Jump to content

COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)


Orbit

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Prozac said:

Perhaps Anthony Faucci is part of the grand conspiracy that will have us all speaking mandarin within the next five years. Or perhaps he’s just a dude trying to do the best he can with limited and constantly changing information. Your argument sounds like the one my ten year old makes when I promised him a chocolate shake at Red Robin and all they have left is vanilla. Regardless, the vaccine works, it is safe, and it already has been highly effective in allowing us to claim much of our lives back. Just look at the countries with very low vaccination rates for proof. Sydney just went back on a full on draconian lockdown today. Australia’s vaccination rate is ~5%. 

Are those your only two choices available for understanding Fauci?  I can imagine a more nuanced gradation of possibilities; that you cannot is informative towards your understanding of differing viewpoints.

The analogy of your child is merely another appeal to authority without addressing the underlying issue or question.  You’re using the same trick over and over: mischaracterize the other viewpoint, then mock the mischaracterization.  It plays well with folks who already agree with you; how convincing is that logic for those still deciding what to think about these events?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Planning to opt out when the military does make it mandatory? 

Thank you for answering my questions with another question.  Makes it obvious that you can’t or don’t want to answer them.

But coming from a guy who would give anyone an Article 15 for speeding, not wearing a reflective belt, etc…I’m not surprised.

You do know that you can see the foolishness of your ways and admit that you were wrong, right?  Or are you sticking to your original post below?

image.thumb.jpeg.1e6ccf0ba2560a19baad5e2b84525a03.jpeg

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Thank you for answering my questions with another question.  Makes it obvious that you can’t or don’t want to answer them.

But coming from a guy who would give anyone an Article 15 for speeding, not wearing a reflective belt, etc…I’m not surprised.

You do know that you can see the foolishness of your ways and admit that you were wrong, right?  Or are you sticking to your original post below?

image.thumb.jpeg.1e6ccf0ba2560a19baad5e2b84525a03.jpeg

What a fucking troll.

  • Downvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much emotion with this from everyone.  My family got the vaccine because my wife works with immunocompromised children that can’t get it…. not because we are concerned about ourselves. Every M.D. we know got it the minute they could (even pregnant or nursing)… so we trusted their decisions and followed, because as it turns out, I’m a pilot and not a medical professional.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, brabus said:

Actually it’s an unemotional point referencing CDC data, made by a guy with a 5 page long vax record. You do you, but you look like a dip shit when you launch ad hominem attacks on someone because they have a perspective differing from yours. 

Actually it was an unemotional response just pointing out that the argument you are making is like the argument anti-vaxxers make. It wasn’t an attack. Sorry I’m not sorry you’re offended there are similarities in the arguments.

Personal opinion, no one should be forced to get a vaccine, it shouldn’t be held against you before it’s fully approved, and after approval you should just have to deal with some places not being OK with you being around. Just like every other vaccination.

Edited by MCO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BroncoEN said:

So much emotion with this from everyone.  My family got the vaccine because my wife works with immunocompromised children that can’t get it…. not because we are concerned about ourselves. Every M.D. we know got it the minute they could (even pregnant or nursing)… so we trusted their decisions and followed, because as it turns out, I’m a pilot and not a medical professional.

Lot of military folks who were political scientists last October have suddenly become epidemiologists with the vaccine roll out.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2021 at 9:17 AM, Royal said:

I highly, highly recommend everyone listen to episode 1671 of Joe Rogan's podcast with guests Bret Weinstein and Dr Pierre Kory. It's the closest thing that I've seen to an incontrovertible conspiracy theory play out in real life. Summary: Critical information on the benefits and efficacy of the drug Ivermectin for treating Covid has been suppressed by media outlets, tech companies, the pharmaceutical industry, and the government for almost a year now. It's possible that Covid could have been close to completely eradicated within six months using this ultra-inexpensive, ultra-effective treatment.

But "Trust the science" bro.  I finally got around to listening to it.  Out of curiosity I typed ivermectin into google.  Top hit was FDA saying not to take it.  🙂 Infuriating  

Edited by uhhello
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Thank you for answering my questions with another question.  Makes it obvious that you can’t or don’t want to answer them.

But coming from a guy who would give anyone an Article 15 for speeding, not wearing a reflective belt, etc…I’m not surprised.

You do know that you can see the foolishness of your ways and admit that you were wrong, right?  Or are you sticking to your original post below?

image.thumb.jpeg.1e6ccf0ba2560a19baad5e2b84525a03.jpeg

I don’t post on here very much and I’m sure this post will get a lot of hate…but it needs to be said. If I recall you were passed over not too long ago. After reading this statement about handing out Article 15s I’m thinking maybe big blue got something right the first time. This kind of “leadership” is the problem, not the solution.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Boomer6 said:

I don’t post on here very much and I’m sure this post will get a lot of hate…but it needs to be said. If I recall you were passed over not too long ago. After reading this statement about handing out Article 15s I’m thinking maybe big blue got something right the first time. This kind of “leadership” is the problem, not the solution.

I’m assuming this was meant for Pawnman?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MCO said:

Actually it was an unemotional response just pointing out that the argument you are making is like the argument anti-vaxxers make. It wasn’t an attack. Sorry I’m not sorry you’re offended there are similarities in the arguments.

Personal opinion, no one should be forced to get a vaccine, it shouldn’t be held against you before it’s fully approved, and after approval you should just have to deal with some places not being OK with you being around. Just like every other vaccination.

Citing CDC numbers is not a prime anti-vaxxer trait...they claim religious exemptions, vaccines don’t work, vaccines cause things like autism, etc. I made zero claims, just presented a factual number from the “expert source.” You’re attacking the person, not the numbers-driven risk management discussion...ergo, ad hominem.

But to your last point, I agree. 

 

10 hours ago, Guardian said:

Brabus got bit by the I just deleted a message but someone already quoted me bug.

Jokes on you brabus. I don’t even know what ad homonym means!

Que? It’s on page 65, half way down...with ad hominem spelled correctly I might add. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, pawnman said:

Lot of military folks who were political scientists last October have suddenly become epidemiologists with the vaccine roll out.

It really isn't a discussion on epidemiology though. It's a discussion on policy, government reach and ethics. Turns out being an officer in the military does give you a great handle on those worlds because many of us often deal with them day to day. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Boomer6 said:

I don’t post on here very much and I’m sure this post will get a lot of hate…but it needs to be said. If I recall you were passed over not too long ago. After reading this statement about handing out Article 15s I’m thinking maybe big blue got something right the first time. This kind of “leadership” is the problem, not the solution.

Well, joke's on you, 'cause I got picked up APZ.

Never thought it would be so controversial to suggest we follow the guidance from the SECDEF, but here we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to a podcast the other day and heard an interesting numbers comparison from the VAERS data. VAERS is the government reporting system for Vaccine Adverse Reactions. In a 4 or 5 year period @2010, 2000+ people died from vaccine reactions. Since the beginning of this year, over 5000 people have died from vaccine reactions. Years vs months and 2000 vs 5000. Those are hard data numbers from HHS. Something isn't right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TreeA10 said:

Listening to a podcast the other day and heard an interesting numbers comparison from the VAERS data. VAERS is the government reporting system for Vaccine Adverse Reactions. In a 4 or 5 year period @2010, 2000+ people died from vaccine reactions. Since the beginning of this year, over 5000 people have died from vaccine reactions. Years vs months and 2000 vs 5000. Those are hard data numbers from HHS. Something isn't right. 

Means nothing without the denominator.  2000 vs 5000 deaths sounds scare...how many more vaccines were given in that time frame?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAERS data is NOT people dying from vaccine reactions. It’s people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

To my unscientific brain it seems highly likely that a vaccine that was emphasized in an elderly and immune compromised population would have a high probability of some of those people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

I’m not accusing anyone on here of this, but one thing I have found hilarious is the people who cast doubt on COVID death numbers (a doubt I agree with btw), all of a sudden cite VAERS data like it’s gospel truth, despite it having much of the vagueness as COVID death numbers. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kaputt said:

VAERS data is NOT people dying from vaccine reactions. It’s people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

To my unscientific brain it seems highly likely that a vaccine that was emphasized in an elderly and immune compromised population would have a high probability of some of those people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

I’m not accusing anyone on here of this, but one thing I have found hilarious is the people who cast doubt on COVID death numbers (a doubt I agree with btw), all of a sudden cite VAERS data like it’s gospel truth, despite it having much of the vagueness as COVID death numbers. 

I have no problem casting doubt on both. Some county in CA reduced their COVID death count by 25% after reviewing death causes. I'm sure all the VAERS data can be thinned out as well but why the massive increase in numbers? Reduce the VAERS data by 50% and you still have the same number of deaths in 6 months that usually occurred over years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kaputt said:

VAERS data is NOT people dying from vaccine reactions. It’s people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

To my unscientific brain it seems highly likely that a vaccine that was emphasized in an elderly and immune compromised population would have a high probability of some of those people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

I’m not accusing anyone on here of this, but one thing I have found hilarious is the people who cast doubt on COVID death numbers (a doubt I agree with btw), all of a sudden cite VAERS data like it’s gospel truth, despite it having much of the vagueness as COVID death numbers. 

It’s almost like people skew data to confirm their confirmation bias. Almost…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kaputt said:

VAERS data is NOT people dying from vaccine reactions. It’s people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

To my unscientific brain it seems highly likely that a vaccine that was emphasized in an elderly and immune compromised population would have a high probability of some of those people dying of any cause after getting a vaccine.
 

I’m not accusing anyone on here of this, but one thing I have found hilarious is the people who cast doubt on COVID death numbers (a doubt I agree with btw), all of a sudden cite VAERS data like it’s gospel truth, despite it having much of the vagueness as COVID death numbers. 

So...pre-COVID, old people weren’t getting flu shots?

Your supposition might be correct, but leaves doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BFM this said:

So...pre-COVID, old people weren’t getting flu shots?

Your supposition might be correct, but leaves doubt.

I’d love to know the rates of COVID vax vs Flu vax in elderly. I haven’t been able to find that data. 
 

I’m not saying the VAERS deaths shouldn’t be looked at. It would be nice to get some actual research on the numbers. 
 

But citing them as “vaccine reaction deaths” is spreading false information because that data does not track that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...