Banter The Adelaide Board Politics/COVID Thread Part 2 (WARNING NOT FOR THE FAINT-HEARTED)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
In fairness to me in dealing with someone who complains about focusing on words whe when discussing what was and wasn't said.

Maybe stop with the low value posting, it's tedious.
Oh, my apologies. If that's not what you were thinking of, then I agree with 1970crow. But words do have a fairly static meaning, they can't vary to become whatever makes your arguments not wrong.
 
Oh, my apologies. If that's not what you were thinking of, then I agree with 1970crow. But words do have a fairly static meaning, they can't vary to become whatever makes your arguments not wrong.
Look , I'm genuinely humbled that you chose me to unleash your style of posting onto.

But please, can you stop?
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

I mean it’s pretty obvious. We only ever needed good vax rates among those that were genuinely at risk. Adding another 15 year old to the stats changed nothing.
It's not really that obvious, given we still need to explain it to people like you.

You want a good mix of all the population to be vaccinated.

If you think of Sweden's initial stupid response about Herd immunity (something our conspiracy theorists on here love to focus on) the mass vaccination of a population works with the same theory, just without the death needed to obtain herd immunity without vaccination.

If we went down the poorly thought out way you are suggesting we just end up with variations of the disease as it is allowed to pass through the population and like all living organisms reproduce in its strongest form.
 
which countries do you think achieved a significantly better balance of preventing death and illness while mitigating economic impacts than Australia? What evidence do you have to support this?

For clarity…

You admit that lockdowns had widespread catastrophic consequences (economically, socially and other) but your view is that countries had no other choice than to lockdown hard for two years, lest their health system collapses.

Am I correct in outlining this is your central argument?

If so, then we don‘t have to waste pages and pages arguing over whether lockdowns had horrible effects.

All we need to discuss is whether they were a)successful in making any significant impact on Covid’s trajectory b) to what extent, and c)did it outweigh the massive consequences we both agree they had.
 
Look , I'm genuinely humbled that you chose me to unleash your style of posting onto.

But please, can you stop?
Someone else would have said "Oh I see, Vader did say that, it was before I started posting, I didn't realise"

But you continued on with bizarre definitional games that fooled nobody (but you), post after post after post, and when I call you out – much more politely than the way you treat people you disagree with, btw, you complain.

Look at the thread title. Notice that it doesn't say "Post crap and never be challenged"...it says "banter."
 
It's not really that obvious, given we still need to explain it to people like you.

You want a good mix of all the population to be vaccinated.

If you think of Sweden's initial stupid response about Herd immunity (something our conspiracy theorists on here love to focus on) the mass vaccination of a population works with the same theory, just without the death needed to obtain herd immunity without vaccination.

If we went down the poorly thought out way you are suggesting we just end up with variations of the disease as it is allowed to pass through the population and like all living organisms reproduce in its strongest form.
It's not just the elderly in hospital with covid!

Hospitals would be overwhelmed without a decent vax rare, but the lemmings on this board don't get it.

Just need to watch the footage overseas when covid was out of control & non-covid patients were not getting the care they needed.

But you are trying to get through to selfish morons who don't understand the big picture as more concerned their whole way of life is over because of all those nasty restrictions which impact how exactly...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's not really that obvious, given we still need to explain it to people like you.

You want a good mix of all the population to be vaccinated.

If you think of Sweden's initial stupid response about Herd immunity (something our conspiracy theorists on here love to focus on) the mass vaccination of a population works with the same theory, just without the death needed to obtain herd immunity without vaccination.

If we went down the poorly thought out way you are suggesting we just end up with variations of the disease as it is allowed to pass through the population and like all living organisms reproduce in its strongest form.

Sweden is the perfect example. They failed to protect the genuinely at risk in the nursing homes and suffered enormous losses in that group. But outside of those, the death rate was negligible. Had they concentrated on protecting the at risk, they'd have not suffered the losses that they did. No different to us, we still lost people from the actual at risk group, despite controlling every part of society equally.

Either way, it was the same cohort being buried. But I bet you thought mentioning "Sweden" was somehow playing the right bower. Son, you're playing Euchre, this is 500 on steroids, it's well beyond your mental capacities.
 
You want a good mix of all the population to be vaccinated.

If you think of Sweden's initial stupid response about Herd immunity (something our conspiracy theorists on here love to focus on) the mass vaccination of a population works with the same theory, just without the death needed to obtain herd immunity without vaccination.

You’re getting the Covid vaccine mixed up with vaccines that actually work to stop spread and infection for years if not life.

This is a vaccine that maintains its efficacy about as long as a piece of Fruit Stripe Gum.

The tour is over chief, your Covid vaccination status right now isn’t worth the paper it’s written on lol.

At least you got to feel nice and virtuous for a few months, so it wasn’t totally worthless:tearsofjoy:
 
Someone else would have said "Oh I see, Vader did say that, it was before I started posting, I didn't realise"

But you continued on with bizarre definitional games that fooled nobody (but you), post after post after post, and when I call you out – much more politely than the way you treat people you disagree with, btw, you complain.

Look at the thread title. Notice that it doesn't say "Post crap and never be challenged"...it says "banter.

But you haven't challenged me, I can summarise our interaction for you.

Me. Noone said he'd be led out the white house handcuffed
You. Here's a link to a post
Me. That post doesn't mention anything about handcuffs
You. Why are you focusing on words.
Me ?


Again, I don't know why you decided to pick a reasonably tame post to try and demonstrate your intellectual prowess, but it's a yawn.

I'm happy for banter, but you don't provide banter.

Maybe find a new avenue, because at this stage you are just a diet version of what already exists.
 
Last edited:
You’re getting the Covid vaccine mixed up with vaccines that actually work to stop spread and infection for years if not life.

This is a vaccine that maintains its efficacy about as long as a piece of Fruit Stripe Gum.

The tour is over chief, your Covid vaccination status right now isn’t worth the paper it’s written on lol.

At least you got to feel nice and virtuous for a few months, so it wasn’t totally worthless:tearsofjoy:
Spoken like a true anti vaxxer.

I do like how you've finally embraced it though
 
Sweden is the perfect example. They failed to protect the genuinely at risk in the nursing homes and suffered enormous losses in that group. But outside of those, the death rate was negligible. Had they concentrated on protecting the at risk, they'd have not suffered the losses that they did. No different to us, we still lost people from the actual at risk group, despite controlling every part of society equally.

Either way, it was the same cohort being buried. But I bet you thought mentioning "Sweden" was somehow playing the right bower. Son, you're playing Euchre, this is 500 on steroids, it's well beyond your mental capacities.
I said Sweeden because it gets pseudo experts like you going because you missed how they acknowledge they got it wrong.
 
You’re getting the Covid vaccine mixed up with vaccines that actually work to stop spread and infection for years if not life.

This is a vaccine that maintains its efficacy about as long as a piece of Fruit Stripe Gum.

The tour is over chief, your Covid vaccination status right now isn’t worth the paper it’s written on lol.

At least you got to feel nice and virtuous for a few months, so it wasn’t totally worthless:tearsofjoy:

It's weird that they haven't noticed the vax rates reducing despite being smack bang in the middle of a covid crisis. We marched to 95% like it was the only thing that could save humanity despite us being in off-season. But since we've needed our 3rd and 4th, and also now at peak hospital pressure (thanks influenza), less and less are 'updating' themselves to fully vaxxed. Soon we'll not be fully vaxxed unless we've been jabbed 5 times, but guess what, the restrictions are dead. It played out exactly as predicted all those months ago.
 
Last edited:
But you haven't challenged me, I can summarise our interaction for you.

Me. Noone said he'd be led out the white house handcuffed
You. Here's a link to a post
Me. That post doesn't mention anything about handcuffs
You. Why are you focusing on words.
Me ?


Again, I don't know why you decided to pick a reasonably tame post to try and demonstrate your intellectual prowess, but it's a yawn.

I'm happy for banter, but you don't provide banter.

Maybe find a new avenue, because at this stage you are just a diet version of what already exists.

Dig up dude.
 
I said Sweeden because it gets pseudo experts like you going because you missed how they acknowledge they got it wrong.

A qualified admission, if you'd actually looked at it. They conceded that their policy failed the genuinely at risk and if they had their time again, they'd do more to protect the at risk. They only ever conceded that they failed the aged homes.
 
A qualified admission, if you'd actually looked at it. They conceded that their policy failed the genuinely at risk and if they had their time again, they'd do more to protect the at risk. They only ever conceded that they failed the aged homes.
What happened to dig up?

Or did you google that too?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top