The ultimate COVID thread

[deleted171991]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Just a friendly reminder before anyone starts nodding their head in concordance with Andrew Sullivan's sanctimoniousness drivel, he is the same guy who when editor of The New Republic thought it would be a great idea to publish a lengthy excerpt from The Bell Curve, the book in which the main argument is that black people have lower median IQ scores in part because they're genetically inferior.

So he published an excerpt from a (politically) controversial science book about IQ. So what? I am halfway through that excerpt and I haven't seen anything unreasonable (unless they are lying or using bad science). Most popular science books cannot be trusted.

Whites are genetically inferior to blacks when about muscle mass and athletic ability. So what? Whites and blacks are taller than most Asians. Genetically. So what?

Making a scientific finding taboo won't solve the problems that result from it. So the right attitude is to explore whether the finding is true or not. If it's true, does it matter? If it matters, can it be helped? If it can be helped, how?

We are doctors, hence we have seen, again and again, that genetics matter. Certain diseases are way more prevalent in certain ethnic groups (e.g. sickle cell disease in blacks, Crohn's in Ashkenazi Jews etc.). Why would we expect everybody to have the same median IQ, then? Just because it's politically correct? Nature is not PC. Even the friggin' coronavirus has a higher mortality in blacks. So what? If we find a gene that's associated with that, which could prevent the disease by turning it off, will we deny the finding? Of course, various populations are different, after millions of years of Evolution (e.g. sickle cell disease is a defense to malaria, which is prevalent in the same areas). Duh!

What's the big deal? Haters will hate, whether the black IQ is higher or lower than the white one. They will find a pretext, any pretext, to hate, the same way woke people do. Four feet good, two feet bad! Like you reduced Sullivan to publishing that article. I would argue that his IQ makes him worth reading, even if one disagrees (or he was wrong). Nobody's perfect.

All this hysteria reminds me of the fact that some of biggest gay-bashers in political history were closet gays. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people who see white racism everywhere were as racist as the KKK, just against whites and other races.

P.S. For the record, I have no idea which population has a higher IQ, and I couldn't care less. Mine is high enough not to worry about stuff like this, except to help those in need. But the last time science was muzzled because it was inconvenient, we had the Inquisition.

 

[vector2]

So he published an excerpt from a (politically) controversial science book about IQ. So what? I am halfway through that excerpt and I haven't seen anything unreasonable.

Whites are genetically inferior to blacks when about muscle mass and athletic ability. So what? Whites and blacks are taller than most Asians. Genetically. So what?

Making a scientific finding taboo won't solve the problems that result from it. So the right attitude is to explore whether the finding is true or not. If it's true, does it matter? If it matters, can it be helped? If it can be helped, how?

We are doctors, hence we have seen, again and again, that genetics matter. Certain diseases are way more prevalent in certain ethnic groups (e.g. sickle cell disease in blacks, Crohn's in Ashkenazi Jews etc.). Why would we expect everybody to have the same median IQ, then? Just because it's politically incorrect? Nature is not PC. Even the friggin' coronavirus has a higher mortality in blacks. So what? If we find a gene that's associated with that, which could prevent the disease by turning it off, will we deny the finding? Of course, various populations are different, after millions of years of Evolution (e.g. sickle cell disease is a defense to malaria, which is prevalent in the same areas). Duh!

What's the big deal? Haters will hate, whether the black IQ is higher or lower than the white one. They will find a pretext, any pretext, to hate, the same way woke people do. Like you reduced Sullivan to publishing that article. I would argue that his IQ makes him worth reading, even if one disagrees.

All this hysteria reminds me of the fact that some of biggest gay-bashers in political history were closet gays. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people who see white racism everywhere were as racist as the KKK, just against whites and other races.

It's too bad you didn't look at the article on that book. The "scientific finding" that the genetics of the (artificial construct known as) race are causally related to an IQ disparity is about as well-established as aspirin curing the 1918 pandemic flu. The Bell Curve was and is a piece of pseudoscientific racist trash, and the fact that Sullivan thought it was worthwhile at all is significant in as far as anyone today evaluating his ability to critique anything related to race relations in a rational way. Not to mention, honestly, that guy LOVES playing the victim....just as long as it means he's the only one.


-------------

In response to the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association's Board of Scientific Affairs established a special task force to publish an investigative report focusing solely on the research presented in the book, not necessarily the policy recommendations that were made.[14][15]

Regarding explanations for racial differences, the APA task force stated:

The cause of that differential is not known; it is apparently not due to any simple form of bias in the content or administration of the tests themselves. The Flynn effect shows that environmental factors can produce differences of at least this magnitude, but that effect is mysterious in its own right. Several culturally based explanations of the Black/White IQ differential have been proposed; some are plausible, but so far none has been conclusively supported. There is even less empirical support for a genetic interpretation. In short, no adequate explanation of the differential between the IQ means of Blacks and Whites is presently available.

The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997

-------------

Criticism by Stephen Jay Gould[edit]
Stephen Jay Gould wrote that the "entire argument" of the authors of The Bell Curve rests on four unsupported, and mostly false, assumptions about intelligence:[9][16]

1. Intelligence must be reducible to a single number.
2. Intelligence must be capable of rank ordering people in a linear order.
3. Intelligence must be primarily genetically based.
4. Intelligence must be essentially immutable.

-------------

Criticism by Noam Chomsky[edit]
In 1995, Noam Chomsky, one of the founders of the field of cognitive science, directly criticized the book and its assumptions on IQ. He takes issue with the idea that IQ is 60% heritable saying, the "statement is meaningless" since heritability doesn't have to be genetic. He gives the example of women wearing earrings:

To borrow an example from Ned Block, "some years ago when only women wore earrings, the heritability of having an earring was high because differences in whether a person had an earring was due to a chromosomal difference, XX vs. XY." No one has yet suggested that wearing earrings, or ties, is "in our genes," an inescapable fate that environment cannot influence, "dooming the liberal notion."[21]

He goes on to say there is almost no evidence of a genetic link, and greater evidence that environmental issues are what determine IQ differences.

-------------

Evolutionary biologist Joseph L. Graves described The Bell Curve as an example of racist science, containing all the types of errors in the application of scientific method that have characterized the history of scientific racism:

1. claims that are not supported by the data given
2. errors in calculation that invariably support the hypothesis
3. no mention of data that contradict the hypothesis
4. no mention of theories and data that conflict with core assumptions
5. bold policy recommendations that are consistent with those advocated by racists.[52]

--------------
Criticism of statistical methods
Criticism of use of AFQT

 

[deleted171991]

It's too bad you didn't look at the article on that book. The "scientific finding" that the genetics of the (artificial construct known as) race are causally related IQ disparity is about as well-established as aspirin curing the 1918 pandemic flu. The Bell Curve was and is a piece of pseudoscientific racist trash, and the fact that Sullivan thought it was worthwhile at all is significant in as far as anyone today evaluating his ability to critique anything related to race relations in a rational way. Not to mention, honestly, that guy LOVES playing the victim....just as long as it means he's the only one.


-------------

In response to the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association's Board of Scientific Affairs established a special task force to publish an investigative report focusing solely on the research presented in the book, not necessarily the policy recommendations that were made.[14][15]

Regarding explanations for racial differences, the APA task force stated:


The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997

-------------

Criticism by Stephen Jay Gould[edit]
Stephen Jay Gould wrote that the "entire argument" of the authors of The Bell Curve rests on four unsupported, and mostly false, assumptions about intelligence:[9][16]

1. Intelligence must be reducible to a single number.
2. Intelligence must be capable of rank ordering people in a linear order.
3. Intelligence must be primarily genetically based.
4. Intelligence must be essentially immutable.

-------------

Criticism by Noam Chomsky[edit]
In 1995, Noam Chomsky, one of the founders of the field of cognitive science, directly criticized the book and its assumptions on IQ. He takes issue with the idea that IQ is 60% heritable saying, the "statement is meaningless" since heritability doesn't have to be genetic. He gives the example of women wearing earrings:


He goes on to say there is almost no evidence of a genetic link, and greater evidence that environmental issues are what determine IQ differences.

-------------

Evolutionary biologist Joseph L. Graves described The Bell Curve as an example of racist science, containing all the types of errors in the application of scientific method that have characterized the history of scientific racism:

1. claims that are not supported by the data given
2. errors in calculation that invariably support the hypothesis
3. no mention of data that contradict the hypothesis
4. no mention of theories and data that conflict with core assumptions
5. bold policy recommendations that are consistent with those advocated by racists.[52]

--------------
Criticism of statistical methods
Criticism of use of AFQT

I've read that. The book was controversial. Unfortunately, we don't have more data, because some democratic Congress has frozen research about IQ since. You know, the Inquisition, heresy etc.

I just don't have any reason to think that Sullivan is a POS because he approved publishing an excerpt from that book. Controversy is good for journalism (and for science).

 

[vector2]

I've read that. The book was controversial. Unfortunately, we don't have more data, because some democratic Congress has frozen research about IQ since. You know, the Inquisition, heresy etc.

I just don't have any reason to think that Sullivan is a POS because he approved publishing an excerpt from that book. Controversy is good for journalism (and for science).

Controversial means there's actually some credible evidence for both sides. Or have you started using Blade's approach to "controversial" new COVID treatments?

 

[chocomorsel]

So he published an excerpt from a (politically) controversial science book about IQ. So what? I am halfway through that excerpt and I haven't seen anything unreasonable (unless they are lying or using bad science). Most popular science books cannot be trusted.

Whites are genetically inferior to blacks when about muscle mass and athletic ability. So what? Whites and blacks are taller than most Asians. Genetically. So what?

Making a scientific finding taboo won't solve the problems that result from it. So the right attitude is to explore whether the finding is true or not. If it's true, does it matter? If it matters, can it be helped? If it can be helped, how?

We are doctors, hence we have seen, again and again, that genetics matter. Certain diseases are way more prevalent in certain ethnic groups (e.g. sickle cell disease in blacks, Crohn's in Ashkenazi Jews etc.). Why would we expect everybody to have the same median IQ, then? Just because it's politically incorrect? Nature is not PC. Even the friggin' coronavirus has a higher mortality in blacks. So what? If we find a gene that's associated with that, which could prevent the disease by turning it off, will we deny the finding? Of course, various populations are different, after millions of years of Evolution (e.g. sickle cell disease is a defense to malaria, which is prevalent in the same areas). Duh!

What's the big deal? Haters will hate, whether the black IQ is higher or lower than the white one. They will find a pretext, any pretext, to hate, the same way woke people do. Like you reduced Sullivan to publishing that article. I would argue that his IQ makes him worth reading, even if one disagrees.

All this hysteria reminds me of the fact that some of biggest gay-bashers in political history were closet gays. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people who see white racism everywhere were as racist as the KKK, just against whites and other races.

Wow. It must be nice to be that White race with the possibility of the superior IQ?

I am honestly beginning to think that you are at best playing devils advocate and at worst are completely and utterly ignorant when it comes to race relations and what it's like to constantly be the race that is put down and thought of as uncivilized and not that smart. Do you really think that if you were black and you constantly heard and read and saw negative images about your culture while in a majority world, you would just have thick skin and let it all roll off your back each and every time?

Just take a moment, and read some of the stuff you post. It's not about being PC as much as it's about trying to empathize and put yourself in other people's shoes and try to see how they could possibly view the world the way they do based on their life experiences. That whole adage of sticks and stones is not true you know. People do have feelings and emotions.

You seem hell bent on digging your heels in and proving that you can spew whatever you feel on here, while insulting a whole race again and again. You really have made zero effort to try and understand why plenty of us brown and black people feel a certain way living in this great country. You just minimize people's experiences and tell us all we should have "thick skin" when constantly questioned and having to prove that we belong in a certain place or know that we are treated differently because of our race.

You say over and over again how intelligent you are. Wonderful. But I am beginning to think that you lack empathy. There have been many many posts on here of you just being totally insulting to people and I am honestly beginning to think that there could be a bit of an Asperger/high functioning autism situation with you. And its best to just walk away.

 

[vector2]

Most of those refutations were from before the Human Genome Project, no less. Imagine what they look like now

----------------
A 2005 literature review article by Sternberg, Grigorenko and Kidd stated that no gene has been shown to be linked to intelligence, "so attempts to provide a compelling genetic link of race to intelligence are not feasible at this time."[130] Hunt (2010, p. 447) concurs with this critique, noting that "The argument for genetic differences has been carried forward largely by circumstantial evidence. Of course, tomorrow afternoon genetic mechanisms producing racial and ethnic differences in intelligence might be discovered, but there have been a lot of investigations, and tomorrow has not come for quite some time now." Mackintosh (2011, p. 344) concurs as well, noting that while several environmental factors have been shown to influence the IQ gap, the evidence for a genetic influence has been negligible. The 2012 review by Nisbett et al. (2012a) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range." They consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh finds this view to be reasonable.

Race and intelligence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

------------------

 

[vector2]

Wow. It must be nice to be that White race with the possibility of the superior IQ?

I am honestly beginning to think that you are at best playing devils advocate and at worst are a completely and utterly ignorant when it comes to race relations and what it's like to constantly be the race that is put down and thought of as uncivilized and not that smart. Do you really think that if you were black and you constantly heard and read and saw negative images about your culture while in a majority world, you would just have thick skin and let it all roll off your back each and every time?

Just take a moment, and read some of the stuff you post. It's not about being PC as much as it's about trying to empathize and put yourself in other people's shoes and try to see how they could possibly view the world the way they do based on their life experiences. That whole adage of sticks and stones is not true you know. People do have feelings and emotions.

You seem hell bent on digging your heels in and proving that you can spew whatever you feel on here, while insulting a whole race again and again. You really have made zero effort to try and understand why plenty of us brown and black people feel a certain way living in this great country. You just minimize people's experiences and tell us all we should have "thick skin" when constantly questions and having to prove that we belong a certain place or know that we are treated differently because of our race.

You say over and over again how intelligent you are. Wonderful. But I am beginning to think that you lack empathy. There have been many many posts on here of you just being totally insulting to people and I am honestly beginning to think that there could be a bit of an Asperger/high functioning autism situation with you. And its best to just walk away.

As we have now reached the point where he is defending the myth of race, intelligence, and genetic superiority, you can tell he's jumped the shark into 'being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian' territory.

 

[chocomorsel]

As we have now reached the point where he is defending the myth of race, intelligence, and genetic superiority, you can tell he's jumped the shark into 'being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian' territory.

Hopefully that is all it is. Because I am totally beginning to think he doesn't have a clue as to how what he writes can be not just insulting (he has a right to free speech) but also quite ignorant.

 

[deleted171991]

Controversial means there's actually some credible evidence for both sides. Or have you started using Blade's approach to "controversial" new COVID treatments?

Seriously, dude, your bias...

I mean, you're quoting Chomsky as proof, and emphasizing it. Chomsky is a linguist, not a biologist, geneticist, psychologist or physician. (And he has strong political bias, but that's a different story.) And again, I couldn't care less how much of the book is true, just whether the authors' intentions were decent (i.e. they were not some racist bigots).

And yes, controversial means that there is no final conclusion, because research on the subject is now taboo. Not that I care (see my P.S. above).

This is why I don't like chatting with you about politics. You end up borderline trolling. You spam the forum with long quotes "proving" your side, like a corporate law firm burying the other side in boxes of documents. Is it a zero-sum game for you? Can't we each be partially right?

 

[deleted171991]

Wow. It must be nice to be that White race with the possibility of the superior IQ?

I am honestly beginning to think that you are at best playing devils advocate and at worst are a completely and utterly ignorant when it comes to race relations and what it's like to constantly be the race that is put down and thought of as uncivilized and not that smart. Do you really think that if you were black and you constantly heard and read and saw negative images about your culture while in a majority world, you would just have thick skin and let it all roll off your back each and every time?

Just take a moment, and read some of the stuff you post. It's not about being PC as much as it's about trying to empathize and put yourself in other people's shoes and try to see how they could possibly view the world the way they do based on their life experiences. That whole adage of sticks and stones is not true you know. People do have feelings and emotions.

You seem hell bent on digging your heels in and proving that you can spew whatever you feel on here, while insulting a whole race again and again. You really have made zero effort to try and understand why plenty of us brown and black people feel a certain way living in this great country. You just minimize people's experiences and tell us all we should have "thick skin" when constantly questions and having to prove that we belong a certain place or know that we are treated differently because of our race.

You say over and over again how intelligent you are. Wonderful. But I am beginning to think that you lack empathy. There have been many many posts on here of you just being totally insulting to people and I am honestly beginning to think that there could be a bit of an Asperger/high functioning autism situation with you. And its best to just walk away.

I WILL walk away. I don't like bullies, even when they hide behind the "woke" left.

And you're wrong about me. But I couldn't care less about your biased opinion, at this point.

 

[chocomorsel]

I WILL walk away. I don't like bullies, even when they hide behind the "woke" left.

And you're wrong about me. But I couldn't care less about your biased opinion, at this point.

Maybe try some therapy. And maybe some exercise. It's good stuff. It's not about being woke as much as its about having some empathy.
Clearly the irony of you calling me a bully is lost on you.

 

[Lawpy]

Calls to remove 'racist' Gandhi statue in Leicester

A petition accuses the man who fought for Indian independence of being fascist and racist.

www.bbc.com

Q.E.D.

It's a British article. And the British youth worship Jeremy Corbyn, who luckily got replaced by a far saner opposition leader. It's why i was excited when Boris Johnson completely decimated the opposition in last year's election and sent the British youth on Reddit into chaos.

 

[vector2]

Seriously, dude, your bias...

I mean, you're quoting Chomsky as proof, and emphasizing it. Chomsky is a linguist, not a biologist, geneticist, psychologist or physician. (And he has strong political bias, but that's a different story.) And again, I couldn't care less how much of the book is true, just whether the authors' intentions were decent (i.e. they were not some racist bigots).

And yes, controversial means that there is no final conclusion, because research on the subject is now taboo. Not that I care (see my P.S. above).

This is why I don't like chatting with you about politics. You end up borderline trolling. You spam the forum with long quotes "proving" your side, like a corporate law firm burying the other side in boxes of documents. Is it a zero-sum game for you? Can't we each be partially right?

Trolling? See my follow up post- papers were still being published this decade. As far as I can tell the weight of the actual evidence from the field of genetics over the last 20 years demonstrates no causal link. Obviously that doesn't exclude it as a possibility, but you know as well as I do that science is not in the business of "proving" a negative in this case anymore than it is in the business of "proving" the easter bunny definitively doesn't exist. I shouldn't have to explain to you that simply because there is no definitive answer, it doesn't make both outcomes equally likely. That would be like the *****s who claim there is a "controversy" vis a vis the origin of species, and that intelligent design is as likely a hypothesis as evolution because neither has been definitively "proven" or "disproven."

I mean, you're quoting Chomsky as proof, and emphasizing it. Chomsky is a linguist, not a biologist, geneticist, psychologist or physician. (And he has strong political bias, but that's a different story.) And again, I couldn't care less how much of the book is true, just whether the authors' intentions were decent (i.e. they were not some racist bigots).

Notably here you attack Chomsky's bonafides......without actually trying to refute the very salient argument he made.

 

[deleted171991]

Maybe try some therapy. And maybe some exercise. It's good stuff. It's not about being woke as much as its about having some empathy.
Clearly the irony of you calling me a bully is lost on you.

Oh, the irony of showing your BIAS against whites, again and again.

Life is not a dick-measuring contest for most people (including me). I am way beyond bothering with people suffering of Napoleon syndrome, who have to prove things to the world. I have pretty solid self-respect. I know what I am good at, and what I suck at. So I don't need to insult anyone to feel good about myself.

And I was not insulting anybody, just mimosas, by comparing you to one.

But I will stop posting on woke subjects, because people just can't have a rational discussion about certain subjects.

 

[deleted171991]

Trolling? See my follow up post- papers were still being published this decade. As far as I can tell the weight of the actual evidence from the field of genetics over the last 20 years demonstrates no causal link. Obviously that doesn't exclude it as a possibility, but you know as well as I do that science is not in the business of "proving" a negative in this case anymore than it is in the business of "proving" the easter bunny definitively doesn't exist. I shouldn't have to explain to you that simply because there is no definitive answer, it doesn't make both outcomes equally likely. That would be like the *****s who claim there is a "controversy" vis a vis the origin of species, and that intelligent design is as likely a hypothesis as evolution because neither has been definitively "proven" or "disproven."

So IQ is probably not genetically-determined. Great! You think I care? This discussion was about Sullivan and sensitivities.

Still I don't think Sullivan is a bigoted dingus, and he's worth reading. I used to think that even when I preferred Vox, and he was way to my right.

I swear to God that there are fewer and fewer differences between the Stalinists and the woke PC police, as years pass. It's just that the Gulag is now at home and called Cancellation.

P.S.
Btw:
"Twin studies of adult individuals have found a heritability of IQ between 57% and 73%[6] with the most recent studies showing heritability for IQ as high as 80%[7] and 86%.[8] IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics, for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood. This phenomenon is known as the Wilson Effect.[9] Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores;[10] however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects.[11][12]"

Source: Heritability of IQ - Wikipedia

Not that I really care.

