Kestrel
Flashaholic
I challenge everyone to watch this video [edit: link deleted] and still believe that this in not a scam of epic proportions. So much verifiable facts and real science presented in this video that if you persist in believing all the malarkey that will end up being the end of life as we have known and a nightmare for you and everyone.
OK;
-----
"Most people won't even know they have this thing." <- /any/ talking head can say something like this.
But supplying /zero/ supporting statistics behind that blatant statement? A preview of how weak his presentation will be right there.
His main point from ~2:00 until ~halfway through is anti-lockdown; "What a sick deranged cult this is".
Bold words; but without supporting those very inflammatory words, he undermines the strength he hopes to build for his position.
"[Sweden] was told 'such-and-such' [and then it didn't turn out so bad]". No citation provided for the supposedly- over-the-top warning.
Of course he easily then dismantles his inaccurate representation of the other side of the argument.
"The media has distorted this so badly"; /How/ badly ? No supporting citation.
-----
Getting into the meat of the video, his main argument is a classic strawman argument:
"We were told that if we wore masks, this thing would be over quickly"; um no, masks have not been sold as this sort of panacea.
He graphs the mask mandate vs cases (through Europe), and attempts to show that mask wearing doesn't have an effect on cases.
But he makes no effort whatsoever to isolate for other variables. What is the degree of compliance ? Voluntary proactive citizens doing a good job before the mandate ? Did mask wearing actually increase after the mandate ? What about travel restrictions ? Comparison with South Korea or Japan ? (crickets)
His only non-European supporting data for this argument is four counties in Tennessee - seriously ! Are you friggin' kidding me ??
Am I supposed to assume that four counties in TN represent the entirety of the US and /all/ of Asia (from which he conveniently takes no data at all).
The deal with all of the above is this - he builds a weak straw man argument, then proceeds to cherry-pick data to support his teardown of it.
He mocks Slate magazine, and we're supposed to believe that represented /all media/ - so we're supposed to throw all media reporting out ??
His concluding statement: "At one point or another, you have to assess your own level of risk and live the one life you get."
Well, duh :duh2:; Unfortunately that common-sense, 'Chinese Fortune-Cookie' perspective is completely divorced from the amateur-night theatrics that he attempts to pass off as solid arguments.
-----
Bottom line, you suggest that the whole thing is a 'scam of epic proportions' and use this weak-*** narrow-focus video (anti-lockdown, and masks not having an apparently-significant effect) to support that argument ?
That's it - I gave it a shot & watched your suggested video, and it utterly fails to support your broad brush generalizations that you've been trumpeting here for all this time.
Please note that any further nonsense such as this will be summarily deleted, at a minimum.
I am 100% with Empath on this; find another forum to spread this claptrap - it will no longer be tolerated on CPF.
I am only taking this hard of a line after evaluating the value of this cited presentation - and found it lacking.
Best regards,
Last edited: