User Controls
How you liking the new normal?
-
2021-10-13 at 8:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Lol..so in your mind 5% of the virus going into the atmosphere is just as dangerous as 100%? Someone doesn't know how things work…
You are in a crowd…you aren't wearing a mask, 100 viruses escape your mouth and infect the closest 100 people…conveniently 1 virus per person.
You are in a crowd…you ARE wearing a mask, 5 viruses escape your mask and infect the closest 5 people…
Result? the mask wearer had a 95% less transmission rate.
It doesn't work that one virus infects one person.
Viral quorum sensing is a thing. No one knows how or why it works.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01880-6 -
2021-10-13 at 8:28 PM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump It doesn't work that one virus infects one person.
I know..I was dumbing it down...hence why I used the words "conveniently 1 virus per person."
the point being that 5% virus transmission in the atmosphere...obviously infects LESS people that 100% virus transmission.
That really shouldn't have needed explaining... -
2021-10-13 at 8:37 PM UTCWith or without a mask, the transmission rate difference is negligible. This has already been proven by dozens of studies on this very topic.
-
2021-10-13 at 8:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ With or without a mask, the transmission rate difference is negligible. This has already been proven by dozens of studies on this very topic.
Again, the handkerchief experiment...cough up a lugy (however it's spelled) facing a person but into your handkerchief...it retains in the high 90% range of gunk...and with it any viruses/bacteria etc encapsulated within that gunk...
that's (even obvious to a mountain goat) FAR LESS transmission than coughing one up into the persons face without a handkerchief.
I'm guessing the "studies" you read were by anti maskers...and as is well known..you can find a study to prove any point...because "studies" are generally worthless and not scientific. -
2021-10-13 at 8:52 PM UTCIt's like you're on a battlefield on the front line and there's bullets by the thousands zinging and zipping everywhere, and you point at a few of the bullets and say those won't kill you. It doesn't matter if those few bullets don't kill you, because the rest will. The few bullets you point to don't mean anything.
-
2021-10-13 at 8:54 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ It's like you're on a battlefield on the front line and there's bullets by the thousands zinging and zipping everywhere, and you point at a few of the bullets and say those won't kill you. It doesn't matter if those few bullets don't kill you, because the rest will. The few bullets you point to don't mean anything.
Close
But wrong logic...
If you are on a battlefield and you have 100 machine guns spraying the field...you are far more likely to get "infected" by bullets than if there are only 3 single shot rifles spraying the field...1000s of bullets vs a few dozen. -
2021-10-13 at 9 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Close
But wrong logic…
If you are on a battlefield and you have 100 machine guns spraying the field…you are far more likely to get "infected" by bullets than if there are only 3 single shot rifles spraying the field…1000s of bullets vs a few dozen.
But that's the very point I'm making. There are literally billions of people infected by various airborne viruses. They are all around you. In your home. Outside your home. In the schools. In the supermarkets. In the parks. In the water. At your place of work. At every place you go. In your own living room. There's no way to escape exposure to an airborne virus. Worrying about droplets doesn't change anything about that situation. You WILL be infected eventually. It's not even a question if IF you will. You WILL. The only real question is when. -
2021-10-13 at 9:03 PM UTCUnderwear mask FTW
-
2021-10-13 at 9:06 PM UTCPeople should pay more attention to the phrase: to what degree? Examining the micro-manageable elements of a thing is pointless, if you are already outside the parameter of degree.
-
2021-10-13 at 9:10 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Close
But wrong logic…
If you are on a battlefield and you have 100 machine guns spraying the field…you are far more likely to get "infected" by bullets than if there are only 3 single shot rifles spraying the field…1000s of bullets vs a few dozen.
That is not logic that is a just a sitty analogy. -
2021-10-13 at 9:18 PM UTC
-
2021-10-13 at 9:29 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I know..I was dumbing it down…hence why I used the words "conveniently 1 virus per person."
the point being that 5% virus transmission in the atmosphere…obviously infects LESS people that 100% virus transmission.
