Jeb, from one of your posts on page 3...
07-19-2020, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by
alfablue View Post
It's curious how quickly people want to roll things back. I know there was a TON of impatience here in Michigan, but Governor Whitmere held her ground, and let the science say when things can open back up. Even then, because people could not take care of themselves, we had to put in a mask order to prevent it from coming back.
The fact that the whole mask thing has become so political is almost criminal. There's SO MUCH SCIENCE backing the facts around masks, it's not even funny. But if you find one study that shows a specific kind of mask of unknown origin, that means masks are bad- even if that same study shows that masks are REALLY effective.
Plenty of data out there telling people how to find the right materials for both filtering in and out, plenty of data that shows how quickly things change when they are added to social distancing, plenty of it. But since idiots want to think that the person they so much worship and honor and fall over their fates over says they are bad- people are just too dumb to think for themselves.
Then again, when you see people who are supposed to be smart and caring meet up in a large group to sing, and then people die. Repeat after it's happened before... yea, thinking is not part of their M.O.
I'm sure some regurgitation of information will be used to argue against this. I'll go out and find even more new data supporting masks and separations. And remember that these deaths are preventable. Like drunk driving.
Jeb's comments...
Science for lockdowns? LMAO
And So much of that Great Science for masks. So great, masks weren’t even mentioned in the dooms day scenarios.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JordanSch...07428052705280
There is no mention of masks in Birx and Fauci’s infamous models (IHME and Imperial UK), which were used to shut down not just the country, but the entire world. Was the science not evolved enough in March of 2020?
https://medium.com/@JordanSchachtel/...t-9dff41a6d626
In response to your "Science for lockdowns?" LMAO....
Link to various
scientific articles regarding lockdowns;
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...ted-infections
"Lockdowns may have averted 531 million coronavirus infections
In the United States alone, an estimated 60 million infections were avoided, researchers say"
Next Link:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKBN23F1G3
From the article:
LONDON (Reuters) - Lockdowns imposed to curb the spread of COVID-19 have saved millions of lives and easing them now carries high risks, according to two international studies published on Monday. “The risk of a second wave happening if all interventions and all precautions are abandoned is very real,” Samir Bhatt, who co-led one of the studies by researchers at Imperial College London, told reporters in a briefing.
By comparing the number of deaths counted with deaths predicted by their model if no lockdown measures had been introduced, they found some 3.1 million deaths were averted.
Jeb, these are just 2 of a number of articles from various respected publications that easily prove the "science" behind the effectiveness of lockdowns. Are you really this lazy? Or, is it just a lack of intelligence?