Jump to content

Asithappens

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Asithappens

  1. Who actually thinks that these parents really thought they were making donations to the school? If that's the case, go through the school, not a middleman. If that's the case, then why photoshop your kid's head onto a soccer/crew athlete? And maybe Singer did "tell" them that it was a donation, with a wink, wink. They are guilty as hell. Fuck them.
  2. Lol. Next time you talk to him see if you can get him to finally find those WMDs.
  3. Nothing in that contradicted my assertion of "very, very low (deaths) relative to other health issues". Maybe I missed it. There are, iirc, fewer than 3,000 deaths. I think you may have overlooked the "other health issues" part?
  4. Yeah, there is a lot of noise in the current data, what with the change of diagnostic criteria.
  5. I think you should care about how many people will die from tobacco use. Because if they are smoking, then there is second-hand smoke (or even third-hand, if you are of that ilk). People die from that. It's a slower death, to be sure, and doesn't raise the alarm bells like covid-19. I give a flying fuck about tobacco deaths b/c those deaths are preventable for the smoker and for those who live/are around the smoker. But that's an aside. I guess you and I will have to be on separate sides of these issues. *** edit to add *** Another thing, imo, to highlight the questionable statement that one doesn't give a flying fuck about tobacco deaths: use of tobacco is a public health concern, and can create comobidities that result in more deaths from things like, wait for it, covid-19. It's like they think this thing can be viewed in isolation from all other public health concerns. Imo, it cannot. If you don't give a fuck about tobacco deaths (for the reasons given) then you're a crackpot.
  6. Well yeah, but in the absence of a vaccine, it's only luck that 20% become infected rather than 50%. My point is that if there is enough of the virus to get 20% infected, then it's open season for everyone. By next year we're all gonna have been exposed. That assumption may be incorrect. But the genie is out of the bottle, imo. Now, if we have a vaccine, then everyone should jump on that train. I guess I'm saying that it's unrealistic to think that we can "contain" the virus for a year.
  7. Fuck the grandfather for basically killing his grandchild through his negligence. Fuck the grandfather for lying about it. Fuck the whole family for blaming the cruise ship and trying to get $ out of it.
  8. Well yeah, I see the problem. I also see how checking the temp of every single person coming over from the Pacific is a fool's errand (imo). You seem to think that if there are 100 people with the virus and we identify 90 of them, then we're good. What about the other 10 that we don't/can't get? I guess I'm fixating on your comment of it being negligent to not check the temp of every single person coming in from the Pacific. I couldn't disagree more.
  9. But it makes people feel better and gives the sense that we can control this. And that feeling is not a bad thing. Just don't use that feeling to make poor public health decisions.
  10. Right. From an analytical view, my interests (assuming I don't die from covid-19) are: 1. Risk analysis. Humans can exhibit some faulty thinking here (see Kahneman). We're not stupid, it's just how we are wired. One death in South Korea is "breaking news". Meanwhile, how many people will die from tobacco use? Today? 2. Marginal costs, which ties into 3. the psychology of "just doing something". Our fears are more assuaged if something is done, even if that something is ineffective, because we can more easily convince (fool?) ourselves that we have some control over events. Especially if we have kids. It puts our minds at ease, so that's a plus. Now, we all make assumptions and mine may be wrong. But imo the virus is already out there. We're not gonna stop it from spreading. Will it kill a lot? I hope not.
  11. Yeah, you know that seems like a good idea, but how effective is it? It's not. Checking the temps may be a well-intentioned effort but it's worthless. You can have the virus without having a temp. Imo, these steps just make us feel good about "doing something". It doesn't seem to matter that the steps are not effective. And what's a normal temp? What level triggers alarm? What about the mean/average human temp falling? How do you account for all this? Especially when if even one infected person gets through all these preventive steps have just become worthless? This whole thing is also an interesting study in marginal costs. How much are we willing to spend to eliminate every single chance of infection? (never mind that it can't be done) And as you can imagine, I don't think it was negligent to not take the temp of every single person who came over from the Pacific.
  12. And Spam. Don't forget Spam. Spam, Spam, Spam, bacon, Spam, eggs, and Spam is a great dish.
  13. I still think this is way overblown. I saw a "breaking news" tweet about one (yes, one) death in South Korea. Could this be a pandemic that kills millions? Maybe. It's an interesting view on risk analysis, imo. Most of the disruption (almost all) is due to the reaction/fear of the virus. As far as deaths go, the numbers are very, very low relative to other health issues. It's not surprising that elderly with comorbidities may die at a greater frequency. It's also an interesting study in how the internet feeds into this fear. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe 50 million will die. Maybe I'll be one of them. I doubt it, though.
  14. See, this right here is why I'm a member of the Soft Earth Society. Accidents like this just wouldn't happen.
  15. Hot, cold, whatever. Warren has no chance of defeating Trump. Doing well in a meaningless debate counts for bupkis. Or is it bupkus?
  16. Do you know how much he's already spent to help Dems? A lot.
  17. I'll tell ya what, I've always wanted a Pres candidate to call for gubmint funding for sex-change operations for those poor souls in federal prison, and to have a trans teenager vet the future Sect'y of Education. God Bless Elizabeth Warren. Where would we be without her? /sarcasm off She's a brain dead fucking idiot. Bloomberg has the best chance of beating Trump. When will the Dems stop being the party of stupid? Probably never.
  18. Isn't there some saying, apropos to Trump, like "when the legend becomes fat print the legend"?
  19. The New Yorker (TNY) has issues.... Their science articles suck. Their fiction and poetry is too, I don't know, "woke", among other things (see Batuman and the "fiction factory" and some letter to the editor in the TLS some years ago), but, and this is a big but, they excel at current events, blending facts with analysis in such a way that informs, educates, and helps one decide what is important. How does one keep up on things after college? One way is to subscribe to high quality publications. Anyway, enough of the editorializing. Here is a great article. Imo. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/02/10/qassem-suleimani-and-how-nations-decide-to-kill
  20. You know what's dumber than this prof saying this? Whining about it. Jesus, don't say stupid shit like that, and don't apologize if you do. Grow a fucking pair.
  21. That's new footage from Wuhan. Things are getting crazy.
  22. Imo, the Senators (R and D) have the power that the voters give them. The constitution seems to have used as ass-wipe a long time ago, so that's worthless, and the Chief Republican Operative, er John Roberts doesn't have the balls to do anything. So, get out and vote these dipshits out of office.
×
×
  • Create New...