Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

Tired of Covid crap

48K views 602 replies 43 participants last post by  Mstr-Chris 
#1 ·
I’m about fed up with the news media over blowing this Covid stuff.
Today, it’s how bad the Iowa outbreak is. Run for the hills. The sky is falling.
The tested infection rate is 100 in 100,000. Not the death rate. Not even the hospital rate. Not even the “I’m home sick rate”.
They’re telling the truth, per say, there is a spike. But if you crunch the numbers it’s so small it’s time to crawl from under the bed get back to living. If there was one case last week and this week there are two, the media reports there are twice as many cases, 100% increase. While this is factual it’s still just 2.

How about we just get a grip, stop being a nation of whiners, and get back to living and working.

Just my opinion. Your mileage my vary. Just an “I’m fed up” rant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: twood and Bkite
#194 ·
So what you are trying to convince me of is that in the last 120 years no new methods, technologies or biology has been developed to shorten the amount of time required to examine a microbe and find a way to safely kill it within the human body? That's it??? Is this really all it takes for you to throw mud in the face of the anti virus?

I have a problem for you...

How many years did it take to actually put men on the moon the first time?

How many years after that did it take to once again put men on the moon?

Now I could be mistaken but I believe the amount of time from the first landing was give or take a fer million years until Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969. Then from 1969 to 1972 6 missions landed men on the moon. So the time got considerably shorter because of advancements in science and technology. So from a few million years to far less than 1. That's quite a time jump!!!!

So you would have us believe science and technology can no way advance in other areas as well?
 
#197 ·
How many years did it take to actually put men on the moon the first time?

How many years after that did it take to once again put men on the moon?

Now I could be mistaken but I believe the amount of time from the first landing was give or take a fer million years until Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969. Then from 1969 to 1972 6 missions landed men on the moon. So the time got considerably shorter because of advancements in science and technology. So from a few million years to far less than 1. That's quite a time jump!!!!
Yes, quite a time jump if you use an outlandish starting point, the creation of man. Using the same point for the moonshot you have a 60 year difference. Insignificant in a few million.

Go from when a moonshot plan was realistically started. As in when (May 25, 1961) Kennedy stated he wanted it done in that decade. Apollo 11 landed on the Sea of Tranquility on 24 July 69. 8 years, 2 months time span.

Nemo

https://www.history.nasa.gov/moondec.html

https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo.html
 
#199 ·
The speed of vaccine development we're seeing here indeed benefits from new tech, like CRISPR, prime editing, advances in computing and modeling, etc. Two of the vaccines use a completely new vaccine technology, mRNA.

It's also unprecedented in really being a fairly coordinated, global effort with a lot of open wallets around.

Generally speaking, vaccine development is not very profitable for companies, so they don't focus on it; therapies are more profitable. I mean, no vaccine is ever going to be a cash cow for Pfizer like Viagra was. Now, companies have been incentivized financially so some of the downside risk is managed.

Frankly, it's very impressive, and probably - as happens when you have a big project to solve a big problem - new techniques have been developed along the way which themselves will have effects way beyond covid: offhand, obviously, the mRNA viruses (we'll see more of those), advances in refrigeration and refrigerated packaging, advances in computer modeling of proteins, and even advances in logistics and supply-chain software and methodologies.

For what it's worth, I'm a biochemist and a PhD biophysicist, and I'm looking at this rapid vaccine development and saying "cool!" Am I wary? Sure... new is new. But when I take my daughter to the playground, I usually wind up chatting with at least one other parent who's a CDC scientist or policy wonk (since I live in the neighborhood), and I feel pretty good about the pace of development.

I'll be getting it as soon as it's available, and I will recommend as much to family members. I'm hoping to have a blowout Easter party with the fam and all the cousins (who next year will be in that Easter "sweet spot" of 6-9), with as little social distance as possible. Fingers crossed... but that's more about logistics at that point, not the technology.

DH
 
#200 ·
It's nothing more than cycle time reduction that is used in all kinds of processes. 90% of cycle time of any process is nothing more than queues, holds, waits and re-work. Those things are due to having too many items in process at any one time. Reducing those, eliminating batching, and focus on one action in process can reduce that cycle time to its "entitlement" cycle time. You don't think it really takes the state 6-12 weeks to process a gun carry permit do you ? It probably takes less than a couple of hours, so if you identify one of them, focus and prioritize that item through all of the process, you could get it through in a few hours instead of a few months.

I worked in all kinds of industries all over the world for over 25 years and we commonly saw the same magnitude reductions in processes all of the time.
 
#206 ·
If you don't know anything about John Whitehead and The Rutherford Institute's defense of civil liberties, you should.

https://www.rutherford.org/publicat...ve_the_way_for_a_new_frontier_in_surveillance
Like it or not, the COVID-19 pandemic with its veiled threat of forced vaccinations, contact tracing, and genetically encoded vaccines is propelling humanity at warp speed into a whole new frontier-a surveillance matrix-the likes of which we've only previously encountered in science fiction.
Now this same government-which has taken every bit of technology sold to us as being in our best interests (GPS devices, surveillance, nonlethal weapons, etc.) and used it against us, to track, control and trap us-wants us to fall in line as it prepares to roll out COVID-19 vaccines that owe a great debt to the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for its past work on how to weaponize and defend against infectious diseases.
Remaining singularly human and retaining your individuality and dominion over yourself-mind, body and soul-in the face of corporate and government technologies that aim to invade, intrude, monitor, manipulate and control us may be one of the greatest challenges before us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimBob
#213 ·
What's the real end goal of the rushed through testing, rushed to market wonder vaccines for the coronavirus? Immunity or depopulation?

https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/the-covid-19-vaccine-is-the-goal-immunity-or-depopulation/
"There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic… You do not vaccinate people who aren't at risk from a disease. You also don't set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn't been extensively tested on human subjects." Dr. Mike Yeadon PhD, Pfizer's former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory Disease
All real power has been conceded to a globalist oligarchy that operates behind the curtain of corrupt government officials and public health experts. This begs the question of whether the hoopla surrounding the Coronavirus emerged as a spontaneous and appropriate reaction to a lethal and fast-spreading pandemic or whether the hysteria has been greatly exaggerated (Infection Fatality Rate is 0.26% or 1 in 400) to implement a transformational political-social agenda that will not only eradicate democracy and basic human rights, but also pave the way for dangerous vaccines that will dramatically curtail population growth, which is an objective that is widely shared among wealthy elites.
 
#214 ·
Why would “wealthy elites” want population reduction?

“Gee, what I really want is smaller markets, less money, and less political power.”

Look at any negative-growth population: it’s a huge problem, if for no other reason than it completely hamstrings the welfare state, since that’s based on the young and healthy paying to care for the old and infirm.

This is like the classic complaint that Chinese restaurants use MSG to make diners feel “less hungry”, like of course, what’s better for a restaurant than curbing appetites. Hah.

DH
 
#217 ·
Why would "wealthy elites" want population reduction?

"Gee, what I really want is smaller markets, less money, and less political power."

Look at any negative-growth population: it's a huge problem, if for no other reason than it completely hamstrings the welfare state, since that's based on the young and healthy paying to care for the old and infirm.

This is like the classic complaint that Chinese restaurants use MSG to make diners feel "less hungry", like of course, what's better for a restaurant than curbing appetites. Hah.

DH
Not all of us can have a PhD in Bio Nuclear Thermogenerative Nanotechnology or even Basket Weaving. The more information we have, whether we agree with it or not, the better informed we are and the better choices we can make. Unless you believe in the Facebook methodology of presenting only the "approved" version of whatever the Issue du jour is.
 
#215 ·
Look at North Korea, how much richer could the "elites" be if they embraced capitalism? Probably a lot, but there would be more of them and the ones already there, would have less control. If someone is "on top" is it better to them to have limited power over a lot of people, or absolute power over a few? "Better to reign in hell than serve in Heaven."
 
#218 ·
#224 ·
Does this not strike anyone as odd?

The ubiquitous annual flu virus.
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200902/how-effective-is-the-flu-vaccine
Because flu viruses mutate constantly and the vaccine wears off over time, you can't get vaccinated once and expect to be covered for years, as you can with other diseases. The vaccine must be changed each year, in hopes of matching the ever-mutating viruses. And that's been a challenge. On average, it's been 40% effective, meaning it's prevented illness 40% of the time. Since health officials started tracking it in 2003, effectiveness has varied from year to year, ranging from a low of 10% in 2004-05 to a high of 60% in 2010-11.
The coronavirus.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine
As coronavirus cases surge in the United States and elsewhere, with little relief in sight, the world got good news on Monday. Pfizer and its partner, the German company, BioNTech, announced preliminary results that suggested their vaccine was more than 90 percent effective.
As I understand it, the coronavirus also mutates over time. And yet we're getting vaccines that approach 90-95% effectiveness (which isn't really effective as I understand it) for a virus we have about a single year's worth of data for. While the annual flu vaccine with decades (centuries?) of data averages a measly 40%. Why don't the Gateses of the world and the "Davos Crowd" try throwing some of their weight and money at the old winter flu bug and get that 40% vaccine effectiveness rate up a bit? Oh, wait. There's no agenda with the annual flu bug, is there?
 
#228 ·
Does this not strike anyone as odd?

The ubiquitous annual flu virus.
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200902/how-effective-is-the-flu-vaccine

The coronavirus.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine

As I understand it, the coronavirus also mutates over time. And yet we're getting vaccines that approach 90-95% effectiveness (which isn't really effective as I understand it) for a virus we have about a single year's worth of data for. While the annual flu vaccine with decades (centuries?) of data averages a measly 40%. Why don't the Gateses of the world and the "Davos Crowd" try throwing some of their weight and money at the old winter flu bug and get that 40% vaccine effectiveness rate up a bit? Oh, wait. There's no agenda with the annual flu bug, is there?
On that 95% effectiveness, please read posts 179-180 for a better understanding.
 
#225 ·
There is a difference in the mutation rates of influenzas and coronaviruses.
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutation-rate.html
Given that the SARS-CoV-2 genome is almost twice as large as the seasonal flu genome, it seems as though the seasonal flu mutates roughly four times as fast as SARS-CoV-2. The fact that the seasonal flu mutates so quickly is precisely why it is able to evade our vaccines, so the significantly slower mutation rate of SARS-CoV-2 gives us hope for the potential development of effective long-lasting vaccines against the virus.
My understanding is that poliovirus is a slower mutator and HIV is an absurdly fast mutator.
 
#242 ·
There is a difference in the mutation rates of influenzas and coronaviruses.
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutation-rate.html

My understanding is that poliovirus is a slower mutator and HIV is an absurdly fast mutator.
Nothing was said or implied that they are the same things. Just the absurdity of what is passing as "science" for the coronavirus compared to something the world has lived with every year for centuries.
 
#237 · (Edited)
But remember, Bill Gates wants the world inoculated against everything. This for now. And he is smart enough to know all about this.

Nemo

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1968632/bill-gates-warns-covid-lockdowns-2022/

LONG COVID
Bill Gates warns Covid lockdowns could drag on into 2022 and restaurants will be closed for the next six months
Elizabeth Little
Dec 14 2020, 9:28 ET
Updated: Dec 14 2020, 11:01 ET

BILL Gates predicts global Covid-19 restrictions could last until 2022, and the first four to six months of next year could be "the worst so far."

The Microsoft founder gave the stark warning as the US set a new record for coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths over a seven-day period.

Speaking to CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday, Mr Gates shocked listeners saying "the next four to six months could be the worst of the epidemic."

He went on to explain forecasts predict over 200,000 additional deaths.

The billionaire said if the public were to follow the rules and wear face masks, use sanitiser and avoid mixing with other households, "we could avoid a large percentage of those deaths. So in the near term, it's bad news."

Mr Gates expressed his support for the controversial coronavirus restrictions - including California Governor Gavin Newsom's latest stay-at-home order affecting more than 75 percent of the state.

He said: "Well certainly mask-wearing has essentially no downsides."

"Bars and restaurants in most of the country will be closed as we go into this wave, and I think sadly that's appropriate."

He said the next four to six months "really call on us to do our best, because we can see that this will end and you don't want somebody that you love to be the last to die from coronavirus."

. . .

continued
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top