Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Then you ought to choose your social media a bit more wisely.  Schachtel has a long history of excoriating Faucci for being a traitor, e.g. within the past 24 hours he's tweeted his disappointment that he hasn't been jailed.

But you and Schachtel have more in common than just the fact that you both inhabit far-right social media.  You also like to post claims online without any sources.  You're clearly enraged about Feigl-Ding's hypocrisy in moving country, but are you sure it's true?  When Schachtel was questioned about where he's got his information from, this was his reply:

"Yes, this info is 100% confirmed. Not 99% sure. 100%. Publicly available open source info, which has been archived."

He might have saved himself a bit of typing by simply naming or linking to his information source.  Here's your challenge for today: go and locate this 'open source info' which Schachtel is relying on and report back to us.  (Unsubstantiated claims by other far-right bloggers don't count by the way.)

Finally - you are aware that citing 'hypocrisy' in an argument about a substantive/factual matter is called 'whatabouttery' aren't you?  It's like the in-breds you'll see shouting about how a climate change scientist once took a private jet or owns a gas-guzzler.  Whether or not they're hypocrites makes not one jot of difference to whether the scientific claim they're making is valid.  It just serves as as a convenient distraction from the actual evidence-based debate.

Feign dongs wife confirms they are in Austria

20210310_190453.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gizmoman said:

If this guy's even part right they might have to cancel that,

https://nitter.tedomum.net/GVDBossche

 

"For those who may have some difficulty in understanding how mass vaccination drives viral immune escape, it will suffice to watch infectivity and morbidity rates in those countries who have now succeeded in vaccinating millions of people in just a few weeks. "
media%2FEv9u5NmXYAI9hK3.jpg%3Fname%3Dsma

He's written an open letter to the WHO warning that the vaccine rollout is a disaster and will lead to more deaths. One for an evaluation by Toilet Duck i think.

Evzvo-jWYAQpfCR.jpg%3Fname=orig

 

20 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Howdy, so, we’ve kinda been through this before in a couple of guises...antibody enhanced disease and variants that escape neutralising antibodies. On the first, as it happens, this was brought up by one of the Oxford team in a talk he gave us this morning. Despite the evidence from SARS being poor quality pre-clinical studies, they checked for it anyway and simply saw no evidence for it. The data from the trials doesn’t support it either, nor does our real world use (effectiveness). Israel and the UK are in the period he is suggesting here and morbidity and mortality continue to fall in vaccinated populations rather than any signal of increasing. So, lots of people have looked at this, even though it was only a remote possibility and just don’t see any evidence for it. The second part is immune escaping variants. While variants that evade neutralising antibodies have emerged, variants that evade every part of our immune response are extremely unlikely. One of the key things about the genetic vaccines compared to subunit ones, is that the antigen that stimulates our immune response has to be made inside our cells. This means it gets displayed on the surface of our cells and elicits a far more complex immune response compared to older while killed/attenuated/subunit vaccines. The amount of changes required to escape all of that would likely render the virus inactive. The selection pressures he talks about are already there and they are driving independent evolution of the same changes. This in itself is reassuring as it means there’s only so many places the virus actually can change and still function. So the scenario presented is unlikely. 

You said much more nicely then me! 

 

@gizmoman this is one of those be careful of your online sources situations as the guy is effectively spreading a dangerous conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leyrulion said:

 

You said much more nicely then me! 

 

@gizmoman this is one of those be careful of your online sources situations as the guy is effectively spreading a dangerous conspiracy.

Yeah, I should have known he was dodgy as soon as I saw he had worked for Bill & Melinda Gates and GAVI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Wales looking to be locked up for the year.

 

"Just in case"

 

I think regardless of devolution it would be political suicide to try to mandate social distancing restrictions in one nation of the U.K, when the rest of the U.K. drops restrictions entirely. I get that he’s trying to be cautious, but that article reads like he’s trampling on peoples last vestiges of hope of getting back to normality this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zero000 said:

I think regardless of devolution it would be political suicide to try to mandate social distancing restrictions in one nation of the U.K, when the rest of the U.K. drops restrictions entirely. I get that he’s trying to be cautious, but that article reads like he’s trampling on peoples last vestiges of hope of getting back to normality this year. 

