Full House at the Rangers game right now

[Jason19th]

No you don’t. It is irresponsible and conflicts with all accepted science.

[honus94566]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

No you don’t. It is irresponsible and conflicts with all accepted science.

Yes, he does. Refer to his original post. It's pretty clear, actually.

Your opinion is just that, your opinion. It's no more or less important than his.

[abothebear]

It’s great that they are letting healthy people decide what they want to do with their lives. What a strange idea.

[YankeeCollector]

Originally Posted by abothebear

it’s great that they are letting healthy people decide what they want to do with their lives. What a strange idea.

100%

[FrankWakefield]

0%

[oldjudge]

Allowing full attendance at a sporting event, especially without mandating mask wearing, is idiocy at this point. I agree that people should be free to act as they choose, except when it starts affecting others. Get everyone vaccinated and I’m fine with this. Until then, I think events like this just lead to the continuation of the pandemic.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Allowing full attendance at a sporting event, especially without mandating mask wearing, is idiocy at this point. I agree that people should be free to act as they choose, except when it starts affecting others. Get everyone vaccinated and I’m fine with this. Until then, I think events like this just lead to the continuation of the pandemic.

Masks are required at all their home games. Did everyone comply? I don't know, but probably not. But that's going to hold true any place that masks are required.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by abothebear

It’s great that they are letting healthy people decide what they want to do with their lives. What a strange idea.

I'm going to be the grammar guy for a moment and point out that you misspelled "asymptomatic."

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

No you don’t. It is irresponsible and conflicts with all accepted science.

Are you talking about the same science that said they "have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission" of the Coronavirus? That science?

[Jason19th]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Are you talking about the same science that said they "have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission" of the Coronavirus? That science?

No, I am talking about the peer reviewed and rigorous study that has been done by the Centers for Disease Control over the last year plus. I am talking about the studies that have been completed by world renown Universities in America and Europe. I am not talking about a self serving statement made early in an outbreak by a totalitarian government.
Let’s stop pretending that this is a political or even disputed issue. Covid is an airborne virus that is spread by droplets. We are within a couple months of widespread immunity and transmission will drop. Why can’t we just wait a bit more and finish the job. Baseball can be done much more safely than Texas is deciding to do. A small sacrifice of having 25% capacity would have a huge impact.

I am not asking for the world to close. I am not asking to close many business. I agree with the science that says that most kids should be back in person. All I am asking is that we don’t pack 50,000 people into a stadium for a couple of months

Jason Mishelow

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

We are within a couple months of widespread immunity and transmission will drop.

We're also about 13 months past "two weeks to flatten the curve."

You do what you feel is right for yourself. Nobody will fault you for that. But let others do what they feel is right for themselves too...including going to ball games. If you don't want to go, don't go. But don't call other people irresponsible because they want to go. Is someone criticizing you for doing what you want to do? I'm guessing not. So why are you doing it to others? Who are you that only your opinion matters?

[packs]

I think it's natural for people to worry for themselves. The pandemic has taught us that other people's actions can have consequences for you re: getting sick. That's why they call events that people attended in the past super spreader events. They affected people who weren't there.

[Jason19th]

[QUOTE=vintagetoppsguy;2090800]We're also about 13 months past "two weeks to flatten the curve

That was never science, that was wishful thinking. That did not come from scientist.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

That was never science, that was wishful thinking. That did not come from scientist.

I agree with you here. But isn't "We are within a couple months of widespread immunity and transmission will drop" wishful thinking too? Where is the science to back this up?

A good percentage of people won't get the vaccination. I won't. I'm not trying to disparage anyone that does, but I just don't understand why someone would inject themselves with something with so little testing? I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I just don't think enough testing has been conducted.

You have a company like Johnson and Johnson that just two years ago paid out nearly $4B to settle cancer lawsuits from their baby powder. Come on! These guys can't even safely make baby powder and folks are going to trust them with a vaccine? Yeah, good luck with that.

And not to mention that none of the vaccines are 100% effective. I think we're a long way off from widespread immunity and a drop in transmission. So, I can either let fear take over, or go about living my life as normal. I choose the latter...just like those fans at the baseball game.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You do what you feel is right for yourself. Nobody will fault you for that. But let others do what they feel is right for themselves too...including going to ball games. If you don't want to go, don't go. But don't call other people irresponsible because they want to go. Is someone criticizing you for doing what you want to do? I'm guessing not. So why are you doing it to others? Who are you that only your opinion matters?

What I feel is right for me is to go speeding around in my car while drunk. Good to know that nobody will fault me for that.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

What I feel is right for me is to go speeding around in my car while drunk. Good to know that nobody will fault me for that.

I have been thinking about taking up drinking again so I can do that. If I remember right it was a lot of fun in high school.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

What I feel is right for me is to go speeding around in my car while drunk. Good to know that nobody will fault me for that.

Let me reword it for the mentally impaired. If people aren't breaking any laws or causing intentional harm to others, they should be left alone to do their own thing.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

What I feel is right for me is to go speeding around in my car while drunk. Good to know that nobody will fault me for that.

Exactly.
Please do it in poor driving conditions at high speed around a number of large and solid brick walls, and preferably with the car loaded with like-minded simpletons.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Exactly.
Please do it in poor driving conditions at high speed around a number of large and solid brick walls, and preferably with the car loaded with like-minded simpletons.

How does one connect an illegal activity with a legal one? Flimsy comparison

[Gnep31]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

What I feel is right for me is to go speeding around in my car while drunk. Good to know that nobody will fault me for that.

Respectfully you are comparing apples to oranges. In your example you would be breaking the law. There is no law stating anyone has to get injected with a vaccine....especially one we are crossing our fingers and hoping works.

I have fingers crossed on both hands and I pray it works, but knowing a little bit about pharma I'm not holding my breath and I certainly won't be their guinea pig.

I could also potentially spread the common flu or cold in which susceptible individuals could die from. Are you advocating for making it law that anyone who is sick cannot go out into public?

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by Gnep31

Respectfully you are comparing apples to oranges. In your example you would be breaking the law. There is no law stating anyone has to get injected with a vaccine....especially one we are crossing our fingers and hoping works.

I could also potentially spread the common flu or cold in which susceptible individuals could die from. Are you advocating for making it law that anyone who is sick cannot go out into public?

Actually it is apples to apples. You, unfortunately, let vintagetoppsguy sidetrack you. The discussion was about calling a certain behavior irresponsible.

Ask yourself this, if it weren't against the law to drive while drunk, would you? Would you consider that responsible behavior?

Nowhere in my response do I advocate for creating any laws.

I do consider driving while drunk irresponsible.
I do consider going to a packed baseball game during a pandemic without proper safety protocols irresponsible.
I do consider going out in public while active with the flu to be irresponsible.

What's wrong with calling drunk drivers irresponsible?
What's wrong with calling people who go to a packed baseball game during a pandemic irresponsible?
What's wrong with calling people who knowingly go out in public while they have the flu irresponsible?

Who got their panties in a twist and became the PC Police?

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You do what you feel is right for yourself. Nobody will fault you for that. But let others do what they feel is right for themselves too...including going to ball games. If you don't want to go, don't go. But don't call other people irresponsible because they want to go. Is someone criticizing you for doing what you want to do? I'm guessing not. So why are you doing it to others? Who are you that only your opinion matters?

It's also good to know that since I don't call people who don't want to drive drunk irresponsible, they shouldn't call me irresponsible for wanting to drive drunk.

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Let me reword it for the mentally impaired. If people aren't breaking any laws or causing intentional harm to others, they should be left alone to do their own thing.

Driving drunk isn't causing intentional harm to others. It's just a side product ... collateral damage. A law was passed to make it illegal to drive drunk because of that potential collateral damage (not every drunk driving escapade ends with someone being injured or killed). People gathering in large crowds during a pandemic without masks and social distancing can create a side product ... collateral damage. There is a potential for people to pass the virus to others who then pass it to others. Potentially, some people may get very sick and even die.

Are people who drive drunk irresponsible?
Are people who gather in a large crowd without masks during a pandemic irresponsible?

[Oscar_Stanage]

I wear a mask because it is common sense to do so. I do not need a scientific study to prove or disprove whether or not this is effective.

I will listen to science as soon as it becomes consistent, regardless of political affiliation.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Are you talking about the same science that said they "have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission" of the Coronavirus? That science?

This is such a specious post. Using the logic on display here, we can cite any number of positions held by doctors/scientists in the past, going back centuries, and use that as a reason to call them wrong and foolish today. But we all know that knowledge evolves. Things we didn't know on Day X, especially about novel subjects, we come to learn in Day X +++.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by MattyC

This is such a specious post. Using the logic on display here, we can cite any number of positions held by doctors/scientists in the past, going back centuries, and use that as a reason to call them wrong and foolish today. But we all know that knowledge evolves. Things we didn't know on Day X, especially about novel subjects, we come to learn in Day X +++.

Yeah, but the fact of the matter is that we're not going back centuries; we're only going back a little over a year. Nice try though. You get an E for effort.

[mr2686]

I am a potato!

[dstudeba]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Yeah, but the fact of the matter is that we're not going back centuries; we're only going back a little over a year. Nice try though. You get an E for effort.

You are the one who started with a deliberately misleading post. Yes it is a little over a year, but in terms of the amount of research that had been at the time and the amount of research that has been done since it is a huge amount of time. But that doesn't fit your agenda so you will disregard it.

I don't give a flying flip if you get the vaccine or go to a baseball game or do whatever makes you feel good. This isn't about my views on Covid, it is an objection to your cherry picking scientific examples to meet your needs.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by dstudeba

You are the one who started with a deliberately misleading post. Yes it is a little over a year, but in terms of the amount of research that had been at the time and the amount of research that has been done since it is a huge amount of time. But that doesn't fit your agenda so you will disregard it.

I don't give a flying flip if you get the vaccine or go to a baseball game or do whatever makes you feel good. This isn't about my views on Covid, it is an objection to your cherry picking scientific examples to meet your needs.

You missed the point of my post, so let me make it a little more clear for you. I'm tired of being told that we need to listen to science...the same science that is constantly changing. I only gave one example of that, but if you would you like others so I don't seem to be cherry picking or come across as misleading then I can certainly provide them.

My entire point was this. People need to stop telling others to listen to science and let people do their own thing...and not criticize them or call them irresponsible for doing so. Just remember, this "science" is from the same brilliant minds () that tell us we should double mask, but are photographed at a baseball game without their mask.

[dstudeba]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You missed the point of my post, so let me make it a little more clear for you. I'm tired of being told that we need to listen to science...the same science that is constantly changing. I only gave one example of that, but if you would you like others so I don't seem to be cherry picking or come across as misleading then I can certainly provide them.

My entire point was this. People need to stop telling others to listen to science and let people do their own thing...and not criticize them or call them irresponsible for doing so. Just remember, this "science" is from the same brilliant minds () that tell us we should double mask, but are photographed at a baseball game without their mask.

Yes science constantly evolves, I would hope that people engaging in science learn something from their experiments and observations and push our knowledge forward. This is not a bad thing.

My point is that you have an agenda and you use specific cherry picked examples to push that agenda. When current science doesn't back up what you want you disparage it. When you want to use science to back up what you say you tout that you hold a water license from the State of Texas.

You want to get back to your life, we all do. Just say that and you live in a place where you can do that. You don't need to disparage science to be able to do it.

As I said before I don't care. There are 3 results I see

1) You don't get covid
2) You get covid and survive
3) You get covid and die

As long as you don't spread it to others, I don't care. You do you.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You missed the point of my post, so let me make it a little more clear for you. I'm tired of being told that we need to listen to science...the same science that is constantly changing.

Whenever you see one of the several variations of this comment, you can be assured that the person saying it is not a practitioner of science.

All science is provisional and necessarily falsifiable. It follows a rigorous process of hypothesis, testing, analysis, and peer review and represents the best current explanation of the natural world. As more information is learned, and as testing and analysis techniques improve, science moves forward and, in some cases, overturns the prior best explanations.

Anyone who expects scientific understanding to be immutable is confusing it with religion.

And since every thread needs a card: