| General > General Technical Chat |
| Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website |
| << < (139/222) > >> |
| Siwastaja:
--- Quote from: james_s on March 12, 2023, 07:50:37 pm ---It's not passion about Scott Adams, the whole cancel mob thing is much, much bigger than him. And despite it being blatantly obvious that it happens, there are still people that somehow insist that it isn't real. --- End quote --- The same people who insist it's not real, also support the case that it's good. I'm fine with double standards, actually, we all are more or less susceptible of letting something "slip" when done by our favorites; but intellectual dishonesty and outright sociopathic lying I hate. |
| Nominal Animal:
--- Quote from: Buriedcode on March 12, 2023, 07:39:54 pm ---This entire thread has descended into juvenile arguments... --- End quote --- Yes, apparently my links to Nature and peer-reviewed articles on the unreproducibility of psychology and cancer research aren't up to par against Very Solid Beliefs stated as facts. --- Quote from: Buriedcode on March 12, 2023, 07:39:54 pm ---very questionable links/citations --- End quote --- Yes, Nature is such an alt-right publication, very Fox News -like. They haven't even put Greta on the front page yet! How dare they! --- Quote from: Buriedcode on March 12, 2023, 07:39:54 pm ---Might be time to lock it eh? --- End quote --- "Please shut down this discussion. It is hurting my emotions." I haven't yet seen a single credible post defending cancellation, or showing any other than emotive basis for why treating anyone like Scott Adams was treated should be acceptable. Is that the real reason you want this thread to be locked down? Because it makes you question your beliefs? |
| ebastler:
--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on March 12, 2023, 08:10:28 pm --- --- Quote from: Buriedcode on March 12, 2023, 07:39:54 pm ---Might be time to lock it eh? --- End quote --- "Please shut down this discussion. It is hurting my emotions." --- End quote --- I indeed find this thread painful. A 28-page circle jerk, with 95% of posters in vehement agreement and the remaining 5% getting shot down or insulted when they speak up. Being part of this back-patting circle may be comforting for your emotions, but I don't think it does much good for your intellect. I recommend the regulars' table at the bar for this type of discussion. Cheers. |
| Kim Christensen:
--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 12, 2023, 07:41:58 pm --- --- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 11, 2023, 08:10:38 pm --- --- Quote ---The mandates never made any sense because the vaccine doesn't induce sterilising immunity and it's certainty doesn't reduce the spread enough to have a significant effect on the number of cases. The idea everyone needed to have it is not based on any scientific evidence. There is no evidence to suggest it provides any additional protection against severe disease and death, after someone has already been exposed to the virus. Someone who's already had the virus, then recovered would be perfectly rational in refusing the vaccine, because there's no evidence of any benefit. They FDA might as well have just told everyone, who caught it, to take ivermectin. It has the same level of evidence to support it as vaccinating those with natural immunity. --- End quote --- "Sterilising immunity" is almost impossible to prove because you have to demonstrate that an infection never occurred. All you can observe are symptoms. Some vaccines are more effective than others. --- End quote --- But we know the vaccine doesn't induce sterilising immunity, because those who've had it clearly continue to get infected. It was pretty obvious fairly early on, it wasn't going to stop the pandemic. When Alpha hit, we knew it was mutating to become more infectious, then Delta had sufficient immune escape to ensure it would slowly spread, even if everyone were vaccinated overnight and Omicron just spread like wildfire. --- End quote --- I only mentioned "sterilising immunity" because the person I was replying to brought it up. During the pandemic there were many antivaxxers claiming they weren't actually antivaxxers because they had been the recipients of other vaccines. When it became clear that the covid vax didn't provide sterilizing immunity, the antivaxxers felt vindicated while trying to claim that it was useless. But that's the thing about "sterilizing immunity", while it is easy to prove that a vaccine doesn't provide sterilizing immunity, it is much more difficult to prove when it does. Many other vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity but are still useful to administer. --- Quote ---Then why were people who had never been infected and more vulnerable, put before those with natural immunity? --- End quote --- Because it was very early in the pandemic. There was no widespread easy way to test people the entire population for natural immunity. Logistically, it was simply easier to base it on age and overall health status than trying to triage people of unknown status. --- Quote ---There has been no randomised, placebo-controlled trial into whether vaccines provide any benefit in those who have natural immunity. None whatsoever. --- End quote --- Not sure how you would slip an antivaxxer a "placebo" but here you go: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119497 |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: james_s on March 12, 2023, 07:56:12 pm --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on March 12, 2023, 07:41:58 pm ---There was also the madness of people refusing blood from those who had been vaccinated. You couldn't make it up. :palm: --- End quote --- That is truly bizarre, though if somebody requires blood and they choose to refuse it for that or any other reason I really don't have a problem with that, it's their life and if they die because of the choice they made that is their problem, not mine. --- End quote --- Its not that bizarre. Studies have shown the key components of the vaccine in some people's blood and organs for considerable periods after it was administered. If you don't trust the vaccine, why would trust blood that might contain it going straight into your own blood stream? |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |