Anyone else about sick to fucking death of the term "social distancing"?

[Millard]

Trump, as well as his Chinese counterpart, made similar statements as early as the middle of January. I doubt I will find a reference predating those statements...

I'm not sure what the disagreement is here.

I am questioning the timeline and veracity of when/whether the media was promoting a "narrative" that warm weather would kill covid-19 prior to Trump's statements.

First, I'm sure there were more than a few experts who felt this was a possibility. But it didn't become a mainstream story until Trump suggested it.

This is why I requested links to media stories discussing this theory predating Trump's statements. I can't find any.

Secondly, it obviously became mainstream news after Trump used his position to amplify the theory. But even then, the vast majority, as far as I could tell, of mainstream media stories seemed to urge caution in embracing this theory with some even rejecting it completely. Of course, a few embraced and endorsed.

So, I never felt I was led to believe that the summer heat would end the pandemic. And I find it hard to believe, outside of certain bubbles, that most people felt the media told them this.

Of course, we all hoped this would be true. And we all hope the theories that herd immunity has been largely achieved are true. I would be thrilled if it magically disappeared. But how likely are these possibilities?

 

[Millard]

Factcheck says that Trump said the virus would "go away" in April. Which is not true. He said in theory it would go away, simply going with the prevailing speculation. IOW, factcheck needs its own fact checker.

When I quoted your post I was referring to the fact that factcheck was attributing to Trump something that Trump got directly from the CDC or somewhere similar. My claim is that factcheck did so intentionally with other motives than educating the public.

What Trump didn't do is say the virus would disappear without qualifying it with "in theory" which factcheck didn't include...

When I quoted your post I was referring to the fact that factcheck was attributing to Trump something that Trump got directly from the CDC or somewhere similar.

Ok. I'll play semantics with you.

Factcheck DID NOT say Trump said the "virus would disappear".

Factcheck DID say Trump "suggested that the new coronavirus would 'go away'".

You failed to "qualify" Factcheck's characterization of Trump's statement as referencing something that he suggested.

By every definition of 'suggest', Factcheck's characterization seems pretty accurate:

 

[flenser]

Ok. I'll play semantics with you.

Factcheck DID NOT say Trump said the "virus would disappear".

Factcheck DID say Trump "suggested that the new coronavirus would 'go away'".

You failed to "qualify" Factcheck's characterization of Trump's statement as referencing something that he suggested.

By every definition of 'suggest', Factcheck's characterization seems pretty accurate:

View attachment 132600

Fair enough. I'll concede the point. I'm definitely very biased against that site from things I've read there in the past.

 

[Millard]

Point being, we all die. I could be the safest driver on the road and take every precaution possible and still die. I could get shot or have something fall on me. My main point is simply that you can take all the precautions in the world and still die. When it’s your time to go, it’s your time to go.

Come on. This isn't some Final Destination shit. There is no predetermined appointed time for your death that is immutable no matter what you do.

It sounds like you're really arguing that:

"I could be the most dangerous driver on the road and take every risk possible and still live."

"My main point is simply that you can take all the risks in the world and still live. When it’s your time to live, it’s your time to live."

 

[Millard]

Fair enough. I'll concede the point. I'm definitely very biased against that site from things I've read there in the past.

I know you don't like factcheck very much. And I'm sure you can find bias in some entries. I just didn't think this was one of them.

 

[Villain]

Come on. This isn't some Final Destination shit. There is no predetermined appointed time for your death that is immutable no matter what you do.

It sounds like you're really arguing that:

"I could be the most dangerous driver on the road and take every risk possible and still live."

"My main point is simply that you can take all the risks in the world and still live. When it’s your time to live, it’s your time to live."

Depends on your religious viewpoint

 

[flenser]

I am questioning the timeline and veracity of when/whether the media was promoting a "narrative" that warm weather would kill covid-19 prior to Trump's statements.

First, I'm sure there were more than a few experts who felt this was a possibility. But it didn't become a mainstream story until Trump suggested it.

This is why I requested links to media stories discussing this theory predating Trump's statements. I can't find any.

Secondly, it obviously became mainstream news after Trump used his position to amplify the theory. But even then, the vast majority, as far as I could tell, of mainstream media stories seemed to urge caution in embracing this theory with some even rejecting it completely. Of course, a few embraced and endorsed.

So, I never felt I was led to believe that the summer heat would end the pandemic. And I find it hard to believe, outside of certain bubbles, that most people felt the media told them this.

Of course, we all hoped this would be true. And we all hope the theories that herd immunity has been largely achieved are true. I would be thrilled if it magically disappeared. But how likely are these possibilities?

Also fair enough. I don't disagree with anything you wrote here. When I said there was much speculation, I meant among virologists, experts, whatever you want to call them. I had read of that possibility in multiple (not MSM) articles prior to Trump or any significant public figure bringing it up. Of course, the second Trump makes a reference to something the media explodes with why it's not true.

And in this case, what Trump implied was also very much against the approved narrative of doom and gloom. My attempts to find earlier references were complicated by the number of MSM articles all saying pretty much the same thing. The CDC article was actually the only one I located that didn't mention Trump as a source.

 

[Villain]

I am questioning the timeline and veracity of when/whether the media was promoting a "narrative" that warm weather would kill covid-19 prior to Trump's statements.

First, I'm sure there were more than a few experts who felt this was a possibility. But it didn't become a mainstream story until Trump suggested it.

This is why I requested links to media stories discussing this theory predating Trump's statements. I can't find any.

Secondly, it obviously became mainstream news after Trump used his position to amplify the theory. But even then, the vast majority, as far as I could tell, of mainstream media stories seemed to urge caution in embracing this theory with some even rejecting it completely. Of course, a few embraced and endorsed.

So, I never felt I was led to believe that the summer heat would end the pandemic. And I find it hard to believe, outside of certain bubbles, that most people felt the media told them this.

Of course, we all hoped this would be true. And we all hope the theories that herd immunity has been largely achieved are true. I would be thrilled if it magically disappeared. But how likely are these possibilities?

What are your thoughts on Thailand then? Hot climate, right next to China basically and they have had very few cases and even fewer deaths.

 

[Villain]

 

[Millard]

Depends on your religious viewpoint

Are you arguing from a religious viewpoint?

 

[Villain]

Are you arguing from a religious viewpoint?

My reality is based on my religious views, so yes sir.

 

[Multislacking]

My reality is based on my religious views, so yes sir.

So what is your take on that? Serious question.

 

[Millard]

What are your thoughts on Thailand then? Hot climate, right next to China basically and they have had very few cases and even fewer deaths.

I don't have any thoughts on Thailand's hot climate other than it'd be a nice place for a vacation.

https://www.asiaone.com/asia/no-new-covid-19-cases-thailand-over-24-hour-period

A lot has been written recently about Vietnam (also on the Indochinese peninsula and also bordering China) and the few cases and fewer deaths. For example:

How Did Vietnam Become Biggest Nation Without Coronavirus Deaths?

For a deeper dive, here is a lengthy explanation that you are free to discount if you think Bill-Gates-is-the-boogeyman:

Emerging COVID-19 success story: Vietnam’s commitment to containment

June 30, 2020

Introduction
Although Vietnam reported its first case of COVID-19 on January 23, 2020, it reported only a little more than 300 cases and zero deaths over the following four months.1,2 This early success has been attributed to several key factors, including a well-developed public health system, a strong central government, and a proactive containment strategy based on comprehensive testing, tracing, and quarantining. Lessons from Vietnam’s successful early detection and containment strategy are worth examining in detail so other countries may apply them to their own responses.

Detection: Vietnam has taken a targeted approach to testing, scaled up testing in areas with community transmission, and conducted three degrees of contact tracing for each positive case.

Containment: As a result of its detection process, hundreds of thousands of people, including international travelers and those who had close contact with people who tested positive, were placed in quarantine centers run by the government, which greatly reduced transmission at both the household and community levels. Hot spots with demonstrated community transmission were locked down immediately, and the government communicated frequently with citizens to keep them informed and involved in the public health response.

One of the reasons Vietnam was able to act so quickly is that the country experienced SARS in 2003 and human cases of avian influenza between 2004 and 2010. Therefore, Vietnam had both the experience and infrastructure to take appropriate action. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to unfold and Vietnam relaxes many of its restrictions, monitoring how the case levels change, and studying the reasons for those changes, will be particularly important.

Source: Emerging COVID-19 success story: Vietnam’s commitment to containment

 

[flenser]

My reality is based on my religious views, so yes sir.

I thought you were referring to the atheist religion which I understand considers all human actions to be physics based. In effect, all actions are reactions and therefore deterministic.

 

[Villain]

So what is your take on that? Serious question.

Not sure I really understand your question.

 

[Multislacking]

Not sure I really understand your question.

I wondered if you felt like God had predetermined when you would die and how or if He merely knows when. (Assuming you have a christian viewpoint?)

 

[Villain]

I don't have any thoughts on Thailand's hot climate other than it'd be a nice place for a vacation.

https://www.asiaone.com/asia/no-new-covid-19-cases-thailand-over-24-hour-period

A lot has been written recently about Vietnam (also on the Indochinese peninsula and also bordering China) and the few cases and fewer deaths. For example:

How Did Vietnam Become Biggest Nation Without Coronavirus Deaths?

For a deeper dive, here is a lengthy explanation that you are free to discount if you think Bill-Gates-is-the-boogeyman:

Emerging COVID-19 success story: Vietnam’s commitment to containment

June 30, 2020

Introduction
Although Vietnam reported its first case of COVID-19 on January 23, 2020, it reported only a little more than 300 cases and zero deaths over the following four months.1,2 This early success has been attributed to several key factors, including a well-developed public health system, a strong central government, and a proactive containment strategy based on comprehensive testing, tracing, and quarantining. Lessons from Vietnam’s successful early detection and containment strategy are worth examining in detail so other countries may apply them to their own responses.

Detection: Vietnam has taken a targeted approach to testing, scaled up testing in areas with community transmission, and conducted three degrees of contact tracing for each positive case.

Containment: As a result of its detection process, hundreds of thousands of people, including international travelers and those who had close contact with people who tested positive, were placed in quarantine centers run by the government, which greatly reduced transmission at both the household and community levels. Hot spots with demonstrated community transmission were locked down immediately, and the government communicated frequently with citizens to keep them informed and involved in the public health response.

One of the reasons Vietnam was able to act so quickly is that the country experienced SARS in 2003 and human cases of avian influenza between 2004 and 2010. Therefore, Vietnam had both the experience and infrastructure to take appropriate action. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to unfold and Vietnam relaxes many of its restrictions, monitoring how the case levels change, and studying the reasons for those changes, will be particularly important.

Source: Emerging COVID-19 success story: Vietnam’s commitment to containment

I’m not sure if I missed it (I did more of a quick read than a full in depth read) but I didn’t see anything related to Bill Gates. One thing I find interesting (and @flenser touched on it) was how the media attacks Trump every chance they get. Vietnam pretty much immediately shut down travel to and from China yet Trump was called a racist for doing so. The numbers are very interesting because Japan also had relatively low cases and deaths and they didn’t lock down their country. Thailand has had some form of lockdown but not even close to the US and their case and death rates are very low. There are just way too many inconsistencies with info we’ve been given.

 

[Villain]

I wondered if you felt like God had predetermined when you would die and how or if He merely knows when. (Assuming you have a christian viewpoint?)

Absolutely. You can call it a play on words, but a very specific scripture comes to mind which says “it is appointed unto man to die once and then to face judgment.” So while you can say that appointment is to only die once and not a predetermined death date, other scriptures back it up, such as God knowing the very number of hairs on my head or that a sparrow does not even fall to its death without God knowing.

 

[Villain]

I thought you were referring to the atheist religion which I understand considers all human actions to be physics based. In effect, all actions are reactions and therefore deterministic.

Not at all brother.

 

[flenser]

Absolutely. You can call it a play on words, but a very specific scripture comes to mind which says “it is appointed unto man to die once and then to face judgment.” So while you can say that appointment is to only die once and not a predetermined death date, other scriptures back it up, such as God knowing the very number of hairs on my head or that a sparrow does not even fall to its death without God knowing.

I've had numerous arguments with Christians on the apparent contradiction of having free will with God, your creator, knowing every choice you will ever make. It's a form of double-think my mind refuses to accept : )