Place more value on "reasoning, data and the scientific process" than those who accept the Government line...

unherd.com/thepost/elites-have-lost-fait...tenment-rationality/

I use the 'God theory'.

I don't know. When you are forced to listen to people bleating on about the vaccine making you more susceptible to catching the virus that they also claim doesn't exist, it is hard to accept that some have a brain at all.

Honey wrote:
I don't know. When you are forced to listen to people bleating on about the vaccine making you more susceptible to catching the virus that they also claim doesn't exist, it is hard to accept that some have a brain at all.

You are mistaking conspiracy theorists with Covid sceptics Honey - sceptics are sceptic about the lethality of the virus and the proportionality of our response to it. We don't deny it exists; and as many of us are pro-vaccine as anti.

I've placed my life always in the hands of medical researchers. professionals and scientists and they haven't failed me yet.

They are not perfect..science never is as it's an ongoing series of research..but it's all we have.

The anti-vaxers were around long before Cobid but have seized upon it and a whole blancmange of ratbags have come out of the woodwork (witness the so-called "building workers" riots in Melbourne in their suspicious brand new "hi-viz" jackets and boots) screaming "freedumb" (from what? we all want freedom from disease).

The main aspect of the freedumb and anti-vax movement that scoops up all and sundry including Graduates from the University of Social Media who have "done their own research" and uncovered "facts" missed by scientists after a lifetime of research is, it's a Fascist movement as idiots parrot "1984 wasn't an instruction manual" and other such absurdities, oblivious to the fact (if they had read his books) they are the very ones George Orwell was writing about and predicted who could be whipped into a frenzied mob all with their own little conspiracies to complain about.

It's blatantly obvious (Hello MI5 and security services) that a lot of planning has gone into this loose "movement" and it's financially backed be nefarious characters (cheap in these days of the internet) but who are they?

The so-called "libertarians" are deeply involved but that movement was co-opted by the extreme right-wing in the USA over 20 years ago financed by the billionaire Koch Bros (one is deceased) ..who want "big" government strangled in the bathtub..except the arms industry and the occasional invasion of an innocent country and huge Social Welfare for corporations.

Then along comes a deadly virus and the only cure is..whatever bungles government can come up with seeing these pandemics are a once-in-a-lifetime event (we hope) and throws everything belly-up.

hedda wrote:
I've placed my life always in the hands of medical researchers. professionals and scientists and they haven't failed me yet.

They are not perfect..science never is as it's an ongoing series of research..but it's all we have.

The anti-vaxers were around long before Cobid but have seized upon it and a whole blancmange of ratbags have come out of the woodwork (witness the so-called "building workers" riots in Melbourne in their suspicious brand new "hi-viz" jackets and boots) screaming "freedumb" (from what? we all want freedom from disease).



Interesting Hedda and I agree with a lot of what you are saying.

Freedom from Gov lockdowns however is not freedom from a virus but freedom from state control. A legitimate request if one thinks the controls are disproportionate and largely political in motivation.

Anti vax madness: 6 billion people have been jabbed. Of course it is bloody safe!!! 0% of people have died or experienced any significant effect.

That is the point of this thread, the article and also the views of sceptics such as myself.

We have also examined the data and applied reasoning to "with Covid" death stats (as we do to the vaccine) and lockdown harm and concluded that most measures were/are disproportionate; causing as much or more harm than the virus.

Just as we can equally see that vaccine scare stories are clearly not based on reason or evidence.

We see Governments blowing in the wind to inflated media scare stories and regret that a process of scientic, rational thinking isn't applied to the crisis.

Instead we endure a pre-rational almost medieval religious response to both the virus and in many quarters the vaccine; because that is how people tend to think these days and it makes a much better story, easier to understand, no thought required, nice and certain and emotionally satisfying.

hedda wrote:
I've placed my life always in the hands of medical researchers. professionals and scientists and they haven't failed me yet.

They are not perfect..science never is as it's an ongoing series of research..but it's all we have.

Agreed, as to follow an alternative logic would be immensely brave and rather foolish

There have been some deaths and injuries from the vaccine.
There is no medication that is completely safe for everyone. (or food, drink, or any other substance)

hedda wrote:
It's blatantly obvious (Hello MI5 and security services) that a lot of planning has gone into this loose "movement" and it's financially backed be nefarious characters (cheap in these days of the internet) but who are they?
Wouldn't be surprised if Russia was involved, e.g. in helping to stir things up on social media. Can imagine Putin chuckling over the democratic West facing (more) trouble.

Honey wrote:
There have been some deaths and injuries from the vaccine.
There is no medication that is completely safe for everyone. (or food, drink, or any other substance)

Of course Honey; but when 6 billion have been jabbed we can say the vaccine is safe.

Linda wrote:
hedda wrote:
I've placed my life always in the hands of medical researchers. professionals and scientists and they haven't failed me yet.

They are not perfect..science never is as it's an ongoing series of research..but it's all we have.

Agreed, as to follow an alternative logic would be immensely brave and rather foolish

I agree and it is great to hear that you have read and understood the article I have linked to and finally changed your thinking on Covid "Linda"...

Sorry I didn't read any link. Just fully accepted a previous poster's logical and indisputable view, hedda

Linda wrote:
Sorry I didn't read any link. Just fully accepted a previous poster's logical and indisputable view, hedda

Then I would recommend reading the link Barney if - as you say - you value science and reason.

It argues that the application of the scientific process when reasoning about how we should respond to Covid sits with us sceptics; not those who unthinkingly accept official Gov dogma and are strangers to reason.

Wyot wrote:
Linda wrote:
Sorry I didn't read any link. Just fully accepted a previous poster's logical and indisputable view, hedda

Then I would recommend reading the link Barney if - as you say - you value science and reason.

It argues that the application of the scientific process when reasoning about how we should respond to Covid sits with us sceptics; not those who unthinkingly accept official Gov dogma and are strangers to reason.

I agree, and can I add that it is important to follow the information right back to the original source and not rely on what the stunt scientists are saying.

Honey wrote:
[quote]Wyot wrote:
[quote]Linda wrote:


I agree, and can I add that it is important to follow the information right back to the original source and not rely on what the stunt scientists are saying.

Absolutely spot on Honey.

Of course I don't know more scientifically about how a virus works than those who have studied it all their lives (blatantly obvious; cheap shot rebuke); but a considered reading of source materials - while never claiming I can understand them or weight them accurately - should raise serious questions about whether a rational, scientific process has been followed in how we responded to the level of threat the virus poses, and how this threat measures against the harm of ongoing restrictions (little considered and never "weighted" by those who adhere to - dumbo voice - "The Science" of SAGE et al which merely describes how a virus may spread).

Why so few people are able to comprehend this distinction is beyond me; except to say their thinking is something other than rational or scientific.

Thinking I broadly term as religious.