Bonus points.
|
|
|
Coronavirus
- Thread starter nobbie48
- Start date
- Status
Citation?
And I'm talking *actual* experts, not a random "personality" purporting to be one.
I'm watching the news, as you know CBC likes to bring on certain infectious doctors that go on about this and that on covid. would they not be considered experts?. or that at least that's how the CBC introduces them
Without knowing which experts we're talking about that's impossible to say.
Without going into details on who's saying it, what exactly are you suggesting they're disagreeing on?
Keep in mind science changes as we learn things. What we knew about Covid back in March and April resulted in things being said that may or may not reflect the same today now that science knows a lot more, so lets not compare statements from 6 months ago with statements from current day and suggest that experts are "not agreeing with each other", lets use examples from 3-4 weeks apart at most.
DownUnder
Well-known member
This is what bugs me with people screaming at the top of their lungs "listen to the science, don't question the facts". As we learn new things our understanding of how things really work changes. 400yrs ago science was telling everyone the world is flat and leeches will cure all your ailments.
The whole point of science is to question it, test it and push the boundaries, but it seems it has just turned into another religion with zero tolerance for dissent.
South Dakota ranks 43 in the U.S. for total deaths. People need to pay attention and read through the article nowadays.
Most have an agenda. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it needs to be understood.
United States Coronavirus: 11,501,486 Cases and 252,441 Deaths - Worldometer
Most have an agenda. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it needs to be understood.
United States Coronavirus: 11,501,486 Cases and 252,441 Deaths - Worldometer
Question, test, but don't simply ignore because whatever it's saying happens to be inconvenient for you.
An infected person breathes out droplets containing virus particles, an uninfected person breathes it in.
Anything that reduces the probability of that happening ... reduces the amount that the virus moves around.
and isn't this the crux of the issue?
Put 50 'experts' in a room on the appropriate way to handle a firearm, how many would agree? Even with facts people's opinion can override a lot of what's going on.
The goal above is to make your weapon safe, anyone whose handled one knows how to get there but the steps involved are not set in stone. To this day when i go to the range/private lot and i get handed someone elses weapon i still clear it, years of the military have made this second nature to me. I also clear it before handing mine over. Odds are random Joe plumber watches me clear my weapon he's going to assume i knew what i was doing and we're good.
Ask me sometime about the guy in Infantry Battle School who tried to clear his C7 by cocking it before removing the mag, let's just say thank jesus we had blanks.
I think it's simply a part of being human in a free society. We R not Robot.
Last edited:
I can see the reasoning for First Nations in remote communities....lack of medical infrastructure which is why they have been so careful with restrictions, some of the strongest restrictions in the country. If there was an outbreak it would likely be devastating. This should go for any remote community though.
Theres also a high degree of hereditary comorbidities in some First Nations communities too.
Theres also a high degree of hereditary comorbidities in some First Nations communities too.
that’s because all eight people in South Dakota live in a bajilion square miles and have to hike three months to see their nearest neighbour ...or something like that.
False. Neither of those things are based on science. That's like saying vaccine conspiracies are based on science....no they are based on pseudo science....like homeopaths. Just because someone calls it science doesn't make it so.
Science knew the world was round way before 400 years ago.
I went through army cadidiots. Saw one guy try to unjam a C1A1 by jumping on it.
Someone else got bayoneted during a demonstration in the armoury.
and then there was Podgorski.
I don't think any of us were "experts". Corporal who taught us orienteering mixed up longitude and latitude.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
DownUnder
Well-known member
Actually flat earth was considered science. Along with a plethora of other stuff we would call insane now that we know better.
Superceded scientific theories
Is that by voting district?
Arthur C Clarke had it right...it’s kind of appropriate for this discussion..
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Copernicus was condemned for heresy by the Catholic Church by using scientific theory to show the earth orbited the sun and not the other way around.
What we teach in schools about subatomic particles today is very different than was taught only maybe 20 years ago.
Science evolves (also religion often interferes with science).
Can you see how your comment and mine can both be correct? Homeopathy was thought to be based on science....still is. But is not. Again, just because some people SAY the word "science" doesn't mean that it is. Science proved the world was a sphere more than 2000 years ago.
Under your article it says "see Pseudoscience".
pseudo- a combining form meaning “false,” “pretended,” “unreal,” used in the formation of compound words (pseudoclassic; pseudointellectual): in scientific use, denoting close or deceptive resemblance to the following element (pseudobulb; pseudocarp), and used sometimes in chemical names of isomers (pseudoephedrine).
For thbbft, and all the other freedumb warriors
- Status
|
|
|
|
|