UNT students petition for more virtual learning options amid omicron surge

[TheColonyEagle]

9 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

And honestly, the best & brightest I'm talking about are the myriads of reputable doctors, epidemiologists, virologists, pathologists, etc... that have all come to the same conclusion.  

They have not all come to the same conclusion. 
 

Here were some yesterday:

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by TheColonyEagle

[Censored by Laurie]

26 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

Most of the people I know that have had Covid aren't vaccinated.....and they had no issues with it. 

why even bother with studies in that case if we can just poll your social circle?

ya know, since we're just taking snippets of what I wrote out of context.

I think I wrote very plainly that the current science is suggesting that those with vax+booster and out of high-risk demographics should be the ones participating as fully as possible in society/economy, because ya...society/economy needs participation. 

that said, in large part, those with 3 shots are the ones who have been taking the pandemic the most serious throughout...and mentally the gymnastics of going from limiting behavior over two years into full participation, in the middle of another variant and surge, will produce fear and apprehension in a lot of people...and if the university already has in place systems and capacity for some remote learning, expansion of that along side in-person shouldn't be a huge to-do. 

maybe those considerations aren't an issue for you because, well, you never took it seriously...maybe from March 2020 on you've been saying it's the "flu" and now that we actually have a predominant variant that does appear to be something to be lived with/around rather than avoided a kin to the flu you feel validated. I don't know? I also don't care about he scientific opinion of a GMG poster (except maybe to know what new bovine deconstipation medicine @UNTLiferis hawking as "alternative medicine") 

 

[MeanGreenTexan]

9 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

They have not all come to the same conclusion. 
 

Here were some yesterday:

 

I'm gonna need some bullet points on this because I'm not watching a 38 minute video of politicians talking.

Do any of the doctors cited look like this:

Remember, I qualified these doctors with the word "reputable".

[Censored by Laurie]

1 minute ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

I'm gonna need some bullet points on this because I'm not watching a 38 minute video of politicians talking.

Do any of the doctors cited look like this:

Remember, I qualified these doctors with the word "reputable".

science: 4 out of 5 doctors recommend exercise. 

lazy man with motivated reasoning: let me go find that one doctor...

[Censored by Laurie]

and here's a second opinion of "the second opinion" which won't validate @TheColonyEagle's motivated reasoning, so he'll just dismiss it. 

https://journaltimes.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/fact-check-ron-johnsons-covid-19-a-second-opinion-panel/article_7f0b5bca-b7e5-53e4-a4af-4b377787e598.html

Edited January 26, 2022 by Censored by Laurie

[TheColonyEagle]

8 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

and here's a second opinion of "the second opinion" which won't validate @TheColonyEagle's motivated reasoning, so he'll just dismiss it. 

https://journaltimes.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/fact-check-ron-johnsons-covid-19-a-second-opinion-panel/article_7f0b5bca-b7e5-53e4-a4af-4b377787e598.html

Ahh yes. The fact checkers. 
 

I immediately looked up fact checkers to see the other side. (I always make it a habit of doing that)

and I learned I was wrong when one of the fact checkers proved it by stating “the scientific consensus says otherwise”

With pin point data analysis like that….I for sure am going to stay home 

[TheColonyEagle]

28 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

why even bother with studies in that case if we can just poll your social circle?

ya know, since we're just taking snippets of what I wrote out of context.

I think I wrote very plainly that the current science is suggesting that those with vax+booster and out of high-risk demographics should be the ones participating as fully as possible in society/economy, because ya...society/economy needs participation. 

that said, in large part, those with 3 shots are the ones who have been taking the pandemic the most serious throughout...and mentally the gymnastics of going from limiting behavior over two years into full participation, in the middle of another variant and surge, will produce fear and apprehension in a lot of people...and if the university already has in place systems and capacity for some remote learning, expansion of that along side in-person shouldn't be a huge to-do. 

maybe those considerations aren't an issue for you because, well, you never took it seriously...maybe from March 2020 on you've been saying it's the "flu" and now that we actually have a predominant variant that does appear to be something to be lived with/around rather than avoided a kin to the flu you feel validated. I don't know? I also don't care about he scientific opinion of a GMG poster (except maybe to know what new bovine deconstipation medicine @UNTLiferis hawking as "alternative medicine") 

 

Ok, let's agree to ignore my social circle that shows the virus isn't dangerous and also agree to ignore the anecdotal "my family member got really sick" from others that is supposed to show it really is dangerous. Why pay attention to one and not the other? Done.

And for the record, I did take it seriously...that's why I got vaccinated. But we also have 3 years of data....And I'm with you on not caring about the scientific opinion of any GMG posters.

Look at that, you and I are on the same page here. 

 

[TheColonyEagle]

36 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Remember, I qualified these doctors with the word "reputable".

who decides if they're "reputable"

 

Oh I know: "scientific consensus"

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by TheColonyEagle

[TheColonyEagle]

Never question the medical “experts”

[MeanGreenTexan]

13 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

who decides if they're "reputable"

 

Oh I know: "scientific consensus"

 

 

Consensus from places like Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Cedars Sinai, The CDC (who was trusted by all not that long ago... until some people's favorite politicians told them not to), etc...   closer to home: BSWH, TXHealth, Memorial Herman, UTSouthwestern, MD Anderson...   people/places we all trust with our health in EVERY OTHER INSTANCE.   
Why distrust these same folks with this one issue?   
I mean, I think we all know why: It's been politicized, and many people (on both sides, mind you) can't seem to tell the difference between what's true and what their favorite politicians shove in their rears via their media channels.

[Coffee and TV]

25 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

Never question the medical “experts”

If your argument is that medical consensus can be wrong then you'd be better off with an example that came from our lifetimes. The consensus also thought heroine was a good way to ween civil war vets off of morphine, yet I still trust them to take out my appendix in 2022.