How society will positively advance

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > How society will positively advance > Page 2

Page 2 of 3

20-04-2020 02:01
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	Oh, that was a good one James. Some folks do say just the opposite no matter what.
20-04-2020 17:12
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:...New York State Department of Health ...4/9/20 - 4/15/20, NYS saw about 8,900 new "confirmed" cases per day over that time period. That amounts to a very insignificant infection rate. That's your own assessment of a flu infection rate? Yes. 8,900 "confirmed" cases per day in NYS is a rather insignificant infection rate. That's not even 1% a day... not even 0.5% a day... not even 0.25% a day... not even 0.125% a day... not even 0.0625% a day... However, as antibody tests have been showing, it seems that MANY more people have already been exposed to the virus than what was previously thought. This means that the "confirmed cases" number is severely understated, which means that the "death rate" number is severely overstated. In simple terms, this flu isn't any worse than the common flus that go around annually. tmiddles wrote: I presume you're comparing that number to the entire state of New York in years when no mitigation steps have been taken (social distancing, shut down and so on) or that you think the mitigation steps have had little to no effect? I'm not comparing it to anything. The "mitigation" steps HAVE had little to no effect. tmiddles wrote: Of course people don't get tested for regular flu strains unless they are very sick so we don't have a basis for comparison on that. Same with this flu strain. tmiddles wrote: I think deaths are the only number that is going to be counted accurately for Covid-19 and other flu deaths. Deaths AREN'T being counted accurately though, or even in a consistent manner for that matter. New York is now adding "probable" "virus victims" to their death tolls to further inflate the death numbers. Michigan is also doing this. I haven't looked into what other States are doing, but wouldn't be surprised if plenty of other States are doing this too. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:....12,192 "fatalities". Using 20 million as the NYS population number,...Those are rather insignificant numbers. So your logic is that you take the impact and divide by the total population. If it's a small % then it is insignificant. So by that logic 911 was completely insignificant, ... if speaking of the percentage of people who died, then yes. tmiddles wrote: toddlers with revolvers are a far far greater threat than Al Queda Please elaborate upon "toddlers with revolvers" as well as "far far greater threat". What are you even asserting? tmiddles wrote: and hot dogs are more dangerous than machine guns. Please elaborate upon "more dangerous". What are you even asserting? tmiddles wrote: Of course the crux of our not seeing eye to eye on this is your presumption that had we not taken such dramatic action to slow Covid-19 everything would also qualify as "mild" in your estimation. We have not "slowed" COVID-19. Calling COVID-19 "mild" is not calling everything "mild". tmiddles wrote: BUT you didn't say the Covid-19 was "mild" generically you said it was "mild" as a flu which is comparing it to other flus. It is "mild" in both manners. tmiddles wrote: You repeatedly ignore this data which is New York state: This disproves your "mild" assessment for Covid-19 as a flu even using your hilarious per capita logic. Already addressed this.
20-04-2020 17:21
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	keepit wrote: Oh, that was a good one James. Some folks do say just the opposite no matter what. Attached image:
20-04-2020 17:25
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I do not attempt to redefine words. LIE. call me on it. Be specific. https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/republican-d6-e3114-s40.php#post_55093 Your own words are right here, in plain sight for everyone to see. Day 24 without a response....... I want my five bonus points... Edited on 20-04-2020 17:28
20-04-2020 17:32
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	gfm7175 wrote:I want my five bonus points... Well earned! Attached image:

20-04-2020 17:39
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Five smileys in appreciation!
