Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

I know. I just couldn't stay away!  I had been looking in though. And besides there is some useful information to be be gleaned. I was interested in the video concerning blood clots and aspirating the syringe. 

Fair enough. 

 

You mean information that you want to hear. 

 

While you're here, why not actually read my response to you and the data I presented regarding your misconceptions about Sweden that was to prompt your inglorious exit, then at least you'll avoid making the claim again. 

 

The problem with some on here that claim to be sceptical, they only process information that reinforces their beliefs and filter out the rest. When they find that their claims are challenged or refuted with evidence, the inevitable irrational response is that "only one viewpoint is allowed on this thread". lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil Bowman

Phil Bowman

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, MonmoreStef said:

It’s reached the stage for me where the actual virus itself is the least scary thing about this whole pandemic and how things are going. 

I know what you mean. The vehemence and science-ignoring determination - and even violence - of the anti-vaxxers and the mask refuseniks and the conspiracy theorists can be a bit scary, but for me the virus is still the scariest thing about the pandemic.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Line-X said:

What scares you more?

 

4 minutes ago, Phil Bowman said:

I know what you mean. The vehemence and science-ignoring determination - and even violence - of the anti-vaxxers and the mask refuseniks and the conspiracy theorists can be a bit scary, but for me the virus is still the scariest thing about the pandemic.

I'm going to be frank, it's reasonably obvious to me.

 

An act of nature has taken more lives and as a result caused more societal disruption than any event since World War 2. And this is a (relatively) mild one in terms of potential for havoc. I honestly can't see how anyone fears what humans do to each other more when the statistics are so in favour of acts of nature being the bigger killer.

 

Is it something abstract about it? Something we feel we can't change? I honestly don't get how you can look at what a virus like this does, in terms of sheer hats on the ground (to say nothing of all the knock on effects) and then say,  "yeah, what's being done to stop it scares me more because it's going to be more damaging than over 5 million dead people (at the very least)".

 

I'd honestly love an explanation, if anyone were willing to give it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil Bowman

Phil Bowman

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'd honestly love an explanation, if anyone were willing to give it.

Well I certainly can’t help - I have no idea what goes on in some people’s heads.

You might get an explanation, but I don’t know how logical, convincing and based on peer-reviewed science (or even common sense) it’ll be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Farrington fox

Farrington fox

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Fair enough. 

 

You mean information that you want to hear. 

 

While you're here, why not actually read my response to you and the data I presented regarding your misconceptions about Sweden that was to prompt your inglorious exit, then at least you'll avoid making the claim again. 

 

The problem with some on here that claim to be sceptical, they only process information that reinforces their beliefs and filter out the rest. When they find that their claims are challenged or refuted with evidence, the inevitable irrational response is that "only one viewpoint is allowed on this thread". lol

Fair comments. And to a degree, guilty me lud. Can I ask. What is your profession? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Phil Bowman said:

Well I certainly can’t help - I have no idea what goes on in some people’s heads.

You might get an explanation, but I don’t know how logical, convincing and based on peer-reviewed science (or even common sense) it’ll be.

I'm not really looking for that tbh as I know you're right. I'm more looking for any explanation that makes much sense at all (like an appeal to emotion, for instance).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robo61

Robo61

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Look, I’m not having a pop or anything, people who save other peoples lives are hero’s in my book but I don’t work in the nhs so I don’t know what the staffing levels actually are. From an outsiders point of view being fed information from the government via the media, 45 beds doesn’t seem a lot spread over 3 hospitals and they’ve not suddenly put those beds in so surely the staffing is sufficient for those beds and those 45 beds must have been sufficient prior to the pandemic considering how few there are. Or am I massively mistaken and under normal circumstances 45 beds wouldn’t be needed. We’re being told there are 50000 people a day contracting this virus, 1 in 60, that’s 350000 a week, and it’s going to get worse, where are all these people? Football grounds are full, pubs are packed as are shopping centres and everywhere else that is open to the public, surely you’d expect to notice something like less people out and about. I dunno, maybe it’s my small world I live in but it just makes you think someone’s exaggerating a bit

Do yoiu really think you would notice if 2% of the people were missing from the streets,  not sure I would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robo61

Robo61

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Farrington fox said:

Prof Neil Ferguson and his models innit. Let's hope the global temperature rise models are a bit more, well, accurate.

They have been so far,  but then so were Prof Neil Fergusons,  but you don't want to hear that either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robo61

Robo61

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, adam said:

I just read what gets published and all of their scenarios that they predict are a lot more doom and gloom compared to what actually happens.  I thought you would of noticed by now. Been happening since the start of this. 

Go on then show us the full published models,  because the only ones I read have been broadly accurate.  I fear you are referring to press reports of the models,  the two are not the same thing you know.

Edited by Robo61
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Fair comments. And to a degree, guilty me lud. Can I ask. What is your profession? 

And fair play to you. Appreciated. Same goes to @Soup

 

I work in HE - research capability and development. New role, less intense, supposedly more certainty and security, but was definitely under threat during lockdown even though I'm fortunate that aspects of it can be done remotely. This is something that some people on this thread refuse to grasp. I do not relish the prospect of lockdown, nor the restrictions that accompany it that some on here regard as punitive. Like many, over a year of my life was pretty much screwed along with my plans/ambitions, whilst almost costing me my new job. What I do understand however, that it wasn't lockdown or restrictions that ****ed with my life per se, but a highly infections global virus that doesn't give two shits about my existence. All of the sacrifices we have made and continue to make - however insignificant or however obtrusive they may seem - are intended to reduce spread and save lives. If I need to wear a mask in public or have an annual booster to maintain antibodies, so ****ing what?

 

Although I understand how nasty this virus potentially can be, genuinely, I have never feared for myself...I've placed myself in absurd amounts of danger throughout my life and currently, if I was consumed by risk, I wouldn't be anywhere remotely near motorcycles. What I worry about is what it can do to others and as I have consistently said, unknowingly passing it on to the elderly or vulnerable really concerns me. 

 

I notice that the small minority that continually bleat about restrictions are those that tend to be the most frightened themselves and gravitate towards appeal to emotion in the arguments that they attempt to present. That almost invariably, their position is a self-centred one. 

 

Edited by Line-X
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Soup

Soup

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Line-X said:

And fair play to you. Appreciated. Same goes to @Soup

 

I work in HE - research capability and development. New role, less intense, supposedly more certainty and security, but was definitely under threat during lockdown even though I'm fortunate that aspects of it can be done remotely. This is something that some people on this thread refuse to grasp. I do not relish the prospect of lockdown, nor the restrictions that accompany it that some on here regard as punitive. Like many, over a year of my life was pretty much screwed along with my plans/ambitions, whilst almost costing me my new job. What I do understand however, that it wasn't lockdown or restrictions that ****ed with my life per se, but a highly infections global virus that doesn't give two shits about my existence. All of the sacrifices we have made and continue to make - however insignificant or however obtrusive they may seem - are intended to reduce spread and save lives. If I need to wear a mask in public or have an annual booster to maintain antibodies, so ****ing what?

 

Although I understand how nasty this virus potentially can be, genuinely, I have never feared for myself...I've placed myself in absurd amounts of danger throughout my life and currently, if I was consumed by risk, I wouldn't be anywhere remotely near motorcycles. What I worry about is what it can do to others and as I have consistently said, unknowingly passing it on to the elderly or vulnerable really concerns me. 

 

I notice that the small minority that continually bleat about restrictions are those that tend to be the most frightened themselves and gravitate towards appeal to emotion in the arguments that they attempt to present. That almost invariably, their position is a self-centred one. 

 

Not sure why you've mentioned me here but I'll digest it later, I'm off down the beach for a dip in the sea :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Harrydc

Guest Harrydc

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Babylon said:

Hi Harry,

 

just watched his whole interview and he never said anything if the sort.

 

Is there any reason you ignored all the scientists who did regularly discuss how long this could go on for, potential for variants and waning immunity. Because they categorically never said have a vaccine and that’s it, nothing to worry about.

When he said we can 'get on with our lives'. I think that can be interpreted in a way in which this will be over with the vaccination programme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighPeakFox

HighPeakFox

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Soup said:

So we could have this for another 5 years. It'll fly by and this thread will be fun I guess 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10272001/SAGE-calls-WFH-vaccine-passports-face-Omicron-wave.html

 

I respectfully suggest not reading the Daily Mail if you want to to be in receipt of balanced, unmanipulative reporting. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, adam said:

That's just not true. He even admits himself that his predictions have been off. 

He has, but we are talking about modelling and projections here. You evidently still need to appreciate what the difference is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, adam said:

I just read what gets published and all of their scenarios that they predict are a lot more doom and gloom compared to what actually happens.  I thought you would of noticed by now. Been happening since the start of this. 

They publish about 5 scenarios at once, if you are being spoon fed worst case scenario in an attempt to ridicule the projections, question the agenda of those cherry picking. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Babylon said:

They publish about 5 scenarios at once, if you are being spoon fed worst case scenario in an attempt to ridicule the projections, question the agenda of those cherry picking. 

In fairness,  the press are often guilty of the opposite in the race for clicks and headlines ……….

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...