Is there a "post-truth" majority in the US?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

I think you are a little too slow to be participating in this conversation. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you DO tell surgeons to stop wearing masks because according to you, they are ineffective and pointless? WHAT A TOOL you are!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

You responded to my post. You claimed I said this: “there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science.” I’m asking again: in the post that you responded do (which is visible immediately above what you wrote), where precisely did I say what you claimed I said? I have quoted it above for you, for convenience. You told me I said that. The post is above. What lines exactly in my post said that? Tell me.

The fact is that you are as post-truth as your Democratic heroes. You just made it up, wholesale. Typical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

You responded to my post. You claimed I said this: “there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science.” I’m asking again: in the post that you responded do (which is visible immediately above what you wrote), where precisely did I say what you claimed I said? I have quoted it above for you, for convenience. You told me I said that. The post is above. What lines exactly in my post said that? Tell me.

The fact is that you are as post-truth as your Democratic heroes. You just made it up, wholesale. Typical.

Wow, you must be some kind of major narcissist, to think that you are the one and only person in this thread being referenced and responded to. Again, re-read my response. You came here and posted anonymously, so none of us has any precise clue which posts are yours and which are not. Tough shit for you. Maybe try and do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

Surgeons wear masks to stop spittle from dripping into an open wound.

Virus particles that are small enough to pass through a surgical or cloth mask material do nothing to prevent transmission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

I think you are a little too slow to be participating in this conversation. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you DO tell surgeons to stop wearing masks because according to you, they are ineffective and pointless? WHAT A TOOL you are!

Like I said, too slow for this conversation. You don’t seem to understand the difference between the effectiveness of masks in specific clinical settings versus mask mandates that required, for instance, daycare centers to mask toddlers. Democratic policymakers required masking toddlers long after there was no credible basis for harming children that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

You responded to my post. You claimed I said this: “there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science.” I’m asking again: in the post that you responded do (which is visible immediately above what you wrote), where precisely did I say what you claimed I said? I have quoted it above for you, for convenience. You told me I said that. The post is above. What lines exactly in my post said that? Tell me.

The fact is that you are as post-truth as your Democratic heroes. You just made it up, wholesale. Typical.

Wow, you must be some kind of major narcissist, to think that you are the one and only person in this thread being referenced and responded to. Again, re-read my response. You came here and posted anonymously, so none of us has any precise clue which posts are yours and which are not. Tough shit for you. Maybe try and do better.

Such a temper tantrum because your lies got caught out. You should work on that.

This whole thread has been entertaining because the Democratic religionists can’t handle the fact that their political heroes are as anti-science as the Republicans, and are melting down accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

You responded to my post. You claimed I said this: “there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science.” I’m asking again: in the post that you responded do (which is visible immediately above what you wrote), where precisely did I say what you claimed I said? I have quoted it above for you, for convenience. You told me I said that. The post is above. What lines exactly in my post said that? Tell me.

The fact is that you are as post-truth as your Democratic heroes. You just made it up, wholesale. Typical.

Wow, you must be some kind of major narcissist, to think that you are the one and only person in this thread being referenced and responded to. Again, re-read my response. You came here and posted anonymously, so none of us has any precise clue which posts are yours and which are not. Tough shit for you. Maybe try and do better.

It’s a reasonable assumption to assume that you are responding to the post you yourself directly quoted, but you clearly don’t understand the basics of communication.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

I think you are a little too slow to be participating in this conversation. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you DO tell surgeons to stop wearing masks because according to you, they are ineffective and pointless? WHAT A TOOL you are!

Like I said, too slow for this conversation. You don’t seem to understand the difference between the effectiveness of masks in specific clinical settings versus mask mandates that required, for instance, daycare centers to mask toddlers. Democratic policymakers required masking toddlers long after there was no credible basis for harming children that way.

Well at least now we're getting somewhere. You have now finally admitted that masks DO IN FACT work, when surgeons wear them. From here on out, there's no taking that one back. Masks are indeed useful, helpful and effective.

But then you lost the plot and tried moving the goalposts by saying since toddlers might not be able to properly put on or keep on a mask , it's apparently pointless for anyone at all other than surgeons to wear masks (note that nobody here was even talking about toddlers). Sorry, but that's some harebrained logic there. I'm definitely not the slow one in this conversation. And again, the real-world observational studies did in fact show overall reductions in transmission, toddlers or no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no science when the pandemic hit. The scientists were working off data from SARS and MERS, which were in the same family but never at a global scale of impact. We did lockdowns so that hospital wouldn’t get overwhelmed. I feel like a lot of conservative are making calls in hindsight with known data, which wasn’t available information in the Spring/summer of 2020. So yes looking back, they could have possibly changed a few actions, like having kids return in the fall of 2020 to schools.

