All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!

Fighting Tao

Dohnjoe wrote: »

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/mvicaw/doctors_of_reddit_what_happened_when_you/

Medical staff posting anecdotal views of treating Covid deniers who had Covid. Similar stories to many I've read in the press. People will literally die out of spite and stupidity.

If covid deniers get covid, then surely the best option is to deny them medical treatment that will save their lives and use the medicine and equipment on other people. Fortunately for the covid deniers, most other humans have empathy and they do get the treatment.

NaFirinne

I wouldn't deny that covid19 exists - It's certainly not as bad as it was first made out to be. Our health care system is far to easily overwhelmed because of the extreme lack of will too improving our Health Care system for decades.

The solution to this by our government is to criminalise what used to be normal every day activities and imprision people in there own homes unless they get vaccinated and comply with the new digital certificates being fast tracked now through the EU.

In many respects this pandemic has been used unjustly to change our country into a Dictorial style state, where the people have to rely soley on the government for survival.

While many people believe that this course of action is about saving lives I disagree. This is about taking freedoms away and forcing people take regular vaccines for the rest of their lives or face criminal charges if they want to attend something as simple as a religious service.

The Lockdowns only decrease everyones quality of life, while people are still dying and even more are suffering because there not recieving other vital treatments that have been cancelled and postponed indefinetly due to the excuse of covid lockdowns.

The long term effects of these vaccines are unknown and could be far worse then covid itself and even how long they will be effective for is unknown. We are experiementing with People on mass, destroying there livelyhoods, not treating the sick, refusing religious people the rights to attend their services.

Professor Moriarty

Fighting Tao wrote: »

If covid deniers get covid, then surely the best option is to deny them medical treatment that will save their lives and use the medicine and equipment on other people. Fortunately for the covid deniers, most other humans have empathy and they do get the treatment.

I'm not so sure. It's important not to interfere with nature. The concepts of evolution and natural selection spring to mind.

Pinch Flat

NaFirinne wrote: »

I wouldn't deny that covid19 exists - It's certainly not as bad as it was first made out to be. Our health care system is far to easily overwhelmed because of the extreme lack of will too improving our Health Care system for decades.

The solution to this by our government is to criminalise what used to be normal every day activities and imprision people in there own homes unless they get vaccinated and comply with the new digital certificates being fast tracked now through the EU.

In many respects this pandemic has been used unjustly to change our country into a Dictorial style state, where the people have to rely soley on the government for survival.

While many people believe that this course of action is about saving lives I disagree. This is about taking freedoms away and forcing people take regular vaccines for the rest of their lives or face criminal charges if they want to attend something as simple as a religious service.

The Lockdowns only decrease everyones quality of life, while people are still dying and even more are suffering because there not recieving other vital treatments that have been cancelled and postponed indefinetly due to the excuse of covid lockdowns.

The long term effects of these vaccines are unknown and could be far worse then covid itself and even how long they will be effective for is unknown. We are experiementing with People on mass, destroying there livelyhoods, not treating the sick, refusing religious people the rights to attend their services.

So presumably you'd be happy with increased deaths over and above the current number (although reading your post you may not believe Covid was to blame). Also, no health system can cope with the exponential overwhelming that Covid brings - France and Germany are finding this out, both with stronger health systems than us.

As unpalatable as the lock down is, it's less palatable than people dying in their homes or in the back of an ambulances because the hospitals cannot cope or have run out of sedative drugs, oxygen and equipment key to intubation. Although in this scenario was to occur, the conspiracy set probably would have cried depopulation.

robinph

NaFirinne wrote: »

I wouldn't deny that covid19 exists - It's certainly not as bad as it was first made out to be. Our health care system is far to easily overwhelmed because of the extreme lack of will too improving our Health Care system for decades.

The solution to this by our government is to criminalise what used to be normal every day activities and imprision people in there own homes unless they get vaccinated and comply with the new digital certificates being fast tracked now through the EU.

Does the same apply to every country? Has every country that has implemented lockdowns done so because of underfunded health care systems for decades, and how are the Australian and New Zealand health care systems? Did they not lockdown because of superb funding?

Are lockdowns unique to Ireland, are vaccinations only happening in Ireland, is there only talk of vaccination passports in Ireland or the EU or have other countries been floating around the ideas too?

If it is all down to the poor funding of the Irish health system and the EU conspiring with the Irish government to bring in vaccine passport then how do you explain what is going on around the rest of the world?

King Mob

NaFirinne wrote: »

I wouldn't deny that covid19 exists - It's certainly not as bad as it was first made out to be.

"I wouldn't deny that the Nazis killed Jews, it's just not as many as historians claim because of the global conspiracy."

Same argument.

NaFirinne wrote: »

The solution to this by our government is to criminalise what used to be normal every day activities and imprision people in there own homes unless they get vaccinated and comply with the new digital certificates being fast tracked now through the EU.

In many respects this pandemic has been used unjustly to change our country into a Dictorial style state, where the people have to rely soley on the government for survival.

While many people believe that this course of action is about saving lives I disagree. This is about taking freedoms away and forcing people take regular vaccines for the rest of their lives or face criminal charges if they want to attend something as simple as a religious service.

Complete waffle and bull****.
Proclimations do not become more true the more dramatic you make them sound.
No one is being forced to get a vaccine.

NaFirinne wrote: »

The long term effects of these vaccines are unknown and could be far worse then covid itself and even how long they will be effective for is unknown. We are experiementing with People on mass, destroying there livelyhoods, not treating the sick, refusing religious people the rights to attend their services.

And more nonsense.
The vaccines have been tested and shown to be far far far safer than catching covid.
You cannot point to or suggest any possible side effects beyond vague scaremongering that you will not back up, support or explain. You've been challenged on this before, but of course you ignored and ran away. Yet, here you are claiming the same crap.

Additionally, you're claiming to be "worried" the possible long term effects of the vaccine, yet you are dismissing entirely the possible long term effects of covid.
You are declaring that they don't exist despite there being no studies of those effects to the same level and scale you'd demand of vaccines. This is contradictory and hypocritical and shows you understand that your own arguments are crap.
Again, you were challenged on this and ran away when you weren't able to address it.

So again, why are you making false claims and dishonest arguments to defend a conspiracy that you know is silly nonsense?

eddie73

Covid 19 is a better description of Coronavirus, as coronavirus has been around a hell of a long time.

The difficulties debating this topic is that the consensus lacks science. The WHO are still scrambling to keep up with the virus. Basing the virus on modelling as opposed to scientific deduction is also problematic.

The difficulty on the other side is that they range in opinion from bio war to seasonal flu. They are likely to jump from one bed to the other as quick as you change your partner in a barn dance.

The difficulty with everyone is that no-one likes to admit being wrong, and you see people holding onto opinions and strategies the same way as a gambling addict keeps backing a bad horse in the forlorn hope that it eventually comes in.

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

Covid 19 is a better description of Coronavirus, as coronavirus has been around a hell of a long time.

The difficulties debating this topic is that the consensus lacks science. The WHO are still scrambling to keep up with the virus. Basing the virus on modelling as opposed to scientific deduction is also problematic.

The difficulty on the other side is that they range in opinion from bio war to seasonal flu. They are likely to jump from one bed to the other as quick as you change your partner in a barn dance.

The difficulty with everyone is that no-one likes to admit being wrong, and you see people holding onto opinions and strategies the same way as a gambling addict keeps backing a bad horse in the forlorn hope that it eventually comes in.

I presume you are aware you're in a thread about Covid being a ruse to install global Communism and that all lockdown measures will be permanent..

That a valid opinion?

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I presume you are aware you're in a thread about Covid being a ruse to install global Communism and that all lockdown measures will be permanent..

That a valid opinion?

And how about the claim that the vaccines are part of a plot to depopulate the planet/track people/ alter their DNA to connect them to an AI.

It's kinda hard to claim "both sides" when one side is claiming stuff like that...

eddie73

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I presume you are aware you're in a thread about Covid being a ruse to install global Communism and that all lockdown measures will be permanent..

That a valid opinion?

I doubt very much global communism will be in situ anytime soon.
Permanent lockdowns don't require global communism.
For instance, restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained. The excuse for this?
1 Continued contingency against the spread of covid and its myriad of variants.
2 Global warming and carbon footprint. Stay local and keep the footprint down.

Is this a conspiracy theory or does it sound plausible?

King Mob

eddie73 wrote: »

I doubt very much global communism will be in situ anytime soon.
Permanent lockdowns don't require global communism.
For instance, restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained. The excuse for this?
1 Continued contingency against the spread of covid and its myriad of variants.
2 Global warming and carbon footprint. Stay local and keep the footprint down.

Is this a conspiracy theory or does it sound plausible?

It's not plausible because no one has suggested how doing this would benefit the people behind the conspiracy.

We've been asking for 280 pages and no one seems able to suggest anything better than global communist-nazi-satanists.

Do you agree that the suggestion that the pandemic has been orchastrated for the purposes of installing a communist world government is not a rational or supported thing to believe?
Would you go as far as saying that theory is wrong?

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

I doubt very much global communism will be in situ anytime soon.
Permanent lockdowns don't require global communism.
For instance, restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained. The excuse for this?
1 Continued contingency against the spread of covid and its myriad of variants.
2 Global warming and carbon footprint. Stay local and keep the footprint down.

Is this a conspiracy theory or does it sound plausible?

I think you meant to use the word "reason" in the bolded.

Masks will stay as long as the virus remains over a certain threat level, and obviously taking into account the level of vaccination in the country and the global situation. Even after mask mandates are lifted I presume some people will continue to wear them out of habit, precaution, etc (like in Asian countries where they are the norm to protect against pollution, seasonal illnesses, etc)

All that is normal and rational.

What's not rational is the notion that somehow measures will stay for some "ulterior" or nefarious motive as suggested by posters in this thread. Not a single one of them has explained why or how.

robinph

eddie73 wrote: »

I doubt very much global communism will be in situ anytime soon.
Permanent lockdowns don't require global communism.
For instance, restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained. The excuse for this?
1 Continued contingency against the spread of covid and its myriad of variants.
2 Global warming and carbon footprint. Stay local and keep the footprint down.

Is this a conspiracy theory or does it sound plausible?

If covid is well contained then what reason would there be for government to continue to impose restrictions, and where are the new variants coming from if it is well contained? What reason would their populations have to go along with those ideas and not vote them out of power?

How does anyone benefit from these lockdowns and requirements to wear masks continuing long term, past the needs of dealing with the pandemic?

PintOfView

eddie73 wrote: »

I doubt very much global communism will be in situ anytime soon.
Permanent lockdowns don't require global communism.
For instance, restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained. The excuse for this?
1 Continued contingency against the spread of covid and its myriad of variants.
2 Global warming and carbon footprint. Stay local and keep the footprint down.

Is this a conspiracy theory or does it sound plausible?

I don't agree with the idea that "restrictions on movement and compulsory mask wearing will more than likely remain indefinitely despite how well covid 19 is contained"

How would that make sense?
Restrictions on movement and mask wearing are completely logical and explainable responses to the virus.

For the virus to transmit it requires an infected person to exhale viral particles,
and an un-infected person to inhale or otherwise contract those particles.

Masks reduce the range of exhaled particles,
and protect the non-infected person (not the mask wearer)

If people are discouraged from travelling far from their homes then
the virus can't go on its own, and this dramatically reduces the transmission across the country
(it can still jump from house to house locally, but can't go from Dublin to Galway in one go)

So these two measures are completely sensible if we want to reduce transmission.

If, when a lot of people are vaccinated, Covid then comes under control (low numbers of new cases, and low deaths)
what would stop us firstly removing travel restrictions, and later the recommendations for masks?
(this would have to be done in stages, monitoring the results as we go)

It all depends on the virus, if it's gone then I, for one,
would not see the need for continued restrictions,
and would not support keeping them in place
(and I'd expect that would be the viewpoint of the vast majority)

eddie73

King Mob wrote: »

It's not plausible because no one has suggested how doing this would benefit the people behind the conspiracy.

We've been asking for 280 pages and no one seems able to suggest anything better than global communist-nazi-satanists.

Do you agree that the suggestion that the pandemic has been orchastrated for the purposes of installing a communist world government is not a rational or supported thing to believe?
Would you go as far as saying that theory is wrong?

It is not a rational thing to believe. Too big an operation and someone would eventually blow the lid.

Addressing your first point, anything is plausible if it gives people power and control. Whether this is likely or not might be a better question. I say no.
But if you were to suggest could governments keep regulations and control in situ to suit their agenda, (not satanist, communist, or nazi), I would say it's possible.

King Mob

eddie73 wrote: »

It is not a rational thing to believe. Too big an operation and someone would eventually blow the lid.

Ok. So the conspiracy theorists here who've been claiming this are wrong.

eddie73 wrote: »

Addressing your first point, anything is plausible if it gives people power and control.

Ok. So then if it's plausible, what is the benefit in forcing permanent mask wearing and social distancing when the virus is less of a threat?

Please explain what you believe is the specific benefits that could be gained by doing this.
Simply saying "power" is not specific. It's vague to the point of being meaningless.

If you can't suggest anything (like people have failed to do for these past 280 pages), please just say so.

Timberrrrrrrr

eddie73 wrote: »

It is not a rational thing to believe. Too big an operation and someone would eventually blow the lid.

Addressing your first point, anything is plausible if it gives people power and control. Whether this is likely or not might be a better question. I say no.
But if you were to suggest could governments keep regulations and control in situ to suit their agenda, (not satanist, communist, or nazi), I would say it's possible.

What would the agenda be though? Why would they do this and what would be gained? Are all governments in on this?

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

It is not a rational thing to believe. Too big an operation and someone would eventually blow the lid.

Addressing your first point, anything is plausible if it gives people power and control. Whether this is likely or not might be a better question. I say no.
But if you were to suggest could governments keep regulations and control in situ to suit their agenda, (not satanist, communist, or nazi), I would say it's possible.

What agenda?

Also you are veering into the hypothetical. Masks reduce the virus, to be more specific, what possible agenda could the e.g. Irish gov have beyond that?

eddie73

King Mob wrote: »

Ok. So the conspiracy theorists here who've been claiming this are wrong.


Ok. So then if it's plausible, what is the benefit in forcing permanent mask wearing and social distancing when the virus is less of a threat?

Please explain what you believe is the specific benefits that could be gained by doing this.
Simply saying "power" is not specific. It's vague to the point of being meaningless.

If you can't suggest anything (like people have failed to do for these past 280 pages), please just say so.

Mandatory restrictions paves the way for future restrictions. That may not be specific per say, but it is relevant.

Social distancing means that people can't meet up on their own terms. They will rely on virtual meet ups to do so in order not to breach social distancing. That means they can be monitored. This potential scenario should speak for itself.

This is hypothetical, but very worthy of consideration.

Timberrrrrrrr

eddie73 wrote: »

Mandatory restrictions paves the way for future restrictions. That may not be specific per say, but it is relevant.

Social distancing means that people can't meet up on their own terms. They will rely on virtual meet ups to do so in order not to breach social distancing. That means they can be monitored. This potential scenario should speak for itself.

This is hypothetical, but very worthy of consideration.

Again, monitored by whom and to what ends?

King Mob

eddie73 wrote: »

Mandatory restrictions paves the way for future restrictions. That may not be specific per say, but it is relevant.

What future restrictions? How do restrictions specifically for a virus pave the way for anything?

You're still being very vague to the point of meaninglessness.

eddie73 wrote: »

Social distancing means that people can't meet up on their own terms. They will rely on virtual meet ups to do so in order not to breach social distancing. That means they can be monitored. This potential scenario should speak for itself.

This is hypothetical, but very worthy of consideration.

Ok. So the claim now is that social distancing will be permanent so people will be forced to meet online so the government can listen to their conversations.
That's very silly.
I assume you've no evidence or basis to back this idea up?

You've also ignored the point about masks.
How will masks being permanent benefit the people behind the conspiracy?

Why do we have to keep repeating this question before it's acknowledged?

robinph

eddie73 wrote: »

Mandatory restrictions paves the way for future restrictions. That may not be specific per say, but it is relevant.

Social distancing means that people can't meet up on their own terms. They will rely on virtual meet ups to do so in order not to breach social distancing. That means they can be monitored. This potential scenario should speak for itself.

This is hypothetical, but very worthy of consideration.

So it's the shareholders of Zoom who are behind all of this last year then?

eddie73

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Again, monitored by whom and to what ends?

Most likely algorhytms. To what end is anyone's guess.
I think it is better for people to be aware of these potential scenarios as opposed to not thinking about them at all.

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

Social distancing means that people can't meet up on their own terms. They will rely on virtual meet ups to do so in order not to breach social distancing. That means they can be monitored. This potential scenario should speak for itself.

Strange and very vague insinuation. In this country, Irish people would be monitored by whom and why? and for what end?

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

Most likely algorhytms. To what end is anyone's guess.
I think it is better for people to be aware of these potential scenarios as opposed to not thinking about them at all.

Aware of what scenarios exactly?

Please spell it out with details.

Pinch Flat

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Strange and very vague insinuation. In this country, Irish people would be monitored by whom and why? and for what end?

Bill Gates listens to everything. Or George Soros. Or Satan. Not sure.

robinph

eddie73 wrote: »

Most likely algorhytms. To what end is anyone's guess.
I think it is better for people to be aware of these potential scenarios as opposed to not thinking about them at all.

You're now claiming that Skynet has taken over and created the virus?

There was a documentary about this I saw a few years ago hosted by the governer of California, although in that prophetic documentary it was claimed that some robots made of liquid metal would destroy us on behalf of AI systems rather than a virus. Can't get everything right I guess.

Dohnjoe

I'm getting vibes here of:

"We should entertain all sorts of zany scenarios, because you never know, it could hypothetically happen, nothing wrong with thinking about it, trails off.."

eddie73

King Mob wrote: »

What future restrictions? How do restrictions specifically for a virus pave the way for anything?

You're still being very vague to the point of meaninglessness.


Ok. So the claim now is that social distancing will be permanent so people will be forced to meet online so the government can listen to their conversations.
That's very silly.
I assume you've no evidence or basis to back this idea up?

You've also ignored the point about masks.
How will masks being permanent benefit the people behind the conspiracy?

Why do we have to keep repeating this question before it's acknowledged?

Maybe the masks are benign. Maybe they are serving a purpose. Maybe it's just theatre.
Or maybe masks are a display of compliance. Psychological, if you like. Who knows?

You'd swear I was peddling the conspiracy theory by the way you are ratcheting up the replies. I am just putting as many angles on the table to discuss.

Dohnjoe

eddie73 wrote: »

Maybe the masks are benign. Maybe they are serving a purpose. Maybe it's just theatre.
Or maybe masks are a display of compliance. Psychological, if you like. Who knows?

We do know. They are to reduce the virus.

Can you detail another reason?

You'd swear I was peddling the conspiracy theory by the way you are ratcheting up the replies. I am just putting as many angles on the table to discuss.

You are suggesting conspiracies whilst be deliberately careful not to actually detail them. When someone does that they know very well what they are doing.