21-04-2020 00:48
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I do not attempt to redefine words. LIE. call me on it. Be specific. https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/republican-d6-e3114-s40.php#post_55093 Your own words are right here, in plain sight for everyone to see. Day 24 without a response....... What am I redefining? You referenced the entire post below, included the text "Day 24 without a response" (which does not appear in my post) and I have no clue what you are talking about: tmiddles wrote: GasGuzzler wrote: Inflation coming? Care to predict an average percentage? during the great depression but there was considerable deflation: https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/040715/were-there-any-periods-major-deflation-us-history.asp "Prices dropped an average of ten percent every year between the years of 1930 and 1933." So it could be they offset each other. Also this is fundamentally no different than 2008 in terms of dumping a bunch of money out right? Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:Trump lied about sharing his tax return in the presidential race. He doesn't have to. End of story. He doesn't have to lie? Of course not. He doesn't have to honor a promise made while campaigning? Well wouldn't be the first time that's happened. End of story? Not at all. Who knows what secrets he is hiding? Maybe the Russian oligarchs he owes billions too, or the industries he's doing favors for that are giving him a kick back. We may find out in spite of his dishonesty in not doing as he claimed he would. I'm not going to bother looking up mantras if you're not going to respond to my rebuttals. Let me know if your policy of running scared changes. Into the Night wrote: Trump never filed for bankruptcy. Some of his investments have. Trump filed for business bankruptcy yes. What is your point? Into the Night wrote: I also tend to use a couple of acronyms,... You have also refused to debate. Look at my sig Duncan. ITN just quit trying to match me a long time ago. He says RQAA when a question is presented for the first time ever. He is a total fraud. Topics debunking 5 years of nonsense from ITN that he just refused to debate (he just gave up): Misuse of the 1st LTD, Plancks Law/SB Law, and glaring hypocrisy of "Valid Data" exposed: https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/venus-is-hotter-than-mercury--d6-e2710-s720.php#post_53762 33 days with no reply Here: Debating "photons of the lower temperature object are not absorbed by the higher temperature object." and that the a light bulb absorbs the radiance from an oven, IBD claims "go ahead ... I'm ready to debate it.": https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/the-radiative-greenhouse-effect-does-not-exist-d10-e3047-s40.php#post_53357 40 days with no reply And Here: 2nd Law and disproving IBD's confusion about Earth being a isolated system: https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/2nd-law-d6-e3030-s80.php#post_53063 46 days with no reply "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
21-04-2020 01:06
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote:That's your own assessment of a flu infection rate? Yes. ... not even 0.0625% a day...However, ...the "confirmed cases" number is severely understated, which means that the "death rate" number is severely overstated. So you are arguing both sides on that one: It's very little, No wait it's a lot Also the DEATH number is not overstated. The graph with the red line up above you refuse to comment on. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I presume you're comparing that number to the entire state of New York in years when no mitigation steps have been taken (social distancing, shut down and so on) or that you think the mitigation steps have had little to no effect? I'm not comparing it to anything. The "mitigation" steps HAVE had little to no effect. Yes you are comparing it to the entire NY State population above. Your "not even 0.0625% a day" is using that basis. Also you are attempting to exercise reality by fiat again with you claim the steps taken have no effect. That is not an argument. You have not supported it at all. It's simply a statement and a highly contrarian one that cannot rest of the presumption that anyone knows what you mean by that. gfm7175 wrote: Deaths AREN'T being counted accurately though, Do you have anything other than your own suspicions to cite here? Also what is the motive for NYC to exaggerate the number of deaths? Wasn't the theory the China understated the number? Which is it? How can both be motivated? gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:....12,192 "fatalities". Using 20 million as the NYS population number,...Those are rather insignificant numbers. So your logic is that you take the impact and divide by the total population. ... if speaking of the percentage of people who died, then yes.... Please elaborate upon "toddlers with revolvers" as well as "far far greater threat". What are you even asserting? Well if I apply your logic then in the US hot dogs are far more dangerous than machine guns because if you take the number of hot dog chocking deaths and compare it with the number of deaths by machine gun there is not contest: ~ 70 to 0. Also toddlers with with revolvers kill far more than Al Queda in the US, far far more: ~ 70 to 0 again. The problem with you approach is there are two major errors: 1- You compare to the entire population as opposed to the exposed population 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. Let's take the classic NRA brain fart that "Making guns illegal has no impact on crime because criminals don't respect laws ha ha" the pretense being that criminals are not restricted by our efforts to prevent their access to weapons, that our mitigation measures are ineffective. Yet murder by machine gun is pretty much a nonexistent crime. So applying your logic machine gun's are less dangerous than hand guns. But of course that is wrong. And no hotdogs are not equally dangerous as revolvers, though they both kill the same number of small children. Simple division is simple minded. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: You repeatedly ignore this data which is New York state: This disproves your "mild" assessment for Covid-19 as a flu even using your hilarious per capita logic. Already addressed this. No you did not. You're written words, but you have dodge the above graph. Harvey said it was "bogus" you said nothing.
21-04-2020 17:42
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote:That's your own assessment of a flu infection rate? Yes. ... not even 0.0625% a day...However, ...the "confirmed cases" number is severely understated, which means that the "death rate" number is severely overstated. So you are arguing both sides on that one: It's very little, No wait it's a lot Misleading quoting of what I said. For the first part, I was referring specifically to the NYS DoH "confirmed cases" and then drawing an infection rate from that, since you specifically wanted people to look at the NYS numbers. For the second part, I was referring to various antibody tests that have been performed on people in various areas of the USA, and noting that if one goes along with what has been discovered through them, then that means that many more people have been infected than originally thought, which means that the death rate of this disease is being severely overinflated, even BEFORE taking into account the shit that New York and Michigan are pulling in order to receive more federal funding. Personally, my position is that the denominator (# of people infected) can only be an "educated" guess at best (and that many more people have already been infected with this virus than what the "confirmed cases" number is), and that the numerator (# of deaths caused by COVID-19) is being inconsistently defined/applied and is being purposely overstated for increased paranoia and increased receipts of federal funding. My conclusion from the above is that this COVID-19 flu is no worse than the common flus that make their rounds each year. tmiddles wrote: Also the DEATH number is not overstated. Yes, it is. It is being severely overstated, for the reasoning I provided above. tmiddles wrote: The graph with the red line up above you refuse to comment on. Already commented on it. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I presume you're comparing that number to the entire state of New York in years when no mitigation steps have been taken (social distancing, shut down and so on) or that you think the mitigation steps have had little to no effect? I'm not comparing it to anything. The "mitigation" steps HAVE had little to no effect. Yes you are comparing it to the entire NY State population above. Your "not even 0.0625% a day" is using that basis. I'm not comparing it to anything. I was just using the NYS DoH data to tell you how fast the infection rate currently is in the State of New York. It has nothing to do with anything else. tmiddles wrote: Also you are attempting to exercise reality by fiat again with you claim the steps taken have no effect. You are attempting to base an argument on a buzzword once again... Define "reality". Your attempt to define it along the lines of "what actually is" does not suffice since you did not define "what actually is". tmiddles wrote: That is not an argument. Yes, it is. You are once again showing your complete illiteracy in logic. tmiddles wrote: You have not supported it at all. Yes, I have, and even by your very own rules of "supporting an argument". You are also completely illiterate in philosophy. tmiddles wrote: It's simply a statement It is also an argument. Social distancing does not stop a virus, masks do not stop a virus, gloves do not stop a virus, etc... That means that the draconian measures that have been taken have not even reduced, let alone stopped, the virus. tmiddles wrote: and a highly contrarian one So? tmiddles wrote: that cannot rest of the presumption that anyone knows what you mean by that. You are also illiterate in English. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Deaths AREN'T being counted accurately though, Do you have anything other than your own suspicions to cite here? Already presented. tmiddles wrote: Also what is the motive for NYC to exaggerate the number of deaths? More paranoia, another feeble attempt at attacking Trump, and more federal funding. tmiddles wrote: Wasn't the theory the China understated the number? Yes, China has severely understated both their "confirmed infections" and their "deaths". tmiddles wrote: Which is it? Both. tmiddles wrote: How can both be motivated? Because they are separate things. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:....12,192 "fatalities". Using 20 million as the NYS population number,...Those are rather insignificant numbers. So your logic is that you take the impact and divide by the total population. ... if speaking of the percentage of people who died, then yes.... Please elaborate upon "toddlers with revolvers" as well as "far far greater threat". What are you even asserting? Well if I apply your logic then in the US hot dogs are far more dangerous than machine guns because if you take the number of hot dog chocking deaths and compare it with the number of deaths by machine gun there is not contest: ~ 70 to 0. Also toddlers with with revolvers kill far more than Al Queda in the US, far far more: ~ 70 to 0 again. I think you mean choking, not chocking. Your illiteracy in English is showing again. randU Fallacy. You're just making shit up. tmiddles wrote: The problem with you approach is there are two major errors: 1- You compare to the entire population as opposed to the exposed population The entire population can be fairly accurately estimated and the entire population is at risk of being exposed. Meanwhile, you have absolutely no idea what the "exposed population" is. You only know what the "confirmed cases" are. tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. I've already told you why. tmiddles wrote: Let's take the classic NRA brain fart that "Making guns illegal has no impact on crime because criminals don't respect laws ha ha" That's absolutely correct. It won't reduce crime at all, since law abiding citizens do not commit crimes to begin with. tmiddles wrote: the pretense being that criminals are not restricted by our efforts to prevent their access to weapons, that our mitigation measures are ineffective. Correct. You can't kill the free market. It will go underground if it has to, but you can't kill it. Guns will still be available one way or another. Criminals will still have them all the same. They will still commit crimes all the same. tmiddles wrote: Yet murder by machine gun is pretty much a nonexistent crime. Yup. tmiddles wrote: So applying your logic machine gun's are less dangerous than hand guns. But of course that is wrong. ... in terms of number of deaths in the USA, that would be correct. tmiddles wrote: And no hotdogs are not equally dangerous as revolvers, though they both kill the same number of small children. randU Fallacy. tmiddles wrote: Simple division is simple minded. Not always. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: You repeatedly ignore this data which is New York state: This disproves your "mild" assessment for Covid-19 as a flu even using your hilarious per capita logic. Already addressed this. No you did not. You're written words, but you have dodge the above graph. Harvey said it was "bogus" you said nothing. Yes I did. Edited on 21-04-2020 17:44
21-04-2020 20:17
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote:That's your own assessment of a flu infection rate? Yes. ... not even 0.0625% a day...However, ...the "confirmed cases" number is severely understated, which means that the "death rate" number is severely overstated. So you are arguing both sides on that one: It's very little, No wait it's a lot Also the DEATH number is not overstated. The graph with the red line up above you refuse to comment on. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I presume you're comparing that number to the entire state of New York in years when no mitigation steps have been taken (social distancing, shut down and so on) or that you think the mitigation steps have had little to no effect? I'm not comparing it to anything. The "mitigation" steps HAVE had little to no effect. Yes you are comparing it to the entire NY State population above. Your "not even 0.0625% a day" is using that basis. Also you are attempting to exercise reality by fiat again with you claim the steps taken have no effect. That is not an argument. You have not supported it at all. It's simply a statement and a highly contrarian one that cannot rest of the presumption that anyone knows what you mean by that. gfm7175 wrote: Deaths AREN'T being counted accurately though, Do you have anything other than your own suspicions to cite here? Also what is the motive for NYC to exaggerate the number of deaths? Wasn't the theory the China understated the number? Which is it? How can both be motivated? gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:....12,192 "fatalities". Using 20 million as the NYS population number,...Those are rather insignificant numbers. So your logic is that you take the impact and divide by the total population. ... if speaking of the percentage of people who died, then yes.... Please elaborate upon "toddlers with revolvers" as well as "far far greater threat". What are you even asserting? Well if I apply your logic then in the US hot dogs are far more dangerous than machine guns because if you take the number of hot dog chocking deaths and compare it with the number of deaths by machine gun there is not contest: ~ 70 to 0. Also toddlers with with revolvers kill far more than Al Queda in the US, far far more: ~ 70 to 0 again. The problem with you approach is there are two major errors: 1- You compare to the entire population as opposed to the exposed population 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. Let's take the classic NRA brain fart that "Making guns illegal has no impact on crime because criminals don't respect laws ha ha" the pretense being that criminals are not restricted by our efforts to prevent their access to weapons, that our mitigation measures are ineffective. Yet murder by machine gun is pretty much a nonexistent crime. So applying your logic machine gun's are less dangerous than hand guns. But of course that is wrong. And no hotdogs are not equally dangerous as revolvers, though they both kill the same number of small children. Simple division is simple minded. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: You repeatedly ignore this data which is New York state: This disproves your "mild" assessment for Covid-19 as a flu even using your hilarious per capita logic. Already addressed this. No you did not. You're written words, but you have dodge the above graph. Harvey said it was "bogus" you said nothing. Al Gore proved that Hockey-stick graphs are a bogus, mis-representation of the facts. The planet isn't 'warming, at an alarming rate', people aren't dying at an alarming rate. We were at 42,000 this morning, and pretty obviously on the downward slope in many states. Some are starting to open stuff up again. I haven't found any seperate numbers, so not sure if that's just Covid-19, or all flu related severe respiratory distress deaths for this season. Even if there is a seperate count, it's not unusually high, for a new viral infection first run through the human population. It's way to high, for all the crap we got put through.
21-04-2020 22:10
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: ...deleted Mantras 25e...25g...29...30...36c...29...36c...29...25g...25f... The problem with you approach is there are two major errors: 1- You compare to the entire population as opposed to the exposed population This is completely valid, since we are talking about the entire population. Mantra 16b. tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. A mask will not stop a virus. 6 feet will not stop a virus. Shutting down an economy will not stop a virus. The statement is justified. Mantra 38a. tmiddles wrote: ...deleted Mantras 16b...31...25g...11...4b...25g...25a...25g...4a...37c No arguments presented. RQAA. Fear mongering. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 21-04-2020 22:11
25-04-2020 20:41
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: The graph with the red line up above you refuse to comment on. Already commented on it. No you have not you continue to dodge this and it's "The Bottom Line" so to speak. The number of DEATHS int he STATE OF NEW YORK from COVID-19 is shockingly high relative to the previous 5 years of flu deaths. This demolishes everything you have to say on that subject as detailed below: gfm7175 wrote:....the NYS DoH "confirmed cases" and then drawing an infection rate...not even 0.0625% a day...the death rate of this disease is being severely overinflated,... On both counts you are saying that it's not a big deal. Low infection rates and overstated death rates. This graph show the TOTAL deaths, not the rate, and it is scary: That is the bottom line. Dead people. The total number. It is an apples to apples comparison with "regular flue" over a 5 year span. Tell me how your claim: gfm7175 wrote:COVID-19 flu is no worse than the common flus that make their rounds each year. Squares with that data? How do you reconcile your statement with the graph above? And no you NEVER answered that at all. gfm7175 wrote:... the shit that New York and Michigan are pulling in order to receive more federal funding... Care to back that up with something? My interpretation, correct me if I'm wrong, is that you believe New York is faking a crisis to make money from federal aid? You expect the state will come out ahead financially in this? That they will make more money than if they hadn't indulged the hoax and shut the state down? gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: Also the DEATH number is not overstated. Yes, it is. It is being severely overstated, for the reasoning I provided above. "NUMBER" not "RATE". Are you alleging that doctors are lying and saying people died of Covid-19 who did not? Your argument above was that the rate of deaths per infection was inflated that is not the same thing as addressing the total number of deaths as shown in the red line graph above. gfm7175 wrote:Define "reality"....you did not define "what actually is". Let's have your definition. I gave you mine. If you have some argument as to why you don't need a definition for yourself that's even more interesting. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. I've already told you why. No you did not. Social distancing was even used during the Spanish Flu very effectively. It works with ALL contagious diseases. Why you don't think it works is beyond me. You have never shared what I'm sure is a truly fascinating reason for thinking as you do. gfm7175 wrote:Social distancing does not stop a virus, masks do not stop a virus, gloves do not stop a virus, etc... That is entirely false information you just excreted. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/social-distancing.html https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/covid-19-face-masks-help-stop-spread A virus is physically transmitted to a human. It makes it's way into the body. There is no magic involved. If it cannot get to you then you will not be infected. Distance and barriers of any kind are OF COURSE effective in stopping a virus. And no, no one ever said 100%. Neither did you in you entirely false statement above. I'll take "mostly" any day. HarveyH55 wrote: Al Gore proved that Hockey-stick graphs are a bogus, mis-representation of the facts. Close to the dumbest thing you've ever said Harvey. A graph of data can take a variety of shapes and be completely accurate I assure you. Microbial Growth Provided with the right conditions (food, correct temperature, etc) microbes can grow very quickly. Just one of the many examples in the natural world of hockey stick growth. Incidentally it's most often referenced in business. If you believe doctors in New York are liars admit it and back up your claim. "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
26-04-2020 00:51
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 29...25g...15...fear mongering...4b...25a...38b...37c...29...35a...25a...15...30...4b...lie...10d...29...21...31...2...29...31...23...29...25g...4d...31...15...4d...38b... No argument presented. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-04-2020 17:17
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: The graph with the red line up above you refuse to comment on. Already commented on it. No you have not you continue to dodge this and it's "The Bottom Line" so to speak. Already addressed. tmiddles wrote: The number of DEATHS int he STATE OF NEW YORK from COVID-19 is shockingly high relative to the previous 5 years of flu deaths. This demolishes everything you have to say on that subject as detailed below: gfm7175 wrote:....the NYS DoH "confirmed cases" and then drawing an infection rate...not even 0.0625% a day...the death rate of this disease is being severely overinflated,... On both counts you are saying that it's not a big deal. Low infection rates and overstated death rates. This graph show the TOTAL deaths, not the rate, and it is scary: It's not a big deal. Already addressed the graph. tmiddles wrote: That is the bottom line. Dead people. People die all the time. tmiddles wrote: The total number. It is an apples to apples comparison with "regular flue" over a 5 year span. Tell me how your claim: gfm7175 wrote:COVID-19 flu is no worse than the common flus that make their rounds each year. Squares with that data? How do you reconcile your statement with the graph above? And no you NEVER answered that at all. Already answered. Also, your illiteracy in English is showing again. It is FLU, not FLUE. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:... the shit that New York and Michigan are pulling in order to receive more federal funding... Care to back that up with something? My interpretation, correct me if I'm wrong, is that you believe New York is faking a crisis to make money from federal aid? You expect the state will come out ahead financially in this? That they will make more money than if they hadn't indulged the hoax and shut the state down? Already expanded upon. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: Also the DEATH number is not overstated. Yes, it is. It is being severely overstated, for the reasoning I provided above. "NUMBER" not "RATE". The number itself is severely overstated. tmiddles wrote: Are you alleging that doctors are lying and saying people died of Covid-19 who did not? Yes. tmiddles wrote: Your argument above was that the rate of deaths per infection was inflated that is not the same thing as addressing the total number of deaths as shown in the red line graph above. The total number of deaths is severely inflated. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Define "reality"....you did not define "what actually is". Let's have your definition. I gave you mine. If you have some argument as to why you don't need a definition for yourself that's even more interesting. Reality is one's personal model of the universe. The universe is uniquely experienced by each individual. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. I've already told you why. No you did not. Yes I did. tmiddles wrote: Social distancing was even used during the Spanish Flu very effectively. Social distancing does not stop a flu virus. tmiddles wrote: It works with ALL contagious diseases. No it doesn't. tmiddles wrote: Why you don't think it works is beyond me. Because people are still getting sick all the same. tmiddles wrote: You have never shared what I'm sure is a truly fascinating reason for thinking as you do. Having basic knowledge about viruses and immunology... tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Social distancing does not stop a virus, masks do not stop a virus, gloves do not stop a virus, etc... That is entirely false information you just excreted. No it's not. tmiddles wrote:... deleted holy links... A virus is physically transmitted to a human. It makes it's way into the body. There is no magic involved. If it cannot get to you then you will not be infected. Distance and barriers of any kind are OF COURSE effective in stopping a virus. And no, no one ever said 100%. Neither did you in you entirely false statement above. I'll take "mostly" any day. No, they are not effective. People are still getting sick all the same. The current germaphobe nonsense is not good for one's immune system.
28-04-2020 07:20
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote:Already addressed the graph. Not true. Dodging something is not addressing it. gfm7175 wrote:The number itself [of doctor reported Covid-19 deaths] is severely overstated. As in doctors are liars according to you. A massive fraud is being perpetrated with lock step, entirely uniform participation by the entire medical community worldwide. No motive has been identified and the shear scale of the fraud alleged, and the potential liability, is mind blowing. It is truly worthy of INFOWARS. gfm7175 wrote:Reality is one's personal model of the universe. The universe is uniquely experienced by each individual. So you used the word "Reatlity" where I would use "Perception". It is the subjective experience of the universe. So what word would you use to fill in the blank here: Timmy was sure he'd found a king snake which would make a great pet, but in _______ it was not a king snake but a coral snake and extremely venomous. It was the last time Timmy would be wrong about anything. I would use the word "reality", "fact", or "actuality". What would you use? gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. I've already told you why. No you did not. Yes I did. No, you have learned ITN's pathetic trick of simply lying that you did debate at one point when in reality you're just lying. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Social distancing does not stop a virus, masks do not stop a virus, gloves do not stop a virus, etc... That is entirely false information you just excreted. No it's not. So if an infected person stands 1ft, 3ft, 6ft, 60ft, or 6000ft away from an uninfected person it makes no difference? The Virus is just as likely to spread to the uninfected person? "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN

28-04-2020 17:28
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Already addressed the graph. Not true. Dodging something is not addressing it. Inversion fallacy. Mantra 17. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:The number itself [of doctor reported Covid-19 deaths] is severely overstated. As in doctors are liars according to you. Doctors do not track cause of death. Coroners do. They work for the government. The statistics are compiled from government officials by government. tmiddles wrote: A massive fraud is being perpetrated with lock step, entirely uniform participation by the entire medical community worldwide. No motive has been identified and the shear scale of the fraud alleged, and the potential liability, is mind blowing. The entire medical community has nothing to do with it. It is quite mind blowing, that people in the government would go this far, but they have. tmiddles wrote: It is truly worthy of INFOWARS. And correctly reported as well. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Reality is one's personal model of the universe. The universe is uniquely experienced by each individual. So you used the word "Reatlity" where I would use "Perception". It is the subjective experience of the universe. So is 'reality', dude. tmiddles wrote: So what word would you use to fill in the blank here: Timmy was sure he'd found a king snake which would make a great pet, but in _______ it was not a king snake but a coral snake and extremely venomous. Coral snakes run when confronted by humans. That's why bites from them are so rare. tmiddles wrote: It was the last time Timmy would be wrong about anything. I would use the word "reality", "fact", or "actuality". What would you use? Coral snake bites can be treated. Obviously, your reality is different from mine. Mantra 16b. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:[quote]tmiddles wrote: 2- You assume, without justification, that mitigation/prevention have no impact. I've already told you why. No you did not. Yes I did. No, you have learned ITN's pathetic trick of simply lying that you did debate at one point when in reality you're just lying. Lie. RQAA. Inversion fallacy. Mantras 17...29 tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Social distancing does not stop a virus, masks do not stop a virus, gloves do not stop a virus, etc... That is entirely false information you just excreted. No it's not. So if an infected person stands 1ft, 3ft, 6ft, 60ft, or 6000ft away from an uninfected person it makes no difference? The Virus is just as likely to spread to the uninfected person? Yup. That's exactly what he means. The virus has already spread from country to country, regardless of social distancing practiced in either country. Only 0.00135% of the population became infected (and the infection rate is going down). That means at least 99.99865% is healthy. Wearing masks that don't stop viruses only makes you look like a hypochondriatic dork. Avoiding people like they are carrying the Black Death only makes you look like an agoraphobic hypochondriac. Governors placing people under house arrest and banning business activity at large is unconstitutional. So is banning gun sales. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 28-04-2020 17:37
28-04-2020 21:11
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: The entire medical community has nothing to do with it. It is quite mind blowing, that people in the government would go this far, but they have. Wouldn't you agree that most of the medical community is in a position to be a whistle-blower? What WAS the motive for this grand fraud again? Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:So if an infected person stands 1ft, 3ft, 6ft, 60ft, or 6000ft away from an uninfected person it makes no difference? The Virus is just as likely to spread to the uninfected person? Yup. That's exactly what he means. How do you think Viruses spread? You do know they aren't magical right?
28-04-2020 23:41
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: The entire medical community has nothing to do with it. It is quite mind blowing, that people in the government would go this far, but they have. Wouldn't you agree that most of the medical community is in a position to be a whistle-blower? No. tmiddles wrote: What WAS the motive for this grand fraud again? RQAA. tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:So if an infected person stands 1ft, 3ft, 6ft, 60ft, or 6000ft away from an uninfected person it makes no difference? The Virus is just as likely to spread to the uninfected person? Yup. That's exactly what he means. How do you think Viruses spread? You do know they aren't magical right? In the case of Covid-19, by air, and by surface contamination. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
29-04-2020 00:02
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:Wouldn't you agree that most of the medical community is in a position to be a whistle-blower? No. tmiddles wrote:How do you think Viruses spread? In the case of Covid-19, by air, and by surface contamination. So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? And how long would Covid-19 remain a threat on surfaces? Several years? As for whistle-blowers help me out here: A doctor/nurse/family member has a patient die of something that's not Covid-19. The Death certificate says it was Covid-19. How is that not not easily called out publicly?
29-04-2020 01:18
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	tmiddles wrote:As for whistle-blowers help me out here: A doctor/nurse/family member has a patient die of something that's not Covid-19. The Death certificate says it was Covid-19. How is that not not easily called out publicly? Because it goes like this: Death certificate reads "COD: Massive organ failure following cardiac arrest, note: patient had tested positive for COVID-19 during hospitalization" Government: "We need your stats on all deaths in which COVID-19 was present MSM: "The government is reporting a high number of COVID-19 deaths" (not that COVID-19 was the cause of death because there just arent' any) Gullible Sheeple: "The world is dying from the coronaflu! It's the Coronapocalypse! Shut down the economy before we all die!" . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-04-2020 03:20
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:Wouldn't you agree that most of the medical community is in a position to be a whistle-blower? No. tmiddles wrote:How do you think Viruses spread? In the case of Covid-19, by air, and by surface contamination. So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. tmiddles wrote: And how long would Covid-19 remain a threat on surfaces? Several years? Depends on the surface, as always. Clean the surface. tmiddles wrote: As for whistle-blowers help me out here: A doctor/nurse/family member has a patient die of something that's not Covid-19. The Death certificate says it was Covid-19. How is that not not easily called out publicly? It is. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
29-04-2020 03:30
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	For Better Information about Covid contact IBDM and ITN. They know stuff!
29-04-2020 04:12
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	keepit wrote: For Better Information about Covid contact IBDM and ITN. They know stuff! Everything but a motive for this great caper apparently. Too bad the dang government is so nefarious. Who's in charge over there again?
29-04-2020 05:09
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	tmiddles wrote: Everything but a motive for this great caper apparently. Too bad the dang government is so nefarious. Who's in charge over there again? Once again, insisting that NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN. I've got some new awards for ... well, for awarding, and one of them is named in your honor. For distinguishing dishonesty above and beyond the call of duty, I present ... the "tmiddles": Attached image:
29-04-2020 16:45
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. You do realize that it has spread much farther than 6,000 feet, right?
29-04-2020 16:50
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	keepit wrote: For Better Information about Covid contact IBDM and ITN. They know stuff! HOLY SHIT!!!!!!!!!!! This is the closest that you have ever come to getting a hit!! You at least made contact with the ball, but unfortunately it flew out of bounds (in baseball, this is called a "foul ball"). If you would have said those words seriously instead of sarcastically, you would've had a hit. Still batting 0.000
29-04-2020 17:45
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	gfm7175 wrote: keepit wrote: For Better Information about Covid contact IBDM and ITN. They know stuff! HOLY SHIT!!!!!!!!!!! This is the closest that you have ever come to getting a hit!! You at least made contact with the ball, but unfortunately it flew out of bounds (in baseball, this is called a "foul ball"). If you would have said those words seriously instead of sarcastically, you would've had a hit. Still batting 0.000 I thought he was being sincere. I mean you know that lungs can heal if the patient doesn't die. See? We learned something new from you. Of course, I think some of us are queerious about ewe, itn and ibdm. Could any of ewe be the ewe? Baaa, Baaa Edited on 29-04-2020 17:45
30-04-2020 00:36
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. You do realize that it has spread much farther than 6,000 feet, right? I didn't say it would make ALL the difference gfm but that it would make a big difference. When someone is sick they shouldn't go into work so that they don't get everyone else sick correct? Same thing. Contagious doesn't mean all powerful. Edited on 30-04-2020 00:36
30-04-2020 03:50
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. You do realize that it has spread much farther than 6,000 feet, right? I didn't say it would make ALL the difference gfm but that it would make a big difference. When someone is sick they shouldn't go into work so that they don't get everyone else sick correct? Same thing. Contagious doesn't mean all powerful. You don't seem to recall that this flu has already spread all over the world. Even if one stays home, it can spread to where he works. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
30-04-2020 16:29
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. You do realize that it has spread much farther than 6,000 feet, right? I didn't say it would make ALL the difference gfm but that it would make a big difference. It would make no difference. tmiddles wrote: When someone is sick they shouldn't go into work so that they don't get everyone else sick correct? Same thing. Contagious doesn't mean all powerful. Everyone else might have already been exposed and infected by then.

30-04-2020 16:39
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Into the Night wrote: Even if one stays home, it can spread to where he works. Indeed it could (in more ways than one), and I'm surprised that it (seemingly) hasn't yet. There's been plenty of confirmed cases around where I work.
30-04-2020 22:55
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: Into the Night wrote: Even if one stays home, it can spread to where he works. Indeed it could (in more ways than one), and I'm surprised that it (seemingly) hasn't yet. There's been plenty of confirmed cases around where I work. Do the two of you believe that all viruses that spread to just one person reach every human on Earth? If so how quickly? Seems to be what you're saying in the name of justifying your claim that it's impossible to mitigate the risk. Edited on 30-04-2020 23:37
01-05-2020 03:07
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Into the Night wrote: Even if one stays home, it can spread to where he works. Indeed it could (in more ways than one), and I'm surprised that it (seemingly) hasn't yet. There's been plenty of confirmed cases around where I work. Do the two of you believe that all viruses that spread to just one person reach every human on Earth? If so how quickly? Seems to be what you're saying in the name of justifying your claim that it's impossible to mitigate the risk. A virus doesn't spread to one person. Assuming a single infected individual as a starting point, how fast the virus spreads depends on the virus. You are beginning another attempt at a contrived conclusion. It may or may not be possible to mitigate the risk of infection. It again depends on the virus. For an air transmitted virus such as Covid, the best way is to wash your hands, and clean surfaces touched by the infected individual. N95 masks will do nothing. Wearing them only makes you look like a dork. 6 feet will do nothing. The Covid virus can easily traverse that distance in open air. Since only 0.00135% of the population is infected, there really is an insignificant risk of getting infected at all. If you do contract somehow contract Covid, it is not an automatic death sentence. Most people recover, even elderly people. If you have damaged your lungs due to smoking, have another disease such as cancer weakening you, or have lung damage serious enough to already cause you breathing difficulties, then Covid could very well finish the job and do you in IF you manage to contract it. It doesn't warrant shutting down the economy. It doesn't warrant everyone going into a major panic about it. It doesn't warrant the fear mongering in the press and by people like you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 01-05-2020 03:14
01-05-2020 03:12
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: 6 feet will do nothing. The Covid virus can easily traverse that distance in open air. Ah but how about 6,000,000 feet ITN? You went in the wrong direction above. You'd already ruled out 6000 making any difference. Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:... So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. I see that a naturally flip side to the NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN! of you and IBD is NOTHING CAN BE DONE! Edited on 01-05-2020 03:14
01-05-2020 03:20
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: 6 feet will do nothing. The Covid virus can easily traverse that distance in open air. Ah but how about 6,000,000 feet ITN? The virus has already traveled that distance. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: You went in the wrong direction above. You'd already ruled out 6000 making any difference. No, you are contriving again. tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:... So certainly 6000ft vs 1ft would make a pretty big difference by air wouldn't you agree? No. I see that a naturally flip side to the NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN! of you and IBD is NOTHING CAN BE DONE! I have already described what can be done. * wash your hands * clean surfaces * open for regular business The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-05-2020 03:31
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Ah but how about 6,000,000 feet ITN? The virus has already traveled that distance. RQAA. So being 6,000,000 feet from someone infected vs. 1ft makes not difference. That's an RQAA all right. Because the answer is crazy.
01-05-2020 03:36
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 23...29...21... No argument presented. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-05-2020 17:37
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: Ah but how about 6,000,000 feet ITN? Take a second and think about it... That would only be about 1/3 of the way across the USA (depending on your particular route)... This virus has already spread all over the world. 6 million feet doesn't stop a virus either.
01-05-2020 17:39
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Ah but how about 6,000,000 feet ITN? The virus has already traveled that distance. RQAA. So being 6,000,000 feet from someone infected vs. 1ft makes not difference. That's an RQAA all right. Because the answer is crazy. It makes no difference. The virus has already traveled that far. Distance does not stop a virus. RQAA.
02-05-2020 06:50
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote:Distance does not stop a virus. So if someone is sick, knows they are contagious, but feels strong enough to work, the should just head on into the office right? Since they can just as easily get you sick from their living room?

Page 2 of 3

Join the debate How society will positively advance:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Would You Join A New Secret Society Help Humans Live To At Least 200 Years And More ?	2	03-01-2024 20:18
All Video Games Should Add This New "Happy Ending" Feature Mode For Better Society	4	13-07-2023 19:24
New Unique Vision For A Better Society Model Book Document For Sale	1	17-06-2023 18:05
The Book That Will Stop All War Instantly: New Creation New Society New World By Bodhi Udumbara	10	06-03-2023 05:33
The Weather, Climate Change Are Revealing The Truth Of This Corrupt Society System	50	10-01-2023 16:48