That only explains the first couple of weeks of lockdowns, and not the behavior months and years afterwards. It doesn’t explain the very specific facts I mentioned about the lack of a scientific basis for example for extended school closures, distancing, mandated child vaccinations and cloth masking. The entire time those decisions were coming down, we had evidence out of European countries (that were managing things differently) that was discarded.

For all of the leftist worship of European socialism, they are remarkably good at frantically silencing the hard, solid science that comes out of those countries. They did it in the pandemic with respect to evidence concerning school closures and distancing, and they’re doing it now with respect to medicalized gender transition for children. It’s almost as if they want the socialist dream and propaganda without the accompanying state-sponsored science.

Poor baby. Try to get over your anger. What’s happened is over. We can’t go back in time and change it. The pandemic is over; move on.

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not that science. We don’t like that science.”

That’s fine if you want, but don’t expect people not to see through you.

Sorry hon, YOU are the one disregarding 98% of the science while cherrypicking the tiny handful of items that you think somehow give credence to your broken anti-vaxxer, anti-mask beliefs.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I believe N-95 masks are effective if worn correctly on adults. I do not believe mask mandates are effective at preventing disease spread, because that isn’t well-supported by studies.

Where I differ from you is that I do not reject science that isn’t politically expedient. I am not rejecting the overwhelming science outside of the US showing the failure of medicalized gender transition, unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post.

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.

Actually, no. PPs have been making the point about the science of medicalized gender transition for children (and how the left is ignoring the science) for many posts in this thread, as well as Covid. There are several posts talking about both. You only respond to the Covid posts, because the lack of evidentiary support for medicalized transition for children is so overwhelming, even you know you can’t defend it. But the discussion has been present in this thread from the start, from multiple PPs.

But since we are here: tell me how Democrats and leftists in the US are embracing the science coming out from around the world about the lack of medical support for youth gender transition. Show me those rigorous investigations, the Congressional hearings about that lack of evidence put forth by Democrats. Where are the blue state politicians that have championed rolling back the laws they passed to permit kids to get gender affirming medical treatment without parental permission?

Sorry, but fewer people are responding to medicalized gender transition because it didn't kill hundreds of thousands of people the way the covid lies did. Likewise, medicalized transition is not some kind of proven science lie that led thousands to violently storm the capitol and cause millions of dollars in damage. To me, your priorities are completely backwards, you want to overhype something that barely affects a fraction of 1% of America while being completely dismissive of something that actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary and preventable deaths, serious illnesses and lifelong complications.

I haven't been here for this whole discussion. Personally, I disagree with medicalized gender transition solely because the current state of medicine is ill equipped to actually deal with it. But as for whether it's valid or not for people to genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and to psychologically feel they are the opposite gender in the wrong body - I would likewise argue that medical science is also not sufficiently advanced to speak to this phenomenon - yet that doesn't stop conservatives from unscientifically trying to deny, demonize, marginalize and attempt to shut down any discussion of it as well, without any adequately robust scientific basis other than "God made two genders, there is only black and white" given what science we have points to a whole range of things like anomalous DNA, people born intersex, Klinefelter syndrome and a whole range of other things which science is still only scratching the surface of. Caster Semenya grew to adulthood never actually knowing she had parts of male genitalia internally. As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."

Point out where exactly in my post I said the bolded. Be precise, thank you.

First, I already said I haven't been here for this whole discussion - unlike you I don't have the time, interest, or inclination to hang out on DCUM pushing an agenda all day. But I HAVE definitely seen plenty of those "there are only two genders, it's black and white" comments on DCUM over the last couple of years. You post anonymously, so I have no way of differentiating your post from the remainder of your anti-trans cohort who DO post such things. As such I cannot give you credit for what you did or didn't say, and I'm pretty sure that the whole "plausible deniability blame shift" game of "uhh that wasn't me, it was a different poster who said that" gets grossly overplayed on this platform. Rather than whining at me, I suggest you work on some way to differentiate yourself if you are upset about being lumped in with the rest of your anti-trans compatriots.

You responded to my post. You claimed I said this: “there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science.” I’m asking again: in the post that you responded do (which is visible immediately above what you wrote), where precisely did I say what you claimed I said? I have quoted it above for you, for convenience. You told me I said that. The post is above. What lines exactly in my post said that? Tell me.

The fact is that you are as post-truth as your Democratic heroes. You just made it up, wholesale. Typical.

Wow, you must be some kind of major narcissist, to think that you are the one and only person in this thread being referenced and responded to. Again, re-read my response. You came here and posted anonymously, so none of us has any precise clue which posts are yours and which are not. Tough shit for you. Maybe try and do better.

It’s a reasonable assumption to assume that you are responding to the post you yourself directly quoted, but you clearly don’t understand the basics of communication.

It would only be a reasonable assumption if there were only one single thread of discussion with uniquely identifiable parties, rather than the reality of numerous anonymous anti-mask posters on DCUM. As was pointed out to you, apart from Jeff, none of us know which posts are yours and which aren't yours. When something like this has to be explained to you repeatedly, then it's probably you who is having difficulty understanding basics of communication.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The gold standard Cochrane meta analysis of over 78 rigorous studies showed that mask mandates don’t work. “The review’s authors found “little to no” evidence that masking at the population level reduced COVID infections, concluding that there is “uncertainty about the effects of face masks.” That result held when the researchers compared surgical masks with N95 masks, and when they compared surgical masks with nothing.” (Tayag)

If you haven’t been following the science, then maybe just sit this discussion out.

The Cochrane study was only "gold standard" in terms of limiting itself to randomized controlled trials, it did not not capture real-world effectiveness as well as observational studies, and beyond that it has other flaws, for example it included pre-COVID studies of influenza, which has different transmission dynamics than COVID. However even that said, the Cochrane review nonetheless still concluded that there was "low to moderate certainty" evidence that masks provide a small reduction in viral respiratory infections based on RCTs - which contradicts your suggestion that masks were totally ineffective and worthless. Even the Cochrane study can't back that claim up.

No.

Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10484132/

"The science of masking and its impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission is complicated. Observational studies present valuable data that warrant consideration in informing policy with a full understanding of the utility of mask use in a variety of settings. The Cochrane review did not include a large body of evidence, and that resulted in a biased conclusion. If all types of studies are considered, it is clear that well-fitting, properly used masks do have a measurable and significant effect on reducing transmission when properly worn by the vast majority of the population during times of high community transmission.3 Although the data in the two new studies included in the Cochrane update on masks are accurate, modeling studies correctly predict the small effect sizes that those studies observed; furthermore, the models predict that the effect size would be much larger with better masks more widely and correctly used. Taken together, these and other studies strongly indicate that masking is an effective intervention to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (source control) and should be considered to protect those most vulnerable from severe COVID-19 illness (wearer protection) as a general nonpharmaceutical intervention during times of high transmission."

When you go around citing scientific studies, you have to consider their strengths and weaknesses.

One of the most important considerations with masking is whether they are properly worn. Unless a study completely controls for this, it is hard to draw a strong conclusion. The problem is not that masks don't work, it's that people don't always wear them properly. The problem, as always, is with people.

Agreed, but passing mandates based on wishful thinking about how people should act is never going to work. The problem here is that the people promoting the mandates claimed they were supported by science, when in fact the opposite was true.

I don’t disagree that a properly fitted N95 on an adult works to contain Covid. I strongly disagree that masking toddlers did anything other than harm those poor children, but that was policy promulgated by Democratic policymakers. And this thread is about post-truth and lack of science promulgated by political parties. The fact is that Democrats promulgated harmful policies that were not grounded in science. OF COURSE the Republicans did and do as well (guns being the first that come to mind but also a lot of their Covid policies). That isn’t a question. What you and other PPs seem to believe is that Democrats are somehow immune to the same political failings with respect to science and truth as the Republicans, despite mounds of evidence otherwise.

I am new to this discussion, but what is hard for me to fathom is that you are so hung up about toddlers masking. It is such an odd thing to focus on this many years later. It was a blip in their lives they don't even remember. Did you have a toddler and trying to keep a mask on them drove you to an insane place? You are still traumatized this many years later?

Mask mandates in medical facilities was a good idea. Probably not so effective in other places, like a daycare, but we were facing a virus that killed many, many people and that we knew was transmitted through the air. Just because it wasn't 100% effective, an impossible dream in any scenario, doesn't mean in wasn't worth reducing transmission.

Your blanket hatred of all Dems based on policies during a world-wide pandemic the likes of which we had never before seen in our lifetimes is...weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And meanwhile, surgeons wear masks... because they reduce transmission of germs.

And you know this.

Pretty sure not a single one of the anti-maskers on this thread are scoffing at their surgeons, telling them masks don't work, and demanding they don't wear masks in the operating theater. The whole anti-mask thing is so ridiculously dishonest.

I think you are a little too slow to be participating in this conversation. Try to keep up.

Oh, so you DO tell surgeons to stop wearing masks because according to you, they are ineffective and pointless? WHAT A TOOL you are!

Like I said, too slow for this conversation. You don’t seem to understand the difference between the effectiveness of masks in specific clinical settings versus mask mandates that required, for instance, daycare centers to mask toddlers. Democratic policymakers required masking toddlers long after there was no credible basis for harming children that way.

Well at least now we're getting somewhere. You have now finally admitted that masks DO IN FACT work, when surgeons wear them. From here on out, there's no taking that one back. Masks are indeed useful, helpful and effective.

