Talk Irvine

General => Health & Fitness => Topic started by: nosuchreality on November 22, 2020, 10:53:48 AM

Title: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 22, 2020, 10:53:48 AM
Covid has a roughly 99% survival rate.  People tout it as a panacea for reopening.

For comparison, skydiving, a perceived notably risky undertaking had 3.3 million jumps in 2019.  It had 15 fatalities.

Skydiving has a 99.9995% survival rate.

Covid is 2000 times more deadly than jumping from a plane.

According to BTS and NHTSA , 38,800 people died in vehicle crashes in 2019, near the 38,000+ annual average.  The people USA also made 411 Billion vehicle trips (not miles, trips).

That is a 99.99999% survival rate. 
 
Covid is one hundred thousand times more deadly than a vehicle trip.



Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: aquabliss on November 22, 2020, 01:54:02 PM
Sorry, COVID survival rate is much higher than 99%.  Millions of people have had it and are asymptomatic and will never be tested.   Millions others had very mild symptoms and never got tested. 

Also, tens of thousands have died from strokes, heart attacks, and cancers in the last 8 months who had a COVID test when they entered the hospital.  If they tested positive for COVID they are labeled as a COVID death even if they never had symptoms.

I have a friend whose father passed from a stroke and got a COVID test as soon as he was admitted to the hospital.  They marked his death as COVID.  I have a colleague whose son was in an auto accident with a girl who was fatally injured.  She received a COVID test as soon as she got to the hospital.  She tested positive and succumbed to her injuries a couple days later.  Most likely this was marked as COVID death but I don’t know the family in this case.

I guarantee there are thousands of examples like this, combined with positive cases who haven’t been tested.

COVID survival rate is probably neck and neck with skydiving or better.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: StarmanMBA on November 22, 2020, 02:12:02 PM
Covid has a roughly 99% survival rate.  People tout it as a panacea for reopening.

 
Covid is one hundred thousand times more deadly than a vehicle trip.

Your faux statistics are wrong for several reasons.
First, you cite only vehicle accidents for the United States.  Africa, to name but one example, has fatality rates orders of magnitude higher.

Secondly, you are quoting the fatality rates which are overwhelmingly people in their seventies, eighties and nineties, who according to the CDC had, on average, 2.6 ADDITIONAL predisposing medical conditions contributing to their deaths.

Of the deceased who had ONLY Covid-19, the number is around 10,000 in the United States.

Fear to your heart's content. It is a very powerful driving force, particularly among the anti-science Left.  "FEAR climate change."  "FEAR Trump."
FEAR Covid-19."  "Stranger danger."

Oh please.  Common sense and judgment trump your fears.

http://CovidFacts.blogspot.com (http://CovidFacts.blogspot.com)

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 01:33:30 PM
Yeah, I think I'm more like aquabliss and StarmanMBA on this matter. It's funny how the opinions are divided by political preferences though. Most Democrats will see Covid in one way and Republicans the other. I try to see things as unbiased as possible, but you might not see me that way.

A question for nosuchreality. If the percentage of fatality rate of vehicle crashes increases, do you think we should be banned to drive altogether?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 23, 2020, 01:41:32 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 01:48:13 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?

You see it logically that fits in your logic which might not be logical for others. But I don't think you try to fit nonlogical into logical or anything mostly so I get what you mean.

People also talk about the long term effects. How do we know? We've only had this virus less than a year now. Who decides it will side effect people long term? Sure, there has been other coronaviruses before, but isn't this one special unique disease that everyone needed to be put into a long pandemic? I'm trying to see logically here.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 01:53:31 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?

You see it logically that fits in your logic which might not be logical for others. But I don't think you try to fit nonlogical into logical or anything mostly so I get what you mean.

People also talk about the long term effects. How do we know? We've only had this virus less than a year now. Who decides it will side effect people long term? Sure, there has been other coronaviruses before, but isn't this one special unique disease that everyone needed to be put into a long pandemic? I'm trying to see logically here.

On the one hand...we have a ton of data and scientists/medical experts/public health officials saying that the virus is really really bad, has killed lots and lots of people, and will kill lots more people if we don't do certain things.  ERs, hospitals, and medical staffs are being overwhelming and asking the public to help them. 

We have studies that show people having long-term effects as a result of COVID with more studies needed as to whether those effects are permanent.

On the other hand, we have people who say "hey we are sure that lots of people have had it and thus the disease isn't that bad" and politicians/pundits screaming about how putting on a mask is what George Washington fought against. 

Which side is logical and which side is not?

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Goriot on November 23, 2020, 01:57:14 PM
Anyways, Low or high survivability aside, Covid-19 directly caused an "incremental" 250,000 deaths so far in the U.S. and 1.5 million Globally.  This is direct known death cases.  Probably significantly more deaths then these recorded numbers.  I say 3x more until herd immunity is reached.   So, just take it seriously for protect the vulnerable population.

Long-term effects - https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 01:59:06 PM
Sorry, COVID survival rate is much higher than 99%.  Millions of people have had it and are asymptomatic and will never be tested.   Millions others had very mild symptoms and never got tested. 

Also, tens of thousands have died from strokes, heart attacks, and cancers in the last 8 months who had a COVID test when they entered the hospital.  If they tested positive for COVID they are labeled as a COVID death even if they never had symptoms.

I have a friend whose father passed from a stroke and got a COVID test as soon as he was admitted to the hospital.  They marked his death as COVID.  I have a colleague whose son was in an auto accident with a girl who was fatally injured.  She received a COVID test as soon as she got to the hospital.  She tested positive and succumbed to her injuries a couple days later.  Most likely this was marked as COVID death but I don’t know the family in this case.

I guarantee there are thousands of examples like this, combined with positive cases who haven’t been tested.

COVID survival rate is probably neck and neck with skydiving or better.

Sorry...this is ridiculous.  There are at least 300K extra death this year as compared to historical norms....250K of those are being attributed to COVID.   If anything, most experts think that we are undercounting COVID-related deaths because many people could have died without being tested.

You anenctodal evidence is not reflective of the norm:

Quote
When a person dies, the cause and manner of death of death are determined separately from any comorbidities that may have been present. A person who takes his own life, for instance, has suicide listed for a cause of death, with any comorbidities he may have had documented separately.

Quote
“These data come from death certificates, and the death certificate is designed to only capture information on causes of death,” Anderson said, explaining that COVID-19 would then not be "an incidental or trivial factor."

"The underlying cause of death is the condition that began the chain of events that ultimately led to the person’s death," Jeff Lancashire, acting associate director for communications at the National Center for Health Statistics, told PolitiFact.

"In 92% of all deaths that mention COVID-19, COVID-19 is listed as the underlying cause of death," Lancashire said.

“It’s kind of ridiculous, because if they took the time to just read, they’d understand a little better what’s going on here,” Anderson also said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/09/01/fact-check-cdcs-data-covid-19-deaths-used-misleading-claims/5681686002/

Have you actually examined the death certificate yourself and note what was listed as the cause of death versus commorbidity? 


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 02:08:27 PM
Yeah, I think I'm more like aquabliss and StarmanMBA on this matter. It's funny how the opinions are divided by political preferences though. Most Democrats will see Covid in one way and Republicans the other. I try to see things as unbiased as possible, but you might not see me that way.

A question for nosuchreality. If the percentage of fatality rate of vehicle crashes increases, do you think we should be banned to drive altogether?

We do ban something like drunk driving because we have decided that it is beneficial to the society.

We added a lot of laws, safety procedures, safety standards, and safety equipment in cars in the last 50 years because car deaths. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 23, 2020, 02:17:24 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?

You see it logically that fits in your logic which might not be logical for others. But I don't think you try to fit nonlogical into logical or anything mostly so I get what you mean.

People also talk about the long term effects. How do we know? We've only had this virus less than a year now. Who decides it will side effect people long term? Sure, there has been other coronaviruses before, but isn't this one special unique disease that everyone needed to be put into a long pandemic? I'm trying to see logically here.

Logic is logic, just like math is math.

You don't get it because you are being illogical.

That is my point.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 02:35:46 PM

First, you cite only vehicle accidents for the United States.  Africa, to name but one example, has fatality rates orders of magnitude higher.


I literally have no idea what this has to do with anything?  The reason why US vehicle accident death are much lower than Africa is because we have implemented a lot of more regulations and safety requirements to make car travel a lot safe. 

Conversely, Africa has done relatively well with COVID while US has done poorly.

Quote
Secondly, you are quoting the fatality rates which are overwhelmingly people in their seventies, eighties and nineties, who according to the CDC had, on average, 2.6 ADDITIONAL predisposing medical conditions contributing to their deaths.

Of the deceased who had ONLY Covid-19, the number is around 10,000 in the United States.

Cause people in their 70s don't matter...them dying is totally okay and cause there are no long term effect for those with COVID.

Quote


Fear to your heart's content. It is a very powerful driving force, particularly among the anti-science Left.  "FEAR climate change."  "FEAR Trump."
FEAR Covid-19."  "Stranger danger."

Oh please.  Common sense and judgment trump your fears.


I rather rely on science, data, and experts.  Your emotions and feelings lie...just as "common sense" do.  There are entire industries that exist to manipulate your emotions and "common sense".

I would love to see the "science" that are being denied by the "left"
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 23, 2020, 02:36:32 PM
It’s a combination of logic and value system.  We all make decisions or have opinions based on our sensibilities. I find religion to be extremely illogical. I think a lot of folks here are pretty smart and religious. One could easily argue how ridiculous religion is and it wouldn’t change a believers mind.

Beliefs around covid are no different. I consider myself to be pretty practical. I take the view that people die every day and the covid deaths are just one more type of death that can be prevented. A lot of deaths that happen every day can be prevented/mitigated by taking drastic measures similar to the drastic measures we have taken fir covid but we have never chosen to prevent those deaths before. We can ban alcohol and prefer alcoholism and the related abuse that comes with and that would get rid of the drunk driving deaths. You could ban guns as well, etc. but it seems too many people like to drink and have their guns so the majority generally wins.  For
Covid it seems like we don’t quite have a majority so a good part of the population is split. I definitely understand the arguments on both sides.

No one really answered my question before but  I already know the answer. Will the people that are strong proponents of masks for covid continue to push mask wearing to prevent old people from catching the flu so they don’t die. Will you do permanent remote learning to prevent the old folks living at home from getting the flu and potentially dying? A lot of people use the  vulnerable population as a big reason to do the shutdowns and remote learning - to prevent the spread from getting the vulnerable population from getting covid. I’m guessing the answer is no. Society does the cost benefit on the acceptable level of deaths. For some reason we have tweaked the cost benefit for covid. Not sure what the magic number of deaths is that causes people to care more about covid.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 02:43:35 PM
It’s a combination of logic and value system.  We all make decisions or have opinions based on our sensibilities. I find religion to be extremely illogical. I think a lot of folks here are pretty smart and religious. One could easily argue how ridiculous religion is and it wouldn’t change a believers mind.

Beliefs around covid are no different. I consider myself to be pretty practical. I take the view that people die every day and the covid deaths are just one more type of death that can be prevented. A lot of deaths that happen every day can be prevented/mitigated by taking drastic measures similar to the drastic measures we have taken fir covid but we have never chosen to prevent those deaths before. We can ban alcohol and prefer alcoholism and the related abuse that comes with and that would get rid of the drunk driving deaths. You could ban guns as well, etc. but it seems too many people like to drink and have their guns so the majority generally wins.  For
Covid it seems like we don’t quite have a majority so a good part of the population is split. I definitely understand the arguments on both sides.

No one really answered my question before but  I already know the answer. Will the people that are strong proponents of masks for covid continue to push mask wearing to prevent old people from catching the flu so they don’t die. Will you do permanent remote learning to prevent the old folks living at home from getting the flu and potentially dying? A lot of people use the  vulnerable population as a big reason to do the shutdowns and remote learning - to prevent the spread from getting the vulnerable population from getting covid. I’m guessing the answer is no. Society does the cost benefit on the acceptable level of deaths. For some reason we have tweaked the cost benefit for covid. Not sure what the magic number of deaths is that causes people to care more about covid.

1)  Religion by definition is "illogical"...it requires faith with means belief without factual basis.  For example, being a Christian means that you believe an unknown deity made himself a human being and sacrificed himself for to bring everlasting life for the entirety of humanity.  There is no "logic" there...you either believe it or not.  It is highly personal and impossible to prove.

2)  Weird that you generalize what is being restricted versus what is happening.  People are being asked to wear masks and socially distant but have in large part refused to do it.  After 9/11, the country's entire security apparatus was changed because 3K people died.  We are at 250K dead in 6 months but hey...it's too drastic.

3)  Is Covid the flu?  Because if it is not...your breakdown and analysis make no sense.

4)  This is about "risk aversion"...you see relatively little risk.  Fine...but again...social policies and public health protocols should not be based upon personal risk assessments but rather data, science, and experts. 

Again...had we done the right things (i.e. Taiwan/NZ/Australia) in the first place, we wouldn't have to do this.  It is because we continuously don't do what is needed that we have to start over again. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 02:53:48 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?

You see it logically that fits in your logic which might not be logical for others. But I don't think you try to fit nonlogical into logical or anything mostly so I get what you mean.

People also talk about the long term effects. How do we know? We've only had this virus less than a year now. Who decides it will side effect people long term? Sure, there has been other coronaviruses before, but isn't this one special unique disease that everyone needed to be put into a long pandemic? I'm trying to see logically here.

On the one hand...we have a ton of data and scientists/medical experts/public health officials saying that the virus is really really bad, has killed lots and lots of people, and will kill lots more people if we don't do certain things.  ERs, hospitals, and medical staffs are being overwhelming and asking the public to help them. 

We have studies that show people having long-term effects as a result of COVID with more studies needed as to whether those effects are permanent.

On the other hand, we have people who say "hey we are sure that lots of people have had it and thus the disease isn't that bad" and politicians/pundits screaming about how putting on a mask is what George Washington fought against. 

Which side is logical and which side is not?

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 02:54:46 PM
Yeah, I think I'm more like aquabliss and StarmanMBA on this matter. It's funny how the opinions are divided by political preferences though. Most Democrats will see Covid in one way and Republicans the other. I try to see things as unbiased as possible, but you might not see me that way.

A question for nosuchreality. If the percentage of fatality rate of vehicle crashes increases, do you think we should be banned to drive altogether?

We do ban something like drunk driving because we have decided that it is beneficial to the society.

We added a lot of laws, safety procedures, safety standards, and safety equipment in cars in the last 50 years because car deaths. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year

Yeah, but why ban driving altogether first? Then we can figure out the detail, right?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 02:57:08 PM
I'm neither Republican or Democrat... I see it logically.

I understand that anti-Covid feel it's not as serious as Coviders but this is still a deadly virus that has unknown long term effects.

Does anyone here want to get cancer or diabetes?

You see it logically that fits in your logic which might not be logical for others. But I don't think you try to fit nonlogical into logical or anything mostly so I get what you mean.

People also talk about the long term effects. How do we know? We've only had this virus less than a year now. Who decides it will side effect people long term? Sure, there has been other coronaviruses before, but isn't this one special unique disease that everyone needed to be put into a long pandemic? I'm trying to see logically here.

Logic is logic, just like math is math.

You don't get it because you are being illogical.

That is my point.

Illogical. That was the word I was looking for, but couldn't remember!

Anyways, I think you are in your own bubble. But that's ok. Most people are.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 02:57:45 PM

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.

Logic is logic...logic may not fit your personal feeling or sense but that does not negate objective logic.  You can continue to argue that 1+1 is not 2 but that doesn't change the logic or math of it.

You seem to be confusing logic with personal preference and subjective "common sense".

How exactly would you like to it to be proven?  Conversely, what is your evidence that there are no material long-term effects?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 02:58:30 PM

First, you cite only vehicle accidents for the United States.  Africa, to name but one example, has fatality rates orders of magnitude higher.


I literally have no idea what this has to do with anything?  The reason why US vehicle accident death are much lower than Africa is because we have implemented a lot of more regulations and safety requirements to make car travel a lot safe. 

Conversely, Africa has done relatively well with COVID while US has done poorly.

Quote
Secondly, you are quoting the fatality rates which are overwhelmingly people in their seventies, eighties and nineties, who according to the CDC had, on average, 2.6 ADDITIONAL predisposing medical conditions contributing to their deaths.

Of the deceased who had ONLY Covid-19, the number is around 10,000 in the United States.

Cause people in their 70s don't matter...them dying is totally okay and cause there are no long term effect for those with COVID.

Quote


Fear to your heart's content. It is a very powerful driving force, particularly among the anti-science Left.  "FEAR climate change."  "FEAR Trump."
FEAR Covid-19."  "Stranger danger."

Oh please.  Common sense and judgment trump your fears.


I rather rely on science, data, and experts.  Your emotions and feelings lie...just as "common sense" do.  There are entire industries that exist to manipulate your emotions and "common sense".

I would love to see the "science" that are being denied by the "left"

But 1% and 99% are the scientific numbers, not emotions and feelings.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 02:59:56 PM
Yeah, I think I'm more like aquabliss and StarmanMBA on this matter. It's funny how the opinions are divided by political preferences though. Most Democrats will see Covid in one way and Republicans the other. I try to see things as unbiased as possible, but you might not see me that way.

A question for nosuchreality. If the percentage of fatality rate of vehicle crashes increases, do you think we should be banned to drive altogether?

We do ban something like drunk driving because we have decided that it is beneficial to the society.

We added a lot of laws, safety procedures, safety standards, and safety equipment in cars in the last 50 years because car deaths. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year

Yeah, but why ban driving altogether first? Then we can figure out the detail, right?

Unless driving is airborne and highly infectious...your analogy is super poor.  And if 250K people died from car accidents in 6 months..you better believe there would be some pretty drastic things done.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:00:21 PM

Illogical. That was the word I was looking for, but couldn't remember!

Anyways, I think you are in your own bubble. But that's ok. Most people are.

What bubble are you speaking of?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:03:03 PM

But 1% and 99% are the scientific numbers, not emotions and feelings.

Yes...1% of 330 million people is 3.3 million. 

More data and facts:  250K dead, 11 million cases.

Arizona, Missouri, Washington, Minnesota, SD, ND, and a whole host of other states are at or near full capacity for ICU beds.

Quote
The impact varies state by state with certain areas showing much more rapid increases in hospitalizations. As of Monday, hospitalizations are rising in 47 states, according to data collected by The COVID Tracking Project, and 22 states are seeing their highest numbers of COVID-19 hospitalizations since the pandemic began.

Quote
An increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations statewide is also associated with higher mortality, according to a recent study that analyzed the relationship between COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths.

"It's an indicator that you're going to have more deaths from COVID as you see the numbers inch up in the hospital," says Pinar Karaca-Mandic, professor and academic director of the Medical Industry Leadership Institute at the University of Minnesota.

Specifically, Karaca-Mandic's research found that a 1% increase of COVID-19 patients in a state's ICU beds will lead to about 2.8 additional deaths in the next seven days.

She says a statewide level of 20% COVID-19 hospitalizations may not look all that alarming, but that number doesn't capture the constraints on the health care system in adding more ICU beds.

Edit:  https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/10/933253317/covid-19-hospitalizations-are-surging-where-are-hospitals-reaching-capacity

You may not think there are emotions and feelings there...but there are plenty.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:11:10 PM
1)  Religion by definition is "illogical"...it requires faith with means belief without factual basis.  For example, being a Christian means that you believe an unknown deity made himself a human being and sacrificed himself for to bring everlasting life for the entirety of humanity.  There is no "logic" there...you either believe it or not.  It is highly personal and impossible to prove.

Sorry, but that is not Christianity. As much as you try to defend false information, I try to sort out things that can mislead people in Christian faith.

In Christian faith, you believe God because He made Himself known to you. He is not an unknown deity. He made heavens and earth, everything you see around. He made Himself known that way before anything. Then once you realize you're not worthy to be with such a powerful holy deity, God reveals His Son Jesus for the only way you can be with God the Father ultimately. To know more about Jesus is by hearing the gospel, by hearing The Holy Bible. As you know more and more, of course with doubts time to time, everything becomes very logical He created things the way He did. It is a very logical faith once you actually know. And you can prove by how the one faithful man/woman loves.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:11:44 PM

Illogical. That was the word I was looking for, but couldn't remember!

Anyways, I think you are in your own bubble. But that's ok. Most people are.

What bubble are you speaking of?

I was talking to IHO.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:12:44 PM
1)  Religion by definition is "illogical"...it requires faith with means belief without factual basis.  For example, being a Christian means that you believe an unknown deity made himself a human being and sacrificed himself for to bring everlasting life for the entirety of humanity.  There is no "logic" there...you either believe it or not.  It is highly personal and impossible to prove.

Sorry, but that is not Christianity. As much as you try to defend false information, I try to sort out things that can mislead people in Christian faith.

In Christian faith, you believe God because He made Himself known to you. He is not an unknown deity. He made heavens and earth, everything you see around. He made Himself known that way before anything. Then once you realize you're not worthy to be with such a powerful holy deity, God reveals His Son Jesus for the only way you can be with God the Father ultimately. To know more about Jesus is by hearing the gospel, by hearing The Holy Bible. As you know more and more, of course with doubts time to time, everything becomes very logical He created things the way He did. It is a very logical faith once you actually know. And you can prove by how the one faithful man/woman loves.

That's seems like a highly subjective and personal experience that cannot be proven scientifically or with logic.  As certain as you are about God and Jesus as Christian, you will find others who express equal certainty about being a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Jew, a Hindu, or an agnostic.

It's not logical at all...it may make sense to you but it is literally the opposite of logic.

By definition...Faith:

Quote
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

I will give you another example...how do you know that God created the world?  How do you prove it to a nonbeliever?  Is it something you can demonstrate and prove?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:22:25 PM

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.

Logic is logic...logic may not fit your personal feeling or sense but that does not negate objective logic.  You can continue to argue that 1+1 is not 2 but that doesn't change the logic or math of it.

You seem to be confusing logic with personal preference and subjective "common sense".

How exactly would you like to it to be proven?  Conversely, what is your evidence that there are no material long-term effects?

"Logic is logic like math is math" does sound correct, but the issue is that which logic are we talking about? You can say my logic is like math 1+1=2. Sure, but your logic might be illogical to others. You don't think so? You say that is a subjective common sense, but how do you know your logic is not a subjective common sense? You say 1% of the US population is huge. Yes, that is logical. But others might say 1% is a too small of a number. That is logical too. You don't think so? What makes your logic deserves to be the only logic where there is a counter logic which is also true? My point here is not to prove I'm more logical. My point here is what you say logical might actually be a preference subjective matter after all. Of course, you won't admit it.

I'm not in a position to prove or debunk the long term effects. You guys are the ones who say there are long term effects with Covid. YOU need to prove it. I'll say though, we're less than a year having this virus. How can we determine it'll have long term effects while we have only studied this virus less than a year? Am I being illogical?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 23, 2020, 03:23:40 PM
You guys shut down as soon as covid is compared to the flu. The flu is also a highly contagious and deadly disease. Yes, not as deadly as covid, I get it.

In 2018 there were 2.8M deaths in the US. If that was 4.5M per year due to covid does that mean we change our way of life? Why was the 2.8M acceptable and 4.5M is not? Where is the line and who decides? Everyone has a viewpoint

All policies/laws/rules are generally based on what the majority wants and to some extent on religious beliefs. Generally most reasonable people can come to an agreement on what that is and whether it’s beneficial to society. Covid is unique because of the negative economic impact the shutdowns have and governments seem to think that is the only way to get things under control.

So one side cares about the money and the other cares about the lives. No right or wrong answer.

If you really want to apply logic you do what’s best for the majority and that would be for the 99% survivors. It can easily be argued that it’s illogical to ruin everything for the 1%.


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:29:42 PM
You guys shut down as soon as covid is compared to the flu. The flu is also a highly contagious and deadly disease. Yes, not as deadly as covid, I get it.

In 2018 there were 2.8M deaths in the US. If that was 4.5M per year due to covid does that mean we change our way of life? Why was the 2.8M acceptable and 4.5M is not? Where is the line and who decides? Everyone has a viewpoint

All policies/laws/rules are generally based on what the majority wants and to some extent on religious beliefs. Generally most reasonable people can come to an agreement on what that is and whether it’s beneficial to society. Covid is unique because of the negative economic impact the shutdowns have and governments seem to think that is the only way to get things under control.

So one side cares about the money and the other cares about the lives. No right or wrong answer.

If you really want to apply logic you do what’s best for the majority and that would be for the 99% survivors. It can easily be argued that it’s illogical to ruin everything for the 1%.

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:32:01 PM
You guys shut down as soon as covid is compared to the flu. The flu is also a highly contagious and deadly disease. Yes, not as deadly as covid, I get it.

In 2018 there were 2.8M deaths in the US. If that was 4.5M per year due to covid does that mean we change our way of life? Why was the 2.8M acceptable and 4.5M is not? Where is the line and who decides? Everyone has a viewpoint

All policies/laws/rules are generally based on what the majority wants and to some extent on religious beliefs. Generally most reasonable people can come to an agreement on what that is and whether it’s beneficial to society. Covid is unique because of the negative economic impact the shutdowns have and governments seem to think that is the only way to get things under control.

So one side cares about the money and the other cares about the lives. No right or wrong answer.

If you really want to apply logic you do what’s best for the majority and that would be for the 99% survivors. It can easily be argued that it’s illogical to ruin everything for the 1%.

1)  No..no one shut down because COVID is like the flu...we have flu season every year...zero shutdowns.  We had SARS and H1N1...again no shutdowns.   Rather than concluding that COVID is the same as the other diseases we have previously dealt with...shouldn't it make more sense to see COVID as unique and much more impactful?

2)  2.8 million is acceptable?  How much time, money, and energy do we spend a year on trying to reduce heart disease, cure cancer, and reduce death?  How many of the 2.8 million are acute death?   Dying is a nature way of life and most people can accept it...having people die suddenly and unexpected however is completely different

3)  You have not even discussed the impact on the healthcare/medical system...hospitals are being overwhelmed by COVID cases, which is affecting healthcare professionals and the medical care system.  That has significant short and long term issues.

4)  Yes...in a way it is a money v people analysis but if we were being economically logical about this, we would have done this right the first time and be on the path to recovery now...instead we acted like babies and children and are now paying the price for it.  Government is not shutting down cause it's hilarious or fun...it's a last resort measure.  Again...had we done things properly...there would be no need for a shutdown...Taiwan never shutdown.

5)  Again...you are talking about risk.  1% risk is not small...it is incredibly high...casinos are built on 1 to 2% difference in risk.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 23, 2020, 03:32:39 PM
As I previously stated you should consider more than covid deaths. You should also consider the covid survivors with serious health conditions due to covid.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:33:31 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:37:18 PM
1)  Religion by definition is "illogical"...it requires faith with means belief without factual basis.  For example, being a Christian means that you believe an unknown deity made himself a human being and sacrificed himself for to bring everlasting life for the entirety of humanity.  There is no "logic" there...you either believe it or not.  It is highly personal and impossible to prove.

Sorry, but that is not Christianity. As much as you try to defend false information, I try to sort out things that can mislead people in Christian faith.

In Christian faith, you believe God because He made Himself known to you. He is not an unknown deity. He made heavens and earth, everything you see around. He made Himself known that way before anything. Then once you realize you're not worthy to be with such a powerful holy deity, God reveals His Son Jesus for the only way you can be with God the Father ultimately. To know more about Jesus is by hearing the gospel, by hearing The Holy Bible. As you know more and more, of course with doubts time to time, everything becomes very logical He created things the way He did. It is a very logical faith once you actually know. And you can prove by how the one faithful man/woman loves.

That's seems like a highly subjective and personal experience that cannot be proven scientifically or with logic.  As certain as you are about God and Jesus as Christian, you will find others who express equal certainty about being a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Jew, a Hindu, or an agnostic.

It's not logical at all...it may make sense to you but it is literally the opposite of logic.

By definition...Faith:

Quote
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

I will give you another example...how do you know that God created the world?  How do you prove it to a nonbeliever?  Is it something you can demonstrate and prove?

If I were to say I had a power to prove that by one post here, that would be illogical, wouldn't it?

Not sure if you've studied science deeply, but more and more you get to know how this universe runs and how a small creature in this universe, a human, is functioning with cells, molecules, and all the biological components, you WILL come to conclude there must be a God who makes and controls all these. Sure, that is an emotional belief. But that is also a logic concluded by many scientists.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:39:09 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

You mean experts and scientists YOU CHOOSE to listen to? Are you sure all 100% of them are saying the same thing?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 23, 2020, 03:40:27 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

This might sound funny. But people are brainwashed to believe covid is fake or not serious.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 03:41:25 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

This might sound funny. But people are brainwashed to believe covid is fake or not serious.

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:44:11 PM

If I were to say I had a power to prove that by one post here, that would be illogical, wouldn't it?

Not sure if you've studied science deeply, but more and more you get to know how this universe runs and how a small creature in this universe, a human, is functioning with cells, molecules, and all the biological components, you WILL come to conclude there must be a God who makes and controls all these. Sure, that is an emotional belief. But that is also a logic concluded by many scientists.

And there are plenty of people and scientists who believe the opposite..because humans cannot prove God.  He either is or is not.  You certainly cannot prove that your version of God is the "right" version...you cannot even prove the existence of God because our minds are so tiny that we cannot fathom.  Conversely...you cannot disprove God or religion because they are not proveable things.

Point is that faith is belief in the absence of objective proof or logic.  You hold those belief regardless of what the outside world or proveable facts are. 

Logic requires proveability and replication...God by definition is not proveable to anyone outside of yourself.

Even in the Bible, God had to reveal Himself in physical ways such as a burning bush or having a big fish swallow a person for that person to believe. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:45:30 PM

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:49:11 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

This might sound funny. But people are brainwashed to believe covid is fake or not serious.

Watching and listening to those who are downplaying COVID sound like what I hear on People's Court or Pro per parties...it totally make sense in their mind on how the law should be and what they think is right when in fact they are completely off-base. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:51:33 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

You mean experts and scientists YOU CHOOSE to listen to? Are you sure all 100% of them are saying the same thing?

I choose to listen?  No...it's what almost all of the scientists and experts say...I don't need 100% agreement to make decisions. 

If you go to 10 doctors and 9 of them say you have cancer and need treatment...do you say...hey I probably don't have cancer cause not all ten agree?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 03:56:33 PM

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.

Logic is logic...logic may not fit your personal feeling or sense but that does not negate objective logic.  You can continue to argue that 1+1 is not 2 but that doesn't change the logic or math of it.

You seem to be confusing logic with personal preference and subjective "common sense".

How exactly would you like to it to be proven?  Conversely, what is your evidence that there are no material long-term effects?

"Logic is logic like math is math" does sound correct, but the issue is that which logic are we talking about? You can say my logic is like math 1+1=2. Sure, but your logic might be illogical to others. You don't think so? You say that is a subjective common sense, but how do you know your logic is not a subjective common sense? You say 1% of the US population is huge. Yes, that is logical. But others might say 1% is a too small of a number. That is logical too. You don't think so? What makes your logic deserves to be the only logic where there is a counter logic which is also true? My point here is not to prove I'm more logical. My point here is what you say logical might actually be a preference subjective matter after all. Of course, you won't admit it.

I'm not in a position to prove or debunk the long term effects. You guys are the ones who say there are long term effects with Covid. YOU need to prove it. I'll say though, we're less than a year having this virus. How can we determine it'll have long term effects while we have only studied this virus less than a year? Am I being illogical?

No...the effects of the disease is not debatable.  What we do in response to that those effects are.  As you said...whether 3.3 million death is acceptable is subjective but that decision needs to be based upon 3.3 million...not hey..it's not really 3.3 million. 

That's the mark difference...almost every argument I have had on this issue starts with 1) COVID is not that bad, 2) most people don't die from it, and 3) it's not really 250K. 

The debate should start with...250K are dead and our medical system is being stretched to the limit...are we okay with that and if we are, what are we willing to accept.  Is 500K death okay?  What about 1 million?

In many ways, I am okay with Qwerty's analysis on issues (although I disagree with them) because he recognize the risk and simply states that he is okay with the outcomes.  Most people are not willing to accept those outcome and try to belittle or ignore those potential outcome because it does not fit their beliefs or narratives. 

Just come out and say that you are okay with like 400K death by January because it probably won't affect you and you think being with your family and friend to eat turkey is more important.  Not this "oh my goodness George Washington and the gang are turning over in their graves" bit.

There is evidence that COVID has longterm effects...one year is long term.  You confuse long term from permanent. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 04:08:54 PM

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.

Logic is logic...logic may not fit your personal feeling or sense but that does not negate objective logic.  You can continue to argue that 1+1 is not 2 but that doesn't change the logic or math of it.

You seem to be confusing logic with personal preference and subjective "common sense".

How exactly would you like to it to be proven?  Conversely, what is your evidence that there are no material long-term effects?

"Logic is logic like math is math" does sound correct, but the issue is that which logic are we talking about? You can say my logic is like math 1+1=2. Sure, but your logic might be illogical to others. You don't think so? You say that is a subjective common sense, but how do you know your logic is not a subjective common sense? You say 1% of the US population is huge. Yes, that is logical. But others might say 1% is a too small of a number. That is logical too. You don't think so? What makes your logic deserves to be the only logic where there is a counter logic which is also true? My point here is not to prove I'm more logical. My point here is what you say logical might actually be a preference subjective matter after all. Of course, you won't admit it.

I'm not in a position to prove or debunk the long term effects. You guys are the ones who say there are long term effects with Covid. YOU need to prove it. I'll say though, we're less than a year having this virus. How can we determine it'll have long term effects while we have only studied this virus less than a year? Am I being illogical?

No...the effects of the disease is not debatable.  What we do in response to that those effects are.  As you said...whether 3.3 million death is acceptable is subjective but that decision needs to be based upon 3.3 million...not hey..it's not really 3.3 million. 

That's the mark difference...almost every argument I have had on this issue starts with 1) COVID is not that bad, 2) most people don't die from it, and 3) it's not really 250K. 

The debate should start with...250K are dead and our medical system is being stretched to the limit...are we okay with that and if we are, what are we willing to accept.  Is 500K death okay?  What about 1 million?

In many ways, I am okay with Qwerty's analysis on issues (although I disagree with them) because he recognize the risk and simply states that he is okay with the outcomes.  Most people are not willing to accept those outcome and try to belittle or ignore those potential outcome because it does not fit their beliefs or narratives. 

Just come out and say that you are okay with like 400K death by January because it probably won't affect you and you think being with your family and friend to eat turkey is more important.  Not this "oh my goodness George Washington and the gang are turning over in their graves" bit.

There is evidence that COVID has longterm effects...one year is long term.  You confuse long term from permanent.

So all you tried to prove about Covid's long term effect here is by sayin we've been into a year by now. Ok. I'll see if others will take that as a good evidence.

I guess I was right you wouldn't admit your logic being a preference.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 04:09:50 PM

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

You mean experts and scientists YOU CHOOSE to listen to? Are you sure all 100% of them are saying the same thing?

I choose to listen?  No...it's what almost all of the scientists and experts say...I don't need 100% agreement to make decisions. 

If you go to 10 doctors and 9 of them say you have cancer and need treatment...do you say...hey I probably don't have cancer cause not all ten agree?

Oh so you're in favor of 90% or 99% here instead of 1%? Hmm....
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 04:11:48 PM

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 23, 2020, 04:21:47 PM
@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: zubs on November 23, 2020, 04:32:27 PM

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.

Trump and crew have been trying to down play COVID for 8 months now.  Where have you been? 
Iowa just put in mandatory mask order because their hospitals are crying they don't have enough staff to man the ICU beds.


Just read starman & morekaos covid denial posts here.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 04:38:40 PM
@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 23, 2020, 04:59:02 PM
@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Why do I need to post it? His followers will not think about context or "portions" of what he says... that's what I mean. Obviously it's logical to take everything into context but the illogical don't... you just proved my point.

Quote
Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

If Covid is spreading this much with restrictions, safety protocols, at least part of the population wearing masks... it would be much worse otherwise. That is not opinion, that is logic.

Quote
Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

And there you go again with lack of logic. It will take many months... even maybe a year or two for the vaccine to be administered to enough of the population to effectively reduce the spread. And then who knows if the vaccine will be effective against future strains.

This isn't about Biden or Trump... it's about public health... and logic.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 05:21:15 PM
@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Why do I need to post it? His followers will not think about context or "portions" of what he says... that's what I mean. Obviously it's logical to take everything into context but the illogical don't... you just proved my point.

Quote
Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

If Covid is spreading this much with restrictions, safety protocols, at least part of the population wearing masks... it would be much worse otherwise. That is not opinion, that is logic.

Quote
Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

And there you go again with lack of logic. It will take many months... even maybe a year or two for the vaccine to be administered to enough of the population to effectively reduce the spread. And then who knows if the vaccine will be effective against future strains.

This isn't about Biden or Trump... it's about public health... and logic.

So you're saying what you *believe* is logic. Sounds more like your opinion to me. That's what I'm saying though. What we see logic might not be logic to others. Get it now? We're all playing with our preferences and beliefs. How can you say what you believe is the absolute logic?

BTW, yeah it would take some time for vaccine to be used, but I meant to say Biden gets to be the President when people actually get to be vaccinated. Good for him to get all credits. The accuracy of it is a complete separate matter.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 05:23:53 PM

So all you tried to prove about Covid's long term effect here is by sayin we've been into a year by now. Ok. I'll see if others will take that as a good evidence.

I guess I was right you wouldn't admit your logic being a preference.

No...that's not what I said.  I said that your definition of "long term" is wrong...one year is longterm for purposes of studying a disease.  If you had a year-long cough after an illness, that's a long-term effect.  It may not be permanent but it is long-term.   

There have been studies about the long-term effect of COVID and plenty of data showing that such effects and issues exists.  The question now is whether how long they last and whether they are permanent or irreversible.   There is also evidence of that including permanent damages to organs including the brain and the heart.

You have this habit of reading what you believe to be said rather than what is actually said.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 05:28:26 PM

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.

There you go again projecting talking points...point out where in my post did I use the word "fake" or how he handled it..or my opinions on what he did.  Point out where I said that you supported Trump?  You totally missed the point of my post.

Again...Trump and GOP have repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, media is overhyping it, and that it will go away after the November elections.  There are numerous examples of them saying those things literally...in fact Trump himself stated that he purposively downplay the virus to avoid a panic. 

Stop setting up strawpeoples to knock down and then acted outraged about it.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 05:33:33 PM

So you're saying what you *believe* is logic. Sounds more like your opinion to me. That's what I'm saying though. What we see logic might not be logic to others. Get it now? We're all playing with our preferences and beliefs. How can you say what you believe is the absolute logic?

BTW, yeah it would take some time for vaccine to be used, but I meant to say Biden gets to be the President when people actually get to be vaccinated. Good for him to get all credits. The accuracy of it is a complete separate matter.

How is it opinion?  There are numerous studies and data showing that the lockdowns and protocols helps to reduce the spread of the disease.  I can cite those evidence to you but it doesn't seem to matter.

You just agree with IHO's statement that the implementation of vaccine will take time...how is that an opinion?

What is your definition of logic and opinion?  Reminds me of this:


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 05:46:34 PM

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

Yes we do know the outcome...states and countries that imposed stricter guidelines and restrictions far better than those who did not.  There are actual studies and data to show this...it's not a thought experiment.

https://www.popsci.com/story/health/masks-states-mandates/

Quote
Data from states and counties that have so far required masks in public show that when these policies go into effect, cases and deaths decrease. Models predict that if the US adopted a universal mask mandate, cases would almost immediately drop and lower death tolls would follow. But 14 states across the country still don’t have a sweeping policy for the protective gear. “This is something that states should have taken care of before,” says Christopher Adolph, professor of political science and statistics at the University of Washington and leader of the COVID-19 State Policy Project. “If they haven’t yet, it’s a very low-cost thing that everyone can do.”
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 23, 2020, 06:01:52 PM

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Here is a handy guide with links to when he said them:

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/politics/covid-disappearing-trump-comment-tracker/

Also...the leader of the free world shouldn't be on the fence...he should have an understanding of the disease, what we are doing about it, and what the possible outcomes are.  It is not sufficient for him to say that the disease will go away 50% and then the disease is bad the other 50%...that's poor leadership.

BTW:  Trump knew how bad it was back in February...he admitted it to Woodward on tape.  He just wanted to pretend it was not going to be and then refused to move off the narrative.  He even admits to purposively downplaying the disease out of fear that it would panic people.   

It is amazing to me that people rather believe that nothing more could have been done despite all the evidence to the contrary.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 23, 2020, 06:14:31 PM
@Mety:

Again, logic is logic, just like math is math.

There is no belief system or opinion for logic.

Like IC was saying, does anyone not "believe" 1+1=2? No, because 1+1 *is* 2... regardless of emotion, belief or opinion.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 23, 2020, 11:02:00 PM
@Mety:

Again, logic is logic, just like math is math.

There is no belief system or opinion for logic.

Like IC was saying, does anyone not "believe" 1+1=2? No, because 1+1 *is* 2... regardless of emotion, belief or opinion.

If that's what you guys believe, then there is no point of me talking any further on this matter. The definition of logic is: a proper or reasonable way of thinking about something. It is not an absolute truth as if saying 1+1=2. But again, no need to discuss further. Everyone will believe what they want to believe. Seems like you and I and many here all wear masks and be careful which are all we can do anyways so it's all good.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 23, 2020, 11:07:53 PM
It’s a combination of logic and value system.  We all make decisions or have opinions based on our sensibilities. I find religion to be extremely illogical. I think a lot of folks here are pretty smart and religious. One could easily argue how ridiculous religion is and it wouldn’t change a believers mind.

Beliefs around covid are no different. I consider myself to be pretty practical. I take the view that people die every day and the covid deaths are just one more type of death that can be prevented. A lot of deaths that happen every day can be prevented/mitigated by taking drastic measures similar to the drastic measures we have taken fir covid but we have never chosen to prevent those deaths before. We can ban alcohol and prefer alcoholism and the related abuse that comes with and that would get rid of the drunk driving deaths. You could ban guns as well, etc. but it seems too many people like to drink and have their guns so the majority generally wins.  For
Covid it seems like we don’t quite have a majority so a good part of the population is split. I definitely understand the arguments on both sides.

No one really answered my question before but  I already know the answer. Will the people that are strong proponents of masks for covid continue to push mask wearing to prevent old people from catching the flu so they don’t die. Will you do permanent remote learning to prevent the old folks living at home from getting the flu and potentially dying? A lot of people use the  vulnerable population as a big reason to do the shutdowns and remote learning - to prevent the spread from getting the vulnerable population from getting covid. I’m guessing the answer is no. Society does the cost benefit on the acceptable level of deaths. For some reason we have tweaked the cost benefit for covid. Not sure what the magic number of deaths is that causes people to care more about covid.

Being bluntly honest I really hope schools step up and keep up the hardline on undiagnosed respiratory illnesses sitting in class. I dispise the yearly bribes given out for 'perfect' attendence so that parents send their kids until they're too sick to walk.

We didn't take draconian action in a vacuum, China had a pretty good shitshow with the virus, Cali issed the first widescale stay at home on March 19, by then Italy was already in shitshow status.

Case fatality rate was extremely high due to lack of testing.

John Hopkins reports today that we are 257,671 deaths, (in basically 9 months) and likely isn't reflecting many of the coming deaths from nearly two millions new cases in the last two weeks. The flu kills on average 36,000. 

Personally, I think people in general are overly cavalier about the flu.  On average drunk driving kills a little over 10,000 a year and as a society we greatly condemn it, and steadily tightened laws on it.

The most important thing though is of those 99% survivors, 90% haven't had it, yet. 

The other big difference, with the flu, even in bad years, we have enough beds, enough medical staff to treat effectively. Uncontrolled covid, we don't.

That 90% doesn't want it.  We may not be able to stop them from getting it, but slower and later is better.


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 10:22:55 AM

If I were to say I had a power to prove that by one post here, that would be illogical, wouldn't it?

Not sure if you've studied science deeply, but more and more you get to know how this universe runs and how a small creature in this universe, a human, is functioning with cells, molecules, and all the biological components, you WILL come to conclude there must be a God who makes and controls all these. Sure, that is an emotional belief. But that is also a logic concluded by many scientists.

And there are plenty of people and scientists who believe the opposite..because humans cannot prove God.  He either is or is not.  You certainly cannot prove that your version of God is the "right" version...you cannot even prove the existence of God because our minds are so tiny that we cannot fathom.  Conversely...you cannot disprove God or religion because they are not proveable things.

Point is that faith is belief in the absence of objective proof or logic.  You hold those belief regardless of what the outside world or proveable facts are. 

Logic requires proveability and replication...God by definition is not proveable to anyone outside of yourself.

Even in the Bible, God had to reveal Himself in physical ways such as a burning bush or having a big fish swallow a person for that person to believe.

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 10:38:11 AM

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being.

Hmm...you literally just pointed out how belief in God is personal and subjective.  It makes sense to you because you are a Christian.  That does not make it objectively logical.

The fact that you believe that 1) God exists, 2) that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God, 3) there was a Jesus, 4) that He performed miracles, and 5) Jesus sacrificed Himself to save the world are expressions of faith...many people don't think those things happened and are nothing more than fantastical tales.

If you ask believers of other religions or even non-believers, you will get their explanations as to the things that you talk about and it will be "logical" to them.  Can you provide any evidence or proof that you are more "correct" than a Muslim or a Buddhist?  No..because it's not something that is provable.  Those are matters of faith.  Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh, Muslim, and non-believers all explain "love" in their own way.  Subjective belief is not logic...it's subjective. 

You are actually engage is reductive reasoning...which is the opposite of deductive reasoning that science and logic are based upon.  It is fine...religion in general is reductive because it seeks to narrow the answers while logic and science are supposed to be open to new and different possibilities. 

Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 10:54:55 AM
@Mety:

I think the disconnect is semantics. You are using the definition of logic as a "way of thinking"... such as "What is your logic" or "I can see your logic". I am using logic as  more the scientific term, that adheres to certain rules like math. It's data based... not belief or opinion based.

And yes, as someone who believes in God, like qwerty wonders, that is not logical.

But conversely, when you look at life and the wonders of the world, my "logic" (using your definition) is how can one not think God exists?

So maybe that's the struggle the anti-Coviders have... since they really don't see the impact of Covid on their lives, it is "logical" for them to think it's not a big deal. You can see this same difference in attitudes in people who have never had a loved one pass from cancer vs a cancer survivor. It's only real when it happens to you.

That's the individualism that really prevents us from not just tackling Covid, but racism, poverty and whatever else ails society.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 11:43:16 AM

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being.

Hmm...you literally just pointed out how belief in God is personal and subjective.  It makes sense to you because you are a Christian.  That does not make it objectively logical.

The fact that you believe that 1) God exists, 2) that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God, 3) there was a Jesus, 4) that He performed miracles, and 5) Jesus sacrificed Himself to save the world are expressions of faith...many people don't think those things happened and are nothing more than fantastical tales.

If you ask believers of other religions or even non-believers, you will get their explanations as to the things that you talk about and it will be "logical" to them.  Can you provide any evidence or proof that you are more "correct" than a Muslim or a Buddhist?  No..because it's not something that is provable.  Those are matters of faith.  Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh, Muslim, and non-believers all explain "love" in their own way.  Subjective belief is not logic...it's subjective. 

You are actually engage is reductive reasoning...which is the opposite of deductive reasoning that science and logic are based upon.  It is fine...religion in general is reductive because it seeks to narrow the answers while logic and science are supposed to be open to new and different possibilities. 

Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 11:44:31 AM
Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

This is actually what I'm saying. Thank you for finally getting it. :D
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 11:56:23 AM

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.

You cannot say something is objective logically by referencing itself.  It is not objectively logical to say that something is right or wrong because I said so.  That may make sense to you but it is not objectively logical.

