27 Feb 23
@earl-of-trumps saidIt "proves" no such thing.
First of all it is clear that Joe is from the USA.
Forget all around the world, think about the USA for a moment.
The crime rate of African Americans is way way over the top of the crime rate of many African people in Africa.
This itself just about *proves* that it is culture and not race (genes). You and No1 need your heads banged together.
Is it your claim that the "culture" of Black Americans is supportive of crime? Remember who is the primary victims of that crime.
27 Feb 23
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI'm evading? Fielding all of your ins-and-outs is like watching an octopus falling out of a tree.
I wouldn't expect someone as stupid as you to actually know what a "culture" is and you don't. Therefore, when you repeat a bunch of racist stereotypes and then say "oh, no. it's not race, it's culture" it's clear you're just trying to evade a correct categorization of your views as racism.
So far, I am getting from you that there is no difference between race and culture? Is that right..., are you saying we cannot separate the two....that, we cannot talk about one without relating to the other?.
Careful here, because is you say there is a difference, then note that I have been writing about culture.
Are they different concepts? If yes, then I would like to stay on the culture track. You and Shav might take the race issue.
Edit: You say at bottom ..."it's clear you are just trying to evade a correct categorization of (my) views as racism." You are asking me to accept that your 'categorization' (subjective) is unquestionable. My priest in my church would quite disagree. One of you is wrong.
27 Feb 23
@averagejoe1 saidNo, there's an enormous difference between "race" and culture.
I'm evading? Fielding all of your ins-and-outs is like watching an octopus falling out of a tree.
So far, I am getting from you that there is no difference between race and culture? Is that right..., are you saying we cannot separate the two....that, we cannot talk about one without relating to the other?.
Careful here, because is you say there is a differe ...[text shortened]... (subjective) is unquestionable. My priest in my church would quite disagree. One of you is wrong.
But you don't have the faintest clue what a culture is as evidenced by your ridiculous notion that people who commit murder can be considered a separate "culture". That's idiocy.
27 Feb 23
@no1marauder saidSo, how would you delineate these people? Are they one of us? Seriously?? They are savage, and you dare not set them into a separate category? Seriously, where are you going with this?
No, there's an enormous difference between "race" and culture.
But you don't have the faintest clue what a culture is as evidenced by your ridiculous notion that people who commit murder can be considered a separate "culture". That's idiocy.
Funny, during the 52 seconds of thinking and writing this paragraph, I swear to you that I did not think of race. That says something, don't you think?
27 Feb 23
@sh76 saidYes, I know we're discussing mask mandates here, and not masks themselves. It's cute, because the op-ed does just exactly that: blurs the distinction between "masks" and "mask mandates." What follows is the beginning of the op-ed, with the first time "mandates" is mentioned boldfaced:
The thing about that piece is that everyone who reads it seems to skip the headline.
The headline wasn't that masks do nothing, it was that mask MANDATES do nothing.
It's common sense that masks can help. And if everyone wore a properly fitting N-95, I am sure masks would (and do) help.
The problem with mandates is that the marginal person captured by the mandate is so ...[text shortened]... r said people shouldn't wear masks. But that the government should mandate it seems to be pointless.
The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses — including Covid-19 — was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.
“There is just no evidence that they” — masks — “make any difference,” he told the journalist Maryanne Demasi. “Full stop.”
But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks?
“Makes no difference — none of it,” said Jefferson.
What about the studies that initially persuaded policymakers to impose mask mandates?
“They were convinced by nonrandomized studies, flawed observational studies.”
The last quote is something of a tell, because the study did not in fact collect or analyze any data pertaining to mandates as implemented in the community. The statement may or may not be true, but it's well outside the purview of the study and may for all I know be a political opinion.
Here's the full study's link again:
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full
This is the study the op-ed is crowing about as "proof" that masks—er, mask mandates, really—"don't work."
Now that I have had time to really look at this study, I can see that it's not just "masks" that are being conflated with "mask mandates," but indeed "mask mandates" are in turn being conflated with "physical interventions" in general, voluntary or otherwise.
The study's stated objective:
To assess the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of acute respiratory viruses.
The physical interventions considered:
The interventions of interest included: screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, physical distancing, personal protection (clothing, gloves, devices), hand hygiene, face masks, gargling, nasal washes, eye protective devices, face shields, disinfecting, and school closure.
Many of these interventions are known to be useless, or mere theater. And the study is not specifically about the Covid virus, but acute respiratory viruses (such as the flu) in general, with data being included that predates the pandemic by years. The data is not in any way restricted to situations in which a mandate was or was not instituted during the course of the Covid pandemic.
Frankly, you've still got your work cut out for you in your quest to "prove" that mask mandates, specifically, do not work. I would also be wary of what the definition of "work" is in this context. As I said before, the primary purpose of enforcing a mask mandate was to keep hospitals from becoming clogged. Public health and safety would be the primary reason for maintaining a mandate after the initial wave. I think the science backs up the efficacy of mandates, with the 2022 study linked to by No1 being an example.
27 Feb 23
@Soothfast
All of my 80 predictions have come true. I hereby predict that I will never write about January 6, nor will I write about the mask issue. Jesus , y’all get a life.! we are surrounded by Joe Biden on one side and savages on the other in this country. Very very serious.
“WHO IS JOHN GALT!?” “ WHO IS SUSAN RICE?”
28 Feb 23
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidSpeaking of the 'mask' , FOX is all over the lying of the administration. Too bad you fellas won't look at it to build up your argumentative arsenal!! Specifically on the Jesse Watters show tonite, you can record its replay on Fox during the night. I am not chiming in on this nutsy discussion, I am just suggesting to the smarter of you that you can crib a bit off of Jesse Watters!
@Soothfast
All of my 80 predictions have come true. I hereby predict that I will never write about January 6, nor will I write about the mask issue. Jesus , y’all get a life.! we are surrounded by Joe Biden on one side and savages on the other in this country. Very very serious.
“WHO IS JOHN GALT!?” “ WHO IS SUSAN RICE?”
28 Feb 23
@no1marauder saidSince time in memoriam , savages have lived among us. One killed someone last night. Golly, I wonder what for?
Murderers are not a "culture".
According to Merriam-Webster, "culture" is defined as:
: "the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group."
So please tell me what racial, religious or social group presently existing in the US condones acts of extreme violence.
So here, you are placing a lot of importance on whether they are a culture or not. We, you and me, are part of a culture, defined as you say. Our 'customary beliefs, etc' are extremely different the those of the murderers. So, it follows that they naturally are part of a different culture than our
culture. So we all agree.
Then, here, you ask an innocuous question, 'What group, no matter their status, their traits, etc, condones acts of violence."
I could ramble and expound here, but can you 'lead up' to your question, I do not quite get where you are going with your question. Can't get a handle on it. We can stipulate that groups condoning violence are not part of our culture. So, what are you asking? I don't think they have actually been typified by our society, so there is no answer to 'what group condones violence '. I hope this will help you frame your question .
28 Feb 23
@no1marauder saidLiar
I wouldn't expect someone as stupid as you to actually know what a "culture" is and you don't. Therefore, when you repeat a bunch of racist stereotypes and then say "oh, no. it's not race, it's culture" it's clear you're just trying to evade a correct categorization of your views as racism.
28 Feb 23
@earl-of-trumps saidWatch...Marauder is about to crash and burn, got him in a corner again
Liar
01 Mar 23
@averagejoe1 saidJoe, you are so monumentally stupid it's a waste of time responding to such nonsense.
Watch...Marauder is about to crash and burn, got him in a corner again
There's now a "culture" of murderers; be sure you have them add that to Sociology 101 textbooks.
01 Mar 23
@earl-of-trumps saidLMAO! Good retort.
Liar
He obviously doesn't know what a culture is and he is merely parroting racist stereotypes. So where's the "lie"?