Page 32 of 41

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2020 9:51 pm
by ant
geo wrote:
ant wrote:. . .
Hence, rushed science is not very good or reliable science.
My takeaway as well. But I don't see anyone actually ideologically opposed to hydroxychloriquine as treatment for COVID, only those who are praising it as a treatment before it has been shown to be safe and effective. Trump draws a lot of criticism precisely because he is clearly scientifically illiterate and yet too stupid to know that.

:hmm:


Trump could cure cancer and solve global famine and there would be people who would criticize him for doing it.

There is something inherently wrong with bandwagons and Trump Derangement Syndrome is by far the biggest bandwagon in modern day history.

Group-think does not allow for objectivity.
I am not wired for bandwagon riding.
I am the most objective person on BT within the context of the current political climate.

I think Chris is also closer to objectivity than any of you, but he has chosen to steer clear of the subject.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2020 9:57 pm
by ant
Robert wrote:
Yours is the "oblique" interpretation, as I said in my first reply.
I have interpreted nothing. As i clearly stated, the philosopher Robert Solomon shared thoughts on the comparison.
And since the novel was written within the context of Nazism it is indeed an interesting take, but one that you are obviously too self involved to investigate.


So your accusation the obliqueness of said interpretation is mine is a bald-faced lie for all to see.


Shame on you for resorting to such ghetto rhetoric.

Good evening to you, sir.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2020 10:56 pm
by Robert Tulip
ant wrote:I have interpreted nothing.
Once again, you show yourself incapable of reading the plain meaning of your own words, let alone what anyone else might say. You said the Nazi metaphor is "the only interpretation" of The Plague. That is plainly an interpretation on your part.
ant wrote:[The Nazi metaphor] is indeed an interesting take
I agree, but far from "the only interpretation". In the context of a thread on the Coronavirus, the Nazi metaphor is not relevant, and is in fact a derail by you. My interest in how Camus' ideas are relevant to the Coronavirus is entirely on topic.
ant wrote:, but one that you are obviously too self involved to investigate.
More ignorant garbage from ant. I am perfectly happy to investigate the Nazi metaphor in context, as shown by my inclusion of the link to the introduction by Tony Judt which explores exactly that question. But the more important question here, derailed by this Nazi sideshow introduced by ant, is how this great novel about an epidemic is relevant to our situation today.
ant wrote: So your accusation the obliqueness of said interpretation is mine is a bald-faced lie for all to see.
The obliqueness of the Nazi metaphor that you introduced to the thread is seen in the fact that nowhere in the whole book does Camus mention Nazis or even the Second World War. Furthermore, main themes of the book such as the popular denial of the epidemic and the difficulties faced by the doctor in treating highly infectious patients bear little relation to the Nazi occupation. The book is about an epidemic. Yes it is set in the 1940s in Algeria, but the war does not figure at all. So you bringing the war into the discussion is oblique, which in case you didn't know means indirect. Far from a lie by me, this is stupidity by you.
ant wrote:Shame on you for resorting to such ghetto rhetoric. Good evening to you, sir.
Not sure how a discussion of metaphor in a 1940s French novel that won its author the Nobel Prize for Literature qualifies as shameful "ghetto rhetoric", but whatever you say. Epic Godwin Fail.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:35 am
by ant
When I said " only" it was meant as sarcasm, Robert.

And you took that sarcasm and made it a strawman.

See how silly you look now?

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:19 am
by Robert Tulip
ant wrote:When I said " only" it was meant as sarcasm, Robert.

And you took that sarcasm and made it a strawman.

See how silly you look now?
Well done Mr Trump

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -sarcastic

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 6:40 am
by DWill
Interbane wrote:
Dwill wrote:My first question about the article presented by the anti-vaccine organization Children's Health Defense was, who are the authors?
It's a quack site for quackerjacks like KS.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/children ... h-defense/

https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/04/01/an ... racy-14681
Quackerjack wrote:What, no Chatty Cathies? No name-calling? You guys aren't living down to your reputation.
We don't name call. :spam:
I'd like to look more closely at the data manipulation in the Children's Health Defense "paper" that KS believes is such a slam dunk. The paper's main claim is that more like 15,000 U.S.deaths can be attributed to covid-19, not over 150,000. The claims are not easy for me to untangle, but the basis is that CHD ignores the fact of excess deaths during the period that the rest of world calls the pandemic. You can find information on excess deaths in dozens of places. The "nothing to see here" approach of the CHD tries to prove that pneumonia deaths are greater than covid in all population segments. So, why is everyone reacting with such panic to a covid epidemic but not to a pneumonia epidemic? A question for the CHD to answer would be, why then have pneumonia deaths risen so sharply? Why have they accounted for so many of the excess deaths? But The CHD doesn't address that. They want to confuse the issue by claiming that pneumonia is separate from covid-19, when in fact covid-19 typically brings on pneumonia--but not the same pneumonia that we can vaccinate against.

The paper tells us that the gross overcount in covid deaths is all due to CDC guidance released last April, which has resulted in other causes of death to be termed covid deaths. What practice are other countries using? If not CDC's, are their lower counts then not comparable to ours? Would they be much higher if they conformed to CDC? That is unlikely because the associated burdens of the disease are also lower in countries with lower deaths per 100,000--the stress on ICUs, mortuaries, and medical supplies. CDC practice has not created an illusion of a serious viral disease problem in the U.S. The problem is real.

When almost every credible source you go to judges that covid-19 deaths are probably underreported, the CHD claim that covid deaths are really 90% fewer than the numbers we're going by faces long odds. The argument they make in the paper trying to prove that doesn't cut it. They are looking down the road at the vaccine for covid-19 and thinking the best way to lobby against vaccination is to deny the existence of the pandemic.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:06 pm
by ant
Robert Tulip wrote:
ant wrote:When I said " only" it was meant as sarcasm, Robert.

And you took that sarcasm and made it a strawman.

See how silly you look now?
Well done Mr Trump

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -sarcastic

Oh, stop, Robert.
Donald Trump did not invent sarcasm, nor should you blame him for mine.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:28 pm
by Interbane
Trump could cure cancer and solve global famine and there would be people who would criticize him for doing it.
I'd worship him eternally. What kind of miracle would that be! I mean, he has the mental capacity of a 4th grader. Imagine if such an imbecile managed to cure cancer. Surely a sign from God.

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:36 pm
by ant
Interbane wrote:
Trump could cure cancer and solve global famine and there would be people who would criticize him for doing it.
I'd worship him eternally. What kind of miracle would that be! I mean, he has the mental capacity of a 4th grader. Imagine if such an imbecile managed to cure cancer. Surely a sign from God.

I don't think you'd have the time with all that self worshiping on your daily agenda

Re: Coronavirus

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:40 pm
by geo
ant wrote: Trump could cure cancer and solve global famine and there would be people who would criticize him for doing it.


If Trump cured cancer and solved global famine, it would be completely uncharacteristic of the kind of person we've come to know the last four years. But, hey, if he did accomplish these things, many of us would certainly have to reformulate our opinions of him.
ant wrote:I am not wired for bandwagon riding.
I am the most objective person on BT within the context of the current political climate.
I don't see it myself. But I'm rather curious, what objective criteria do you use to come to this self-evaluation?