As I mentioned, somebody is systematically going through all my comments on regional media over the past year and labeling them “spam”. They tell me I am, now, the only one who can see them.
As near as I can tell–and I have no data other than a couple notices on Facebook every day that 5-10 more posts have been deleted–it seems to be the NEWSPAPERS doing it. I was quite active regionally for a while, and I WAS VINDICATED. I was right. I was arguing, then, for what is become, finally, obvious now.
But just ponder that this was labeled “spam” and removed. And I will underscore the link is from March a YEAR AGO:
The numbers will speak for themselves, won’t they? Let’s allow them to do that. You, yourself, have offered a scientific hypothesis, that differing degrees of labor lockout between [our state and our neighbor] will lead to higher death rates in [our neighbor] over the course of this epidemic. It’s not a highly controlled experiment, but the two populations are pretty similar.
I myself predict death rates will be quite close. And the regrettable fact is that [our neighbor’s] labor lockout is nearly as restrictive as [our own]. They are quibbling over nearly nothing. The schools and restaurants are shut down in [our neighbor] too, as I understand it.
And you really betray ignorance of the scientific method when you conflate “science” with an alleged “consensus” of scientists. This is an old game, but one only played by ignorant people. When Copernicus was an army of one, was he wrong? Was Galileo? Was Lister?
The way the game is played for the dumb people is you make it in the interest somehow of one gang of scientists to go on record with X, Y, and Z. Then you SIMPLY PRETEND DISSENT DOES NOT EXIST. Or you accuse them of being “deniers”, or on some infernal payroll or other, as if your first gang didn’t depend wholly on the existence of the game for its survival.
Everyone is guessing. You are treating guesses as facts, and guesses as “science”. That’s just not smart.
You want a link? If you were attempting to inform yourself, you would already know what I’m talking about. But if you were attempting to inform yourself you would find your fingers unable to type phrases like “I believe in science and I believe the consensus view of qualified scientists.”
Put another way, if you were attempting to inform yourself, you would know there is and can be no firm and lasting consensus in situations of intrinsic doubt and bad data.
But here is a link: https://news.yahoo.com/oxford-study-suggests-millions…
I’m not sure how to respond to someone so out of touch that would think that I made that up. It’s certainly not a mark of intelligence or sound intuition.