Support NeoGAF

[FunkMiller]

You're being obtuse about what the actual issue is to keep up this gloating

If a person thinks a certain way and is 'corrected', a lot hinges on whether the correctee actually trusts the correcter and their relationship is solid. If you get corrected by someone you believe is full of shit, you're not going to lose any sleep over it right? Like I've argued many times before, the core issue here is trust , not bad info or social media. The problem you are completely failing to acknowledge is that it isn't at all that apparent to many people who is trustworthy in the current social climate. You might feel that it's obvious to trust the doctors, but that will not be as obvious to everyone.

So basically "anyone who mistrusts the people I trust is not worthy of sympathy". I'd say you have little more to fear for your sympathy gland, it seems thoroughly shriveled as it is.

Scientists. I trust the scientists. The epidemiologists. The vaccinologists. The biologists. People like Professor Sarah Gilbert, Dr David Strain, Dr Catherine Green, Dr Larry Brilliant, to name but four. There are many more. All of them saying the same damn thing that many around here refuse to listen to.

When you have an issue in your life - whatever it is - you go to the people who are trained and have the skills in dealing with that issue for information, assistance and guidance. If you don’t, you’re a fucking idiot.

It is 100% blindingly apparent that they are the people we should listen to, because they are the experts. They know better than any of us.

And yeah, I have little time or regard for people who think they know better than the experts, especially when they spout their ill-informed bullshit at others.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Scientists. I trust the scientists. The epidemiologists. The vaccinologists. The biologists. People like Professor Sarah Gilbert, Dr David Strain, Dr Catherine Green, Dr Larry Brilliant, to name but four. There are many more. All of them saying the same damn thing that many around here refuse to listen to.

When you have an issue in your life - whatever it is - you go to the people who are trained and have the skills in dealing with that issue for information, assistance and guidance. If you don’t, you’re a fucking idiot.

It is 100% blindingly apparent that they are the people we should listen to, because they are the experts. They know better than any of us.

And yeah, I have little time or regard for people who think they know better than the experts, especially when they spout their ill-informed bullshit at others.

Jesus dude. I’m going to paraphrase what you just said in the context of this discussion. “If people don’t think like me, they can die for all I care.”

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Scientists. I trust the scientists. The epidemiologists. The vaccinologists. The biologists. People like Professor Sarah Gilbert, Dr David Strain, Dr Catherine Green, Dr Larry Brilliant, to name but four. There are many more. All of them saying the same damn thing that many around here refuse to listen to.

I don't see highly accredited and esteemed epidemiologist and SAGE advisor, Professor Neil Ferguson on that list!

I wonder why.

 

[Rentahamster]

You really just Googled about for an article that makes the numbers look better and shared it as your own opinion? That's... interesting.

What are you talking about? I clearly cited the sources. You wanted age group separation so there it is. Why would I waste my time doing the calculations and making a chart if I already know someone else did that already?

 

[FunkMiller]

Jesus dude. I’m going to paraphrase what you just said in the context of this discussion. “If people don’t think like me, they can die for all I care.”

That is clearly not what I said. What on earth are you on about?

I said I have no time or regard for people who dismiss independent expert opinion and guidance, in favour of their own misinformed, false bullshit.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

What are you talking about? I clearly cited the sources. You wanted age group separation so there it is. Why would I waste my time doing the calculations and making a chart if I already know someone else did that already?

Because that requires you to trust that the person is right and not making any mistakes. Always verify, especially when your source is just a website of some dude that turned up when you we're Googling for favorable ammunition in an Internet argument.

Anyway, if you find the official daily breakdown of cases by age, please do let me know. I'm genuinely curious.

 

[FunkMiller]

I don't see highly accredited and esteemed epidemiologist and SAGE advisor, Professor Neil Ferguson on that list!

I wonder why.

Because Mr Ferguson has shown himself to be more concerned with his public profile than with conveying accurate information. This does not mean the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is not correct on Covid.

If your argument is ‘you can’t trust any scientists because this one here is a right cock’ then it’s an extremely fallacious and very silly one.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Because Mr Ferguson has shown himself to be more concerned with his public profile than with conveying accurate information.

Sounds a lot like a prominent figure of medical authority in the US that we hear from frequently.

 

[FunkMiller]

Sounds a lot like a prominent figure of medical authority in the US that we hear from frequently.

Yes. Okay. Not quite sure what you’re point is.

 

[QSD]

Scientists. I trust the scientists. The epidemiologists. The vaccinologists. The biologists. People like Professor Sarah Gilbert, Dr David Strain, Dr Catherine Green, Dr Larry Brilliant, to name but four. There are many more.

When you have an issue in your life - whatever it is - you go to the people who are trained and have the skills in dealing with that issue for information, assistance and guidance. If you don’t, you’re a fucking idiot.

It is 100% blindingly apparent that they are the people we should listen to, because they are the experts. They know better than any of us.

And yeah, I have little time or regard for people who think they know better than the experts, especially when they spout their ill-informed bullshit at others.

We are going around in circles. You are still being obtuse. By saying you trust scientists who 'know better' you are in a way pivoting this discussion back to knowledge, when trust is the core issue. There is an implicit assumption in your argument that these scientists not only 'know better' but also have your best interests at heart. People that don't trust vaccines, don't trust scientists. They are the same people that told them opiates and benzo's were not addictive and perfectly safe to take. They even had the research to back that up! The FDA even vetted them. They would never mislead the public purely to line their own pockets, right?
That is the core issue. You trust scientists, many others don't and to my mind they have sufficient reasons to do so. So nothing about this is 100% blindingly apparant, and calling people idiots helps no one. It just makes you feel good about yourself while further entrenching the social divisions that are currently already costing lives as it is.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Yes. Okay. Not quite sure what you’re point is.

My point is that it requires trust and faith in individuals or institutions, especially when you lack the same highly specialized knowledge they are supposed to have. You hold that trust for some, but not for others for various reasons.

 

[FunkMiller]

My point is that it requires trust and faith in individuals or institutions, especially when you lack the same highly specialized knowledge they are supposed to have. You hold that trust for some, but not for others for various reasons.

So, you are trying to say that we shouldn’t trust the scientific consensus because one or two scientists aren’t all that great. That really is your argument. And it’s such a silly one, there’s no point in responding.

 

[FunkMiller]

We are going around in circles. You are still being obtuse. By saying you trust scientists who 'know better' you are in a way pivoting this discussion back to knowledge, when trust is the core issue. There is an implicit assumption in your argument that these scientists not only 'know better' but also have your best interests at heart. People that don't trust vaccines, don't trust scientists. They are the same people that told them opiates and benzo's were not addictive and perfectly safe to take. They even had the research to back that up! The FDA even vetted them. They would never mislead the public purely to line their own pockets, right?
That is the core issue. You trust scientists, many others don't and to my mind they have sufficient reasons to do so. So nothing about this is 100% blindingly apparant, and calling people idiots helps no one. It just makes you feel good about yourself while further entrenching the social divisions that are currently already costing lives as it is.

No. They are not the same people, and the fact you think they are, speaks volumes about your grasp on the situation.

If somebody is dumb enough, wilfully ignorant enough, uneducated enough, or deluded enough to think epidemiologists who study and combat diseases have anything to do with people prescribing benzodiazepines… then fuck me, there are far broader problems going on here.

 

[Jaysen]

What are you going on about? You sound like you need to get back to digging your bunker and muttering to yourself.

Says the person who thinks both sides of the vaccination debate are equally intelligent and equally principled.

 

[Jaysen]

Jesus dude. I’m going to paraphrase what you just said in the context of this discussion. “If people don’t think like me, they can die for all I care.”

Of course that’s what you from that. Of course.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

So, you are trying to say that we shouldn’t trust the scientific consensus because one or two scientists aren’t all that great. That really is your argument. And it’s such a silly one, there’s no point in responding.

The problem is that scientific consensus in regard to unreproducible phenomena is often just consensus among a select group of scientists who have been allowed to have a platform and we all know that politics and various influential powers control who is allowed to have a platform.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

My point is that it requires trust and faith in individuals or institutions, especially when you lack the same highly specialized knowledge they are supposed to have. You hold that trust for some, but not for others for various reasons.

Not all individuals and institutions are created equal, so calling this trust and faith is somewhat missing the mark. I have had extensive interactions with FDA, EU notified bodies and various other regulatory agencies over the years. Some of us have informed opinions on these things. When I’m talking about risk, I’m coming from years of experience evaluating risk assessments for medical interventions that get turned over to regulatory agencies for review prior to approval. It would be preposterous, however, to expect a gas station attendant to have the sort of experience I have when evaluating the risk of vaccination. That’s why institutions exist, to take that burden off the layman, and people like me who don’t know enough about virology, but do know enough about agencies like FDA to know they’re not just approving anything willy-nilly.

 

[FunkMiller]

The problem is that scientific consensus in regard to unreproducible phenomena is often just consensus among a select group of scientists who have been allowed to have a platform and we all know that politics and various influential powers control who is allowed to have a platform.

No. Your paranoia is stifling. No one is controlling the scientific consensus on Covid for illicit means. No political organisation or ‘influential power’ is cultivating the information that’s allowed out to the public, or only allowing platforms to those they approve of. The global independent scientific consensus is clear. Yours is the talk of the paranoid conspiracy theorist, and there’s no point in continuing to speak to you. Get help.

 

[QSD]

No. They are not the same people, and the fact you think they are, speaks volumes about your grasp on the situation.

If somebody is dumb enough, wilfully ignorant enough, uneducated enough, or deluded enough to think epidemiologists who study and combat diseases have anything to do with people prescribing benzodiazepines… then fuck me, there are far broader problems going on here.

You're finally getting it... there are far broader problems going on here.

Obviously I don't think epidemiologists are pill-pushers, I never said that. Epidemiologists advise the government, I don't know how much they have to do with actually developing and marketing medication. Either way, most people that are currently vaccine hesitant probably don't see the distinction. Which is part of the 'broader problems' I'm trying to get you to see.

This discussion:
you: there is a clear distinction between scientists and quacks, and anyone that doesn't see that is an idiot!
me: actually it's not all that clear to many people
you: but there is a clear distinction between people that are trying to help and shitty grifters, and anyone that can't tell the difference is a moron that (more or less) deserves to die a slow death of suffocation
me: actually that's not all that clear either, and wishing death upon people who are unable to tell the difference is not nice
you: but there is a clear distinction between black and white! Why is everyone but me a blithering retard?
me: umm how old are you again?

 

[Deleted member 1159]

…but what if the vaccine that’s been given to millions without almost any sign of serious adverse events is the real problem?

 

[Jaysen]

…but what if the vaccine that’s been given to millions without almost any sign of serious adverse events is the real problem?

You know, people on both sides are making equally compelling arguments. Who should I trust?!

 

[Deleted member 17706]

No political organisation or ‘influential power’ is cultivating the information that’s allowed out to the public, or only allowing platforms to those they approve of. The global independent scientific consensus is clear.

Yeah, it's almost as if that whole scientific community consensus debunking the lab leak theory was arrived at completely independently and free of any outside influence, not even mentioning the numerous interesting incidents from the WHO.

Most meaningful science doesn't get to happen independent of funding and we all know what happens when money get involved.

 

[Halo is Back]

Maybe the problem is framing people as the enemy rather than the virus?

You are actively conspiring with the enemy to instill distrust into the people from taking the vaccine. You are working WITH the enemy to undermine the best weapon we have against the virus.

 

[Chaplain]

 

[QSD]

You are actively conspiring with the enemy to instill distrust into the people from taking the vaccine. You are working WITH the enemy to undermine the best weapon we have against the virus.

"Hey sarge, the guns we are using to shoot the terrorists seem to be jamming real bad some of the time. A couple of my men got hurt pretty bad."

You: What is this insubordination? You are working with the enemy! Off to the firing squad with you!

 

[Infiltrator Irelia]

If you don't want vaccine passports, get the vaccine. If you do want vaccine passports then by all means keep being an irresponsible little shit who believes Facebook over facts, because that's how we get them here in America.

 

[Rock And Roll]

If you don't want vaccine passports, get the vaccine. If you do want vaccine passports then by all means keep being an irresponsible little shit who believes Facebook over facts, because that's how we get them here in America.

So basically no one has a say and you have to get the vaccine. Fantastic logic, you really presented both sides and made a compelling argument.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

If you don't want vaccine passports, get the vaccine. If you do want vaccine passports then by all means keep being an irresponsible little shit who believes Facebook over facts, because that's how we get them here in America.

Sounds a lot like an abusive relationship.

"Just do what he says or it will get worse for you!"

 

[Infiltrator Irelia]

Sounds a lot like an abusive relationship.

"Just do what he says or it will get worse for you!"

No, it sounds like a solution. You don't want to be a part of the solution? You can crawl back into your house and sit there forever until you decide to be a grown up adult and do what's right for society at large. The day is coming when you won't be allowed out without a vaccine. We will return to normal with or without you.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

No, it sounds like a solution. You don't want to be a part of the solution? You can crawl back into your house and sit there forever until you decide to be a grown up adult and do what's right for society at large. The day is coming when you won't be allowed out without a vaccine. We will return to normal with or without you.

No, I don't think your sadistic delusions are going to play out like you hope they will. Enjoy your angry fantasies while you can, I guess?

 

[Rock And Roll]

No, it sounds like a solution. You don't want to be a part of the solution? You can crawl back into your house and sit there forever until you decide to be a grown up adult and do what's right for society at large. The day is coming when you won't be allowed out without a vaccine. We will return to normal with or without you.

Solution. Interesting word choice. Now where have I heard solution used as some sort of societal divide before

 

[Infiltrator Irelia]

No, I don't think your sadistic delusions are going to play out like you hope they will. Enjoy your angry fantasies while you can, I guess?

How is it an angry fantasy? It's the stark reality of our future if the irresponsible masses continue to propagate misinformation. You are actively causing this pandemic to last longer than necessary.

You must have nefarious reasons for wanting that. What are they? Does a weak America benefit you somehow?

 

[Halo is Back]

"Hey sarge, the guns we are using to shoot the terrorists seem to be jamming real bad some of the time. A couple of my men got hurt pretty bad."

You: What is this insubordination? You are working with the enemy! Off to the firing squad with you!

This analogy is bad and you should feel bad. It's quite clear from the data presented in this thread that getting vaccinated is one of the best ways to prevent serious hospitalization and death from the virus. Spreading misinformation and discouraging people from taking the vaccine will get people killed. The hospital in my area is now in talks with the possibility of denying patients proper care if they have a higher chance of death due to pre-existing health conditions because ICU rooms are being filled to the brink.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

How is it an angry fantasy? It's the stark reality of our future if the irresponsible masses continue to propagate misinformation. You are actively causing this pandemic to last longer than necessary.

You must have nefarious reasons for wanting that. What are they? Does a weak America benefit you somehow?

A year from now you're likely to be screeching at people who were once your sophisticated vaccinated allies but are now resisting the idea of a mandated 4th dose as the promised ticket out of this pandemic, but for real this time.

 

[DeepBreath87]

A year from now you're likely to be screeching at people who were once your sophisticated vaccinated allies but are now resisting the idea of a mandated 4th dose as the promised ticket out of this pandemic, but for real this time.

He’s a deranged lunatic. Pay him no mind. He’s clearly lost his.

 

[Infiltrator Irelia]

A year from now you're likely to be screeching at people who were once your sophisticated vaccinated allies but are now resisting the idea of a mandated 4th dose as the promised ticket out of this pandemic, but for real this time.

Joseph Smith, dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb. How has any other past pandemic been defeated? What is the common link between viruses that affect humans and how they are treated?

Don't be a Joseph Smith.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Says the person who thinks both sides of the vaccination debate are equally intelligent and equally principled.

 

[QSD]

This analogy is bad and you should feel bad. It's quite clear from the data presented in this thread that getting vaccinated is one of the best ways to prevent serious hospitalization and death from the virus. Spreading misinformation and discouraging people from taking the vaccine will get people killed. The hospital in my area is now in talks with the possibility of denying patients proper care if they have a higher chance of death due to pre-existing health conditions because ICU rooms are being filled to the brink.

The analogy still holds IMHO. You're telling me the terrorists are on the attack and on the verge of overrunning the base. Whether or not some of the guns are faulty is orthogonal to that problem. You could say it's bad for morale if people even express their worries about the guns, so STFU. But do you really want to be that guy? Besides, if morale is really that bad, you have clearly have huge other problems that you should be worrying about. Which is what I've been arguing... it's not about data. I realize what the data says. It's about trust. A lot of people in your division believe the higher-ups don't care at all about the infantry, which is why they are (perhaps needlessly) worried about the guns they are being provided.

 

[synchronicity]

Life eventually makes fools of us all in one way or another. For some of you in here, the only thing I will say is that when arrogance dies, it dies a hard death. You have my deepest sympathies, in advance.

 

[Kraz]

A year from now you're likely to be screeching at people who were once your sophisticated vaccinated allies but are now resisting the idea of a mandated 4th dose as the promised ticket out of this pandemic, but for real this time.

And you'll still be pointing to data you don't understand and screeching that vaccines don't work on a daily basis and that everyone should study the data and believe you're stupid fucking chicken scratch.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

And you'll still be pointing to data you don't understand and screeching that vaccines don't work on a daily basis and that everyone should study the data and believe you're stupid fucking chicken scratch.

Why would I want people to believe I am "stupid fucking chicken scratch?"

Anyway, you can claim I don't understand the data I've shared, but it would be nice if you could point out where I'm making a mistake like I've asked multiple times in this thread. Finally, I don't think I've said that the currently available COVID-19 "vaccines don't work" at least in regards to helping prevent severe symptoms, hospitalizations, and deaths.

 

[Kraz]

Why would I want people to believe I am "stupid fucking chicken scratch?"

Anyway, you can claim I don't understand the data I've shared, but it would be nice if you could point out where I'm making a mistake like I've asked multiple times in this thread. Finally, I don't think I've said that the currently available COVID-19 "vaccines don't work" at least in regards to helping prevent severe symptoms, hospitalizations, and deaths.

Since you were unable to parse a simple grammatical error (you're/your) it's no wonder you have such difficulty with data.

Maybe instead of bringing hypotheticals forward from your misunderstanding wait until people more qualified bring those forward or there are published articles.

Expecting others to do study and research to prove the scientists right and your paranoai wrong is a bit much. Especially if you're going to claim the lack of effort proves a validity to your point or distrust.

You could instead talk about your personal experiences with the vaccine and pandemic responses in your local area.

That is important stuff. You do want to talk about that, don't you? It should be fascinating to get your insight.

 

[Halo is Back]

The analogy still holds IMHO. You're telling me the terrorists are on the attack and on the verge of overrunning the base. Whether or not some of the guns are faulty is orthogonal to that problem. You could say it's bad for morale if people even express their worries about the guns, so STFU. But do you really want to be that guy? Besides, if morale is really that bad, you have clearly have huge other problems that you should be worrying about. Which is what I've been arguing... it's not about data. I realize what the data says. It's about trust. A lot of people in your division believe the higher-ups don't care at all about the infantry, which is why they are (perhaps needlessly) worried about the guns they are being provided.

No, it doesn't hold up because the guns you are referring to vastly have been proven to save their lives. If you have someone in your command telling all the other soldiers not to use the weapon because it jammed on some people then he is a problem that can jeopardize the safety of the rest of the squad. The proper procedure is to report it to high command and look into the issue, not tell your other squadmates to refuse the guns that have been proven to be more useful than not.

 

[vpance]

Yeah, it's almost as if that whole scientific community consensus debunking the lab leak theory was arrived at completely independently and free of any outside influence, not even mentioning the numerous interesting incidents from the WHO.

Most meaningful science doesn't get to happen independent of funding and we all know what happens when money get involved.

Yep. Science being bought and sold for is nothing new, so we need to question it all and regularly, especially consensus opinions. Look no further than the once consensus support for cigarettes, or Harvard's infamous sugar studies in the 60s, paid for by the sugar industry, which led to ridiculous things like the food pyramid and impacted the health of millions for the worse over an entire generation.

 

[TheDreadBaron]

You are actively conspiring with the enemy to instill distrust into the people from taking the vaccine. You are working WITH the enemy to undermine the best weapon we have against the virus.

Wow, hyperbolic much? I'm out of this thread guys, it's getting too nasty.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Since you were unable to parse a simple grammatical error (you're/your) it's no wonder you have such difficulty with data.

It was a lame attempt at a joke about your mistake.

Maybe instead of bringing hypotheticals forward from your misunderstanding

If you're going to claim someone is misunderstanding something, then the onus should be on you to point out wherein lies the misunderstanding.

wait until people more qualified bring those forward or there are published articles.

Did you write this?

You could instead talk about your personal experiences with the vaccine and pandemic responses in your local area.

Why am I not surprised that you would prefer anecdotes?

 

[Kraz]

Why am I not surprised that you would prefer anecdotes?

And I'm unsurprised you have no direct experience with vaccines or the doctors that deal with them.

 

[Jaysen]

Same idiot who banned mask mandates in schools is now seeking outside medical help for a situation that could have been greatly mitigated if he had chosen not be a complete moron.

 

[Desavona]

So I went to visit my doctor to get my son his 6 month shots and I asked if I should be vaccinated for covid. He advised if I can get phizer sure but no AZ and if I didn’t want to get vaccinated I’m not really at risk so I don’t have to. Australian btw

 

[Deleted member 17706]

And I'm unsurprised you have no direct experience with vaccines or the doctors that deal with them.

I've got nothing against vaccines in general and have had plenty myself. I get them for my kids, too. They're pretty cool.