Covid-19 Revisit

pinkeye

Wonder woman
I KNOW.! Most of us GOT IT.


Obviously you feel compelled to back up every thing you say... that's fine.. it may be a bit pre-emptive tho.

You really do not need to shove multiple facts down peoples' throats.. it becomes overly dominating and arrogant.

Just saying.. I like to share my 'opinions' , and I doubt posters here would disagree with me. However I am just talking for me really, and others may choose to disagree.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
My gripe is that our freedom of choice has been taken away. We can no longer choose NOT to wear a mask. Clearly, this is not an issue with you. But it is with me. So stop implying that I don't like wearing masks because it is some kind of physical or emotional burden for me.
Shell, do you see what I have indicated above in underlined bold italics. ?

In the first instance you say you have lost your freedom of choice, and that is your gripe.
You add you can't choose to wear a mask or not. (Remember, this is a temporary measure and you don't have to wear one permanently or everywhere.)

(Wearing masks does however provide a signal to others that we want to work for the good.! It's propaganda .. a bonding experience. ! )


You observe that I have no issue with masks.. and then you say


But it is with me. So stop implying that I don't like wearing masks because it is some kind of physical or emotional burden for me.




You just shot yourself in the foot.

( please excuse the gun analogy... they are very common in the OZ vernacular)


I actually think this relates way back to an earlier post of mine, on this topic when I YES did bring in gender as a way of discussing how differently mask wearing can be perceived, on a gender basis.

It was still on topic...
You prove my point...
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Obviously you feel compelled to back up every thing you say... that's fine.. it may be a bit pre-emptive tho.
You should also practice this. Especially when trying to make an argument.

You really do not need to shove multiple facts down peoples' throats.. it becomes overly dominating and arrogant.
I certainly understand how facts, data, and stats, can upset people who rely almost entirely on their beliefs and media sound-bites.

Your second post misrepresents most of everything I said. I just wouldn't know where to begin to respond. The fact that you can rationally characterize the government suspending your own civil liberties, as "..working for the good" or a "..bonding experience", tells me that you will accommodated whatever the government tells you. You will do and believe whatever you are told. Period.

In a perfect world, the facts alone should speak for themselves. But for many people, facts are to be ignore, unless they are relevant and supportive. Clearly, you are not interested.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Is there any hope in this entire deflection, that you will answer any of my questions?
when your ask relevant questions I might answer ... when your questions are designed to obfuscate and deflect, then you can hyperventilate.

Would you consider the deaths from smoking and drinking too much, also "unnecessary deaths"? Are the deaths caused by obesity and diabetes, also "ünnecessary deaths" as well?
drink, eat and smoke to much and you're most likely to kill yourself rather than someone else. There's a huge difference between that and you going around spreading a virus that is going to kill others in the community. That you think the two are even remotely comparable shows just how ridiculous you are.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
when your ask relevant questions I might answer ... when your questions are designed to obfuscate and deflect, then you can hyperventilate.
My questions do deflect from your blatant misrepresentations. In fact, and in your case, that is all they do. You tell me that I have said something that I haven't. Then you deflect my questions to avoid answering them. Then I am forced to endure your silly excuses, fake bravado, and personal insults, just to avoid answering them. This is called "hit and run". With others, my questions try to clarify ideas to promote understanding. Or, to question how facts are interpreted. But, since you avoid them all anyway, I guess you can call them anything you like as an excuse. Right?

I just think that our individual freedoms and liberties(unless in extreme emergencies), should never be sacrificed. Especially, when the solutions are so impractical, simple-minded, impossible to enforce, ineffective, and fascist. Only a simple-minded moron would think you can keep 26M people 2 meters apart, for even one day. Let alone for a year. Especially, when less than 1% of the population is infected anyway. Or, when over 97% of those infected will recover anyway.

Forcing people to self-isolate by ending their employments(jobs and businesses), closing down their sporting and entertainment venues, parks and beaches, and virtually ending the travel, hospitality, and tourist industries, is not only extreme and simplistic but is also unrealistic and short-sighted.

I know that many people don't give a shit about, the 700,000+ Australians who are now out of work. Or, the Australian businesses that are on the brink of collapse, due to international and interstate border closures/restrictions. Or, even those who are unable to visit their families relatives and friends. You may not give a shit, but I do.

drink, eat and smoke to much and you're most likely to kill yourself rather than someone else. There's a huge difference between that and you going around spreading a virus that is going to kill others in the community. That you think the two are even remotely comparable shows just how ridiculous you are.
I certainly may be ridiculous, but I don't make ridiculous comments to prove it. Since your closed mind can't see the comparison, let me help.

Pubs, bottle shops, restaurants, RSL's, etc. all distribute/sell(spread) alcohol to those who will eventually develop a dependency on alcohol. Supermarkets, tobacco shops, newsagencies, etc., distribute/sell(spread) smokes to those who will eventually develop a dependency on smokes. Bakeries, fast foods restaurants, food courts, etc., distribute/sell(spread) sugar saturated foods to those who will eventually develop a glucose dependency. The diseases related to these products, can be easily prevented at the points of distribution. Covid-19 is a viral disease. It is spread(distributed) by one person coming into contact with another. In both comparison, choice is irrelevant after the product is distributed. In the majority of cases, you WILL become dependent on the product. Or, you WILL become infected. Is this analogy still remote and ridiculous?

What IS ridiculous is the assumption that people are, "..going around spreading a virus that is going to kill others in the community.". Since over 97% of those infected are NOT being killed, it is more than a ridiculous assumption. And just more government fear-mongering sound-bites, out of the mouths of babes(sheep). I personally don't think 26M Australians should fear 145 still active Covid-19 cases in Australia.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Is this analogy still remote and ridiculous?

Of course it is.
pubs, restaurants etc distribute the products to people who CHOOSE to buy them. You want to eat maccas every meal it's you who will most likely die from your obesity, not someone else. If you get addicted to it it's your own fault, not someone elses.

If you walk around spreading covid you spread it around to people who have neither asked for it nor wanted it.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Of course it is.
pubs, restaurants etc distribute the products to people who CHOOSE to buy them. You want to eat maccas every meal it's you who will most likely die from your obesity, not someone else. If you get addicted to it it's your own fault, not someone elses.

If you walk around spreading covid you spread it around to people who have neither asked for it nor wanted it.

John. This is NOT about the right of people to buy legal products from distributors. This is not about a false assumption, that the 145 infected people are somehow knowingly spreading a nearly invisible pathogen to other people. I'm sure that 90% of people who are aware they are infected will do the right thing(isolate themselves).

This is about a duty of care by the government, and its apparent double standards. Even you will agree that the government has a mandate to protect the health of its citizens? To protect its citizens against diseases, or anything that will cause diseases? With this sensationalize, overhyped pathogen, it suspends our freedoms, destroys our economy, closes down our borders, and fines and arrests our citizens. With all the other health threats it does nothing, but to collect as much revenue as it can through taxation.

Alcohol, nicotine, have been scientifically proven addictive in humans. Sugar, although not addictive, have direct causal links to Diabetes and Obesity. These addictions and uses, will lead directly to cancers, heart and lung, and other metabolic diseases. Eventually leading to death. Fact!

You are the one who said that it is okay for the government, suspend our freedoms, close down our borders, sacrifice our economy, or destroy the lives and the livelihood of millions, if it would save even one person from dying unnecessarily. Right? Since you've made this argument for the government, I'm asking why the inconsistency? Hence why the comparison. Without making this comparison, I can't make this argument. Do you understand?

As Pinkeye said, the government makes money. And money IS more important than the lives of the citizens. This applies to any government. Your beliefs are either incredibly idealistic, or incredibly naive, to not see this.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
This is NOT about the right of people to buy legal products from distributors
no one said it was. YOU tried to link the spread of covid to the spread of illnesses due to drinking, eating and smoking

I'm sure that 90% of people who are aware they are infected will do the right thing(isolate themselves).
the fact that it spread around the globe despite people being aware of covid should show you whats wrong with your statement.


Alcohol, nicotine, have been scientifically proven addictive in humans.
Why are you still going on about this? I can't make you addicted to alcohol by having a beer myself. Anything i do i do to me. Covid on the other hand doesn't work that way. If I have covid and go out I can cause the death of 100's of innocent people through no fault of their own


You are the one who said that it is okay for the government, suspend our freedoms, close down our borders, sacrifice our economy, or destroy the lives and the livelihood of millions, if it would save even one person from dying unnecessarily. Right?
it's not saving one person ... it's saving thousands if not tens of thousands. If you have to be disingenuous to make your point you probably have no point to start with.

I'm asking why the inconsistency?
because your argument is inconsistent. They aren't even remotely similar scenarios no matter how much you wish it so
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
no one said it was. YOU tried to link the spread of covid to the spread of illnesses due to drinking, eating and smoking
No! You did that, and you know it. This all started because you said that the government cares more about preventing "unnecessary" deaths, than it does about the cost to the economy. Since you failed to answer what is a "necessary" death, you're now trying to create a nonsense rabbit-hole, about my obvious comparison. It is NOT a direct "link"(red herring), nor was it meant to be. The original issue was always about the freedom of choice being taken away from us. Because of your silly comments, we are now talking about, me linking how the coronavirus is spread, to how cigarettes and booze are bought and sold in the retail market. This is why I hyperventilate whenever I respond to your nonsense. You never know where it will lead.

Why are you still going on about this? I can't make you addicted to alcohol by having a beer myself. Anything i do i do to me.
More crap. Most people start their road to addiction from an early age. And, you know it. And, you also know that it is not as simple as choice. Doesn't the government still have a responsibility to protect impressionable and immature minds from any clear health hazard? So, yes, you(not you personally) are allowing people to become addicted, by allowing the sales and distributions of medically hazardous products to the public. You(personally) may, or may not be responsible for someone becoming addicted to the drugs mentioned. I have no idea. But an hour with you, and I would be on the booze. Are you saying that IF heroin and cocaine were legally sold on the retail market, that you would have no problem with it? If so, then all drugs should be legal, since it is up to people if they want to use them or not. Nothing to do with the government. Right?

Covid on the other hand doesn't work that way. If I have covid and go out I can cause the death of 100's of innocent people through no fault of their own
Are you really saying that Covid-19 patient zero, is responsible for the deaths of 909 Australians? Does this even remotely sound rational? So why would you think YOU could cause the death of 100s of people? You alone can directly infect 2-3 people at best. After a 5-6 day viral incubation period. Are you also responsible for the tens of thousands of Covid-19 victims who will recover? Or, do you just fear-monger half truths only?

it's not saving one person ... it's saving thousands if not tens of thousands. If you have to be disingenuous to make your point you probably have no point to start with.
Stop distorting, and taking my words out of context. Nevermind, that is what you do. I said, in context,

"You are the one who said that it is okay for the government, suspend our freedoms, close down our borders, sacrifice our economy, or destroy the lives and the livelihood of millions, if it would save even one person from dying unnecessarily. Right?".

Exactly where do I say that the government is trying to save just one person? So spare me the strawman response. You knew I was NOT talking about the government doing all these things, just to save ONE person. Another fallacy(appeal to incredulity). Disingenuous? That is really a compliment, comi.

because your argument is inconsistent. They aren't even remotely similar scenarios no matter how much you wish it so
Do you think that if you just keep saying something over and over again, that eventually it will be accepted as the truth? Is this the strategy?
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
.........................


Do you think that if you just keep saying something over and over again, that eventually it will be accepted as the truth? Is this the strategy?
So, it seems to be your strategy. Why shouldn't others employ that method. Not that I could be bothered, but JS enjoys it.

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member

Yesterday at 10:35 AM
You really do not need to shove multiple facts down peoples' throats.. it becomes overly dominating and arrogant.
he doesn't.


Well yes he does.
How many times can he repeat the same thing over and over again.
:dunno2
Isn't that a definition of insanity.??

To repeat the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.? Or words to that effect.

any hoo .......

cheers and enjoy
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
So, it seems to be your strategy. Why shouldn't others employ that method. Not that I could be bothered, but JS enjoys it.

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member

Yesterday at 10:35 AM

he doesn't.


Well yes he does.
How many times can he repeat the same thing over and over again.
:dunno2
Isn't that a definition of insanity.??

To repeat the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.? Or words to that effect.

any hoo .......

cheers and enjoy

Einstein was referring to the Quantum Theory. Which explains how the world really works. His parable was just tongue and cheek, and was never meant to be a definition of insanity. Oh, and he was wrong about both.

In quantum mechanics you can do the same thing many times and get different results. In colliders, you can bash together the same particles in exactly the same way, trillions upon trillions of times, and still get different results. Are these scientists all insane to do so?
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
No! You did that, and you know it.

liar. reply 1169 ... it's all yours baby. Thanks for playing:up yours

More crap. Most people start their road to addiction from an early age. And, you know it.
yes, it is more crap ... by if you knew that why did you bother writing it anyway?

Are you really saying that Covid-19 patient zero, is responsible for the deaths of 909 Australians?
Now that wasn't what I said, was it?
See this is your problem. Rather than replying to what I say, you pretend I've said otherwise and reply to that instead.

Stop distorting, and taking my words out of context.
you mean like when you pretend I said all 909 Australians died because of one person. I've figured out your problem .. you're a moron. Sure, a well written moron, but a moron nevertheless.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
liar. reply 1169 ... it's all yours baby. Thanks for playing:up yours


yes, it is more crap ... by if you knew that why did you bother writing it anyway?


Now that wasn't what I said, was it?
See this is your problem. Rather than replying to what I say, you pretend I've said otherwise and reply to that instead.


you mean like when you pretend I said all 909 Australians died because of one person. I've figured out your problem .. you're a moron. Sure, a well written moron, but a moron nevertheless.
No he doesn't ... whilst he certainly repeats himself over and over ... rarely is it factual
No John, my problem is, that I sometimes can't see the forest for the trees. Well played!
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Why is Morrison being told to hold back vaccinations for everyone under 50. Do you think he finally noticed the stats of how many under 50's are dying? Or, is it because of the clearly-linked side effects, of this RUSHED vaccine from Big Pharma?

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/austral...b-gets-blood-clot-warning-for-adults-under-50
 
Top