|
18th December 2021, 14:53 | #2241 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
I love wearing a mask when I’m in public because I’m a privacy tinfoilhatter and I like frustrating the facial-recognition surveillance that I know is going on everywhere every day.
|
18th December 2021, 15:14 | #2242 | |
|
Quote:
How did a critical mass of experts fall upon the exact same conclusion? Is the dogma and stigmitization not evident? Plenty of examples of dissenting people losing their jobs, having their peer-reviewed papers "temporarily retracted". Twitter accounts suspended, youtube videos removed, Police paying you a visit because of a Facebook post. If you need your paycheck, and your reputation cannot withstand the stigma you may just say and do anything that fits within the Overton Window just to keep your head above water. Incentives matter. Life is easier if you just go along with what is socially acceptable. I don't think anyone is in control. I think to get everyone in the pandemic mode we encouraged snitching, shaming, fear, and abundance of caution as if these were virtues. By an large we were all in need of a common goal, so this became it. Governments are excellent at starting wars, but terrible at ending them. So this train is going to continue until the wheels come off because governments in the 21st century also don't have any balls. Bureaucratic hell is our ruin. The best description (but shitty invented term) I've seen is Dr Mattias Desmet's Mass Formation concept. Probably better described as Mass Hypnosis, he describes the ingredients for totalitarianism as: - Lack of social bond (anti-religion, anti-patriotism sentiment growing. Subreddits give greater sense of belonging than a flag or religious icon) - Large swathe of society with lack of meaning (see Bullshit Jobs) - Free floating anxiety - Free floating frustration These boxes have been checked for well over a decade. Trump almost solved it, but the pandemic solved all of it in the most unhealthy way possible. - We can now bond over public health actions (This is our World War moment, but instead of grabbing a rifle, just sit down and watch Netflix!) - We now have meaning! #InThisTogether! - We finally know what we're anxious about, it's the virus! - We finally know what we're frustrated about, it's COVIDIOTs and anti-vax nutters! But this isn't exactly totalitarianism. It's not from a single government, nation, or originator. We have converged on grass-roots totalitarianism somehow. I don't believe world leaders and public health advisors thought their suggestions would mutate into this monster.
__________________
but what would I know? |
|
18th December 2021, 16:38 | #2243 | |||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As laypeople we count on reputation systems, as we're not in a position to fully understand the science ourselves. When shills see an opportunity to make bank cause the science is inconvenient and they know we'll never parse their bullshit, we need the scientific community to shame and discredit them. Quote:
The nature of individual and group consciousness is not something that can be understood with certainty, however yeah, if you study these things one understanding is that we're all under some kind of "hypnosis", both as individuals and as groups. It's how the electrochemical soups we all are can somehow find ways to understand itself, each other. It's why children who experience neglect might struggle as their parents haven't appropriately "hypnotised" them. It's why psychedelics impact the way they do, as they can undermine that hypnosis. If you've ever tripped hard, you've had the experience of returning back to that hypnosis. However understanding what is meant by hypnosis in this way requires a considerable amount of opaque reading, and is completely inappropriate for the layperson as the term is already loaded up with unsuitable meaning. Telling people we're under "mass hypnosis" in this context is completely inappropriate. Just like we're all "deluded" because none of us has the capacity to completely grasp reality. We're all taking shortcuts, grappling with contradictions, acting on assumptions we can't know to be true. But that's not what's usually meant when we talk about delusion.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|||||
18th December 2021, 21:01 | #2244 | ||
|
Quote:
The study was published by the CDC and supported by WHO, but it was done by the University of Hong Kong. They didn't find the masks were useless, or didn't work. The absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence, etc. Quote:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2 I'm 100% cherry picking here, but it's clear that findings such as the one you quoted can be put forward as evidence for one's viewpoint at face value, but it doesn't take much to tear it apart and damage its credibility in such a discussion.
__________________
ɹǝʌo sᴉ ǝɯɐƃ ʎɥʇ |
||
20th December 2021, 14:10 | #2245 |
|
Great, let superior scientific findings beat inferior scientific findings. Let's not tip the scales with "quick and devestating published" takedowns in WIRED, WP, and removing search results from Google search, and rewriting wikipedia biographies of scientists who see it differently.
__________________
but what would I know? |
20th December 2021, 15:50 | #2246 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Stop trusting Google results and Wikipedia articles
|
20th December 2021, 17:09 | #2247 |
|
If anything good comes of this pandemic, it will be a profound distrust of Google, social media, corporate media, governments, regulatory agencies, prediction models, and hubristic public health celebrities.
__________________
but what would I know? |
20th December 2021, 17:31 | #2248 | |
|
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...te-revelation/
Head of SAGE modelling UK: Quote:
Models follow policy, not policy follows models.
__________________
but what would I know? |
|
20th December 2021, 18:22 | #2249 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
21st December 2021, 10:15 | #2250 | |
I... err - F*ck It.
|
Quote:
|
|
21st December 2021, 16:51 | #2251 | |
|
Quote:
People that believe in those things will still believe in those things and people who dont, wont. Similar to politics. No matter what the other side says, they are wrong. |
|
21st December 2021, 17:06 | #2252 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
22nd December 2021, 10:54 | #2253 |
|
I grew up like a good Labour voting automoton like my parents (and the rest of my extended family). I believed some people were good, and that they were striving to be honest and truthful. We just had to make sure to vote the good people in.
These days I still find it easier to give people and organisations a fair shake at first. But they go straight to the shit list if I detect a lie. I'll admit it's very easy these days because they have an international script: - "safe and effective" shitlist - "Russian misinformation" shitlist - "white supremecist" shitlist - "asymptomatic spread" shitlist - "Pandemic of unvaccinated" shitlist and the list goes on
__________________
but what would I know? |
22nd December 2021, 15:31 | #2254 |
|
Why are the last two on a shitlist? They are actual things - how do you think coronavirus got into the US in the first place? Asymptomatic carriers of the disease played a big part in spreading it there.
As for the last one, well, it's starting to come down to that; the virus is simply looking for people who are not vaccinated to infect them, and infect them in a bad way too. |
22nd December 2021, 23:46 | #2255 | ||
|
Those last 2 are contingent on the premise that our method of confirming a "positive case" is actually telling us the person is diseased and infectious, or whether the test merely identifies some nucleotides in an amplified genetic noise.
RT-PCR test, at high enough cycle threshold, is said to be able to detect anything in anybody. On top of that there's a baseline 2% false positive rate. So if your standard is 45 CT (like in Australia, even today), and you are on a mission to perform as many tests as possible, you will have a not insignificant number of people being classified as a positive case. You still have a ultra high sensitivity test looking for signs of virus, not signs of disease. Anthony Fauci said this about PCR test cycle thresholds: Quote:
For shits and giggles, heres the paper the WHO referenced when deciding PCR tests should be the gold standard in this pandemic: Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31992387/ Quote:
Some of the authors of this paper actually associated with a company that sells PCR test kits! No conflict of interest declared. https://www.tib-molbiol.de/company/m...t/olfert-landt https://www.tib-molbiol.de/covid-19 Regarding pandemic of unvaccinated. It's a data collection problem combined with hospitalisation numbers from countries further down the road than us (UK, Scotland, Singapore, Israel). Countries further into the COVID vaccine campaign have more absolute vaccinated numbers in hospital vs unvaccinated. in these numbers, we can't tell who is in hospital for COVID vs who is in for something else. Unless we follow up with a antigen test (immune system jumped into action), all we know is the virus is detected maybe with or without disease. Any new patient is tested for COVID, and presumably their vaccination status is also checked. What we don't know is whether the person is in hospital because of COVID disease, or they are in for something else, but test positive for SARS-COV2 virus incidentally. Like, deaths we lump it all together and call the whole thing COVID hospitalisations. For a brief period, CDC also changed how they count vaccinated and unvaccinated cases. Vaccinated (breakthrough cases) were tested at CT 28, while unvaccinated were to be tested at CT 40. This would naturally skew the figures.
__________________
but what would I know? Last edited by Nich : 22nd December 2021 at 23:50. |
||
23rd December 2021, 03:41 | #2256 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
|
23rd December 2021, 13:52 | #2257 | |
|
Quote:
IIRC this was a over-emphasised thing - so a middle ground between batshit and fact.
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية |
|
23rd December 2021, 13:57 | #2258 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
These days when I read "Fauci", my brain hears "Benghazi"
|
23rd December 2021, 15:31 | #2259 |
|
So. Decided to do the cautious thing this xmas/nye. (Melbourne)
I was going to attend a few events elsewhere - one that's a 70-min train ride (each way) to Geelong, the other a 20 min taxi ride away... and considering changing my mind about NYE too, even though that venue is walking distance. WAY too many people don't scan and a disturbing amount don't understand how to wear a mask - which there's no fucking excuse for nowadays. So exposure to the random public? Time to squash that shit IMO. Other people want to risk it? Well, IMO that selfish fucker, but I can't do shit about them, only me, and I don't trust others. So I do what will help me. .
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية Last edited by crocos : 23rd December 2021 at 15:35. |
23rd December 2021, 16:04 | #2260 |
|
Why? The pandemic is over, if you want it to be.
__________________
but what would I know? |
23rd December 2021, 16:08 | #2261 |
|
lolz, shut up Nich.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
24th December 2021, 01:08 | #2262 |
|
Well, for me it's over. I got off the crazy bus many many stops ago.
This is a good read. https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/t...nic-in-denmark I was wrong with the "everyone has aids" joke. A possible reality is everyone's immune system is now a one trick pony (it sees Omicron, and adaptive immune system does the Wuhan strain trick)
__________________
but what would I know? Last edited by Nich : 24th December 2021 at 01:11. |
24th December 2021, 04:00 | #2263 |
|
Have you gone down the Adam Curtis rabbit hole yet, I can't recall? So much good stuff there.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
24th December 2021, 13:29 | #2264 |
|
Of course! Adam Curtis strikes a good balance most of the time. He starts at the edge of commonly held beliefs and drags you deep into the woods and asks "is it such a leap to also believe this?".
I find documentaries hard to follow these days and have avoided them in favour of well-cited books and articles so I can check sources myself. The book I'm reading at the moment starts very strong at the edge just like Adm Curtis, but is now onto George Soros, and champions of technocracy... sure, still lots of citations to verify the claims in the book, but that's when I stop reading.
__________________
but what would I know? |
24th December 2021, 13:56 | #2265 |
|
More on data collection problems especially when trying to figure out vaccine efficacy.
Worldwide standard is Vaccinated 1st dose = >14 days after injection. People still <14 days remain in the Unvaccinated bucket. What happens in the 14 days after 1st dose? Your immune system is temporarily supressed and your chances of catching COVID (or shingles, or herpes, or anything... except fungal infections IIRC) are doubled in some cases. So in that 14 day period you are considered Unvaccinated, and risk of infection increased. Almost like it'd be more helpful to make a distinct category for the newly vaccinated. https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/w...utm_medium=web
__________________
but what would I know? |
24th December 2021, 23:55 | #2266 |
|
That's a blog. What does a medical expert say about this? That's what I'm interested to know, not some random guy on the internet with his 5 followers on his blog.
|
25th December 2021, 01:29 | #2267 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية |
|
25th December 2021, 09:02 | #2268 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
25th December 2021, 23:20 | #2269 |
|
Simple. If your actual health experts can lie to you about something as simple as case numbers, why should we presume that is the only lie? We already know it's not the only lie, so why keep giving them another chance?
__________________
but what would I know? |
25th December 2021, 23:36 | #2270 |
|
I have "trust" issues. And I think we all should.
I don't trust anything or anyone. The oft repeated Bitcoin quote is "Don't trust. Verify".
__________________
but what would I know? |
26th December 2021, 00:29 | #2271 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by The Edge : 26th December 2021 at 00:30. |
||
26th December 2021, 09:58 | #2272 |
|
Don't trust, verify.
__________________
but what would I know? |
26th December 2021, 10:10 | #2273 |
|
5 minutes searching on Google isn't verifying anything. All you're doing is finding someone who agrees with your viewpoint.
As before, evidence please for your statement about lies and also; why should we all have "trust" issues? How does that work with your interpersonal relationships? |
26th December 2021, 10:14 | #2274 | |
|
Quote:
It's one thing to be uncertain and distrustful, but why you gotta sell bullshit?
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
26th December 2021, 10:55 | #2275 |
|
I didn't mean to say the case numbers are simple, I agree they are not. I mean to say I have a simple rule for my sense-making process. I'll repeat it:
An information source goes straight to the shitlist if I catch 1 lie, and there's no entertainment / comedy value. I even extend that to information that in order to challenge you'd need to disprove a negative ("If we didn't lockdown blah blah.", "If he wasn't vaccinated blah blah.")
__________________
but what would I know? Last edited by Nich : 26th December 2021 at 10:57. |
26th December 2021, 11:24 | #2276 |
|
Having a rationale isn't the same as a lie. All information from a health science perspective is presented with rationale. It's unavoidable, as there are always more than one way to collate and present data. Choices inevitably need to be made.
Even just working with information systems for much more basic things I've experienced the effort of producing sets of data where there's no way to elicit a single "truth", with different, yet equally valid results being able to be generated.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
26th December 2021, 14:22 | #2277 |
|
This is a good video on the lies in science and knowledge communication:
We Lied To You ...And We'll Do it Again - Kurzgesagt
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
26th December 2021, 18:36 | #2278 |
|
it's entirely the fault of public health officials and communicators that I have lost all confidence in their stated intentions to improve health of individuals and populations. I've tried to understand their rationale, which is more effort than I should have to put in.
Maybe I'm a big dumdum like crocos suggests.
__________________
but what would I know? |
26th December 2021, 19:05 | #2279 | |
|
Quote:
The Science™ is perfect, settled, and relies on WIRED and Washington Post to stop "fringe scientists" (from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford) from challenging a narrative. I like science. I oppose The Science™. To what extent can Australia and New Zealand distance themselves from The Science™? My guess is they must fundamentally march in lockstep with whatever NIH, CDC, NHS chooses. The only wiggle room is superficial localization changes like messaging in Te Reo.
__________________
but what would I know? |
|
26th December 2021, 22:16 | #2280 |
|
The Science™ says athletes in 2021 are all of a sudden suffering from "dehydration and overheating". Case closed!
https://goodsciencing.com/covid/athl...er-covid-shot/ This is a live article, the number is going up every couple of minutes. Many athletes have reached out to the authors to confirm, while others have been discounted when insufficient proof.
__________________
but what would I know? |