placeholder

Actually, there was a study done that said that the richest 1% of the human population generates twice as much emissions as do the bottom 50%. So it's not just about the numbers of humans. Think of the environmental damage caused by 1 superyacht. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/carbon-emissions-richest-1-percent-more-double-emissions-poorest-half-humanity

But epidemiology and virology are pure sciences. And because of them we know why the vaccinated are far better protected than those who are not.

Once again, your bias blinds you to the fact it that it could just as sensibly, or rather non sensibly, that you have nothing to lose. Or that your bias, in the face of evidence to the contrary, makes you exaggerate the risk and minimize the downside of not getting your alleged child vaccinated. When 16 out of 17 experts approved the use of it and 1 abstained, you focused on that one abstention. But when 27% of parents, are in favor of getting their children vaccinated, that doesn't count. As for that article, was that drawn from a representative poll of experts? Or did the daily mail seek out only those opposed to such a measure?

Wind and solar power are growing rapidly. Actually more new wind and solar plants are being built that those powered by fossil fuels. So as time goes by, the percentage of power provided by fossil fuels will decrease. And EV battery recycling is already a thing and is already getting a lot bigger very quickly: "Battery recycling company Redwood Materials said on Wednesday it has forged an alliance with Korean battery materials maker L&F Co (066970.KQ) that could help transform the Nevada startup into a major battery component manufacturer over the next decade. Redwood has signed a multi-year deal to use L&F's design and manufacturing technology at a new U.S. facility to make enough battery cathodes to supply up to 1 million electric vehicles a year by 2025, and more than 5 million by 2030, Redwood told Reuters, without elaborating. The partnership is the latest element in Redwood Chief Executive J.B. Straubel's vision of building a "closed loop" or circular supply chain for EV batteries, from raw materials to recycling. https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-us-battery-startup-redwood-materials-sets-deal-with-koreas-lf-2021-10-27/ Unless that "old banger" is immortal, someday it will need to be replaced.

On the other hand, there's this from the same report:

False. The problem with this kind of assertion is that it takes no account of rate of increase. It's like saying you don't care if your money earns 1% interest or 10% interest, just so long as it's increasing.

There's a fascinating article in theatlantic.com about how researchers who are doing forensic peer review are catching out fraudulent science including, but not limited to, ivermectin studies. The author is himself a forensic researcher. He points out that in the case of various covid studies, it's the more shoddy research that tends to show the beneficial effects of covid. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/10/ivermectin-research-problems/620473/

"In a press conference on Oct 2, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung also said that unvaccinated people are 14 times more likely to need intensive care or die, compared with those who are vaccinated. Around three in four who were reported to have died in October were individuals who received a single dose of a vaccine or were unvaccinated. The unvaccinated accounted for 84 out of 169 of the reported deaths here this month as at Wednesday, and 30 more of the reported deaths had only a single dose of the vaccine." https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/more-covid-19-patients-in-singapore-reported-to-have-died-in-october-than-18-months-prior

And this proves what exactly? That being emotionally involved makes for more level-headed assessments of risk?

In the USA, you're 11 times more likely to die if you're unvaccinated than if you're vaccinated?.So if you think being unvaccinated protects you from living better than being vaccinated, you've got a point. Otherwise, not so much.

I guess since you've got nothing, you try and make it personal. It does nothing to hide the gaping hole in your reasoning.

You know objectively as much about my parental status as I do about yours. In other words, nothing. As for the children who were part of the test groups, are they all orphans? Or were they hatched from test tubes? The flaw in your self-aggrandizing claim to special authority on the issue is so large that a baby carriage big enough to contain quintuplets could pass through it.

Because having a child means you're more liable to think rationally?

I suppose it depends on what definition of infections is being used. Clearly the CDC claims that covid vaccines can and do prevent infection, although not in 100% of the vaccinated. There is a concept called sterilizing immunity which means 100% protection against viruses reproducing themselves. It's been claimed that this has been achieved in pre-clinical tests for one vaccine candidate administered in the form of a nasal spray to vaccinated animals. https://www.uab.edu/news/research/item/12027-intranasal-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-shows-sterilizing-immunity-in-preclinical-tests

Your argument, if it can be dignified as such, seems to be that because you haven't contracted covid up to now then you won't ever contract it. If that were a valid argument, then anyone who hasn't contracted covid up to now will never contract it. So, has the case rate dropped to zero?

It may be that the vaccinated are just as likely to spread it, but they are far less likely to be infected by it.

And by the way, guess what country has the most new auto sales? If you didn't guess China, you got it wrong. And India is moving up China Continues to be Largest Passenger Vehicle Market in the World in 2019, India on 5th Spot. https://www.news18.com/news/auto/china-continues-to-be-largest-passenger-vehicle-market-in-the-world-in-2019-india-on-5th-spot-2584975.html

You don't seem to understand that in countries with huge populations like India and China, even if only 10% of the people can afford to buy an auto, that's a lot of potential customers. For the first 3 quarters of 2021 Tesla sold 204684 vehicles in China https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/14/china-ev-tesla-xpeng-nio-byd-are-best-selling-electric-cars-in-2021-.html It's a pretty safe bet that Tesla will at least double its Chinese sales in 2021 In September alone, Tesla sold 52163 vehicles in China. That's well over a 3rd of what they sold for the entire previous year. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-sold-56006-china-made-vehicles-september-cpca-2021-10-12/ As for pricing, are you suffering under the delusion that Tesla is the only EV manufacturer out there? The biggest selling electric vehicle in China is The Hongguang Mini (SAIC-GM-Wuling). It had a starting price of $4162 and tops out at $5607 in 2020. So, if a similarly priced auto were available in India who could afford it? "To be in the top 5 percent, your minimum wealth should be $45,909, while you require a minimum of $22,476 to be among the richest 10 percent of Indian adults." https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/earnings/moneycontrol-pro-weekender-where-are-you-on-indias-wealth-ladder-7215981.html After discounting the 40% of non adult Indians, that still leaves 850 million. 10% of that would be 85 million people who could easily afford an EV were one available at the price of the Chinese vehicle. And this affordability calculation is a severe underestimate. In the US the average auto or pickup costs about $37000 per year. Average household income is about $68,000, So the cost of a vehicle comes to over 50% of household income in the US. Whereas in India the price for a chinese vehicle could be less than 20% and tops out at about 25%. And as for your comment about the total number of people in the world who can afford an EV,, doesn't that apply to ICE vehicles as well? You are clearly afflicted with a severe case of doublethink.

From the article:

False, as usual. PFIZER AND BIONTECH SUBMIT INITIAL DATA TO U.S. FDA FROM PIVOTAL TRIAL OF COVID-19 VACCINE IN CHILDREN 5 TO <12 YEARS OF AGE https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-submit-initial-data-us-fda-pivotal

How much less likely are you to spread covid-19 if you're vaccinated? People who are fully vaccinated against covid-19 are far less likely to infect others, despite the arrival of the delta variant, several studies show. The findings refute the idea, which has become common in some circles, that vaccines no longer do much to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. “They absolutely do reduce transmission,” says Christopher Byron Brooke at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. “Vaccinated people do transmit the virus in some cases, but the data are super crystal-clear that the risk of transmission for a vaccinated individual is much, much lower than for an unvaccinated individual.” Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294250-how-much-less-likely-are-you-to-spread-covid-19-if-youre-vaccinated/#ixzz7AbRxrzyG

What utter nonsense. First off, how do you think vaccines created in the past were tested? Do you think that researchers used Barbies? Teddy Bears? Ultimately, they've always been tested on children. Always. There is currently no other way. As for what that person on a 7 second clip was really getting at, who knows? When someone abstracts a tiny quote (7 seconds!) out of what was clearly a larger context, it's pretty safe to assume that they're trying to put one over on us. And whether the people who push such suspect material are con-artists themselves or willing dupes, who cares? If you were running a courtroom, it's mascot would be a kangaroo.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/502208/tesla-quarterly-vehicle-deliveries/ Wait times for new Teslas are as long as 10 months — unless you're willing to splurge for expensive add-ons https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-model-3-y-s-x-delivery-wait-times-months-2021-10

What this anti-vaxxer point really boils down to is this: we don't know about the latent effects of vaccination. The problem with that position is that we do know that no vaccine has ever been show to have latent effects. Whereas several virus do in fact result in seriously painful or fatal latent effects. So if the question is whether covid-19 or vaccines are more likely to have unfortunate latent effects, the odds are that it will be covid-19.

In Thailand there is no meaningful difference between the military and the government.