No, I was saying your thinking on the matter was flawed; "baselessly" is in the eyes of the beholder, but even if I am wrong I think I had a pretty good basis for saying so. As I said in my original comment, I feel you were presenting a false narrative.
> Even though I posted numerous references while your ideas were unsourced false fear mongering information?
As I felt I was responding to a Gish Gallop, I didn't provide any references either, though I made references to facts that are easily verifiable from a number of sources. Is there something specific I said that you cannot verify?
Now you are claiming the information I provided in my response was false, but you haven't made any specific claims about a statement I made that was false. The closest you came to such a statement would be be your reiteration about the disease's survival rate (and if you're looking for a citation on how disease survival rate is computed: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-term...).
In general, "unsourced false fear mongering information" feels like a case of projection. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you saying we should be fearful of the vaccines by making unsourced statements that at the most charitable could be described as misleading?
> You should be banned from this site forever for posting Facebook science and attacking people.
Again, this feels like projection, but I'm not sure what "Facebook science" is. Can you define it and provide an example of something I've posted that is "Facebook science"?
Again, I made a comment I shouldn't have, and I understand you read it as a personal attack. It was a derogatory statement (which again, I should not have done), but it was derogatory towards the comments you made, and not you personally. If anything, I was assuming you to be a reasonable and good person who had fallen prey to faulty reasoning and misinformation.
"was assuming you to be a reasonable and good person who had fallen prey to faulty reasoning and misinformation."
"feels like a case of projection"
You're saying in so many words I'm stupid and not in control of my thoughts.
You have NO citations for anything you have said except for survival rate and you're manipulating that survival rate number by using people who are already infected versus general population survival rate.
You're spending all of your time telling me I'm projecting and not enough time having an actual valid point.
Not a single hospital was overwhelmed in the United States and numerous other countries.
Almost every state in the country has seen through the faulty science that you're promoting...and eliminated most of not all Covid restrictions and we're not even at a 50% vaccination rate and fatality and infection rates are at record lows and not a single hospital has overflowed or will.
> "was assuming you to be a reasonable and good person who had fallen prey to faulty reasoning and misinformation."
If assuming you are a reasonable and good person constitutes a personal attack, then I apologize and I withdraw the comment.
> "feels like a case of projection"
> You're saying in so many words I'm stupid and not in control of my thoughts.
No.
If I thought you were stupid I'd not make reference to projection, as understanding cognitive bias and the ability to be self-aware enough to understand and/or perceive one's own cognitive bias requires a non-trivial amount of intelligence. If I thought you were stupid, I'd have expected that sentence to mean nothing to you... and cognitive bias, and in particular projection, doesn't mean someone isn't in control of their thoughts. Indeed, it means their thinking is very much driven by them.
> You have NO citations for anything you have said except for survival rate and you're manipulating that survival rate number by using people who are already infected versus general population survival rate.
First off: how is it not hypocritical & dishonest to be after me about not providing citations, claiming that you have "posted numerous references", while not actually providing references to anything about vaccines or covid?
I think you've forgotten the context of your statement. You said the "a disease that has a 99.99% survival rate". You weren't making a statement about general population survival rate, but about disease survival rate. General population survival rate isn't even relevant to the discussion. How would that even be relevant?
> Not a single hospital was overwhelmed in the United States and numerous other countries.
Again, a statement without references or citations. Allow me to Google "hospitals overwhelmed by covid-19" for you:
At various times during this crisis, hospitals been transferring patients to other hospitals because of lack of capacity. They've been treating patients in emergency rooms instead of of ICUs. Across the country, field hospitals have been set up (at multiple points in time) because extant hospitals were overwhelmed. There's been a tremendous amount of effort put in to collating the data. Datasets on individual hospital capacity are available here: https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Im.... You can read about some of the work collecting and collating the data here: https://github.com/CareSet/COVID_Hospital_PUF.
To provide some specific data from my neighbourhood (and from references provided above): in LA County, at the end of last year, five hospitals closed their facilities to all ambulance traffic (normally they do qualified restrictions). To be specific, MLK Jr. has a capacity for 131 patients, but had 215 patients (not the highest they reported either) reported in the new year: https://apnews.com/article/public-health-immunizations-coron.... The CMO at the USC Medical Center, Brad Spellberg, specifically said "When you walk into the ICU, and you see every bed occupied by a ventilated COVID patient...". LA PHS Directory Christina Ghaly said, "Ambulances are still having to wait many hours to offload patients to the emergency room."
> So what you're saying is straight up wrong.
>
> That's Facebook science.
Okay, so "Facebook science" is when someone says something that is "straight up wrong", as evidenced by... nothing beyond your assertions? What does that have to do with Facebook or science?
is that instead of violently threatening me....
you were baselessly calling me stupid??
Even though I posted numerous references while your ideas were unsourced false fear mongering information?
You should be banned from this site forever for posting Facebook science and attacking people.