murraypaul wrote:What is your strategy for dealing with Covid at this point? Xfool ducked that question but I feel sure that you will not.
Basically what we are doing.
Then we agree.
Thanks to gpadsa,Steffers0,lansdown,Wasron,jfgw, for Donating to support the site
murraypaul wrote:What is your strategy for dealing with Covid at this point? Xfool ducked that question but I feel sure that you will not.
Basically what we are doing.
Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:Lootman wrote:As an aside, is your implicit claim there that The Telegraph is biased and wrong, but The Guardian is unbiased and correct?
And if so, does that give readers information about those newspapers? Or information about your personal prejudices?
So what's that called? 'Bait and switch'?
No, if someone claims that paper A is right and paper B is wrong, then they need to back that claim up with more than just "paper A supports my biases".
Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:What was it Lootman said about some people not being happy despite the waning of the virus?
Glad you are paying attention. I was noting how some people here and elsewhere seem positively sad that the virus is on the retreat, to the point of even denying that. Almost as if their scaremongering about the virus represented an important part of their lives.
Lootman wrote:murraypaul wrote:I think most sensible people are expecting them to go up again as lockdown is relaxed more and more.
Ah I see you are using the Xfool tactic of claiming that anyone who disagrees with you is not "sensible".
Lootman wrote:Anyway, what you are ignoring is vaccinations. You know, our entire and successful strategy of escaping that loop of despair.
Lootman wrote:What is your strategy for dealing with Covid at this point? Xfool ducked that question but I feel sure that you will not.
XFool wrote:Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:So what's that called? 'Bait and switch'?
No, if someone claims that paper A is right and paper B is wrong, then they need to back that claim up with more than just "paper A supports my biases".
Once again, you are missing all the pertinent points and concentrating on the peripheral ones. It's about appropriate sources of expertise and who is trustworthy.
XFool wrote:XFool did not duck the question.
Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:Once again, you are missing all the pertinent points and concentrating on the peripheral ones. It's about appropriate sources of expertise and who is trustworthy. Some people believe in expertise, consensus, realism. Some prefer 'alternatives', 'anti-establishment' opinions, counter-arguments etc.
I would welcome evidence to support your claims about "appropriateness" and "trustworthy". Sounds a lot like you define those in terms of your personal preferences.
Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:XFool did not duck the question.
Ah I see, so Xfool decides how readers assess Xfool's contributions? Glad we cleared that up.
XFool wrote:Lootman wrote:XFool wrote:Once again, you are missing all the pertinent points and concentrating on the peripheral ones. It's about appropriate sources of expertise and who is trustworthy. Some people believe in expertise, consensus, realism. Some prefer 'alternatives', 'anti-establishment' opinions, counter-arguments etc.
I would welcome evidence to support your claims about "appropriateness" and "trustworthy". Sounds a lot like you define those in terms of your personal preferences.
Yes. My personal preferences are indeed for "appropriate" and "sensible" expertise, as opposed to "contrary" and "maverick" - or of those with some axe to grind due to their political ideology.
Lootman wrote:Ah I see. So if someone presents an argument agreeing with you then that is "sensible"?
And if someone presents an argument disagreeing with you, then that is "maverick"?
How perfectly convenient! I envy anyone who is so smugly comfortable that they are right 100% of the time.
XFool wrote:Lootman wrote:Ah I see. So if someone presents an argument agreeing with you then that is "sensible"?
And if someone presents an argument disagreeing with you, then that is "maverick"?
How perfectly convenient! I envy anyone who is so smugly comfortable that they are right 100% of the time.
Sigh... Another miss I'm afraid.
Probably time to give up here? Not for the first time.
Lootman wrote:I was not suggesting that you give up here. Only that you give up on the "anyone who disagrees with me is a maverick" shtick.
XFool wrote:Lootman wrote:I was not suggesting that you give up here. Only that you give up on the "anyone who disagrees with me is a maverick" shtick.
The answer to that is so obvious I don't need to make it! So I won't.
Lootman wrote:9873210 wrote:Lootman wrote:Well, the official Covid death count yesterday was 1 (one)!
Probably about the same as the number who died from being gored by a wild animal.
I don't know where you are getting your data from but https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths does not support your statement. You'd have to wait another four days before yesterday's death become available.
"On Tuesday, the UK reported four Covid deaths within 28 days of a positive test. On Monday it was only one."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... r-optimism
UncleEbenezer wrote:So our covid incidence has approximately doubled since mid-April, with every individual area of Devon except Torbay out of the healthy lemon-yellow. Other English counties that had joined us at low levels are also up: our neighbours Cornwall and Dorset, west-of-England Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, and outlier East Sussex, all lost our yellow status on the map. Newcomer Cumbria is today the most significant English population in yellow ahead of fellow-newcomer West Cheshire (I'm reluctant to count part-counties here, but it appears to be a significant area).
Meanwhile most of Wales, including now some of their significant population centres and poorer regions in the Valleys, is knocking the spots off us. What are they doing right?
UncleEbenezer wrote:UncleEbenezer wrote:So our covid incidence has approximately doubled since mid-April, with every individual area of Devon except Torbay out of the healthy lemon-yellow. Other English counties that had joined us at low levels are also up: our neighbours Cornwall and Dorset, west-of-England Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, and outlier East Sussex, all lost our yellow status on the map. Newcomer Cumbria is today the most significant English population in yellow ahead of fellow-newcomer West Cheshire (I'm reluctant to count part-counties here, but it appears to be a significant area).
Meanwhile most of Wales, including now some of their significant population centres and poorer regions in the Valleys, is knocking the spots off us. What are they doing right?
And just to maintain the record again, while Devon's big cities have fallen from grace, today's map shows them surpassed by some much bigger centres of population. Indeed, two of Blighty's biggest cities. How long will Liverpool and Bristol keep it up (or should that be down?)
Wales is still knocking the spots off us.
Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests