4 ms·

I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally choose this hill because 1) the numbers for COVID deaths appear to be inflated; 2) mandates for health and safet

I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally choose this hill because 1) the numbers for COVID deaths appear to be inflated; 2) mandates for health and safety are perilously close to what the Nazis and other authoritarians claimed in order to enact their policies; 3) the "experts" telling us to do those things admitted that they lied on purpose about a few things, so I don't trust them with anything anymore; 4) those same experts seem to have a lot to gain by having us do the things they say; and 5) with regards to masks, those experts and politicians don't even follow their own rules, which makes it seem like either the masks don't work, or those elites think COVID is not really a problem. In other words, the ruling class burned their trust, and without that trust, and they also make COVID seem inconsequential by their actions. So this social contract you are talking about is entirely pushed by people who don't follow it. Why should I?

nautilius 5y ago
So - topless at the beach kills more people?
- ghoward 5y ago
  Not going topless at beaches is a social contract that is followed. But if you want my real opinion, society is subverted by allowing indecency like that.
  - nautilius 5y ago
    Interesting, but not surprising. So what you’re saying is that actually, you are perfectly fine with imposing completely arbitrary rules unto others, that restrict their liberties, with the only justification being ‘because I say so’. You’re perfectly happy with restricting other people’s lives, even though it does not even affect you whatsoever. But, if the rules now somehow affect you instead, even if the justification is “this is safe for surgeons, and current data suggest that we can safe hundreds of thousands of lives (and we could have, the US are by far the country with the most COVID cases and deaths)” this is now somehow authoritarian? More authoritarian than a completely arbitrary rule? Even though this massively impacts other people’s health? You may want to read up on which opinion is actually closer to what the Nazis did.
    - gavinhoward 5y ago
      You are completely misreading what I said. I said it was my opinion. I didn't say anything about me actually restricting people because I don't. If such a beach exists, I don't go there. I don't tell people that they can't go there. So your claim that I would restrict the liberties of others is not correct. It seems like a baseless accusation to discredit me. You claim that allowing people to go topless at a beach does not affect me, but it does. It makes it so I can't go to that beach without seeing things I don't want to see, so thus, I don't go to that beach. Also, saying that not allowing toplessness at a beach is a completely arbitrary rule is also disingenuous because there's a completely non-arbitrary reason: to cover up private parts of a body. The claim that "this is safe for surgeons, and current data suggest that we can safe hundreds of thousands of lives (and we could have, the US are by far the country with the most COVID cases and deaths)" is so far not shown to be true in all cases. In some cases, yes. In others, no. For surgeons, they change their masks frequently and wear them in the environment they were designed for. Out in the real world? Not so much. How much do masks actually help? When it comes to children, it appears not at all. For adults, the claim that masks work appear to only consider one variable: does it reduce the transmission of COVID. That is not enough; in science, all factors matter [1], and the scientists seem focused on that one factor to the detriment of all of the others, such as carbon dioxide intake [2] or how masks might expose wearers to more bacteria [3]. If scientists came out and said, "Here's the data, here's the factors we considered, here's the factors we did not consider," then I might listen. But they don't. Instead, they make claims that just one factor matters, which is not scientific at all. Also, you claim that these things affect other people's health? By how much? What are the numbers? How much more than vaccinated people? How much more than masked people? If you can't provide those numbers, then why should I believe you? There have been big sporting events without masks, but we're not seeing the massive spike in cases afterwards. In other words, I think your arguments are completely disingenuous, that they try to draw parallels where there is none, accuse me of authoritarianism for an opinion I hold but do nothing to actually enforce, and actually desire to exercise authoritarianism with few numbers to actually back up your claims. By the way, the Nazis allowed a bit of nudity, but they also coerced medical practices. [1]: https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/in-science-all-factors-matter/ https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/in-science-all-factors-matte... [2]: https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/masks-and-carbon-dioxide/ https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/masks-and-carbon-dioxide/ [3]: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-group-of-parents-sent-their-kids-face-masks-to-a-lab-for-analysis-heres-what-they-found-n2591047 https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-gr...

nautilius 5y ago

So - topless at the beach kills more people?

ghoward 5y ago
Not going topless at beaches is a social contract that is followed. But if you want my real opinion, society is subverted by allowing indecency like that.
- nautilius 5y ago
  Interesting, but not surprising. So what you’re saying is that actually, you are perfectly fine with imposing completely arbitrary rules unto others, that restrict their liberties, with the only justification being ‘because I say so’. You’re perfectly happy with restricting other people’s lives, even though it does not even affect you whatsoever. But, if the rules now somehow affect you instead, even if the justification is “this is safe for surgeons, and current data suggest that we can safe hundreds of thousands of lives (and we could have, the US are by far the country with the most COVID cases and deaths)” this is now somehow authoritarian? More authoritarian than a completely arbitrary rule? Even though this massively impacts other people’s health? You may want to read up on which opinion is actually closer to what the Nazis did.
  - gavinhoward 5y ago
    You are completely misreading what I said. I said it was my opinion. I didn't say anything about me actually restricting people because I don't. If such a beach exists, I don't go there. I don't tell people that they can't go there. So your claim that I would restrict the liberties of others is not correct. It seems like a baseless accusation to discredit me. You claim that allowing people to go topless at a beach does not affect me, but it does. It makes it so I can't go to that beach without seeing things I don't want to see, so thus, I don't go to that beach. Also, saying that not allowing toplessness at a beach is a completely arbitrary rule is also disingenuous because there's a completely non-arbitrary reason: to cover up private parts of a body. The claim that "this is safe for surgeons, and current data suggest that we can safe hundreds of thousands of lives (and we could have, the US are by far the country with the most COVID cases and deaths)" is so far not shown to be true in all cases. In some cases, yes. In others, no. For surgeons, they change their masks frequently and wear them in the environment they were designed for. Out in the real world? Not so much. How much do masks actually help? When it comes to children, it appears not at all. For adults, the claim that masks work appear to only consider one variable: does it reduce the transmission of COVID. That is not enough; in science, all factors matter [1], and the scientists seem focused on that one factor to the detriment of all of the others, such as carbon dioxide intake [2] or how masks might expose wearers to more bacteria [3]. If scientists came out and said, "Here's the data, here's the factors we considered, here's the factors we did not consider," then I might listen. But they don't. Instead, they make claims that just one factor matters, which is not scientific at all. Also, you claim that these things affect other people's health? By how much? What are the numbers? How much more than vaccinated people? How much more than masked people? If you can't provide those numbers, then why should I believe you? There have been big sporting events without masks, but we're not seeing the massive spike in cases afterwards. In other words, I think your arguments are completely disingenuous, that they try to draw parallels where there is none, accuse me of authoritarianism for an opinion I hold but do nothing to actually enforce, and actually desire to exercise authoritarianism with few numbers to actually back up your claims. By the way, the Nazis allowed a bit of nudity, but they also coerced medical practices. [1]: https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/in-science-all-factors-matter/ https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/in-science-all-factors-matte... [2]: https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/masks-and-carbon-dioxide/ https://gavinhoward.com/2020/08/masks-and-carbon-dioxide/ [3]: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-group-of-parents-sent-their-kids-face-masks-to-a-lab-for-analysis-heres-what-they-found-n2591047 https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-gr...