Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

About Toofarfromthesea

  • Rank
    Cool Cruiser

About Me

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. CDC COVID-19 Survival Rates Age 0-19 — 99.997% Age 20-49 — 99.98% Age 50-69 — 99.5% Age 70+ — 94.6% https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/09/26/cdc-releases-updated-covid-19-fatality-rate-data/
  2. BTW, the new HQC study was peer-reviewed. As was the censored Danisk mask study. It has become the media's role to cover the news. With a pillow. Until it stops moving.
  3. No, that is not what Hopkins said about the study. But stay in your bubble. The article I linked to had a link to the disappeared study, but it would violate your bubble to read it. What is YOUR theory of how increased covid deaths are accompanied by an unprecedented decline in heart disease death? And what is your theory about how all of these covid deaths resulted in no increase in overall all-events deaths?
  4. Must not venture out of your bubble. A study by John's Hopkins becomes unreliable because the 'establishment' media ignores it.
  5. Thank you for proving the point I just made to nbt. Did you even read them?
  6. That "careful reading" of the NYT would have led the reader to believe for 3+ years that there was massive evidence of Russian collusion in the 2016 election, whereas in the end the IG couldn't find ANY such evidence. In an earlier age a careful reading of the NYT and their star foreign correspondent, Walter Duranty, would have informed the reader that Stalin's Russia was a socialist paradise.
  7. https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/11/27/johns-hopkins-study-saying-covid-19-has-relatively-no-effect-on-deaths-in-u-s-deleted-after-publication-n1178930 https://www.theblaze.com/news/peer-reviewed-hydroxychloroquine-study-hospitalizations
  8. So, what's your take on the censored Johns Hopkins study that shows that in spite of all the so-called Covid deaths, the total number of excess deaths in 2020 isvessentially 0. Suggesting a whole lot of misclassification has been going on. Or the recent HCQ study where early stage infected were given the whole treatment of HCQ+zinc+antibiotic and showed excellent results?
  9. Yup, really. You can ignore sources and studies that cut against the narrative all you want, but the facts remain.
  10. Because any citation of a publication even suspected of being conservative gets instantly dismissed, here.
  11. As I suspected, not a clue about science. What you are describing is how hypotheses are formed, not how scientific conclusions are drawn. At the core of biology and other sciences lies a problem-solving approach called the scientific method. The scientific method has five basic steps, plus one feedback step: 1)Make an observation. 2) Ask a question. 3) Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation. 4) Make a prediction based on the hypothesis. 5) Test the prediction. 6) Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/high-sch
  12. Thank you for making my case, as I knew you would. You had to reach back more than 100 years. Yet in the intervening 100 years, despite numerous pandemics of infectious respiratory diseases, of varying severity, masks were not recommended. And at the start of THIS pandemic masks were not only not recommended they were actively discouraged by both US and world public health officials. Because that is what the state of the science told them. And then, while that science didn't change, the opinions of scientists changed - not the same thing. And we started hearing about common sense, which
  13. Yes, we don't know either way. But when we don't know whether A or B is right, we don't just assume A is right and act accordingly. At least we don't do that as a matter of science.
  14. Perhaps science begins with the decades long consensus about the ineffectiveness of masks in controlling the spread of infectious respiratory diseases. Perhaps science begins with a complete lack of any evidence that a virus is more virulent after 10 PM than before it. Perhaps science starts with understanding that the potential danger is unaffected by the cause of the large crowd, whether it be a football game, a violent protest, or a celebration. Perhaps science starts by not checking our critical reasoning ability at the door.
  • Create New...