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][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]

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 [b]the failure of medicalized gender transition[/b], unlike the US left, for instance.

You sound weaker and weaker every time you post. [/quote]

Weakness us moving the goalposts by changing the subject - we were talking about covid.[/quote]

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? [/quote]

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.  [b]As such you can't just glibly say "there is only male and female and to say otherwise is unscientific and anti-science."[/b][/quote]

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

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/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