Changes

Talk:Main Page/Archive index/190 (view source)

Revision as of 20:59, May 6, 2020

32,318 bytes added , 20:59, May 6, 2020

→‎Everyone wearing masks in public would solve coronavirus crisis within a few weeks

Line 412: Line 412:

:::I would say that the evidence is strongly against the idea of virus testing at this point. California's response to the epidemic was a general failure at every level in terms of testing and so forth. Yet it ended up with the second lowest death rate of any state. (Texas is lower.) This is presumably because they have warm weather and a low population density. In short, what every other state needs is a warmer climate. Just say "no" to big wind and solar panels! [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:52, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

::It looks like herd immunity is [https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2020/04/26/study-infected-prison-inmates-four-states-finds-96-asymptomatic/ developing nicely] in prisons. From a month ago: "''[https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/fp6pis/the_czech_republic_went_from_zero_mask_usage_to/ The Czech Republic went from zero mask usage to 100% in 10 days, and in the process they halted the growth of new covid-19 cases.]''" And today, [https://www.zerohedge.com/health/2-whisteblowing-cali-er-doctors-urge-open-society-now-because-lockdowns-are-weakening-our ER Docs Urge "Open Up Society Now" Because "Lockdowns Are Weakening Our Immune Systems"] - lockdowns impede the development of herd immunity. Besides easing the burden on healthcare providers, lockdowns serve one other important purpose in dealing with a novel or unknown virus - it gives time to educate the public about what is known of the virus. The question, as always, at what point does starving to death outweigh the risks of spreading the virus to vulnerable persons? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 03:14, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==How to watch news==

+

Tucker Carlson says at [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7_sNsSK6X4&feature=youtu.be 2:28 "I spoke to two people today who have who have seen the documents"]. Well duh. Who would be two people who've seen documents under court seal? The judge? The prosecutors who the docs embarrass and prove prosecutorial misconduct? No. Flynn attorney Sidney Powell and Mike Flynn himself. Most casual viewers, as well as those following this case, wouldn't catch that. But in reality, journalists make statements like this frequently, sometimes deliberately sometimes inadvertently.

+

Tomorrow is suppose to be the big day for Flynn. Trump won't need to pardon him, just schedule a date to award him the [[Presidential Medal of Freedom]]. Then Flynn needs a big million dollar contract like Clapper, Brennan, and McCabe got to pay off his legal bills. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 04:06, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:"make statements like this" Oh, come on. In a news story, especially a long running one, the facts need to be gathered, collated, processed and then presented in a lively, informative narrative connecting with the previous stories and setting the stage for what comes next. Shouldn't they be allowed to support their story as it goes along by citing supporting evidence when appropriate without leading the audience down alleyways that, simply by their superficial resemblance to the practices of corrupt individuals, are likely to confuse and complicate, so the audience loses sight of the story as a whole? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 04:54, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:At least if Flynn gets himself a million-dollar book contract, he won't have to weigh every word with an eye toward legal exposure. Or hire a guard for his book tour to keep Laura Loomer from showing up to call him a fraud during question time. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 05:13, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::Well they're both under a sealed document gag order, and Tucker's bound by journalistic ethics. So if the judge was watching, it's unlikely he'll call both attorneys in before tomorrow's hearing and ask which side talked to Tucker Carlson yesterday. That's small potatoes compared to the magnanimity of the judge's decision, which presumably, he's already reached regarding the dispensation of justice toward an innocent man and victim of gross government misconduct and abuse.

+

::I'm looking for Flynn to be hired as a national security expert consultant by Fox, with an audience about three times larger than McCabe and Clapper at CNN and about eight times larger than Brennan at MSNBC. So dollar for dollar, he ought to be paid about 3 or 8 times more than that gaggle of criminal scum who may be headed to jail. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 05:30, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::How can Flynn's defense attorney Sydney Powell file legal motions if she's under a gag order? Aren't those public records? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 06:20, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::She can't disclose what's under seal, but she walked right up to the line talking with Tucker about it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 07:24, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==Neoconservatism, Nationalism, and parallels to the French Revolution==

+

I highly recommend you guys read this article by William S. Smith at ''The American Conservative''.

+

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/mike-pompeo-american-jacobin/

+

--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:22, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:I've read it, and it does resonate somewhat. Unfortunately, one of the bigger problems here is that we'd essentially hand the world to communism on a silver platter, that you have essentially suggested that let ChiComs and Iranians run things, even though they've already exposed themselves as far worse people than the Saudis. I've already let myself be tricked by Hideo Kojima and his trickery regarding promoting American ideals in Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater and Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty, his use of historical research as well, into thinking from certain stuff that WE Americans are pure evil via selective reporting on America's crimes, and that Che Guevara was a saint who walked on water, and didn't even KNOW how evil Che truly was or even that he was a communist until I cracked open one of the Politically Incorrect Guides (and I wasn't even a liberal, I was a conservative myself), to say little about how George Lucas has straight up admitted to tricking countless Americans into rooting for the Vietcong by dressing them up in Marine outfits in Star Wars (and how, on the subject of the French Revolution, he not only modeled the Old Republic on Robespierre's France, but even implied it was a good form of government until Napoleon took over, certainly better than Louis XVI). I am NOT letting the left try to push their anti-war, anti-American views on us and treating people like the Jacobins and Marxists as heroes, period. As bad as Neoconservatives might be, the Marxists and far left are FAR worse, and I'm speaking from experience. I myself have ALSO been on that same road as you, so I know EXACTLY what you went through to go against Neoconservativism. Unfortunately for me, even if I were to consider going against Neoconservativism, I'd automatically have to be a Che-loving anti-American radical just to do that, and I simply CANNOT do that, not after how many Christians were slaughtered by them, and WILL continue to be slaughtered by them (and what's worse? Unlike during the Cold War, or even the French Revolution, where the Pope DID at least side with the persecuted Christians, whether by the French Jacobin government or by the Soviet bloc, our current pope is telling the ChiComs that the Christians are all theirs to kill, giving them permission to kill us, stabbing us in the back). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 14:41, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::I dunno. I'm still of the mindset that ''some'' criticism of neoconservativism has a tinge of [[anti-semitism]] to it. Was [[Eisenhower]] a neoconservative? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 14:54, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::Rob, I absolutely understand where you're coming from there. Yes, there ''is'' a serious anti-Semitism problem within the anti-neocon movement. Just like there was once a serious anti-Semitism problem within the anti-Communist movement. But the anti-Semites in the anti-Communist movement were pushed to the sidelines thanks to people like Bill Buckley. The anti-neocon movement needs its own Bill Buckley at this time. On a side note, I do not consider Eisenhower to be a neocon. Yes, he was rather liberal compared to modern Republicans. But his foreign policy was close to the polar opposite of that espoused by the neocon movement. He was a general, but he was no jingoist. He knew war firsthand, and how found it to be brutal, futile, and stupid. His words, not mine.[https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/eisenhowers/quotes]--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 21:36, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::Eisenhower is considered a Republican Internationalist. It used to be called Vandenberg/Eisenhower Republican internationalism. Nixon was a Republican internationalist. Somewhere after the Nixon/Kissinger relationship, neocons eclipsed Republican internationalists, the difference being GOP internationalist put America first whereas neocons are accused of putting Israel first.

+

::::Fast forward to the immediate moment: Nixonian internationalism is now under attack for normalizing relations with the [[CCP]]. But the alternative to Nixonian internationalism is repeating the endless non-winnable ground confrontations with the CCP as in Korea and Vietnam, only now the battlefield is more likely to shift toward Africa. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 22:36, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::I have never accepted the idea that neocons are Israel first. For most, if not all neocons, their first love is the "American Empire." Hence their obsession with the Middle East. At this time, the key to sustaining an American empire lies in the petrodollar. That's why they are so accommodating to Saudi Arabia and its Wahhabist proxies, while simultaneously pretending to oppose Wahhabism in public.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:17, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::@ [[User:RobSmith|RobS]] Is [[Internationalism]] different than [[Globalism]]? If so do we need to end the re-direct and build out the page for [[Internationalism]] to point out differences? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 17:38, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::::Internationalism relates to issues of peace and war - the old ''interventionism vs. isolationism debate''. When the hero of [[Normandy]] became the Republican president, that ended the dominance of Republican isolationists in the party and the monopoly Democrats had on Internationalism and America's role in world affairs. Globalism relates to trade issues and peacetime governance and offers little help in issues of going to war. By that I mean globalism and global commitments carry the risk of a minor ally dragging the U.S. into war, where the U.S. cedes in role as an International leader. For example Israel and the UK dragging the U.S. into Beirut in 1982 or France and the U.K. into Libya in 2012. Or Eisenhower avoiding the U.K and France dragging the U.S. into the [[Suez Crisis]] in 1956. That's the meaning of Republican Internationalism, global leadership with restraint, not blanket commitments such as to Ukraine in 1994. I suspect you'll be hearing more about the [[Taiwan Defense Act]] in the near future. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 21:51, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::Pokeria, don't let your fear of Communism hold you back. Isn't it a Christian's duty to oppose ''all'' evil, even in cases where evil does not persecute Christians outright?--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 21:36, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::Maybe you haven't noticed, but George Lucas and Hideo Kojima aren't card-carrying members of the Communist Party, nor do they oversee death camps against Christians, yet they still root for Communists. So yes, what I'm doing IS that duty, especially when they're not persecuting Christians outright via gunpoint. And maybe I'll give you what exactly it means to me to have to go against neo-conservativism. It means I'll have to act EXACTLY like George Lucas and James Cameron did [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxl3IoHKQ8c here] when discussing the subject of the VC and Mujahideen and al Qaeda, or how Big Boss and Kazuhira Miller acted [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usYtK3d2ydk here] regarding Che Guevara (and bear in mind, the latter was stated in his upbringing tape to be more patriotic to America than he was to his home country of Japan). Heck, how Kojima acted [https://web.archive.org/web/20060813191032/http://www.mgstus.org/downloads/misc/MGS2_orginal_gameplan/metal_gear_solid_2_grand_game_plan.pdf here] where he claimed America's pure evil, and claims Snake, the good guy, is a spy for Communist China. NOW do you see where I'm getting at? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:31, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::But you ''don't'' have to act like those people. There are both left-wing ''and'' right-wing arguments against neoconservatism. Those arguments don't necessarily validate one another by their mere existence.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:41, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::I wish that some conservatives would realize that to many, pro-intervention and foreign military engagement is a strategy, not an ideology. It's not like [[John Bolton]] spends all his time (or any of it) lobbying for more intervention, now that his tactical ''manoeuvres'' are no longer being used or considered. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 17:14, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::In Bolton's case it ''is'' ideology. He was one of the founders of PNAC, after all.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 21:36, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::If John Bolton didn't get his way, it doesn't seem to bother him, at least, because he's encouraging the U.S. on Twitter with diplomacy advice and suggestions, despite the military options being dropped by Trump.

+

::::Contrast that with Bill Kristol, who withdrew from party politics and adopted an attitude of SMUG ALOOFNESS. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 01:05, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::You're right that Bolton is a lot more reserved than Kristol (the latter who has endorsed Biden). But unless Bolton publicly endorses Trump, I'll continue assume that deep down inside he secretly feels what Kristol outright says. And even if he does endorse, I won't forgive him for his past conduct.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:41, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==The Oil War==

+

I'm posting this to continue a conversation from the [[Talk:Project_for_the_New_American_Century|talk page]] of [[Project_for_the_New_American_Century|PNAC]].

+

So, here's my take on the oil price conflict that started over COVID. MbS had ''nothing'' to gain from starting a price war with Russia. Do recall that the price war started after MbS asked Putin to cut oil production due to falling global demand, and Putin refused. From Putin's point of view, production cuts weren't an urgent issue. Russia has more efficient oil extraction technology than Saudi Arabia. It costs Russia less money to produce one barrel of oil than it does for Saudi Arabia to do so. This means Russia is able to charge less money for its oil then Saudi Arabia is. Russia is not as vulnerable to falling prices as Saudi Arabia is.

+

Now, here's the big question. Why would MbS dramatically increase oil production in his own country, when doing so would drive global oil prices down even lower? Why would he do that, despite the facts that (1) he originally wanted oil production cut; and (2) such an action would potentially inflict serious harm on his own country's economy? I'm sure some of you have differing explanations, but I'll give mine here. MbS increased oil production for no reason other than to hurt Russia. He didn't care that this action would harm not just his own economy, but also the economy of his main benefactor, the US. His main priority at that moment was ''revenge''. He did it out of nothing but pure, unadulterated ''spite''. In his mind, as long as he hurt Russia, any side consequences were worth it.

+

This price war was just the latest of a series of provocative acts Saudi Arabia has committed ever since MbS became crown prince and took over many of his ailing father's official duties. And I do believe that these acts (such as waging war on Yemen; sponsoring the failed coup in Turkey; isolating Qatar and trying to turn it into an island; kidnapping the Lebanese prime minister; killing Khashoggi; deploying troops into Northern Syria; possibly multiple false flag incidents blamed on Iran, etc.) were all done for the same reason. MbS (and his father) are unwilling to accept that Saudi Arabia is a declining power, and the balance of power in the region is changing. So its leadership is lashing out. It would rather start a war that would "burn everything down" than share power with its enemies or even its own allies. MbS knows full well that such behavior will result in his country becoming an international pariah (if it's not one already). But he doesn't care. And I fear that one day he will start a major war, one that the US almost certainly will be dragged into.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:45, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHZGhGx4ozU&t=794s My sources say MBS started the price war]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 00:25, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::Saudi's cost of production is $5 per barrel compared to $7.60 for Russia and $13.50 for the United States.[https://knoema.com/rqaebad/cost-of-producing-a-barrel-of-crude-oil-by-country] I assume MBS wants to put the frackors out of business, so Russia isn't really relevant. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:17, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::Okay. Let me clarify. When I said "cost of production," I meant break-even selling prices. I apologize if I caused any confusion. The Saudi Arabia's break-even price is $84 per barrel; Russia's is $40 per barrel. [https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/The-Inevitable-Outcome-Of-The-Oil-Price-War.html] Based on [https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-chart this chart], Saudi Arabia has been in the red since November 2014. During that same time period, Russia has almost always been in the black, with the exceptions being during January and February of 2016, and during this oil war. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:57, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::We're on the same page, RobS.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:57, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::The Saudi number you gave to is the amount they need to support the Saudi state in it's current form, service their debt, keep all the princes in their villas, and so forth. I am not sure that "break-even price" is the right word for this. It certainly costs more for the Russians to get oil from Siberia than for the Saudis to pump it out from under the sand. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 14:58, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

== Everything wrong with Chuck Schumer, etc. ==

+

[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/494764-schumer-to-introduce-no-pr-act-to-stop-trump-from-placing-name-on-stimulus This article] explains everything wrong with [[Chuck Schumer]]. Also, out of topic, but given the heated battleground in [[Maine]] this election season, did anyone else see [[Debate:Should Susan Collins win re-election in 2020?|this great debate]] I started? The latter might a really interesting topic for [[CP]] editors to debate on. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 00:18, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:If the Democrats stuff the ballot box within a 3% or less margin, issues such as abortion are of little consequences. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 00:27, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::What do you mean by little consequences? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 00:52, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

== Neil Ferguson and the covid panic ==

+

[[File:Coronavirus Infected and recoveries minus China & Italy Apr. 28.jpg|float|right|278px]]

+

If you are in lockdown these days, you can thank Neil Ferguson of Imperial College in London. On March 16, Ferguson issued a forecast of 2.2 million Americans dead from covid-19. The Western world then shifted into panic and lockdown mode. Plans to promote "herd immunity" in Britain and The Netherlands had to be abandoned. Only Sweden and Nicaragua kept their schools open. So who is Ferguson and why does anyone listen to him? Basically, he's a professional doomsayer, a Paul Ehrlich of epidemics who has been overforcasting deaths from one disease after another for years. His forecasting code is proprietary and was written '''''thirteen''''' years ago. See "[https://youtu.be/MhRJ8mfyCv8 EXPOSED: The Man Behind the COVID-19 Panic!]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:47, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:The headlines today tell us that the Wuhan virus has now killed more Americans than the Vietnam War. Is there any logic in comparing a disease to a war? Let's compare this epidemic to a previous epidemic. The Hong Kong flu of 1968 (H3N2) killed 100,000 Americans, twice as many as the Wuhan virus. “The novel virus triggered a state of emergency in New York City; caused so many deaths in Berlin that corpses were stored in subway tunnels; overwhelmed London’s hospitals; and in some areas of France left half of the workforce bedridden.”[https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/04/28/how-different-we-treated-the-hong-kong-flu-pandemic-of-1968/] The Wuhan virus narrative is driven by the media's nasty politics of anti-Americanism and Trump hatred. In 1968, I'm pretty sure the media never thought of scaring Americans into staying home so that the economy would collapse. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:15, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::Don't be so sure the 1968 media wouldn't think of scaring Americans into doing so. Let's not forget that the 1968 media's the same one that infamously gave the false report that the Communists WON the Tet Offensive and single-handedly turned public opinion against the war (and even before that went out of their way to demonize our war effort there). Had Wuhan occurred during that time, they most CERTAINLY would have done so with even MORE success. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:35, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::You two ought to realize there ''was'' no 1968 media. They didn't call themselves that. They were the ''press''. And Peter, the media is "scaring" people "into staying home" because they passed on Trump's epidemic doctor's information uncritically, and now they have to pretend it's still more deadly than the flu so liberal governors who over-reached in lockdowns and the complicit media aren't attacked for being alarmists and for denying civil liberties when the danger wasn't that dire. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 19:40, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::Fauci may have known better all along: "This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively," according to [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387 his article in the ''New England Journal of Medicine]''. [https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/why-the-covid-19-death-forecasts-are-wrong/ar-BB12ZwWB Here] he forecast 60,000 dead, which is pretty on the nose. Comparing covid to the Vietnam War or to the 1918 pandemic makes it sound so much worse than comparing it to the forgotten pandemics of 1957 and 1968. The baby boomers went through this stuff twice and soldiered on both times. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:14, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::That was ''a good way into the pandemic'', not "all along". He previously predicted much higher numbers. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 23:50, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::And we've been through this. RobS mentioned the serious problem of compliance issues (with regard to visiting the elderly) in New York, whereas Florida and Texas did alright.

+

:::::And the brilliant move of mandatory placing of Wuhan virus patients in nursing homes in New York, I guess so Wuhan virus patients wouldn't be stigmatized for being too different or something or whatever. At least those to whom they spread the contagion didn't die "viro-phobic".

+

:::::And let's not forget, the more slowly economy is opened, the longer the media can ride on the gravy train where everyone is turning to ''them'' for advice and watching them and their commercial sponsors. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:04, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::::Fauci's ''NEJM'' article was published on February 28, so it's pre-Ferguson. Fauci made the forecast of 60,000 dead on April 9. It seems that he is following the model created by University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. IHME first reported covid forecast 80,000 deaths made back on March 26.[http://www.healthdata.org/research-article/forecasting-covid-19-impact-hospital-bed-days-icu-days-ventilator-days-and-deaths] Sadly, the world had already been panicked by Ferguson's wild overestimate by that time. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:48, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::I'm not mad at you, Peter, but what the h--- is that supposed to mean? Dr. Fauci wants to have his cake and eat it too with dual forecasts? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:04, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::::Just so people know what I'm talking about, 39% of American Wuhan flu virus fatalities as of Wednesday, April 29, are in the single state of New York. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:11, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::::::And let me give an example of the expensive problems of "lock-down logic", so it's clear what I'm talking about there in quarantining the healthy: Why not keep the elderly away from schools, rather than keep all children at home away from elderly school staff? If you're under 30 with no health problems, you're essentially immune. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:24, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::::::Cadet leader Pavel Milyukov wrote a history of the Russian Revolution. (The Cadets -- Constitutional Democrats -- were the good guys in the Russian Revolutions.) Trotsky would compare "Milyukov the politician" to "Milyukov the historian." It seems that there was a "Fauci the politician" and a "Fauci the medical doctor." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:17, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

== Justin Amash becomes the first Libertarian in Congress ==

+

[https://twitter.com/nsarwark/status/1255310040942116869?s=21 This tweet] by the chair of the Libertarian Party all but confirms that Justin Amash has formally joined the party. Amash is now the first ever member of the Libertarian Party to serve in Congress. He is also the first third-party member of Congress (''not'' counting Independents) since Dean Barkley, who served as a Senator from Minnesota as a member of the Independence Party of Minnesota from 2002-03.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 14:12, 29 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:The Libertarian party is an absolute joke. Many principles championed by Libertarians are actually very useful and worthy of talking about. The party is just a bunch of hacks that put forth a presidential candidate every 3.5 years with no intention whatsoever of making a difference. Anybody with influence there? Hell no. Anybody that associates with the party is a public loser. If they had any brains, they would nominate a solid person December 2020 for the 2024 campaign. Then campaign for four straight years. That's the only way to compete with the duopoly-dominant political system. --Jpatt 12:33, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==Unemployment numbers==

+

Just a heads up: New unemployment figures are arriving in a few days, and if the reports of them are anything like last month's, expect to see the tabulations in media reports mangled beyond recognition. They are reported at [https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm this website]. Don't look at the jobless claims, and heaven help you if try to add different weeks of those claims together. Look at the size of the total labor force (employed), measure the shrinkage and work from there. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:31, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==A reporter's story==

+

"Dad, what did you do as a journalist during the 2020 pandemic?"

+

"Well son, I covered the menacing growth of the virus, and how super dangerous it was to everyone, and the lockdowns ordered to prevent it from spreading, and then my reporting covered the economy—with a pillow until it suffocated." [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:31, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:If the media's plan works, a broken economy will pave the way for the election of Joe Biden. A rapist president who can't answer a question or even finish a sentence. That would be the anti-American media's dream come true.

+

:With Georgia and Texas reopening, the media is having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that it was wrong about lockdowns and social distancing: "[https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/why-georgia-reopening-coronavirus-pandemic/610882/ Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice: The state is about to find out how many people need to lose their lives to shore up the economy]." If Georgia is committing human sacrifice, can the media come up with an even more extreme phrase to describe what Sweden and the Netherlands are doing? Georgia and Texas are warmer than Sweden and the Netherlands, so the risk should be lower.

+

:When the lockdowns were imposed, it was assumed that 2.2 million deaths were on the way whatever we did. The best we could do was to "flatten the curve" to avoid overwhelming the medical system. Overwhelming the medical system certainly isn't an issue at this point. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:26, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::"A call to punish the ignorant in stocks again: A study of a media person who envisions risk management as human sacrifice, yet strangely too timid to describe similar practice of triage in medicine in the same way." [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 03:21, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:::Looks like the World Health Organization has approved "human sacrifice": "[https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/who-lauds-sweden-as-model-for-resisting-coronavirus-lockdown/ WHO lauds lockdown-ignoring Sweden as a ‘model’ for countries going forward]". Sweden did the full "herd immunity" thing and let the kids keep going to school. The covid stats for the Netherlands are slightly better than those for Sweden. The Dutch closed the schools, but never imposed a lockdown. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:27, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

==Global warning disproven: the argument is over==

+

In [the] last month mankind CO2 emissions have been drastically reduced over the world. This has had no effect on net levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Global warming null hypothesis is thus not rejected. There is no correlation between man's emissions of CO2 and net CO2 in the atmosphere.

+

The definitive experiment has been done....Global warming has now been proved a hoax by a worldwide experiment.

+

Alan Tomalty, April 9, 2020.

+

[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 03:03, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

:The more CO2, the greener the planet.--Jpatt 12:26, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

::According to [https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/22/climate-and-human-civilization-for-the-past-4000-years/ this chart], we are lucky to be in one of history's rare periodic warm periods. The late Bronze Age and the Romans both had warmer weather than we do, but no one thinks that they suffered from global warming. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:42, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

+

== Everything wrong with the liberal courts ==

+

[https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/04/30/judge-rejects-request-block-whitmers-stay-home-order/3054609001/ This article] explains everything wrong with the far-left courts nowadays. According to them, [[abortion]] is a absolute right that can ''never'' be infringed upon, but actual constitutional rights are mere conveniences. Then again, perhaps the date is 36 years off... --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 13:01, 30 April 2020 (EDT)

Conservative

Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators

351,672

edits

Changes

Talk:Main Page/Archive index/190 (view source)

Revision as of 20:59, May 6, 2020

Navigation menu

Search