ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 21st July 2020, 10:21 PM   #201
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 23,665
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That's not what defines a con.



OK, Bob.
Religion in America is one great tax free racket.
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2020, 10:26 PM   #202
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 4,289
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
So you are agreeing?
I don't think reducing religion to a con is helpful for the purposes of this discussion.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2020, 11:24 PM   #203
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
Religion in America is one great tax free racket.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2020, 07:28 AM   #204
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,490
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I don't think reducing religion to a con is helpful for the purposes of this discussion.
I think if you look back at this thread, you'll realize that discussion was never the purpose. It's just another Two Minutes Hate, and anti-religious sentiment is entirely appropriate.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2020, 09:25 AM   #205
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Unquestionably.

It's a con that believers cannot see.
They're all a bunch of Doyle Lonnegans.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 08:02 AM   #206
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,209
If you actually care about an answer to the question that started this thread listen to the podcast, "You Are Not So Smart!" Pretty much all of them from the beginning but the latest episode is a nice summary. The short version, no one actually cares about what the best science on anything, they just care what supports their side of the argument and what will be vaguely convincing to people who already agree with them.

https://youarenotsosmart.com/

There are a number of experiments that show folks basically decide what they believe based on what their side/tribe/in-group/political party believe. Even when the tribe in question didn't exist prior to five minutes ago or it is something the individual believed the opposite off five minutes ago. Side note, we even forget that we ever believed anything different from what we now do. That's why its hard to think of something we've changed our mind about and why its pretty easy to find politicians saying the exact opposite thing in too different interviews.

For an example of where most dems are clearly on the wrong side of the evidence, opening up primary schools in the time of covid. There's insignificant risk to anyone involved, lower than the typical flu even, on account of covid not really affecting kids much, in contrast to the flu.

This post and the podcast will naturally be ignored and/or met with hostility by those who disagree.

Last edited by ahhell; 28th July 2020 at 08:03 AM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 08:31 AM   #207
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
If you actually care about an answer to the question that started this thread listen to the podcast, "You Are Not So Smart!" Pretty much all of them from the beginning but the latest episode is a nice summary. The short version, no one actually cares about what the best science on anything, they just care what supports their side of the argument and what will be vaguely convincing to people who already agree with them.

https://youarenotsosmart.com/

There are a number of experiments that show folks basically decide what they believe based on what their side/tribe/in-group/political party believe. Even when the tribe in question didn't exist prior to five minutes ago or it is something the individual believed the opposite off five minutes ago. Side note, we even forget that we ever believed anything different from what we now do. That's why its hard to think of something we've changed our mind about and why its pretty easy to find politicians saying the exact opposite thing in too different interviews.

For an example of where most dems are clearly on the wrong side of the evidence, opening up primary schools in the time of covid. There's insignificant risk to anyone involved, lower than the typical flu even, on account of covid not really affecting kids much, in contrast to the flu.

This post and the podcast will naturally be ignored and/or met with hostility by those who disagree.

This is a load of crap. The science on this doesn't really exist. Extrapolating from small samples is dangerous.
While it is true that children are not in as much danger as adults, what is entirely unknown are the effects on society as a whole. How it will affect teachers and the children's families and how COVID might spread as a result is entirely unknown.

Not being confident in limited evidence is not the same as not believing in science.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 28th July 2020 at 08:34 AM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 08:33 AM   #208
rockysmith76
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,377
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
This is a load of crap. The science on this doesn't really exist. While it is true that children are not in much danger, what is entirely unknown are the effects on society as a whole. How it will affect teachers and the children's families and how COVID might spread as a result is entirely unknown.

Not being confident in limited evidence is not the same as not believing in science.
It's ignoring the risk, so it basically is. Poor planning by Dems. SHame.
rockysmith76 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 08:42 AM   #209
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by rockysmith76 View Post
It's ignoring the risk, so it basically is. Poor planning by Dems. SHame.
It's not ignoring the risk. Ignoring the risks is what Trump has been doing. As well as DeSantis and Abbott.
Ignoring the risks has led to people not wearing masks. And overcrowded hospitals. And 150,000 Americans dying. And probably up to 300,000 dead by the end of the year.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 09:49 AM   #210
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,209
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It's not ignoring the risk. Ignoring the risks is what Trump has been doing. As well as DeSantis and Abbott.
Ignoring the risks has led to people not wearing masks. And overcrowded hospitals. And 150,000 Americans dying. And probably up to 300,000 dead by the end of the year.
It's over rating the risk covid while ignoring the risks of not reopening.

This isn't studies with small sample sizes its based on the data from pretty much everywhere. The risks of catching, spreading, and getting sick or dying from covid clearly decrease dramatically the younger you are. There is virtually no risk from opening primary schools normally.

https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23...age-race-14863

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-condition-us/

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid

There is however substantial risk that kids will fall behind in education, especially so for lower income kids who's parents don't have the time or resources to find alternatives.

If you're worried about teacher's health. Send the old farts home and set up classrooms so they can teach remotely with a young healthy proctor. There's really no reason that a teacher under 50 with no underlying conditions can't teach a class full of 10 year olds. There's really no reason that a teacher under 40 can't teach a class full of teanagers either, that's a little less clear though.

Doesn't matter, if the evidence doesn't match the audiences party affiliation, it won't convince anyone. That's what the science on evidence, believe and in-group ideology shows.

Of course, most of those deaths were in the republican hot beds of New York and New Jersey where public hospitals were over crowded while temporary facilities went unused and the public facilities refused to transfer patients to private hospitals.

https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Po...icId=156029013 Check out the show from yesterday, or not, it won't change anyone's mind.

Last edited by ahhell; 28th July 2020 at 09:54 AM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 10:16 AM   #211
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
It's over rating the risk covid while ignoring the risks of not reopening.

This isn't studies with small sample sizes its based on the data from pretty much everywhere. The risks of catching, spreading, and getting sick or dying from covid clearly decrease dramatically the younger you are. There is virtually no risk from opening primary schools normally.

https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23...age-race-14863

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-condition-us/

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid

There is however substantial risk that kids will fall behind in education, especially so for lower income kids who's parents don't have the time or resources to find alternatives.

If you're worried about teacher's health. Send the old farts home and set up classrooms so they can teach remotely with a young healthy proctor. There's really no reason that a teacher under 50 with no underlying conditions can't teach a class full of 10 year olds. There's really no reason that a teacher under 40 can't teach a class full of teanagers either, that's a little less clear though.

Doesn't matter, if the evidence doesn't match the audiences party affiliation, it won't convince anyone. That's what the science on evidence, believe and in-group ideology shows.

Of course, most of those deaths were in the republican hot beds of New York and New Jersey where public hospitals were over crowded while temporary facilities went unused and the public facilities refused to transfer patients to private hospitals.

https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Po...icId=156029013 Check out the show from yesterday, or not, it won't change anyone's mind.
I have read the links you provided. Thanks. They really only talk about mortality and the risk to children and DON'T address the issue of reopening and the effect on spreading COVID to parents, teachers etc.

Unless you can offer some data regarding children spreading the disease you're just flying blind.

According to the third link 5.6 percent of people over 65 die from the infection. And this doesn't discuss the issues of other effects short of death. They don't address the burden of increased infections on an already overburdened healthcare system. Unless you can show that opening the schools won't lead to more issues, it still seems very risky.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 28th July 2020 at 11:30 AM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 10:36 AM   #212
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 9,549
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Nuclear power is not inherently safe, it's dangerous. Engineering standards and practices can make nuclear power very safe, but those standards, practices and regulations must be upheld. There's also the issue of the waste, there still isn't a good way to dispose of the waste that doesn't harm the environment.

Essentially, democrats as a whole aren't anti-science. They believe the science and facts, they question how it's used. This is totally unlike the right wing, who deny reality and fact.
I actually don't see waste disposal to be as much a technical problem as a political problem. I think there are means of waste disposal which are, if not guaranteed to be safe, at least carry an acceptable level of risk (and of course just what level of risk is acceptable is a ripe subject for debate). The biggest problem is that absolutely nobody wants the disposal site in their backyard, and understandably so.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 10:42 AM   #213
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,766
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
The short version, no one actually cares about what the best science on anything, they just care what supports their side of the argument and what will be vaguely convincing to people who already agree with them.
True but irrelevant. Republicans have abandoned the field wrt science. With Republicans taking an anti-science stance on almost everything, the Democratic counterargument has almost no choice but to be on the side of science.

If Republican positions had a better base in science, fact and logic I’m fairly certain mainstream Democrats would embrace more pseudo-science and counter-factual argument s of their own, the just don’t need to because Republicans have handed them the pro-science arguments on a silver platter.

Originally Posted by ahhell View Post

For an example of where most dems are clearly on the wrong side of the evidence, opening up primary schools in the time of covid. There's insignificant risk to anyone involved, lower than the typical flu even, on account of covid not really affecting kids much, in contrast to the flu.
The only thing you got partially right is that COVID-19 is mild in children, but it’s still more serious than OC43 and HKU1, 2 related viruses that are a major cause of colds. Anyone with children knows that school is a major avenue for colds to spread from one family unit to another. Children get them at school from other children who have a sniffle and when they come home they infect the entire household.

COVID-19 spreads asymptomatically, so it likely it will spread among children the same way colds caused by OC43 and HKU1 do. It’s also likely they will infect the rest of the family when they come home from school. The children may not be in much danger but the same cannot be said of the parents and grandparents they infect.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 10:54 AM   #214
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,209
Meh, I can't help but think the responses to my post confirm my previously held belief that I would not convince anyone with actual evidence. Regardless of covid, the reality is still that we mostly just look for evidence to support our beliefs. We come to our beliefs for reason other than evidence and one of the most important drivers is, what group do we belong to and what do they believe.

If it happens that the Dems opinions coincide with the latest science on an issue that is just luck and not because Dems have some loyalty to science.

The weight of the evidence is that children are at much less risk of catching, carrying, spreading and getting sick from covid than adults. They are clearly at risk from not going to school, the poorer kids are most at risk. Sure, the evidence isn't great but its only been about six months. I have at least looked at the evidence and provided some. I have yet to see any one provide any evidence that there is substantial risk of spreading covid by re-opening primary school.

Lots of places have and don't seem to see much increase in spread.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/07/...uld-take-note/

Of course, none of that matters nor will it change anyone's mind.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 11:35 AM   #215
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post

If you're worried about teacher's health. Send the old farts home and set up classrooms so they can teach remotely with a young healthy proctor. There's really no reason that a teacher under 50 with no underlying conditions can't teach a class full of 10 year olds. There's really no reason that a teacher under 40 can't teach a class full of teanagers either, that's a little less clear though.
Wow. Just wow.

Quote:
1 in 3 Young Adults May Face Severe COVID-19, UCSF Study Shows
Smoking Habits Trump Asthma, Obesity in Risk Factors for Otherwise Healthy Population
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/07/41...sf-study-shows

Quote:
Data in a March 16, 2020, report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are showing that younger adults are also getting COVID-19, and some are requiring hospitalization, even intensive care.

For example, the CDC report shows that as of March 16, 2020, 508 people were hospitalized for COVID-19 in the U.S. Of these, 38% were between 20 and 54 years old. Half of those ending up in intensive care were younger than 65.

Officials in Europe are noting the same trend, with reports that half of serious cases in France and the Netherlands are in people under age 50.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/heal...re-at-risk-too

Quote:
Although COVID-19 has been known mainly for its impact on seniors, experts said the disease can debilitate patients in young age cohorts as well. And they warned that an expansion in cases among younger people ultimately threatens any vulnerable person with whom they come in contact.

“Inevitably, infection will spread,” said Stephen Kissler, a postdoctoral researcher and epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “So I think that just because infection is currently mostly spreading in young people is not really a reason to breathe a sigh of relief.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...le/3258221001/
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 11:37 AM   #216
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Meh, I can't help but think the responses to my post confirm my previously held belief that I would not convince anyone with actual evidence. Regardless of covid, the reality is still that we mostly just look for evidence to support our beliefs. We come to our beliefs for reason other than evidence and one of the most important drivers is, what group do we belong to and what do they believe.

If it happens that the Dems opinions coincide with the latest science on an issue that is just luck and not because Dems have some loyalty to science.

The weight of the evidence is that children are at much less risk of catching, carrying, spreading and getting sick from covid than adults. They are clearly at risk from not going to school, the poorer kids are most at risk. Sure, the evidence isn't great but its only been about six months. I have at least looked at the evidence and provided some. I have yet to see any one provide any evidence that there is substantial risk of spreading covid by re-opening primary school.

Lots of places have and don't seem to see much increase in spread.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/07/...uld-take-note/

Of course, none of that matters nor will it change anyone's mind.
No. I read thoroughly the the 3 links you provided and not one of them discussed the spread of the disease through children to adults. But if I missed something, please cite the relevant information. All 3 links focused on mortality rates of infections in different age groups as well as in minorities.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 11:39 AM   #217
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,294
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Meh, I can't help but think the responses to my post confirm my previously held belief that I would not convince anyone with actual evidence. Regardless of covid, the reality is still that we mostly just look for evidence to support our beliefs. We come to our beliefs for reason other than evidence and one of the most important drivers is, what group do we belong to and what do they believe.

If it happens that the Dems opinions coincide with the latest science on an issue that is just luck and not because Dems have some loyalty to science.

The weight of the evidence is that children are at much less risk of catching, carrying, spreading and getting sick from covid than adults. They are clearly at risk from not going to school, the poorer kids are most at risk. Sure, the evidence isn't great but its only been about six months. I have at least looked at the evidence and provided some. I have yet to see any one provide any evidence that there is substantial risk of spreading covid by re-opening primary school.

Lots of places have and don't seem to see much increase in spread.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/07/...uld-take-note/

Of course, none of that matters nor will it change anyone's mind.

Not to be too snarky, but it shouldn't change anyone's mind and you are making some very basic mistakes that put your conclusion very much on the wrong side of the science.

Those countries have less community spread than the US currently, or are Sweden who we don't want to emulate for this. False equivalence is false.

More importantly, you're taking a reduced hazard to justify greatly increased exposure, which increases overall risk, not reduces it. This is a very, very basic risk analysis concept.

I'll over-simplify. Say we have a hazard; broken glass. We find reducing exposure to that hazard justified because the risk of getting cut (and the adverse effects of blood loss, missed work, infection, etc) to be fairly high. So we put in measures to reduce exposure, and fewer people get cut. Then you come in and say that with these kevlar sleeves, the risk of getting cut is reduced 50% when exposed to the hazard. You further state that therefore, if we use the sleeves we can ignore the exposure reduction. This is only true if the exposure reduction had other risks and didn't work very well. A 50% reduced risk reduction when exposed to the hazard would in no way justify a 500% increase in exposure to the hazard. Sound like a lot? Well in the case of schools it is well in excess of that increase in exposure for covid.

Even with reduced risk of spread in children, as huge an increase in exposure to the hazard as going back to classes is would still greatly increase the absolute number of cases, of deaths, and rate of spread.

Which is why to reopen schools would need many, many more mitigation techniques that they are not receiving and in many places can not be done on short order. Pretending this puts the Dems on the wrong side of science is ridiculous.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 11:41 AM   #218
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,294
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No. I read thoroughly the the 3 links you provided and not one of them discussed the spread of the disease through children to adults. But if I missed something, please cite the relevant information. All 3 links focused on mortality rates of infections in different age groups as well as in minorities.
I did recently see some data indicating that children under ten spread at a reduced rate. But of course see my post above for how that doesn't justify increased exposure and of course there are a lot of students older than freaking ten. Older children spread it JUST AS MUCH as adults.

And that is only prelim data with one study iirc.

EDIT: Found the study. Early release from CDC site.

EDIT 2: The transmission rate for those under ten was indeed about %50 of others, so my example is spot on.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

Last edited by tyr_13; 28th July 2020 at 11:49 AM.
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 12:17 PM   #219
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I did recently see some data indicating that children under ten spread at a reduced rate. But of course see my post above for how that doesn't justify increased exposure and of course there are a lot of students older than freaking ten. Older children spread it JUST AS MUCH as adults.

And that is only prelim data with one study iirc.

EDIT: Found the study. Early release from CDC site.

EDIT 2: The transmission rate for those under ten was indeed about %50 of others, so my example is spot on.
These people seem to think we like these circumstances. That we don't want children to go back to school. I don't know of a single parent that doesn't desperately want the kids back in school.

If only Trump had not acted like an idiot and addressed this issue on day one. His pretending it would just go away has been a disaster. Trump's inaction as well as his actions cost this country hundreds of thousands of lives and Trillions of dollars and the meter is still running.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 28th July 2020 at 12:19 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 12:56 PM   #220
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,766
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
No

Those countries have less community spread than the US currently, or are Sweden who we don't want to emulate for this. False equivalence is false.
They also give Quebec as an example. Quebec has 21% of Canada’s population and 64% of Canada’s COVID-19 deaths. In fact per-capita mortality rate is higher than Sweden.
Quebec population 8.1 million 5667 dead
Sweden population 10.3 million 5702 dead
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 01:09 PM   #221
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 4,289
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
If you actually care about an answer to the question that started this thread listen to the podcast, "You Are Not So Smart!" Pretty much all of them from the beginning but the latest episode is a nice summary. The short version, no one actually cares about what the best science on anything, they just care what supports their side of the argument and what will be vaguely convincing to people who already agree with them.

https://youarenotsosmart.com/

There are a number of experiments that show folks basically decide what they believe based on what their side/tribe/in-group/political party believe. Even when the tribe in question didn't exist prior to five minutes ago or it is something the individual believed the opposite off five minutes ago. Side note, we even forget that we ever believed anything different from what we now do. That's why its hard to think of something we've changed our mind about and why its pretty easy to find politicians saying the exact opposite thing in too different interviews.

For an example of where most dems are clearly on the wrong side of the evidence, opening up primary schools in the time of covid. There's insignificant risk to anyone involved, lower than the typical flu even, on account of covid not really affecting kids much, in contrast to the flu.

This post and the podcast will naturally be ignored and/or met with hostility by those who disagree.
Will check it out.

In the Epstein controversy there were people on both sides basically doing the WTC7 talking points all over again trying to cast doubt on the mechanics of his suicide. From there, the finger points to Barr or the Clintons depending on which nuts you ask.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 01:13 PM   #222
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,766
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I did recently see some data indicating that children under ten spread at a reduced rate. But of course see my post above for how that doesn't justify increased exposure and of course there are a lot of students older than freaking ten. Older children spread it JUST AS MUCH as adults.

And that is only prelim data with one study iirc.

EDIT: Found the study. Early release from CDC site.

EDIT 2: The transmission rate for those under ten was indeed about %50 of others, so my example is spot on.
Furthermore, while young children was the lowest infection rate, children 10-19 were the highest.
Quote:
We also found the highest COVID-19 rate (18.6% [95% CI 14.0%–24.0%]) for household contacts of school-aged children and the lowest (5.3% [95% CI 1.3%–13.7%]) for household contacts of children 0–9 years in the middle of school closure. Despite closure of their schools, these children might have interacted with each other, although we do not have data to support that hypothesis. A contact survey in Wuhan and Shanghai, China, showed that school closure and social distancing significantly reduced the rate of COVID-19 among contacts of school-aged children (8). In the case of seasonal influenza epidemics, the highest secondary attack rate occurs among young children (9). Children who attend day care or school also are at high risk for transmitting respiratory viruses to household members (10). The low detection rate for household contacts of preschool-aged children in South Korea might be attributable to social distancing during these periods. Yet, a recent report from Shenzhen, China, showed that the proportion of infected children increased during the outbreak from 2% to 13%, suggesting the importance of school closure (11). Further evidence, including serologic studies, is needed to evaluate the public health benefit of school closure as part of mitigation strategies.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 01:42 PM   #223
Lupus
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 22
Aren't hippies and new age types almost universally democrats? Also, black people support the democrats despite being highly religious.
It seems that believing in science isn't integral to be a democrat.

Science isn't the endall either. Sure it does have a lot of practical uses but there are other important things like culture and philosophy.
Lupus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 01:50 PM   #224
slyjoe
Master Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 2,037
Originally Posted by Lupus View Post
Aren't hippies and new age types almost universally democrats? Also, black people support the democrats despite being highly religious.
It seems that believing in science isn't integral to be a democrat.

Science isn't the endall either. Sure it does have a lot of practical uses but there are other important things like culture and philosophy.
How are culture and philosophy going to solve real world problems like the pandemic?
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 01:54 PM   #225
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,327
Originally Posted by Lupus View Post
Aren't hippies and new age types almost universally democrats? Also, black people support the democrats despite being highly religious.
It seems that believing in science isn't integral to be a democrat.

Science isn't the endall either. Sure it does have a lot of practical uses but there are other important things like culture and philosophy.
Being religious does not mean disbelieving science on non-religious subjects like climate change and medicine.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2020, 06:15 PM   #226
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by Lupus View Post
Aren't hippies and new age types almost universally democrats? Also, black people support the democrats despite being highly religious.
It seems that believing in science isn't integral to be a democrat.

Science isn't the endall either. Sure it does have a lot of practical uses but there are other important things like culture and philosophy.
I have little use for anyone who discounts science in any way. Nothing has proved to be as useful for understanding the physical world as well as science. Absolutely nothing

No one said culture and philosophy weren't important. Philosophy means the study of wisdom. Philosophy, logic and epistemology are actually at the root of scientific endeavors. Without them science does not go forward. That said, philosophy without the discipline of applied logic, is the equivalent of mental masturbation.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2020, 03:29 PM   #227
Lupus
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
How are culture and philosophy going to solve real world problems like the pandemic?
Medicine is a field in science.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Being religious does not mean disbelieving science on non-religious subjects like climate change and medicine.
It often does for evolution.

Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I have little use for anyone who discounts science in any way. Nothing has proved to be as useful for understanding the physical world as well as science. Absolutely nothing

No one said culture and philosophy weren't important. Philosophy means the study of wisdom. Philosophy, logic and epistemology are actually at the root of scientific endeavors. Without them science does not go forward. That said, philosophy without the discipline of applied logic, is the equivalent of mental masturbation.
Did I say that it wasn't useful for understanding the physical world?
Science is a philosophy system, but there are other systems as well and those are what I intend by philosophy is also important.
Lupus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2020, 03:36 PM   #228
slyjoe
Master Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 2,037
Originally Posted by Lupus View Post
Medicine is a field in science.



It often does for evolution.



Did I say that it wasn't useful for understanding the physical world?
Science is a philosophy system, but there are other systems as well and those are what I intend by philosophy is also important.
What you are implying is that culture or philosophy are on equal footing with science when it comes to solving real world problems. They are not.
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2020, 06:56 PM   #229
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 31,085
I think today's hearing with Dr Fauci is damning evidence that Republicans hate science.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2020, 07:14 PM   #230
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 25,541
Originally Posted by Lupus View Post
Did I say that it wasn't useful for understanding the physical world?
Science is a philosophy system, but there are other systems as well and those are what I intend by philosophy is also important.
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
What you are implying is that culture or philosophy are on equal footing with science when it comes to solving real world problems. They are not.
I like Sly's response.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.