2600 bro wrote:
ImpaIa31 wrote:
Of course not... Hydra.
I'd much rather have a cool nickname like "Hydra" than broadcast to the world I drive a Chevy Impala.
That's because you are ignorant and you don't know what an impala is.
2600 bro wrote:
ImpaIa31 wrote:
Of course not... Hydra.
I'd much rather have a cool nickname like "Hydra" than broadcast to the world I drive a Chevy Impala.
That's because you are ignorant and you don't know what an impala is.
ImpaIa31 wrote:
2600 bro wrote:
I'd much rather have a cool nickname like "Hydra" than broadcast to the world I drive a Chevy Impala.
That's because you are ignorant and you don't know what an impala is.
I assumed if youwere going to name yourself after an antelope you'd have chosen the pronghorn (American!, better distance runner, cooler name) - so you really have me perplexed now...
2600 bro wrote:
ImpaIa31 wrote:
That's because you are ignorant and you don't know what an impala is.
I assumed if youwere going to name yourself after an antelope you'd have chosen the pronghorn (American!, better distance runner, cooler name) - so you really have me perplexed now...
Who says I didn't?
non-fatty wrote:
LRC vaccine promoter wrote:
You are all idiots.
The CDC never said that.
But I am sure somebody in the Fox"News" network made up BS like that.
Get your vaccine and shut up!
...is this guy really serious? The CDC 1000% advised against public mask wearing early in the pandemic, based on a century of research showing that masking the general public does no good whatsoever.
Correct, they said they don't do work for the purpose of mitigating the spread of viruses ....because they don't and all science confirms this....the politics, political scientific hand waving took over, and fear mongering control freaks took over.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
non-fatty wrote:
...is this guy really serious? The CDC 1000% advised against public mask wearing early in the pandemic, based on a century of research showing that masking the general public does no good whatsoever.
Correct, they said they don't do work for the purpose of mitigating the spread of viruses ....because they don't and all science confirms this....the politics, political scientific hand waving took over, and fear mongering control freaks took over.
Masks were an economic preservation measure. Tell people a mask protects them, and they'll keep shopping.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
non-fatty wrote:
...is this guy really serious? The CDC 1000% advised against public mask wearing early in the pandemic, based on a century of research showing that masking the general public does no good whatsoever.
Correct, they said they don't do work for the purpose of mitigating the spread of viruses ....because they don't and all science confirms this....the politics, political scientific hand waving took over, and fear mongering control freaks took over.
Thank you. CDC virtue signaling/goal post moving at its finest.
No masks OPE masks OPE vaccines WHOOPS but not Johnson and Johnson OPE J&J is safe now OPE still mask mandated
Here we go again. The same cranks complaining about lack of vaccine long term safety data are now wanting to drop all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people based on . . . a lack of long term transmission/infection data. The vaccines have only been going into arms for the past few months. There just isn't enough data yet on transmission and breakthrough infections to let up on all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people.
If you want to lay into the CDC and WHO, you should be looking at why it took so long to acknowledge the role aerosols played in transmission. As much as everyone likes to spew plandemic conspiracy theories about the CDC and WHO, the reality is that these agencies are quite captive to business interests. The main reason it took so long to recognize that COVID 19 was spreading through aerosols was that the implications for the economy were massive. COVID 19 restrictions were based on the idea that 1-2 meters of separation and a mask could keep people safe indoors. States issued piles of exceptions to COVID restrictions for "essential" businesses based on CDC 6 ft rule. But prolonged indoor exposure in a poorly ventilated space could defeat the 6 ft rule. Had this been established early on, much could have been done to stop transmission through improving ventilation and limiting time spent indoors with others. Instead, the CDC was pushing hand washing and disinfecting surfaces, which turned out to be useless hygiene theater. And restrictions on outdoor activities were also largely unnecessary when people were not in close contact with each other.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html
Precious Roy wrote:
Here we go again. The same cranks complaining about lack of vaccine long term safety data are now wanting to drop all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people based on . . . a lack of long term transmission/infection data. The vaccines have only been going into arms for the past few months. There just isn't enough data yet on transmission and breakthrough infections to let up on all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people.
If you want to lay into the CDC and WHO, you should be looking at why it took so long to acknowledge the role aerosols played in transmission. As much as everyone likes to spew plandemic conspiracy theories about the CDC and WHO, the reality is that these agencies are quite captive to business interests. The main reason it took so long to recognize that COVID 19 was spreading through aerosols was that the implications for the economy were massive. COVID 19 restrictions were based on the idea that 1-2 meters of separation and a mask could keep people safe indoors. States issued piles of exceptions to COVID restrictions for "essential" businesses based on CDC 6 ft rule. But prolonged indoor exposure in a poorly ventilated space could defeat the 6 ft rule. Had this been established early on, much could have been done to stop transmission through improving ventilation and limiting time spent indoors with others. Instead, the CDC was pushing hand washing and disinfecting surfaces, which turned out to be useless hygiene theater. And restrictions on outdoor activities were also largely unnecessary when people were not in close contact with each other.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html
I like how you cite the NYT as some sort of honest background that support your need to cling to failed authority figures and the dogma we spent the last year dealing with. Face it, you were wrong, they were wrong, and the harm done to society, our children and public health in general is immeasurable and on the shoulders of those that forced these lies upon everyone with "expertise" and guilt. Go away Precious, you are a useless fool; the lemmings have killed enough already. Nobody cares if you think you are sounding smart, you are not.
non-fatty wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Correct, they said they don't do work for the purpose of mitigating the spread of viruses ....because they don't and all science confirms this....the politics, political scientific hand waving took over, and fear mongering control freaks took over.
Masks were an economic preservation measure. Tell people a mask protects them, and they'll keep shopping.
This might just be the best explanation and only reasonable justification.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
non-fatty wrote:
Masks were an economic preservation measure. Tell people a mask protects them, and they'll keep shopping.
This might just be the best explanation and only reasonable justification.
LFH man... you’ve really lost it. Kinda sad to see.
“No masks, no vaccines, no deaths, no risk, no nothing!”
People would take you a little seriously if you didn’t just slowly convert to contrarian on every. single. point. surrounding COVID over past 6 months.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
Here we go again. The same cranks complaining about lack of vaccine long term safety data are now wanting to drop all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people based on . . . a lack of long term transmission/infection data. The vaccines have only been going into arms for the past few months. There just isn't enough data yet on transmission and breakthrough infections to let up on all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people.
If you want to lay into the CDC and WHO, you should be looking at why it took so long to acknowledge the role aerosols played in transmission. As much as everyone likes to spew plandemic conspiracy theories about the CDC and WHO, the reality is that these agencies are quite captive to business interests. The main reason it took so long to recognize that COVID 19 was spreading through aerosols was that the implications for the economy were massive. COVID 19 restrictions were based on the idea that 1-2 meters of separation and a mask could keep people safe indoors. States issued piles of exceptions to COVID restrictions for "essential" businesses based on CDC 6 ft rule. But prolonged indoor exposure in a poorly ventilated space could defeat the 6 ft rule. Had this been established early on, much could have been done to stop transmission through improving ventilation and limiting time spent indoors with others. Instead, the CDC was pushing hand washing and disinfecting surfaces, which turned out to be useless hygiene theater. And restrictions on outdoor activities were also largely unnecessary when people were not in close contact with each other.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.htmlI like how you cite the NYT as some sort of honest background that support your need to cling to failed authority figures and the dogma we spent the last year dealing with. Face it, you were wrong, they were wrong, and the harm done to society, our children and public health in general is immeasurable and on the shoulders of those that forced these lies upon everyone with "expertise" and guilt. Go away Precious, you are a useless fool; the lemmings have killed enough already. Nobody cares if you think you are sounding smart, you are not.
Citing an Op-Ed by an outside writer in the NYT isnt “citing the NYT.”
The writer of that piece is highly critical of the CDC’s messaging and many mitigation measures. You’d probably find common ground if you could reject your inane dogma for a even a second :)
Precious Roy wrote:
Here we go again. The same cranks complaining about lack of vaccine long term safety data are now wanting to drop all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people based on . . . a lack of long term transmission/infection data. The vaccines have only been going into arms for the past few months. There just isn't enough data yet on transmission and breakthrough infections to let up on all COVID 19 measures for vaccinated people.
If you want to lay into the CDC and WHO, you should be looking at why it took so long to acknowledge the role aerosols played in transmission. As much as everyone likes to spew plandemic conspiracy theories about the CDC and WHO, the reality is that these agencies are quite captive to business interests. The main reason it took so long to recognize that COVID 19 was spreading through aerosols was that the implications for the economy were massive. COVID 19 restrictions were based on the idea that 1-2 meters of separation and a mask could keep people safe indoors. States issued piles of exceptions to COVID restrictions for "essential" businesses based on CDC 6 ft rule. But prolonged indoor exposure in a poorly ventilated space could defeat the 6 ft rule. Had this been established early on, much could have been done to stop transmission through improving ventilation and limiting time spent indoors with others. Instead, the CDC was pushing hand washing and disinfecting surfaces, which turned out to be useless hygiene theater. And restrictions on outdoor activities were also largely unnecessary when people were not in close contact with each other.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html
There was never enough data to support the measures in the first place. The reason the measures need to be let up is because they don't do anything to stop the spread of the virus. We were just harming lives, livelihoods and our children's education to make tools like yourself feel good. Give it up, we don't care if you think we still need restrictions, you are wrong and we don't and never did. They did nothing but harm people and the only evidence out there, study after study and just base reality says they were never needed and did not achieve anything. Vaccinated or not, nobody should be wearing a mask and the kids should be back in school like normal.
2600 bro wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
I like how you cite the NYT as some sort of honest background that support your need to cling to failed authority figures and the dogma we spent the last year dealing with. Face it, you were wrong, they were wrong, and the harm done to society, our children and public health in general is immeasurable and on the shoulders of those that forced these lies upon everyone with "expertise" and guilt. Go away Precious, you are a useless fool; the lemmings have killed enough already. Nobody cares if you think you are sounding smart, you are not.
Citing an Op-Ed by an outside writer in the NYT isnt “citing the NYT.”
The writer of that piece is highly critical of the CDC’s messaging and many mitigation measures. You’d probably find common ground if you could reject your inane dogma for a even a second :)
Yes it is dude. Do you think the Times approves of anything outside of its narrative? You are losing credibility faster and faster each day.
2600 bro wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
I like how you cite the NYT as some sort of honest background that support your need to cling to failed authority figures and the dogma we spent the last year dealing with. Face it, you were wrong, they were wrong, and the harm done to society, our children and public health in general is immeasurable and on the shoulders of those that forced these lies upon everyone with "expertise" and guilt. Go away Precious, you are a useless fool; the lemmings have killed enough already. Nobody cares if you think you are sounding smart, you are not.
Citing an Op-Ed by an outside writer in the NYT isnt “citing the NYT.”
The writer of that piece is highly critical of the CDC’s messaging and many mitigation measures. You’d probably find common ground if you could reject your inane dogma for a even a second :)
You see, the whole piece is trying to claim why the "needed" mask mandates took so long. The premise is false. Of course these viruses spread by aerosols, that was common sense on day one. Public mask wearing is not helping mitigate this, particularly not in American where people generally do not stand very close to each other. The article is shill nonsense trying to justify a false poorly substantial pseudoscientific premise. The CDC was making the right recommendation at first, and it is still the right one. Even more so now that the people who need the vaccine have it. There is no longer any significant reason for people to do these sort of things any more other than because they are either scared and selfish and need to control other people to feel safe in their environment. It is pure OCD false thinking; yes there is a grain of sand of truth that mask stop some droplets, but it is false to translate this into something that actually mitigate viral spread on the public.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
2600 bro wrote:
Citing an Op-Ed by an outside writer in the NYT isnt “citing the NYT.”
The writer of that piece is highly critical of the CDC’s messaging and many mitigation measures. You’d probably find common ground if you could reject your inane dogma for a even a second :)
Yes it is dude. Do you think the Times approves of anything outside of its narrative? You are losing credibility faster and faster each day.
Of course they "approve" nominally but they let outside voices in every now and then. Remember... Tom Cotton had an NYT Op-Ed this past summer. I know it's easier to just write things off prima facie rather than think critically but I am extending a proverbial olive branch here...
2600 bro wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Yes it is dude. Do you think the Times approves of anything outside of its narrative? You are losing credibility faster and faster each day.
Of course they "approve" nominally but they let outside voices in every now and then. Remember... Tom Cotton had an NYT Op-Ed this past summer. I know it's easier to just write things off prima facie rather than think critically but I am extending a proverbial olive branch here...
Are you serious? You can't be this dumb. No they don't, and people were fired over allowing the Cotton Op-Ed, so so much for that arguments. Bullocks.
What are the other lies ?
https://nypost.com/2021/05/11/cdc-exaggerates-outdoor-transmission-rate-covid-19-experts/
2600 bro wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Yes it is dude. Do you think the Times approves of anything outside of its narrative? You are losing credibility faster and faster each day.
Of course they "approve" nominally but they let outside voices in every now and then. Remember... Tom Cotton had an NYT Op-Ed this past summer. I know it's easier to just write things off prima facie rather than think critically but I am extending a proverbial olive branch here...
I don't think thinking critically is in you realm of expertise, but you can believe what you want.
Harambe wrote:
Vaccine passports are Libertarian Actually
No, they are not and you are an authoritarian. Anyone who holds our freedoms at the point of the government's gun and says you get your freedom if you comply with what we are telling you to do is not offering liberation. That is tyranny. The constitution and bill of rights do not get suspended just because you think they should be.
DanM wrote:
What are the other lies ?
https://nypost.com/2021/05/11/cdc-exaggerates-outdoor-transmission-rate-covid-19-experts/
The biggest lie is that many thousands of elderly people were already dying each year from corona viruses and it went unnoticed, chalked up as:
- died of pneumonia
- health was failing and they finally caught something that they could not fight off
- died of the flu
This was already happening all of the time. Yes, this one specifically is extra nasty, but everything at so many levels has been grossly exaggerated, case counts, death count, excess death counts, the need for mitigation efforts, the successfulness of mitigation efforts, the ignoring all of the the other harm, the demand that even though all susceptible people have a vaccine we must shove it into the kids who are not affected. We are being ruled by delusional narcissist whom will double down and continue to harm society even when they know they are wrong. Everyone who has been putting up with this idiocy for the past year needs to just say no, no more. We are not listening and giving in anymore, and society and human health will be better off for it.
Colin Sahlman runs 1:45 and Nico Young runs 1:47 in the 800m tonight at the Desert Heat Classic
Molly Seidel Fails To Debut As An Ultra Runner After Running A Road Marathon The Week Before
Megan Keith (14:43) DESTROYS Parker Valby's 5000 PB in Shanghai
Female coach having affair with male runner. Should I report it?
Need female opinions: I’m dating a woman that is very sexual with me in public. Any tips/insight?
Hallowed sub-16 barrier finally falls - 3 teams led by Villanova's 15:51.91 do it at Penn Relays!!!