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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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.[/quote]

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.  [/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

Shrug.

“Believe science. Oh wait. Not [i]that[/i] science. We don’t like [i]that[/i] science.”

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

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.[/quote]

You are speaking to multiple posters, HON. And there’s no “98 percent of the science” when it comes to COVID data, yet again you are making that up, and we all see through it.  There is NO “pro science” political party.[/quote]

Ignoring 98 percent of the science is referring to "ohh I have my Cochrane study of lab-only tests and influenza that I think proves masks don't work and therefore I am going to completely ignore the hundreds of other papers out there which say otherwise despite those studies being more specifically focused on covid and real-world effectiveness."[/quote]

OMG what is confusing you about the idea that one way masking works and yet government mask mandates don’t? This is the what, the third time you’ve mixed this up? Even at the time this is exactly what Republican governors were saying when they dropped the mandates in their states and the Democrats put out absurd hyperbolic press releases about how they were going to kill their residents (which of course didn’t happen).  [/quote]

So now we're at "masking works" but "mask mandates don't."  Well now there's some truth.  The main reason mandates don't work is because some people are just contrarian idiots who also lack the common sense for self-preservation.  The anti-maskers are birds-of-a-feather with the people who fought seatbelts and motorcycle helmets.  Good for you.  Darwin's law in action. [/quote]

This is spot on![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics