Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When it comes to accepting science, one of the essentials is for a person has to be able think logically and without bias. A person then examines the evidence and comes to conclusions. So, do masks help reduce the spread of covid-19? The evidence says yes, both the statistical evidence, as well as other empirical evidence. The same can be said of social distancing. The evidence suggests that covid-19 vaccines work with minimal risk.
This is not to say that science gets it right all of the time. There are examples of where scientific findings, and beliefs, proved unfounded. Again, the best that can be done is to go by the evidence. This has worked to stop many diseases in their tracks and extend the human life expectancy many decades. It also has given us the electric light and air travel, to name two of thousands of non-medical scientific advancements.
I'm not all that impressed with the soap salesperson !!!
??? The question I'd like to see answered is, how is solar going to lubricate all the gearboxes that cars and trucks need to be mobile
??? Can you help out OP on that question
Nearly every vehicle has 5 or more gearboxes of various size and other modes of transportation have even more and some quite large !!! It takes quite a few gallons of lubricant per vehicle !!!
??? What solar lubricant is recommended now
??? What is Science recommending
What is wrong with people who refuse to believe science?
Probably nothing.
Have you noticed that during a year of lock downs and limited human activity, global warming continued?
I thought it was all human caused and would reverse if we all held our breath.
Maybe the problem is science as promoted by politicians.
Because of science, we are told to wash our hands with antibacterial soap and frequently use antibacterial hand sanitizer to combat - a virus. Sure antibacterial does nothing to kill virus, but use it anyway, it is good science to do so. Ignore those people who say that ordinary soap is just as good, they are not "scientists."
We are told to wipe/sanitize all surfaces after touching them. Then the “scientists” discover the virus does not live on hard surfaces and such surfaces are not a substantial transfer risk. Still we are told to continue to daily wipe down all doorknobs, counters and other hard surfaces with antibacterial cleaners that will not kill the virus that does not live on the hard surfaces. These cleaners tend to destroy the finish on many of the hard surfaces, but that is ok because the antibacterial cleaners do a good job of not killing the virus that does not live on the hard surfaces. Just do it, it is science. Oh and forget the softer surfaces where the virus actually lives for a while. We do not have a solution for that so we need you to look the other way. It is science after all.
We are told not to wear masks because it will cause the disease to spread because it makes us touch our faces more, which is a major cause of the spread according to science. Then we must all wear masks to stop the spread of the disease. Forget about the touching your face thing, we never said it. Look the other direction – it is science after all. Then we are told that masks only help keep us from spreading the disease, they do nothing to keep us from getting it. Therefore it is important for each of us to compel others to wear masks. Then a study finds most masks do not help prevent aeration of the virus and some make it worse, but we are told to continue wearing those types of masks anyway. – because “science.” Besides, no one is really sure whether the virus spreads through breathing or other aerosol means. It probably does because science thinks it might, the new science, not the old science that said it spreads though contact with hard surfaces, but still keep wiping down hard surfaces anyway – because science wants you to. Then we are told that masks do in fact keep you from getting the virus, at least a little bit. science says so. Then we see that wearing masks does not seem to make any difference in the spread of the disease but we are told to keep wearing them, in fact maybe wear two of them. "Science" now thinks that where one mask has failed, two (or maybe three) will succeed. Still, for now, keep wearing those gator masks that we know make things worse. Science wants you to.
We close our bars and restaurants and other service businesses at massive economic and value of life cost and discover it does not seem to have a substantial impact on the spread of the disease. Then we are told science has discovered that most of the transmissions seem to be taking place in people’s homes, but we still need to keep the bars restaurants and other service businesses closed – just because. Or maybe because you cannot close homes, so you close something, just so you can say you are doing something. But they have to stay closed because of science.
We establish random rules based on “science” which had no basis in logic. Buying paint in a large store spreads the virus but buying it in a slightly smaller store does not. The virus only comes out significantly after 10 p.m., so bars and restaurants must close by then. Bars that get 29% of the revenue from food and 71% from alcohol sales are hotbeds to Covid and must be closed. But bars that get 30% of their revenue from food and only 70% from alcohol are safe places to be. Fishing in a sail boat, canoe, kayak, rowboat or inner tube are all safe activities, but a motor boat will give you covid. Fishing standing up is safe, but if you sit down while fishing, you will get covid. Liquor stores are essential and safe enough to keep open, but churches are not. 2000 people can safely go to a church to vote in an election without wearing masks or social distancing, but 250 people wearing masks and staying 6 feet apart who go to the same church to worship will get or spread covid and must be stopped at all costs. Jail them if necessary. A thanksgiving get together of two families of ten people each is safe, but three families with two people each is a covid disaster and must be banned. It is perfectly safe to gather in large packed crowds without masks to protest police activity or popular political issues, but you cannot have an outdoor concert or church service with 100 people all wearing masks and staying distant. Too dangerous, science says you must arrest them all.
Social distancing is the answer to controlling covid and people must remain locked up in their homes despite skyrocketing mental illness, suicide, drug addictions and overdoses, divorce rates, etc. All of those must be tolerated in the name of science. However we must let prisoners out into society with no rules (and no home to go to) in order to prevent the spread of covid among inmates locked in a cell. This all makes sense because of Science.
Science tells us the first rule of statistical analysis is “correlation does not show causation” Except in 2020 and 2021, the rule is different. Correlation is scientific proof without any consideration of other impacting factors when it tends to support what science wants to say. In fact, in those conditions, correlation is absolute irrefutable scientific proof and you are an idiot who should be mocked into silence if you question this.
What on earth is wrong with these people who say “science” has no credibility? What idiots! It is science for crying out loud, it cannot be wrong and it does not need to make sense, Everyone knows that anything labeled "science is an absolute truth that cannot be questioned. You are just too stupid to understand it because you did not spend four or six or eight years partying at a university before going to work for the government in an administrative role, so you could not possibly know anything about science. Oh and those scientists over there who disagree with us? Ignore them we will label them wackos or politically motivated, or some other title so we can dismiss their version of “science” There is only one version of science and that is the version that fits the PC agenda.
When I tell my friend, a PhD scientist, virologist and toxicologist who works for the government that I no longer have any respect for "science" He no longer fights with me - he just says "Neither do I"
C'mon guys, just trust the science, just trust the experts:
That is priceless!
Although, they forgot to include bleeding and the health benefits of arsenic.
The "smoking promotes health" ad is hilarious. But "science" really thought that was true at one time. Smoking used to be promoted as healthy, and as a cure for female "hysteria" and obesity.
A significant effort to improve the maintenance of EMs has been carried out specifically in rolling bearing lubrication since about 40–60% of all early motor failures are ascribed to the bearings. Most bearing failures are a consequence of improper lubrication with the wrong grease or missing relubrication [14]. Hence, the rotor rolling bearings and the brushes/slip rings can be considered as the critical tribological elements in EMs to be optimized further.
A person then examines the evidence and comes to conclusions. So, do masks help reduce the spread of covid-19? The evidence says yes, both the statistical evidence, as well as other empirical evidence.
Except that the "evidence" only says that for "studies" published after April of last year (at least most of them published after that time). The evidence that was published in studies prior to April of last year say just the opposite: that cloth masks are nearly worthless.
So how do you explain the contradiction? Did science or physics suddenly change last April?
True. But it's as close as you can get, since everything is fact checked, revisions requested, rechecked after the revisions, and confirmed by others working in the field. Most peer review is conducted blind without the reviewer knowing who submitted the article to be reviewed, thus insuring as much as possible that there is no favoritism in the findings, and that sloppy or intentionally skewed science is flagged to be avoided. It's as good a system as you can get. Peer review is not perfect, but it can be trusted.
Scientific findings such as those resulting from experiments conducted with the goal of supporting the argument of the patron, such as the "science" the tobacco companies paid for for years with the goal of undermining genuine studies that found tobacco harmful are not generally peer reviewed.
Except that the "evidence" only says that for "studies" published after April of last year (at least most of them published after that time). The evidence that was published in studies prior to April of last year say just the opposite: that cloth masks are nearly worthless.
So how do you explain the contradiction? Did science or physics suddenly change last April?
Yes, you are correct. Additional evidence came to the fore concerning a novel virus creating a pandemic. Scientific viewpoints changed accordingly. This is a very common dynamic. People died making early aircraft, at the hands of electricity, and exploring the oceans. But because of scientific inquiry the human species is no longer relegated to living in caves and being warmed by campfires.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
