Total posts: 3,383
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Then you pretended to agree with it in post 27.
care to share with the boys and girls where that was actually said by me?
(insert apology here)
that is what I wrote in post #27
Can you acknowledge that covid-19 is significantly more deadly than flu or will you claim their death rate is roughly the same?
I will do neither because I have not seen enough evidence one way or the other. There's plenty of theories and assumptions but those are merely opinions which we all have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Oh so you can acknowledge that covid-19 is significantly more deadly than flu.
they are not the same, obviously since I never said that even though you falsely accused me of say that, I have not said one is significantly more deadly than the other so stop listening to the voices in your head telling you stuff that is not written on the screen, believe your eyes not the voices. Do you like to just make up shit and look dishonest?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Some guy sitting on his keyboard chitchatting about why Covid is compared to the flu is only a good sign as at least he's social distancing.It is not a time to nitpick terminology, this is about really fighting a threat to all elderly and health-vulnerable in our species. Whether you like that it's compared to the flu or not, what is the use of the whining?!
when at work have you have little to nothing to do, chitchatting about it is at least something. fun fact covid presents with leukopenia and lymphopenia, why I find that very interesting is we had a lot of those results pretty much before this covid was a known thing, we commented how odd it was at the time, makes me wonder how many of those would have been positive had they been tested, oh well, just more stuffs to think about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
the fact that the cause of the death is the same means the death rate is the same hurr hurr hurr gotcha there!"
care to share with the boys and girls where that was actually said by me?
(insert apology here)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
And the answer is "They are equally dangerous because they both cause death via pneumonia"?
I would say, which one is more likely to cause pneumonia that leads to death. All the deaths have been respiratory failure related/pneumonia. Certainly there are factors as to why someone is more likely to get pneumonia than others, so there is that (smoking, probably asthma and other lung or breathing issues). But that is true for any illness that has the potential to cause pneumonia I would think.
There certainly are many variables to try to take into account when trying to determine which one is "worse"
some food (virus) for thought
Among US adults, an estimated 177,000 hospitalizations and 14,000 deaths associated with RSV infections occur annually. However, these are likely underestimates of RSV-associated deaths.
here's what interesting about this, the actual test is not fda approved for anyone over 19, and that's new! for many years it was 6 years old and under. Pediatricians often won't bother checking children OVER 2 years of age, because there is no "cure" all you can do is manage symptoms.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
@whiteflame
Even when the flu vaccine is a mismatched year, they say it still helps with immunity to some degree. If there was no flu vaccine it would seem reasonable to assume the flu stats would be that much worse. Since there is no covid vaccine yet, when it's all taken into context perhaps the flu is "worse" than covid?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
just being argumentitive, that's fine
covid-19 isn't the only virus or way people get pneumonia right?
Bacterial pneumonia is an inflammation of the lungs due to bacterial infection.
pneumonia is a response to the infection incase you didn't read the previous link.
I think your question "Why compare covid-19 to flu?" has been answered.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
it's usually trump supporters who are trying to defend the idea that trump promoted that we shouldn't be taking this so seriously.
source?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
people have died from viral pneumonia since the dawn of man, it happens, generally not identified but rather the generic term viral pneumonia is used (to the best of my knowledge)
the comparison (right or wrong) helps some alleviate some fear and help with understanding. People generally don't die from these viral infections but rather get pneumonia because of them.
the air sacs in your lungs get infected and inflamed, and they fill up with fluid.
Anything that weakens your body’s defenses (immune system) can raise your chances of getting pneumonia.
Anything that weakens your body’s defenses (immune system) can raise your chances of getting pneumonia.
so in many ways you can compare covid-19 with the flu, some strains of flu may be a better comparison but that would be too much work to compare and contrast.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Let's see what Trump has done recently, well he's told the FDA to remove restrictions that were not needed and to allow more leeway for providers to use medications off label, like the malaria medicine. What I find interesting is the push to use medicines that have been around for a long time and are inexpensive. There doesn't seem to be any real political or personal benefit to do that. Companies developing new medicines would probably give plenty of kick backs and "donations" to a politician promoting them. This doesn't appear to be the case. It's almost like he's doing what is right instead of what is best for self or party interest.
