If there is no such thing as herd immunity, there remains the problem that there may be no such thing as a vaccine.

Indefinite lockdown.

The arguments against both herd immunity and waiting for a vaccine, and against indefinite lockdown should be heard.

He doesn't want to.
He is immune to hearing.

The idea that one doesn't develop immunity to a virus one has overcome seems patently absurd to me.

How does one resist or overcome it, if it is not by virtue of a functioning immune system?

Not by lockdowns, that is for sure.
The claims about cases of secondary infection seem poorly evidenced, far-fetched and anecdotal. And convenient to a power-crazed lunatic's mission, whatever it may be, but which I very much doubt the good faith of.

I'd rather take my chances with the virus than the government.
He ignores a body, however flawed or minority he claims it is, of scientific opinion. He makes a statement that he cannot understand. Rather than seeking more scientific debate to help clear uncertainty, he shuts it down and shuts it out, politicising science. He is dangerous.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ben Pile

Ben Pile Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @clim8resistance

16 Oct
A government that has just caused millions of redundancies claims it will "create" 460,000 "green jobs".

It is the same promise the Labour and coalition governments made, a decade and more ago.

They didn't happen. And even if they did, they would cause unemployment elsewhere...
The UK will not be "carbon neutral" by 2050.

The government -- all parties, in fact -- have not tested the public's willingness to put up with the policies.

It does not know how much it will cost to reach Net Zero.

It does not know how it will be achieved.
What will happen is that the government will continue to announce new policies in line with emissions-reduction targets. This will cause economic chaos as companies try to find ways to accommodate regulation. Many will go out of business. Skills & trade will be lost.
Read 12 tweets
15 Oct
Imagine not understanding why a seemingly scientific injunction to suspend democratic norms, reverse and constrain economic growth and limit material freedoms might have "politicized" the issue.

But it's the "deniers" who are "ideological", right?
It's all hidden in the putative equivalence of the link between smoking increasing the incidence of cancer and the effect of CO2 on the atmosphere.

But global warming is not cancer. Global warming is not even a first-order problem, as cancer undoubtedly is.
It's the way, way, way downstream consequences of global warming -- nth-order effects -- which are the alleged problems. They are very far from the scientific "consensus". They are not part of it. Very many of them are political. Some are categorically mystical.
Read 15 tweets
14 Oct
This fraud, using the *same* data has been going on for a few years now.

We know it's a fraud because you cannot accidentally produce the UN's claim in good faith.
Here is when I spotted the same fraud, a few years ago.

cliscep.com/2018/09/06/mis…
The New Climate Economy report produced by @NewClimateEcon, which is part of @WorldResources and chaired by Nick Stern is a project that cost the UK taxpayer £millions.
Read 22 tweets
11 Oct
From 45 minutes to ready WMDs, to Covid's mode of transmission, there is a pattern to craven, morally bankrupt authoritarianism...

It is "denial" that vexes them more than the putative threat.
It is always about *denial*.

It's not hard to read this as terror about loss of control of narrative.

Accusations of "denial" are the shortcut to proving the interlocutor's bad faith: nefarious connections, sinister motivations, profit-seeking and malign intent.
Read 6 tweets
11 Oct
She has a good track record of brokering international deals that lead to strong and stable domestic leadership and strong public backing.
May's deal famously united the nation and gave her administration authority that no other administration in a century has enjoyed.
Read 4 tweets
11 Oct
And another. Quotes a line from the piece which is its fig leaf, as though it was not the piece's fig leaf.
The piece in summary is "There should be no expectation that scientists fall into line with a consensus.... Except that scientists who do not fall into line with a consensus are industry-funded propagandists who are only in it for the money".
Throughout the piece, claims like "it is misleading to suggest that giving up on suppression is anything but an outlier position" go unsubstantiated.

Even the WHO has now stated a position AGAINST lockdowns.

She's a bullshit artist.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!