P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
have you seen her boyfriend? I'll pass on the threesome, thanks.
have you seen her boyfriend? I'll pass on the threesome, thanks.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Ebola - all or nothing?
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
yes, of course every worker is that responsible and sensible. They never get on big metal tubes in close proximity with 1000s of other people...
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ebola-scare-sends-caribbean-cruise-ship-back-home/story?id=26276019
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Another story:
But yes, let's panic.
Another worker was on a flight from Dallas to Cleveland on October 10 and may have exhibited Ebola symptoms. The other passengers were fine. People need to relax. Again, more Americans have been married to Kim Kardashian than have died from Ebola. We're actually pretty good at curing it. There have been eight cases in the US (possibly a ninth currently) and one person has died while the other seven have made a full recovery. This is the United States where we have such extravagances as clean running water, sanitation and indoor plumbing.
Another story:
But yes, let's panic.
Another worker was on a flight from Dallas to Cleveland on October 10 and may have exhibited Ebola symptoms. The other passengers were fine. People need to relax. Again, more Americans have been married to Kim Kardashian than have died from Ebola. We're actually pretty good at curing it. There have been eight cases in the US (possibly a ninth currently) and one person has died while the other seven have made a full recovery. This is the United States where we have such extravagances as clean running water, sanitation and indoor plumbing.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Perhaps if we put this a different way it will "trigger" some different thoughts:
What if every time someone left an ebola ward, we handed them a high powered assault rifle that might or might not be loaded and they had to carry it around for 21 days with their finger on the trigger, so that so much as a sneeze (get it?) might cause the weapon to discharge. And if it's loaded, it's loaded with a special bullet that doesn't just kill the innocent victim, it actually causes them to go insane and grab an assault weapon themselves, which they might or might not use to kill even more innocent people. What do you think? Would it be a good idea for so many people to be wandering around in society with assault rifles loaded with insanity bullets?
Dead is dead - it doesn't matter if it was a bullet or ebola.
Choosing not to go on a cruise during the normal 21-day window = panic. Gotcha.
Perhaps if we put this a different way it will "trigger" some different thoughts:
What if every time someone left an ebola ward, we handed them a high powered assault rifle that might or might not be loaded and they had to carry it around for 21 days with their finger on the trigger, so that so much as a sneeze (get it?) might cause the weapon to discharge. And if it's loaded, it's loaded with a special bullet that doesn't just kill the innocent victim, it actually causes them to go insane and grab an assault weapon themselves, which they might or might not use to kill even more innocent people. What do you think? Would it be a good idea for so many people to be wandering around in society with assault rifles loaded with insanity bullets?
Dead is dead - it doesn't matter if it was a bullet or ebola.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
There's only one thing I am interested in... and that is the preservation of LIFE!
There's only one thing I am interested in... and that is the preservation of LIFE!
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
I'm sorry. I tried to follow that insane premise but you lost me.
I'm sorry. I tried to follow that insane premise but you lost me.
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
putdowns do not get rid of the existence of loss functions. Fact is that we all agree that the probabilities are not high... but the impact could be high... its always a balancing act. We know that we're taking this less seriously than Nigeria. Now, are the people advising the Nigerians a bunch of ignorant clods?
putdowns do not get rid of the existence of loss functions. Fact is that we all agree that the probabilities are not high... but the impact could be high... its always a balancing act. We know that we're taking this less seriously than Nigeria. Now, are the people advising the Nigerians a bunch of ignorant clods?
P
Priceless
Guest
There were no putdowns. He argued that the bullets somehow made you crazy...My reply was a play on that.
Jokes are always best when you have to explain them.
As for Nigeria, I have no idea who is advising them. I am glad I don't live there. They have minimal infrastructure and a military coup about twice a year. Their third largest industry is sending those emails to Americans and Europeans trying to get cash. I doubt they have a Constitution that says if the government wants to lock you up it's up to them to prove why they should, not up to you to show why you should remain free.
Do you really think a developed nation thousands of miles from the hotspot needs to respond to a medical condition the same way a third-world nation in the same geographic neighborhood does?
Let me explain it Barney Style, then. You would favor government intervention to prevent people from running around with assault rifles which have the potential to kill people. Why not in the case of Ebola, which has significantly higher potential to kill a much greater number of people?
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Because the people handling possibly infected bodily fluids are trained medical personnel, whereas a blind guy can buy a gun with (literally) no questions asked. A crazy guy can legally buy a gun. A felon can legally buy a gun. If he ever managed to leave prison, Charles Manson could go buy a gun.
Because the people handling possibly infected bodily fluids are trained medical personnel, whereas a blind guy can buy a gun with (literally) no questions asked. A crazy guy can legally buy a gun. A felon can legally buy a gun. If he ever managed to leave prison, Charles Manson could go buy a gun.
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Why do you think everyone riding the subway or shopping at the grocery store or waiting in airports would be "trained medical personnel?" Those are the people who might be handling possibly infected bodily fluids if people with ebola were wandering around in society.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
No, they wouldn't. You do know how hospitals work, right?
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Don't hospitals start to do their work only after people go there?
You seem to have omitted an important step in your chain of "logic."
Listen, no one hopes that any of these steps will become necessary. However, when pompous talking heads start to yammer about "the" science, their use of that modifier immediately makes whatever they say sound suspect. There is no "the" yet. There are various degrees of likelihood and probability but no absolutes, we are still learning.
One of the hallmarks of the scientific process is the use of a testable hypothesis, and running experiments to determine if the results of the experiment support the hypothesis or contradict it. Right now, some people are insisting that we conduct some experiments (using the general public) on how Ebola may or may not be transmitted under certain conditions. Other people are saying, please do not recruit us to be part of your experiment without our permission.
In this situation, based on incomplete knowledge that we are still developing, there are a multiple of different viewpoints that all have some validity. It's not really so much a question of who is "right" or "wrong" so much as it is a question of "how to we reconcile a number of different viewpoints, each of which has some validity, in a way that resolves the conflict between individuals' desire for personal liberty with society's desire for responsible behavior regarding public safety."
LynahFan nailed it several pages back: the "typical" positions are not holding true to form. Usually it's you big government lefties that are saying that individuals must make sacrifices for the common good, yet here y'all are saying just the opposite. One wonders if your Anointed One had taken a different position than He has, whether you would be saying the same thing or not...or whether you would still be saying what you are saying now anyway.
Those who generally believe in limited government are saying that in this kind of situation, it is one of the few, enumerated, proper functions of government to promote public safety, to reconcile the tension between individual liberty and social responsibility when it is necessary to inconvenience the individual temporarily to keep the rest of society safe during the interim.
The CDC itself is putting forth contradictory information: you read one thing on its website while people from the agency are saying something different. Local authorities are directly responsible to their constituency.
The odd thing right now is that Christie, Cuomo, and Quinn all said and did pretty much the same thing, yet only Christie is being skewered while Cuomo and Quinn are getting a free pass. You don't think people notice the inconsistency and wonder what is really going on? If all the supposed concerns were really what people said the concerns were, wouldn't the response to all three governors be exactly the same, since they all did the same thing?
Don't hospitals start to do their work only after people go there?
You seem to have omitted an important step in your chain of "logic."
Listen, no one hopes that any of these steps will become necessary. However, when pompous talking heads start to yammer about "the" science, their use of that modifier immediately makes whatever they say sound suspect. There is no "the" yet. There are various degrees of likelihood and probability but no absolutes, we are still learning.
One of the hallmarks of the scientific process is the use of a testable hypothesis, and running experiments to determine if the results of the experiment support the hypothesis or contradict it. Right now, some people are insisting that we conduct some experiments (using the general public) on how Ebola may or may not be transmitted under certain conditions. Other people are saying, please do not recruit us to be part of your experiment without our permission.
In this situation, based on incomplete knowledge that we are still developing, there are a multiple of different viewpoints that all have some validity. It's not really so much a question of who is "right" or "wrong" so much as it is a question of "how to we reconcile a number of different viewpoints, each of which has some validity, in a way that resolves the conflict between individuals' desire for personal liberty with society's desire for responsible behavior regarding public safety."
LynahFan nailed it several pages back: the "typical" positions are not holding true to form. Usually it's you big government lefties that are saying that individuals must make sacrifices for the common good, yet here y'all are saying just the opposite. One wonders if your Anointed One had taken a different position than He has, whether you would be saying the same thing or not...or whether you would still be saying what you are saying now anyway.
Those who generally believe in limited government are saying that in this kind of situation, it is one of the few, enumerated, proper functions of government to promote public safety, to reconcile the tension between individual liberty and social responsibility when it is necessary to inconvenience the individual temporarily to keep the rest of society safe during the interim.
The CDC itself is putting forth contradictory information: you read one thing on its website while people from the agency are saying something different. Local authorities are directly responsible to their constituency.
The odd thing right now is that Christie, Cuomo, and Quinn all said and did pretty much the same thing, yet only Christie is being skewered while Cuomo and Quinn are getting a free pass. You don't think people notice the inconsistency and wonder what is really going on? If all the supposed concerns were really what people said the concerns were, wouldn't the response to all three governors be exactly the same, since they all did the same thing?
Last edited:
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
I don't favor gun control, but how about a bit of perspective on potential impact:
In the U.S.:
Gun deaths per year: 30,000+
Kim Kardashian weddings: 3
Deaths by Ebola: 2
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/
That said it's good to see that Priceless is back and as condescending and snarky as ever.
I don't favor gun control, but how about a bit of perspective on potential impact:
In the U.S.:
Gun deaths per year: 30,000+
Kim Kardashian weddings: 3
Deaths by Ebola: 2
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/
That said it's good to see that Priceless is back and as condescending and snarky as ever.
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
I started to wonder if he got ensnared in that whole Maine quarantine thing.That said it's good to see that Priceless is back and as condescending and snarky as ever.
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
I'm bored already. Where's the next racewar and/or offshoot terrorist organization and/or missing plane to appease me?
I'm bored already. Where's the next racewar and/or offshoot terrorist organization and/or missing plane to appease me?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
Burkina Faso is right next door and they've already moved on.
I know a guy who just started TDY in Ouagadougou. That decision is now looking... problematic. Despite the fact that from those pics BF is apparently populated exclusively by supermodels.
Burkina Faso is right next door and they've already moved on.
I know a guy who just started TDY in Ouagadougou. That decision is now looking... problematic. Despite the fact that from those pics BF is apparently populated exclusively by supermodels.
Last edited:
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure if you're going to declare yourself president-for-life, you might want to make sure you have the ability to stifle any and all opposition first.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure if you're going to declare yourself president-for-life, you might want to make sure you have the ability to stifle any and all opposition first.
So the fact that something has never been a problem in the past is conclusive proof that it can't possibly be a problem in the future, regardless of whether we take any precautions at all. That's great to know, and will save us lots of effort in so many ways.
Man, I hate being on the same side as FF - this issue is all kinds of twisted!