Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[Gregs24]

What field is your PhD in?

Greg may not be a Royalist but he is a subject of the throne.

I do have a masters in a medical related degree as it happens

I seem to remember (although you struggle with memory) telling you that before, as well as you struggling with the concept that you may need a certain level of education / knowledge before your opinion on a subject could be valid.

You love posting opinions, I love posting facts that refute your opinions.

A bit like your 'sea levels are not rising' opinion. I produced data that demonstrated that sea levels are rising (not an opinion, actual data). You went quiet and then the next day just said the same thing again. I didn't give an opinion on sea levels, I just posted data.

The problem for you is you can't distinguish opinion and fact. Then if you are presented with those facts that demonstrates your opinion is wrong, you claim it is all a hoax.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

I do have a masters in a medical related degree as it happens

The only people who answer that way are dentists or massage therapists.

 

[Burkey]

Simple, I and many scientists, do not believe your evidence, same as you don't believe mine.

You haven’t presented any evidence.…
The only evidence you’ve provided is that you haven’t done your homework.

Do you even realise that here’s entire repositories dedicated to debunking the claims of the deniers? Seriously, every objection you’ve raised so far has been junk.

Hello; Such would fit your concept, but it is not the case. You want those of us who do not buy into your cause 100% to be flawed. That way you can pretend we do not have valid comments to make or points of view. Nice try but wrong. I will not be spoon fed by you nor by the media. I can make my own mind up. I can filter out the hype as well.

Based on what you’ve posted so far, that is evidently not the case.

 

[Gregs24]

The only people who answer that way are dentists or massage therapists.

If you say so

You avoided answering:

A bit like your 'sea levels are not rising' opinion. I produced data that demonstrated that sea levels are rising (not an opinion, actual data). You went quiet and then the next day just said the same thing again. I didn't give an opinion on sea levels, I just posted data.

 

[K4fxd]

If anyone really cares all I ever said is man is not the cause of any warming or effects from warming. The warming, or cooling if that is the real case, is purely natural and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

All the charts and graphs you and your twin have presented show a natural cyclic nature to things.

I'm done with this thread so get in your last jab.

 

[Burkey]

Let’s break this down shall we?

face masks are "really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection."

As far as I know, that is still correct. That is the principle we operate under here in Australia. Whether that is supported by the evidence, I don’t know, but it makes sense that if you can even slightly reduce the volume and distance of travel of an airborne virus, it SHOULD “help“ to reduce the likelihood of infection.

Which part of that do you want to dispute?

the "typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material."

That is more than likely true. However, note the wording.
”Not REALLY effective”. It would be good if we knew just how effective, rather than a subjective term like “not really”.
I’d also note that the statement wasn’t “are completely ineffective”.
The nuance of language.

COVID-19-era societal lockdowns, which were never justified on the scientific metrics

Hmmm….
Ok, so it’s abundantly obvious that one way to prevent the spread of the virus is to separate people.
Eg. The virus can’t infect people if they aren’t in contact with the virus. Agreed?

Now, how exactly do you stop people from coming together? You can’t. The best you can do is to place restrictions on their movements.

The system of lockdowns seems to be working just fine here where I live. Case numbers go up' we lockdown' case numbers fall. Rinse and repeat as necessary.

 

[sk47]

Let’s break this down shall we?


As far as I know, that is still correct. That is the principle we operate under here in Australia. Whether that is supported by the evidence, I don’t know, but it makes sense that if you can even slightly reduce the volume and distance of travel of an airborne virus, it SHOULD “help“ to reduce the likelihood of infection.

Which part of that do you want to dispute?


That is more than likely true. However, note the wording.
”Not REALLY effective”. It would be good if we knew just how effective, rather than a subjective term like “not really”.
I’d also note that the statement wasn’t “are completely ineffective”.
The nuance of language.


Hmmm….
Ok, so it’s abundantly obvious that one way to prevent the spread of the virus is to separate people.
Eg. The virus can’t infect people if they aren’t in contact with the virus. Agreed?

Now, how exactly do you stop people from coming together? You can’t. The best you can do is to place restrictions on their movements.

The system of lockdowns seems to be working just fine here where I live. Case numbers go up' we lockdown' case numbers fall. Rinse and repeat as necessary.

Hello; Interesting. For someone who claimed he did not want to get into covid discussion again, you actions do at least contradict you words.

First thing is you have posted in such a way to indicate statements were made by me. This is false. The statements you quoted were from the text of the link I placed in a post, not my words. Those were the words of the authors of the article I posted a link to. Sneaky and perhaps unethical, but not a surprise.

Next is I have found several sources of information which back up my claim that a natural immunity gained from having recovered from covid is proving to be long lasting and strong. I will post a link to just one now, but did find several.

Another study shows natural COVID-19 immunity lasts for ‘substantial’ period of time | News | LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)


Quotes from the link: ( This means I copied the following comments from the article itself and that they are not my words. That is why they are cited as quotes from the link.)( I also used this one because Dr. Makary is a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.)

"Makary argues that natural immunity and vaccinated immunity are equally effective and “probably life-long,” and that, between the roughly 50% of Americans he thinks are naturally immune and the 41% fully vaccinated so far, the United States has already reached herd immunity – the point at which enough of the population is impervious to COVID-19 that the virus will run out of places to spread and die out."



"Dr. Marty Makary, professor of surgery at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. “We are not seeing reinfections, and when they do happen, they’re rare. Their symptoms are mild or are asymptomatic.”"

Hello; This is me writing again just so you know. I can continue to respond to this side track if needed but am ready to let it die here if you will.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; Interesting. For someone who claimed he did not want to get into covid discussion again, you actions do at least contradict you words.

That is correct. However, I’m also not one to let crap ideas gain any traction.

First thing is you have posted in such a way to indicate statements were made by me. This is false. The statements you quoted were from the text of the link I placed in a post, not my words. Those were the words of the authors of the article I posted a link to. Sneaky and perhaps unethical, but not a surprise.

You posted the statements as if they supported your position. Is that not why you posted the quotes?
I‘m sorry that you’re having these issues in comprehension.

Next is I have found several sources of information which back up my claim that a natural immunity gained from having recovered from covid is proving to be long lasting and strong. I will post a link to just one now, but did find several.

Please insert some caveats into that statement.
Maybe change it to read:
“It seems that for MOST of the public, the natural immunity gained from getting Covid seems to have a lasting effect up to X months post-infection. This of course relies on them not dying from the virus. They also may or may not have long lasting side-effects as a result of contracting the virus”


As for the rest of it, you’re showing us that if you take a statement out of its broader context, you can omit certain details.

 

[Burkey]

If anyone really cares all I ever said is man is not the cause of any warming or effects from warming. The warming, or cooling if that is the real case, is purely natural and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

All the charts and graphs you and your twin have presented show a natural cyclic nature to things.

I'm done with this thread so get in your last jab.

My final jab would be that your “explanation” has no predictive power. It does absolutely nought to inform governments on the actions they should or shouldn’t take.

By analogy, it would be like saying tsunami‘s are natural, which they are. But once you understand how they work, rather than just throwing your hands in the air, you can make predictions that actually help governments to help the people. Warnings can be issued, better building locations identified, etc etc.

Your model for “how the Earth works” has zero utility.
How accurately can your model predict global average temp 40 years from now? What does it say about sea level rise?
What mechanisms will you insert into your model that given it the functionality it requires? Will you ignore CO2 as one of the indicators? Best of luck with that.

 

[sk47]

As for the rest of it, you’re showing us that if you take a statement out of its broader context, you can omit certain details.

Hello; As far as statements out of context goes. I add the address of the article as a link so anyone can open it up and read the entire article and see for them selves. That way anyone can judge for themselves about the context. I do pick relevant parts from an article and add them as quotes. Sometimes to back up my position. Sometimes to give a sense of the gist of the article, but not as an attempt to take things out of context. I do not need to add caveats as anyone can read the entire article for one thing and I figure my own written comments can stand for themselves.

Unlike you and a couple of others I do not think the members on this forum are unable to understand complex topics. I do figure they can think for themselves.

Back when I first started adding links to some posts I saw that you among others would not comment on the substance of the linked article, but would only dish the source or do something such as accuse me of not having read the article. Now I add some direct quotes from an article to give more information and get information out for others to see if they do not wish to open the link. This has been working. I may try to further distinguish my comments from those of a link. So far I try to write (Hello;) just before I write something. Hope this little tutorial helps.

 

[sk47]

If anyone really cares all I ever said is man is not the cause of any warming or effects from warming. The warming, or cooling if that is the real case, is purely natural and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

All the charts and graphs you and your twin have presented show a natural cyclic nature to things.

I'm done with this thread so get in your last jab.

Hello; While I do not blame you for an exit, I do wish to say your activity in this thread has been a worth wile thing. Have a good one.

 

[Super-Genius]

But isn't it good that it changes as more information becomes available ?
I get the impression that some people in this thread wouldn't trust a MD with their medical care, and would rather Google how to treat themselves. You know, doing their own "research"

 

[Super-Genius]

Ok, as long as you understand that just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it isn't true. I think that is a point you have tried to make throughout this thread.

 

[Super-Genius]

Cute meme ... I thought we were done. I've noticed you have a low tolerance for anybody that thinks differently than you do. Is that a character flaw or what ?

 

[sk47]

Cute meme ... I thought we were done. I've noticed you have a low tolerance for anybody that thinks differently than you do. Is that a character flaw or what ?

Hello; Not sure when you started in the thread but early on a few jumped on him hard. He has fought back. Now several are in their respective corners and it does get very testy. Perhaps you already know why they felt they had license to attack him.

Sponsored