Covid-19

[Jpan85]

The great thing is that their are dozens of teams working on a vaccine independently so their is a higher chance of getting a fully effect vaccine.

[Tracker]

4 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

The great thing is that their are dozens of teams working on a vaccine independently so their is a higher chance of getting a fully effect vaccine.

No so great. Its like getting 9 women pregnant simultaneously in hopes of producing a baby in 30 days. There is no international or even national coordination to avoid duplication.

 

                                            

[The Unknown Poster]

 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

[17to85]

18 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

honestly shocked he hasn't caught it already. 1

[Noeller]

the reason I brought up a vaccine in regards to "returning to full normal", is that I keep reading how we won't have gatherings over 50 people without a vaccine. So, no fans at sports or concerts until a vaccine. Now, obviously I don't know ****.... just that's what I keep reading in legitimate media.

[The Unknown Poster]

Start planning your trips to Vegas. Very cheap right now. 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Noeller said:

the reason I brought up a vaccine in regards to "returning to full normal", is that I keep reading how we won't have gatherings over 50 people without a vaccine. So, no fans at sports or concerts until a vaccine. Now, obviously I don't know ****.... just that's what I keep reading in legitimate media.

Well we’ve said September.  I think if numbers trend down with the phased in re-opening they will allow fans before a vaccine.  Id assume it would require copious sanitizing stations and staff wearing gloves and masks. 
 

i doubt  Disney is going to wait for a vaccine.   Cruise lines are booking dates.  Vegas wants to re open. So we will see how bad it gets with the public gatherings soon enough. 

[17to85]

4 minutes ago, Noeller said:

the reason I brought up a vaccine in regards to "returning to full normal", is that I keep reading how we won't have gatherings over 50 people without a vaccine. So, no fans at sports or concerts until a vaccine. Now, obviously I don't know ****.... just that's what I keep reading in legitimate media.

I read it on the internet it must be true! 

I think a lot people want that vaccine because it would simplify things immensely. But this will not carry on indefinitely. 

[FrostyWinnipeg]

10 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

honestly shocked he hasn't caught it already. 1

He's the only person who has called it a hoax and not got it.

Re: Vegas

This was the last deal i saw.

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by FrostyWinnipeg

[Mr Dee]

 

6 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Start planning your trips to Vegas. Very cheap right now. 

 

 

Is Vegas giving odds on catching the virus while visiting?

[Noeller]

4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I read it on the internet it must be true! 

I think a lot people want that vaccine because it would simplify things immensely. But this will not carry on indefinitely. 

In my defense, it was direct quotes from Horgan in BC and Trudeau. And again, I fully understand that nobody really knows anything right now...they're all guessing. But when the people at the top seem resided to the idea that it's "vaccine or nothing", you just sort of go along with it. But time will tell, I suppose. Everyone's most afraid of that second wave come flu season in the fall...

[pigseye]

For discussion purposes only,

https://www.justfacts.com/news_covid-19_anxiety_lockdowns_life_destroyed_saved

 

[17to85]

For discussion purposes : the trustworthiness of your website lists them as the following: 

RIGHT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.

[blue_gold_84]

40 minutes ago, Noeller said:

In my defense, it was direct quotes from Horgan in BC and Trudeau. And again, I fully understand that nobody really knows anything right now...they're all guessing. But when the people at the top seem resided to the idea that it's "vaccine or nothing", you just sort of go along with it. But time will tell, I suppose. Everyone's most afraid of that second wave come flu season in the fall...

This. Once summer's done and people begin going back indoors, the potential for a second wave seems likely. The major concern with that, IMO, lies with numbers dropping during the summer and people thinking we're out of the woods, creating a false sense of hope.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

[pigseye]

11 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

For discussion purposes : the trustworthiness of your website lists them as the following: 

RIGHT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/

 

[17to85]

11 minutes ago, pigseye said:

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/

 

OK but is the analysis I posted wrong? Because I drew that conclusion just reading the initial article. 

They take real things and present it in a biased way. It's just another form of dishonesty that as your link here shows, they can hide behind and say "see!! Totally legit" 

I have said too many times in this thread that people need to cultivate the ability to discern whether information is factual on their own rather than being led around by others pushing their own agenda.

[blue_gold_84]

4 minutes ago, pigseye said:

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/

It's an opinion article from three years ago, written by James D. Agresti, founder and president of Just Facts. https://www.justfacts.com/james.d.agresti.asp (He's basically jerking himself off by trying to discredit the work MBFC does)

And would you look at that... He's also a policy advisor for the Heartland Institute: https://www.heartland.org/about-us/who-we-are/james-agresti 

Quote

James D. Agresti is the president of Just Facts and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute.

Just Facts is a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues.

 

Agresti holds a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Brown University and has worked as a designer of jet engine components and systems, a technical sales professional, and chief engineer of a firm that customizes helicopters.

 

He is also the author of Rational Conclusions, a meticulously researched and scholarly acclaimed book evidencing factual support for the Bible across a broad array of academic disciplines.

If some born again bible thumper is your defense for the garbage you continue to post in this forum, you should just go and commit yourself already. That lightbulb in your echo chamber never did work.

[bustamente]

5 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

It's an opinion article from three years ago, written by James D. Agresti, founder and president of Just Facts. https://www.justfacts.com/james.d.agresti.asp (He's basically jerking himself off by trying to discredit the work MBFC does)

And would you look at that... He's also a policy advisor for the Heartland Institute: https://www.heartland.org/about-us/who-we-are/james-agresti 

If some born again bible thumper is your defense for the garbage you continue to post in this forum, you should just go and commit yourself already. That lightbulb in your echo chamber never did work.

You better watch with the "bible thumper" mister 😄

 

[Mr Dee]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

For discussion purposes only,

https://www.justfacts.com/news_covid-19_anxiety_lockdowns_life_destroyed_saved

 

From that article:

will destroy at least seven times more years of human life than can possibly be saved by lockdowns to control the spread of the disease. This figure is a bare minimum, and the actual one is likely more than 90 times greater. 

Anxiety is not great, but neither is death. 
How in the hel* can anyone seriously post these guesses and promote them as facts?
I call BS

 

[pigseye]

28 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

OK but is the analysis I posted wrong? Because I drew that conclusion just reading the initial article. 

They take real things and present it in a biased way. It's just another form of dishonesty that as your link here shows, they can hide behind and say "see!! Totally legit" 

I have said too many times in this thread that people need to cultivate the ability to discern whether information is factual on their own rather than being led around by others pushing their own agenda.

 

From Media Bias Fact Check president Dave Van Zandt to Just Facts president Jim Agresti
4/29/17

Good Morning James,

Sorry for the delay in getting the Just Facts site re-reviewed. I am sure you can appreciate how busy we are. First, I want to apologize for the previous review. The reviewer clearly zeroed in on one issue and did not look at the big picture. I feel in my review I did do that. I removed that review and replaced it with mine. I also have another reviewer working on your website. In our communication we are on the same page. I will add his notes when he completes them. Here is the new review:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts/

I also reviewed Just Facts Daily, which you can view here.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts-daily/

I would appreciate it if you would address the fact that we did re-review your website and made appropriate changes. I don’t expect you to remove your article, but I would greatly appreciate you changing the headline to something less inflammatory.

Sincerely,

Dave

Factual Reporting: HIGH

What more do you need? The factual reporting is high, who cares if they lean slightly left or right, do not fall into the same trap that most of the sheep on here have. 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

For discussion purposes : the trustworthiness of your website lists them as the following: 

RIGHT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.

It's a step up from his usual source:

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/watts-up-with-that/

 

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE

Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

 

• Overall, we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on the promotion of consistent human influenced climate denialism propaganda.

[17to85]

6 minutes ago, pigseye said:

 

From Media Bias Fact Check president Dave Van Zandt to Just Facts president Jim Agresti
4/29/17

Good Morning James,

Sorry for the delay in getting the Just Facts site re-reviewed. I am sure you can appreciate how busy we are. First, I want to apologize for the previous review. The reviewer clearly zeroed in on one issue and did not look at the big picture. I feel in my review I did do that. I removed that review and replaced it with mine. I also have another reviewer working on your website. In our communication we are on the same page. I will add his notes when he completes them. Here is the new review:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts/

I also reviewed Just Facts Daily, which you can view here.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts-daily/

I would appreciate it if you would address the fact that we did re-review your website and made appropriate changes. I don’t expect you to remove your article, but I would greatly appreciate you changing the headline to something less inflammatory.

Sincerely,

Dave

Factual Reporting: HIGH

What more do you need? The factual reporting is high, who cares if they lean slightly left or right, do not fall into the same trap that most of the sheep on here have. 

The piece I took was from the current review. Here is what you are missing, facts can be presented in misleading ways. Facts should be neutral. There is a quote I love about statistics but it applies here too I feel: Statistics are only as useful as the person interpreting them. Like I said, it's another form of dishonesty. Leading people down a path by telling them how to interpret things. 

[pigseye]

15 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

The piece I took was from the current review. Here is what you are missing, facts can be presented in misleading ways. Facts should be neutral. There is a quote I love about statistics but it applies here too I feel: Statistics are only as useful as the person interpreting them. Like I said, it's another form of dishonesty. Leading people down a path by telling them how to interpret things. 

I'm not missing anything, you are the one suggesting that the facts are misleading because of who is presenting them, so please, go ahead and show me how they are misleading the facts. 

Appears to me that you are dismissing the facts because of who is presenting them, without ever looking at the facts to begin with.