, as vaccination rates increase, obviously any outcome, good or ill, will befall the vaccinated to a higher degree. If Canada were 100% vaccinated then 100% of COVID deaths would be among the vaccinated. I think the reality is closer to 90% vaccination among adults. But at any rate that's a statistic meant to mislead. 

Science is certainly not a "monster" and vaccination has saved countless lives. And it is plainly and factually incorrect to claim that the COVID vaccines are not vaccines. Again, I can only assume you've tapped into some garbage media and have chosen to believe those claims over those of every medical body in the world. I'd suggest looking to authoritative sources.

 

I gave up on the idea that politicians were meant to be role models a long time ago. And in the US our former president demeaned women, boasted about sexually assaulting women, cheated on all 3 of his wives, paid for sex with porn stars, stole from his own charity and ran a scam education program--and the religious right flocked to him in droves. So yeah, some state senator doing a goofy dance on the beach is honestly the least of my worries when it comes to moral public service.

 

Are you familiar with the philosopher John Rawls? He advanced a theory of justice, that is very influential, the cornerstone of which is a thought experiment called the "veil of ignorance." It asks you to imagine that you will be born into the world without knowing anything of your circumstance-- your sex, your gender, your sexuality, your class, your race, your location, your religion etc. are all unknown. How then would you design a society and legal structure? 

I bring it up because though our world is far from perfect, it is certainly not in decline. Put yourself in that experiment and try to imagine any point in history in which you would have a better, fairer shot at a happy life. It doesn't exist. There is no point in history in which you can shake up all those random variables and be assured of a better, fairer outcome.

Society is not collapsing, nor is it in decline. But there are certain privileged and entitled groups that feel pretty angry about the idea of a fairer world.

 

I don't believe Trump paid for sex with porn stars; he's too cheap to do that.

What he paid for was shut them up during his political campaign. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

You must have a sad existence.  No meaning, no hope, no future.  Just an accident in the cosmos.  That leads to a life of ultimate meaninglessness and despair.

I have whatever meaning I WANT to believe, just like YOU.

The difference is, you fail to acknowledge your BELIEF is ONLY what YOU WANT.

And you believe a lot of sophistry is evidence for your BELIEF.

Edited by robosmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Correct.

Life is meaningless. So we can assign our own meaning. I celebrate existence by making the world better and enriching the lives of the people I know. You do it by pretending there’s a supernatural great pumpkin who will reward you for all of eternity if you correctly decode the rules he wrote in a book 4,000 years ago, as amended by the opinions of some men who showed up later on. 
I’d say you’re the one with the meaningless life. 

The history of Christianity is sadly the history of brutality. It’s been used for nearly 2,000 years as a justification for dictators to stay in power and start wars against innocent people. 
So I think it’s quite important that people who choose to follow the Bible do so within the context of the historical nature of that book.  

I have already explained countless times that the evil things that happened in history are not the fault of Christianity as taught in the Bible.  They are the fault of the fallen, evil nature of the human heart.   If a baby has blemishes on it's body when you give it a bath, you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.  You incorrectly attribute the faults and sins of mankind with biblical Christianity which is a false and simpleton conclusion.

We have many charletons selling things in the world.  That does not mean we abolish material goods because some bad people are selling them.  It is the same with the Bible.  Some people misinterpret the Bible or ignore it's teachings and do evil things.  That is not the fault of God or his word, the Bible.  

The Bible is not just an historical record of some things.  It is far more than that.  It is God's revealed will for mankind for all ages.  It applies today just as much as it did 2,000 years ago.  It is not the "opinions of men" and nowhere does it claim to be.   It is God's truth that must be studied and understood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

I have whatever meaning I WANT to believe, just like YOU.

The difference is, you fail to acknowledge your BELIEF is ONLY what YOU WANT.

And you belief a lot of sophistry is evidence for it.

My belief is not just what I want.  My belief is what God wants me to believe and I try to share it because that is what he wants me to do.  Everyone falls short and nobody is perfect in this world.  It is mistake to determine truth or falsehood of something by examining other people.   Ultimately truth only comes from God's word, the Bible.  I am talking about God's revelation to mankind and what he wants.  When he says thou shalt not kill, I believe it and accept it as absolute truth.   When he says thou shalt have no false gods, I believe it and accept it.  I don't make the environment or mother earth a god as many environmentalists do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, blackbird said:

My belief is not just what I want.  My belief is what God wants me to believe and I try to share it because that is what he wants me to do.  Everyone falls short and nobody is perfect in this world.  It is mistake to determine truth or falsehood of something by examining other people.   Ultimately truth only comes from God's word, the Bible.  I am talking about God's revelation to mankind and what he wants.  When he says thou shalt not kill, I believe it and accept it as absolute truth.   When he says thou shalt have no false gods, I believe it and accept it.  I don't make the environment or mother earth a god as many environmentalists do. 

You don’t know what God wants you to believe. He commanded you to not eat pork, and you’re going to tell Him that Paul said it’s ok. You were commanded to love immigrants but you want them thrown out or imprisoned. You are commanded not to wear clothing with different threads mixed in but you do. You are commanded not to commit adultery but you cherish a man who repeatedly commits it. You just twisted the Bible into suiting what is convenient for you, and you think that makes you superior.  

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

It also says...

Which is exactly what I was saying. Biden's and indeed most of the western leaders, are telling the fossil fuel industry to shove it. They see the righting on the wall and the result? Higher fuel prices and less of it.

These insane people are actively trying to dump our primary source of energy.

Then there's the REAL conclusion of the article...

As I said...Biden's actions have forced all fossil fuels to escalate...artificially...in price. NONE of that has been necessary except perhaps because of some backroom deal the blithering idiot may have made with Bernie Sanders.

So...you remember this...your lying to yourself and anyone else you try to sell your green little fable to. This push to dispose of our primary source of fuel and energy, is causing the entire world and is stupid...stupid...stupid!

Your source is an article from a conservative think tank which clearly concludes that Biden’s primary responsibility in higher gas prices is based on his policy towards Russia. You didn’t address that at all. 
The article claims that Biden’s actions will increase fuel prices in five to ten years but your claim is about NOW, and the article is clear that Biden had little to do with it. 
That’s what the article says.  Deal with it. Props for providing a decently written article.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Nope. You just can't read apparently. 

I said "basically 100%", which is to say that the polio vaccine isn't 100% effective, but it's very close to it.

Contrast that with a covid "vaccination" death rate that matches that of the unvaccinated.

One of those things is a vaccine. One of those things is definitely not a vaccine

I'll leave you to guess which is which.

No sense quibbling over a few percent, if you think that vaccines must be anywhere close to 100% effective to be called a vaccine you are sorely mistaken. --  And as for these numbers, you are either misunderstanding or misrepresenting these statistics. The death rate is not equivalent, or even close. This isn't showing rates. These are raw numbers. And the longer you track this statistic the more deaths will show up among the vaccinated. Because nearly everyone there is vaccinated. Surprise!

Now slow down and actually think about why. In a population that is like 90% vaccinated, obviously most of the deaths will be among the vaccinated. If 100% of the population were vaccinated, 100% of the deaths would be among the vaccinated. I'm not tricking you. This is just how numbers work.

Scientific American: "Taken at face value, these numbers may appear to indicate that vaccination does not make that much of a difference. But this perception is an example of a phenomenon known as the base rate fallacy. One also has to consider the denominator of the fraction—that is, the sizes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. With shots widely available to almost all age groups, the majority of the U.S. population has been vaccinated. So even if only a small fraction of vaccinated people who get COVID die from it, the more people who are vaccinated, the more likely they are to make up a portion of the dead."

 

Quote

 They don't actually say "flu vaccine" in Canada, they say "flu shot". At least in that instance they don't play pretend.

Are you just used to people not calling you on your bullshit, because this is pretty blatant? Yes, the "flu shot" is a vaccine, and yes, that's what they call it in Canada too--because that's what it is. It's not a tuque. lol

2021-2022 flu vaccine

This season's flu shot will protect you against:

influenza A(H1N1)
influenza A(H3N2)
influenza B

 

 

Quote

 Thanks you Lancet, for doing this:

FYI that is not a statistic, it is a projection based upon their estimates, which is based upon lab results. 

You're the one who's calling "gossip" stats.

The number of actual people who were fully vaxed and died, compared to the number of actual people who were unvaxed and died, within the exact same country under the exact same conditions, is the statistic that trumps all others. Especially those derived through models which are basic solely on the expectations of the people who are promoting the pseudovax.

I personally don't care what the Lancet "predicts". The Lancet is the same mag that had to retract their bogus HCQ "study" or whatever they called it. FWIW I don't care if HCQ works or not, the lies that were told about it by vax-pushers were completely outrageous. I never saw a group of people so hopeful that a cost effective treatment wouldn't work. It's weird.

Pssst. It's called statistical modeling. Yes, it is statistics. Believe it or not, the field of statistics is not limited to simply counting things that have happened in the past. Oy.

And you are welcome to reject articles from the world's premiere medical journal, but we all know why you're choosing to do so and it has nothing to do with anyone's credibility except for yours.

 

Quote

 Stop equating groping with rape. There are women who don't mind being groped, sorry to say, and they're not hard to spot. 

At least one senator too, apparently.

Again, this is a completely unacceptable perspective. No, you cannot "spot" people who don't mind being groped. You will eventually be wrong and then you'll have committed a sex crime. Get consent before you run around groping people. Jeebus.

 

Quote

 I've been married since '05. I don't have any need or desire to grope bubbleheads.Y

Good on you. Maybe that's one way you're different than that dirtbag Trump.

Quote

 You made an idiotic comment to the effect that "fair outcomes" are at an all-time high, and "privileged people are upset" blah, blah, blah. 

Fair outcomes nosedived in 2015. The basic safety of Americans started dropping in 2015. It's just a fact, and the people affected the most by rioting and violent crime are the ones in poorer neighbourhoods. Crime isn't spiking in Pelosiville.

I just disproved that BS in my earlier post. America peaked at some point before 2015. Back when politicians didn't cheer for riots, and when media outlets didn't lie to keep them going.

You didn't disprove anything, and in fact I think you've missed the point entirely. Rioting sucks, but protesting is powerful. Why don't you ask any of those people if they would like to go back in time to before the BLM movement, or whether those growing pains were necessary and worthwhile?

Again, to be clear, at no time in history has there been a better chance at fair treatment for a person playing demographic roulette. Whether you're Black or gay or a woman or Hispanic or indigenous or even a white man, you'll find a better, more equitable society today than at any point in history. Much progress still to be made, but the progress is undeniable. 

Quote

 Wahh, wahh, waah, no one gives a crap about what you think. We're grounded in reality here. Or at least I'll speak for those of us who are. 

Merits? The only things that you're good at are getting sucked in by propaganda and regurgitating said propaganda from what I can see.  

 

Aw, it's cute that you think you're anywhere near reality. Step one is to turn off whatever media you're currently mainlining, because it's rotting not just your brain, but you heart as well. If you wanna know if vaccines work, ask the medical community. If you wanna know what the definition of a vaccine is, consult with the medical community. If you wanna know how to read statistics, ask a statistician. There's a world of knowledge out there if you rely on real sources instead of getting your information pre-chewed and digested from some fringe hate outlet.

Frankly, right now you're not much better off than the religious folks who toss out all science in the name of dogma. 

Edited by Hodad
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

I don't believe Trump paid for sex with porn stars; he's too cheap to do that.

What he paid for was shut them up during his political campaign. ?

This all came out when Al Franken was thrown under the bus for pretending to grope a woman through her kevlar vest. The Dems actually need a sacrificial lamb to help create the impression that they were way up there on the moral high ground, because they wanted to fling some poop at Trump. Their aggressive defence of Bill Clinton was still fresh in people's memories and they needed to do a quick reset. 

"Look! We're ditching one of our own senators for merely pretending to grope a woman through her kevlar, as well as the woman's unsubstantiated accusation that he tried to kiss her on another occasion. We are THE party of women. All y'all bitches need ta vote fer us!"

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics/settlements-congress-sexual-harassment

Quote

Congress paid out $17 million in settlements. Here’s why we know so little about that money.

Ho-hum.

Quote

On Thursday, the Office of Compliance released additional information indicating that it has paid victims more than $17 million since its creation in the 1990s. That includes all settlements, not just related to sexual harassment, but also discrimination and other cases.

***

When was this money paid out?

According to the OOC data released Thursday, there have been 268 settlements. On Wednesday, Rep. Jackie Speier, the California Democrat who unveiled a bill to reform the OOC, announced at a news conference Wednesday that there had been 260 settlements. The previous tally did not include settlements paid in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

Where did the settlement money come from?

Taxpayers. Once a settlement is reached, the money is not paid out of an individual lawmaker’s office but rather comes out of a special fund set up to handle this within the US Treasury – meaning taxpayers are footing the bill. The fund was set up by the Congressional Accountability Act, the 1995 law that created the Office of Compliance.

How many of the settlements were sexual harassment-related?

It’s not clear. Speier told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that the 260 settlements represent those related to all kinds of complaints, including sexual harassment as well as racial, religious or disability-related discrimination complaints. The OOC has not made public the breakdown of the settlements, and Speier says she’s pursuing other avenues to find out the total.

Trump getting an NDA signed before he banged a "woman of dubious integrity with a striking silhouette" was one of the most normal things that he ever did as a politician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

I don't believe Trump paid for sex with porn stars; he's too cheap to do that.

What he paid for was shut them up during his political campaign. ?

Eh, whether you pay them to open their mouths or close them, it's still paying for sex. I actually think that's how it's marketed in some circles, you don't pay for the encounter, you pay for the discretion.

Edited by Hodad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

No sense quibbling over a few percent, if you think that vaccines must be anywhere close to 100% effective to be called a vaccine you are sorely mistaken. --  And as for these numbers, you are either misunderstanding or misrepresenting these statistics. The death rate is not equivalent, or even close. This isn't showing rates. These are raw numbers. And the longer you track this statistic the more deaths will show up among the vaccinated. Because nearly everyone there is vaccinated. Surprise!

Stop pretending that I said 100% was required just to pretend to make a point. 

I used the polio vaccine as an example of a real vaccine, then I compared it to the Pflacebo. 

Don't pretend that leftists weren't posting memes and making comparisons to the polio vax when they were pushing the covid thing.

Quote

Now slow down and actually think about why. In a population that is like 90% vaccinated, obviously most of the deaths will be among the vaccinated. If 100% of the population were vaccinated, 100% of the deaths would be among the vaccinated. I'm not tricking you. This is just how numbers work.

Holy f'ing stupidity Batman, are you still arguing how the numbers work?

Here's a thing:

Imagine that you gave 73% of the people a Pflacebo, and 27% of people nothing. You'd expect a 73/27 split among whatever outcomes you were looking for.

Now imagine that you gave 85% of people a "covid vaccine" and 15% of people had nothing. If the vaccine worked at all, you'd be expecting something like 60/40, or even 50/50 would be a positive result. But 88/12 is right smack in the middle of where you'd expect a Pflacebo to end up. IE, the "vaccine" isn't exactly "vaccining". It's "vacationing".

I'm glad that you brought up the "100%" thing, 'cause here's the thing: If their vax-Naziism managed to force us all to vax, there'd be no control group left, and we'd never have anything to gauge vax success rates by. They could just say "10,000 Canadians died of covid this year after vaxing, but that number would be 14.4M without the vax" and we'd have no way of knowing if they were lying to us. We'd all have to nod our credulous heads like you do. 

Quote

Scientific American: "Taken at face value, these numbers may appear to indicate that vaccination does not make that much of a difference. But this perception is an example of a phenomenon known as the base rate fallacy. One also has to consider the denominator of the fraction—that is, the sizes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. With shots widely available to almost all age groups, the majority of the U.S. population has been vaccinated. So even if only a small fraction of vaccinated people who get COVID die from it, the more people who are vaccinated, the more likely they are to make up a portion of the dead."

OMG, you're trying to use eyeball's base rate fallacy here because you, like him, don't even understand it.

If 88% of the people were vaxed and only 53% of the deaths were among the vaxed, it would be folly to say "Look, there are more vaxed deaths than unvaxed deaths - that's proof that the vax doesn't work!"

This is not a base rate fallacy. 85% of people are vaxed and they account for 88% of covid deaths. They're actually punching slightly above their weight in the dying category. Not below. 

Quote

Are you just used to people not calling you on your bullshit, because this is pretty blatant. Yes, the "flu shot" is a vaccine, and yes, that's what they call it in Canada too--because that's what it is. It's not a tuque. lol

2021-2022 flu vaccine

This season's flu shot will protect you against:

influenza A(H1N1)
influenza A(H3N2)
influenza B

https://pharmacy.londondrugs.com/health-clinics/flu-clinic

Quote

Flu Shot

Make the most of your health and wellness.

Flu shot.

Quote

Pssst. It's called statistical modeling.

I posted actual stats, you posted someone's model, which is based on their own beliefs

Quote

Yes, it is statistics. Believe it or not, the field of statistics is not limited to simply counting things that have happened in the past. Oy.

And you are welcome to reject articles from the world's premiere medical journal, but we all know why you're choosing to do so and it has nothing to do with anyone's credibility except for yours.

It's part of statistics, just like imaginary numbers are a part of math. Neither one is necessary here because we have the "rubber meets the road" stats - they're all that really matters. 

Quote

You didn't disprove anything, and in fact I think you've missed the point entirely. Rioting sucks, but protesting is powerful. Why don't you ask any of those people if they would like to go back in time to before the BLM movement, or whether those growing pains were necessary and worthwhile?

Again, to be clear, at no time in history has there been a better chance at fair treatment for a person playing demographic roulette. Whether you're Black or gay or a woman or Hispanic or indigenous or even a white man, you'll find a better, more equitable society today than at any point in history. Much progress still to be made, but the progress is undeniable. 

OMG, what a bunch of pathetic excuses and dodging. 

You're completely dodging the part about "The MSM lying to promote rioting" and "politicians who promoted rioting for months where their constituents lived and then shrieking "PTSD" when they experienced less than 1/4 of a day of it".

Your head couldn't be any further up your ass.

Quote

Again, to be clear, at no time in history has there been a better chance at fair treatment for a person playing demographic roulette. Whether you're Black or gay or a woman or Hispanic or indigenous or even a white man, you'll find a better, more equitable society today than at any point in history. Much progress still to be made, but the progress is undeniable. 

At no point in history has the US been more of a giant shithole. 2015-2022 is not the best time for any American, blacks included. 

Quote

Aw, it's cute that you think you're anywhere near reality. Step one is to turn off whatever media you're currently mainlining, because it's rotting not just your brain, but you heart as well. If you wanna know if vaccines work, ask the medical community. If you wanna know what the definition of a vaccine is, consult with the medical community. If you wanna know how to read statistics, ask a statistician. There's a world of knowledge out there if rely on real sources instead of getting your information pre-chewed and digested from some fringe hate outlet.

Frankly, right now you're not much better off than the religious folks who toss out all science in the name of dogma. 

It's ballsy that you even replied, TBH. I thought for sure that I'd seen the last of you.

In the future, before you trot out any "stats", or you wanna use any big new terms like "base rate fallacy", just ask me. Unlike your idiotic sources, I don't lie to you.  

I hope that you've learned a lot today. The things I'm teaching you are actually quite important. An uninformed, ignorant electorate is a danger to democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    RevolutionPartyofCanada
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Mentor
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User went up a rank
      Veteran
    • PoliFile earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...