Seems a bit of a mystery to me that masks and social distancing completely eliminated normal seasonal flu deaths but not COVID-19.
I see a few possible explanations.
One explanation is that this novel coronavirus is much more catchable by its nature. Maybe. The other explanation is that normal seasonal flu deaths were never real. They are based on excess death estimates, I believe, not counting.
Was our belief in 50K seasonal flu deaths per year in the United States ever substantiated, or is it just a way to sell vaccinations? All I know for sure is that I've never heard of anyone dying of seasonal flu complications, and I've been around awhile.
When you hear someone in the news talking about science, that isn't science. That's someone's interpretation of science, and it has the same level of credibility as a political opinion, which is low.
None of us are "following the science." We are following people who tell us they can accurately interpret science and create rational policy from it. Sometimes they are right. But you and I can't tell in advance which times those people are right. We only imagine we can.
Are the people interpreting science for us usually right, usually wrong, or something closer to a coin toss? You and I have no idea.
Here are six easy ways to know you live in a propaganda bubble and the Fake News Industry is malicious:
1. The Fake News tells you Trump is "lying" about the election being stolen as opposed to actually believing it, the way tens-of-millions of his supporters do. The Fake News mind-reading act is propaganda.
2. The Fake News tells you all of the election fraud claims have been rejected by courts. But where is the master list of all the (non-crazy) claims and which court rejected them and why? If that list doesn't exist, assume you have been fed propaganda, not news.
Here's a big dog that isn't barking: I've been saying in public since the election that the design of our system doesn't just ALLOW potential fraud, it GUARANTEES it. By design. Because it is both feasible (we have learned) and the potential gain is enormous.
Under those conditions, a reasonable person with even modest experience in life understands that massive fraud HAD to have happened. You don't need to observe it to know it with certainty.
By analogy, if I drop ice cream on a hot sidewalk in summer, I don't need to stay and observe it to know it melted. I can walk away and be equally certain. Our election system (all of it) is like that ice cream. Don't tell me I have to show you proof it melted. It melted.
If we can't audit our nation's vote-counting software because the company claims it is proprietary information, I'm totally cool with that. But obviously the election has to be thrown out in whole for that very reason. I see no room for compromise on this point.
Who agreed to a no-audit deal with an election software company? Name ANYTHING you have ever heard that is dumber. Literally anything. You can't.
Will the Supreme Court give a free pass to an election that was non-transparent BY DESIGN? Accidental would be one thing, but non-auditable voting machines are not an accident.
CNN keeps reporting that claims of election fraud are "baseless." I had to look up the word to be sure I still know what it means.
Merriam Webster defines "baseless" as "having no basis in reason or fact"
Given that courts have not ruled on all of the MANY alleged election fraud allegations, I agree to not call them verified facts. But does that qualify as baseless? The definition includes "reason," not just fact.
Let's look at the reason.
Crime happens 100% of the time when you have extreme motivation matched with ample opportunity. We have learned in the past week there are LOTS of opportunities for cheating in our porous election system so long as you can control the witnessing process, which is the case.
Democrats are employing some excellent brainwashing technique to defend the election as fair. Here are some of their tricks.
1. "Refuses to concede" is making you think past the sale that Trump's legal challenges will fail. This is their main persuasion trick.
2. "Audit" is being used to make a simple recount of (alleged) fraudulent ballots seem as if that could potentially find all types of fraud, which a recount is not designed to do. When none is found (because they are not looking), they will declare it proof there was no fraud.
3. "No evidence" is being used to reframe "plenty of evidence but not yet proven in court."
The best brainwashing trick the Democrats are using on the public is the assertion that because we do not yet having court-confirmed proof of election fraud it means there was no fraud.
For a normal crime -- let's say a burglary or murder -- no evidence of a crime could reasonably be interpreted to mean no crime happened. But an election should be seen as a "situation." And this particular situation GUARANTEES fraud to some extent.
Fraud ALWAYS happens when you have this setup: 1) Lots to gain by cheating, 2) Cheating is feasible, and 3) Lots of people involved (so you know some crooks are in the mix). That describes our election system.
Question for Democrats: If you are 100% certain Trump is OBVIOUSLY a racist, how do you explain all the Black people who DON'T see it? Can there be that many Black people who don't recognize OBVIOUS racism?
The alternative hypothesis is that the media is capable of convincing most (but not all) of the public of any-damned-thing, and the left-leaning brainwashers decided to tell the public Trump is a racist. But what about all of the examples that prove their case, you ask?
Democrats don't have access to this information because the news is so siloed. But Republicans generally know the racism examples are fake news. The Fine People Hoax is the prime example. Half the country actually believes Trump called neo-Nazis "fine people." He did not.
I’m working on some persuasion ideas for avoiding a civil war. Suggestions welcome.
We don’t have any good common enemies to divert our attention. Coronavirus didn’t bring us together. Our national adversaries might pester us with fake ads, but we won’t notice them in the sea of domestic bullshit.
Maybe on Election Day Trump can announce he is releasing the UFO secrets the government has been hiding. But that would be too obvious.
If you think you can tell which leaders did the best job with coronavirus, you are not trained to compare things rationally. I’ll give you a few reasons why, but there are dozens...
Trump used the “excuse” of the coronavirus to claw back manufacturing from China. Not every leader would have made that play. How many lives does an improved economy save in the long term? No one knows.
And how many decisions did Trump make that DISAGREED with the experts? I’m not aware of any.
I wonder if I could deprogram a Democrat from TDS on livestream. I’d start by asking them to make a list of national priorities.
Then I’d talk them through the list with the goal of showing them how many relevant facts their news sources leave out. The goal would be to weaken their confidence in their own opinion.
If the Green New Deal is a high priority, I’d point to California and Germany being failed experiments in green energy. And I’d update their knowledge about nuclear energy that is always lacking on the left.
We need an EO allowing some places to be designated "experimental single home" properties where entrepreneurs can rapidly build and test low-cost homes that are entirely different from what local building codes allow.
Still need an engineer to sign off, but risk is low, payback huge.
Once you have some single-family home designs that are insanely affordable and liveable, you start experimenting with small community designs that are optimized for healthy interactions and low crime opportunity. Make fifty different small communities. Learn.
If in 2020 you still think President Trump once called neo-Nazis “fine people,” you are a low-information voter. It is the most debunked fake news in American history.
This is where the low-information voters stream in to say, “But I heard him say it! It is on video!” Then I show you the entire non-edited video and you see he said literally the opposite and condemned neo-Nazis in direct language.
Then the low-information voters say, “But no one marching with neo-Nazis are good people!” Then I tell you I interviewed attendees and learned the normies were herded to safety by police upon arrival and never got near the neo-Nazis. Nor did they support them.