This is what I mean by reductive reasoning....you take objective data and fit them into an existing conclusion.  What you believe is to be a "logical" explanation is just you trying to reaffirming your own beliefs.  That is the opposite of logic.

Again...your explanations are subjective.   Go talk to a Muslim or a Buddhist or an agnostic and they will each have their own explanation on things like love or creation.  There is no way that you can prove that you are more right than them from an objective standard.  It's just your belief.

For example, you stated that:  "I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God."  You can do that with basically any religion or belief system.  You speak to a Muslim, they will tell you that Allah is the one true god and that the Koran is the inerrant word of Allah.  How are you going to prove that you are more correct than them? 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 11:59:20 AM
Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

This is actually what I'm saying. Thank you for finally getting it. :D

I know that's what you have been saying except your conclusions are based upon incorrect data (i.e. 0.1% death rate), that you claim to be right and that you do not believe other people's data are correct.  For example, you were arguing that there was no data that COVID has longterm effects when that is demonstrably false.  I present you the data and you tell me that the data does not mean anything.

Once we agree on a common set of objective data, we can have a discussion about what can and should be done about it. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 12:02:03 PM

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.

You cannot say something is objective logically but referencing itself.  It is not objectively logical to say that something is right or wrong because I said so.  That may make sense to you but it is not objectively logical.

This is what I mean by reductive reasoning....you take objective data and fit them into an existing conclusion.  What you believe is to be a "logical" explanation is just you trying to reaffirming your own beliefs.  That is the opposite of logic.

Again...your explanations are subjective.   Go talk to a Muslim or a Buddhist or an agnostic and they will each have their own explanation on things like love or creation.  There is no way that you can prove that you are more right than them from an objective standard.  It's just your belief.

You keep thinking or saying I somehow think I'm more right than others. Is that what I'm saying though? You defined Christianity as something that is illogical yesterday. That's why I stepped in and tried to explain it very logical if you believe The Bible.

I'll use what you said with Covid data objectivity and subjectivity -
The Bible is the truth and that is objective... what you do with it is subjective.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 12:05:51 PM
Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

This is actually what I'm saying. Thank you for finally getting it. :D

I know that's what you have been saying except your conclusions are based upon incorrect data (i.e. 0.1% death rate), that you claim to be right and that you do not believe other people's data are correct.  For example, you were arguing that there was no data that COVID has longterm effects when that is demonstrably false.  I present you the data and you tell me that the data does not mean anything.

Once we agree on a common set of objective data, we can have a discussion about what can and should be done about it.

I already made an apology saying I now see 1.7% is the accurate data. Why skipping that altogether and spreading only the things I said as a mistake? Also when did I say datas you provided didn't mean anything? No offense, but what you do seems like a reporting from fake news networks lol.

Well, if you knew what I've been saying all along then why waste time with me since we're saying the same thing?

 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 12:06:45 PM

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.

You cannot say something is objective logically but referencing itself.  It is not objectively logical to say that something is right or wrong because I said so.  That may make sense to you but it is not objectively logical.

This is what I mean by reductive reasoning....you take objective data and fit them into an existing conclusion.  What you believe is to be a "logical" explanation is just you trying to reaffirming your own beliefs.  That is the opposite of logic.

Again...your explanations are subjective.   Go talk to a Muslim or a Buddhist or an agnostic and they will each have their own explanation on things like love or creation.  There is no way that you can prove that you are more right than them from an objective standard.  It's just your belief.

You keep thinking or saying I somehow think I'm more right than others. Is that what I'm saying though? You defined Christianity as something that is illogical yesterday. That's why I stepped in and tried to explain it very logical if you believe The Bible.

I'll use what you said with Covid data objectivity and subjectivity -
The Bible is the truth and that is objective... what you do with it is subjective.

What?  Bible is not "objectively" truth...it is true only if you are a Christian or a Jew.  For a Muslim, the Koran is the truth.  For agnostics, the Bible is just a collection of fairy tales.

I did not say Christianity is illogical...I said religion by its very nature is not objectively logic because it requires faith.  You keep skipping that first part...the most important part of Christianity is the faith.  That's why salvation is based upon faith alone...you just need to believe. 

Up until the last 400 to 500 years...most people did not even have access to the Bible...they just heard from prophets and/or the Church.

Again...you are reading what you want to read.  I never said that you said that you were more "right"...I said that you cannot objectively prove that your belief is more "right" than anyone else's beliefs, which is what objective logic requires.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 12:10:45 PM

I already made an apology saying I now see 1.7% is the accurate data. Why skipping that altogether and spreading only the things I said as a mistake? Also when did I say datas you provided didn't mean anything? No offense, but what you do seems like a reporting from fake news networks lol.

Well, if you knew what I've been saying all along then why waste time with me since we're saying the same thing?

Because you continue to dismiss the data points...i.e. your claim that there is no evidence proving long term effects or somehow there are no studies/data showing the effectiveness of mandatory protocols like masks and social distancing.   

If you acknowledge those data points, it makes little sense to not at least reconsider your stance or make an alternative argument.  I mean..is your stance the same whether the mortality rate is 0.1%, or 1.7%, or 17%?

That's why I made the point about Qwerty...he is seldomly dismiss data points and acknowledge the data presented...he just states that he has a higher risk tolerance. 

If that is you, just say that.  Just say that you are okay with a 1.7% mortality rate and hospitals being nearly full.  Just don't water it down by saying that the data is not true or that the disease is being overblown or hyped by the media.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 12:22:46 PM
@Mety:

I think the disconnect is semantics. You are using the definition of logic as a "way of thinking"... such as "What is your logic" or "I can see your logic". I am using logic as  more the scientific term, that adheres to certain rules like math. It's data based... not belief or opinion based.

And yes, as someone who believes in God, like qwerty wonders, that is not logical.

But conversely, when you look at life and the wonders of the world, my "logic" (using your definition) is how can one not think God exists?

So maybe that's the struggle the anti-Coviders have... since they really don't see the impact of Covid on their lives, it is "logical" for them to think it's not a big deal. You can see this same difference in attitudes in people who have never had a loved one pass from cancer vs a cancer survivor. It's only real when it happens to you.

That's the individualism that really prevents us from not just tackling Covid, but racism, poverty and whatever else ails society.

I replied to IC also, but Christianity is very logical once you believe The Bible. I'm not saying everything is explainable and can be figured out, but why God made everything and how He loves are all shown and proven throughout The Bible. If you don't believe The Bible which is your choice, then of course it becomes very illogical to you. I only try to explain Christianity is not something you believe just because out of nowhere. He might not be saying that, It sounded like that from what IC was saying yesterday, so I just stepped in.

Also you said you're not leaning toward any political parties. You said you're logical. But here is the thing. We all have the datas and scientific proofs. But what you do with them is your choice, isn't it? Some people ignore datas altogether, some people believe them as God's words. Today is Tuesday. That is logically and objectively true. Covid has 1.7% death rate. That is true (besides the real number of solely Covid deaths). How we come to conclude as a consequence is subjective as IC is also saying. Therefore, you have no choice but to be subjective dealing with logics you choose to believe. Preferring a political party is a subjective matter as much as not preferring anything.

BTW, this is nothing to brag about, but I've had too many friends and even a family member died out of cancer. One of my best friends is a cancer survivor. It's not because someone doesn't have any problems around that they don't take Covid as serious as you do. It's because they choose to believe something out of their own logical sense which might be illogical to you. 1.7% death rate to me is not something that requires sacrifices of 98.3%.


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 12:30:23 PM

I already made an apology saying I now see 1.7% is the accurate data. Why skipping that altogether and spreading only the things I said as a mistake? Also when did I say datas you provided didn't mean anything? No offense, but what you do seems like a reporting from fake news networks lol.

Well, if you knew what I've been saying all along then why waste time with me since we're saying the same thing?

Because you continue to dismiss the data points...i.e. your claim that there is no evidence proving long term effects or somehow there are no studies/data showing the effectiveness of mandatory protocols like masks and social distancing.   

If you acknowledge those data points, it makes little sense to not at least reconsider your stance or make an alternative argument.  I mean..is your stance the same whether the mortality rate is 0.1%, or 1.7%, or 17%?

That's why I made the point about Qwerty...he is seldomly dismiss data points and acknowledge the data presented...he just states that he has a higher risk tolerance. 

If that is you, just say that.  Just say that you are okay with a 1.7% mortality rate and hospitals being nearly full.  Just don't water it down by saying that the data is not true or that the disease is being overblown or hyped by the media.

When did I dismiss your datas? 1 year to you is a long term. To me, not really. I've had allergy all this year. Is that a long term effects and should I lock myself down alone?

You ignored my question from other thread. So you think masks and distancing should be *mandatory* in the US? Meaning possible fines, beat ups (like some other country as IHO mentioned) or jail times?

1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

I don't remember watering anything down. I've been saying 0.1 or even 2 % is not something that should put everyone into mandatory curfews and close downs. Again, there is the objective matter. What we come to believe are subjective.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 12:32:05 PM
I replied to IC also, but Christianity is very logical once you believe The Bible. I'm not saying everything is explainable and can be figured out, but why God made everything and how He loves are all shown and proven throughout The Bible. If you don't believe The Bible which is your choice, then of course it becomes very illogical to you. I only try to explain Christianity is not something you believe just because out of nowhere. He might not be saying that, It sounded like that from what IC was saying yesterday, so I just stepped in.

Also you said you're not leaning toward any political parties. You said you're logical. But here is the thing. We all have the datas and scientific proofs. But what you do with them is your choice, isn't it? Some people ignore datas altogether, some people believe them as God's words. Today is Tuesday. That is logically and objectively true. Covid has 1.7% death rate. That is true (besides the real number of solely Covid deaths). How we come to conclude as a consequence is subjective as IC is also saying. Therefore, you have no choice but to be subjective dealing with logics you choose to believe. Preferring a political party is a subjective matter as much as not preferring anything.

BTW, this is nothing to brag about, but I've had too many friends and even a family member died out of cancer. One of my best friends is a cancer survivor. It's not because someone doesn't have any problems around that they don't take Covid as serious as you do. It's because they choose to believe something out of their own logical sense which might be illogical to you. 1.7% death rate to me is not something that requires sacrifices of 98.3%.

personal sense and objective logic are very different things...personal choice and sense are fine when you are dealing with one's own decisions.  But you cannot use subjective beliefs and sense when making decision on a social level...because by definition, a society requires individuals to give up rights. 

Government officials need to make decisions on a social level.  A person may think that s/he can drive while intoxicated but the state does not.  Why is 0.08 a magical number?  It really isn't but the result of a social decision on what the state of California states as the level of acceptable risk. 

Yes...people can have varying tolerances for risk..just check people's stock portfolios/401K accounts.  But people should not replace their own risk tolerance level for others and certainly not ones that the state/government have decided to be the socially acceptable risk tolerance.  It is not okay for someone to say that s/he have the subjective belief that s/he can drive a 0.12 BAC.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 12:36:13 PM

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.

You cannot say something is objective logically but referencing itself.  It is not objectively logical to say that something is right or wrong because I said so.  That may make sense to you but it is not objectively logical.

This is what I mean by reductive reasoning....you take objective data and fit them into an existing conclusion.  What you believe is to be a "logical" explanation is just you trying to reaffirming your own beliefs.  That is the opposite of logic.

Again...your explanations are subjective.   Go talk to a Muslim or a Buddhist or an agnostic and they will each have their own explanation on things like love or creation.  There is no way that you can prove that you are more right than them from an objective standard.  It's just your belief.

You keep thinking or saying I somehow think I'm more right than others. Is that what I'm saying though? You defined Christianity as something that is illogical yesterday. That's why I stepped in and tried to explain it very logical if you believe The Bible.

I'll use what you said with Covid data objectivity and subjectivity -
The Bible is the truth and that is objective... what you do with it is subjective.

What?  Bible is not "objectively" truth...it is true only if you are a Christian or a Jew.  For a Muslim, the Koran is the truth.  For agnostics, the Bible is just a collection of fairy tales.

I did not say Christianity is illogical...I said religion by its very nature is not objectively logic because it requires faith.  You keep skipping that first part...the most important part of Christianity is the faith.  That's why salvation is based upon faith alone...you just need to believe. 

Up until the last 400 to 500 years...most people did not even have access to the Bible...they just heard from prophets and/or the Church.

Again...you are reading what you want to read.  I never said that you said that you were more "right"...I said that you cannot objectively prove that your belief is more "right" than anyone else's beliefs, which is what objective logic requires.

What words coming out of a so -called Christian believer. I'm sure you're very popular with all others. Well, I'm sure God can still use you to do His wonders.

But you got some parts correct. Church was the place you hear the Word of God until we could have access to the Bible physically. How irony of that coming from someone who thinks we don't need physical church anymore.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 12:37:41 PM

When did I dismiss your datas? 1 year to you is a long term. To me, not really. I've had allergy all this year. Is that a long term effects and should I lock myself down alone?

You ignored my question from other thread. So you think masks and distancing should be *mandatory* in the US? Meaning possible fines, beat ups (like some other country as IHO mentioned) or jail times?

1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

I don't remember watering anything down. I've been saying 0.1 or even 2 % is not something that should put everyone into mandatory curfews and close downs. Again, there is the objective matter. What we come to believe are subjective.

Again...you keep doing this thing where you believe that all terms are relative.  There are objective definitions for things like "long term", "chronic", and "permanent".  When scientists and researchers study effects...they use objective terms to define what they find.  An effect can be long-term but not permanent. 

Quote
A problem that is caused by a disease or treatment of a disease and may continue for months or years. Long-term side effects of cancer treatment include heart, lung, kidney, or gastrointestinal tract problems; pain, numbness, tingling, loss of feeling, or heat or cold sensitivity in the hands or feet; fatigue; hearing loss; cataracts; and dry eyes or dry mouth

https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/long-term-side-effect

I literally have no idea what you mean by your allergies. 

I have repeatedly answered your questions.  I do think masks and social distancing should be mandatory as a matter of law...enforcement and punishment for that mandatory restriction can vary.  Just like people drive 70 mph in a 65 mph is very different from someone driving 130.  Why does everything need to be black and white?

If you are fine with 1.7% mortality rate, that is certainly with in your right but there are plenty of others who are not.  People shouldn't get to flaunt orders and laws just because they do not agree with the risk level assigned.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 12:40:15 PM
What words coming out of a so -called Christian believer. I'm sure you're very popular with all others. Well, I'm sure God can still use you to do His wonders.

But you got some parts correct. Church was the place you hear the Word of God until we could have access to the Bible physically. How irony of that coming from someone who thinks we don't need physical church anymore.

So..you are telling me that I am not Christian enough for you?  I can differentiate between my personal beliefs and the world value.  How do you speak to non-Christian about Christianity unless you can approach them in a manner and in a way that they understand and appreciate?  I guess you just ascribe to the hammer method.

Church does not require a physical location...it was not for the early Christian and it was not for Jesus.  Apostles actually separate to spread the Word of God rather than hunkering down in one place.  Jesus walked all over Israel to speak about God.  Early Christians met in their homes to fellowship and worship.   

There is nothing requiring that Christians have to congregate in an indoor building...certainly not during a time of a global pandemic.  The God I believe in can function just fine in this pandemic or any other situations/scenarios.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 24, 2020, 12:56:14 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 01:29:58 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 01:34:19 PM
What words coming out of a so -called Christian believer. I'm sure you're very popular with all others. Well, I'm sure God can still use you to do His wonders.

But you got some parts correct. Church was the place you hear the Word of God until we could have access to the Bible physically. How irony of that coming from someone who thinks we don't need physical church anymore.

So..you are telling me that I am not Christian enough for you?  I can differentiate between my personal beliefs and the world value.  How do you speak to non-Christian about Christianity unless you can approach them in a manner and in a way that they understand and appreciate?  I guess you just ascribe to the hammer method.

Church does not require a physical location...it was not for the early Christian and it was not for Jesus.  Apostles actually separate to spread the Word of God rather than hunkering down in one place.  Jesus walked all over Israel to speak about God.  Early Christians met in their homes to fellowship and worship.   

There is nothing requiring that Christians have to congregate in an indoor building...certainly not during a time of a global pandemic.  The God I believe in can function just fine in this pandemic or any other situations/scenarios.

That's why I said God can use someone like you also to spread gospel. It's just a bit sad that a Christian person says The Bible is not the objective truth in defense of other religions. That's kind of like how Joel Osteen and many others do. Christians should present the gospel as is which does require calling out one's sins and repentance and the inerrancy of The Bible, then let God do the rest to regenerate that person. Of course we can still be friends and be nice and loving while we present all those messages at the same time. It's not like hammer in and out fast.

We've talked about church gathering before. I provided biblical verses to back my position, but I guess you went to Taiwan then and just didn't answer back.

I'm fine with church meeting at someone's home. Except that's not really allowed at this time. You said we can do so by just not calling it a church or worship, but come one, really? Why does strip clubs get to be boldly open without hiding anything while churches have to?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 01:38:04 PM

When did I dismiss your datas? 1 year to you is a long term. To me, not really. I've had allergy all this year. Is that a long term effects and should I lock myself down alone?

You ignored my question from other thread. So you think masks and distancing should be *mandatory* in the US? Meaning possible fines, beat ups (like some other country as IHO mentioned) or jail times?

1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

I don't remember watering anything down. I've been saying 0.1 or even 2 % is not something that should put everyone into mandatory curfews and close downs. Again, there is the objective matter. What we come to believe are subjective.

Again...you keep doing this thing where you believe that all terms are relative.  There are objective definitions for things like "long term", "chronic", and "permanent".  When scientists and researchers study effects...they use objective terms to define what they find.  An effect can be long-term but not permanent. 

Quote
A problem that is caused by a disease or treatment of a disease and may continue for months or years. Long-term side effects of cancer treatment include heart, lung, kidney, or gastrointestinal tract problems; pain, numbness, tingling, loss of feeling, or heat or cold sensitivity in the hands or feet; fatigue; hearing loss; cataracts; and dry eyes or dry mouth

https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/long-term-side-effect

I literally have no idea what you mean by your allergies. 

I have repeatedly answered your questions.  I do think masks and social distancing should be mandatory as a matter of law...enforcement and punishment for that mandatory restriction can vary.  Just like people drive 70 mph in a 65 mph is very different from someone driving 130.  Why does everything need to be black and white?

If you are fine with 1.7% mortality rate, that is certainly with in your right but there are plenty of others who are not.  People shouldn't get to flaunt orders and laws just because they do not agree with the risk level assigned.

Ok. So you think masks and distancing should be mandatory with law enforcement. I don't think so. There's our difference even though we both might be practicing these guidelines with or without enforcement.

I'm not saying 1.7% is nothing and fine. I'm saying 98.3% is a bigger number. Not by a little, but a A LOT. Logic.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 01:51:04 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Don’t wear a mask and find out. People say this and that on TI. But at the end you and someone else on TI wears a mask.

I just saw a video of a person had a condition after surviving covid. That person could not put his tongue back in his mouth due to covid. He had to see a specialist and over time his tongue came back to normal.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 01:51:20 PM

That's why I said God can use someone like you also to spread gospel. It's just a bit sad that a Christian person says The Bible is not the objective truth in defense of other religions. That's kind of like how Joel Osteen and many others do. Christians should present the gospel as is which does require calling out one's sins and repentance and the inerrancy of The Bible, then let God do the rest to regenerate that person. Of course we can still be friends and be nice and loving while we present all those messages at the same time. It's not like hammer in and out fast.

We've talked about church gathering before. I provided biblical verses to back my position, but I guess you went to Taiwan then and just didn't answer back.

I'm fine with church meeting at someone's home. Except that's not really allowed at this time. You said we can do so by just not calling it a church or worship, but come one, really? Why does strip clubs get to be boldly open without hiding anything while churches have to?

Again...you have a hard time separating your own beliefs from those of others or the world.  The term "objective" as used in the discussion was as to the objective standard of the world.  In God's world, there are no Muslims or non-believers...to have this discussion in the Christian bubble is pointless.  I have my own personal beliefs but that doesn't change the worldly "objective" standard of logic.   

Jesus didn't present the Bible in the fashion you stated most of the time...He spoke in parables and just helped people. You sound like the Pharisees who complained to Jesus about Him just hanging out and eating with non-believers.

Again...my God can thrive in any environment.  Zoom meetings are just as good for me as physical gathering because my faith and belief in God does not require any specific rules or requirements.  I am my own priest with a direct connection to Jesus and God. 

You also keep mischaracterizing my prior statements...you can call it whatever you want as long as it has fewer than 10 people.  Call it a dinner party...call it Church...call it worship.  The issue the number of people congregating...not the purpose.

We can go back and forth as to what the Bible says (and I have quoted you verses in the past) but only one of us actually look at what Jesus, Apostle, and Paul modeled in the New Testament.  They didn't congregate in a set place, they moved around all the time, and they were often separated from each other and/or alone.  Your need for rules and guidelines is pretty interesting considering you are arguing against rules and guidelines re COVID.

BTW...you keep missing the part about how the State of California was opposing the strip club in that case and the judge granted the relief sought by the strip club.  The matter is likely to be appealed and the appellate court will likely overturn it.

You also keep missing the part where the superior court actually granted Grace Church's initial request to reopen but then was overturned on appeal. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 01:53:16 PM

Ok. So you think masks and distancing should be mandatory with law enforcement. I don't think so. There's our difference even though we both might be practicing these guidelines with or without enforcement.

I'm not saying 1.7% is nothing and fine. I'm saying 98.3% is a bigger number. Not by a little, but a A LOT. Logic.

Problem is not you or me...it's the other people including the 14 states that had no mandates that keep the disease going and ruining it for the rest of us.   

It doesn't matter if I drive at the speed limit if a drunk driver hits me at 80 mph. 

That's not logic...that's subject risk tolerance.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 01:55:16 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Then why have any laws or regulations?   Are the laws against drunk driving really going to stop drunk driving...it's the behavior of drunk drivers that matters.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 01:57:30 PM
We are wasting time. They wear masks and pretend they do not.

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 02:02:45 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Don’t wear a mask and find out. People say this and that on TI. But at the end you and someone else on TI wears a mask.

I just saw a video of a person had a condition after surviving covid. That person could not put his tongue back in his mouth due to covid. He had to see a specialist and over time his tongue came back to normal.

There may very well be some long term effects of covid.  But I think we need to pump the brakes a little bit on trying to make everything covid related.  At the rate we are going we are going to attribute heart attacks, high cholesterol, diabetes, etc to covid. Is there a possibility that this person was going to have the tongue issue regardless of covid? Could it just be a coincidence?  Not trying to be dismissive of any long term effects but let’s just slow down and see if more tongue issues develop before we attribute tongue issues to covid.

Coming to a courthouse near you: I committed murder because covid made me do it
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 02:04:58 PM

There may very well be some long term effects of covid.  But I think we need to pump the brakes a little bit on trying to make everything covid related.  At the rate we are going we are going to attribute heart attacks, high cholesterol, diabetes, etc to covid. Is there a possibility that this person was going to have the tongue issue regardless of covid? Could it just be a coincidence?  Not trying to be dismissive of any long term effects but let’s just slow down and see if more tongue issues develop before we attribute tongue issues to covid.

Coming to a courthouse near you: I committed murder because covid made me do it

Considering that there is evidence that COVID caused long-term/permanent damage to organs like the brain, the lung, and heart, it's not that difficult to imagine. 

How much evidence is enough evidence?  That also has little to do with the impact COVID is having right now in both mortality and overwhelming of the health care system.

Why do you always run through this parade of horribles arguing style?  Society and governments make laws all the time without falling into the pit of horribles.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 02:07:19 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Don’t wear a mask and find out. People say this and that on TI. But at the end you and someone else on TI wears a mask.

I just saw a video of a person had a condition after surviving covid. That person could not put his tongue back in his mouth due to covid. He had to see a specialist and over time his tongue came back to normal.

There may very well be some long term effects of covid.  But I think we need to pump the brakes a little bit on trying to make everything covid related.  At the rate we are going we are going to attribute heart attacks, high cholesterol, diabetes, etc to covid. Is there a possibility that this person was going to have the tongue issue regardless of covid? Could it just be a coincidence?  Not trying to be dismissive of any long term effects but let’s just slow down and see if more tongue issues develop before we attribute tongue issues to covid.

Coming to a courthouse near you: I committed murder because covid made me do it

But you wear a mask. Take your mask off when you go outside.
A total anti Fake mask person. Lol
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 02:08:05 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Then why have any laws or regulations?   Are the laws against drunk driving really going to stop drunk driving...it's the behavior of drunk drivers that matters.

It’s about things that will make a difference. Its socializing that is the issue. My guess is that we could all go to the grocery store/Costco/target etc and there probably wouldn’t be much spread because you aren’t hanging out and talking to people. Have a mask regulation/rule/requirement while people socialize in their home at thanksgiving and Christmas isn’t going to make much of a difference. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 02:09:28 PM

It’s about things that will make a difference. Its socializing that is the issue. My guess is that we could all go to the grocery store/Costco/target etc and there probably wouldn’t be much spread because you aren’t hanging out and talking to people. Have a mask regulation/rule/requirement while people socialize in their home at thanksgiving and Christmas isn’t going to make much of a difference.

Again...the argument can be made as to any laws or regulation.  Why have them since people are just going to ignore them.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 02:10:22 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 02:12:16 PM
@ eyephone - I wear a mask at places that require it. If I’m outside I never wear a mask. Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 02:13:33 PM
We are wasting time. Both Mety and Qwerty wears masks.
It would be different if they did not wear a mask since February until now.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 24, 2020, 02:19:32 PM
@ eyephone - I wear a mask at places that require it. If I’m outside I never wear a mask. Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Would you go or wear a mask if you know someone there has tested COVID positive within the last 10 days?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 02:19:54 PM
Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Good luck man and hope you guys stay safe.

Notice how Kings isn't around anymore? :(
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 02:36:53 PM
@ eyephone - I wear a mask at places that require it. If I’m outside I never wear a mask. Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Would you go or wear a mask if you know someone there has tested COVID positive within the last 10 days?

No We wouldn’t go if we knew someone there actually had it. If given a preference I would rather not get covid. It’s the same reason I wouldn’t go into a house that’s on fire, but if the house catches on fire while I’m there then not much I can do. I’m not going to stop living my life because of covid. Perhaps that makes me ignorant and/or selfish but that is why every adult can choose what risk they are willing to take. Everyone is welcome to stay home if they wish. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 02:37:48 PM
@ eyephone - I wear a mask at places that require it. If I’m outside I never wear a mask. Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Would you go or wear a mask if you know someone there has tested COVID positive within the last 10 days?

No We wouldn’t go if we knew someone there actually had it. If given a preference I would rather not get covid. It’s the same reason I wouldn’t go into a house that’s on fire, but if the house catches on fire while I’m there then not much I can do. I’m not going to stop living my life because of covid. Perhaps that makes me ignorant and/or selfish but that is why every adult can choose what risk they are willing to take. Everyone is welcome to stay home if they wish.

Just sucks for society as a whole.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 02:40:20 PM
Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Good luck man and hope you guys stay safe.

Notice how Kings isn't around anymore? :(

You too IHO and everyone else as well!! Hope you get to enjoy some good food either by yourselves or however you choose to spend your thanksgiving!!
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 02:45:45 PM
I would avoid going to Costco between now and Thanksgiving. After the potential Thanksgiving rush then I would go.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 24, 2020, 02:56:16 PM
Quote
1.7% and 17% are very different and you know it. 1.7% is not something to sacrifice 98.3% IMHO.

So 1.7% dying is less important than expecting 98.3% to be washing their hands, wearing a masks in public temporarily and maintaining social distancing to limit effects and allow us keep businesses open?

Wearing a mask is so onerous that 1.7% dying is a fair trade off?



Are masks really going to address the issue? It’s the behavior of people who choose to go to bars, restaurants etc or even family gatherings, etc.

Not wearing masks and gathering in bars is part of the same me before society mindset.

With testing, proper contact tracing and an expectation that people take minimal steps, we could be in a much better place.  More businesses open, more people working. 

You do realize you made argument for bars to be closed.

Some number of people regardless of the efforts we make will die from covid.  With about 4 million active cases and likely another 4-8 million more undiagnosed out there, the reality is between do we hold it to 100,000 dead over the next six months?  Or do we roll with 1% dying of the 100,000,000 that easily could get it if we just roll?  A bad flu year 60,000,000 infections over the next four months, that's with vaccines. 100 Million is not hyperbole.

1,000,000 dead and another 3, 4 or maybe 5 million of more with permanent lung damage, brain damage, heart damage, blood clot amputated foot or leg etc.

A two week moratoriam on bars? Seems like a no brainer.  A month? Still acceptable.  Longer?  If needed but lets put in place business safety need, emergency laws to suspend rents if business if required to be closed.  Loan payments automatically deferred for pro perty owner until end of loan term until lockdown ends.  Of course,  longer is a bigger and that problem is cause by people not doing their part.

The more people don't do minimal the longer we have pressure to do more drastic restrictions to prevent the collapse of our medical network.

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 02:57:23 PM
I would avoid going to Costco between now and Thanksgiving. After the potential Thanksgiving rush then I would go.

But I'm trying to find TP!!!

It amazes me... you would think they would have fixed that supply chain by now.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 24, 2020, 02:59:59 PM
@ eyephone - I wear a mask at places that require it. If I’m outside I never wear a mask. Going to a thanksgiving with 15-20 people. No one will be wearing a mask.

Would you go or wear a mask if you know someone there has tested COVID positive within the last 10 days?

No We wouldn’t go if we knew someone there actually had it. If given a preference I would rather not get covid. It’s the same reason I wouldn’t go into a house that’s on fire, but if the house catches on fire while I’m there then not much I can do. I’m not going to stop living my life because of covid. Perhaps that makes me ignorant and/or selfish but that is why every adult can choose what risk they are willing to take. Everyone is welcome to stay home if they wish. 

Relax.  So defensive.  I'm only asking because you seem to tout the fact that you're not going to be wearing a mask at an indoor gathering of 15-20 people.  But you also wouldn't go if you knew someone there had COVID.  But since COVID isn't obvious and you really don't know who has it, I'm just curious how you reconcile that.  Because the house on fire analogy doesn't really work here.  If it caught on fire while you're there... you would leave. I'm just confused as to how that correlates to COVID.  You would leave mid bite if someone told you they had COVID?  That's good I guess.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 03:07:44 PM
@NSR - yeah I know I made the argument about closing bars, doesn’t mean I would agree with it.

I agree with you on the way the initial shutdown should have been handled or future shutdowns. If we wanted to minimize the economic harm of a shutdown the government/Fed should have just halted all payments due to banks and essentially press pause. Without hitting the pause button it created a bigger mismatch of cash coming in vs cash going out for people. The banks are are essentially supported by the Fed/govt anyway because they are too big to fail so they are pseudo nationalized entities anyway.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 03:15:11 PM
@bones - I wasn’t being defensive, didn’t mean to come across that way. Coming up with analogies isn’t a strength of mine, I don’t have many strengths :-)

If a dodger got pulled out of a World Series game due to a positive result, i could definitely walk out of dinner mid bite if someone got  notified of a positive test.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 03:18:51 PM
Yeah... but then he qwertied it and trotted back out onto the field, and took pictures with his teammates without his mask on which resulted in all of them getting quarantined.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 03:19:24 PM
@NSR - yeah I know I made the argument about closing bars, doesn’t mean I would agree with it.

I agree with you on the way the initial shutdown should have been handled or future shutdowns. If we wanted to minimize the economic harm of a shutdown the government/Fed should have just halted all payments due to banks and essentially press pause. Without hitting the pause button it created a bigger mismatch of cash coming in vs cash going out for people. The banks are are essentially supported by the Fed/govt anyway because they are too big to fail so they are pseudo nationalized entities anyway.

They could have just provide direct relief to individuals rather than propping up corporations that were already planning on cutting jobs.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 03:29:23 PM

That's why I said God can use someone like you also to spread gospel. It's just a bit sad that a Christian person says The Bible is not the objective truth in defense of other religions. That's kind of like how Joel Osteen and many others do. Christians should present the gospel as is which does require calling out one's sins and repentance and the inerrancy of The Bible, then let God do the rest to regenerate that person. Of course we can still be friends and be nice and loving while we present all those messages at the same time. It's not like hammer in and out fast.

We've talked about church gathering before. I provided biblical verses to back my position, but I guess you went to Taiwan then and just didn't answer back.

I'm fine with church meeting at someone's home. Except that's not really allowed at this time. You said we can do so by just not calling it a church or worship, but come one, really? Why does strip clubs get to be boldly open without hiding anything while churches have to?

Again...you have a hard time separating your own beliefs from those of others or the world.  The term "objective" as used in the discussion was as to the objective standard of the world.  In God's world, there are no Muslims or non-believers...to have this discussion in the Christian bubble is pointless.  I have my own personal beliefs but that doesn't change the worldly "objective" standard of logic.   

Jesus didn't present the Bible in the fashion you stated most of the time...He spoke in parables and just helped people. You sound like the Pharisees who complained to Jesus about Him just hanging out and eating with non-believers.

Again...my God can thrive in any environment.  Zoom meetings are just as good for me as physical gathering because my faith and belief in God does not require any specific rules or requirements.  I am my own priest with a direct connection to Jesus and God. 

You also keep mischaracterizing my prior statements...you can call it whatever you want as long as it has fewer than 10 people.  Call it a dinner party...call it Church...call it worship.  The issue the number of people congregating...not the purpose.

We can go back and forth as to what the Bible says (and I have quoted you verses in the past) but only one of us actually look at what Jesus, Apostle, and Paul modeled in the New Testament.  They didn't congregate in a set place, they moved around all the time, and they were often separated from each other and/or alone.  Your need for rules and guidelines is pretty interesting considering you are arguing against rules and guidelines re COVID.

BTW...you keep missing the part about how the State of California was opposing the strip club in that case and the judge granted the relief sought by the strip club.  The matter is likely to be appealed and the appellate court will likely overturn it.

You also keep missing the part where the superior court actually granted Grace Church's initial request to reopen but then was overturned on appeal.

You call it the Christian bubble. I call it the truth. If you really cared about others' souls as much as you cared about something that has 2% death rate, you definitely would not call it a bubble.

I told you about this before. Jesus clearly says why He used parables when His disciples asked him since His stories were hard to understand. Jesus' usage of parables was actually a judgment on Pharisees and those who didn't feel the need of Jesus' rebukes and teachings. It was a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy so that even with eyes and ears open, they could not understand the word of God in person. Jesus then explained what his parables meant to His disciples privately.

You keep calling me Pharisees. I'll call you something a little better. You're like Peter when he tried to separate himself from the uncircumcised when Jews were coming. Paul then rebuked Peter of his hypocrisy because Peter was doing that out of fear for Jews while he should have fearless preached his acceptance of even the uncircumcised. You are defending non-believers in offending believers by not saying The Bible is the truth objectively and by saying wrong things like Jesus mostly just helped people. Peter was sorted out by Paul and I'm sure he repented and came back right. I believe you also will.

I never said we had to meet in a set building to be Church. I only said we should not neglect the importance of gathering in person. And The Bible also says so. I only brought up questions since some things were being allowed and places of worship weren't.

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 03:39:01 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.


Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 03:56:50 PM
I would avoid going to Costco between now and Thanksgiving. After the potential Thanksgiving rush then I would go.

But I'm trying to find TP!!!

It amazes me... you would think they would have fixed that supply chain by now.

If you really need some, Home Depot has those. Secret exposed. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 24, 2020, 04:17:16 PM

You call it the Christian bubble. I call it the truth. If you really cared about others' souls as much as you cared about something that has 2% death rate, you definitely would not call it a bubble.

What?  I feel like I type A...you read B.  Christian bubble refers to how some Christians believe that the world all share in their beliefs and that there is no dispute in the world as to who God is or Christianity.  The world is of Satan...it does not believe in God.  That is a recognition of reality.

Quote
I told you about this before. Jesus clearly says why He used parables when His disciples asked him since His stories were hard to understand. Jesus' usage of parables was actually a judgment on Pharisees and those who didn't feel the need of Jesus' rebukes and teachings. It was a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy so that even with eyes and ears open, they could not understand the word of God in person. Jesus then explained what his parables meant to His disciples privately.


I know why Jesus spoke in parable.  His parables were not difficult to understand...they were just hard to decipher if you do not have right mindset.  Jesus did things for multiple reasons...a large part of why He spoke in parables was because they were accessible by the general masses, who had little or no religious learning. 

On the contrary, when He spoke to the Pharisees, He did so with reference to the Old Testaments and Jewish laws to rebuke them on their own grounds.  He did not do so with the general public.

Quote
You keep calling me Pharisees. I'll call you something a little better. You're like Peter when he tried to separate himself from the uncircumcised when Jews were coming. Paul then rebuked Peter of his hypocrisy because Peter was doing that out of fear for Jews while he should have fearless preached his acceptance of even the uncircumcised. You are defending non-believers in offending believers by not saying The Bible is the truth objectively and by saying wrong things like Jesus mostly just helped people. Peter was sorted out by Paul and I'm sure he repented and came back right. I believe you also will.

You still don't get it.  The term objective is with reference to the worldly standard.  I am not defending anyone...nor did I say that the Bible is not the truth.  I said that the Bible is not objectively true for non-believers and to try and bring others into the flock requires a lot more than "the Bible is true and therefore you should believe".

We are called to be the light and salt of the world but too much light and too salt can blind and cause people to turn away.  We are told to speak the truth but in love...acknowledging and engaging non-believers in a manner they understand and appreciate is not heretical...its what Jesus did.

Quote
I never said we had to meet in a set building to be Church. I only said we should not neglect the importance of gathering in person. And The Bible also says so. I only brought up questions since some things were being allowed and places of worship weren't.

No one is questioning the need to meet...but there is nothing requiring that we need to do so during this time.  Paul spent most of his life alone and in jail...I think he turned out fine spiritually.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 24, 2020, 04:41:43 PM
@bones - I wasn’t being defensive, didn’t mean to come across that way. Coming up with analogies isn’t a strength of mine, I don’t have many strengths :-)

If a dodger got pulled out of a World Series game due to a positive result, i could definitely walk out of dinner mid bite if someone got  notified of a positive test.

Calves!  But yea, like IHO said, don’t forget to go back for pie :)

I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind because we’re way past that but I do like to try to understand people’s motivations. I get trying to live your life but your logic still doesn’t quite make sense to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! Hope no one at your gathering is knowingly or unknowingly  covid positive.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 04:50:38 PM

You call it the Christian bubble. I call it the truth. If you really cared about others' souls as much as you cared about something that has 2% death rate, you definitely would not call it a bubble.

What?  I feel like I type A...you read B.  Christian bubble refers to how some Christians believe that the world all share in their beliefs and that there is no dispute in the world as to who God is or Christianity.  The world is of Satan...it does not believe in God.  That is a recognition of reality.

Quote
I told you about this before. Jesus clearly says why He used parables when His disciples asked him since His stories were hard to understand. Jesus' usage of parables was actually a judgment on Pharisees and those who didn't feel the need of Jesus' rebukes and teachings. It was a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy so that even with eyes and ears open, they could not understand the word of God in person. Jesus then explained what his parables meant to His disciples privately.


I know why Jesus spoke in parable.  His parables were not difficult to understand...they were just hard to decipher if you do not have right mindset.  Jesus did things for multiple reasons...a large part of why He spoke in parables was because they were accessible by the general masses, who had little or no religious learning. 

On the contrary, when He spoke to the Pharisees, He did so with reference to the Old Testaments and Jewish laws to rebuke them on their own grounds.  He did not do so with the general public.

Quote
You keep calling me Pharisees. I'll call you something a little better. You're like Peter when he tried to separate himself from the uncircumcised when Jews were coming. Paul then rebuked Peter of his hypocrisy because Peter was doing that out of fear for Jews while he should have fearless preached his acceptance of even the uncircumcised. You are defending non-believers in offending believers by not saying The Bible is the truth objectively and by saying wrong things like Jesus mostly just helped people. Peter was sorted out by Paul and I'm sure he repented and came back right. I believe you also will.

You still don't get it.  The term objective is with reference to the worldly standard.  I am not defending anyone...nor did I say that the Bible is not the truth.  I said that the Bible is not objectively true for non-believers and to try and bring others into the flock requires a lot more than "the Bible is true and therefore you should believe".

We are called to be the light and salt of the world but too much light and too salt can blind and cause people to turn away.  We are told to speak the truth but in love...acknowledging and engaging non-believers in a manner they understand and appreciate is not heretical...its what Jesus did.

Quote
I never said we had to meet in a set building to be Church. I only said we should not neglect the importance of gathering in person. And The Bible also says so. I only brought up questions since some things were being allowed and places of worship weren't.

No one is questioning the need to meet...but there is nothing requiring that we need to do so during this time.  Paul spent most of his life alone and in jail...I think he turned out fine spiritually.

I agree with the first part you wrote. The world is of Satan and it does not believe God. I'm glad you know and wrote here.

About the parables. You have to understand. Most people were very religious at the time. Meaning they all knew The Scripture pretty well. That was all there was for people. There was no entertainment like today to kill some time. People, especially Jews talked about God and His words. Of course the religious leaders were there to teach deeply with interpretations and etc, but most common people knew OT pretty well. Even the man who's been blind his whole life until Jesus healed was able to proclaim the correct doctrine to the religious leaders when he was being questioned by Pharisees. The Samaritan woman at the well showed her knowledge of the Scripture. The gentile woman at the table knew of where she stood when she talked about herself compared to dogs. Lazarus and his families were common folks. Even 12 disciples were very common folks, but still showed thorough knowledge of the Scriptures even before meeting with Christ. Therefore Jesus intentionally spoke in a language no one understood. Only the ones who were curious and wanted to know Him more came to ask.

However, there are times He did use stories (probably fictions) as a supporting illustration for better understanding like the prodigal son story. He used stories instead of parables for those. But the clear reason of His usage of parables was a judgment. What more fearful judgment than being able to hear the Son of God speaks and not being able to understand?

I never said proclaim gospel in a rude manner. We can still speak the truth and be kind and loving. Although some people might get angry at the truth since the world is of Satan's. But we still carry the responsibility to proclaim the gospel at all times. Of course with love. With love that is defined by The Bible. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 24, 2020, 05:02:29 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 06:17:16 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.

It is all good IHO. Btw - Mety wears a mask. He is not a true non masker.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 24, 2020, 07:03:12 PM
It boils down to personal responsibility.

Okay, okay, when I hear that statement in regard to Covid, it’s really no responsibility.  They say it’s personal responsibility but it’s always you stay home if you want, I will do what I want and refuse to acknowledge it’s impacts on the things I want.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on November 24, 2020, 07:20:29 PM
It boils down to personal responsibility.

Okay, okay, when I hear that statement in regard to Covid, it’s really no responsibility.  They say it’s personal responsibility but it’s always you stay home if you want, I will do what I want and refuse to acknowledge it’s impacts on the things I want.

We are repeating our previous history. Woodrow Wilson the US President got the 1918 flu and also played down the pandemic.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 09:16:47 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.

'Tis the time you could use a parable, perhaps? ;D

I know what you're saying. I'm just saying there follows a belief system with logic behind for everyone. You can't say "I follow logic, therefore I'm right." There cannot be such statement. At least for me... :P   
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 24, 2020, 09:18:17 PM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.

It is all good IHO. Btw - Mety wears a mask. He is not a true non masker.

You riight, I ain't no true non masker. I ain't someone like Gavin Newsom. ;D
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 24, 2020, 11:08:27 PM
I get trying to live your life but your logic still doesn’t quite make sense to me.

True genius is never fully appreciated in its time :-)

Happy thanksgiving to you as well!
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: StarmanMBA on November 25, 2020, 07:10:52 AM

I know what you're saying. I'm just saying there follows a belief system with logic behind for everyone. You can't say "I follow logic, therefore I'm right." There cannot be such statement. At least for me... :P

Leftists do this relentlessly: "I'm logical, I'm rational, I'm scientific, I'm smarter than you, so if you have the temerity to disagree with ME, you are :::sniff::: unbearably stupid and wrong."

In another thread, I posed a brain teaser which makes the point very elegantly and I think, convincingly, that even when people all have the same information which will provide a definite conclusion,  all of them cannot and will not arrive at that conclusion.  Some refute it even after it has been explained to them.  Emotions and pride often drive wrong-headed conclusions, such as tens of millions of Democrats cheering and voting for Joe Briben and Kamala Quid Blow Quo Ho.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 08:24:22 AM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.

'Tis the time you could use a parable, perhaps? ;D

I know what you're saying. I'm just saying there follows a belief system with logic behind for everyone. You can't say "I follow logic, therefore I'm right." There cannot be such statement. At least for me... :P

I did not say right or wrong. I just follow the data.

The virus can kill people, use safety protocols.

Simple.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 09:52:12 AM
@Mety:

There is still a disconnect. What you believe or choose is not the same as logic.

Let me make it easy.

Covid death rate is about 2%. That is the fact and logic.

eyephone then believes Trump messed up for that much of fatality. morekaos then believes Newsom is dumb by closing down everything with that small of a percentage.

Both eyephone and morekaos had no choice but to choose something to believe out of the logic.

You say you don't take either parties' views and stay only in logic. There is 2% death rate. You've been saying what should be and shouldn't be done based on that logic. You might not have chosen a particular party's take, but you have chosen something to believe after knowing the truth. So you can't say you're logical and not believe at the same time. You have no choice but to believe something from logic. They go hand in hand if you're a human with a thinking process.




Again, you are not making the connection.

You are using "believe"... but that's not what logic is about. You're mixing "logic" as a "belief system" rather than what is the actual facts and the logical outcome. Try to reform what you wrote in the context of actuals rather than opinions/beliefs.

I should stop trying to explain.

'Tis the time you could use a parable, perhaps? ;D

I know what you're saying. I'm just saying there follows a belief system with logic behind for everyone. You can't say "I follow logic, therefore I'm right." There cannot be such statement. At least for me... :P

I did not say right or wrong. I just follow the data.

The virus can kill people, use safety protocols.

Simple.

Ok, then you're saying you're open to admit you could be wrong. That's good to know. Thanks.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 10:03:57 AM
@bones - I wasn’t being defensive, didn’t mean to come across that way. Coming up with analogies isn’t a strength of mine, I don’t have many strengths :-)

If a dodger got pulled out of a World Series game due to a positive result, i could definitely walk out of dinner mid bite if someone got  notified of a positive test.

Calves!  But yea, like IHO said, don’t forget to go back for pie :)

I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind because we’re way past that but I do like to try to understand people’s motivations. I get trying to live your life but your logic still doesn’t quite make sense to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! Hope no one at your gathering is knowingly or unknowingly  covid positive.

This doesn't make sense to me either.

Covid can be asymptomatic and contagious... so if one of those 10-12 are infected but looks and feels fine you won't know you've been exposed for several hours until they call you a few days later and tell you. House was burning and you didn't even realize it.

This has happened to at least one person I know... they've gone to small family dinners and everyone seems fine but then one of them got Covid, infected their spouse and they have no idea where it came from.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 10:21:23 AM
Someone said kings isn't around anymore? What happened to him?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 10:26:18 AM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".

I think everyone agrees protecting public health is the right thing. It's just figuring out how much is the right amount of sacrificing on this matter.

BTW, have you ever thought about the possibility that the datas you're looking could be wrong? Not saying they are, but could happen and I think it did happen. Seems like you absolutely firmly believe what they put out. 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 10:30:29 AM
@bones - I wasn’t being defensive, didn’t mean to come across that way. Coming up with analogies isn’t a strength of mine, I don’t have many strengths :-)

If a dodger got pulled out of a World Series game due to a positive result, i could definitely walk out of dinner mid bite if someone got  notified of a positive test.

Calves!  But yea, like IHO said, don’t forget to go back for pie :)

I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind because we’re way past that but I do like to try to understand people’s motivations. I get trying to live your life but your logic still doesn’t quite make sense to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! Hope no one at your gathering is knowingly or unknowingly  covid positive.

This doesn't make sense to me either.

Covid can be asymptomatic and contagious... so if one of those 10-12 are infected but looks and feels fine you won't know you've been exposed for several hours until they call you a few days later and tell you. House was burning and you didn't even realize it.

This has happened to at least one person I know... they've gone to small family dinners and everyone seems fine but then one of them got Covid, infected their spouse and they have no idea where it came from.

Exactly. How do you know where they got it from? How do you know if it was from the family dinner? Obviously, if you're not feeling well, you should rest at home. Covid or not, that was the norm in our society. But if you're making people who are feeling great stay home, I think that's a little bit of a problem.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 10:38:52 AM
@bones - I wasn’t being defensive, didn’t mean to come across that way. Coming up with analogies isn’t a strength of mine, I don’t have many strengths :-)

If a dodger got pulled out of a World Series game due to a positive result, i could definitely walk out of dinner mid bite if someone got  notified of a positive test.

Calves!  But yea, like IHO said, don’t forget to go back for pie :)

I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind because we’re way past that but I do like to try to understand people’s motivations. I get trying to live your life but your logic still doesn’t quite make sense to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! Hope no one at your gathering is knowingly or unknowingly  covid positive.

This doesn't make sense to me either.

Covid can be asymptomatic and contagious... so if one of those 10-12 are infected but looks and feels fine you won't know you've been exposed for several hours until they call you a few days later and tell you. House was burning and you didn't even realize it.

This has happened to at least one person I know... they've gone to small family dinners and everyone seems fine but then one of them got Covid, infected their spouse and they have no idea where it came from.

Exactly. How do you know where they got it from? How do you know if it was from the family dinner?

That's the point... they don't... which is why you shouldn't put yourself in situations where you are at risk.

Quote
Obviously, if you're not feeling well, you should rest at home. Covid or not, that was the norm in our society. But if you're making people who are feeling great stay home, I think that's a little bit of a problem.

Are you not reading? Covid can be asymptomatic. So infected people feel fine and don't know they have it, and spread it to others who think they are healthy too. That's the problem with Covid vs other obviously symptomatic illnesses like the flu.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 10:43:19 AM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".

I think everyone agrees protecting public health is the right thing. It's just figuring out how much is the right amount of sacrificing on this matter.

BTW, have you ever thought about the possibility that the datas you're looking could be wrong? Not saying they are, but could happen and I think it did happen. Seems like you absolutely firmly believe what they put out. 

How does a Christian who "believes" in something he doesn't see, not "believe" in so many things that he does see?

So are you saying that the over 1.4m deaths around the world is just a media ploy? Sorry Mety... most of the time... up is up and down is down.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 25, 2020, 11:03:33 AM
I don't think anyone (or least I'm not) trying to make someone feel bad for not staying home.  I'm just trying to understand.  So qwerty has stated that he wears masks, believes they are somewhat effective (sorry I skim the forum so I'm not sure where you have landed on this issue but I think this is the case) and DOES NOT want to get COVID, then going to an indoor gathering with 15-20 people when cases are at an all time high isn't logical to me.  If he says, he doesn't care if he gets it, then ok, I get why he's going.  If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be laying super low for 10 days prior to said gathering, ok, cool, pretty low risk.  If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be tested NBA style every day prior to eating turkey together, logical decision.  Or even if he said, we know the risk, but we're going to wear masks and try to be 6 feet apart and keep the meal short/sweet/outdoors. But he's saying none of those things and his actions contradict what he's saying about COVID.

Sorry qwerty - you know I'm your number 1 fan. Just using you as an example because you volunteered your turkey day plans :)
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 25, 2020, 11:59:55 AM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".

I think everyone agrees protecting public health is the right thing. It's just figuring out how much is the right amount of sacrificing on this matter.

BTW, have you ever thought about the possibility that the datas you're looking could be wrong? Not saying they are, but could happen and I think it did happen. Seems like you absolutely firmly believe what they put out.

Are we going back to this argument again?  This is like dealing with Trump supporters on "election fraud"...."how do you know there wasn't fraud..."

Just stick with "I am okay with a 1.7% mortality rate and healthcare system on the brink of collapse" stance...at least it's understandable.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on November 25, 2020, 12:02:44 PM
I have come to the conclusion that people are trying to pretend that COVID is not really COVID...it's like the flu or the common cold. 

"ALL WE NEED TO DO IS QUARANTINE ALL THE OLD PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WHO ARE SICK!"

Anyone who has small children knows that even the flu is spread without symptoms...
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 25, 2020, 01:22:38 PM
@bones - it’s just a balance of trying to be normal while minimizing the risk of catching covid. I definitely don’t want to get it but if I do then so be it. I would say my risk tolerance is higher than than average when it comes to covid. My kids have been in school since the summer, we were going to the pool, we have done play dates with other kids in the neighborhood whose parents also generally share our same risk tolerances.  My kids have gone to public parks, are in sports, etc. 

Wearing a mask takes little effort, not the most comfortable but I’m generally in a store for 5-30 minutes so not too bad. I couldn’t get in to the store without a mask so I don’t have a choice. If I’m outside I never wear a mask but i respect others and always keep my distance, this minimizes my chance of catching anything as well. To me whatever effort I put into not getting covid is pretty minor. However, because I don’t want to get covid doesn’t mean I’m just going to stay home.

I try to minimize risk within reason, not eliminate it at all cost. Is going to a a thanksgiving dinner higher risk than staying home, sure it is. Some of you may view that as illogical and it is but living life isn’t all about logic. If everything we did was based on logic life we be pretty boring. The people that will be there I guess would be considered lower risk (if we were ranking them).

And in general, if I do get covid I like my chances with a 98–99% survival rate. Trying to apply logic here :-)
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 25, 2020, 02:55:59 PM
Q: Stay safe and don't disappear on us!  IHO and I would be very sad.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 02:57:38 PM
Obviously, if you're not feeling well, you should rest at home. Covid or not, that was the norm in our society. But if you're making people who are feeling great stay home, I think that's a little bit of a problem.

Are you not reading? Covid can be asymptomatic. So infected people feel fine and don't know they have it, and spread it to others who think they are healthy too. That's the problem with Covid vs other obviously symptomatic illnesses like the flu.

Well, IC just said here "even the flu is spread without symptoms" so I don't know if that makes Covid special any more...

Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 03:07:06 PM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".

I think everyone agrees protecting public health is the right thing. It's just figuring out how much is the right amount of sacrificing on this matter.

BTW, have you ever thought about the possibility that the datas you're looking could be wrong? Not saying they are, but could happen and I think it did happen. Seems like you absolutely firmly believe what they put out. 

How does a Christian who "believes" in something he doesn't see, not "believe" in so many things that he does see?

So are you saying that the over 1.4m deaths around the world is just a media ploy? Sorry Mety... most of the time... up is up and down is down.

Hmm... not sure why you're overblowing this, but I was simply asking have you ever thought that might be possible. I guess you're saying, "No."

If you're a real Christian, you see so many things to support your belief. You can see God's creation all around you. You can see Christian brothers and sisters devoting themselves in loving one another selflessly. You can see Christians' joyful triumphant even in the midst of difficult times like this pandemic. Also you can see yourself and your life completely being guided by His will. If you don't *see* those, I don't know what evidences you're having your faith with.

No, I don't see as many evidences to firmly believe these "datas" you're talking about compare to my Christian belief.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 03:09:26 PM
If you think protecting public health is wrong... that's your "belief".

I think everyone agrees protecting public health is the right thing. It's just figuring out how much is the right amount of sacrificing on this matter.

BTW, have you ever thought about the possibility that the datas you're looking could be wrong? Not saying they are, but could happen and I think it did happen. Seems like you absolutely firmly believe what they put out.

Are we going back to this argument again?  This is like dealing with Trump supporters on "election fraud"...."how do you know there wasn't fraud..."

Just stick with "I am okay with a 1.7% mortality rate and healthcare system on the brink of collapse" stance...at least it's understandable.

You keep being an advocate for IHO. Good to see you guys help each other. :D

I will say a little different than how you're saying - I'm not ok with 98.3% sacrificing rate.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 03:17:12 PM
I have come to the conclusion that people are trying to pretend that COVID is not really COVID...it's like the flu or the common cold. 

"ALL WE NEED TO DO IS QUARANTINE ALL THE OLD PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WHO ARE SICK!"

Anyone who has small children knows that even the flu is spread without symptoms...

Thanks for saying that statement. I've made it bold for everyone can see.

I don't know if you were referring to me on this post, but let me say how I think of this current situation so far. I'm sure I might have to say this over and over, but here we go.

I believe Covid is very real.
I also believe the numbers are skewed.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 03:20:24 PM
@Mety: What evidence do you have to come to the conclusion that the numbers are skewed. And which numbers are you referring to?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 04:07:50 PM
@Mety: What evidence do you have to come to the conclusion that the numbers are skewed. And which numbers are you referring to?

Covid infection and death rates we have in public are very unreliable. I'm sure none of you believe the public rates they put out in China or N. Korea. Sure, the US might have better accurate numbers overall in anything, but strange things pop up time to time. Couple things to point.

1. The test kits are known to be very unreliable since they keep giving different results.

2. CDC once said only 6% of Covid death numbers they have in public were "solely" from Covid based on the death certificates.

3. Hospitals run Covid test when you're admitted even if you're not a Covid patient. With unreliable test results and marking patient as Covid patient/death by default in case of positive, which BTW might come out negative next day, the numbers would not be 100% accurate overall.

4. Pre-existing condition patients are being marked as a Covid patient even if the other condition was more severe.

5. Many public figures who had Covid survive fine no matter what they support politically. Many say they had no or a little symptoms, some say they felt real bad couple days, but many other diseases also give real bad experiences.

6. Not sure if it's just me, but you guys don't feel like you're being controlled somehow? Sure, this is more of a personal feeling rather than evidence, but I somehow feel like this whole world is being tested in some sort of a way. Call me crazy 8)

7. Even if all of the above weren't the issue, we still have the public number about 2% death rate. That IMHO is not something to sacrifice 98% of the population. People say other countries are doing much better than this country. So are they sacrificing like 99% of the population then? What's going on in this world?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 25, 2020, 04:38:05 PM
I don't think anyone (or least I'm not) trying to make someone feel bad for not staying home.  I'm just trying to understand.  So qwerty has stated that he wears masks, believes they are somewhat effective (sorry I skim the forum so I'm not sure where you have landed on this issue but I think this is the case) and DOES NOT want to get COVID, then going to an indoor gathering with 15-20 people when cases are at an all time high isn't logical to me.  If he says, he doesn't care if he gets it, then ok, I get why he's going.  If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be laying super low for 10 days prior to said gathering, ok, cool, pretty low risk.  If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be tested NBA style every day prior to eating turkey together, logical decision.  Or even if he said, we know the risk, but we're going to wear masks and try to be 6 feet apart and keep the meal short/sweet/outdoors. But he's saying none of those things and his actions contradict what he's saying about COVID.

Sorry qwerty - you know I'm your number 1 fan. Just using you as an example because you volunteered your turkey day plans :)

But what is the real exposure risk?  Public health impacts of lots of people gathering is very different than individual family outcomes,

If they are OC centric and it basically three families, the risk really is minimal.  He has  1/3 rd exposure already in his own family.

Our 14 day case count is 8800 according to the State dashboard.  If you assume 2 additional undiagnosed for every diagnosed, we are at 26,400.  Of those, how many of the 8800 are sick and know it, how many of the 17,600 asymptomatic are no longer infectious very peak infectivity  How infectious is a day 14 non-symptomatic person? 

Hypothetically maybe 20,000 infective walking around. That’s out of 3.2 million. That’s 0.006, at 8 non family people that’s 5%.  That, IMO, seems like a very high approximation of upper bound on risk.  I suspect the risk closer to 1%, given the way families separate duties for exposing themselves to the grocery stores etc. 

The risk profile is also lower, IMO, if all of their approaches are similar and not restaurant dining in,  going to stores to browse shop versus get in, get out, maskers versus chin diaperer,  etc.

Then if you are exposed, if they otherwise healthy 40-somethings, 2/3rds of the sick will be asymptomatic without noticeable impacts.  Of the remaining 1/3rd, that are symptomatic, for 40-49 yo, their survivability is 99.6% (5770 deaths/ 1402000 cases)

So we are looking at 1-5% exposure risk, 33% noticeably infected, with a 99.6% survivability.  That cranks out to a 0.007% risk of death for him, spouse and the kids are way less..

From a public health standpoint it is very different, that gathering represents 7% chance that 12 people have close contact and subsequent infection.

False confidence maybe, but if they are doing basic precautions what is the risk of a relatively small twelve person gathering.

JIMHO, local family gatherings are different than people traveling 100s or thousands of miles. 12/15 is very different than 30+. 

Besides I drove by The district this afternoon, JIMHO, Q’s gathering isn’t going blow up our numbers, that District crowd will.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: bones on November 25, 2020, 04:44:29 PM
I don’t know. He just told me it’s like being in a burning building. Shrug.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: icey on November 25, 2020, 06:03:34 PM
The death rate is only part of the story. It also doesn't talk about people who have recovered and have sustained irreversible damage to their lungs, along with other organs. There's all kinds of blood clotting and inflammation issues that come with the disease and we still don't fully understand the long term damage.

Stay safe out there people.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 25, 2020, 07:23:21 PM
@Mety: What evidence do you have to come to the conclusion that the numbers are skewed. And which numbers are you referring to?

Covid infection and death rates we have in public are very unreliable. I'm sure none of you believe the public rates they put out in China or N. Korea. Sure, the US might have better accurate numbers overall in anything, but strange things pop up time to time. Couple things to point.

1. The test kits are known to be very unreliable since they keep giving different results.

2. CDC once said only 6% of Covid death numbers they have in public were "solely" from Covid based on the death certificates.

Every naysayer likes to point out this CDC statement. I suggest you go back and re-read what it actually says.

Let me help you out:

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/cdc-did-not-admit-only-6-of-recorded-deaths-from-covid-19/

Quote
3. Hospitals run Covid test when you're admitted even if you're not a Covid patient. With unreliable test results and marking patient as Covid patient/death by default in case of positive, which BTW might come out negative next day, the numbers would not be 100% accurate overall.

4. Pre-existing condition patients are being marked as a Covid patient even if the other condition was more severe.

You know all this as a fact? Sounds like voter fraud. Again, check your facts.

Quote
5. Many public figures who had Covid survive fine no matter what they support politically. Many say they had no or a little symptoms, some say they felt real bad couple days, but many other diseases also give real bad experiences.

Are you sure? More than a few public figures have died from Covid. Are you seeing a trend to my responses?

Quote
6. Not sure if it's just me, but you guys don't feel like you're being controlled somehow? Sure, this is more of a personal feeling rather than evidence, but I somehow feel like this whole world is being tested in some sort of a way. Call me crazy 8)

I think there is something off, sounds very conspiracy theory-like. Especially when you started saying that public health mandates are persecution of churches.

Quote
7. Even if all of the above weren't the issue, we still have the public number about 2% death rate. That IMHO is not something to sacrifice 98% of the population. People say other countries are doing much better than this country. So are they sacrificing like 99% of the population then? What's going on in this world?

How is 98% being sacrificed? You do realize that 2% could be much higher if we don't continue to observe certain safety measures/protocols. Do you also not get "flattening the curve" like qwerty?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 25, 2020, 09:57:32 PM
@IHO,

The article you linked about CDC talks about how it could be misleading since Trump tweeted in such way. It’s not denying about the 6%. It says,

“That means that 6% of those who died with COVID-19 through Aug. 15 didn’t have any other reported conditions.”

BTW just to clarify, I wasn’t saying 6% is the real number. I’m saying how we would never know the real number since you were asking why I think the numbers are skewed.

Have you got nothing to say about the unreliable testing kits? That’s the main issue I labeled since we’re all depending on that result.

You’re free to think however you want to think. It all comes down to what you end up believing. Of course you’ll say you’re just following logic.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 26, 2020, 08:17:01 AM
Mety, that is known as the fallacy of perfection.

The CDC clarified that 6% number reiterating that covid tends to cause lots of issues in the body, those issues get noted if present at time of death which is why covid being listed solely isn’t the gotcha people want it to be.

Here’s the CDC excess deaths report January to September 2020.  It is 299,000 deaths above the average expected deaths. A lot of those are tagged covid, quite few, are not.  Either way, it basically is 100,000 excess deaths every three months.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6942e2-H.pdf
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 26, 2020, 08:21:15 AM
@iho - get your facts straight. The 2% would not be higher. Perhaps the overall death count but not the 2%. Get your logic straight!!! :-)

Happy thanksgiving!!
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 26, 2020, 10:43:50 AM
@IHO,

The article you linked about CDC talks about how it could be misleading since Trump tweeted in such way. It’s not denying about the 6%. It says,

“That means that 6% of those who died with COVID-19 through Aug. 15 didn’t have any other reported conditions.”

BTW just to clarify, I wasn’t saying 6% is the real number. I’m saying how we would never know the real number since you were asking why I think the numbers are skewed.

You still didn't read the whole article. That 6% number is not what you are saying it is. Here, let me post the relevant portion for you:

Quote
The following morning, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, clarified what the CDC data mean.

He noted that the 6% figure includes cases where COVID-19 was listed as the only cause of death. “That does not mean that someone who has hypertension or diabetes who dies of Covid didn’t die of Covid-19. They did,” Fauci said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

“So the numbers you’ve been hearing — the 180,000-plus deaths — are real deaths from Covid-19. Let [there] not be any confusion about that,” Fauci said.


I think what you call "believe" is really only "see what you want to see regardless of the facts (or logic)".

Quote
Have you got nothing to say about the unreliable testing kits? That’s the main issue I labeled since we’re all depending on that result.

That's why I asked which numbers. I've already explained multiple times that number of cases, percentages, etc will always be a moving, inexact target, you need to look at positivity rate and actual number of deaths (which you don't "believe").

Quote
You’re free to think however you want to think. It all comes down to what you end up believing.

Yes, this seems to be your own philosophy and disconnect here.

Quote
Of course you’ll say you’re just following logic.

Of course you still don't understand what my definition of logic is.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 26, 2020, 10:45:15 AM
@iho - get your facts straight. The 2% would not be higher. Perhaps the overall death count but not the 2%. Get your logic straight!!! :-)

Wow... you still don't understand flattening the curve? I thought you were attend Zoom math with your daughter?

Quote
Happy thanksgiving!!

You too... but please watch out for any signs of fire. :)
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 26, 2020, 10:54:11 AM
@IHO,

You’re still missing my point. The point is numbers are inaccurate. I also said even if it was accurate and all, 2% still doesn’t justify 98% of people being restricted. We’re circling the same thing over and over.

Anyways... Happy Thanksgiving! Hope you feel true thanksgiving of having Jesus as your Lord regardless of what circumstances or arguments we may have.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 26, 2020, 03:07:51 PM
Mety, that is known as the fallacy of perfection.

The CDC clarified that 6% number reiterating that covid tends to cause lots of issues in the body, those issues get noted if present at time of death which is why covid being listed solely isn’t the gotcha people want it to be.

Here’s the CDC excess deaths report January to September 2020.  It is 299,000 deaths above the average expected deaths. A lot of those are tagged covid, quite few, are not.  Either way, it basically is 100,000 excess deaths every three months.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6942e2-H.pdf

Exactly. We don't know the real number and we never will probably. I do agree that Covid is giving people more health issues and even more deaths. I'm not saying Covid isn't real. I'm just arguing we're all looking at flawed datas after all. You along with many, maybe most, will say the numbers aren't too off, saying that's the fact and logic. A few and I are saying it's something we can't really trust. Either way, I support being careful so wash your hands, wear your masks and try to come not to close to others unless you really have to. I just don't see closing down and all that much restrictions are really necessary though.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: qwerty on November 26, 2020, 03:30:55 PM
From USA Today:

“CDC report: US misses 8 COVID cases for every 1 counted

The United States is still severely undercounting the number of COVID-19 cases it has across its population, a new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report says. The CDC calculated that about 53 million Americans had been infected by the end of September, eight times below the confirmed cases at the time.

A previous CDC report had estimated the U.S. was undercounting cases by 10 times the amount. Of the 53 million estimated infections, the CDC says about 45 million were sick at some point and about 2.4 million were hospitalized.”

So if I’m doing the math right, 263,000 deaths divided by 53,000,000 that would put the death rate just a bit under half of one percent (.0049). Math is math!!
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: nosuchreality on November 26, 2020, 04:50:32 PM
From USA Today:

“CDC report: US misses 8 COVID cases for every 1 counted

The United States is still severely undercounting the number of COVID-19 cases it has across its population, a new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report says. The CDC calculated that about 53 million Americans had been infected by the end of September, eight times below the confirmed cases at the time.

A previous CDC report had estimated the U.S. was undercounting cases by 10 times the amount. Of the 53 million estimated infections, the CDC says about 45 million were sick at some point and about 2.4 million were hospitalized.”

So if I’m doing the math right, 263,000 deaths divided by 53,000,000 that would put the death rate just a bit under half of one percent (.0049). Math is math!!


Honestly that would be wonderful.

Unfortunately, I can find many sites touting the same headline but not a single one linking the CDC report.  I know earlier in June the CDC reported 10x over, but that was in specific regional areas.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 26, 2020, 05:23:10 PM
@IHO,

You’re still missing my point. The point is numbers are inaccurate.

Your point is inaccurate. I've already told you which numbers will be ambiguous. You pointed out a single number from the CDC but your reading of that number was also inaccurate.

Quote
I also said even if it was accurate and all, 2% still doesn’t justify 98% of people being restricted. We’re circling the same thing over and over.

What percentage does? Every death is either a parent, sibling or child of someone. And again, how are the 98% being "restricted"? The reason you keep circling is because you can never support your statements so then you try to obfuscate and pivot somewhere else. Just like with voter fraud, have you found that evidence yet? What about how the lockdown is a persecution of churches? Or now your latest, that we are somehow being "controlled".

I should have stopped when I said I would.

Quote
Anyways... Happy Thanksgiving! Hope you feel true thanksgiving of having Jesus as your Lord regardless of what circumstances or arguments we may have.

Same to you.... and you should consider the same so you don't keep thinking that this is all a conspiracy.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 26, 2020, 08:18:22 PM
@IHO,
If that’s all you can get out from what I’m saying then I guess that is all you’ll get.

Conspiracy or not, God is in control so I’m thankful. I’m just sharing what my thoughts are, but some of you just can’t handle them or think of them as illogical.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: irvinehomeowner on November 26, 2020, 09:36:23 PM
@IHO,
If that’s all you can get out from what I’m saying then I guess that is all you’ll get.

Conspiracy or not, God is in control so I’m thankful. I’m just sharing what my thoughts are, but some of you just can’t handle them or think of them as illogical.

If God is in control, why are you thinking there is some conspiracy, persecution or skewing of numbers?

Your posts are so contradictory, confusing and unsupported that it's very difficult to have meaningful discourse with you.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 27, 2020, 09:11:42 AM
@IHO,
If that’s all you can get out from what I’m saying then I guess that is all you’ll get.

Conspiracy or not, God is in control so I’m thankful. I’m just sharing what my thoughts are, but some of you just can’t handle them or think of them as illogical.

If God is in control, why are you thinking there is some conspiracy, persecution or skewing of numbers?

Your posts are so contradictory, confusing and unsupported that it's very difficult to have meaningful discourse with you.

This world is of Satan as Irvinecommuter mentioned. Whether they acknowledge or not, this world operates under Satan's dominion as God is allowing that for a set time. That's the basic principal of Christianity which should have been taught in churches anyways. Therefore, persecutions, conspiracy against good, and lies are all common practices in this world. The US had a blessing of having those probably a little less than some others overall, but it's just a matter of time for Satanic dominion to take over as it's been happening already subtly and surely. So times like this is certainly good testing times for faithful people. Instead of just believing whatever we are told whether by the government or the certified officials, I think it's wise to think twice about accepting those. Of course we can still practice "safety protocols" at the same time and obey the authorities instead of totally ignoring them.

Even with Satanic dominion taking over, God still is over all these and He is in His divine providence as that should have been taught in churches as well. That's why even in the midst of difficult times, we the believers can have confidence of His good guidance for us. To live or to die, our lives are for Christ. Even the death is not the end for the believers so there is nothing to worry about but stay thankful.

However, we're not to ignore what's going on around the world. We should know and test what's given to us. Things like datas you're talking about, media news, rumors, and even the religious authorities are some of those. So we need to be careful of accepting what's known as "facts" and still be mindful of others by practicing safety protocols. But most importantly sharing the real fact, the real truth, gospel is our responsibility especially in times like this. 

Hope all these don't make you even more confused. ;D
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: icey on November 27, 2020, 05:56:10 PM


12 If a ruler listens to lies,
    all his officials become wicked.

16 When the wicked thrive, so does sin,
    but the righteous will see their downfall.

27 The righteous detest the dishonest;
    the wicked detest the upright.

Proverbs 29
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: icey on November 27, 2020, 06:09:16 PM
TLDR; Listen to the experts instead of being a rebel against the truth

Romans 13:1, NLT Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 27, 2020, 06:57:48 PM
@icey,

That’s exactly what I’m saying though. I clearly stated we should obey the authority instead of ignoring them. That’s why we should practice safety guidelines even if we might not completely agree. To agree or believe what the “experts” are putting out in public is a total different subject.

As I’ve been saying, I follow all safety guidelines, but I don’t just accept those datas as facts... yet. And as some others brought up, there are all different kinds of datas these days. Are we just to believe the most popular one? Also if you are all about submitting to the governing authorities, have you been submitted to Trump’s administration?
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: icey on November 27, 2020, 09:46:04 PM
There’s a few different forces at work here. The Proverbs passages I posted made me think mostly about Trump and ironically even has a passage in it about frivolous court cases. I didn’t post the whole thing. The Constitution says I have to accept his rule whether I like it or not, so that’s what I do. My loyalty is to the Constitution, not him.

On the other hand, you have apolitical career civil servants who are subject matter experts in their field, and we should listen to their guidance. Dr. Fauci being the most famous and a shame the crisis had to turn political when it should have been dealt with at a different level.

As Americans it’s our job to question our government, but once you dig into the political attacks, it’s easy to see where the disinformation is coming from.  It’s despicable Fauci had had to deal with death threats.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Mety on November 27, 2020, 10:11:39 PM
There’s a few different forces at work here. The Proverbs passages I posted made me think mostly about Trump and ironically even has a passage in it about frivolous court cases. I didn’t post the whole thing. The Constitution says I have to accept his rule whether I like it or not, so that’s what I do. My loyalty is to the Constitution, not him.

On the other hand, you have apolitical career civil servants who are subject matter experts in their field, and we should listen to their guidance. Dr. Fauci being the most famous and a shame the crisis had to turn political when it should have been dealt with at a different level.

As Americans it’s our job to question our government, but once you dig into the political attacks, it’s easy to see where the disinformation is coming from.  It’s despicable Fauci had had to deal with death threats.

I knew your Proverbs verses were referring to Trump. Ironically, you also quoted Romans verse saying Christians are to submit to the governing authorities. Paul was writing that in the midst of Roman authorities and Jewish leaders were persecuting Christians, saying even those people are there positioned by God's divine providence. Obama, Trump, Biden, whoever becomes the President, they're there by God's providence and Christians' job is to submit, not to rebel. Of course, while we still submit, we do not obey laws and orders that are contrary to God's. If you're saying you're loyal to the governing authority whoever is the President, then you're doing the right thing as a Christian.

However, my questions are not about politics. My questions are originally about accepting datas and public information from people like Dr. Fauci and experts. Sure those people are the most famous indeed. But to me that doesn't give much credit of believing whatever they say. I actually think those people could be even more dangerous since most people are willing to accept whatever they say.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on December 09, 2020, 05:18:31 PM
There’s a few different forces at work here. The Proverbs passages I posted made me think mostly about Trump and ironically even has a passage in it about frivolous court cases. I didn’t post the whole thing. The Constitution says I have to accept his rule whether I like it or not, so that’s what I do. My loyalty is to the Constitution, not him.

On the other hand, you have apolitical career civil servants who are subject matter experts in their field, and we should listen to their guidance. Dr. Fauci being the most famous and a shame the crisis had to turn political when it should have been dealt with at a different level.

As Americans it’s our job to question our government, but once you dig into the political attacks, it’s easy to see where the disinformation is coming from.  It’s despicable Fauci had had to deal with death threats.

I knew your Proverbs verses were referring to Trump. Ironically, you also quoted Romans verse saying Christians are to submit to the governing authorities. Paul was writing that in the midst of Roman authorities and Jewish leaders were persecuting Christians, saying even those people are there positioned by God's divine providence. Obama, Trump, Biden, whoever becomes the President, they're there by God's providence and Christians' job is to submit, not to rebel. Of course, while we still submit, we do not obey laws and orders that are contrary to God's. If you're saying you're loyal to the governing authority whoever is the President, then you're doing the right thing as a Christian.

However, my questions are not about politics. My questions are originally about accepting datas and public information from people like Dr. Fauci and experts. Sure those people are the most famous indeed. But to me that doesn't give much credit of believing whatever they say. I actually think those people could be even more dangerous since most people are willing to accept whatever they say.

Then what does give someone credibility..if not someone who spent their entire life studying a subject? 

How does one make risk analysis about activities?  If your doctors tell you that you have cancer...do you go "these guys don't know what they are talking about?"
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on December 09, 2020, 05:19:53 PM
@IHO,
If that’s all you can get out from what I’m saying then I guess that is all you’ll get.

Conspiracy or not, God is in control so I’m thankful. I’m just sharing what my thoughts are, but some of you just can’t handle them or think of them as illogical.

If God is in control, why are you thinking there is some conspiracy, persecution or skewing of numbers?

Your posts are so contradictory, confusing and unsupported that it's very difficult to have meaningful discourse with you.

This world is of Satan as Irvinecommuter mentioned. Whether they acknowledge or not, this world operates under Satan's dominion as God is allowing that for a set time. That's the basic principal of Christianity which should have been taught in churches anyways. Therefore, persecutions, conspiracy against good, and lies are all common practices in this world. The US had a blessing of having those probably a little less than some others overall, but it's just a matter of time for Satanic dominion to take over as it's been happening already subtly and surely. So times like this is certainly good testing times for faithful people. Instead of just believing whatever we are told whether by the government or the certified officials, I think it's wise to think twice about accepting those. Of course we can still practice "safety protocols" at the same time and obey the authorities instead of totally ignoring them.

Even with Satanic dominion taking over, God still is over all these and He is in His divine providence as that should have been taught in churches as well. That's why even in the midst of difficult times, we the believers can have confidence of His good guidance for us. To live or to die, our lives are for Christ. Even the death is not the end for the believers so there is nothing to worry about but stay thankful.

However, we're not to ignore what's going on around the world. We should know and test what's given to us. Things like datas you're talking about, media news, rumors, and even the religious authorities are some of those. So we need to be careful of accepting what's known as "facts" and still be mindful of others by practicing safety protocols. But most importantly sharing the real fact, the real truth, gospel is our responsibility especially in times like this. 

Hope all these don't make you even more confused. ;D

So basically you are saying that there are no absolutely facts and one should just make the determination what is real or what is not based upon one's own views on "reality"? 
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: eyephone on December 09, 2020, 05:20:23 PM
Alternative facts? ;)
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: Irvinecommuter on December 09, 2020, 05:21:17 PM
Alternative facts? ;)

There are no facts...it's apparently all subjective because I mean...who knows which facts are from Satan and which ones are from God.
Title: Re: 99% Survival rate
Post by: StarmanMBA on December 16, 2020, 05:41:27 PM

I would love to see the "science" that are being denied by the "left"

No you wouldn't.  You would only deny it and claim intellectual superiority. 

Distinguished pediatricians say schools and universities should be reopened immediately. 

Distinguished physician groups say masks are useless and separation is worthless.  They want businesses opened NOW, but all you care about is the politics and the posturing.   

Dying WITH Covid is very different than dying FROM Covid.  A large Danish study proves masks are worthless, but you don't care about science. And on and on.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal