Group of doctors claim pandemic is a sham

[Setton]

3 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Oh dear. The iSAGE's argument.

Seriously.

Is that all you got?

Can you seriously not see the bias problem with that?

Yep, that's all I've got. Like you, I'm not an epidemiologist so at some point we're both going to have to trust someone else's word. I choose to trust peer reviewed scientific articles in journals I've found to be reliable for my whole career. You choose to trust strangers on YouTube.

As I said, please do show me why I shouldn't trust these sources and present your more reliable ones.

Whenever you're ready.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Setton

[+Desertrat56]

21 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Some things are so obvious once you lean against them that you start wondering why people think there's a pandemic.

Simple questions beyond the media headlines very quickly demonstrate a bed of disinformation.

What makes you believe them? 

I know people who have died, I have a relative that was hospitalized, I don't look at the media, I look at the state health department website.  They are not making the numbers up. If you are insulated enough to pretend it is a hoax then you need to consider yourself very very lucky.   Maybe you should turn your television off and check in with your neighbors.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

38 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I know people who have died, I have a relative that was hospitalized, I don't look at the media, I look at the state health department website.  They are not making the numbers up. If you are insulated enough to pretend it is a hoax then you need to consider yourself very very lucky.   Maybe you should turn your television off and check in with your neighbors.

Firstly it is not a hoax. Neither did I say that.

Your two tragic experiences do not usurp a friggin mountain load of information.

Third, it's the television that distils what they decide you see which is why I ignore it 

Finally, take a break off social media while you are still recovering from your loss. It is sad to lose people and especially those close to us. I hope you have fond memories as you remember them.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

3 hours ago, Setton said:

Yep, that's all I've got. Like you, I'm not an epidemiologist so at some point we're both going to have to trust someone else's word. I choose to trust peer reviewed scientific articles in journals I've found to be reliable for my whole career. You choose to trust strangers on YouTube.

As I said, please do show me why I shouldn't trust these sources and present your more reliable ones.

Whenever you're ready.

And present something you can idly sit back and dismiss.

Let me suggest a starting place. 

Check the deaths per million rate by country and overlay the introduction of lockdowns and facemasks. Show me the curve doing anything other than dissipating and I will have to rethink.

Nice easy and simple request. 

I will even donate $50 to a charity linked with respiratory disease if you prove me wrong.

Sound fair? 

[+Desertrat56]

4 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Firstly it is not a hoax. Neither did I say that.

Your two tragic experiences do not usurp a friggin mountain load of information.

Third, it's the television that distils what they decide you see which is why I ignore it 

Finally, take a break off social media while you are still recovering from your loss. It is sad to lose people and especially those close to us. I hope you have fond memories as you remember them.

Where is your "mountain load" of information?  If you are not getting it from television or other internet media, where are you getting it?

[+Desertrat56]

1 minute ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

And present something you can idly sit back and dismiss.

Let me suggest a starting place. 

Check the deaths per million rate by country and overlay the introduction of lockdowns and facemasks. Show me the curve doing anything other than dissipating and I will have to rethink.

Nice easy and simple request. 

I will even donate $50 to a charity linked with respiratory disease if you prove me wrong.

Sound fair? 

Have you looked lately.  Places that implemented lockdowns had few cases per capita, then when the lockdowns were released there were spikes upward in the curve.  The state I live in is a good example of that. 

[Setton]

34 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

And present something you can idly sit back and dismiss.

Let me suggest a starting place. 

Check the deaths per million rate by country and overlay the introduction of lockdowns and facemasks. Show me the curve doing anything other than dissipating and I will have to rethink.

Nice easy and simple request. 

I will even donate $50 to a charity linked with respiratory disease if you prove me wrong.

Sound fair? 

So your claim is that lockdowns and masks don't work because when they are introduced the death rate falls?

Sounds right...

How about you support your own claim with the evidence instead of expecting me to do it for you?

I've presented mine. Anyone would think you didn't actually have any.

[Setton]

You know what @OpenMindedSceptic? It's so pathetically easy to prove you wrong, I will do your work for you.

Behold, Sweden with no lockdown and the UK which had then removed lockdown.

Can you tell which is which?

 

[OpenMindedSceptic]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

You know what @OpenMindedSceptic? It's so pathetically easy to prove you wrong, I will do your work for you.

Behold, Sweden with no lockdown and the UK which had then removed lockdown.

Can you tell which is which?

 

 

FFS.

Those are the wrong graphs.

What you need to look at is the deaths per million per country per day.

The number of cases (whatever that means, let's argue later on this) will rise due to a sorts of reasons, most of which have sweet nothing to do with live covid.

The deaths per million per country will prove that masks and lcokdown have zero impact. 

Grab those, and then let's chat.

Edited October 26, 2020 by OpenMindedSceptic
Missed 'per day' off

[OpenMindedSceptic]

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Have you looked lately.  Places that implemented lockdowns had few cases per capita, then when the lockdowns were released there were spikes upward in the curve.  The state I live in is a good example of that. 

Get the graphs I asked for and then let's chat.

 

[Setton]

2 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

FFS.

Those are the wrong graphs.

What you need to look at is the deaths per million per country per day.

The number of cases (whatever that means, let's argue later on this) will rise due to a sorts of reasons, most of which have sweet nothing to do with live covid.

The deaths per million per country will prove that masks and lcokdown have zero impact. 

Grab those, and then let's chat.

Number of cases is a far better measure of the spread of a disease than number of deaths.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

Number of cases is a far better measure of the spread of a disease than number of deaths.

For a common source epidemic?

You are clueless and out of your depth.

You have zero idea.

Get educated and then come back.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Now Setton has backed off and trying to change the debate, anyone else? 

[Setton]

3 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

For a common source epidemic?

You are clueless and out of your depth.

You have zero idea.

What do you think masks and lockdowns are designed to achieve?

Quote

Get educated and then come back.

Would love to but gosh you still haven't provided your sources so I can educate myself.

[+Desertrat56]

3 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Now Setton has backed off and trying to change the debate, anyone else? 

You feel proud about your perception of how the conversation is going?

[OpenMindedSceptic]

3 minutes ago, Setton said:

What do you think masks and lockdowns are designed to achieve?

Would love to but gosh you still haven't provided your sources so I can educate myself.

Find any primary school to start with.

[Setton]

5 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Now Setton has backed off and trying to change the debate, anyone else? 

Oh yes absolutely, I'm changing the debate to be about transmission instead of deaths.

So are you going to claim this wasn't your post or did the YouTube goblins make you write it?

23 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Only for operational reasons in a country, not to slow cases down. It doesn't slow them down. The WHO know it doesn't work, nor do those facemasks. 

 

[Setton]

Just now, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Find any primary school to start with.

Hilarious.

You really are new here aren't you?

[OpenMindedSceptic]

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

You feel proud about your perception of how the conversation is going?

Yep.

What the hell are you measuring?

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Just now, Setton said:

Hilarious.

You really are new here aren't you?

Hilarious. Yes, I did chuckle as I wrote it.

Your next question is random nonsense to hide embarrassment I'd guess.

The point still stands.

And you can't even find the right graph or even understand why the graphs you posted don't prove the point about why lockkdowns and facemasks don't work.

[psyche101]

10 hours ago, stevewinn said:

How can Sky News Australia be so different to Sky News UK. chalk and cheese. Australia reminds of good old England mindset, cut through all the bull ****, Its the old Victorian mindset when building the new world, when someone said this is going to be perilous they say excellent. us in the UK do a runner, hide under a blanket in the closet.

Such a mindset coupled with the landmass will see Australia as a potential superpower in a century's time.

Nobody I have ever known watches it. It's a satellite channel that's mostly on in pubs. Alan Jones is a real righht wing conservative that as far as I know, most people think is a bit of a tosser. When he left radio, he was quickly and easily replaced. He made his name as a shock jock, not as a respected journalist. ABC is far more reliable. Media Watch is probably the most unbiased factual program on TV. Alan Jones certainly doesn't represent an average Australian.

[Setton]

44 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Hilarious. Yes, I did chuckle as I wrote it.

Your next question is random nonsense to hide embarrassment I'd guess.

No, you'd just appreciate the irony if you'd been here long enough to know anything about me.

Quote

The point still stands.

 

And you can't even find the right graph or even understand why the graphs you posted don't prove the point about why lockkdowns and facemasks don't work.

48 minutes ago, Setton said:

Oh yes absolutely, I'm changing the debate to be about transmission instead of deaths.

So are you going to claim this wasn't your post or did the YouTube goblins make you write it?

 

On 10/25/2020 at 10:00 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Only for operational reasons in a country, not to slow cases down. It doesn't slow them down. The WHO know it doesn't work, nor do those facemasks. 

 

[the13bats]

13 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Ermmm, if it all opens up again, that's exactly what they are doing. Exposing themselves to the virus.

People asking for everything to open up aren't the ones who are living in fear.

It doesn't mean they are calling it a sham or fake. Those arguments are two separate things.

I think nearly everyone agrees that covid is real.

You are so right that does seem to be the stigma if you arent careless to the point of stupidity then you are living in fear, no happy middle ground,  this is one of those damned if you do damned it you dont scenarios.

Thank you! Boy is my face red and hats off to you for being the first to step up and clue me in on my confusion, yes, what you say makes perfect sense they do want to get deliberatly infected, if they die, if they take family friends with them they are good with that because they did it there way, no fear no regrets.

Thanks for pointing out they arent so blindly ignorant they call covid a fake or sham only a real dolt would do that they just dont care who dies including themselves, man, that is fearless.

Perhaps they could set up like a superspreader kissing booth at trump rallys seems a great place, you know to help pass it to others to further their cause and agenda.

 

 

 

[psyche101]

5 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Get the graphs I asked for and then let's chat.

 

[Golden Duck]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Nobody I have ever known watches it. It's a satellite channel that's mostly on in pubs. Alan Jones is a real righht wing conservative that as far as I know, most people think is a bit of a tosser. When he left radio, he was quickly and easily replaced. He made his name as a shock jock, not as a respected journalist. ABC is far more reliable. Media Watch is probably the most unbiased factual program on TV. Alan Jones certainly doesn't represent an average Australian.

Whether, or not, he is a right-wing conservative has little to do with ability spin BS.  His form in "cash-for-comments"; and, being ordered to strengthen procedures in ensuring accuracy in reporting and employ a "fact-checker" by ACMA - raises apprehension that there is little he utters that is anything more than tendentious opinion.

It's amusing that he is introduced in this thread by someone paranoid of a Mind-Control-Media.

But hey, he had good results with the Wallabies in the eighties; but, even in Rugby his views are outdated now.