Yeah it'll be crazy for him to insist on social distancing when no other part of the UK is doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zero000 said:

I think regardless of devolution it would be political suicide to try to mandate social distancing restrictions in one nation of the U.K, when the rest of the U.K. drops restrictions entirely. I get that he’s trying to be cautious, but that article reads like he’s trampling on peoples last vestiges of hope of getting back to normality this year. 

Agreed - would they have to kick half the people off the Bristol - Cardiff train at Severn Tunnel Junction so they could start abiding by social distancing in Wales? If the restrictions (other than on overseas travel / quarantine, which he doesn’t mention in the article) can’t be lifted with the whole adult population vaccinated, and in the middle of summer to boot, why does waiting until the next calendar year make any difference?

Saying social distancing has to stay all year amounts to it being in place forever, which is absolute drivel. Someone should call him out on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, zero000 said:

I think regardless of devolution it would be political suicide to try to mandate social distancing restrictions in one nation of the U.K, when the rest of the U.K. drops restrictions entirely. I get that he’s trying to be cautious, but that article reads like he’s trampling on peoples last vestiges of hope of getting back to normality this year. 

As it happens, when we might get back to normal was one of the questions put to a member of the Oxford team at our symposium today. His opinion was optimistic, reckoned pretty much normal by end of June/Mid summer. Risk of a resurgence in the winter, that could require masks in crowded places for a short time, nothing like the restrictions we currently have, but that topping up those most at risk with a further updated boost before then could be sufficient to prevent large amounts of morbidity and mortality associated with it if it did arrive. Not guaranteed to happen though and the vaccines continue to outperform their expectations (not just their own, he was equally complimentary about all the approved jabs), so while the models predict an increase in cases, the kind of impact we’ve seen from that before will be significantly mitigated by vaccine protection. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

As it happens, when we might get back to normal was one of the questions put to a member of the Oxford team at our symposium today. His opinion was optimistic, reckoned pretty much normal by end of June/Mid summer. Risk of a resurgence in the winter, that could require masks in crowded places for a short time, nothing like the restrictions we currently have, but that topping up those most at risk with a further updated boost before then could be sufficient to prevent large amounts of morbidity and mortality associated with it if it did arrive. Not guaranteed to happen though and the vaccines continue to outperform their expectations (not just their own, he was equally complimentary about all the approved jabs), so while the models predict an increase in cases, the kind of impact we’ve seen from that before will be significantly mitigated by vaccine protection. 

Got to say any talk of masks in crowded places surely puts limits on mass events like gigs? I can't see how it'd be serious enough to need any measures at all and somehow still allow those

Edited by efcfanwirral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

As it happens, when we might get back to normal was one of the questions put to a member of the Oxford team at our symposium today. His opinion was optimistic, reckoned pretty much normal by end of June/Mid summer. Risk of a resurgence in the winter, that could require masks in crowded places for a short time, nothing like the restrictions we currently have, but that topping up those most at risk with a further updated boost before then could be sufficient to prevent large amounts of morbidity and mortality associated with it if it did arrive. Not guaranteed to happen though and the vaccines continue to outperform their expectations (not just their own, he was equally complimentary about all the approved jabs), so while the models predict an increase in cases, the kind of impact we’ve seen from that before will be significantly mitigated by vaccine protection. 

this for UK, Ireland or both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Wales looking to be locked up for the year.

 

"Just in case"

 

The man is so frustrating, he is so pessimistic and negative. As a lifelong Welsh Labour member, it was Drakeford that made me leave the party in April last year. And what I have seen from him since has cemented my opinion I made the right choice. I predict a very poor showing for Labour in the elections in May. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I hate it when Manchester seems to randomly stall its case drops for a day. Hopefully back to decent drops in the next couple of days like last time. It's so weird, not as if the schools will have made an impact yet - maybe it's surge testing?

 

0_JSR_MEN_100321table_01JPG.jpg

It’s 4 days old data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Got to say any talk of masks in crowded places surely puts limits on mass events like gigs? I can't see how it'd be serious enough to need any measures at all and somehow still allow those

I think we need to wait and see where we are. If vaccination curbs transmission to the degree we currently see, then it’s possible that masks might only be required when in contact with high risk individuals. We might not need them at all. There’s no real suggestion we’ll be shutting down again, though pubs/gigs might need to be creative over the winter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...