jsasker007
5 year old buck +
Trump 2020
I was working for a rent a car company at an airport on 9/11 and for months after. I was commissioned and didn’t make much money for a few months. This is going to be much worse. I actually became good friends with some of the police officers they sent in to patrol it for months after. It was just airport employees and security forces in the airport, no customers. Multiply our small airport by all the airports, crazy numbers. If anyone buys used vehicles your time is coming. 9/11 crashed the used car market as all the rental car companies had to dump their fleets at auctions. I have to imagine this will dwarf 9/11.And those news stories of planes packed like sardines are B.S. again the news picked one plane to hype a story. I can’t believe American Airlines even flew the plane it was so empty.
At least your little guy's hair looks goodHobby Lobby in our nearby town opened a few days ago. Today they got shut down by the state police. Guess they have to answer to their boss, Gov Prickster, who coincidentally we caught fishing today.
View attachment 29731
No, we can't. Move on how? With the new normal? No more hugs, sports, school, church, travel, commerce, 80% of people thinking they'll die if they go outside? If the smartest among us can't hold up their narrative, what good is it? Science needs to stay in the ring and argue this out, cause their narrative is BS.So here's a novel idea. When someone is killed by getting run over by a car, we should evaluate whether they were in good enough shape to get out of the way before we assign "death by auto accident". For example, if they're in a wheelchair, then obviously it's death by disability. If they're old and can't see well enough to make out the oncoming vehicle, it's death by age. If an eight year old runs out into the street after a ball, it's death by youth. And so on. Obviously I'm being facetious, but I would love to hear a reasonable alternative to listing COVID on the death certificate when someone who is sick with a deadly disease passes away. I mean, there's no way that someone who's COVID positive gets hit by a car and the cause of death gets listed as COVID. But in cases that aren't so clear, who exactly is supposed to make these decisions, and what's the criteria? There is something to be said for clarity. Yeah, it's an imperfect system and there are bound to be a few cases that fall through the cracks, but you know - it's not like anyone is trying to hide anything. The dogma from day one has been that COVID kills people with underlying health issues. It's a deadly disease, period. Can we just move on?
I don't know where you get your information, but I will respectfully correct your illusion that there wasn't a HUGE discussion nationwide on the merits of wearing masks, with guidance as to whether it was impactful or not. Science certain DID NOT "just get around to telling us yesterday". In point of fact, we - as scientists and medical professionals - have been touting the facts since day one. Non-N95 masks protect OTHER people from you. They aren't for your benefit. This has been made clear time and time again. Moreover, N95 masks are only 95% effective. Hence, even they are not fully protective. So, deadly negligence just doesn't even come close. In fact, it is such as distortion of the truth that I can't fathom how you would write that. Sorry, but honestly? You just triaged yourself. How is one supposed to engage in a valid argument, when facts become fluid?No, we can't. Move on how? With the new normal? No more hugs, sports, school, church, travel, commerce, 80% of people thinking they'll die if they go outside? If the smartest among us can't hold up their narrative, what good is it? Science needs to stay in the ring and argue this out, cause their narrative is BS.
Your rationale would mean nobody dies from cancer. People with terminal cancer end up not eating or drinking at their end. Did that person die of starvation, or because their body was so riddled with cancer pain they could no longer eat or tolerate consciousness? There's no point in researching a cure to cancer if it's starvation that kills people that happen to have cancer with this logic.
Science just got around to telling us yesterday that non-N95 masks will not stop 'rona particles from getting in or out of your bucket. Is that deadly negligence towards the most vulnerable among us that were promised it was safe to go buy paint and mulch at Menards if they wore a mask? You darn right.
https://kstp.com/coronavirus/govern...wearing-face-masks-covid-19-pandemic/5730911/
... How is one supposed to engage in a valid argument, when facts become fluid?...
Fauci himself said in March that masks do nothing. Birx said in March. Masks do nothing. Except for healthcare workers. Then there was some fear mongering going on about all these people running around that didn’t know they had the virus and were spreading it. So all the infectious disease experts. And those i mentioned changed they’re tune. Now you say, they’ve always said masks were needed for everybody. Really who is listening anymore. The “experts”. Have changed their tune and advice constantly through this. So here’s some interesting news from UPMC. A 55,000 bed system in PA and NY. Guess what, they now believe that asymptomatic spreaders are much less than believed. Of the thousands tested only 3 had it. That were asymptomatic. They now think this whole business about asymptomatic spread is overstated. how many infectious disease experts are out there now. Lol. They all seem to have different advice. And All advice changes daily.I don't know where you get your information, but I will respectfully correct your illusion that there wasn't a HUGE discussion nationwide on the merits of wearing masks, with guidance as to whether it was impactful or not. Science certain DID NOT "just get around to telling us yesterday". In point of fact, we - as scientists and medical professionals - have been touting the facts since day one. Non-N95 masks protect OTHER people from you. They aren't for your benefit. This has been made clear time and time again. Moreover, N95 masks are only 95% effective. Hence, even they are not fully protective. So, deadly negligence just doesn't even come close. In fact, it is such as distortion of the truth that I can't fathom how you would write that. Sorry, but honestly? You just triaged yourself. How is one supposed to engage in a valid argument, when facts become fluid?
I've said this many times on multiple forums, but let me be clear here: masks are for other people's protection!!! That's why doctors wear them in surgery. Wear them when you can't social distance, if you care about whether you might make other folks sick. If you want to protect yourself, stay home. Otherwise, practice distancing and wash your hands frequently. This is stuff I can cite in my sleep, since it's what we've said since day one.
Here's a link to one of many, many articles on the subject, dated in this case April 9th: https://www.sciencealert.com/this-i...r-you-should-wear-a-mask-is-just-so-confusing
Deadly negligence or willful ignorance? Hmmm....