Created:
Posted in:
unintended consequences?
are more willing to support the 2a that weren't before?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
it's a surgery, reversal takes 2+ hours
"it may take as long as 12 months for fertility to return."
“Success rates depend primarily on the time since vasectomy.” Success rates can be as high as 95 percent if the vasectomy was done within the last 10 years. They start to decline when a man has had his vasectomy 15 years ago.
People who are thinking about undergoing vasectomy reversal may need to pay out of pocket, Dr. Vij notes, given it’s usually not covered by insurance.
Pregnancy rates after vasectomy reversal will range from about 30 percent to over 90 percent, depending on the type of procedure.
you are also making the assumption that your future wife can have children, so unless you find that out first and will chose not to marry a woman who can't have children you should rethink this.
if you fell in love, got married only to find out she couldn't have children, everything you did was for naught, would you abandon her?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I'm planning on getting one by the time I turn 19.
it hurts, like getting punched in the gut, but worse, you may want to think twice about it. Will they do one at that age? Often they won't because it's not generally meant as birth control or to be reversed.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I didn't pull up the transcript or anything but I seem to recall President Trump asked him to do US a favor, meaning the country, not him personally. The media didn't really attack that either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
In order to eliminate abortions by at least 99.8%, we could implement mandatory vasectomies to males worldwide. Such a policy has additional benefits such as the gradual reduction of poverty. As a pro lifer, I could get behind that. Thoughts?
lead the way, you first!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
I think you are mostly correct, however I'm not sure that is being more contagious is actually translating to more NEEDED hospitalizations when compared to flu, like the h1n1 (many are just being quarantined as a precaution)
just as an fyi the old flu test generally used was around 65-70% sensitive, meaning if it was a person who had flu A or B it would read as a positive test, the current is around 75% A false negative would either be considered a flu infection or a viral (non specific) infection.
the coronovirus that was used outside the U.S. I heard was around 70%
what this means to me is there are far many more people who have/had it but it just wasn't known. people dying or being hospitalized for viral pneumonia is nothing new and they use that term because it's generally pointless to identify the virus or they just can't. There is no real cure and most "treatment" is just managing symptoms.
I'm not convinced we know enough to say one is worse than the other due to lack of actual stats and the prevalence the deaths are primary at risk, compromised people.
from what I have heard is that while covid-19 is more contagious because it lives longer on surfaces it doesn't appear to make people as sick as the flu unless there is some kind of respiratory or immuno underlying condition, not saying I'm right or that I'm fully informed because I'm not, but that is what I think currently, subject to change based on more information.
these "outbreaks" in certain areas are alarming, but I also think that happens and could happen with the flu or any virus if proper precautions aren't used. The CDC tracks the flu every year and you can see patches of it as it spreads.
A flu vaccine has been available for many years and yet the number of deaths every year are still significant.
some doctor from W.H.O. said 80% of people will have mild symptoms of covid which tells me most won't get checked (why would they) they have already been infected and gotten over it and transmitted it.
again I could be wrong but I'm less worried about covid than I am of the flu, subject to change.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
everyone under 65 should be thankful they don't live in Italy, look at how their socialized medicine is handling it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
your lack of comprehension is just staggering, truly it is.
you started off in post #11
your accusation at me was "In your opinion pro-life people no longer want abortion to be illegal. Noted."
to which I replied in post #15 "it's your opinion that it's stripping a woman of her rights, pro life people don't see it that way, see I addressed what you actually said, you distorted and put words in my mouth with what I said, if you don't want to keep this honest I can oblige."
your accusation at me was "Glad you finally agree women have rights to begin with" (implying that I said something about women not having rights)
to which I replied in post #59 "you're doing it again, i never, ever, ever said women didn't have rights, honestly can't you control and check yourself a bit better?"
I was trying to give you an out by agreeing perhaps you had me confused with some other post but since you didn't catch on I'll just repost your lack of understanding and dishonesty again. Happy now?
But you insisted it was secretly "someone else" who wrote that
another thing I never said, I can't figure out if you are a troll, dishonest or have some kind of cognitive dysfunction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
no, I literally told you, you misquoted and misconstrued what I said AGAIN, idgaf if you are a moderator or not, I'm talking to you in the same manner you talk to me, I pointed that out way back, you stopped momentarily then continued and I followed suit, clearly the bar is extremely low to be a moderator.
You pointing out your a moderator clearly shows you shouldn't be one and you are on some kind of power trip.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I wouldn't expect you to be able to figure it out, but I have some crayons so I can draw you some pictures if that will help you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
ah my bad, I thought you knew more about this topic then you obviously do, I shouldn't have assumed that. Pro-life people don't see the baby as part of the woman's body, but rather a separate entity and since you agree that people do not have the right to murder other people then that is consistent.
so yes a woman has a right over her own body insofar that it doesn't involve the murder of another (another meaning the baby)
this right over her body should also extend to killing herself if she chooses, if one is to be consistent right?
do you need further clarification?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Nope. As my prior statements should already contextually indicate.
ok, I thought I was understanding you correctly, just wanted to make sure.
a bell curve basically captures the most of something, in some cases it shows what is "normal" as in a normal range. However there are outliers above and below or outside the bell curve. While a level of x is normal for 95% of people more or less of x will be normal for them.
if at x weeks of development pain is felt then it should stand to reason that x-y or x+y would or would not feel pain
if at 20 weeks or 140 days a baby feels pain, because some must develop that feeling earlier than 140 days then any objection should actually be before 20 days, but how much time before 140 days? Should it be whatever the earliest possible gestational age a baby might feel pain? (whatever that might be)
I ask this because I believe you object to an abortion at whatever development age a baby feels pain. How do you draw that line to be consistent?
For those that do not draw any lines (up to the point of birth) and yet are for gun bans to stop murders, that I find extremely inconsistent.
as far as women's rights, I think you have me confused with someone else, I understand you have many to reply to etc, I think it's just a mistake.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
how much can you do at one time?
who does it compare to a vacuum sealer or dehydrator?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I would of course not endorse an abortion at 9 months without medical complication.
how about 269 days of gestation without complications ok to abort?
scientific community's understanding of fetal development
statistics are a bell curve even with this is it not?
or is the development exactly the same for every baby and everyone that has been born?
Glad you finally agree women have rights to begin with
you're doing it again, i never, ever, ever said women didn't have rights, honestly can't you control and check yourself a bit better?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
you do have a right to party, but you have to fight for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I would guess it was probably facebook. This is concerning in that people really do believe this shit (pun intended) We are on the fast track to making the prophetic movie Idiocracy a reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
ah yes you are new here, well you'll learn quickly that some people just don't respond to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
you said "even if it's winter so they'll die without my hospitality."
I said "are you sure that's true?"
your link "sheriff and police departments have policies to not process eviction orders if the weather is below a certain temperature"
I don't see where you can evict someone so they'll die because of the weather.
Putting the rights of one person on hold for the benefit of another, is still just that; even if you think it's worth it.
I've already given the example that you can't protect your property with lethal traps or security. So certain rights are more important than others when they conflict.
In 98.7% of abortions the fetus has not reached the phase in development where pain is possible
so you accept that we know all there is to know about human development? Does everyone and everything develop at the same rate?
You seem to object to abortions when they can feel pain, is that correct? If so how strong is your objection? Strong enough to er on the side of caution?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
If someone is trespassing in my house, I have the right to evict them from my property, even if it's winter so they'll die without my hospitality.
are you sure that's true? For example, you can't legally set up lethal traps to protect your property. Just like police you are not legally obligated to risk your life to protect another. There's other examples, so I'm not sure that your example is legal.
Many pro-lifers wish it to be legally mandated that she lose her freedoms upon pregnancy (granted I would too for late term pregnancies, as I do believe in protecting beings whom feel pain).
that is not how I see pro lifers approach their argument. Your are looking at the issue from the point of view that this is about the woman. Someone pro life would look at this issue from the point of view of the baby.
let's say there is a conflict, a winner and a loser.
what would the woman actually loose? convenience, physical discomfort, financial discomfort etc
what would the baby actually loose? their life and in some cases a brutally painful death.
so how much is a life worth? where do we draw the lines?
I'm sure you know that we can detect brain waves much earlier in the development than let's say 20-30 years ago, maybe it can be even earlier than we have the technology for currently, do you think that could be possible that we don't know everything? If you do then could it be possible that at some point in the future we will discover that babies can feel pain earlier than what is claimed now? Does that matter or concern you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
In your opinion pro-life people no longer want abortion to be illegal. Noted.
it's your opinion that it's stripping a woman of her rights, pro life people don't see it that way, see I addressed what you actually said, you distorted and put words in my mouth with what I said, if you don't want to keep this honest I can oblige.
like this, your opinion is that someone has the right to kill another if they are unwanted or inconvenient, that how you want to play it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I'm curious how beliefs in stripping women of their rights for the benefit of strangers (AKA "the unborn")
that maybe your belief but it's not for pro life people, maybe that's why you are confused.
let's examine what the sugar coated word "abortion" actually is, well let's not because you should know, there's plenty of graphic video and descriptions.
Are immigrants torn apart willfully and in the same manner? Let's compare apples to apples here right?
Stances against universal health care
I'm opposed to having more of my money, that I earn, that I need, stolen and given to someone else for their personal benefit. Why couldn't restrictions be lessened and systems put in place to encourage and support charities like the Bradley free clinics, St. Jude's children's hospitals as well as other cancer charities etc? It would be too frightening for the government to give up that kind of control.
Gun access at the expense of life. Just universal background checks is estimated to be able to prevent over 1000 murders per year.
I don't believe that to be true since most guns used in crimes were obtained illegally and often used by people prohibited from having them in the first place.
what I find conflicting is pro baby murder then all this nonsense about caring for the issues you listed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
naw he's got the best healthcare money can buy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
yes, theories, which are like opinions really, but yeah I can understand why some people might believe it without and actual proof, just theory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I'm thinking more of the macro evolution " If the bottle became a can, that would be macro evolution."
(everything is adaptation except for the very beginning when non life changed to life, that is how I understand what evolution is.)
Natural selection is simply the tendency of beneficial traits to increase in frequency in a population.
An adaptation is a characteristic that increases an organism's chances of surviving, mating, and reproducing.
The difference between inherited adaptations and evolution is that when the accumulated adaptations become so numerous that the resulting organism's DNA is no longer compatible with the ancestral version of the organisms, the organism has evolved into a new species.
(I like those explanations/definitions.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
where scientists observe within a very short amount of generations the adaptations of a species of fish into two different species of fish?
you see, you said it yourself, thus my very first question about the difference between adaptation and evolution, if there isn't one then the word evolution isn't unique, has no unique meaning and shouldn't be used, it's redundant at best.
yes, organisms adapt.
'observable speciation' they are talking about "species splitting in two"
I don't see how a hybrid is consider a split since it's a combination so I won't bother with the link.
'evolution experiments'
um, that would be intelligent design would it not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
you are talking about survival of the fittest basically which I don't disagree with.
in your example, this arbitrary beneficial difference, what evidence is there that something like that has actually happened? this certainly IS done by selective breeding which can also happen in nature calling it survival of the fittest and or adaptation. I don't see how it's evolution though. If evolution is the same as adaptation and or survival of the fittest the word is meaningless and pointless.
mutations are not evolution the way I understand those words are used and mean or I have not seen any evidence to prove it.
How can you prove evolution using the scientific method?
The scientific method has five basic steps, plus one feedback step:
- Make an observation.
- Ask a question.
- Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
- Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
- Test the prediction.
- Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
from what I have read, evolution is a new/different organism or characteristic than the parent species, to become better, more complex, go up, de-evolve would be the opposite.
adaptation isn't even a question. the evidence of adaptation is plentiful and readily understandable and is caused by some outside force.
for anything to be considered scientifically true, it has to be something that can be duplicated. If evolution were true, wouldn't scientists be able to recreate the sequence of change that transformed monkeys into humans?
Evolution is unpredictable and arbitrary, while science is systematic—based on a preexisting system. And in a broader sense, it does not seem the universe could have created itself arbitrarily and still be completely, totally, and in every regard, systematic.
(maybe it's just not a needed word, it can't be defined differently than words that already exist?)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
you believe in evolution? can you give me an example of evolution which is not just adaptation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
right, which makes me believe it's not about insults etc but rather that they lost control when Trump won, that is what all of this has really been about. They try to claim the moral high ground, fake investigations etc in the desperate hopes they can get that control back. Do as I say, not as I do, Democrat credo.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Bernie is a likeable person and has a great personality overall,
I've heard that, I don't get it, why would you like someone who is going to take more of what you earn? put more government into your life and control a large part of it?
Created:
Posted in:
let's see, he called a guy fat, stupid, threatened to slap someone, then what he called that woman, claimed it was from a movie, but it wasn't, yet he jumped on the Trump said bad stuff!!!
we don't really expect the media to be consistent either but then we wonder why the country is do divided? Sure Trump hasn't really helped that situation as much as he could (imo) However if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem, right?
This division will get wider, how could it not, when there isn't fair and equal treatment/standards, at least attempt a good fake at it.
this is a classic weekend at Bernie's, they will prop him up in hopes to get elected then deem him unfit and replace him with the v.p.
it's funny the claim that Trump is dangerous, Joe is dangerous, should he be elected I really do hope he is replaced, I am genuinely concerned.
Created:
Posted in:
"A right is a power or privilege that is recognized by tradition or law. Natural or human rights are inherent to human nature; they are not given by government,"
Legal rights are those recognized by government, but they can often be taken away as easily as they are given.
(I would say any right that can be taken away as easily as given, is not a right at all, privilege at best)
"All of the rights in the Bill of Rights are designed as limits on government. They say what government cannot do, not what it must do. Such limits are known as negative rights, versus the positive rights of requiring government to provide jobs and healthcare."
(again positive rights are pretty meaningless and not a right imo, privilege at best)
(natural rights to not infringe on anyone else's rights where positive ones can and will)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
News people are talking about it. That's pretty much it from what I can tell.
I have been saying this as well. There's really not much else for the news to report on since most of the political stuff isn't as hot as it once was.
as a side note this is all b.s.
it takes 48-72 hours for a presumptive positive, then 7 days to confirm that positive. imagine how many people will never be tests because their symptoms aren't that bad (same is true for flu etc) they really think this can be contained? lol um, no.
I don't know what the sensitivity and specificity for the test is, but it's a pcr test so probably pretty good, but not 100% so there's there, but I'll bet it's expesnive!
Created:
simple "I'm not Trump" oh and free stuff, let's not forget that.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Biden will pick Hillary, he will then commit suicide by some means equivalent to shooting himself in the back of the head 3 times and she'll be president.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
how do positions appointed for life which are suppose to be a-political pay a political price? oh I know, he's full of sh1t, horrible attempt to justify and backtrack.
calling out 2 specifically by name? Knowing the protests and threats against Kavanaugh and his family this is something someone in his position should do?
How anyone can come to this p.o.s. person's defense is appauling.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
at one time, things like building roads etc, those jobs where "bid" on by private companies, so while publicly funded it was also tied to capitalism, as it should be and expanded into other government funded things. Government control should be at a minimum and only when absolutely necessary. It seems people believe in that enough that they came out to vote for Biden who seems to be the least of all evils.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
his money should be a good boost for Trump's economy though HAHAHA
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Next debate going to be fun. The B word is gonna come out so much
it will be a Trump vs Porky Pig debate, hell he might forget to show up for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You have no clue how many people the IRS bankrupted, do you?
talk about hitting the nail on the head, bankrupted or jailed.
can I pay more in taxes and have more government in my life please? wtf is wrong with these people?
Created: