Jump to content


Supreme User
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Kiloalpha last won the day on May 11

Kiloalpha had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Kiloalpha's Achievements

Gray Beard

Gray Beard (4/4)




Community Answers

  1. If we have vaccinated people needing ventilators en masse… Something has seriously gone wrong, as the whole point of the vaccine is to at least prevent that outcome. Do we have any data showing such a hypothetical is even happening in small samples? How many vaccinated people are being hospitalized?
  2. Yeah, but this study is kind of lacking, as it’s focused on validating the vaccine, not testing the depths of natural immunity. The T-cell response takes approximately 3-5 days (as I understand it) to create new antibodies, so it makes sense those with natural immunity acquired >8 months ago would potentially get “serious” COVID for a few days until their body mounts a defense. What I want to see is hospitalizations and deaths among those with natural immunity.
  3. The WH took the only political route they could with the speech. When you know you're in deep shit, you pivot your message to anything you can that polls/looks/sounds better. Most people can sympathize with the decision to end the war, so he focused on that, offering a smokescreen to the withdrawal. Personally, what makes POTUS' speech so sad is that he tried to do a faux "I'm taking responsibility," but then he follows that up by saying he's taking responsibility for the courageous decision to leave... not mentioning the shitshow of a withdrawal. So many mixed messages, so many fuck ups. Heads should roll, but shit flows downhill.
  4. I know Ben Shapiro isn't everyone's cup of tea (including mine at times), but he's 100% on this one
  5. No. Despite how tempting it is.
  6. @pawnman, I could just as easily flip this around on you. If you're a rational human being, then you surely believe there are regulations/standards/laws/edicts on the books are either worthless or not 100% applicable. If so, then you too must be an anarchist like @dogfish78, right? The appeal to extremes fallacy doesn't work well for anyone, if you're actually insinuating the opponent believes all extremes. Now, if you're using that appeal to test where @dogfish78's limits on government sovereignty lie, fair play. Regardless, there are people against the COVID shot who are otherwise pro-government involvement, and there are people for the vaccine who are otherwise anarcho-libertarian. This isn't a left-right or right-wrong thing. Each individual is doing a cost-benefit analysis for themselves, because that's the rational thing to do. Is each side taking in wrong info to bolster their sides? You bet they are, because where one stands on COVID-19, like everything else anymore... it’s a demonstration of fealty to one's tribe/religion/party. Group-think is a real thing, believe it or not. @dogfish78, don't take this post as a blanket defense of you either. Lay off the "you're not a patriot, and may God have mercy on your soul" stuff. It's no way to engage in a conversation.
  7. Unknown if true. I don’t think this is exactly going to endear the President to the armed forces. But if they say I need it, I’ll get it. Just think it’s a little bullshit.
  8. Here's the thing I'm struggling with. I got COVID really early on in the pandemic. I think I even posted about it on here at the time. Knocked me on my ass for a few days, but I rebounded quickly, and had no lasting effects. Perks of being young (relatively) and without co-morbidities I suppose. I have natural immunity to the virus as a result. I haven't gone and taken the vaccine yet, because the data on re-infection is pretty clearly showing it doesn't happen very often, and I don't seem to be a good carrier of the virus, even with the Delta variant. However, I'm constantly being pressured to get this vaccine, because it's "better than natural immunity," even though it (admittedly rarely) has side effects, and hasn't been shown to do anything else for me other than make my antibodies last for a few months longer. Woohoo. I'm not seeing the cost/benefit as being worth it right now. That easily could change, and if the DoD says I have to... then that's fine. However, I'm being treated by the state and national rhetoric outlets as some kinds of a backwards idiot, because I'm one of the "unvaccinated." I promise I'm reading more medical journals and info than some dipshit who thinks Bill Gates is microchipping folks. I bet I'm also doing more research than the people who are chastising folks for not having the shot, because they actually believe "the science." Bottom line, the rhetoric on this stuff is fucked.
  9. I'm sure statements like this^ are exactly what the French were saying in May of 1789, Russians in February of 1917, the Chinese in 1927, the Cambodians in 1970, or the Iranians in late 1977. I could go on, but you get the idea. History is replete with examples of totalitarian, divisive and combative ideology spreading through a society and causing its demise. Just because America has lasted this long, doesn't mean it always will. I'm not saying we're on the verge of revolution, for the record. However, it takes vigilance on the part of the populace and an honest/open debate to make sure shit like that doesn't take hold. You're failing on both counts by 1) saying IDGAF as long as I'm good (no vigilance) and 2) not even doing the basic due diligence on what CRT's core history is, instead posting articles about what other people think it is (not engaging honestly). According to you, it doesn't matter what Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic, Kimberle Crenshaw, or Derrick Bell, the people who actually developed the theory, think. It's only the coverage in the press that actually matters. As a parallel, TIME magazine, the NY Times, Washington Post and pretty much every major media outlet loved the shit out of Hitler and Mussolini in the 1920s and 30s. They wrote pieces on Fascism and how "fascinating" it was. Give it a google sometime, It'll blow your mind. Walter Duranty did the same thing for the NY Times in Russia. He glowed about the Soviets as they massacred their people while Stalin consolidated power. For that reporting... he got a PULITZER PRIZE. Which still hasn't been rescinded, by the way. If anyone actually looked hard at the policies of Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini, it wouldn't take long to see the coming terror. But those readers of the press back then... I'm sure they had the same carefree attitude you're implying.
  10. There’s conflicting info on when the AFOQT scoring algorithm resets. Specifically the question is if you’re being scored by percentile of the people who took the test that day/week or if it’s everyone who has taken the test thus far. Regardless, something doesn’t seem right. You took every practice section under test conditions and aced them… yet you bombed on test day? That’s impossible unless you’re just a really bad test taker (but even then, you should have seen that in the practice) or the materials weren’t good.
  11. I'm getting a warning the site is unsecured. Tested and confirmed on both Microsoft Edge and Mozilla Firefox. Edit: Add in iOS as well.
  12. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/05/15/space-force-co-who-got-holiday-call-trump-fired-over-comments-decrying-marxism-military.html
  13. A post of clarity in a sea of sport-bitching. I like this thinking. Here's my problem with the discussion. Roe found that abortions were legal until 28 weeks, because that was the court-defined point of "viability." Ok, let's use that term/idea as the consistent standard. To be logically consistent, pro-choice people should now be for restricting abortions after 22 weeks, because medicine has improved since 1973, and the data shows that babies are surviving at 22 weeks. Hell, one was just born at 21 weeks in MN, albeit it was a miracle. The standard Roe sets is a sliding scale. As medicine improves, that number should keep going down. It could even theoretically go down to 1 day. Are abortion advocates going to hold that consistent "viability" standard if that happens? Hell no, because "viability" isn't really their argument. The true argument is "choice." It boils down to this: My ability to live my life as I choose, without the responsibility of a child, is more important than the fetus' right to live. Read that twice, and tell me that doesn't make you uneasy. Idk what the answer is, but I can't support that argument.
  14. Pretty simple. He’s using a parallel example of Mars to show the error in your/society’s whimsical definition of “life.”
  15. They don’t hire off the street. Research a little further though and you might find squadrons who will.
  • Create New...