Censorship backfires

@Metal-Brain
The main thing going on here is you failing to do your civic duty to do your best to protect the entire population.
That means if you are a health care worker, you better be vaxxed or hit the road toad.

Not wearing masks or refusing the shots means you are LITERALLY anti science and there is no amount of mewling a puking your supposed 'debate' which is not even CLOSE to debate because when someone posts a rebuttal all you do is 'did you read the link, OF COURSE you are wrong, and so is everyone else who does not agree with me.

THAT IS NOT DEBATE but you are WAY too stupid to understand that OR you are just bullshyting us, pulling our chain and laughing your pathetic ass off when we show you where you are wrong.

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
The main thing going on here is you failing to do your civic duty to do your best to protect the entire population.
That means if you are a health care worker, you better be vaxxed or hit the road toad.

Not wearing masks or refusing the shots means you are LITERALLY anti science and there is no amount of mewling a puking your supposed 'debate' which is not ...[text shortened]... yting us, pulling our chain and laughing your pathetic ass off when we show you where you are wrong.

No, you are anti science.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

@Metal-Brain
A bit different take by Forbes, who owned clear for a while:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2021/08/18/cdc-director-says-coronavirus-vaccines-less-effective-for-delta-but-still-prevent-severe-infection/?sh=405c4b017721

It says the vaccine is not quite as effective but still keeps you from getting severely ill or dying.

But that message doesn't suit your aim to overthrow our government so instead you want to make people afraid, the first step onto getting a dictator.

@metal-brain said
"Another reason is that some information (say in a meeting) can’t be reasonably interpretted without context"

Then correct the context.
You have a problem with the truth, not misinformation. All of your heroes are spreading misinformation. Fauci, Biden and many others who should be in prison for lying and putting lives at risk.

Why don't you support censoring Fauci? You know he lies all the time. Don't deny it. You know I proved it several times.

You can’t correct context in minutes.
The minutes are of the meeting. If you discuss apples in a meeting, you can’t just add oranges to the minutes.

So, if it is important, you “censor” the minutes until you can set up a communication which does add the context.

There’s nothing evil in it.
And generally context is everything. Look at yourself. You nitpick various pieces of information and leave out context and then can’t grasp how wrong your interpretations are, even when it’s pointed out to you.

There’s also the concept of gradual learning.
For example (very simplistic): you can’t just tell people that global warming causes worse tornados. Well, you can, but they won’t understand.
You have to explain first how the world rotates. Then how clouds are formed. Then how tornados are caused by both these factors. Then how warmer water causes more clouds, etc.
Basically how schools educate children. The same goes for complicated situations.

Is that censorship? Yes. Of a sort. Nothing inherently evil.

Context and gradual learning.

Oh well, I’m off to… well, I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you…

@metal-brain said
"Part of his job is to give us accurate science based information, if he intentionally veers off that road he should have his licence revoked and he should not be a public spokesperson any longer if he does not have a good enough reason for doing so."

He did just that and several times. He admitted he intentionally lied. He was even asked if he was sure because people ...[text shortened]... rkers (a minority of the population) by denying the general population masks. Is that a good reason?

Science isn’t an unchangable fact.
It’s the exact opposite.

Science is learning. So you have a situation and X amount of information. You base your decisions on this. And when you have X+1 information, you re-evaluate your decisions and change them when needed.
Plan-do-check-act.

If you have 1 study that suggest wearing masks doesn’t help, that is the basis for X.
Then 2 studies come out saying it does. You re-evaluate your decision.
Seperate studies at your disposal suggest that constantly changing your decision during a crisis makes the situation too complicated.
You re-evaluate your decision making and choose the safest option, although not technically peer approved or perhaps super effective.

The US (and many other) government’s fault in this is that they failed to explain how this mechanism works. They, and the scientists, assume that people comprehend it.
The people don’t. And this has led to God awful stupid decision making (changing by public demand) and incomprehension in various areas of society.

So, basically, instead of saying:
Wash your hands often.
They should have said: with the information we have now, wash your hands often. When we know more, we may change this stance.
It’s the best we can do at the moment.

Ahhhh… context and gradual learning there…

@metal-brain said
"Part of his job is to give us accurate science based information, if he intentionally veers off that road he should have his licence revoked and he should not be a public spokesperson any longer if he does not have a good enough reason for doing so."

He did just that and several times. He admitted he intentionally lied. He was even asked if he was sure because people ...[text shortened]... rkers (a minority of the population) by denying the general population masks. Is that a good reason?

I don't believe wearing masks saves lives, but if I am wrong Fauci killed people to protect health workers (a minority of the population) by denying the general population masks. Is that a good reason”

Firstly, unless you are retarded you are lying when you say you do not believe face masks save lives, the mechanism for them saving lives is so simplistic that there cannot be a plausible confusion. it’s the difference between sneezing into someone’s face and sneezing into a hanky.
Secondly Fauci’s job is to save as many lives as possible which is a bit more nuanced than simply saving lives, stripping front line health workers of basic ppe like masks is a risk to everyone who may need to use those services, so the general public competing with hospitals for what was at the time a scarce resource does not save as many lives as maintaining a functional health system.

@shavixmir said
Science isn’t an unchangable fact.
It’s the exact opposite.

Science is learning. So you have a situation and X amount of information. You base your decisions on this. And when you have X+1 information, you re-evaluate your decisions and change them when needed.
Plan-do-check-act.

If you have 1 study that suggest wearing masks doesn’t help, that is the basis for X.
...[text shortened]... e this stance.
It’s the best we can do at the moment.

Ahhhh… context and gradual learning there…

https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/pfizer-scientists-caught-undercover-admitting-pfizer-is-evil-and-that-natural-immunity-is-better-than-the-covid-19-vaccine/

@kevcvs57 said
I don't believe wearing masks saves lives, but if I am wrong Fauci killed people to protect health workers (a minority of the population) by denying the general population masks. Is that a good reason”

Firstly, unless you are retarded you are lying when you say you do not believe face masks save lives, the mechanism for them saving lives is so simplistic that there cannot ...[text shortened]... at the time a scarce resource does not save as many lives as maintaining a functional health system.

Fauci aso lied about what percentage of the population needed to get vaccinated to reach herd immunity.

YouTube&t=349s

Was that for a good reason too?
Now we know even 100% is not enough. Did the science change to impossible and he had to change the numbers until impossible?

@metal-brain said
https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/pfizer-scientists-caught-undercover-admitting-pfizer-is-evil-and-that-natural-immunity-is-better-than-the-covid-19-vaccine/

Scientists claiming something (in this case either a company or even worse a vaccine) is evil?
Yeah. I am not going to read that.

The link alone tells you it is utter garbage and not worthwhile.

@metal-brain said
Fauci aso lied about what percentage of the population needed to get vaccinated to reach herd immunity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uENyOGnUH8c&t=349s

Was that for a good reason too?
Now we know even 100% is not enough. Did the science change to impossible and he had to change the numbers until impossible?

First: you don’t use the generally accepted definition of herd immunity. So it is pointless arguing with you.

Secondly: what was true 13 months ago is not necessarily true now. That’s science.

Thirdly: the delta variant caused a hiccup in earlier predictions.

To lie = intent.

@shavixmir said
First: you don’t use the generally accepted definition of herd immunity. So it is pointless arguing with you.

Secondly: what was true 13 months ago is not necessarily true now. That’s science.

Thirdly: the delta variant caused a hiccup in earlier predictions.

To lie = intent.

You are anti science.

Five reasons why COVID herd immunity is probably impossible

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

Will you read the Journal Nature?

@metal-brain said
You are anti science.

Five reasons why COVID herd immunity is probably impossible

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

Will you read the Journal Nature?

Nope.
I won’t read anything you link to. Ever.
Because you are a retard.

@shavixmir said
Nope.
I won’t read anything you link to. Ever.
Because you are a retard.

That is another lie.
Just an excuse to not admit you are wrong.

https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-variant-made-herd-immunity-not-possible-astrazeneca-developer-2021-8?op=1

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/14/ending-covid-19-via-herd-immunity-is-a-dangerous-fallacy

Kim Iversen: Facebook “Whistleblower” Calls For CENSORSHIP, Dems And GOP Agree

YouTube

@Metal-Brain
So you figure it is ok to yell FIRE in a crowded theater. That is what is going on here. But you won't research the issue enough to find out for yourself, instead, just going, What is the source of your information, as if we are supposed to be your librarian.

I guess that is why Putin and Trump likes you so much.