Emergency legislation - information and commentary
Discussion
RSTurboPaul said:
You appear to be suggesting that 'evidence' (regardless of whether or not it supports your views) should not be captured in case of 'mysterious loss'?
Either way, I do like the way how one group of people is very certainly, definitely, 100% right and can tell a second group of people they are totally, utterly, unbelievably wrong, but the second group cannot return the favour, or if they do, they are subject to attempts to belittle them and their views.
Personally, I like to remain civil and open to reading everything that is posted in order to have a wide view, whether or not I agree with it, but contrarianism and an ad hominem approach seems to be favoured by others.
Contrarianism is rife on here, but it obviously isn’t from those of us who aren’t opposed to everything. I had already answered this previously. Either way, I do like the way how one group of people is very certainly, definitely, 100% right and can tell a second group of people they are totally, utterly, unbelievably wrong, but the second group cannot return the favour, or if they do, they are subject to attempts to belittle them and their views.
Personally, I like to remain civil and open to reading everything that is posted in order to have a wide view, whether or not I agree with it, but contrarianism and an ad hominem approach seems to be favoured by others.
Look at my earlier reply to the post you’ve quoted. It’s very simple. Nobody is claiming that wearing a face covering on it’s own is a panacea. However, this added to other measures means it’s highly likely to help reduce the spread. The virus is new. Knowledge is being gained daily. What was once seen as relevant may become irrelevant and vice versa.
Face covering is becoming more and more relevant as the science around it develops. The fact you want to oppose it is your choice, but look around the globe and how this activity is being promoted. This is about showing concern for other people, it’s something that may prevent the infected from spreading the virus to the uninfected. It’s not a solution to the spread on its own. It’s also not a way to protect yourself if others around you aren’t wearing coverings, but if everyone does then it adds to the list of measures being taken.
It’s just a common courtesy, but many on here don’t agree with that unless it’s law. Well, now it’s law and it will probably become law in other indoor spaces too despite current denials.
markyb_lcy said:
The poster you’ve replied to is quite honestly best ignored.
The level,of irony in your post, given what you were replying to, is off the scale. 
unident said:
Jasandjules said:
I wonder, if the Govt told you that "the science" says the virus floated 3ft in the air would you crawl everywhere on your hands and knees?
Yes, that’s exactly the same 
Jasandjules said:
unident said:
Jasandjules said:
I wonder, if the Govt told you that "the science" says the virus floated 3ft in the air would you crawl everywhere on your hands and knees?
Yes, that’s exactly the same I don’t obey science exclusively, I use sensible adult judgment to work out what makes sense and what guidance I think is appropriate and courteous to follow. I don’t refuse to follow any and all guidance “because it’s not law” and I don’t pick an opinion and then stick with it no matter what, even as knowledge develops. As clever as you all think you are, you are the Luddites here. You’re the ones picking the dissenting voices and positing them as absolute fact, you’re the ones picking a position and refusing to adapt it, when things change.
I’ll keep posting here, you can ignore me, but I’ll ridicule the lunacy on here.
Oh and the lockdown has been eased yet again, as we get more control over the spread. I’m sure you’d have preferred a US style approach, but that really has t worked out well.
Jasandjules said:
Do you obey "the science" or not? Why do you consider you can pick and choose which "science" you can follow then?
No one obeys science. Calculating a proportionate response to the science is also science - whether to instigate that response is the decision. We delegate that decision to parliament/government, in some circumstances. There are lot's of risks we tolerate, because the mitigation is not worth the downsides and the benefits outweigh the risks. In this case, the consensus is the risks justify the downsides of the mitigation. There are also lots of things we are forced to do in our daily lives which are to mitigate risks because it was decided that they were worth it.
If the science was the virus remains above 3 feet then, I would expect them to look at what mitigation might work and whether that was worth it. I might crawl through a smoke filled room to save a loved one, I wouldn't do it to go shopping.
Jasandjules said:
I wonder, if the Govt told you that "the science" says the virus floated 3ft in the air would you crawl everywhere on your hands and knees?
Unfortunately there are a re large number of very gullible people that believe the brainwashing propaganda put out but the government, so the answer is probably 'yes'. Oh look........someone's already answered your question!!
PS please don't put ideas like that out on an open forum, if any one from the government is reading this, that will be in the next list of 'guidelines'!
NGee said:
Unfortunately there are a re large number of very gullible people that believe the brainwashing propaganda put out nearly every government, the WHO, the CDC (US & China), SAGE, Oxford, Berkley,Dr Harold Varmus, Dr Richard Horton, The BMA, The EU, Cornell, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Yale etc etc so the answer is probably 'yes'.
FTFYGraveworm said:
NGee said:
Unfortunately there are a re large number of very gullible people that believe the brainwashing propaganda put out nearly every government, the WHO, the CDC (US & China), SAGE, Oxford, Berkley,Dr Harold Varmus, Dr Richard Horton, The BMA, The EU, Cornell, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Yale etc etc so the answer is probably 'yes'.
FTFYIf there was any factual science behind and it wasn't just brainwashing propaganda then all the governments around the world would be all singing off the same hymn sheet. They're not - even the 4 UK governments can't agree on anything.
Apparently, soon we're all going to die if we don't wear muzzles in shops (in some countries). Maybe you can explain why, when this life saving technology was discovered, all governments did not pass on this information and implement the law straight away, instead of allowing us all to continue sharing the virus for another 2 weeks.
NGee said:
Unfortunately there are a re large number of very gullible people that believe the brainwashing propaganda put out but the government, so the answer is probably 'yes'.
Oh look........someone's already answered your question!!
PS please don't put ideas like that out on an open forum, if any one from the government is reading this, that will be in the next list of 'guidelines'!
