Difference between revisions of "Branch COVIDIANS"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | <includeonly>{{ImgA|BranchCOVIDians.jpeg|link=Branch COVIDIANS}}</includeonly><noinclude>{{Img|BranchCOVIDians.jpeg}}</noinclude>Branch COVIDians, are the enthusiastic Karen Enforcers of policies that they've been told work by the DNC or their media, but demonstrate no actual domain knowledge of the problems or skepticism (critical thinking skills) to back it up. They are the [[Dunning-Kruger]]'s who believe the evidence against masks or shutdowns are conclusive: "the science is settled" when in reality, both are still hotly debated in scientific circles and there's as much evidence against both as effective as for. When cornered, instead of discussing the topic, they usually attack people, or post links to their favorite non-scientific source, or rarely, to a junk study that's easy to debunk. <br /><br />While I sometimes argue with these people, the point is not to change their mind (their views demonstrate that they're not open to the nuances of reality), it's to get them to show to others that their consensus demanding tantrums are not based on nuance or reality, but based on a desire to conform to what they've been told to think (usually by the far left). | + | <includeonly>{{ImgA|BranchCOVIDians.jpeg|link=Branch COVIDIANS}}</includeonly><noinclude>{{Img|BranchCOVIDians.jpeg}}</noinclude>Branch COVIDians (aka COVIDIOTS), are the enthusiastic Karen Enforcers of policies that they've been told work by the DNC or their media, but demonstrate no actual domain knowledge of the problems or skepticism (critical thinking skills) to back it up. They are the [[Dunning-Kruger]]'s who believe the evidence against masks or shutdowns are conclusive: "the science is settled" when in reality, both are still hotly debated in scientific circles and there's as much evidence against both as effective as for. When cornered, instead of discussing the topic, they usually attack people, or post links to their favorite non-scientific source, or rarely, to a junk study that's easy to debunk. <br /><br />While I sometimes argue with these people, the point is not to change their mind (their views demonstrate that they're not open to the nuances of reality), it's to get them to show to others that their consensus demanding tantrums are not based on nuance or reality, but based on a desire to conform to what they've been told to think (usually by the far left). |
<noinclude> | <noinclude> | ||
==Shutdowns== | ==Shutdowns== |
Revision as of 18:51, 22 August 2020
Branch COVIDians (aka COVIDIOTS), are the enthusiastic Karen Enforcers of policies that they've been told work by the DNC or their media, but demonstrate no actual domain knowledge of the problems or skepticism (critical thinking skills) to back it up. They are the Dunning-Kruger's who believe the evidence against masks or shutdowns are conclusive: "the science is settled" when in reality, both are still hotly debated in scientific circles and there's as much evidence against both as effective as for. When cornered, instead of discussing the topic, they usually attack people, or post links to their favorite non-scientific source, or rarely, to a junk study that's easy to debunk.
While I sometimes argue with these people, the point is not to change their mind (their views demonstrate that they're not open to the nuances of reality), it's to get them to show to others that their consensus demanding tantrums are not based on nuance or reality, but based on a desire to conform to what they've been told to think (usually by the far left).
Shutdowns
If the COVID Shutdown worked, there would be cases where states or countries that didn't shutdown would outperform those that did. But the facts are there are many examples to the contrary:
- California shut down earlier and harder than Texas. California has more cases, more deaths, and a worse curve than Texas.
- In fact seven states never issues shut down orders at all: Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. All of them outperformed California or New York which had shutdowns.
- There are many countries that never did lockdowns: Belarus, Brazil (Roraima, Rondonia), Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Malawi, Tanzania, Nicaragua, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, Timor-Leste, Uruguay. Many of those countries well outperformed countries that did full lockdowns.
- There's even more evidence that some that did late lockdowns, or didn't lock down as hard, did NOT always under-perform those that did it earlier or harder.
Science doesn't get to cherry pick examples that fit their agenda: that's politics. If any state/country didn't shut down, and has lower case loads then scientists don't pretend that Shutdowns alone cure the problem. Maybe it helps, maybe not. But it certainly doesn't help more than other factors or there would be no cases where places without lockdowns would be even close to those that did. Yet the opposite is true. It seems to be a tool, and not a very effective one -- with HUGE costs to the economy. And that's before you start factoring in other deaths that were caused or contributed to by the lockdown.
So lockdowns are debated for good reasons: we don't have clear evidence that they work. Those screaming that if you don't follow the lockdown, but ignore essential workers, or protestors, Politicians, and others that ignored the lockdown, then you can write them off as ignorant, polemics, or just idiots.
Masks
If the COVID Masks worked, there would be cases where states or countries that didn't require masks would outperform those that did. But the facts are there are many examples to the contrary.
- California required masks earlier and harder than Texas. California has more cases, more deaths, and a worse curve than Texas.
- In fact seven states never issues shut down orders at all: Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. All of them outperformed California or New York which had shutdowns.
- There are many countries that never did lockdowns: Belarus, Brazil (Roraima, Rondonia), Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Malawi, Tanzania, Nicaragua, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, Timor-Leste, Uruguay. Many of those countries well outperformed countries that did full lockdowns.
- There's even more evidence that some that did late lockdowns, or didn't lock down as hard, did NOT always under-perform those that did it earlier or harder.
| ||||||