November friendlies

[LeoH037]

57 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

I got you. But if this is what passes for a pandemic and its this easy to control the masses. Wow, the rest of life sounds like a blast

Anyways do your thing and for the record I didn't officially ever use the c word. I think

Oops, it appears you forgot to reference yourself to as "woke" 

 

and 0.0006%, yikes, and I here though I had already seen ridiculous numbers thrown around. Again, what is your PhD in again?

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[LeoH037]

1 hour ago, SpursFlu said:

Then ask why has media bent over backwards to censor any opposing opinions or images that contradicts their scary stories.

you're the one making an assumption/implication (which I do no such thing.. except about you I guess), so I'm genuinely curious what is going through that noggin of yours (if anything) to do so

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[RS]

3 hours ago, Obinna said:

What do you call it when someone gets something for nothing in this life? I believe @SpursFlu used the word. It begins with a "C".

Cunt?

Edit: I don’t actually believe someone who gets something for nothing is one, but given the source I made an educated guess.

[SpursFlu]

26 minutes ago, LeoH037 said:

Oops, it appears you forgot to reference yourself to as "woke" 

 

and 0.0006%, yikes, and I here though I had already seen ridiculous numbers thrown around. Again, what is your PhD in again?

What does it matter. Im an educated person, im surrounded by educated people. I study data and trends for a living. What kind of an arrogant statement are you trying to make? I've also spent time working in media so I understand what drives the media. Either way, I could be a bum on the street and still be entitled to form my own opinion. Your entitled too, feel free to exercise it at any point 

Edited November 3, 2020 by SpursFlu

[Obinna]

The C word was corruption by the way.

[SpursFlu]

1 minute ago, Obinna said:

The C word was corruption by the way.

I did use that. I thought you were referring to the other c word my Slovakian neighbor used in our discussion last night

[SthMelbRed]

2 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

What does it matter? I'm an educated person. I'm surrounded by educated people. I study data and trends for a living. What kind of an arrogant statement are you trying to make? I've also spent time working in media, so I understand what drives the media. Either way, I could be a bum on the street and still be entitled to form my own opinion. You're entitled too. Feel free to exercise it at any point. 

It's fair to assume that the prevailing opinion around these parts, with one or two possible exceptions, is that you're a fucking idiot. 🙄

[LeoH037]

Lol, arrogant? That's rich, considering the outlandish claims you've been making for a while now, and that somehow your opinion is more valid than statement of folks working decades in fields of medicine/epidemiology/genomics/virology/etc... and the only reason one would not see things as you do must undoubtedly be because they aren't as "woke" as you, and surely a member of the "easy to control the masses". 

[LeoH037]

4 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

It's fair to assume that the prevailing opinion around these parts, with one or two possible exceptions, is that you're a ******* idiot. 🙄

Nah, we're all just a bunch of gullible sheeple, its clearly the most likely outcome.

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[SpursFlu]

4 minutes ago, LeoH037 said:

Lol, arrogant? That's rich, considering the outlandish claims you've been making for a while now, and that somehow your opinion is more valid than statement of folks working decades in fields of medicine/epidemiology/genomics/virology/etc... and the only reason one would not see things as you do must undoubtedly be because they aren't as "woke" as you, and surely a member of the "easy to control the masses". 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-54442386

Just direct your questions in their direction since I'm so stupid. Take captain grammar with you

[Obinna]

16 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-54442386

Just direct your questions in their direction since I'm so stupid. Take captain grammar with you

Hard to argue with that article. 

[RS]

Weird. I thought the media was hiding that information. 

Good thing you were able to dig up the article in the little known, hard-to-find outlet known as *checks notes* the BBC.

[RS]

Just now, Obinna said:

Hard to argue with that article. 

There are literally other experts arguing with that article in the article, but sure. 

The thing about the Great Barrington Declaration is that it’s anti-lockdown, but Canada hasn’t ever been in one so it really doesn’t apply here.

[LeoH037]

Good try.. but not really given news articles aren't primary source materials, which is where I assumed you were getting your info from, since you come across as some kind of expert

Curious though... did you bother to pay any heed to the "What do other experts say?" sub heading? 

ps. I hope you didn't waste too much time finding said BBC article

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[LeoH037]

5 minutes ago, RS said:

Weird. I thought the media was hiding that information. 

Good thing you were able to dig up the article in the little known, hard-to-find outlet known as *checks notes* the BBC.

I though it was amusing he relied on the media to show us how the media if brain washing us all. 

[dyslexic nam]

2 minutes ago, RS said:

There are literally other experts arguing with that article in the article, but sure. 

The thing about the Great Barrington Declaration is that it’s anti-lockdown, but Canada hasn’t ever been in one so it really doesn’t apply here.

That’s what I got a kick out of as well.  And it has been endorsed by “dozens” of experts in the UK   But let’s ignore the fact that it hasn’t been endorsed by the thousands of other experts.   

[Obinna]

1 minute ago, RS said:

There are literally other experts arguing with that article in the article, but sure. 

The thing about the Great Barrington Declaration is that it’s anti-lockdown, but Canada hasn’t ever been in one so it really doesn’t apply here.

Yeah man, of course. You know what I mean though. There are clearly two sides to the argument, but the prevailing wisdom here is that one side is completely out to lunch. When SpursFlu brought up that experts support his position, he was mocked by LeoH037 and others.

To be fair, he did his own mocking, which is equally uncalled for. 

At the least his argument doesn't have to be chalked up to conspiratorial nonesense, which is a typical defense from those who disagree with his view/the view of the article.

[El Hombre]

2 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

There is so much going on who knows where to start? But put it this way.. there is no state of emergency, there is no pandemic. Period. The facts and data prove it. Unfortunately a crazy insane precedent has been set and shoved down our throat. And imagine the questions if we were to abandon it?

Then ask why has media bent over backwards to censor any opposing opinions or images that contradicts their scary stories. You don't have to agree but surely we can agree that there can be more than one true opinion. 3500 experts and professionals from around the world signed a declaration calling for an immediate end to all lockdowns. Stanford, Harvard, Oxford etc. Yet no mention anywhere . The average person knows nothing about it, but they do know kids partied on the streets for Halloween. Oh God, so scary. Cane them in the town square 

We can also agree that the amount of resources we've burnt thru and continue to burn thru. Fiscal capital, human capital, cultural capital is unheard of in the modern world. And apparently we can't ask questions? Its pure madness

 

8 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-54442386

Just direct your questions in their direction since I'm so stupid. Take captain grammar with you

Leaving aside the fact that you contradicted yourself by saying that this is not covered anywhere and then linking to coverage of it by one of the largest news organizations in the world, what we see here is called "Confirmation Bias".  You have linked to an article and cherry-picked the information that makes you the most comfortable or supports your personal bias.  They did not say that there is no pandemic (as you say above).  They do not call for an end to all lockdowns, but actually modified lockdown procedures and rolling the dice on herd immunity.  They actually say: "A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented..."  The actual declaration is short on details which puts the pressure on local governments on how to implement it.  It is big on what should happen with very few details on how to make that happen.  So, its easy to see why so many people signed this including such luminaries as "Mr Banana Rama", "Dr Johnny Fartpants", "Dr Person Fakename", and "Professor Notaf Uckingclue".  Further to that, the declaration calls for kids to go to school.  As a parent, I did not know that we were under this type of lockdown.  I will have to investigate where my kids go between 8am and 3:30pm everyday if not to school.

And, if you look closely at the paragraph above, you'll see my bias creeping through.

Further to that, no one is stopping you from asking questions.  I think people object to you making grand statements of fact in incredibly condescending fashion.

[JamboAl]

All in favour of shutting this thread down, say "aye".  

[kacbru]

AYE!

Can we also implement some sort of system where Spurs Flu gets some sort of shock whenever one of his posts contains the words "covid" "pandemic" etc.?  When they stick to football, the posts are good, when they don't...I'd rather read about Robert's latest analysis of the Dutch programme. 

[Obinna]

28 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

Leaving aside the fact that you contradicted yourself by saying that this is not covered anywhere and then linking to coverage of it by one of the largest news organizations in the world, what we see here is called "Confirmation Bias".  You have linked to an article and cherry-picked the information that makes you the most comfortable or supports your personal bias. 

Had he said this is under reported he would not be wrong. He made it easy for you all because of his choice of words. Focusing on his "contradiction" instead of the heart of his argument is akin to punching a man in the balls during a fight. Cheap, but very effective.

28 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

 

  So, its easy to see why so many people signed this including such luminaries as "Mr Banana Rama", "Dr Johnny Fartpants", "Dr Person Fakename", and "Professor Notaf Uckingclue". 

What is the point of this? 

Edited November 3, 2020 by Obinna

[LeoH037]

45 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Yeah man, of course. You know what I mean though. There are clearly two sides to the argument, but the prevailing wisdom here is that one side is completely out to lunch. When SpursFlu brought up that experts support his position, he was mocked by LeoH037 and others.

To be fair, he did his own mocking, which is equally uncalled for. 

At the least his argument doesn't have to be chalked up to conspiratorial nonesense, which is a typical defense from those who disagree with his view/the view of the article.

Seeing as the clown has been condescendingly and aggressively mocking anyone and everyone who dares to suggest there's legitimacy to the current actions of public health authorities and governments, all because it prevents him from watching grown men kick a ball around like he used to (or maybe he just misses crowds, wgaf), its no less than he had coming. Its too bad we cant all be woke like him.

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[LeoH037]

And yes... when you are challenged to produce sources for your outlandish assertions.. and after some time you produce a BBC article, then you deserved to be mocked. Like lmfao gtfo FFS😅😂🤣

Edited November 3, 2020 by LeoH037

[Obinna]

3 minutes ago, LeoH037 said:

Seeing as the clown has been condescendingly and aggressively mocking anyone and everyone who dares to suggest there's legitimacy to the current actions of public health authorities and governments, all because it prevents him from watching grown men kick a ball around like he used to (or maybe he just misses crowds, wgaf), its no less than he had coming. Its too bad we cant all be woke like him.

Yeah I get it man. I see where you and others are coming from, but if your prerogative is to be equally insulting, to me that is equally clownish.

Not saying anyone has to do as I do, but I always make an effort not to lash out at anyone who has lashed out at me when this matter has come up.

He doesn't do himself any favors though, even though I agree with his perspective for the most part.

[El Hombre]

26 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Had he said this is under reported he would not be wrong. He made it easy for you all because of his choice of words. Focusing on his "contradiction" instead of the heart of his argument is akin to punching a man in the balls during a fight. Cheap, but very effective.

I didn't focus on that.  I said, "leaving that aside" and moved on with the rest...

26 minutes ago, Obinna said:

What is the point of this? 

The point is the contention that "X number of doctors have signed this declaration therefore it must be right" may not hold as much water as one thinks when there are concerns as to the veracity of those signatures.  Again, this speaks to the point I was trying to make regarding confirmation bias.  Dropping the superficial knowledge of the lede: "Thousands of scientists and health experts have joined a global movement warning of "grave concerns" about Covid-19 lockdown policies." is very alluring when talking with someone you disagree with but if you dig a little deeper and find out that some of those names may not be on the up and up is dangerous.  If it supports what you believe, you are less likely to do more research into the veracity of the statement.  If you do not support what it says, then you are more likely to go find an alternate source that may poke holes in the statement.  Like I did.

Also, I found the names genuinely funny.

Edit: I guess I should also clarify that, if you didn't know, those were names found to have signed the declaration and reported on by a bunch of different news sources.  I did not make them up myself.

Edited November 3, 2020 by El Hombre