But then you lost the plot and tried moving the goalposts by saying since toddlers might not be able to properly put on or keep on a mask , it's apparently pointless for anyone at all other than surgeons to wear masks (note that nobody here was even talking about toddlers). Sorry, but that's some harebrained logic there. I'm definitely not the slow one in this conversation. And again, the real-world observational studies did in fact show overall reductions in transmission, toddlers or no.

I don't think there even was any kind of federal mandate for masking toddlers. During the Delta surge the CDC gave guidance, but no mandate. Any mandates for masking children were either state or local school board. But that's not even relevant anymore - the PP admitted that masks work and are effective, for anyone capable of properly wearing one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The gold standard Cochrane meta analysis of over 78 rigorous studies showed that mask mandates don’t work. “The review’s authors found “little to no” evidence that masking at the population level reduced COVID infections, concluding that there is “uncertainty about the effects of face masks.” That result held when the researchers compared surgical masks with N95 masks, and when they compared surgical masks with nothing.” (Tayag)

If you haven’t been following the science, then maybe just sit this discussion out.

The Cochrane study was only "gold standard" in terms of limiting itself to randomized controlled trials, it did not not capture real-world effectiveness as well as observational studies, and beyond that it has other flaws, for example it included pre-COVID studies of influenza, which has different transmission dynamics than COVID. However even that said, the Cochrane review nonetheless still concluded that there was "low to moderate certainty" evidence that masks provide a small reduction in viral respiratory infections based on RCTs - which contradicts your suggestion that masks were totally ineffective and worthless. Even the Cochrane study can't back that claim up.

No.

Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10484132/

"The science of masking and its impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission is complicated. Observational studies present valuable data that warrant consideration in informing policy with a full understanding of the utility of mask use in a variety of settings. The Cochrane review did not include a large body of evidence, and that resulted in a biased conclusion. If all types of studies are considered, it is clear that well-fitting, properly used masks do have a measurable and significant effect on reducing transmission when properly worn by the vast majority of the population during times of high community transmission.3 Although the data in the two new studies included in the Cochrane update on masks are accurate, modeling studies correctly predict the small effect sizes that those studies observed; furthermore, the models predict that the effect size would be much larger with better masks more widely and correctly used. Taken together, these and other studies strongly indicate that masking is an effective intervention to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (source control) and should be considered to protect those most vulnerable from severe COVID-19 illness (wearer protection) as a general nonpharmaceutical intervention during times of high transmission."

When you go around citing scientific studies, you have to consider their strengths and weaknesses.

One of the most important considerations with masking is whether they are properly worn. Unless a study completely controls for this, it is hard to draw a strong conclusion. The problem is not that masks don't work, it's that people don't always wear them properly. The problem, as always, is with people.

Agreed, but passing mandates based on wishful thinking about how people should act is never going to work. The problem here is that the people promoting the mandates claimed they were supported by science, when in fact the opposite was true.

I don’t disagree that a properly fitted N95 on an adult works to contain Covid. I strongly disagree that masking toddlers did anything other than harm those poor children, but that was policy promulgated by Democratic policymakers. And this thread is about post-truth and lack of science promulgated by political parties. The fact is that Democrats promulgated harmful policies that were not grounded in science. OF COURSE the Republicans did and do as well (guns being the first that come to mind but also a lot of their Covid policies). That isn’t a question. What you and other PPs seem to believe is that Democrats are somehow immune to the same political failings with respect to science and truth as the Republicans, despite mounds of evidence otherwise.

I am new to this discussion, but what is hard for me to fathom is that you are so hung up about toddlers masking. It is such an odd thing to focus on this many years later. It was a blip in their lives they don't even remember. Did you have a toddler and trying to keep a mask on them drove you to an insane place? You are still traumatized this many years later?

Mask mandates in medical facilities was a good idea. Probably not so effective in other places, like a daycare, but we were facing a virus that killed many, many people and that we knew was transmitted through the air. Just because it wasn't 100% effective, an impossible dream in any scenario, doesn't mean in wasn't worth reducing transmission.

Your blanket hatred of all Dems based on policies during a world-wide pandemic the likes of which we had never before seen in our lifetimes is...weird.

Agree, the anti-masker is definitely weird. A toddler struggling with a mask is nowhere near as traumatizing as watching a loved one suffocating, unable to breathe, and ultimately dying an awful death from COVID because they believed in malicious lies they were told by figures they trusted on social media.

[Anonymous]

We've had 15 pages of republicans berating democrats for believing things about covid that have been proven to be wrong in hindsight.

Now I'd like a republican to address why they keep saying Biden has open borders even though he expelled a record number of migrants in 2022 while he had title 42 available. And continues high numbers of returns and removals without title 42. I get that many of you would like more, but that's not open borders. Are you post-truth on that?