Have you changed your mind on the COVID Vaccines?

[HeijoshinCool]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

11 hours ago, HeijoshinCool said:

.

 

Do you have a moment to cogently and logically describe what makes the people you don't care about lunatics and lost causes?

 

.

Expand  

That’s an illogical conclusion.

 

There are billions of people who I don’t know let alone care about in any meaningful sense.

 

On the basis probability billions of those people will be entirely sane.

 

.

 

Nice try.....

 

 

.

[Yellowtail]

15 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Imagine changing one's mind when new data/science is presented. Oh the horror, sounds downright intelligent!

Why can't he do like a certain subset of the population and just pick something that suits his bias and damn the science! 

 

Marge! Bring me the UV light and a double shot of Clorox!!

I thought the science was settled, no?

 

I was unaware there was so much new mask technology out there...

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, HeijoshinCool said:

.

 

Nice try.....

 

 

.

Try what?

 

You asked me for a logical description based on your own illogical conclusion.

 

I’m not inclined to defend any view I don’t hold and have never expressed.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I think you have been disinformed. 

 

Oxford got $1,200,000,000 for research. I could go on but it would take a little effort and it's pointless. 

 

I assume you're referring to the money Oxford/AZ got from the United States. If so, what you failed to mention that in return for the money, the US was promised 300,000,000 doses. So, not exactly a donation.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-astrazeneca/u-s-secures-300-million-doses-of-potential-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-idUSKBN22X0J9

[cdemundo]

13 hours ago, ogb said:

New Zealand has had as many deaths from the Pfizer vaccine this year as it has from covid.

Is this true?

Where did you learn this?

Do you have a link or reference?

[Nojohndoe]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Are you an English teacher? 

 

We were taking about funding for vaccinations and the money that Oxford received.

 

What are you talking about?

 

Wax off...

I referred to your "Why does everyone want Trump's vaccines" or words to that effect.

The "we" you refer to is not relevant to the fact that there are no "Trump" vaccines.

Proceed.

 

 

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I assume you're referring to the money Oxford/AZ got from the United States. If so, what you failed to mention that in return for the money, the US was promised 300,000,000 doses. So, not exactly a donation.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-astrazeneca/u-s-secures-300-million-doses-of-potential-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-idUSKBN22X0J9

I never said it was a donation, no need to make things up. 

 

The $1.2B was provided to help AZ accelerate the development before it was proven effective and to secure 300M doses, not to pay for the doses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cdemundo]

52 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I thought the science was settled, no?

 

I was unaware there was so much new mask technology out there...

The scientific consensus always changes when new information becomes available.

That is axiomatic in science.

Following the scientific method hypotheses are tested to see if they are supported by evidence.

Many people form their opinion and then search for evidence to support it.

That is the difference.

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, Nojohndoe said:

I referred to your "Why does everyone want Trump's vaccines" or words to that effect.

The "we" you refer to is not relevant to the fact that there are no "Trump" vaccines.

Proceed.

You are an English teacher, I knew it! 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never said it was a donation, no need to make things up. 

 

The $1.2B was provided to help AZ accelerate the development before it was proven effective and to secure 300M doses, not to pay for the doses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The AstraZeneca vaccine was already in Phase 3 trials.

 

What development are you referring to?

[Nojohndoe]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

You are an English teacher, I knew it! 

lol. Actually  although holding a teaching qualification I am not nor ever have  been.  Interesting that it seems to frighten  you. Perhaps Chomper H is justified in expressing the opinion that there are those  who are vehement in presenting some views are indeed lacking  something?

[placeholder]

11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never said it was a donation, no need to make things up. 

 

The $1.2B was provided to help AZ accelerate the development before it was proven effective and to secure 300M doses, not to pay for the doses. 

Thanks for the correction.

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

The scientific consensus always changes when new information becomes available.

That is axiomatic in science.

Axiomatic or otherwise, the consensus does not always change when new information becoms available. 

 

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

Following the scientific method hypotheses are tested to see if they are supported by evidence.

Indeed

 

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

Many people form their opinion and then search for evidence to support it.

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

That is the difference.

 That is not much of a difference. 

 

Are you an English teacher too? 

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The AstraZeneca vaccine was already in Phase 3 trials.

 

What development are you referring to?

Why not read the article, it was pretty clear.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Axiomatic or otherwise, the consensus does not always change when new information becoms available. 

 

Indeed

 

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

 That is not much of a difference. 

 

Are you an English teacher too? 

“So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

 That is not much of a difference. ”

 

Sorry to break it to you but scientific research seeks evidence that supports and that contradicts the hypothesis.

 

That’s a very significant difference.

[Phoenix Rising]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

I thought the science was settled, no?

 

I was unaware there was so much new mask technology out there...

"I thought the science was settled, no?"

Well, you live and learn (hopefully).

 

"I was unaware there was so much new mask technology out there..."

See previous remark.

[cdemundo]

12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Axiomatic or otherwise, the consensus does not always change when new information becoms available. 

 

Indeed

 

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

 That is not much of a difference. 

 

Are you an English teacher too? 

I am not really surprised that you have resentments against teachers.

When you were in school were all your teachers stupid?

[BusyB]

17 hours ago, l4ml4m said:

 

poor you if you think that luck is only what people who do not get covid have !

 

but it's wrong ! unlike many contaminated we have a brain ! we are able to protect ourselves ! THERE IS NOBODY who got covid when respecting the rules, this is pure BS and people saying this should be jailed without notice !

 

 

You sound really confident in your chosen path ...

[BusyB]

16 hours ago, superal said:

Anti vaccers should be made to pay for any treatment caused by the covid virus . These conspiracy believers spout off about its all B/S by all the world's governments . Just wondering if their thoughts are impeded by some other form of drugs ?  Yet as soon as they get the covid they expect and get hospital treatment . Unless they have a very good reason of refusing the vaccine they should be at the back of the hospital queue because they are putting some brave medical staff in danger .

They are also taking up beds for others in serious need of ICUs, which has resulted in massive delays of cancer OPs for instance.

The problem with them is, whether or not they are deluded or clinically insane, they are very definitely immature - and therefore cannot understand that it's not about 'their' 'freedom'. It's about others.

 

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Axiomatic or otherwise, the consensus does not always change when new information becoms available. 

 

Indeed

 

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

 That is not much of a difference. 

 

Are you an English teacher too? 

Except that qualified scientists at least good ones  look to sound scientific research to support their hypothesis whereas so many non-scientists seem to find their support on youtube. Which isn't so much the case for scientists.

[frantick]

Haven't changed my mind. Continue to follow the rapidly changing science.

 

Soon, the twice vaccinated will be considered unvaccinated, having not had their booster. Then the statistics are out the window. If not the first booster, then the second or third, etc. Think you're out of it? 90% vaccinated? Bam, new variant, start over.

 

It won't end until the man-bun brigade, literally or figuratively, wakes up.

 

I'm not a conspiracy theorist; they're too incapable, stupid, and power hungry to think up a plan like this.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, frantick said:

Haven't changed my mind. Continue to follow the rapidly changing science.

 

Soon, the twice vaccinated will be considered unvaccinated, having not had their booster. Then the statistics are out the window. If not the first booster, then the second or third, etc. Think you're out of it? 90% vaccinated? Bam, new variant, start over.

 

It won't end until the man-bun brigade, literally or figuratively, wakes up.

 

I'm not a conspiracy theorist; they're too incapable, stupid, and power hungry to think up a plan like this.

Thank you, time traveler, for your report from the future. I've been told that zinc is due for a big jump in price. Any truth to that?

[Jeffr2]

13 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Why would I ask my doctor? 

 

I've already gotten the first Pfizer shot and will get the second next week. You?

 

Again, if the vaccine works, why do you care if others take it? 

You don't get it. We won't get past this until more are vaccinated. Thus, we care about the selfish people who won't get the vaccine because of ridiculous reasons .

11 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

The sheer arrogance of some of the posts I am reading here is nothing short of appalling. Claiming that anyone choosing not to receive this injection is either stupid, uneducated or mentally ill is absolutely preposterous.

 

Allow me to offer a counterpoint:

 

I know a lot of smart, educated and reasonable people who do not wish to be injected with this product. And having enough character to stand strong despite overwhelming social and political pressure is not a sign of stupidity or mental illness, in fact it is quite the contrary.

And I don't know any smart, educated and reasonable people who won't get the vaccine.

[Jeffr2]

12 hours ago, Ryan754326 said:

I’m tired of wearing masks too, but Canada hit its target of 70% vaccinated, and as soon as they loosened up the rules, cases started to rise; Now they’re telling us we have to wear them again.
So what is the magic number that we need to reach herd immunity now? what happens if we hit 100%, and cases still continue to pop up? 

Right now, Canada’s 7 day average death rate is under 20 per day, and yet we’re still freaking out about a few hundred new cases, and reinstating restrictions that were only lifted less than two months ago. At what point will it be considered safe to go back to normal? 
 

I understand that the situation in Thailand is different. I’m just using my home country as an example of how some governments apparently won’t let this go until covid has completely disappeared from the face of the earth. If that’s the goal, we’ll be wearing masks and eating take-out forever. 

 

 

I believe that 70% doesn't reflect the entire population. Just those over 12. Sadly, many under 12 are now getting sick and spreading the virus.

[gargamon]

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

No, sorry, wrong.

 

A non-scientist has an opinion and only looks for evidence that supports his or her opinion. A scientist has a hypothesis, and looks for evidence that supports or disproves said hypothesis. If a scientist finds something that doesn't support his hypothesis, he will adjust the hypothesis to match the latest data. A non-scientist will never, or at least very rarely, change his opinion.

[ifmu]

On 8/31/2021 at 7:36 PM, EVENKEEL said:

Not sure why you would try to convince others what to do with their own bodies. 

because the un vaccinated are killing others  duh 

[ifmu]

i am still 100pct  for the vaccine    and yes different vacs are more effective than others   .. but get vacc with what ever you can here in thailand  .. then upgrade asap 

[cdemundo]

9 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Axiomatic or otherwise, the consensus does not always change when new information becoms available. 

 

Indeed

 

So a non-scientist has an opinion, but a scientist has a hypothesis, and they are both looking for evidence to support their opinion/hypothesis, yes?

 

 That is not much of a difference. 

 

Are you an English teacher too? 

You can't understand the difference between:

testing a hypothesis to discover if it is true or false

and

having an opinion and looking only for information that supports it.

That indicates a very limited capacity for critical thinking.

So in topics as complex as are involved in the discussion of a world wide viral pandemic, you really are not able to contribute anything significant.

Your continued posting in these discussions is nothing more than an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[ifmu]

3 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

You can't understand the difference between:

testing a hypothesis to discover if it is true or false

and

having an opinion and looking only for information that supports it.

That indicates a very limited capacity for critical thinking.

So in topics as complex as are involved in the discussion of a world wide viral pandemic, you really are not able to contribute anything significant.

Your continued posting in these discussions is nothing more than an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

boy you are very insulting in your reply

[cdemundo]

4 minutes ago, ifmu said:

boy you are very insulting in your reply

I think what I said was true and that I am much less insulting than the person that I was responding to typically is in his replies.

I believe I was more condescending or patronizing than insulting, in this case I think my tone and content were both appropriate.