COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 517

starting strength gym
Page 517 of 2381 FirstFirst ... 1741746750751551651751851952756761710171517 ... LastLast
Results 5,161 to 5,170 of 23808

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #5161
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    374

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    • starting strength seminar february 2023
    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Ebner View Post
    This is nothing new, you come to expect it after a while.

    Its statements like these that have set off Mr. Hurling's alarm, and he's right. This is an ancient anti-semetic trope that claims that all Jews have a secret, hidden, "dual loyalty" to Israel or Jewry or Zion or some such other nonsense (it has been around long before the modern state of Israel) and every Jew is secretly waiting for the right opportunity (or signal from the Elders or whatever) to betray their home country in favor of a mysterious, undefined, greater Jewish good. The Dreyfus Affair in France is perhaps the textbook example of this particular trope being played out.
    I know you are speaking generally here, and you already said I wasn't "hostile" (which I appreciate you for picking up on) but it's interesting that I, and from what I can remember nobody else in this thread either, said anything like "all Jews have a secret, hidden, "dual loyalty"". It really does seem that the definition of anti-Semitism has now been expanded to include any criticism of Zionism, as Jared Kushner himself admitted in his 2019 New York Times opinion piece President Trump Is Defending Jewish Students.

    Nobody here has accused all Jews of holding Zionist views, either. At all. The fact "alarms" are going off regardless is bizarre.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Ebner View Post
    The reality of the situation is that there are zero members of Congress or the Senate who are Israeli citizens. Being born a Jew does not automatically make one a citizen of Israel. You have to be born in Israel to be a naturalized citizen (duh...). There may be an actual Israeli dual-citizen somewhere among the ranks of "the higher levels of US government", considering that category includes thousands of people, but I doubt it, as the state department takes that issue very seriously, and having served in a foreign army automatically disqualifies you from working for the State Department.

    Jews do enjoy a right of return, whereby a Jew who returns to Israel can become an Israeli citizen, but you have to go through the normal citizenship channels (learn Hebrew, join the army, etc.) and aren't just automatically granted citizenship once you set foot on Israeli soil. Incidentally, the right of return is not unique to Israel--20 or so other countries give their ethnic diasporas the same opportunity, including France, Ireland, Armenia, Poland, Germany, Greece, Ghana, Spain, etc.
    Of course dual citizenship is not illegal for any American, or for representatives in Congress, but I think there should be more transparency. I have no idea how many dual nationality American Israelis there are in government, nor how many are eligible based on their religion and ancestry, and neither do you. As a nationalist, the way the definition of "anti-Semitism" has been expanded is worrying, and it certainly has a chilling effect on free speech.

    It should also be noted that Israel's Law of Return is a foundation stone of Zionism itself, and its mission to bring back the Jewish diaspora to Israel - not just any nation, but an entire religion's spiritual homeland and according to the religion's eschatology the future seat of global governance after an end times prophecy has been realised.

    The religious significance of their Law of Return should not be downplayed, and is highlighted by the fact that "Jews who have converted to another religion are not eligible to immigrate under the Law of Return, even though are still Jews according to halakha".

    Taken from: Law of Return - Wikipedia

    Given Israel's history, their specific Law of Return is uniquely positioned in terms of its ethnic, religious and national significance. None of the other countries' Laws of Return you mentioned have quite the same characteristics. To qualify my own view, this doesn't mean, therefore, that all Jewish people should be viewed with suspicion, or are planning a hit-and-run. I feel the need to state that considering the amount of paranoia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Ebner View Post
    Also, Israel doesn't share borders with any African country, so the suggestion that there's a border wall between Israel and its African neighbors is simply not true. There is a wall between Israel and Palestine, but Palestine is not in Africa. Also, there are many African Jews living in Israel, particularly from Ethiopia, so your suggestion that Israel wants to keep Africans out is just nonsense. You haven't leveled any valid critiques against Israel or its foreign policy that would substantiate your claim that any critique of Israel is being stifled by calling it anti-semitism. This is just the same plain old, garden variety, anti-semitism that Europe has produced from centuries.
    Egypt–Israel barrier - Wikipedia

    TLDR: "The Egypt–Israel barrier (or Egypt–Israel border fence; Project name: Hourglass, Hebrew: שְׁעוֹן הַחוֹל, Sha'on HaḤol, lit. “sand clock”) refers to a border barrier built by Israel along its border with Egypt. It was originally an attempt to curb the influx of illegal migrants from African countries. Construction was approved on 12 January 2010...The final section of the fence was completed in December 2013.

    A number of countries, including the United States and India, have sent delegations to Israel to study border security and the various technologies used by the IDF to secure Israel's borders, including the Israel–Egypt border. Some of these countries may implement these technologies as part of their own border fences.

    About 245 kilometres (152 mi) long, the fence from Rafah to Eilat took three years to construct, at an estimated cost of NIS1.6 billion ($450 million), making it one of the largest projects in Israel's history.

    The barrier was originally planned in response to high levels of illegal migrants who successfully entered Israel across the border, mainly smuggled by Bedouin traffickers, from Eritrea and Sudan. Tens of thousands of people try to cross from Egypt's Sinai peninsula into Israel every year, predominantly economic migrants...

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the barrier is meant to "secure Israel's Jewish and democratic character....

    While 9,570 citizens of various African countries entered Israel illegally in the first half of 2012, only 34 did the same in the first six months of 2013, after construction of the main section of the barrier was completed.After the entire fence was completed, the number of migrant crossings had dropped to 16 in 2016"


    So, when you have someone like a self admitted Zionist like Chuck Schumer standing before an audience at AIPAC, and in numerous interviews, saying God made him a guardian of Israel:
    Senator Schumer says God made him a guardian of Israel - YouTube

    ...and then the vary same man goes about stymieing US border wall funding, I think we should be allowed to cast a critical eye on him without being labelled as "racist".

    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Ebner View Post
    Anyway, I hope this was a teaching moment. I don't think most Europeans know how endemic anti-semitism is in Europe so I try to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume it's simple ignorance rather than malice that allows it to proliferate. Mr. Hurling is not wrong and Mr. Jackson is not malicious.
    I appreciate the measured tone, my view isn't based on ignorance, either. I have a nationalist viewpoint, and I am in complete admiration of what Zionism has been able to accomplish as a Jewish nationalist movement, I am enjoying reading and learning about it, etc. but any criticism of Zionism or Israel should not automatically be defined as hate-speech.

  2. #5162
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jintyo View Post
    I tend to automatically skip over any post that mentions "Soros" for the same reason.
    Yes, I'm sure Soros, who said the period where he helped the Nazis round up fellow Hungarian Jews as the "happiest" of his life, has the West's best intentions at heart with his Open Society Foundation. Yes, any criticism of Soros should be labelled as anti-Semitism. Yes. Nod. Comply. Virtue-signal a politically correct opinion. Yes.

    George Soros’s Foundation Pours $220 Million Into Racial Equality Push

    Mr. Soros’s group will invest $150 million in grants for Black-led racial justice groups, and another $70 million toward local grants for criminal justice reform and civic engagement opportunities.

    The billionaire George Soros has focused previous philanthropic efforts on racial justice groups in the United States, as well as on historically marginalized groups.

    The Open Society Foundations, the philanthropic group founded by the business magnate George Soros, announced on Monday that it was investing $220 million in efforts to achieve racial equality in America, a huge financial undertaking that will support several Black-led racial justice groups for years to come.

    The initiative, which comes amid national protests for racial equality and calls for police reform ignited by the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, will immediately reshape the landscape of Black political and civil rights organizations, and signals the extent to which race and identity have become the explicit focal point of American politics in recent years, with no sign of receding. Mr. Soros, who has at times faced smears and anti-Semitism over his role as a liberal megadonor, is also positioning his foundation near the forefront of the protest movement.

    Of the $220 million, the foundation will invest $150 million in five-year grants for selected groups, including progressive and emerging organizations like the Black Voters Matter Fund and Repairers of the Breach.

    The Open Society Foundations will invest an additional $70 million in local grants supporting changes to policing and criminal justice. This money will also be used to pay for opportunities for civic engagement and to organize internships and political training for young people.

    Patrick Gaspard, the president of the Open Society Foundations, said in an interview that the group believed the investment was about harnessing the momentum toward racial justice, but also giving organizations room to think long-term. Now, he said, is “the moment we’ve been investing in for the last 25 years.”

    “There is this call for justice in Black and brown communities, an explosion of not just sympathy but solidarity across the board,” Mr. Gaspard said. “So it’s time to double down. And we understood we can place a bet on these activists — Black and white — who see this as a moment of not just incrementalism, but whole-scale reform.”

    Even before Monday’s announcement, progressive groups, Democratic candidates and racial justice organizations had been flooded with small-dollar donations, breaking giving records and allowing former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. as well as House and Senate candidates to post eye-popping fund-raising numbers. It is the convergence of an election year in which Democrats are desperate to defeat President Trump with an extraordinary protest movement that has pushed many to action, changing public opinion among white Americans and ideological moderates in the process.

    This not the first effort by Mr. Soros or his foundation to target racial inequality, though it is the most expansive. In 1994, Mr. Soros started Open Society’s domestic work with a focus on criminal justice reform. He has also aimed philanthropic efforts at historically marginalized groups abroad, a nod to his own experience as a Jewish person who survived the Nazi occupation of Hungary. In recent years, Mr. Soros has become a favorite target of some conservatives and right-wing groups, which have sometimes used anti-Semitic tropes to try to recast his giving as an effort to seek world influence.

    Between the local grants and the millions for Black-led organizations, however, Mr. Soros and his foundation have helped answer the question of whether the social justice groups that have dominated the current moment are here to stay.

    Alexander Soros, who serves alongside his father as the deputy chair of Open Society, said in a statement that the new investment was a response to a time “for urgent and bold action.”

    “These investments will empower proven leaders in the Black community to reimagine policing, end mass incarceration and eliminate the barriers to opportunity that have been the source of inequity for too long,” he said.

    (taken from the NYT article)

    Billionaire George Soros To Spend $220 Million On Racial Justice Initiatives

  3. #5163
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Waskis View Post
    Irrespective of the mask issue, and not directed at you JF, but this is one of the most frustrating shifts in thinking in modern research. It is pure bullshit. There is no such thing. You either meet your pre-determined threshold for statistical significance, or you don't.

    Saying something "trends" is tantamount to saying, "the data set doesn't support the thing we were trying to demonstrate, but we really want it to". I see the word "trend" creeping into more and more conclusions and it's irritating as hell.
    You are correct, strictly speaking. I think that as long as you realize what the term "trend" means in this context, however, that it is fair to report. For example, in the meta-analysis we were discussing, a trend toward mask effectiveness would not "prove" anything, so citing it to say that it "disproves" the effectiveness of masks is incorrect. Often, a trend means there is something there, but that the study was not able to prove it. This could be due to an issue with study design or size, or because the issue at hand is inherently hard to study. When I see a "trend" in a study or analysis, I look to see if there is reason to think it is a random finding or whether there are reasons that would dilute the study findings and prevent a finding from reaching statistical significance. This is what I was getting at in the post above about the issues I had with the individual studies in the meta-analysis on masks that we were discussing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Soule View Post
    *Touching dirty shit, like dumbells that someone just sweat all over then adjusting your mask, contaminating both the mask and your face.
    *Reusing a mask for multiple days as many of us do.
    *Taking your mask off and placing it on a contaminated surface then back on your face.

    These are all examples of improper usage of a mask and I observe pretty much everyone doing this at the gym. Do you see how this would increase your risk of infection?
    I see what you mean, but I think that the "increased risk" referred to in the paper at hand was comparing the risk with improper mask usage with the risk of proper mask usage. In any case, there has not to my knowledge been any real evidence that poorly maintained masks actually increase the risk of contagion, although what you are saying is plausible. I think if you are dealing with contaminated surfaces, you are better off touching your mask than touching your face directly, for example. So, in addition to wearing a mask, you should practice good hand hygiene to minimize risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Arnold View Post
    Let's say the masks are slightly effective at best. What does that actually equate to? I think most people would agree they are a pretty big infringement on our lives. Not as big as the full economic shutdown, no sports, removal of gatherings, can't go to restaurants, etc. But they are totally messing up the social dynamic and are just annoying to wear. But how do they affect the total death number? It seems to me this virus has done what its going to do despite the fact that we've all been wearing mask for 4 months. I'm supposed to believe we are saving significant lives until what...a vaccine is available? Will we not reach herd immunity before that occurs? I just don't see how they do anything at all to decrease the total amount of deaths when its all said and done?
    This is literally debatable, which is why we are having this debate! I think we have to weigh the real risks of the virus against the real risks to our economy and freedom, and to have a real conversation about those things we can't just assume that the either side is totally full of shit. That's increasingly been the approach in discussion of social issues, and I think we can all see that the divides among us have been deepening due to this approach, rather than resolving. BTW, I'm not talking about this forum specifically, moreso the social and pundit media.

  4. #5164
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drewcar View Post
    What’s the difference between a p-value of 0.04 and 0.06? The evidence is still leaning towards a given direction.
    Ok, cool. So what’s the difference between a p-value of 0.06 and 0.96? It’s not 1.00, so there’s some chance it’s not completely random, right? So I can say the evidence leans towards my desired conclusion, can’t I? In fact, whatever p-value I get, I’ll just say it’s “close enough” (after I run the analysis of course).

  5. #5165
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drewcar View Post
    What’s the difference between a p-value of 0.04 and 0.06? The evidence is still leaning towards a given direction.

    Personally, Sully has the best takes on this whole thread. He recognizes complexity and uncertainty, and doesn’t cherry pick evidence. That’s more than I can say for 95% of the posters here, including Rip.
    Yup...careful though, you'll be voted off the island if you don't embrace the group think...

  6. #5166
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lakeland, FL
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suwannee Dave View Post
    Well, my wife's name is Karen. How about we change the epithet to Stef.
    An actual Karen that gets offended has pretty much earned the figurative Karen label.

    I do not get insulted due to the lifelong accusation that my namesake's kisses make girls cry.

    It's never even affected my dating life.

    Now Stef, as we all know falls between a Heather and a Becky as a white female slur.

  7. #5167
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drewcar View Post
    What’s the difference between a p-value of 0.04 and 0.06? The evidence is still leaning towards a given direction.
    This reasoning is possible...with different methods requiring either more data or stronger assumptions.

    The point of p-values (i.e. classical frequentist hypothesis testing): by placing unnatural restrictions on your own reasoning (in particular, excluding what you just did), you can be very efficient with the data, and sparing with assumptions.

    You’re trying to have your cake and eat it too.

  8. #5168
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    30,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jintyo View Post
    I tend to automatically skip over any post that mentions "Soros" for the same reason.
    As for Soros, he is the man behind the curtain pulling the strings via funding for those of The Great and Powerful Oz ilk in his pursuit of one world ideals. I do see the libel tossed out at him for being a Jew, but other than having been born one, I doubt he has any tendencies toward being an observant Jew along any part of the spectrum from Orthodox to Reformed or point elsewhere. So, like you, I discount that particular charge leveled against him. He advocates plenty of other things that concern me far more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    Criticism of a nation, like Israel should not be conflated with anti-semitism. Otherwise, we are forbidden from criticizing most nations in general or discussing foreign policy and that would simply be another form of censorship imposed by the standards of political correctness.
    In general, I do not equate mere anti-Israel sentiment with anti-semitism. After all, there are plenty of people like Soros who were born Jews in that nation who can barely put up with some of the breaks that Orthodox Jews enjoy without having to shoulder the responsibility of armed service for instance. But so many of those who call out Israel for what they do inevitably betray their distaste for Judaism as they rant and spew enough of their spittle when challenged on their naive views of what is so wrong about Israel. Sooner or later some remark "like stiff necked Jews" slips out.

  9. #5169
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by George Christiansen View Post

    Does respecting someone mean feeding their delusions?

    I'll respect my neighbor's right to hold possibly wrong opinions, but I won't pretend that I think they are correct just because they might get upset for a second.

    Plus, they can literally still just stay 6' 1" according the current voodoo protocols and be safe.

    The people who might get in my face, literally don't believe their own bullshit and are nasty enough not to get any more of my respect anyway.
    In my older age I've noticed that there is only 1 way to change someones mind... they need to do it themselves.

    Yes, as a non-mask believer you can go right in their face, defy what they believe, bombard them with statistics, argue with them, maybe it goes to the next level shouting match I see all these protestors using against cops... just basically yelling without listening... that's one way to convince them masks are useless. Your logic is impeccable, but their defenses are hardened by your approach. Have you seen the HUGE negative reactions of the "coughing karen" video's... that doesn't convince anyone to not wear a mask.

    OR

    You can wear the harmless mask, keep calm, let the statistics lead us to where we all know this is going (more infections, more death, more news, more spin against the "orange man", but eventually the light at the end of the tunnel). Being a mask activist gets us nothing in modern times. People who are indoctrinated and believe the mask hype are not bad people, they simply need to be convinced otherwise, and the better way to convince them is for everyone to wear comfy masks and still have covid spread, as it will regardless because bad masks are almost useless. ... as long as folks aren't wearing masks their narrative will always be "it's the non-maskers spreading it".

    I urge everyone to take the long view, the calm calculated approach, to love and respect your neighbors and to not evangalize or be a shouting activist, but rather a voice of reason. Turn off the news, help your neighbors, be kind.

    Unless of course someone is breaking into your house to steal your toilet paper, then let em have it.

  10. #5170
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    1,163

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by VNV View Post
    I’d post a picture of a guy (I know him) in a mask at boot camp, completely covered in dirt, just outside of the Crucible cage match ring, if I didn’t think it’d potentially cause trouble. (Identity issues?)

    It’s far from clear what the masks are doing for them except impeding breathing while they pummel each other and exhaust volumes of moisture in immediate proximity to each other. “When you can’t social distance ... and you can’t not breathe down the other guy’s neck, wear a mask?”

    And every one of these guys are not a little very very healthy.

    More insanity.
    Squad bays are perfect environments for spreading respiratory viruses and other things. There's the bootcamp "creep and crud" that everyone gets at some point as you are exposed to pathogens you aren't used to. A good way to earn a trip to the pit is to touch your face. Packing 80-120 recruits into a room the size of a double wide trailer means no silly "social distancing" -- there's a common phrase used. Nut to butt. If you've really pissed off your DI or he's bored you may get the chance to pack everyone into three shitter stalls. I can confirm that you will all fit.

    They may be relatively healthy to the general populace, but the tremendous amount of stress and physical activity couple with sleep and food deprivation takes an enormous toll on your immune system. Which is why everyone gets a ridiculous amount of shots including either the "peanut butter" shot in your ass for a high dose of penicillin, or for penicillin allergies a weekly high dose of straight powdered azithromycin.

    And recruits still get sick and pink eye. You can up your water intake to about 2-3 gallons a day to piss and sweat out the sickness, and Listerine clears up pink eye quickly.

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
  •