We Will Not Comply | Ray Gillenwater We Will Not Comply | Ray Gillenwater - Page 7

starting strength gym
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 77

Thread: We Will Not Comply | Ray Gillenwater

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    73

    Default

    • texas starting strength seminar september 2020
    • wichita falls texas december seminar 2020
    In presenting widely accepted evidence to what appear to be people imperious to fact, I feel like the young medical resident doing the mandatory portion of her rotation on the psych ward, and was talking with a schizophrenic who was convinced he was dead. No amount of conversation, logic, or reasoning could convince him that he was not dead. So, the doctor had an idea. "Dead people can't feel things, can they?" she asked. "Of course not," he replied. So, she took her pen, and poked him in the hand. He flinched, and said "Ouch." The doctor said, "You felt that, didn't you? So, you can't be dead, right?" The patient paused for a moment, and then responded, "Well, I guess dead people CAN feel things."

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nighttrain View Post
    Don't we already restrict personal freedoms for the betterment of health and safety of others? Should an intoxicated person be able to freely drive their car down the street? Should a person be able to light up a cigarette in a restaurant? Should a person be able to freely distribute cocaine in a community? For a relatively unknown virus that we really don't know much about i don't fault the decision for temporary stay at home orders. I mean stores have prevention guidelines, like one way aisles, and emphasize 6 feet of distance but I witness people going the wrong way down the aisle, or reaching over my shoulder to grab something off the shelf, or even not covering their coughs while in public in this current situation. From an economical standpoint we also can't keep everything locked down either. There has to be some sort of middle ground. Everything doesn't have to be so binary.
    excellent points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Satch12879 View Post
    Its not we.

    The State is not we.
    well....."we" created it. and re-create it every 2-6 years. So, my kids are not me, but for goddamn sure I am responsible for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    This is so deeply stupid that it baffles me. You think the NIH = Science. But you represent the 70% of the general public caught up in this mess, and it's worth know your position.
    Truly curious. Not being sarcastic in the slightest. Where do you get your info? We can get into some pretty serious freshman year in college philosophy here (ie what is reality?). But Im interested, what does science equal?

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    42,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muntz View Post
    excellent points.
    I disagree.

    well....."we" created it. and re-create it every 2-6 years. So, my kids are not me, but for goddamn sure I am responsible for them.
    You cannot possibly believe this, unless you are 13. You are not 13.

    Truly curious. Not being sarcastic in the slightest. Where do you get your info? We can get into some pretty serious freshman year in college philosophy here (ie what is reality?). But Im interested, what does science equal?
    It equals the truth, and a way to determine the truth. It does not equal the writings of career bureaucrats and professional researchers covering their collective asses.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muntz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Satch12879
    Its not we.

    The State is not we.
    well....."we" created it. and re-create it every 2-6 years. So, my kids are not me, but for goddamn sure I am responsible for them.
    We recreate the State overy 2-6 years? How long have Brennon, Comey, Mueller, Strzok, Page, Clapper, Fauci, Berx, ad infinitum in "the state"?

    Have you noticed who wags the dog? It's there right in front you right now.

    What happens when an elected politician attempts to remove one of these people from our government?

    This is why nothing here makes sense to you. You actually believe these unelected, life-long members of our government have no power. I bet you also believe they can't be compromised & controlled.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple View Post
    imperious to fact
    A brief summary of your thought process.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    73

    Default

    I meant to say "impervious." Well, since not one person here has cited an actual fact, your jugdement is, well... impervious to fact.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    73

    Default

    I used to say that when I was thoroughly defeated in an argument too.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple View Post
    In presenting widely accepted evidence to what appear to be people imperious to fact, I feel like the young medical resident doing the mandatory portion of her rotation on the psych ward, and was talking with a schizophrenic who was convinced he was dead. No amount of conversation, logic, or reasoning could convince him that he was not dead. So, the doctor had an idea. "Dead people can't feel things, can they?" she asked. "Of course not," he replied. So, she took her pen, and poked him in the hand. He flinched, and said "Ouch." The doctor said, "You felt that, didn't you? So, you can't be dead, right?" The patient paused for a moment, and then responded, "Well, I guess dead people CAN feel things."
    This is a cute analogy, but the presumption you make is that you know the true nature of the reality of the situation, and the opposition is just a bunch of schizophrenics. While I admit it's true that there are some on here who are in flat out denial that there is even a virus, the real underpinnings of this argument are rooted in something far less psychotic. In fact, depending on how one views the situation, you might argue that "our" side is more compassionate, despite perhaps being less tangible.

    I've brought this up in the other thread before, but I'll bring it up again to make my point:

    We know that a 20 year lockdown would simply not be worth it. We intuitively understand that 20 years being locked down would create enormous economic and social effects that would outweigh the total damage of the virus. This would probably hold true even of a virus that was three times as deadly as some of the worst COVID-19 predictions. People who are pro-lockdown argue, though, that 2-3 months (or wherever we're at right now) is too short. So, somewhere between 3 months and 20 years of lockdown, there is a line in which we all intuitively understand that the socio-economic damage from a lockdown is too great. Why has no one advocating for a lockdown even examined where this line is? If they have, I would love to know where the line is approximated at. You all have accepted every statistic about the spread of COVID-19, the infection rate, the fatality rate, etc., but have not asked a single question about the back end cost. That cost is in lives, too, and quite frankly, it'll be much younger lives.

    Three years from now, when a 40 year old husband father of three who opened his new restaurant in January of 2020 blows his brains out because he was forced to shut down his restaurant, the business went under, the unemployment websites were down, his family is hungry, and all he's got is a life insurance policy with his name on it, then that should be considered a "lockdown death." The problem: You people won't track that statistic. You won't even give it the time of day, because it is completely out of sight and out of mind for you.

    Four years from now, when the 45 year old chronic pain patient who couldn't go to their chiropractor, massage therapist, gym, yoga class, etc.., and has instead turned to opioids to treat their pain, sticks the fentanyl-laden needle in their arm and dies, you won't attribute that to the lockdown. Why? It's just a stinky, dead fucking addict in the streets. You don't know their backstory, so how could we possibly call that a COVID-19 death? Yet, a guy who shows up at the hospital with trouble breathing and dies? That's an automatic +1 for your treasured body count.

    The 36 year old man who finally sees his doctor in September because he's had a lump on his right testicle, but couldn't get it checked when he noticed it in March, finds out he's got an aggressive form of testicular cancer. Maybe in March it was Stage I or II. In August, the diagnosis is grim: He'll be dead by 2021.

    I could go on and on and on for days about these little corner cases and niche scenarios. The reality is that they are going to rapidly start growing. They will not be instantaneous deaths. The shock value will not be nearly as sensational as today's COVID-19 death toll we get to salivate over when we wake up and drink our coffee. You'll just see half of them on an episode of LivePD a few years from now and go, "What the fuck is wrong with people?"

    Furthermore, might I remind you that the lockdown was designed to "flatten the curve." We widely understood that the infectious nature of the disease meant MOST people were going to get the virus. We just didn't want to overwhelm the health care system. That was the line most people bought into. So, the reality is that the people who will likely contract the virus and die from it, will probably do so anyway. We just don't want them clogging shit up at the hospitals because that's messy.

    If you take the above and then couple it with the ability of people to seemingly blindly accept that this lockdown business is the best thing for us, you're also giving up your freedoms without so much as a fight. Now, I know some people are passive about this. I'm guilty of this in the past. After 9/11, I thought, "Well, hell yeah, we gotta stop those terrorists." 20 years later and the Senate has just voted to allow the FBI to look at your browser history without a warrant... In what America does that even remotely seem Constitutional? But, in the name of fear, we all accepted this, and barely even bat an eyelash any longer when the government decides to do something to take away our freedoms. Sure, they have to put the word "terrorism" somewhere in the bill, but that's all it takes. The same will go for the words "pandemic," "COVID-19," etc... As long as they preface their bills with these buzzwords, you all will let them do anything.

    There is a cost to this lockdown. You have not even begun to ask what that cost is. You are so blindly following the line that the virus must be stopped at all costs. The problem with stopping things at all costs is that we often go into debt to pay those costs. That debt is going to come in the form of tragic, isolated deaths that you people will not even begin to acknowledge as being related to your precious lockdown. And all for what? So that we can all celebrate flattening the curve, putting tens of millions out of work, and still having the same basic outcome?

    Perhaps you're the schizophrenic unable to clearly see a reality outside of what's been fed to you.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Did someone just compare the harm of pushing your shopping cart in the opposite direction to the retarded COVID-19 floor markings with DRUNK DRIVING.

    If you haven't experienced the shiver pleasure you get looking into another person's angry and confused eyes while you defiantly push your cart past them in opposition to the arrows on the floor, you are really missing out. They might as well replace these surgical masks with horse bits and get Temple Grandin in to redesign supermarkets. The most compliant and dedicated droplet dodgers could get a special symbol branded on their skin to inspire others. Preferably on their forehead.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    187

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple
    imperious to fact
    A brief summary of your thought process.
    I meant to say "impervious."
    I didn't.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •