Home | Community | Message Board

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < First | < Back | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | Next > | Last >
OfflineOz_Salvia
Conservative
Registered: 04/14/20
Posts: 165
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Stable Genius]
    #27539887 - 11/11/21 10:45 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Stable Genius said:
And this 'vortex of death' is another story that isn't going to happen, it simply won't. I've been installing batteries since 2014 and so far I've disconnected 1 person's house from the grid.
It's a completely ridiculous proposition to claim that people will be 'leaving the grid in droves' and that's before electric vehicles are added to the equation.

Yes there will be increasing numbers of far flung communities with their own renewable powered micro grids, there is now, but can you seriously imagine doing something similar in Brisbane with 3 million people... 1 million back up generators...  :nonono:

Coal fired power stations are doomed but the best back up generator you could ever want (slaps the bonnet) the grid, is not going anywhere. It's going to be powered differently and the batteries aren't going to all be lithium but it's here to stay.

I do agree with the idea of more interconnectors but I can almost hear the West Australians blubbering about it now "who'll bloody pay for it" and "why do we bloody need to share our bloody sunshine with the Eastern States, it's our sunshine, just like all this bloody iron ore, it's all ours"  :cryaboutit:




As experience curves show from BNEF the price of PV falls as do batteries. Getting close now. At 17 cents (in link below). That's likely 5 years away. It will give you more sparkie work.

"Once an individual product’s price per kilowatt-hour drops below 10 cents, battery storage is likely to be a worthwhile investment for a large number of households." https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/comparison-table/

The people who will mostly take advantage of that and get off the grid will be the peri-urban to urban people. The urban masses will be on the grid and remain so. They're already all on the water grid (potable water and sewage) and are at whim to whatever quality/quantity and price the market dictates. I don't have that problem.

In regards to interstate cross-continent and Asian market supply, high DC interconnectors with about a 3% loss per 1000 kms could do it. Professor Blakers at the ANU's Energy Change Institute is very keen for it, as he is for pumped hydro.

Right about WA's petulant attitude. I recall when the mining boom came off the boil they were demanding a greater slice of the federal GST.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineStable Genius
Durka durka
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/26/18
Posts: 5,946
Loc: Durkadurkastan
Last seen: 11 hours, 49 minutes
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Oz_Salvia]
    #27539965 - 11/12/21 12:24 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

I keep saying capitalism will save the world :flowstone:

Friendly Jordies summed up anti mask covid freedom fighter's like that dick from Rebel News nicely :laugh2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOz_Salvia
Conservative
Registered: 04/14/20
Posts: 165
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Stable Genius]
    #27540068 - 11/12/21 04:50 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Stable Genius said:
I keep saying capitalism will save the world :flowstone:

Friendly Jordies summed up anti mask covid freedom fighter's like that dick from Rebel News nicely :laugh2:




I don't think capitalism can save the world.

It's based on growth and the planet is finite. The biosphere is facing stress and ecosystems are in collapse from a global over-population reliant on ancient sunlight for liquid and gas hydrocarbon fuels and fertilisers. Capitalism requires increasing this pressure by consumption to generate services and products to grow profit to pay off debt which was borrowed to further increase business activity venture. It has to grow to survive in an endless repeat cycle. The move to renewables will be an adjunct to fossil fuels not a replacement for it is a fossil fuel derivative and too dilute in energy to match.

Further, there isn't a share you'd buy unless it evidences growth i.e. an attractive P/E, wide moat, good management and a sound thesis as a product or service that has scale yet to be realised - a stock not yet loved (i.e not widely known).

What's the alternative? Socialism. It has failed. It also has an appalling environmental record, every bit as bad as capitalism and depending on despot it's even genocidal. Some may argue capitalism is too but that's another topic.

I guess the axiom is money won't buy happiness but poverty is misery. Of the two systems I'll take capitalism because there's at least a chance of not being in misery if one plays the game (which I do). It will end badly though but I'll be long gone in a box. 

As for Avi Yemini, he's a rabid Zionist and more than happy with the theft of Palestinian land and racist repression. He was a Golani Brigades sniper along the Gaza Strip so he'd have shot with impunity stone throwers, often just teenagers who have witnessed nothing but oppression in their Israeli made ghetto concentration camp. Over 5000 crammed to the square kilometre and there's Avi, the Krav Maga man, 'fish in the barrel' shooting out knees from a safe space. Such IDF heroism. If Australia had fair laws free of the Israeli Lobby mobs he'd be locked up for foreign war crimes the same as ISIS.

Hey, I'm off topic. This is the COVID thread.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblefeeversM
Male


Registered: 12/28/10
Posts: 8,546
Loc: Flag
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: junk_f00d] * 4
    #27540090 - 11/12/21 05:26 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

junk_f00d said:
Where is the line drawn between reasonable skepticism, questioning or desire to preserve civil liberties and 'anti-science' or 'anti-vax'? I find it ironic that skepticism and questioning lead one to be considered 'anti-science'.  Legit question though I think this is going to be a tough and interesting issue for society to resolve going forward. This is not limited to just COVID, and I think it's a really interesting issue. And there's a parallel issue of the conviction with which one holds their beliefs.


Being 'anti-science' is a two way street and by ignorantly conforming your thoughts to whatever consensus is dominant, you're very clearly not behaving in a way that corresponds to the scientific method.. Science is not about blindly accepting consensus. I think the crux of the issue is the difference in institutions and systems people trust personally (i.e, Alex Jones providing anecdotal evidence is not a valid source, nor is some crappy facebook post). We outsource truth finding to institutions we trust, and 'anti-science' people tend not to consider them as trustworthy. It doesn't mean they're dumb or 'anti-science' necessarily. For example, when considering their financial incentives, I think it's reasonable to be skeptical of the conclusions Big Pharma may draw from studies they've financed, and it's fair to oppose a monopoly on truth as well, imo. But that's just how the game theory checks out at times unfortunately.


Further, most people simply aren't equipped to meaningfully read scientific papers, especially in fields outside of their domains. A good number of people struggle with basic reading comprehension, logic and  arithmetic. Almost any study will require a knowledge of statistics, something infamously easy to deceive with, and any reading should be done with the goal of finding problems, alternative explanations, or other flaws - not parroting the conclusion, or even worse, drawing conclusions the authors didn't. This is hard and demanding work.



An interesting phrase might be 'anti-conspiracy' to describe what it feels like being on the receiving end of the stick. As if any idea that deviates from 'mainstream' consensus (which is, ironically, disproportionately influenced by a handful of small entities) is categorically false.


But I am curious what talking points you'd consider strictly 'anti-science' or 'anti-vax', and to what extent are you willing to change your own stance, when provided with sufficient evidence? Do you require 'expert consensus' to form or validate your opinions? Will you look at data or read studies yourself and try to poke holes in conclusions? Will you entertain other thoughts or viewpoints without lazily pigeon-holing others as anti-science?




Where is the reasonable skepticism though? At this point there have been likely hundreds of “covid skeptics” posting things on the shroomery. Sometimes it starts out with an argument worth having (do shutdowns do more harm than good, are mandates the way to go, should kids be required to get the vaccine, etc.) but then it is almost always followed immediately by outright lies and misinformation as the basis for their argument. Usually it’s something along the lines of “Why would we shut our entire economy down for something with a .01% death rate?” Or “Why should kids take the risk of getting a vaccine when Covid doesn’t effect them?”

I haven’t seen a single person on the ‘skeptic’ side trying to have a reality based argument, no one I’ve seen is “just asking questions”... that implies that they actually care about getting factual answers. They have a narrative to push and the “just asking questions” ruse gives them an easy cop out any time they’re called out on the misinformation they’re pumping- they just accuse the person who posts facts of being a closed minded sheep brainwashed by mainstream media and “the official narrative”. It happens over and over. It’s like they’re all using the same script, usually they finish with “I can’t believe so many people on a psychedelic site are against free thinking and pro MSM!”

There’s probably a large bias due to the specific population that visits this site, but I think it’s possible we don’t see many rational arguments against anything Covid related because nearly all of the people who are level headed and informed enough to make a fact-based non-emotional argument have used those same skills to draw the same conclusions of nearly every expert in the fields, and also used those conclusions of experts in the fields (along with other widely available data points) to form opinions on things that are outside of their own areas of expertise.

Talking about people calling out conspiracy theorists as being “anti-conspiracy” certainly isn’t accurate. One of the largest and most profitable conspiracies of this whole pandemic has been the pushing of conspiracies themselves. Just look at the viewer numbers and patreon accounts of those spreading the most misinformation, the conspiracy to brainwash and enrage people for profits with Covid lies is far more widespread, effective, and literally deadly than anything CNN is doing by covering a Fauci speech or saying Joe Rogan eats horse paste.

As for your last paragraph, you really need to post specific examples. Anti-vax and anti-science are terms that are probably over used, but the arguments are also usually very easy to identify as well.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineOz_Salvia
Conservative
Registered: 04/14/20
Posts: 165
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
    #27540104 - 11/12/21 05:57 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Kryptos said:
Vortex of death won't ever happen, but I could see wealthier people that can afford to go off grid doing so. Ish. I expect that they will pass some sort of legal backup plan that requires the infrastructure to be maintained so if their off grid generators fail they can hook up again with minimal discomfort.

This will almost certainly raise prices for poor people and city dwellers, but that's pretty standard practice nowadays. Privatize gains, socialize losses.




I know a plastic surgeon up the road who has gone off grid and I mean all the way who flies his helicopter from his acreage out to the Gold Coast.

It's happening, but as you've said to the well heeled, and that's the premium early adopters take on the chin. As the prices on batteries come down per the experience curve more will take them up, as I will. I see no economic advantage just yet given I get the 20 cents Feed in Tariff (so I'm using the utility as my battery). I don't have power bills, nor water bills.

Experience curves are why early plasma TV's, as I saw in Domaine (an over priced retail store run by the wife of Gerry Harvey who also runs over priced retail stores), sold for an insane 30k AUD, now one can get far better for less than $1000 AUD. White goods were the same, vehicles before that. Battery storage will be meh in good time.

As for generators, well they don't fail because you stay on top of maintenance. You have a warranty. As you do all your power tools i.e. chainsaw, pole chainsaw, whipper snipper, ride on mower, rotary hoe, front end loader, and vehicles. This is what I have, it's a 6.5kw with a 32 amp transfer switch to the house. This gen has an app per wifi and tells you how much petrol and oil you have and the hours left on each. https://www.briggsandstratton.com/au/en_au/product-catalog/portable-generators/q6500-quietpower-series-inverter-generator-with-bluetooth.html

A transfer switch means you plug your gen in so there are no extension cords through windows or doors. Your house comforts are 100% despite the black out and at 6.5kw you can run a/c too on cyclonic days. A sparkie by law is required to install it. In stormy QLD this should be a regular item. https://www.bunnings.com.au/briggs-stratton-manual-transfer-switch-accessory-kit_p0054807

The idea that "the off the grid sort" is some whacko with as few teeth from the movie Deliverance and out in the boon docks is a prepper myth. It's getting realistic and high in tech.


Edited by Oz_Salvia (11/12/21 06:06 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,323
Last seen: 41 minutes, 34 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: feevers] * 1
    #27540286 - 11/12/21 09:10 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

feevers said:
Quote:

junk_f00d said:
Where is the line drawn between reasonable skepticism, questioning or desire to preserve civil liberties and 'anti-science' or 'anti-vax'? I find it ironic that skepticism and questioning lead one to be considered 'anti-science'.  Legit question though I think this is going to be a tough and interesting issue for society to resolve going forward. This is not limited to just COVID, and I think it's a really interesting issue. And there's a parallel issue of the conviction with which one holds their beliefs.


Being 'anti-science' is a two way street and by ignorantly conforming your thoughts to whatever consensus is dominant, you're very clearly not behaving in a way that corresponds to the scientific method.. Science is not about blindly accepting consensus. I think the crux of the issue is the difference in institutions and systems people trust personally (i.e, Alex Jones providing anecdotal evidence is not a valid source, nor is some crappy facebook post). We outsource truth finding to institutions we trust, and 'anti-science' people tend not to consider them as trustworthy. It doesn't mean they're dumb or 'anti-science' necessarily. For example, when considering their financial incentives, I think it's reasonable to be skeptical of the conclusions Big Pharma may draw from studies they've financed, and it's fair to oppose a monopoly on truth as well, imo. But that's just how the game theory checks out at times unfortunately.


Further, most people simply aren't equipped to meaningfully read scientific papers, especially in fields outside of their domains. A good number of people struggle with basic reading comprehension, logic and  arithmetic. Almost any study will require a knowledge of statistics, something infamously easy to deceive with, and any reading should be done with the goal of finding problems, alternative explanations, or other flaws - not parroting the conclusion, or even worse, drawing conclusions the authors didn't. This is hard and demanding work.



An interesting phrase might be 'anti-conspiracy' to describe what it feels like being on the receiving end of the stick. As if any idea that deviates from 'mainstream' consensus (which is, ironically, disproportionately influenced by a handful of small entities) is categorically false.


But I am curious what talking points you'd consider strictly 'anti-science' or 'anti-vax', and to what extent are you willing to change your own stance, when provided with sufficient evidence? Do you require 'expert consensus' to form or validate your opinions? Will you look at data or read studies yourself and try to poke holes in conclusions? Will you entertain other thoughts or viewpoints without lazily pigeon-holing others as anti-science?




Where is the reasonable skepticism though? At this point there have been likely hundreds of “covid skeptics” posting things on the shroomery. Sometimes it starts out with an argument worth having (do shutdowns do more harm than good, are mandates the way to go, should kids be required to get the vaccine, etc.) but then it is almost always followed immediately by outright lies and misinformation as the basis for their argument. Usually it’s something along the lines of “Why would we shut our entire economy down for something with a .01% death rate?” Or “Why should kids take the risk of getting a vaccine when Covid doesn’t effect them?”

I haven’t seen a single person on the ‘skeptic’ side trying to have a reality based argument, no one I’ve seen is “just asking questions”... that implies that they actually care about getting factual answers. They have a narrative to push and the “just asking questions” ruse gives them an easy cop out any time they’re called out on the misinformation they’re pumping- they just accuse the person who posts facts of being a closed minded sheep brainwashed by mainstream media and “the official narrative”. It happens over and over. It’s like they’re all using the same script, usually they finish with “I can’t believe so many people on a psychedelic site are against free thinking and pro MSM!”

There’s probably a large bias due to the specific population that visits this site, but I think it’s possible we don’t see many rational arguments against anything Covid related because nearly all of the people who are level headed and informed enough to make a fact-based non-emotional argument have used those same skills to draw the same conclusions of nearly every expert in the fields, and also used those conclusions of experts in the fields (along with other widely available data points) to form opinions on things that are outside of their own areas of expertise.

Talking about people calling out conspiracy theorists as being “anti-conspiracy” certainly isn’t accurate. One of the largest and most profitable conspiracies of this whole pandemic has been the pushing of conspiracies themselves. Just look at the viewer numbers and patreon accounts of those spreading the most misinformation, the conspiracy to brainwash and enrage people for profits with Covid lies is far more widespread, effective, and literally deadly than anything CNN is doing by covering a Fauci speech or saying Joe Rogan eats horse paste.

As for your last paragraph, you really need to post specific examples. Anti-vax and anti-science are terms that are probably over used, but the arguments are also usually very easy to identify as well.




They do read off a script. Look up "how to radicalize a normie", it's literally a 33 step script of how to structure an argument by 'just asking questions', with the end goal of a new MAGA hat. The Holocaust denier from last week also went down the same exact script as well.

In principle, it's a how to guide on structuring an argument, with a few steps on how to obfuscate your true intentions from the audience. Usually with a slow drip of information, and actively hiding behind the 'just asking questions' and 'why are you so close-minded?' lines when challenged.

I also kinda played into the script by getting pissed off, which allowed the guy to do that Jordan Peterson thing where he adjusts his monocle, talks a little slower, enunciates more, and says there's no need for anger.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: feevers]
    #27540530 - 11/12/21 12:54 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

feevers said:
Where is the reasonable skepticism though? At this point there have been likely hundreds of “covid skeptics” posting things on the shroomery. Sometimes it starts out with an argument worth having (do shutdowns do more harm than good, are mandates the way to go, should kids be required to get the vaccine, etc.) but then it is almost always followed immediately by outright lies and misinformation as the basis for their argument. Usually it’s something along the lines of “Why would we shut our entire economy down for something with a .01% death rate?” Or “Why should kids take the risk of getting a vaccine when Covid doesn’t effect them?”




This is the most reasonable, non-fringe arguement I've read against mandates, please read it so I don't have to poorly reword it. It's from a John Hopkins member, and uses evidence to support that natural immunity is superior, that the data clearly shows it does more harm than good for children, that mandates over voluntary vaccination isn't necessary, that the side effects are not sufficiently reported, studied or known (esp w.r.t multiple boosters and/or long term or reproductive) and many more things:
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vaccines-should-not-be-required-for-all-americans

Before we get going, I want to say that in my opinion, the burden of proof is completely on the pro-vax people. They need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that these measures are logical and effective, and that no reasonable alternative exists, before people concede liberties. I think that's agreeable (and the opposite, conceding liberties without logic or alternative considerations, is certainly DISagreeable). Therefore it's import to ponder on this before swiftly introducing new mandates. But on the contrary, I don't need to prove anything other than that consensus does not yet exist. i.e, since the pro-vax mandate argument relies on slowing spread, I don't need to prove the vaccines don't stop spread, I just need to show that there isn't a strict consensus yet.

Quote:

feevers said:
I haven’t seen a single person on the ‘skeptic’ side trying to have a reality based argument, no one I’ve seen is “just asking questions”... that implies that they actually care about getting factual answers. They have a narrative to push and the “just asking questions” ruse gives them an easy cop out any time they’re called out on the misinformation they’re pumping- they just accuse the person who posts facts of being a closed minded sheep brainwashed by mainstream media and “the official narrative”. It happens over and over. It’s like they’re all using the same script, usually they finish with “I can’t believe so many people on a psychedelic site are against free thinking and pro MSM!”

There’s probably a large bias due to the specific population that visits this site, but I think it’s possible we don’t see many rational arguments against anything Covid related because nearly all of the people who are level headed and informed enough to make a fact-based non-emotional argument have used those same skills to draw the same conclusions of nearly every expert in the fields, and also used those conclusions of experts in the fields (along with other widely available data points) to form opinions on things that are outside of their own areas of expertise.




Well, it sounds like you've experienced interfacing with someone who doesn't trust the institutions you trust. That doesn't make it 'not reality based'. But I've linked you an expert in the field at any rate. The MSM can lie and I've seen this myself many times during this, beginning with the false claim that the vaccines slowed the spread when no data had been gathered on this yet (this was awhile ago). But I believe dismantling pro-vax mandates arguments is possible with using 'reality based' mainstream sources and logic on your turf, personally, and that these arguments are more impactful as well.

MSM is allowed to lie, and we have large propaganda campaigns going on right now due to the pandemic (not a conspiracy take, it's true even from a public health perspective).


Quote:

feevers said:
Talking about people calling out conspiracy theorists as being “anti-conspiracy” certainly isn’t accurate. One of the largest and most profitable conspiracies of this whole pandemic has been the pushing of conspiracies themselves. Just look at the viewer numbers and patreon accounts of those spreading the most misinformation, the conspiracy to brainwash and enrage people for profits with Covid lies is far more widespread, effective, and literally deadly than anything CNN is doing by covering a Fauci speech or saying Joe Rogan eats horse paste.

As for your last paragraph, you really need to post specific examples. Anti-vax and anti-science are terms that are probably over used, but the arguments are also usually very easy to identify as well.



The profits these guys are making is nothing compared to big pharma... Perhaps you don't label others as conspiracy theorist so easily, but in my experience any arguement that questions MSM is essentially a conspiracy theory, even if you agree with Fauci, the Surgeon General, and leading research / data (again, this happened to me when I kept repeating that there was no data on whether or not the vaccines reduces infection and transmission rates at the time, and there wasn't, yet the MSM had wrongly presented them as the key to reducing spread).


The last paragraph was just rhetorical. Just pointing out that before one criticizes others they should reflect on themselves. The people supporting the mandate are just as susceptible to propaganda as those that think horse paste is the secret sauce. And on that note, not to point at you personally but it's an example that's been presented, horse paste, or Ivermectin, HAS been very effective in reducing symptomatic COVID, has it not? This may be an example of you shunning something that deviates from the MSM, despite it being true. It is also an alternative, and should be investigated just as fervently if pro-vax people really want to get over the pandemic rather than forcibly inject every last naysayer.


I'm of the opinion that most people actually agree more than 'debates' or 'arguments' often imply, and I like to begin by establishing common ground. I don't like the adversarial tone of those words. When I use the term 'argument' I mean it in the logical sense. We are dialoguing, not 'arguing' or 'debating', and any meaningful dialogue starts by coming terms; agreeing on definitions, data, intent etc. We both want the best for everyone, and we can work back from there to find where we disagree.


Edited by junk_f00d (11/12/21 01:41 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
    #27540566 - 11/12/21 01:22 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Kryptos said:
They do read off a script. Look up "how to radicalize a normie", it's literally a 33 step script of how to structure an argument by 'just asking questions', with the end goal of a new MAGA hat. The Holocaust denier from last week also went down the same exact script as well.

In principle, it's a how to guide on structuring an argument, with a few steps on how to obfuscate your true intentions from the audience. Usually with a slow drip of information, and actively hiding behind the 'just asking questions' and 'why are you so close-minded?' lines when challenged.

I also kinda played into the script by getting pissed off, which allowed the guy to do that Jordan Peterson thing where he adjusts his monocle, talks a little slower, enunciates more, and says there's no need for anger.



Are you implying that MSM and it's followers do not read off a script or something? Or that similar propaganda doesn't exist on all sides, everywhere? Sorry I find this viewpoint hard to understand - only those who disagree with your opinion (or MSM's opinion?) are either practicing or being influenced by propaganda campaigns?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineStable Genius
Durka durka
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/26/18
Posts: 5,946
Loc: Durkadurkastan
Last seen: 11 hours, 49 minutes
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Oz_Salvia]
    #27540571 - 11/12/21 01:25 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Oooooo thanks for the links on Avi, they were somehow not surprising but definitely ugly reading :super:

Quote:

Oz_Salvia said:
I know a plastic surgeon up the road who has gone off grid and I mean all the way who flies his helicopter from his acreage out to the Gold Coast.




... and then there are the super mega insanely rich. The last thing on their mind is the environment.


Quote:

Oz_Salvia said:
It's happening, but as you've said to the well heeled, and that's the premium early adopters take on the chin. As the prices on batteries come down per the experience curve more will take them up, as I will. I see no economic advantage just yet given I get the 20 cents Feed in Tariff (so I'm using the utility as my battery). I don't have power bills, nor water bills.




I keep saying capitalism will save the world. :awesomenod:


Quote:

Oz_Salvia said:
As for generators, well they don't fail because you stay on top of maintenance. You have a warranty. As you do all your power tools i.e. chainsaw, pole chainsaw, whipper snipper, ride on mower, rotary hoe, front end loader, and vehicles. This is what I have, it's a 6.5kw with a 32 amp transfer switch to the house. This gen has an app per wifi and tells you how much petrol and oil you have and the hours left on each.




That's a pretty cool generator :thumbup: and the generator subject is right at the centre of why a home should not disconnect from the grid. But yeah another time.



Quote:

Oz_Salvia said:
The idea that "the off the grid sort" is some whacko with as few teeth from the movie Deliverance and out in the boon docks is a prepper myth. It's getting realistic and high in tech.




lol what I was originally referring to was the high % of prepper/conspiracy/vaccine conspiracy 'types of people' I have been seeing lately. You're normal, I'm talking about having a face to face discussion with someone who has a completely bizarre take on reality.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,313
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 3 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Stable Genius]
    #27540606 - 11/12/21 01:48 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

It's from a John Hopkins member, and uses evidence to support that natural immunity is superior,



Natural immunity is like a vaccine that kills 1% of the people who get it. There’s nothing superior about that.

Quote:

i kept repeating that there was no data on whether or not the vaccines reduces infection and transmission rates at the time, and there wasn't, y



You were repeatedly wrong. The clinical trials literally test the difference between infection rates in the vaccinated and the unvaccinated control group. The they say 90% efficacy that means there were 90% fewer infections in the vaccinated group then the control. The moderna vaccine is still preventing 80% of infections based on real world data. If eight of of ten people who would have been infected unvaccinated are not getting covid because they are vaccinated then the vaccines prevent spread.

It’s really not hard to find this data. Most states now track breakthroughs and it’s all there to see for yourself.


Edited by koods (11/12/21 01:57 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540618 - 11/12/21 01:57 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Quote:

It's from a John Hopkins member, and uses evidence to support that natural immunity is superior,



Natural immunity is like a vaccine that kills 1% of the people who get it. There’s nothing superior about that.



If you're in the demographic that's at risk (for most people, the risk is FAR less than 1%) and you decide you want the vaccine, you can get it. Why mandate?

Additionally, the vaccine looses efficacy against both variants and time, and provide their own non-nil risk. Do you support a solution that involves indefinite boosters?

Lastly, if the vaccines are effective at reducing transmission, hospitalization or death, can you please show me a clear negative correlation between vaccination campaigns and transmission, hospitalization and death across regions?


Edited by junk_f00d (11/12/21 01:59 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,313
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 3 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: junk_f00d]
    #27540620 - 11/12/21 01:59 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Because you are 5-20x times more likely to be a vector of disease if you are not vaccinated. You are feee to not be vaccinated. We are free to not want you in our workplaces and businesses.

Quote:

Do you support a solution that involves indefinite boosters?




If that’s what it takes to go to Walgreens once a year for ten minutes. What’s the big deal? Better than getting sick for a week or two. If you don’t want the boosters, then get sick. Nobody should care about infections as long as everyone has acquired immunity. Infections are a problem because of the 30% who are vulnerable to serious disease.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”


Edited by koods (11/12/21 02:02 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540623 - 11/12/21 02:01 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

edit: double


Edited by junk_f00d (11/12/21 02:05 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: junk_f00d]
    #27540625 - 11/12/21 02:04 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Because you are 5-20x times more likely to be a vector of disease if you are not vaccinated. You are feee to not be vaccinated. We are free to not want you in our workplaces and businesses.



I believe you mean 'if you have no prior immunity'. I take issue with natural immunity being swept under the rug. So someone gets it, they are a vector, they develop immunity. If vaccinations are available for others, I don't see the issue.

So why are you worried about me being a vector? Are you worried you might carry and transmit to some voluntarily unvaccinated vulnerable populations?

Quote:


If you don’t want the boosters, then get sick.




Exactly, so you oppose the mandates or what?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,313
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 3 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: junk_f00d]
    #27540627 - 11/12/21 02:05 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

junk_f00d said:
Quote:

koods said:
Because you are 5-20x times more likely to be a vector of disease if you are not vaccinated. You are feee to not be vaccinated. We are free to not want you in our workplaces and businesses.



I believe you mean 'if you have no prior immunity'. I take issue with natural immunity being swept under the rug. Also, if you are vaccinated, why are you worried about me being a vector? Are you worried you might carry and transmit to some unvaccinated vulnerable populations?




You being a vector isn’t my personal problem. It’s a public health problem.

Acquired immunity is acquired immunity. There’s really no difference if it’s through infection or vaccine. Ifeciln base immunity is far more variable by otherwise is equivalent. The problem is getting immunity naturally is far more dangerous for every single demographic. It’s not even close.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540637 - 11/12/21 02:14 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Quote:

junk_f00d said:
Quote:

koods said:
Because you are 5-20x times more likely to be a vector of disease if you are not vaccinated. You are feee to not be vaccinated. We are free to not want you in our workplaces and businesses.



I believe you mean 'if you have no prior immunity'. I take issue with natural immunity being swept under the rug. Also, if you are vaccinated, why are you worried about me being a vector? Are you worried you might carry and transmit to some unvaccinated vulnerable populations?




You being a vector isn’t my personal problem. It’s a public health problem.

Acquired immunity is acquired immunity. There’s really no difference if it’s through infection or vaccine. Ifeciln base immunity is far more variable by otherwise is equivalent. The problem is getting immunity naturally is far more dangerous for every single demographic. It’s not even close.





Agree it's a public health problem. But what subset of the public is it really a problem for? Those who have not acquired immunity through either vaccination or exposure, which is essentially those who have elected to pass on the vaccines. So, again, why mandate?


Quote:


The problem is getting immunity naturally is far more dangerous for every single demographic. It’s not even close.




Even though I generally agree, I invite you to prove this statement. Can you tell me the comparative risk profiles for a healthy person under 65 with no comorbidities, as well as the comparative risk profile for people under 25 (and provide sources)? The John Hopkins link I posted concludes that the vaccine may pose more risk for children than COVID, and several nordic countries have banned Moderna as it may pose greater risk to certain demographics (males under 30) than COVID.

Additionally, the effects of boosters every 6 months for years has not been studied. At any rate, the risk is SO small for someone under 65 with no co-morbidities. But this isn't what I'm trying to argue about, I'm trying to argue that mandates are not necessary. I don't care if someone gets vaccinated or not, I care if my government starts forcing me to comply with this.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,313
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 3 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540638 - 11/12/21 02:14 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Even without acquired immunity there is a huge range of susceptibility to infection based on the innate immune response. Some people have vaccine level immunity just based in their innate immune response. People who have had covid in general are more susceptible to being infected. As a group, their innate immune system isn’t as good at stopping covid as the population who never got covid.

If you’ve already been infected you should consider that you may be someone who is more susceptible to getting covid in the first place, and you would benefit from the extra boost the vaccine gives you. There certainly have been quite a lot of people on this site who have been infected more than once. Certainly a lot more than people who have been vaccinated and then gotten infected. It’s pretty clear that either through less innate immunity, poor mitigation behavior or poor immune response to infection, getting covid once seems to be a decent predictor of who will get it again.


Edited by koods (11/12/21 02:17 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540641 - 11/12/21 02:18 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Even without acquired immunity there is a huge range of susceptibility to infection based on the innate immune response. Some people have vaccine level immunity just based in their innate immune response. People who have had covid in general are more susceptible to being infected. As a group, their innate immune system isn’t as good at stopping covid as the population who never got covid.

If you’ve already been infected you should consider that you may be someone who is more susceptible to getting covid in the first place, and you would benefit from the extra boost the vaccine gives you.



Can you please address my requests for sources (or least provide accurate comparative risk numbers for the requested demogrpahics) as well as explain why any of this necessitates a mandate? I feel like you're missing the forest for the trees and are just pro-vax. It's fine to be pro-vax, I don't really care. I care about civil liberties that I see the pro-vax wanting to erode, and you're not addressing why any of this implies a mandate is the best course of action.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,313
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 3 seconds
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540642 - 11/12/21 02:18 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

What country has banned moderna? Lol. Either it’s approved or it’s not.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejunk_f00d
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/15
Posts: 933
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
    #27540643 - 11/12/21 02:20 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
What country has banned moderna? Lol. Either it’s approved or it’s not.



Sweden, Finland and Denmark have restricted it's use on certain demographics.  In Sweden, it's a ban on anyone under 30 receiving it. I would like to point out that this gives weight to the 'unknown side effects' arguments, imo. Clearly waiting a bit for more data was wise w.r.t Moderna.

Also, you're still not addressing anything I'm explicitly asking you to, namely how any of this necessitates a mandate.


Edited by junk_f00d (11/12/21 02:26 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < First | < Back | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | Next > | Last >

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Credibility fft2 677 7 07/15/04 07:08 PM
by Redo
* Christians on PalTalk Chat Service Tracked by Radical Islamic Web Site Rogues_Pierre 721 0 03/06/06 08:37 AM
by Rogues_Pierre
* Another rant about JFK and the government's credibility
( 1 2 all )
LearyfanS 1,838 26 06/08/03 04:08 PM
by mike
* PATERSON'S EXCUSE IS SIMPLY INN-CREDIBLE lonestar2004 480 5 03/25/08 09:50 AM
by lonestar2004
* WWII in chat newuser1492 564 4 07/22/05 10:27 AM
by Madtowntripper
* Capitalism at work
( 1 2 3 4 ... 24 25 )
Bigbadwooof 17,383 480 10/30/15 08:29 PM
by hostileuniverse
* This is why we need GMO labeling
( 1 2 3 4 ... 123 124 )
sweeper54 99,348 2,475 12/02/16 08:51 AM
by hostileuniverse
* Bernie 2016!
( 1 2 3 4 ... 250 251 )
elax420 116,019 5,003 01/14/17 04:00 AM
by GPryder

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
59,122 topic views. 6 members, 0 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 16 queries.