| Heading into lockdown aren't we 17:11 - Oct 6 with 7817 views | chrismakin |
Very quiet from the government on things, but behind the scenes they all know Covid is out of control again around the UK.
I See it being a Jan lockdown
Why? the company i work for, government contract have cancelled all January recruitment events. |  |
| |  |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:27 - Oct 6 with 4585 views | chicoazul |
No chance of any more lockdowns. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:32 - Oct 6 with 4568 views | Swansea_Blue |
I don't think they'd be able to do it now given the speed at which a lot of people have abandoned any sense of caution. Not to blame the people particularly, as the whole way coming out of lockdown was communicated was a farce. I'd be very surprised if they could put that genie back in the bottle even if they wanted to (which they don't).
Besides, I don't think they care how sick people get and the vaccines are doing a good job at keeping the death rate down to an apparently acceptable 100+ a day. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:42 - Oct 6 with 4514 views | pointofblue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:32 - Oct 6 by Swansea_Blue |
I don't think they'd be able to do it now given the speed at which a lot of people have abandoned any sense of caution. Not to blame the people particularly, as the whole way coming out of lockdown was communicated was a farce. I'd be very surprised if they could put that genie back in the bottle even if they wanted to (which they don't).
Besides, I don't think they care how sick people get and the vaccines are doing a good job at keeping the death rate down to an apparently acceptable 100+ a day. |
They may re-establish mask wearing and, depending on it’s success in Scotland, see if they can launch Covid passports again (the idea never should have been ditched in the first place) but I can’t see them re-enforcing lockdown - especially as case numbers seem relatively steady and hospitalisations are not really increasing. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:59 - Oct 6 with 4430 views | Kievthegreat |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 17:42 - Oct 6 by pointofblue |
They may re-establish mask wearing and, depending on it’s success in Scotland, see if they can launch Covid passports again (the idea never should have been ditched in the first place) but I can’t see them re-enforcing lockdown - especially as case numbers seem relatively steady and hospitalisations are not really increasing. |
Masks seems so simple and such a no brainer.
Then again so many people don't really give a damn anymore, plus the brain dead who didn't want them when they were required before, it probably wouldn't be widely enforced. |  | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:22 - Oct 6 with 4315 views | Guthrum |
That's only down to the ongoing riots sparked by a lack of turkey and presents at Christmas. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:24 - Oct 6 with 4322 views | Digger77 |
They don't work, as the studies show, so it won't be happening again. | | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:31 - Oct 6 with 4285 views | Trequartista |
Covid is not out of control. Cases, hospitalisations and deaths are all down (week on week) at the moment although a jump in cases today.
Lots of unknowns as ever, but would need a new vaccine-escaping variant or a significant wane in vaccine effectiveness combined with a failed booster jab campaign i would think. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:32 - Oct 6 with 4256 views | ZXBlue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:24 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
They don't work, as the studies show, so it won't be happening again. |
Simply untrue | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:51 - Oct 6 with 4171 views | Weekender |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:24 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
They don't work, as the studies show, so it won't be happening again. |
Do you have to work at being this ignorant or does it come naturally? |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:54 - Oct 6 with 4154 views | Digger77 |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:51 - Oct 6 by Weekender |
Do you have to work at being this ignorant or does it come naturally? |
I'll try and dig out the study.
#bekind | | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:12 - Oct 6 with 4050 views | StokieBlue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:24 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
They don't work, as the studies show, so it won't be happening again. |
This is a dangerous falsehood and you should be ashamed of propagating it.
I've no doubt you can find an individual study which supports you from a pay-to-publish journal but you'll be cherry picking evidence from a sea of papers which say the exact opposite in order to suit your narrative.
The fact that posts like this are even tolerated on here was part of the reason I left. Fighting the torrent of misinformation and "feelings" was both exhausting and in the end a pointless waste of my time. Not all things are open to debate, especially when they are demonstrably wrong and possibly damaging. You can't really claim ignorance either given you've gone out of your way to find a study that supports you whilst clear studies to the contrary were posted as recently as yesterday.
I've noticed that many of your posts seem to use the generic cross-subject denier tactic of "muddying the waters" although I am unsure if this is by design or stupidity whereby you post the things you want to be true. You say "be kind" but you actions don't allow people that possibility.
It's probably wise not to post on things you clearly know nothing about, especially given the dangerous nature of the subject matter. The scientific method cares not for your feelings or opinions and I doubt many posters do either.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:22 - Oct 6 with 3973 views | Wacko |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:54 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
I'll try and dig out the study.
#bekind |
I thought you said it was studies. Now it's just one | |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:30 - Oct 6 with 3928 views | dominiciawful |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:24 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
They don't work, as the studies show, so it won't be happening again. |
Shut up, you twát. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:35 - Oct 6 with 3892 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:12 - Oct 6 by StokieBlue |
This is a dangerous falsehood and you should be ashamed of propagating it.
I've no doubt you can find an individual study which supports you from a pay-to-publish journal but you'll be cherry picking evidence from a sea of papers which say the exact opposite in order to suit your narrative.
The fact that posts like this are even tolerated on here was part of the reason I left. Fighting the torrent of misinformation and "feelings" was both exhausting and in the end a pointless waste of my time. Not all things are open to debate, especially when they are demonstrably wrong and possibly damaging. You can't really claim ignorance either given you've gone out of your way to find a study that supports you whilst clear studies to the contrary were posted as recently as yesterday.
I've noticed that many of your posts seem to use the generic cross-subject denier tactic of "muddying the waters" although I am unsure if this is by design or stupidity whereby you post the things you want to be true. You say "be kind" but you actions don't allow people that possibility.
It's probably wise not to post on things you clearly know nothing about, especially given the dangerous nature of the subject matter. The scientific method cares not for your feelings or opinions and I doubt many posters do either.
SB |
Fwiw Stokie I think it was probably very wise to step back a bit as much as I valued all of your input.
This Winter could yet get very 'interesting' for all the wrong reasons! Take care out there. [Post edited 6 Oct 2021 19:44]
|  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:41 - Oct 6 with 3848 views | Dubtractor |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:12 - Oct 6 by StokieBlue |
This is a dangerous falsehood and you should be ashamed of propagating it.
I've no doubt you can find an individual study which supports you from a pay-to-publish journal but you'll be cherry picking evidence from a sea of papers which say the exact opposite in order to suit your narrative.
The fact that posts like this are even tolerated on here was part of the reason I left. Fighting the torrent of misinformation and "feelings" was both exhausting and in the end a pointless waste of my time. Not all things are open to debate, especially when they are demonstrably wrong and possibly damaging. You can't really claim ignorance either given you've gone out of your way to find a study that supports you whilst clear studies to the contrary were posted as recently as yesterday.
I've noticed that many of your posts seem to use the generic cross-subject denier tactic of "muddying the waters" although I am unsure if this is by design or stupidity whereby you post the things you want to be true. You say "be kind" but you actions don't allow people that possibility.
It's probably wise not to post on things you clearly know nothing about, especially given the dangerous nature of the subject matter. The scientific method cares not for your feelings or opinions and I doubt many posters do either.
SB |
Welcome back Stokie! |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:57 - Oct 6 with 3778 views | eastangliaisblue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:54 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
I'll try and dig out the study.
#bekind |
Stop talking sh1t if you want people to be kind. |  | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:02 - Oct 6 with 3746 views | Ryorry |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:51 - Oct 6 by Weekender |
Do you have to work at being this ignorant or does it come naturally? |
Think there's a case to be made for banning people who serially misinform in this kind of way. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:09 - Oct 6 with 3692 views | Illinoisblue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 18:54 - Oct 6 by Digger77 |
I'll try and dig out the study.
#bekind |
Something more reliable than mymatedavereckons.com please. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:18 - Oct 6 with 3616 views | PhilTWTD |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:02 - Oct 6 by Ryorry |
Think there's a case to be made for banning people who serially misinform in this kind of way. |
I have banned a number of repeat offenders since the start of the pandemic. |  | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:19 - Oct 6 with 3600 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:02 - Oct 6 by Ryorry |
Think there's a case to be made for banning people who serially misinform in this kind of way. |
I agree. I said this months ago when people were posting covid denial on here. TBF Phil did crack down hard on them.
But then there is also a lot of unfounded scaremongering in the other direction.
I recall when there were predictions that we would reach 100,000 cases a day by the end of August, people were saying it would be far higher and happen far sooner. It didn't happen. No retractions or acknowledgement.
The debate needs to be informed and balanced. |  |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:20 - Oct 6 with 3580 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:18 - Oct 6 by PhilTWTD |
I have banned a number of repeat offenders since the start of the pandemic. |
Good of you to let Stokie back.   | |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:29 - Oct 6 with 3525 views | Digger77 |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 19:12 - Oct 6 by StokieBlue |
This is a dangerous falsehood and you should be ashamed of propagating it.
I've no doubt you can find an individual study which supports you from a pay-to-publish journal but you'll be cherry picking evidence from a sea of papers which say the exact opposite in order to suit your narrative.
The fact that posts like this are even tolerated on here was part of the reason I left. Fighting the torrent of misinformation and "feelings" was both exhausting and in the end a pointless waste of my time. Not all things are open to debate, especially when they are demonstrably wrong and possibly damaging. You can't really claim ignorance either given you've gone out of your way to find a study that supports you whilst clear studies to the contrary were posted as recently as yesterday.
I've noticed that many of your posts seem to use the generic cross-subject denier tactic of "muddying the waters" although I am unsure if this is by design or stupidity whereby you post the things you want to be true. You say "be kind" but you actions don't allow people that possibility.
It's probably wise not to post on things you clearly know nothing about, especially given the dangerous nature of the subject matter. The scientific method cares not for your feelings or opinions and I doubt many posters do either.
SB |
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jun/30/covid-19-lockdowns-caused-more- | | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:33 - Oct 6 with 3491 views | Digger77 |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:18 - Oct 6 by PhilTWTD |
I have banned a number of repeat offenders since the start of the pandemic. |
If you want to ban me for having a discussion, that's fine. However, it's not me getting personal here.
I'm not antivax for about the 5th time! | | | |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:40 - Oct 6 with 3430 views | StokieBlue |
Your source is a non-peer reviewed newspaper which propagated the Obama passport theory, second hand smoke deniers, ozone depletion deniers and climate change deniers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times
I go back to my original point.
Don't post about things you don't know about or understand when they are potentially damaging to other people.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:43 - Oct 6 with 3391 views | Digger77 |
| Heading into lockdown aren't we on 20:40 - Oct 6 by StokieBlue |
Your source is a non-peer reviewed newspaper which propagated the Obama passport theory, second hand smoke deniers, ozone depletion deniers and climate change deniers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times
I go back to my original point.
Don't post about things you don't know about or understand when they are potentially damaging to other people.
SB |
Other studies are available! And Sweden. [Post edited 6 Oct 2021 20:46]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
