Kansas Crimson

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:13 pm

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:12 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:10 pm

Ok. One vote in the nay column......

Can I change it to Yes now?

Absolutely. You can move it all around. At midnight it gets locked in tho

Then mark my frame an 8 dude

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:20 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:13 pm

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:12 pm

Can I change it to Yes now?

Absolutely. You can move it all around. At midnight it gets locked in tho

Then mark my frame an 8 dude

You mark that frame an 8 you're in a world of pain

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 8:51 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:12 pm

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:09 pm

I know, right?

But, you DO get points for consistency

You could be a new comic book hero: Duperman: Able to Believe Any Lie the Establishment Feeds Him. Something to think about - you know, if the boat game ever stops producing for you.

Wow, you are putting a lot of effort into this.

Run out of cats to kick?

I’m perfectly happy - maybe as happy as I have ever been - definitely happier than most of the posters in this cesspool of neurosis. I have no idea why you find that so hard to believe, other than you just don’t want it to be true.

A lot of masks at the demonstrations.
Demonstrations in Texas??? where?

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:32 pm A lot of masks at the demonstrations.
Demonstrations in Texas??? where?

Dallas, austin, houston. And dozens of other smaller towns

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:32 pm A lot of masks at the demonstrations.
Demonstrations in Texas??? where?

Masks prevent the spread, they don't stop it. Pull out method is statistically a better form of birth control than masks are at preventing transmission.

LOL

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:18 pm

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:15 pm How does the location of demonstrations match up with the states with accelerating infection rates?

Good question. I know California Oregon and Texas have skyrocketed. All places with large protests


My point being....everything they have warned us about the transmission of the virus is present at the protests. So, if the protests aren't spreading the virus then they have been lying (or innaccurate about) the transmission methods and risks.

Again, you completely ignore all other impacts of the protests.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:30 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:18 pm

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:15 pm How does the location of demonstrations match up with the states with accelerating infection rates?

Good question. I know California Oregon and Texas have skyrocketed. All places with large protests


My point being....everything they have warned us about the transmission of the virus is present at the protests. So, if the protests aren't spreading the virus then they have been lying (or innaccurate about) the transmission methods and risks.

Again, you completely ignore all other impacts of the protests.

Where? This isnt about the otherimpacts of the protests. This is specifically about whether or not these protests are increasing transmission of covid. Thats it, the spread of the virus cares not about the validity the protests or any other fuzzy math

You have a nasty habit of veering out into left field, particularly when youre on the defensive

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:43 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:30 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:18 pm

Good question. I know California Oregon and Texas have skyrocketed. All places with large protests


My point being....everything they have warned us about the transmission of the virus is present at the protests. So, if the protests aren't spreading the virus then they have been lying (or innaccurate about) the transmission methods and risks.

Again, you completely ignore all other impacts of the protests.

Where? This isnt about the otherimpacts of the protests. This is specifically about whether or not these protests are increasing transmission of covid. Thats it, the spread of the virus cares not about the validity the protests or any other fuzzy math

You have a nasty habit of veering out into left field, particularly when youre on the defensive

As I stated here before, yes the protests themselves will result in additional COVID cases. Duh.

But they may also have a net negative if the net impact of the protests is that more people stayed at home who wouldn't have than went out to protest. It is an impossible net impact to put a number to. What concerns me is peoplw like you trying to make this into a simpleton logic yes/no question so that if it turns out that there isn't a huge spike directly from the protests, we'll hear "see, this whole thing is a sham. We shouldn't be restricted at all" when the reality is you simply shouldn't have limited yourself to simpleton logic.

I am not veering anywhere; I am trying to see the big picture instead of the yes/no.

Daily Dose Of Dipshit Donald:

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:29 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:43 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:30 pm

Again, you completely ignore all other impacts of the protests.

Where? This isnt about the otherimpacts of the protests. This is specifically about whether or not these protests are increasing transmission of covid. Thats it, the spread of the virus cares not about the validity the protests or any other fuzzy math

You have a nasty habit of veering out into left field, particularly when youre on the defensive

As I stated here before, yes the protests themselves will result in additional COVID cases. Duh.

But they may also have a net negative if the net impact of the protests is that more people stayed at home who wouldn't have than went out to protest. It is an impossible net impact to put a number to. What concerns me is peoplw like you trying to make this into a simpleton logic yes/no question so that if it turns out that there isn't a huge spike directly from the protests, we'll hear "see, this whole thing is a sham. We shouldn't be restricted at all" when the reality is you simply shouldn't have limited yourself to simpleton logic.

I am not veering anywhere; I am trying to see the big picture instead of the yes/no.

Do you even believe the shit you write? Are you that out of touch with how you sound? Do you truly believe you are an amazingly smart, perfect and perfectly logical individual?

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:34 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:29 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:43 pm

Where? This isnt about the otherimpacts of the protests. This is specifically about whether or not these protests are increasing transmission of covid. Thats it, the spread of the virus cares not about the validity the protests or any other fuzzy math

You have a nasty habit of veering out into left field, particularly when youre on the defensive

As I stated here before, yes the protests themselves will result in additional COVID cases. Duh.

But they may also have a net negative if the net impact of the protests is that more people stayed at home who wouldn't have than went out to protest. It is an impossible net impact to put a number to. What concerns me is peoplw like you trying to make this into a simpleton logic yes/no question so that if it turns out that there isn't a huge spike directly from the protests, we'll hear "see, this whole thing is a sham. We shouldn't be restricted at all" when the reality is you simply shouldn't have limited yourself to simpleton logic.

I am not veering anywhere; I am trying to see the big picture instead of the yes/no.

Do you even believe the shit you write? Are you that out of touch with how you sound? Do you truly believe you are an amazingly smart, perfect and perfectly logical individual?

Eh, ok.

What am I "out of touch" with? There were curfews and lock downs across the US? Were there not? OK, since you're so in tune I'll take your approach.

Simple yes or no question. Do you believe that the stay at home orders, curfews and mass closings of businesses that happened in cities where protests occurred resulted in less COVID cases? Yes or no?

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:46 am

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:34 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:29 pm

As I stated here before, yes the protests themselves will result in additional COVID cases. Duh.

But they may also have a net negative if the net impact of the protests is that more people stayed at home who wouldn't have than went out to protest. It is an impossible net impact to put a number to. What concerns me is peoplw like you trying to make this into a simpleton logic yes/no question so that if it turns out that there isn't a huge spike directly from the protests, we'll hear "see, this whole thing is a sham. We shouldn't be restricted at all" when the reality is you simply shouldn't have limited yourself to simpleton logic.

I am not veering anywhere; I am trying to see the big picture instead of the yes/no.

Do you even believe the shit you write? Are you that out of touch with how you sound? Do you truly believe you are an amazingly smart, perfect and perfectly logical individual?

Eh, ok.

What am I "out of touch" with? There were curfews and lock downs across the US? Were there not? OK, since you're so in tune I'll take your approach.
P1p
Simple yes or no question. Do you believe that the stay at home orders, curfews and mass closings of businesses that happened in cities where protests occurred resulted in less COVID cases? Yes or no?

Uhh. Duh. Yes. Stay at home orders obviously helpes slow the spread. Ive never said anything different. As i said before, i think youve got me conduawe with someone different. I think early reopening + protests have led to this spike. Never claimed any different.

For the 5th time. My problem is that I think it is damn dumb and incredibly biased to run a story that says protests dont spread the virus. AND my point is that if protests dont spread the virus than nothing does as it has all of the bad things that they warn us about the spread.


And what are you out of touch with??? See above. .

When you think about me youre out of touch with yourself whoaohoh

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:48 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:46 am

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:34 am

Do you even believe the shit you write? Are you that out of touch with how you sound? Do you truly believe you are an amazingly smart, perfect and perfectly logical individual?

Eh, ok.

What am I "out of touch" with? There were curfews and lock downs across the US? Were there not? OK, since you're so in tune I'll take your approach.
P1p
Simple yes or no question. Do you believe that the stay at home orders, curfews and mass closings of businesses that happened in cities where protests occurred resulted in less COVID cases? Yes or no?

Uhh. Duh. Yes. Stay at home orders obviously helpes slow the spread. Ive never said anything different. As i said before, i think youve got me conduawe with someone different. I think early reopening + protests have led to this spike. Never claimed any different.

For the 5th time. My problem is that I think it is damn dumb and incredibly biased to run a story that says protests dont spread the virus. AND my point is that if protests dont spread the virus than nothing does as it has all of the bad things that they warn us about the spread.


And what are you out of touch with??? See above. .

When you think about me youre out of touch with yourself whoaohoh

And you just jumped to dumb conclusion I expected. Moving on.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:51 am

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:48 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 12:46 am

Eh, ok.

What am I "out of touch" with? There were curfews and lock downs across the US? Were there not? OK, since you're so in tune I'll take your approach.
P1p
Simple yes or no question. Do you believe that the stay at home orders, curfews and mass closings of businesses that happened in cities where protests occurred resulted in less COVID cases? Yes or no?

Uhh. Duh. Yes. Stay at home orders obviously helpes slow the spread. Ive never said anything different. As i said before, i think youve got me conduawe with someone different. I think early reopening + protests have led to this spike. Never claimed any different.

For the 5th time. My problem is that I think it is damn dumb and incredibly biased to run a story that says protests dont spread the virus. AND my point is that if protests dont spread the virus than nothing does as it has all of the bad things that they warn us about the spread.


And what are you out of touch with??? See above. .

When you think about me youre out of touch with yourself whoaohoh

And you just jumped to dumb conclusion I expected. Moving on.

Dumb conclusion? That reopening caused case spikes or that protests contributed? Which of those is dumb?

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:04 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:51 am

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:48 am


Uhh. Duh. Yes. Stay at home orders obviously helpes slow the spread. Ive never said anything different. As i said before, i think youve got me conduawe with someone different. I think early reopening + protests have led to this spike. Never claimed any different.

For the 5th time. My problem is that I think it is damn dumb and incredibly biased to run a story that says protests dont spread the virus. AND my point is that if protests dont spread the virus than nothing does as it has all of the bad things that they warn us about the spread.


And what are you out of touch with??? See above. .

When you think about me youre out of touch with yourself whoaohoh

And you just jumped to dumb conclusion I expected. Moving on.

Dumb conclusion? That reopening caused case spikes or that protests contributed? Which of those is dumb?

" AND my point is that if protests dont spread the virus than nothing does as it has all of the bad things that they warn us about the spread."

Yes and? If the protests arent contributing to the spread then golfing, bowling, going to work doesnt either. Packed close together, yelling shoulder to shoulder indeed are the things they have said contribute to the spread

TDub wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:10 am Yes and? If the protests arent contributing to the spread then golfing, bowling, going to work doesnt either. Packed close together, yelling shoulder to shoulder indeed are the things they have said contribute to the spread

And we agree that the protests, with no other contributing factors, would increase it. But the protests DID have contributing factors such as cities being shut down entirely during the protests. We seem to both agree that the protests would increase cases of COVID and the associated impacts of the protests would decrease cases of COVID.

Look, I made the same comments that you are making now when these protests first started. I posted along the lines of "Well, we will certainly get a chance to see if these lock downs were necessary" here multiple times. But I didn't take into account any contributing factors then, either.

When I read the story about the study that started this ridiculous conversation, I didn't read it and think "oh, good, the protests didn't cause any extra cases of COVID. What a relief." It just opened my mind to think about all of the other things that went on during the protests. Cities being shut down, curfews eliminating people's abilities (or desires) to go out to do things they normally would have done, streets being shut down preventing people from going where they would have gone, businesses being shuttered in preparation for possible looting, etc... I just hadn't really thought about those factors while the protests were going on. That's all. You simply seem to have come away from the article with a different takeaway. No big deal.