 

[deleted171991]

As we have now reached the point where he is defending the myth of race, intelligence, and genetic superiority, you can tell he's jumped the shark into 'being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian' territory.

Nope. I was defending Sullivan. But I am a born contrarian.

I don't know enough about those myths (and I don't really like them either, except as scientific curiosity and possibility of improving people's lives). They are dangerous in the wrong hands (e.g. the eugenicists of the 20th century and their Nazi or racist friends). But haters will hate, regardless what science says.

Anyway... I am sorry about all those whose feelings have suffered due to my presence on the forum, especially since most discussions are futile.

 

[deleted697535]

Hopefully that is all it is. Because I am totally beginning to think he doesn't have a clue as to how what he writes can be not just insulting (he has a right to free speech) but also quite ignorant.

The single best thing about this site is the ignore function and the site becomes a good read again when he's on mute.

 

[deleted171991]

The single best thing about this site is the ignore function and the site becomes a good read again when he's on mute.

The feeling has been mutual for a long time.

 

[chocomorsel]

Oh, the irony of showing your BIAS against whites, again and again.

Life is not a dick-measuring contest for most people (including me). I am way beyond bothering with people suffering of Napoleon syndrome, who have to prove things to the world. I have pretty solid self-respect. I know what I am good at, and what I suck at. So I don't need to insult anyone to feel good about myself.

And I was not insulting anybody, just mimosas, by comparing you to one.

But I will stop posting on woke subjects, because people just can't have a rational discussion about certain subjects.

Just certain Whites. Such as you. And now let me reuse my ignore button once more for a second person on this site ever. How many are you up to? 100?

 

[deleted171991]

Just certain Whites. Such as you. And now let me reuse my ignore button once more for a second person on this site ever. How many are you up to? 100?

Only if I count the many times I gave you another chance, because of a smart post, and then "woke" up. Somehow, we just don't click, and one of us explodes. 🙁

Don't flatter yourself. I have very few current posters on my list, mostly just known trolls, many from other sections. I have very few reasons to put somebody on the list:

1. They are constantly trolling, or are truly dumb/uninteresting.
2. They are bigoted and/or hateful. (These have been mostly from the right, during and after the 2016 elections, but lately I've been welcoming more and more folks from the PC left. I don't like authoritarians and haters, or extremists, regardless of political color etc..)
3. They obviously don't like me, for some reason. (As in no doubt about it. These are the fewest.)

The overwhelming majority are from the first two groups.

Hope this satisfies your curiosity.

 

[Twiggidy]

COVID related question :

Without a vaccine, how likely are you to return to normal life? Air travel? Movies? Restaurants? Concerts/sports? The big kicker....gyms?

I’m just legit curious. I miss a lot of normal stuff I used to enjoy but I also see a second shutdown coming and a lot “normal stuff” is going to involved risk vs reward evaluation.

 

[marr65]

COVID related question :

Without a vaccine, how likely are you to return to normal life? Air travel? Movies? Restaurants? Concerts/sports? The big kicker....gyms?

I’m just legit curious. I miss a lot of normal stuff I used to enjoy but I also see a second shutdown coming and a lot “normal stuff” is going to involved risk vs reward evaluation.

Not anytime soon for anyone in my family. I don’t even eat lunch at work with people anymore. Usually, just go outside by myself with a sandwich and a drink.

 

[deleted697535]

COVID related question :

Without a vaccine, how likely are you to return to normal life? Air travel? Movies? Restaurants? Concerts/sports? The big kicker....gyms?

I’m just legit curious. I miss a lot of normal stuff I used to enjoy but I also see a second shutdown coming and a lot “normal stuff” is going to involved risk vs reward evaluation.

'normal life' means a lot of different things to everyone obviously!

Personally I don't miss a lot of the rubbish things we used to do. Definitely not malls, concerts, night clubs, gyms, movies (overpriced)

I do miss and will return asap to good restaurants and having beers with my good buddies but that's a very small circle. The thing I most miss is competitive sport that I used to play a lot of but that's definitely gone around here anyway until vaccine comes

 

[deleted87051]

I often went to matinees at an art theater near my hospital and I’d often be the only person in the entire theater. Other times there would be 3-4 people in the theater. I miss that. I wondered how they managed to stay open during those hours even before COVID.

 

[Twiggidy]

'normal life' means a lot of different things to everyone obviously!

Personally I don't miss a lot of the rubbish things we used to do. Definitely not malls, concerts, night clubs, gyms, movies (overpriced)

I do miss and will return asap to good restaurants and having beers with my good buddies but that's a very small circle. The thing I most miss is competitive sport that I used to play a lot of but that's definitely gone around here anyway until vaccine comes

I’m interested what things will look like moving forward. Myself for example lives in a city for the reason that I enjoy “city things”. I’m a paying member of a museum that hasn’t been open, I like near a sports arena has no real indication of coming back anytime soon, and I personally like the gym. I’ve always suggested that movie studios should just give us the option to pay $50 to stream a new release movie at home since that’s how much it would cost at a theater anyway. My big thing is that if none of these things return to normal, then I may as well move to the burbs or BFE. I’m a sports fan but you know it’s desperate times when I’m watching German soccer in empty stadiums.

Granted these are all really first world problems, but any semblance of the economy “re-opening” is going to have to involve some sort of opening of these things which will just likely lead to a second closing. The only glimmer of hope is that it seem that the 02-04 SARS and MERS sort of disappeared, so who knows.

I’m just thinking off the top of my head on a bore semi-sheltered in place Saturday night. I mean, damn, even if you go to Hawaii you still have to quarantine for two weeks in July. I’m actually worried about Hawaii.

 

[Twiggidy]

I often went to matinees at an art theater near my hospital and I’d often be the only person in the entire theater. Other times there would be 3-4 people in the theater. I miss that. I wondered how they managed to stay open during those hours even before COVID.

Yeah. I’ve had a couple of random days off where I would have our museum damn near to myself as well. Now it’s all “virtual exhibits”, which is guess is fine if you want to maintain some culture, but I kind of want to see Van Gogh up close.

 

[deleted87051]

Yeah. I’ve had a couple of random days off where I would have our museum damn near to myself as well. Now it’s all “virtual exhibits”, which is guess is fine if you want to maintain some culture, but I kind of want to see Van Gogh up close.

Van Gogh takes my breath away every single time. Didn’t understand the hooplah until I saw one in real life.

From another Van Gogh lover:

 

[vector2]

So IQ is probably not genetically-determined. Great! You think I care? This discussion was about Sullivan and sensitivities.

Still I don't think Sullivan is a bigoted dingus, and he's worth reading. I used to think that even when I preferred Vox, and he was way to my right.

I swear to God that there are fewer and fewer differences between the Stalinists and the woke PC police, as years pass. It's just that the Gulag is now at home and called Cancellation.

P.S.
Btw:
"Twin studies of adult individuals have found a heritability of IQ between 57% and 73%[6] with the most recent studies showing heritability for IQ as high as 80%[7] and 86%.[8] IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics, for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood. This phenomenon is known as the Wilson Effect.[9] Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores;[10] however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects.[11][12]"

Source: Heritability of IQ - Wikipedia

Not that I really care.

Right, but apparently you cared enough to keep researching and then edit your post. Unfortunately, you responded to a claim that no one was disputing. I never was arguing that intelligence isn't in part a polygenic trait or that intelligence doesn't have some degree of heritability. Dumb people of all melanin concentrations may be more likely to have dumb kids. Smart people of all melanin concentrations may be more likely to have smart kids.

The issue I (and pretty much the rest of scientific community) had with the The Bell Curve is that there is no gold-standard intelligence test, and much more importantly, there is no such thing as a standardized "black genome." The genetic intelligence studies done after the era of the HGP show that just because people have a vaguely similar phenotypic appearance, that does not mean they all share enough of the genes which contribute to intelligence to claim that everyone with that phenotype can be painted with the same IQ brush. Even something incredibly common like sickle cell trait, which is only 1 nucleotide substitution, only has a prevalence of 1/13 black babies, but yet there are some who are willing to claim that a trait which involves thousands of genes has a 100% penetration of the "dumb" alleles for 100% of that population? It was absurd even back in the 90s, and yet our good friend Mr. Sullivan was quite taken.

 

[Lawpy]

COVID related question :

Without a vaccine, how likely are you to return to normal life? Air travel? Movies? Restaurants? Concerts/sports? The big kicker....gyms?

I’m just legit curious. I miss a lot of normal stuff I used to enjoy but I also see a second shutdown coming and a lot “normal stuff” is going to involved risk vs reward evaluation.

No more lockdowns. Just test, trace and isolate. I hated the lockdowns before and i hate any lockdown going forward.

 

[deleted697535]

No more lockdowns. Just test, trace and isolate. I hated the lockdowns before and i hate any lockdown going forward.

Well of course that's preferred but not really possible outside of communist China or South Korea. Especially not with the BLM protests and this an election year with Tramp losing!!

Even assuming your strategy works some lockdowns of certain overun cities is almost inevitable I think anyway

 

[Lawpy]

Well of course that's preferred but not really possible outside of communist China or South Korea. Especially not with the BLM protests and this an election year with Tramp losing!!

Even assuming your strategy works some lockdowns of certain overun cities is almost inevitable I think anyway

Locking down high risk and overrun cities is ok (although that's what NYC should've immediately done in the first place). Statewide and nationwide lockdowns are bad and i'm hoping to avoid dealing with them again.

 

[Twiggidy]

Locking down high risk and overrun cities is ok (although that's what NYC should've immediately done in the first place). Statewide and nationwide lockdowns are bad and i'm hoping to avoid dealing with them again.

I think it’s hard to not defend locking down when you look at what’s going on in Sweden. I don’t like it as much as the next person but it does help

 

[Lawpy]

I think it’s hard to not defend locking down when you look at what’s going on in Sweden. I don’t like it as much as the next person but it does help

Massively scale up testing to ensure as much of the population is tested. Even if many billions of dollars are spent. It's important to only isolate those infected than blindly isolating everyone and continuing to tank the economy and creating conditions of social unrest.

 

[Lawpy]

Also i agree and can relate to @FFP expressed frustration with political extremists but I think i'd blame it on the extreme polarization happening in social media, like Twitter activism. There are a lot of important points the Democrats have listed out regarding police reform and covid responses but those get sidelined because of some *****s going on a tirade on Twitter and Reddit.

It really doesn't help that Trump is notorious for baiting.

 

[deleted87051]

Travis County leaders likely to extend stay-at-home order if COVID-19 hospitalizations increase

“This is a blinking yellow light warning moment,” said Mayor Steve Adler. "It’s still early and we still have the opportunity to be able to get a handle on this but it is going to take the entire community being really disciplined and really diligent.”

www.fox7austin.com

 

[vector2]

Travis County leaders likely to extend stay-at-home order if COVID-19 hospitalizations increase

“This is a blinking yellow light warning moment,” said Mayor Steve Adler. "It’s still early and we still have the opportunity to be able to get a handle on this but it is going to take the entire community being really disciplined and really diligent.”

www.fox7austin.com

Dunno if Travis county can actually enforce anything though....

"
The governor’s Republican allies say Abbott has done just enough, meeting the moment with usual measure and clarity. Whatever the assessment, Abbott is poised to own the outcome, having barred local leaders from enforcing their own closures or mandating masks in public. He has made clear in recent days that he’s prepared to stay the course — if that’s even a choice.

"The government shut the economy down once," said Matt Mackowiak, a GOP consultant in Austin, "That feels to me like a bullet you can fire one time."

As cases rise, the governor has shifted focus away from the health toll. People are hurting, he acknowledged in Amarillo, but “there are so many more people in the state who are suffering economically.”

Redirect Notice

"

 

[dhb]

I think it’s hard to not defend locking down when you look at what’s going on in Sweden. I don’t like it as much as the next person but it does help

The real efficacy of locking down is that it de facto keeps people seperated. Most people don't have the intellect and discipline to adhere to practices that stop viral spread (wearing a mask and not talking in each others face).
Here in Europe everything is going back to normal with more people wearing masks and new cases are staying at a fairly low level.
We know who's at risk from this virus and these people should isolate as much as they can. For the young and healthy it's almost trivial.

In Belgium they have estimated that around 4% of the population aquired the disease and around 8% of a sample of healthcare workers were tested positive.

 

[deleted87051]

Whether it’s food production or running an AMC, huge consolidated corporations are basically evil. But they’re now the basis of our economy. No more mom and pops.

How Rich Investors, Not Doctors, Profit From Marking Up ER Bills

TeamHealth, a medical staffing firm owned by private-equity giant Blackstone, charges multiples more than the cost of ER care. All the money left over after covering costs goes to the company, not the doctors who treated the patients.

www.propublica.org

Emails Reveal Chaos as Meatpacking Companies Fought Health Agencies Over COVID-19 Outbreaks in Their Plants

Thousands of pages of documents obtained by ProPublica show how quickly public health agencies were overwhelmed by meatpacking cases. One CEO described social distancing as “a nicety that makes sense only for people with laptops.”

www.propublica.org

 

[AMEHigh]

The real efficacy of locking down is that it de facto keeps people seperated. Most people don't have the intellect and discipline to adhere to practices that stop viral spread (wearing a mask and not talking in each others face).
Here in Europe everything is going back to normal with more people wearing masks and new cases are staying at a fairly low level.
We know who's at risk from this virus and these people should isolate as much as they can. For the young and healthy it's almost trivial.

In Belgium they have estimated that around 4% of the population aquired the disease and around 8% of a sample of healthcare workers were tested positive.

Yeah it's insane to me that here in the US it has become political and a thought of as a move against "constitutional rights" to ask people to wear a mask. Right now the evidence looks like it could help prevent spread. Why are people so angry about it and refusing?? Maybe in 6 months to a year we'll have more evidence about better ways to stop the spread and keeping people healthy while we go about daily indoor activities, but my god, the outrage to wearing a mask among people in certain states is really something.

 

[doctalaughs]

What do you guys think about the riots/protests in Atlanta over (another) shooting of a black guy by police?

by my estimate that situation is totally different. While the Floyd case was straight-up murder, this guy was driving drunk (so should be arrested) then both assaulted a police officer AND tried to use a weapon against them. Sure, it was a tazer not a gun, but the video makes it pretty difficult to argue the police didn’t think he was a danger....

I understand people are angry but to me seems like BLM should be quiet on this one and certainly firing/arrests of officers is political mob-mentality....

 

[chocomorsel]

What do you guys think about the riots/protests in Atlanta over (another) shooting of a black guy by police?

by my estimate that situation is totally different. While the Floyd case was straight-up murder, this guy was driving drunk (so should be arrested) then both assaulted a police officer AND tried to use a weapon against them. Sure, it was a tazer not a gun, but the video makes it pretty difficult to argue the police didn’t think he was a danger....

I understand people are angry but to me seems like BLM should be quiet on this one and certainly firing/arrests of officers is political mob-mentality....

Police need to be trained on less lethal uses of force. That’s what I think.
He was drunk with a taser. Was he really gonna kill a cop with a taser? And in a drunken state? They had already searched him from what the news said and determined he had no weapons.
Call for help maybe.
These lethal uses of force need to be examined.
Police are too quick to the draw. And I never understand why they fire multiple rounds at a time either.

 

[Lawpy]

Police need to be trained on less lethal uses of force. That’s what I think.
He was drunk with a taser. Was he really gonna kill a cop with a taser? And in a drunken state? They had already searched him from what the news said and determined he had no weapons.
Call for help maybe.
These lethal uses of force need to be examined.
Police are too quick to the draw. And I never understand why they fire multiple rounds at a time either.

The police culture of us vs them is a problem that needs to change. Cops are far more willing to look out for each other or themselves while treating the public as the enemy.

 

[Angus Avagadro]

What do you guys think about the riots/protests in Atlanta over (another) shooting of a black guy by police?

by my estimate that situation is totally different. While the Floyd case was straight-up murder, this guy was driving drunk (so should be arrested) then both assaulted a police officer AND tried to use a weapon against them. Sure, it was a tazer not a gun, but the video makes it pretty difficult to argue the police didn’t think he was a danger....

I understand people are angry but to me seems like BLM should be quiet on this one and certainly firing/arrests of officers is political mob-mentality....

First, everyone is quick to comment before knowing all the facts. Was the taser armed with projectiles and wires? If so, it is not inconceivable that the suspect could have incapacitated the police officer, and taken his gun. So the suspect might be perceived as a threat to the officers life. Im not saying it was justified, just saying to wait for the facts. Why burn down the Wendys? People from the area worked there. Now no job. I was incensed when i saw whst happened to George Floyd. I get some consolation knowing that cop, whose name I wont utter, will make lots of new black friends in prison.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Massively scale up testing to ensure as much of the population is tested. Even if many billions of dollars are spent. It's important to only isolate those infected than blindly isolating everyone and continuing to tank the economy and creating conditions of social unrest.

Massive scale testing was supposed to be the plan in March, then April, then May, then June... That shows you how committed they are to that plan. And reopening doesn't fix the economy. The economy was tanking well before any lockdowns took place and it will tank again. For the economy to recover, you need consumer demand and the only way you get that is controlling the virus. There is no shortcut out of this.

 

[doctalaughs]

Police need to be trained on less lethal uses of force. That’s what I think.
He was drunk with a taser. Was he really gonna kill a cop with a taser? And in a drunken state? They had already searched him from what the news said and determined he had no weapons.
Call for help maybe.
These lethal uses of force need to be examined.
Police are too quick to the draw. And I never understand why they fire multiple rounds at a time either.

I suppose you could spin it that way. You could also say these cops spent 30 minutes trying to talk down this guy (fact). He then decides to fight them while they attempt a lawful arrest (and by the way, he looks to be about a foot taller and 100 lbs heavier than the cop I saw in the video. In the scuffle he takes something from his partner (theres no evidence they are sure it was the taser), ran and pointed what looked like a gun at the cop who subsequently shoots him.

again, world of difference from Floyd. Could the cops have handled that better? Probably. But firings/arrests (not to mention violent protests and property destruction) from this incident before we have more evidence? And how the liberal media is spinning it? Pretty bad as well....

 

[Lawpy]

Massive scale testing was supposed to be the plan in March, then April, then May, then June... That shows you how committed they are to that plan. And reopening doesn't fix the economy. The economy was tanking well before any lockdowns took place and it will tank again. For the economy to recover, you need consumer demand and the only way you get that is controlling the virus. There is no shortcut out of this.

I agree hence the current situation. If the federal response involved taking the disease seriously early on (like in January) and massively scaling up production to prepare for the pandemic, we'd be far better off. We have the necessary technology and resources to get this done and that didn't happen.

Lockdowns accelerated the economic collapse that was initially hit by supply chain disruption and falling consumer demand. It's easy to increase demand by rapidly scaling up test-trace-isolate now and show the virus can be under control.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Not even close. I'm in SC. My hospital is running around 2-3% capacity for COVID as of Friday.

Admittedly I'm not sure what the ICU status is so that might be a different story.

 

[vector2]

I suppose you could spin it that way. You could also say these cops spent 30 minutes trying to talk down this guy (fact). He then decides to fight them while they attempt a lawful arrest (and by the way, he looks to be about a foot taller and 100 lbs heavier than the cop I saw in the video. In the scuffle he takes something from his partner (theres no evidence they are sure it was the taser), ran and pointed what looked like a gun at the cop who subsequently shoots him.

again, world of difference from Floyd. Could the cops have handled that better? Probably. But firings/arrests (not to mention violent protests and property destruction) from this incident before we have more evidence? And how the liberal media is spinning it? Pretty bad as well....

That guy was a drunk idiot and while I don't think deadly force was necessary, perhaps the cop should just face some sort of sanction or firing. However, not even I think the cop should face prison time over an incident where a suspect swings around to fire a taser at you.


And yes, it was most definitely a taser and the cops knew it. He had already been searched, and when the scuffle escalated they threatened numerous times to tase him, and then it sounded like they were talking about him grabbing the taser before he broke off and ran.

As to whether the guy had 1 foot and a hundred lbs on the cop, I'll let you decide:

And how else would they know it was a taser? The thing is bright yellow and even before being fired it glows like a goddamned light saber from 50 ft away, even on a blurry security cam zoom in

 

[Twiggidy]

What do you guys think about the riots/protests in Atlanta over (another) shooting of a black guy by police?

by my estimate that situation is totally different. While the Floyd case was straight-up murder, this guy was driving drunk (so should be arrested) then both assaulted a police officer AND tried to use a weapon against them. Sure, it was a tazer not a gun, but the video makes it pretty difficult to argue the police didn’t think he was a danger....

I understand people are angry but to me seems like BLM should be quiet on this one and certainly firing/arrests of officers is political mob-mentality....

Honestly...having now seen multiple dash cam videos and bystander footage, my opinion is have your drinks at home and if a cop says you’re under arrest just turn around, get in the cuffs and go to jail. Wrestling with two officers, taking one’s taser, running, and then firing at them wont end well for you. What can also be true is police need to re-evaluate how they handle drunks.

I do not equate this situation with George Floyd.

I heard DeRay McKesson say on a podcast to ask yourself to visualize a loved one and ask yourself “What is the minimal thing that person can do where you’d be ok if they were killed by the police?” Personally shooting a cops taser a him comes pretty close.