That really shouldn't have needed explaining…
That seems logical, but Corona virus transmission hasn't ever fitted any model, so there is actually zero reason to assume that your assumptions will hold. -
2021-10-13 at 9:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump That seems logical, but Corona virus transmission hasn't ever fitted any model, so there is actually zero reason to assume that your assumptions will hold.
People are saying its Airborn AIDS. It finally happened.
SARS is a disease caused by HIV. HIV causes like 28 diseases. Sudden Airway Respiratory Syndrome is what I believe SARS means. Corona Virus Disease is like HIV and one of the actually Disease itself is SARS.
HIV looks like a corona virus is they mean Crowning Virus (The mushroom like spikes coming off of it).
So if its not an HIV it's probably a cousin mutation ? -
2021-10-13 at 10:10 PM UTC
-
2021-10-14 at 12:14 AM UTCGuys is this the new normal?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-110767/Girl-gave-birth-12-pregnant-again.html
"Not content with getting pregnant at 11 and giving birth at 12, she is now expecting her second child at the age of 14.
Her unborn baby's father is 17 and out of work, so the financial burden of supporting her growing family will continue to be borne by taxpayers.
One neighbour on a council estate in Rotherham said: 'She is giving out the message that it's OK to keep getting pregnant and the state will just keep paying for it.'
The schoolgirl's family background makes depressing reading.
Her own mother was just 14 when she had her, and went on to become Britain's youngest grandmother at 26. The girl's first baby was fathered by a man of 23 who was also her mother's lover.
He had fathered a child with her mother, too, which was born ten days before hers.
He was convicted of having unlawful sexual intercourse and jailed for seven years at Sheffield Crown Court, but the sentence was halved on appeal.
The girl did not realise she was pregnant until she started giving birth on the lavatory of her family home." -
2021-10-14 at 1:08 AM UTCfuck you
-
2021-10-14 at 8:18 AM UTC
Originally posted by Wariat Guys is this the new normal?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-110767/Girl-gave-birth-12-pregnant-again.html
"Not content with getting pregnant at 11 and giving birth at 12, she is now expecting her second child at the age of 14.
Her unborn baby's father is 17 and out of work, so the financial burden of supporting her growing family will continue to be borne by taxpayers.
One neighbour on a council estate in Rotherham said: 'She is giving out the message that it's OK to keep getting pregnant and the state will just keep paying for it.'
The schoolgirl's family background makes depressing reading.
Her own mother was just 14 when she had her, and went on to become Britain's youngest grandmother at 26. The girl's first baby was fathered by a man of 23 who was also her mother's lover.
He had fathered a child with her mother, too, which was born ten days before hers.
He was convicted of having unlawful sexual intercourse and jailed for seven years at Sheffield Crown Court, but the sentence was halved on appeal.
The girl did not realise she was pregnant until she started giving birth on the lavatory of her family home."
HAWT!!
Now imma do it!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-10-14 at 8:25 AM UTCImagine losing your son to another family (Microsoft) for years and still not see him on his 10th Birthday.
-
2021-10-14 at 8:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by Wariat Guys is this the new normal?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-110767/Girl-gave-birth-12-pregnant-again.html
"Not content with getting pregnant at 11 and giving birth at 12, she is now expecting her second child at the age of 14.
Her unborn baby's father is 17 and out of work, so the financial burden of supporting her growing family will continue to be borne by taxpayers.
One neighbour on a council estate in Rotherham said: 'She is giving out the message that it's OK to keep getting pregnant and the state will just keep paying for it.'
The schoolgirl's family background makes depressing reading.
Her own mother was just 14 when she had her, and went on to become Britain's youngest grandmother at 26. The girl's first baby was fathered by a man of 23 who was also her mother's lover.
He had fathered a child with her mother, too, which was born ten days before hers.
He was convicted of having unlawful sexual intercourse and jailed for seven years at Sheffield Crown Court, but the sentence was halved on appeal.
The girl did not realise she was pregnant until she started giving birth on the lavatory of her family home."
That's pretty normal for chavs, and this sort of thing wouldn't even be reported on if the family was non-white. -
2021-10-14 at 9:11 AM UTC
