When will this shit end?

[Ozanne]

19 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

What going on with gov data atm?

It's having a few issues. 1,048 new cases though.

[gizmoman]

1 hour ago, JoeyT said:

 

They should get her as leader of the Labour party, this is the stuff Starmer should be saying if he was a true opposition leader, holding the government to account and making them PROVE that each infringement on our liberties is absolutely necessary. As she says the current measures are way over the top and unjustifiable. Will Starmer & co vote against the 2 year extension to the emergency powers? I doubt it.

[Matt42]

1 hour ago, JoeyT said:

 

Not a surprise. I’m getting very concerned about this addictive anti-media narrative which has caught wind very quickly. I bet we all know many people who have fallen down this rabbit hole.

I used to love Conspiracy Theories when it was something dumb like Avril Lavinge has been dead for decades or whatever. Nowadays it feels like Conspiracy theories have a dark and subversive undertone and it feels a little bit more like a cult. QAnon, Anti-Vaccination, COVID-Hoax etc - while these people used to just be people you’d laugh at on the fringes of the internet it feels like now these people can really cause political change. 
 

I bet we can each name many family members or close friends who have fallen to this and take these views to the voting booth. I can’t believe I genuinely have a family member that believes trump is exposing a dark Jewish pedophile ring in Hollywood and that’s why the mainstream media hates him.

I can’t believe this shit really aids in forming a basis for who someone will vote for. We will see something similar with COVID I reckon.

55 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

@Matt42 you might find this post interesting on polling for the US election.

 

 

I don’t believe polls. Sorry. I don’t think polls really reflect anything at all. Polls are unreliable because they ask people who are more likely to vote the status quo.

[stuartbert two hats]

3 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Not a surprise. I’m getting very concerned about this addictive anti-media narrative which has caught wind very quickly. I bet we all know many people who have fallen down this rabbit hole.

I used to love Conspiracy Theories when it was something dumb like Avril Lavinge has been dead for decades or whatever. Nowadays it feels like Conspiracy theories have a dark and subversive undertone and it feels a little bit more like a cult. QAnon, Anti-Vaccination, COVID-Hoax etc - while these people used to just be people you’d laugh at on the fringes of the internet it feels like now these people can really cause political change. 
 

I bet we can each name many family members or close friends who have fallen to this and take these views to the voting booth. I can’t believe I genuinely have a family member that believes trump is exposing a dark Jewish pedophile ring in Hollywood and that’s why the mainstream media hates him.

I can’t believe this shit really aids in forming a basis for who someone will vote for. We will see something similar with COVID I reckon.

I don’t believe polls. Sorry. I don’t think polls really reflect anything at all. Polls are unreliable because they ask people who are more likely to vote the status quo.

Randomly deciding not to believe actual evidence (like polls) in favour of whatever your gut tells you is exactly the thought process that leads to conspiracy theories.

[Matt42]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Randomly deciding not to believe actual evidence (like polls) in favour of whatever your gut tells you is exactly the thought process that leads to conspiracy theories.

Which is harmless when we’re talking about dumb shit on the internet.

I’m not going to lie I used to LOVE looking into dumb conspiracy theories just for the fun of it.

But there’s just a bit of a sour taste to it all now. Conspiracy theories seem to play a pretty huge role in not just political decisions but political allegiances now.

This is not a left or right thing either - I see this on both sides. I really don’t know how you untangle some of this.

[Ozanne]

13 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Not a surprise. I’m getting very concerned about this addictive anti-media narrative which has caught wind very quickly. I bet we all know many people who have fallen down this rabbit hole.

I used to love Conspiracy Theories when it was something dumb like Avril Lavinge has been dead for decades or whatever. Nowadays it feels like Conspiracy theories have a dark and subversive undertone and it feels a little bit more like a cult. QAnon, Anti-Vaccination, COVID-Hoax etc - while these people used to just be people you’d laugh at on the fringes of the internet it feels like now these people can really cause political change. 
 

I bet we can each name many family members or close friends who have fallen to this and take these views to the voting booth. I can’t believe I genuinely have a family member that believes trump is exposing a dark Jewish pedophile ring in Hollywood and that’s why the mainstream media hates him.

I can’t believe this shit really aids in forming a basis for who someone will vote for. We will see something similar with COVID I reckon.

I don’t believe polls. Sorry. I don’t think polls really reflect anything at all. Polls are unreliable because they ask people who are more likely to vote the status quo.

The polls have generally been correct though but ok. How about this:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/07/us/allan-lichtman-trump-biden-2020-trnd/index.html

This history Professor has correctly predicted each Presidential election since 1984 used his own 13 key method. He predicts Biden will win in November.

[gizmoman]

20 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Not a surprise. I’m getting very concerned about this addictive anti-media narrative which has caught wind very quickly. I bet we all know many people who have fallen down this rabbit hole.

I used to love Conspiracy Theories when it was something dumb like Avril Lavinge has been dead for decades or whatever. Nowadays it feels like Conspiracy theories have a dark and subversive undertone and it feels a little bit more like a cult. QAnon, Anti-Vaccination, COVID-Hoax etc - while these people used to just be people you’d laugh at on the fringes of the internet it feels like now these people can really cause political change. 
 

I bet we can each name many family members or close friends who have fallen to this and take these views to the voting booth. I can’t believe I genuinely have a family member that believes trump is exposing a dark Jewish pedophile ring in Hollywood and that’s why the mainstream media hates him.

I can’t believe this shit really aids in forming a basis for who someone will vote for. We will see something similar with COVID I reckon.

I don’t believe polls. Sorry. I don’t think polls really reflect anything at all. Polls are unreliable because they ask people who are more likely to vote the status quo.

Why are you dismissing this as a conspiracy theory? She makes the point that the media have exaggerated the dangers of covid, that is a perfectly reasonable and debatable point, every other point she makes is similarly reasoned and rational, you may not agree with her points but maybe you should explain why rather than dismiss then as some "conspiracy".

[March Hare]

17 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Which is harmless when we’re talking about dumb shit on the internet.

I’m not going to lie I used to LOVE looking into dumb conspiracy theories just for the fun of it.

But there’s just a bit of a sour taste to it all now. Conspiracy theories seem to play a pretty huge role in not just political decisions but political allegiances now.

This is not a left or right thing either - I see this on both sides. I really don’t know how you untangle some of this.

John Oliver did a good show on Conspiracy Theories and there was a part of it about Proportionality Bias that was interesting - people want to big events to have big causes. It’s like the mind naturally takes you to conspiracy theory to explain things away.

[Zoo Music Girl]

47 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Not a surprise. I’m getting very concerned about this addictive anti-media narrative which has caught wind very quickly. I bet we all know many people who have fallen down this rabbit hole.

I used to love Conspiracy Theories when it was something dumb like Avril Lavinge has been dead for decades or whatever. Nowadays it feels like Conspiracy theories have a dark and subversive undertone and it feels a little bit more like a cult. QAnon, Anti-Vaccination, COVID-Hoax etc - while these people used to just be people you’d laugh at on the fringes of the internet it feels like now these people can really cause political change. 
 

I bet we can each name many family members or close friends who have fallen to this and take these views to the voting booth. I can’t believe I genuinely have a family member that believes trump is exposing a dark Jewish pedophile ring in Hollywood and that’s why the mainstream media hates him.

I can’t believe this shit really aids in forming a basis for who someone will vote for. We will see something similar with COVID I reckon.

I don’t believe polls. Sorry. I don’t think polls really reflect anything at all. Polls are unreliable because they ask people who are more likely to vote the status quo.

Dark conspiracy theories have always existed. How do you think the Nazis came to power?

And no I don't know anyone who believes the stuff you mention above actually.

Edit: before anyone comes at me I know there was a lot more to the Nazis coming to power than just antisemitism, economic factors being a big one, but conspiracy theory was basically at the heart of Hitler's belief system. Sure there are tons more examples from earlier in history too.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Zoo Music Girl

[Crazyfool01]

1 hour ago, ace56blaa said:

What going on with gov data atm?

It’s fucked like me 

[Sdsm123]

This did crack me up

[Mark E. Spliff]

36 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Why are you dismissing this as a conspiracy theory? She makes the point that the media have exaggerated the dangers of covid, that is a perfectly reasonable and debatable point, every other point she makes is similarly reasoned and rational, you may not agree with her points but maybe you should explain why rather than dismiss then as some "conspiracy".

Having watched the interview, I agree - she doesn't sound like a conspiracy theorist, and seems to have a healthy disdain for anyone that is.  The problem with people like her is that she's got a public platform, but doesn't understand the basic science.  She spends a lot of the time comparing the Covid death rate with cancer and heart disease etc. and seems to place a lot of importance on the fact that the infection/hospitalisation/death rates are all currently low.  Anyone who's been reading this thread should be able to see the flaws in this.  Obviously, the cancer and heart disease comment is easy to dismiss - neither of them are contagious.  And the low rates mean nothing: the problem with Covid is its unique ability to spread like wildfire due to long periods of symptom-free transmission.  Anyone who draws comfort from the fact that rates are low at any specific point in time just doesn't understand why it's such a threat.

[gizmoman]

10 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Having watched the interview, I agree - she doesn't sound like a conspiracy theorist, and seems to have a healthy disdain for anyone that is.  The problem with people like her is that she's got a public platform, but doesn't understand the basic science.  She spends a lot of the time comparing the Covid death rate with cancer and heart disease etc. and seems to place a lot of importance on the fact that the infection/hospitalisation/death rates are all currently low.  Anyone who's been reading this thread should be able to see the flaws in this.  Obviously, the cancer and heart disease comment is easy to dismiss - neither of them are contagious.  And the low rates mean nothing: the problem with Covid is its unique ability to spread like wildfire due to long periods of symptom-free transmission.  Anyone who draws comfort from the fact that rates are low at any specific point in time just doesn't understand why it's such a threat.

You don't need to understand the mechanics of this, it's simply a numbers game, the justification for the lockdown was to reduce the number of cases at that time in order to keep the NHS functioning and save as many as possible, that was achieved and we should now be living a relatively normal life (and by that i don't mean masks on schoolkids), IF the number of hospital admissions and deaths start to increase dramatically then we can ramp up measures then. Many won't agree with this, thinking we must save everyone, but that is just not realistic, and the continued restrictions have far reaching negative effects not just on the economy but on peoples health, physical and mental.

[Mark E. Spliff]

3 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

...the justification for the lockdown was to reduce the number of cases at that time in order to keep the NHS functioning and save as many as possible, that was achieved and we should now be living a relatively normal life

That was never the deal.  Lockdown was never sold as a one-off measure which could be forgotten about once numbers had been brought back down at one particular time.  When the UK govt finally ditched herd immunity and got its act together, the big deadly accelerator pedal known as the R-rate became the focus.  At the same time the phrase 'the new normal' started being used.  In short, we were told that, until a vaccine or treatment was developed, we'd be permanently on 'R watch,' with further lockdowns etc. being used when necessary for the foreseeable.

So yes, it's a numbers game, but it's exponential numbers - so the fact that your favourite metric is low today, tells you nothing about where it's going to be in 2 weeks time.  Hence my previous observation: anyone who draws any significance from the fact that the numbers are low today, just doesn't understand what they're up against.

As for your comment that it's not realistic to save everyone - I think you're right.  All public health spending decisions are a balancing act, and this one is a monster.  I'm under no illusion that taking a 'we must prevent as many covid deaths as possible' is the right policy.  If you do a cost benefit analysis, I'm sure maintaining absolutely strict covid controls would have a strong net negative outcome due to deaths, ill-health, poverty, domestic violence etc. from other causes.

[DeanoL]

16 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

You don't need to understand the mechanics of this, it's simply a numbers game, the justification for the lockdown was to reduce the number of cases at that time in order to keep the NHS functioning and save as many as possible, that was achieved and we should now be living a relatively normal life (and by that i don't mean masks on schoolkids)

I don't get why masks on school kids is such a big deal? It's not hard - you wear a mask, you get used to it. Plenty of people have to do it all day anyway, there's no harm in having kids wear them. It might not shift the needle much, but it's also not a massively challenging or expensive thing to implement.

[Crazyfool01]

10 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I don't get why masks on school kids is such a big deal? It's not hard - you wear a mask, you get used to it. Plenty of people have to do it all day anyway, there's no harm in having kids wear them. It might not shift the needle much, but it's also not a massively challenging or expensive thing to implement.

its terrible people wont be able to see those wonky teeth before the braces sort them out anymore .... 

[gizmoman]

15 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I don't get why masks on school kids is such a big deal? It's not hard - you wear a mask, you get used to it. Plenty of people have to do it all day anyway, there's no harm in having kids wear them. It might not shift the needle much, but it's also not a massively challenging or expensive thing to implement.

Carl Vernon has written books on anxiety and depression, he disagrees,

 

[Mark E. Spliff]

12 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Carl Vernon has written books on anxiety and depression, he disagrees,

'has written books on' is not a qualification.  Anyone reading your post is capable of typing 'Carl Vernon Twitter' into Google and seeing what sort of person he actually is.  We've had similar conversations in the past where, for example, I've called you out for re-tweeting an alt-right troll on here.  I'd say Carl Vernon was right up there with that one.

Linking yourself to a lunatic like Carl Vernon is not a hill you need to die on.  If you think there's a serious problem with the wearing of face covering in schools, why not just say what that is?

[gizmoman]

25 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

'has written books on' is not a qualification.  Anyone reading your post is capable of typing 'Carl Vernon Twitter' into Google and seeing what sort of person he actually is.  We've had similar conversations in the past where, for example, I've called you out for re-tweeting an alt-right troll on here.  I'd say Carl Vernon was right up there with that one.

Linking yourself to a lunatic like Carl Vernon is not a hill you need to die on.  If you think there's a serious problem with the wearing of face covering in schools, why not just say what that is?

This is getting pretty tiresome Mark, for the 3rd time I'll correct you on this, I posted a video that happened to be on someones twitter timeline, the "alt-right troll" in question was not the original source of the video and it wasn't where I originally saw it, so i did not re-tweet anything, I linked to the video direct with no input from the person on twitter who you dislike so much. You may think Carl Vernon is a lunatic but I thought he made some good points in the video, still we are all entitled to our opinion. He seems to sell plenty of books on Amazon and they have generally good reviews so there must be plenty more lunatics out there.

[LJS]

24 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

This is getting pretty tiresome Mark, for the 3rd time I'll correct you on this, I posted a video that happened to be on someones twitter timeline, the "alt-right troll" in question was not the original source of the video and it wasn't where I originally saw it, so i did not re-tweet anything, I linked to the video direct with no input from the person on twitter who you dislike so much. You may think Carl Vernon is a lunatic but I thought he made some good points in the video, still we are all entitled to our opinion. He seems to sell plenty of books on Amazon and they have generally good reviews so there must be plenty more lunatics out there.

that's true

[Reckoner]

3 hours ago, gizmoman said:

still we are all entitled to our opinion

People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

[mcshed]

5 hours ago, gizmoman said:

He seems to sell plenty of books on Amazon and they have generally good reviews so there must be plenty more lunatics out there.

As does David Icke, being able to sell books doesn't make you an authority on a topic.

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, Matt42 said:

Which is harmless when we’re talking about dumb shit on the internet.

is it?

It's the first step down the rabbit hole, of where what you can make up is more meaningful than the real world.

[mcshed]

7 hours ago, gizmoman said:

You don't need to understand the mechanics of this, it's simply a numbers game, the justification for the lockdown was to reduce the number of cases at that time in order to keep the NHS functioning and save as many as possible, that was achieved and we should now be living a relatively normal life (and by that i don't mean masks on schoolkids), IF the number of hospital admissions and deaths start to increase dramatically then we can ramp up measures then. Many won't agree with this, thinking we must save everyone, but that is just not realistic, and the continued restrictions have far reaching negative effects not just on the economy but on peoples health, physical and mental.

I'm sure it would be the likes of you who would complain the most if we were constantly going in and out of full lockdown.

[zero000]

7 hours ago, gizmoman said:

Carl Vernon has written books on anxiety and depression, he disagrees,

 

I’m sorry but that’s a load of bollocks. He picks straw man examples like a two year old being incorrectly told to wear a mask and uses it to justify masks being psychologically damaging. 
 

Similarly his still face experiment reference is absurd. “Deep psychological underdevelopment“ in children because parents wear masks on occasion ? That’s nonsense and there is no evidence to suggest this is true. 
 

He then goes on to reference the flu deaths in 2018 and mentions that there was 60,000 deaths and that we just got on with things. Completely ignoring the fact that this is a different disease and even with lockdown at least 40,000 people have died from it in the U.K.

He’s is not a scientist or a healthcare professional, and he clearly has a very limited grasp on evidence. 

Edited August 27, 2020 by zero000