|
Post by goz on Jul 13, 2020 23:30:56 GMT
It was a Trump recommendation. He went against the science as did many stupid Americans who are anti-intellectual and anti-science like you. If you are going to characterize religion by Donald Trump then religion will indeed be a h u g e problem. Hint: Trump is not religious. And you still didn't count the data properly. ... and yet he recommended that religious people go to church and spread the virus!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 14, 2020 0:57:25 GMT
If you are going to characterize religion by Donald Trump then religion will indeed be a h u g e problem. Hint: Trump is not religious. And you still didn't count the data properly. ... and yet he recommended that religious people go to church and spread the virus! He did indeed try to make churches "essential businesses" and therefore exempt from the lockdown, but you might want to verify that claim about his recommendation to "spread the virus." I just realized that you and Trump have something in common: You're both disingenuous, but I think Trump actually knows better.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 14, 2020 1:02:05 GMT
... and yet he recommended that religious people go to church and spread the virus! He did indeed try to make churches "essential businesses" and therefore exempt from the lockdown, but you might want to verify that claim about his recommendation to "spread the virus." I just realized that you and Trump have something in common: You're both disingenuous, but I think Trump actually knows better. The result of that directive would be to spread the virus.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jul 14, 2020 1:10:10 GMT
So, while we could all cite examples of preachers who seriously suggest that victims of disasters were especially sinful, you make a claim that there is an equal and opposite trend of "amateur 'scientists'" suggesting somehow that "the pandemic is punishment from Darwin". And yet, you cannot cite any examples. I suspected as much. You don't read "between the lines" very well. That is characteristic of the problem with both science and religion lately. People expect a word for word statement on anything. For example of course science isn't going to admit failures word for word. It is necessary to analyze the data yourself, for example on infant restraints for automobiles. If you can only know what you are told word for word, you have a cripplingly simplistic outlook. So here you had an opportunity to give an example where "the pandemic is punishment from Darwin" is being subtly communicated "between the lines". And still ZERO from you. No surprise. After all, it is you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2020 1:20:15 GMT
... and yet he recommended that religious people go to church and spread the virus! He did indeed try to make churches "essential businesses" and therefore exempt from the lockdown, but you might want to verify that claim about his recommendation to "spread the virus." I just realized that you and Trump have something in common: You're both disingenuous, but I think Trump actually knows better. The lack of his listening to proper scientific advice is encouraging the virus to spread. Especially among poor people with no access to health care.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 14, 2020 2:44:20 GMT
He did indeed try to make churches "essential businesses" and therefore exempt from the lockdown, but you might want to verify that claim about his recommendation to "spread the virus." I just realized that you and Trump have something in common: You're both disingenuous, but I think Trump actually knows better. The result of that directive would be to spread the virus. At no point has Donald Trump ever recommended a spreading of the virus.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 14, 2020 5:41:04 GMT
The result of that directive would be to spread the virus. At no point has Donald Trump ever recommended a spreading of the virus. Yet he has, by default.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 14, 2020 5:48:23 GMT
At no point has Donald Trump ever recommended a spreading of the virus. Yet he has, by default. No, he hasn't. Those are your words in his mouth. We're talking about Donald Trump here, Goz. There's no need for that kind of shit. Unless, of course, you think he's actually smart enough to know better. The dumbass probably still thinks it's a hoax.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 14, 2020 8:22:30 GMT
"So if someone has a really, really vicious cold (which are caused by viruses), you would let him or her breath and cough on you? You wouldn't tell them to go away or stand back?" I asked you this and you mentioned you don't like people coughing on you. If you don't feel you are going to catch anything from them, what's the issue? Unless you feel, at least in part, that if they don't keep their social distance, and cough or breath on you. you'll catch something. Go back and reread what I wrote to you yesterday. I don't want to be breathed on or coughed on under any circumstances, whether someone has a cold or not. Did you get it this time?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 14, 2020 8:48:17 GMT
Personally, I believe the End Times began with the Crucifixion and the Resurrection of the Christ, but I think they amped up around the year 2012. At least they did for me. There is no end, nor beginnings, but to put a positive slant on it, only NEW beginnings. It has been a very very long time that the end times have been lurking in the background since Christ's time and 2012. How was it better before? Well, there was blissful ignorance for one thing. I can't ever get that back, not that I would want to if given the choice. It's what you get for choosing the red pill instead of the blue pill.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jul 14, 2020 11:03:36 GMT
The later "new" covid-19 cases were not being matched by a proportionate increase in deaths. That suggest the data is being politicized. It suggests that to the delusional, conspiracy addicted, and willfully ignorant. It has been widely explained how the death rate is a lagging indicator of the progress of the disease: Fatalities lag behind cases because COVID-19 is a rather slow-going illness. It takes time to develop an infection severe enough to require hospitalization. It can take longer still for an acute infection to result in death. Add in that deaths aren't always reported in a timely manner, and you see why fatalities are slow to rise and fall. Note that at the moment, the U.S. is less than a month into a sustained increase in cases.www.newsday.com/opinion/coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-death-rate-toll-america-infections-1.46492118And, as forecast, the death rate is now on the rise again: The rising numbers are significant because they come after some observers, like President Donald Trump, downplayed record numbers of new daily coronavirus infections while the national mortality rate remained low in recent weeks. But health experts warned that the surge in cases would likely be followed by a significant increase in deaths.www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-07-09/coronavirus-deaths-increasing-in-states-with-resurgences
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 14, 2020 11:09:55 GMT
He did indeed try to make churches "essential businesses" and therefore exempt from the lockdown, but you might want to verify that claim about his recommendation to "spread the virus." I just realized that you and Trump have something in common: You're both disingenuous, but I think Trump actually knows better. The lack of his listening to proper scientific advice is encouraging the virus to spread. Especially among poor people with no access to health care. Poor people with no access to health care? I thought Obama fixed that problem, years ago. Have I been under a false impression all this time? Are you saying that Obama didn't fix that problem?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 14, 2020 18:50:02 GMT
A view that Dr Anthony Fauci, America's top guy in so far as Covid is concerned articulated only just recently, it is worth reminding ourselves. I'm sure Trump appreciates your support. As far as I know Fauci and Trump are not the same, while the former has recently been (somewhat) critical of his boss, calling his words about the virus "unfortunate". As usual the question must be, who does one give the most credence to: one of America's leading medical scientists or a guy who used to work in Parks and Recreation, and who thinks Darwin contributed nothing to science?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 14, 2020 18:54:12 GMT
"So if someone has a really, really vicious cold (which are caused by viruses), you would let him or her breath and cough on you? You wouldn't tell them to go away or stand back?" I asked you this and you mentioned you don't like people coughing on you. If you don't feel you are going to catch anything from them, what's the issue? Unless you feel, at least in part, that if they don't keep their social distance, and cough or breath on you. you'll catch something. Go back and reread what I wrote to you yesterday. I don't want to be breathed on or coughed on under any circumstances, whether someone has a cold or not. Did you get it this time? I am interested in this reply. If you don't think that droplets are an issue in spreading disease then why abhor being coughed, sneezed or breathed on?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 14, 2020 19:01:15 GMT
Go back and reread what I wrote to you yesterday. I don't want to be breathed on or coughed on under any circumstances, whether someone has a cold or not. Did you get it this time? I am interested with this. If you don't think that droplets are an issue then why abhor being coughed, sneezed or breathed on? Because it's rude, you incredibly stupid ass. Do you like being coughed, sneezed, or breathed on? Does anyone? Even by a perfectly healthy person? The stupid around here is getting really thick.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 14, 2020 19:05:47 GMT
I am interested with this. If you don't think that droplets are an issue then why abhor being coughed, sneezed or breathed on? Because it's rude, you incredibly stupid ass. Do you like being coughed, sneezed, or breathed on? Does anyone? Even by a perfectly healthy person? The stupid around here is getting really thick. I don't like it because it is unhealthy. It appears that is not a reason for you, which is the point. So why so fussy? For instance on a hot day, a sneeze from someone could be quite refreshing, or a cough in your face could offer a breeze. But presumably a cough or sneeze just over your food is more acceptable for you then? And there is no need to be rude.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 14, 2020 21:36:26 GMT
I am interested with this. If you don't think that droplets are an issue then why abhor being coughed, sneezed or breathed on? Because it's rude, you incredibly stupid ass. Do you like being coughed, sneezed, or breathed on? Does anyone? Even by a perfectly healthy person? The stupid around here is getting really thick. Why do you have any objection to being sneezed on if there is no problem from droplet infection. Why is it rude? Why would someone breathing on coughing near of sneezing on you have any affect whatsoever if there is nothing in their breath that touches you? The stupid is indeed thick as shit in the neck of a bottle around here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2020 0:04:00 GMT
It's bad form to report posts right after quoting them. Why? When something is an outrageous, possibly illegal post under current circumstances...why is is bad form to BOTH report and answer? What a weenie!!!
He actually thinks that violates ProBoard's rule against trolling about Covid? She's a religious nut sometimes, but that was not a troll post.
Actually, the Admin or board owner said he/she wouldn't tolerate false news about Covid and would delete such threads. And you are right, the person is a nutcase.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2020 0:08:51 GMT
"So if someone has a really, really vicious cold (which are caused by viruses), you would let him or her breath and cough on you? You wouldn't tell them to go away or stand back?" I asked you this and you mentioned you don't like people coughing on you. If you don't feel you are going to catch anything from them, what's the issue? Unless you feel, at least in part, that if they don't keep their social distance, and cough or breath on you. you'll catch something. Go back and reread what I wrote to you yesterday. I don't want to be breathed on or coughed on under any circumstances, whether someone has a cold or not. Did you get it this time? Yes, I get that part. No one likes getting coughed on. I acknowledged that a few times. Perhaps you should re-read that. But you also said "You're right about people being able to worship at home, but the social distancing thing is pro-establishment garbage. Viruses don't spread that way." I got news for you...viruses do spread that way! Go look at any current medical book. But I have a feeling you do know that, but you just like pretending you like standing up to "the man".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2020 0:09:46 GMT
Because it's rude, you incredibly stupid ass. Do you like being coughed, sneezed, or breathed on? Does anyone? Even by a perfectly healthy person? The stupid around here is getting really thick. Why do you have any objection to being sneezed on if there is no problem from droplet infection. Why is it rude? Why would someone breathing on coughing near of sneezing on you have any affect whatsoever if there is nothing in their breath that touches you? The stupid is indeed thick as shit in the neck of a bottle around here. As thick as an Alabama ginger redneck.
|
|