Flat Earth, Illuminati, fake moon landings, 9/11 was an inside job, grassy knoll and loads more that you can keep yourself busy with. You could start on here about 5G, manmade viruses too if you want to, better still tell us that the whole thing is made up and never actually happened. You stick it to the man and fight the power Wolfie. Oh look........someone's already answered your question!!
PS please don't put ideas like that out on an open forum, if any one from the government is reading this, that will be in the next list of 'guidelines'!
NGee said:
Yes, thanks for that, that does make it a lot clearer.
If there was any factual science behind and it wasn't just brainwashing propaganda then all the governments around the world would be all singing off the same hymn sheet. They're not - even the 4 UK governments can't agree on anything.
Apparently, soon we're all going to die if we don't wear muzzles in shops (in some countries). Maybe you can explain why, when this life saving technology was discovered, all governments did not pass on this information and implement the law straight away, instead of allowing us all to continue sharing the virus for another 2 weeks.
The factual science is that symptomatic or diagnosed people should self isolate. Asymptomatic people won't know to do that and the factual science has now shown that they are the ones who can transmit the virus readily in droplets produced in breath and particularly speech. This was not known at first. The factual science is that masks (Including homemade masks) have been shown to capture a significant quantity of droplets and aerosols and reduce the distances they can travel.If there was any factual science behind and it wasn't just brainwashing propaganda then all the governments around the world would be all singing off the same hymn sheet. They're not - even the 4 UK governments can't agree on anything.
Apparently, soon we're all going to die if we don't wear muzzles in shops (in some countries). Maybe you can explain why, when this life saving technology was discovered, all governments did not pass on this information and implement the law straight away, instead of allowing us all to continue sharing the virus for another 2 weeks.
They are not saying everyone will die. They are saying this will reduce the chance of dying, like every other measure we are asked or told to take for this or any risk.
They did pass it on in May, when it was known, they changed the advice - people didn't follow the advice so they are now making it compulsory.
I am unclear if you saying that despite all the advice saying it is necessary and proportionate they should ignore that in favour of "What if they are all wrong" or "Well, they should of done it sooner so they shouldn't do it now?"
Edited by Graveworm on Friday 17th July 13:57
Graveworm said:
The factual science is that symptomatic or diagnosed people should self isolate. Asymptomatic people won't know to do that and the factual science has now shown that they are the ones who can transmit the virus readily in droplets produced in breath and particularly speech. This was not known at first. The factual science is that masks (Including homemade masks) have been shown to capture a significant quantity of droplets and aerosols and reduce the distances they can travel.
They are not saying everyone will die. They are saying this will reduce the chance of dying, like every other measure we are asked or told to take for this or any risk.
Fair enough. If factual science has now shown that Asymptomatic people are the ones who can transmit the virus, why are we now coming out of lockdown at the very time when, according to scientific fact, we should be tightening lockdown to avoid Asymptomatic people transmitting the virus?They are not saying everyone will die. They are saying this will reduce the chance of dying, like every other measure we are asked or told to take for this or any risk.
How come we are allowed to go to the pub, the whole point of which is to socialize and talk to people where as if we go shopping we have to dress up like a bank robber, when no one has ever spoken to anyone else in a shop!?
Desiderata said:
I've had a wee look at the Scottish regulations, and as far as I can see, under 8(4) [F4, 5a, I am exempt from wearing a facecovering while shopping for my 84 year old mother (exempt while assisting a vunerable person).
Would anyone who is more legally qualified like to comment?
“Assisting” implies attendance to me but it’s worth a shot. And I’m not legally qualified Would anyone who is more legally qualified like to comment?
NGee said:
Fair enough. If factual science has now shown that Asymptomatic people are the ones who can transmit the virus, why are we now coming out of lockdown at the very time when, according to scientific fact, we should be tightening lockdown to avoid Asymptomatic people transmitting the virus?
How come we are allowed to go to the pub, the whole point of which is to socialize and talk to people where as if we go shopping we have to dress up like a bank robber, when no one has ever spoken to anyone else in a shop!?
Because there are far fewer people with the illness (Symptomatic or asymptomatic) than there were and R0 is below 1 as opposed to 4 before lock down. How come we are allowed to go to the pub, the whole point of which is to socialize and talk to people where as if we go shopping we have to dress up like a bank robber, when no one has ever spoken to anyone else in a shop!?
XCP said:
What is the big deal about wearing a mask? I have worn all sorts of PPE at work when the risk in not doing so is infinitesimal.
On here the big deal is that it’s the latest thing the government wants people to do. Whatever the government wants is whatever gets opposed on here. It really is quite bizarre how some on here think. The only thing that would be acceptable would be a total removal of all precautions. However, that would then lead to demands for a full investigation, questions why things took so long and then absolute refusal to accept any of the findings of the investigation they demanded. Graveworm said:
NGee said:
Fair enough. If factual science has now shown that Asymptomatic people are the ones who can transmit the virus, why are we now coming out of lockdown at the very time when, according to scientific fact, we should be tightening lockdown to avoid Asymptomatic people transmitting the virus?
How come we are allowed to go to the pub, the whole point of which is to socialize and talk to people where as if we go shopping we have to dress up like a bank robber, when no one has ever spoken to anyone else in a shop!?
Because there are far fewer people with the illness (Symptomatic or asymptomatic) than there were and R0 is below 1 as opposed to 4 before lock down. How come we are allowed to go to the pub, the whole point of which is to socialize and talk to people where as if we go shopping we have to dress up like a bank robber, when no one has ever spoken to anyone else in a shop!?
I thought the object was to get R0 to zero, not just to below 1.
I don't understand what difference it makes how many people have the virus. Let's face it, it only took one to start it all in the first place.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff