Corona virus, China major city lockdowns, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

What do you mean? China has been saying that it was an American virus brought over in those military games, since back in 2020 some time. The fact that they couldn't produce any proof didn't even slow them down.

---

The idea of military virus don't makes much sense to me, but it is another possibility.
One of the most affected countries is USA, so in that case they shot on their feet.
And it seems that Donald Trump knew nothing about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Just out of curiosity: What do you mean when you say 'corrupt'? Olaf mentioned criminals, but that's not technically true. Still, I felt that he probably meant something similar to you, but I'm not sure what you mean. Corruption can have a couple different meanings. I think you mean that they are committing crimes. You live in Argentina, so you might be right. In the US, we throw the word around pretty freely, and some elected officials are corrupt and end up in prison. Most here aren't that kind of corrupt, despite the jawing on the subject. In the US, some people feel that anybody is corrupt if they don't support them, which is a pretty weak definition of the word. So, what do YOU mean when you use the word?

---

Yes, you are right. There is a spectrum of corruption, some are literally criminals (like the ones we have currently here) and others no, or not so much.
Basically, to not to pursue the good of the people, in same (many) cases receiving some kind of bribery or benefits, directly or indirectly.
In other cases some are only cowards.

Some are better than others. They are not all the same.
And some may be kind of good, or at least to have good intentions.

The system to reach the power facilitates this to happen, because you cannot make any political campaign without money.

Thank you because you make me reflect more about these things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baka

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjIlrT6qeHQ

---

Vaccinated people should go and join the protests, because it is not about vaccination, it is about liberty.
Once you lose it, it will be too hard to recover.
That's aside whether someone thinks that there is a global agenda or no.
That's my opinion.

If you allow them to cross that line, they'll cross it again and again for any (valid or not) reason.

Martin Niemöller poem:

Code:

---

    First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

---

It is only fear that makes people think that something like that is right, and because they are not touching them (now).

And (about mandatory vaccination) let's suppose that these vaccines of now are good, that there is nothing wrong in them.
Once you allow the state to make something like this, to enforce vaccination with this good vaccine, they could enforce to inject anything in the future.

Bill Gates and some others, that I believe I remember Fauci, already said that "there will be other pandemics in the future, that we need to be ready".
I think they were talking of in a short period, of few years to come.
I wonder how can they know that, if the last pandemic was 100 years ago, and they are not so frequent in history? It is statistically very unlikely that humanity will have naturally other pandemic soon.

exactly, they follow a script. they know exactly all the events beforehand.
and as u say, they will not stop, once they start, the only way to end it is a real war, and nothing we want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

And (about mandatory vaccination) let's suppose that these vaccines of now are good, that there is nothing wrong in them.
Once you allow the state to make something like this, to enforce vaccination with this good vaccine, they could enforce to inject anything in the future.

---

There have been vaccinations required for schoolchildren in the US for decades. There have been mandatory vaccinations for soldiers in the US for decades.

So, that ship sailed before I was born.

Quote:

---

Bill Gates and some others, that I believe I remember Fauci, already said that "there will be other pandemics in the future, that we need to be ready".
I think they were talking of in a short period, of few years to come.
I wonder how can they know that, if the last pandemic was 100 years ago, and they are not so frequent in history? It is statistically very unlikely that humanity will have naturally other pandemic soon.

---

Depends on what you count as a pandemic. The last GLOBAL pandemic that killed a LOT of people was 100 years ago. The last global pandemic was not that long ago (bird flu or swine flu) but didn't kill many people. The last pandemic that killed a lot of people, but which didn't spread all that widely, was Ebola, which was only a few years back....unless you count malaria, which sickens and kills vast numbers of people each year and is one of the greatest killers in history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

Bill Gates made his empire, more than making good software, paying to the media. To every magazine. (along with other things)
Something he must know about the importance of the media to form opinions, and to control people behaviors.

---

That's an example of interpreting history in service of your argument. Bill Gates made his empire because he was able to provide DOS to the IBM PC. It wasn't the best OS, nor was it his (until he bought it). Then, by a happy accident, he understood the potential value of it better than IBM did. They were all guessing, to some extent, and did what they thought was best. IBM bet on the hardware, MS bet on the software. It turned out that Gates and Allen had it right and IBM had it wrong.

It is mighty hard to see where the media even came into this. The most famous ads were all Apple ads...and the Apple OS has never been more than a bit player. The major computer advertising was not for the OS, it was for the hardware. The bulk of the press that I can ever remember seeing around computers glossed over the OS. The first time I remember the OS getting much press was Windows 95, by which time MS was already one of the most powerful tech companies in the world, and Windows 95 got all that press because it was already acknowledged that they'd have 90% of the market because they already did.

During the time when Bill Gates was leading MS, tech had no political footprint at all and no discernible media footprint aside from Apple. Since he left, though, tech woke up to the fact that politics matters. Now they lobby. Now they schmooze. Back in the 90s, and up into the first part of the 2000s, tech was notorious for ignoring all of that.

I remember reading or hearing somewhere that the fact that MS made their operating systems a viable gaming platform was a major contributor to it's success over it's competitors. I don't know if this actually holds any water though but I can see it being true.

Besides writing programs in QuickBasic, I also played quite a bit of games back in my youth like Sopwith, Digger, Prince of Persia, Prince of Persia 2,Doom, Doom 2, Wolfenstein 3D, Corridor 7, Blake Stone, Commander Keen, Wing Commander, Another World, Mortal Kombat 2 and 3, Hexen, Duke Nukem, Duke Nukem 2 and Duke Nukem 3D, Quake in the DOS era and then it was Starcraft, Age of Empires, Quake 2, Pitfall the Mayan Adventures and a few others I can't remember in Win95 to Win XP era. There was just a massive selection of games for DOS and early Windows unmatched by any other platform at the time. If you wanted to play the best games, you wanted to be using a Microsoft operating system. If you look up all these games, you would find that many if not all of them were ground breaking in one way or another. You just could not beat Microsoft's DOS and Windows as a gaming platform in the early days.

Quote:

---

Bill Gates made his empire because he was able to provide DOS to the IBM PC. It wasn't the best OS, nor was it his (until he bought it). Then, by a happy accident, he understood the potential value of it better than IBM did.

---

I remember reading/watching about this. Can't remember exact number but Gates bought the DOS software from a guy for about $30K, maybe $50k. Wish my investment were that good.

But convincing IBM to use his software and still keep control of the software was amazing. Because IBM always kept full control of their products. normally they would have just bought the software.

To Niya point, if 90% of the PC's are running MS DOS then all the best gaming being written for MS DOS seems reasonable. But I don't think gaming was what made MS DOS so dominate. I think the fact they were already so dominate that so many games were written for DOS.

But DOS wasn't dominate for that long, once MS went to Window I think it was hardware that kept them dominate. Because Windows on a 1meg ram with a 286 processor sucked. It was real slow. We had several clients had Windows programs written for them but had to throw them in the trash and pay us to write them a DOS based program. The 386 was available but very expensive and RAM was also too pricey. But amazingly it only took a few years we had the Pentium, cheaper RAM and large cheap hard drives. Windows was now fun to use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

I remember reading or hearing somewhere that the fact that MS made their operating systems a viable gaming platform was a major contributor to it's success over it's competitors. I don't know if this actually holds any water though but I can see it being true.

---

It would be kind of funny if you heard that from me. I've long asserted that point, though I don't recall reading it anywhere else. Games have driven computers for a very long time. I remember reading about the 486 when it was first coming out. The trade journals were all saying that it was for labs and offices because nobody had any use for that much power at home. HA!! That was wrong before it was even written.

Meanwhile, video cards were advancing FAR faster than CPUs, and it sure wasn't so that we could make prettier graphs. In the early 90s, I shelled out the cash for the newest, best, most cutting edge video card that had just come out. It was the Diamond SpeedStart 24, or something like that (I may have the number wrong). Six months later...you couldn't even buy those anymore, since they were so obsolete that stores didn't carry them. I never shelled out the money for the cutting edge video card again. Wait a few months and you can get it for a fraction of the price...or at least you could. Not so much today, though, since GPUs have so many other uses.

And this comes from a person that thinks that the best MS products were DOS and SQL, so.
The best games of DOS era came with the hardware upgrade to VGA and with sound blaster, until then, AMIGA.
The hardware fast change is slowly degrading, till we be able to have quantum computers without needing a liquid nitrogen pack to the side.
But i think this thread is about covid and how the vaxbies slak balls? :bigyello:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

It would be kind of funny if you heard that from me. I've long asserted that point, though I don't recall reading it anywhere else.

---

I probably very well heard it from you ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sapator

The best games of DOS era came with the hardware upgrade to VGA and with sound blaster, until then, AMIGA.

---

You're right about Amiga. It was ahead of it's time, for sure. However, there were some excellent DOS games that predated VGA. The Bard's Tale 1 was an excellent game, while the second version was...a bit weird, but good. Of course, I liked those games because they were not afraid to go all in on a pun or wordplay. There were puzzles that could only be solved if you looked at the words themselves without paying attention to the phrase they were in. For example, there was a sign on a wall that read: "The plan is near!" A while later on, somebody popped up and asked, "OK guys, what's the plan?"

Eye of the Beholder II was really funny because of the level that had stone giants. It was in a dungeon of fixed size, though, so the giants were...crawling.

There was an even better one that I played on monochrome, or on a four color CGA monitor. After a bit of research, I see it was Ultima V.

I started with the c64, and later bought an amiga500, just because the huge difference between the two, amiga was "almost" like arcade machine.
I switched to PC because of sound blaster 16, and when I got it, I noticed the difference of quality of games. but I didnt wait long before PC was ahead, with all those games such as doom and command & conquer, but the favorites was strategy and simulations, like sim city, civilization, pirates, might & magic etc.

I remember the first PC game I saw, I think at school, was Leisure Suit Larry and it was "crap" compared to the Amiga version, but still it had it charms. it was not before Larry 5 PC was as good as the Amiga version.

Larry 2 and 3 where exceptional in the PC and of course my top favorite best game of all time, Space Quest 3. I have no Amiga best as I didn't have one but one must be blind not to call it better.
Started with Atari 2600 as a little brat.
I remember some of my changes on the PC:
1)Bought my first mouse for Lemmings
2)Bought my first HDD (20MB , yes it's not a typo, MB) for Wing Commander
3)Bough my first Sound Blaster for Wing Commander 2 speech

My first VGA experience was Xenon2 , note that from CGA to VGA was like eating a turd and eating souffle.
My first sound card was adlib and listened to Teenage Mutant ninja turtles PC until then it was blip blap bloup on the PC speaker.
And my second favorite game is an old PC games Double Dragon 2 that I played on Hercules(orange black monitor), CGA and VGA. It is a lot different than the arcade or Amiga, a lot harder because the robot can swipe all your energy and the gunman can shoot you even if you are left up and he is right down and of course the keys glitch a lot.So second best. I also think that Monkey Island 2 and Wing Commander with a lot of disk drive needs started to upper the PC because I don't think that the Amiga HDD ever caught on.

I started with Pong...but not my own, because I didn't have a TV back then, either. We then got a TRS-80 Level 1 with 4K RAM. There were only two games worth playing. I don't remember the first, but the second was a tic-tac-toe where the cells were randomly numbered from 1-9. On each turn, every mark advanced by one number. Thus, if you put an X in 1 and your opponent put an O in 4, then on your next turn, you X is in 2 and their O is in 5. This makes the game considerably more challenging than the generic game.

I believe that gaming was the Amiga's destruction. It caused Commodore to gut the platform and hobble it to get costs down even further and focus on it as a games console. Instead of the possibility of being a very big fish in the small pond of workstations it was turned into a small fish in the mass market pond of kiddie PCs, and naturally became trivial prey to be conquered.

Things could have turned out very differently.

even if the graphics was on-par with arcade and consoles, what failed amiga was the controller and presentations of the games.
usually it felt more smooth on the console version, movement and small details also. at least for action/platform games,
strategy and games using the mouse was always at the top.

not 100% sure what failed amiga, maybe bad marketing.
PC started to get market, with all that "build your own", and that was nice.
as I wrote, I could make my computer and choose the sound-card, and I really needed a 16-bit with 16 channels.
eventually I also bought a gravis ultrasound, that I used for just music/sound. but that was it for that brand.

That was also a major issue.
You couldn't just upgrade your Amiga with CPU , graphic and sound as easy as the PC.
I recall a period that I was changing my setup almost every 3 months.
As for workstation goes, I never met in my life a single person that used Amiga as a workstation. It was a gaming monster it died gracefully as a gaming monster. RIP.

The other thing that PC had going for it was it's dominance in business. Once everybody had a PC on their desk, or were headed in that direction, the number of people familiar with DOS was way above any other. The PC could then be sold at home as being both familiar and serious, with a veneer of work to give it respectability as more than just a gaming platform. Toss in that ability to upgrade and you had a positive feedback loop: More PCs made it more reasonable to target the PC, which meant that more PCs would be sold because of the greater hardware/software available. Apple always had superior hardware during that time, but it was a closed system and expensive relative to the PC.

Good times for those that lived them, even in young age.

I'm going to respond to a few folks so I'll put names at the start of quotes for clarity.

Quote:

---

Tyson: He was hospitalized yesterday with Covid pneumonia

---

I'm holding out hope for him. Most people recover even after hospitalisation and he's in the hands of experts. They've learned a lot over the last couple of years.

Quote:

---

DD: if you look at the US, hospitals were almost never overwhelmed though they came close

---

I'm not sure whether you meant to put "almost never" there because it substantially undermines your argument. For that reason I'm going to respond as if you'd basically asserted that hospitals came close to being overwhelmed (just trying to avoid putting words in your mouth). I think you can only assert that if your definition of "overwhelmed" is the inability of hospitals to put covid patients in beds but it's not just about that, it's about the ability to carry out healthcare in general and they have definitely been overwhelmed in that regard. My mother has had two operations postponed due to covid pressure and by father has had one. They weren't life or death matters but it has meant that my father had to live with extreme discomfort for a couple months longer than he would normally have had to. My next door neighbour had chronic respiratory issues and had her regular treatment pushed back. She died of complications in June and, although I can't be sure that it's attributable to that delayed treatment I'm pretty sure it didn't help. The extra pressure on the health service is real.

Quote:

---

DD: This is exaggeration.

---

It wasn't an exaggeration at all, I said it helps prevent the spread and it does. It prevents them by much higher percentages than you're quoting too with fully vaccinated people being 91% less likely to be infected according to the CDC I think some of the confusion here comes from the difference in protection from infection vs transmission. For anyone who's going to dismiss the CDC as part of the conspiracy, here's a really good analysis by FullFact, an independent fact checker.

Quote:

---

DD: Your definition of risk is different from my definition of risk which is why these decisions should be made on an individual basis

---

I think we're essentially into the libertarian debate here and, for me, the Rubicon is whether your choice (or your definition of risk) impacts me. In this case it does and potentially lethally so. For that reason I don't think your individualism trumps the good of society in this particular instance.

Quote:

---

DD: I think that more recently it has famously been against Joe Rogan

---

I think I agree with you here. I think there was some pretty disingenuous rhetoric on both sides (Rogan often implied a much greater efficacy for some of the alternative treatments than they merited, even if he didn't outright state it) but I agree that some sections of the media took some of his statements and exaggerated them way beyond anything he implied and certainly beyond anything he explicitly said.

But seriously, we're not arguing whether Joe Rogan was treated unfairly for touting some unproven treatments. What's being proposed in this thread is that the virus was deliberately created and released in order to make some (as yet unidentified) group of billionaires extra cash. That this group of millionaires was willing to kill millions of people for that extra cash. That the media is in on this plan and running interference for it. That the Chinese government didn't know about it even though it took place in one of their labs. That it's somehow connected to Bill Gates. That it's somehow connected to the Feminist Agenda and the Gay Agenda (it strayed into some particularly hateful territory there). These are the claims that are explicitly being made in this thread. If that stuff's not worth of dismissal then what is?

Quote:

---

Dil: Sure feels like a tussle between "try to be part of the solution" and "screw you, and your little dog too."

---

I'm 100% with you there.

Quote:

---

Eduardo: I know. I wasn't talking about you.

---

I didn't think you were talking about me. But you did bring up Bill Gates and then later say that anyone who brought up Bill Gates should be immediately disregarded. What obvious conclusion do you think we should draw from that?

I don't have Covid, a friend of mine does. He is an anti-vaccine person and the last word I got, yesterday, is he is in the hospital and can only mouth words. He is not allowed visitors so his son is keeping us informed.

Quote:

---

I don't have Covid, a friend of mine does

---

Yeah, I know, you mentioned it a few pages back. I was just sending him (and you) my best regards. I guess you're feeling pretty tense right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

Yeah, I know, you mentioned it a few pages back. I was just sending him (and you) my best regards. I guess you're feeling pretty tense right now.

---

I've seen so many of the clips of a guy in his sixties that can barely breath telling people to get vaccinated and I can super impose his face over it. What breaks my heart is thinking of him beseeching medical staff for a vaccination and them saying "it is too late". He was proud of not getting one to start with.

Fox news is calling the new variant the "Omni cold". I still maintain they have needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people, along with Trump, with their minimalization of the pandemic from the start. There are quite a few posters here that are also guilty of the "minimalization of the pandemic". I wonder if they are part of that Fox culture or fooled by it :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

Fox news is calling the new variant the "Omni cold". I still maintain they have needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people, along with Trump, with their minimalization of the pandemic from the start. There are quite a few posters here that are also guilty of the "minimalization of the pandemic". I wonder if they are part of that Fox culture or fooled by it :confused:

---

I believe quite the opposite: that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic, killed more people and made mode harm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I believe quite the opposite: that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic, killed more people and made mode harm.

---

Could you explain that? Why/how did more people die from fear and panic than from not taking precautions and not getting vaccinated?

I hope he pulls through. The thing to hang on to is that, even at the hospitalisation stage, most people do still recover. He's in a dangerous situation, for sure, but hope isn't lost yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

Could you explain that? Why/how did more people die from fear and panic than from not taking precautions and not getting vaccinated?

---

Taking precautions is good, because there is a real danger, being vaccinated may be good, but shouldn't be a mandate or a coercion.

About the effects of panic, it is well known that it lowers your defenses (and many other things).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

Taking precautions is good, because there is a real danger, being vaccinated may be good, but shouldn't be a mandate or a coercion.

About the effects of panic, it is well known that it lowers your defenses (and many other things).

---

I seriously doubt panic needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people like the minimalization of the pandemic by Fox and Trump from the start. I don't think you can back that up.


Unless they listened to Trump and injected bleach...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

I seriously doubt panic needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people like the minimalization of the pandemic by Fox and Trump from the start. I don't think you can back that up.

---

I see. People don't understand how destructive panic is.

Well, give us an example. Who do you think panic in relation to the virus has killed? Can you come up with 5 million such cases? Because that's how many Covid has currently killed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

Well, give us an example. Who do you think panic in relation to the virus has killed? Can you come up with 5 million such cases? Because that's how many Covid has currently killed.

---

I think most of the cases died because they had fear. But of course that's an interpretation of how life works (that's something general, not just covid).

An example... I can't assure anything (about the following case), but I talked before about a TV presenter that died here, he was every day infusing fear on the audience, all the quarantine doing that.
When at last the vaccines were available, he took one.
He died two days after that.

OK, another interpretation is that he was unlucky, it was random, whatever. Nobody can prove anything.

the problem is not the vaccines.
the virus is out (nature, humans or aliens doesn't matter) and it fatal to many people. they should take it.

the problem is government and media. they are polarizing people. they take away your freedom and your own decision.

they don't say to you:

its you decision, we present you with a vaccine that you can take if you wish.
here is the "full and not censored" documents about how they made it, research and trials. its a risk and something you need to decide for yourself if its worth it.

no, what they do is hide the facts, they make shell companies that will "protect" the pharma companies if something goes wrong. they seems to be lobbying the whole thing, into monetary gain.
they use google, twitter, facebook to block people that speech against, they create panic when theres none, and tell you its ok when theres concern of your safety. its all a show.

right now the new virus tells that no vaccine helps, even so they are still dividing people, saying its the non vaccinated that are to blame, even if statistics right now point to that the fully vaccinated that are now spreading omicron. but politicians are just ignoring that fact, since they enjoy those certificates, to divide people to make you believe the error is the pandemic, not a systematic error with the economy, health care, pension etc, while you go around hating the non vaccinated, the people in power are laughing and feeling good that people are ignorant and dont understand its just theatrical.

vaccines are good, but only as long its not forced on you.
not all people are the same, some people have bad experience with authorities and when they feel threaten they will ignore facts and just go against.

this the government knows, they have sociology experts that knows how people respond, and its exactly what they wanted to happen, to create issues between people so that people are busy hating each other. its not new and they will use it again.

and more the authorities force things more people will respond, and eventually we will have terrorism in our backyard, that could be your neighborhood since childhood.

and this is all manipulation, because they want to hide the real threats of the future. the economical collapse of healthcare and pension system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

An example...

---

Some time ago I heard an interesting story.

We in 1982 had a war with UK, for Malvinas islands (called Falkland islands by them).
The Argentinian warplane pilots were invited, if they wanted to leave a letter for their families, just in case they didn't return.
Some did write a letter, others didn't.
The ones that left a letter, didn't return anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I see. People don't understand how destructive panic is.

---

Do you have the same definition of panic as we have? From your statements, if you substituted "stress" for "panic", I'd agree with you, but given my definition of panic, I don't. Using the term fear makes it sound like you DO have the same definition of the term panic. I don't agree with your assessment that everybody is fearful. I do think that there are people in the news that are fearful, but most just seem reasonably concerned. Reasonable concern is what prompts you to look both ways when crossing the street. Fear is what keeps you from getting anywhere near the street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

Some time ago I heard an interesting story.

We in 1982 had a war with UK, for Malvinas islands (called Falkland islands by them).
The Argentinian warplane pilots were invited, if they wanted to leave a letter for their families, just in case they didn't return.
Some did write a letter, others didn't.
The ones that left a letter, didn't return anyone.

---

That's art imitating life. One of the oldest tropes in Hollywood is that, in a very dangerous situation (war, but not JUST war), it is the person who talks about their loved ones back home that always die.

The problem is poverty brought by job loss on lockdown, no exercise and psychological depression. That creates more deaths than you can imagine.
I see that they are bringing back the lockdowns in Germany Austria and Holland, I sure hope they don't do that to Greece as the unvax are already in a lockdown so that would mean acceptance of failure but I don't think they will do so because that would bring the whole "unvax death traps on route 667" story down.

.....And I'm still at the office, WTH?! LEt's gooooo hoooomeeee!!!!!!

Quote:

---

I think most of the cases died because they had fear

---

For those still doubting why I'm dismissing this stuff, ^that was clearly meant literally. It's not some linguistic failing or rhetorical device. This is literally someone saying that fear has directly killed 5 million people. It wasn't covid, it was fear. They died because they got scared. Defend that.

Quote:

---

they don't say to you:

its you decision, we present you with a vaccine that you can take if you wish.
here is the "full and not censored" documents about how they made it, research and trials. its a risk and something you need to decide for yourself if its worth it.

---

The information is freely available from organisations with no commercial motive. You've just designated those sources as part of the conspiracy.

edit>

Quote:

---

The problem is poverty brought by job loss on lockdown, no exercise and psychological depression. That creates more deaths than you can imagine.

---

Oh I certainly won't deny the damage that lockdowns do. They have deep economic and psychological impacts and can have impacts on physical health and fitness too. But they did not kill 5 million people, it was covid that did that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Do you have the same definition of panic as we have? From your statements, if you substituted "stress" for "panic", I'd agree with you, but given my definition of panic, I don't. Using the term fear makes it sound like you DO have the same definition of the term panic.

---

I'm not sure everybody understand the same way here either, but here lately the people started to use "panic" meaning like a strong fear, something deeper that just fear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I don't agree with your assessment that everybody is fearful.

---

I didn't say that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I do think that there are people in the news that are fearful, but most just seem reasonably concerned. Reasonable concern is what prompts you to look both ways when crossing the street. Fear is what keeps you from getting anywhere near the street.

---

I think they are a bit more than just reasonably concerned.
For most people fear is something normal, because they are not instructed that it is destructive.

I'll try to clear a bit more, if I can.

There are some fears that we could say they are good.
If you are in the rood of a building with no railing, the fear of not going too close to the border is good for you, because it is for preserving your life.

But if you have a fear that something bad will happen to you, for example that you are going to have an accident, you keep that negativity, and to the point that you allow it to go into your heart (deeply into your mind), you decided that something wrong will happen to you.
Do you know what will happen?
You guessed it.
That is, of course, the kind of fears I was talking as "panic".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I think most of the cases died because they had fear. But of course that's an interpretation of how life works (that's something general, not just covid).

---

Now you are over the place with non sequitur statements. I posted:

Quote:

---

Fox news is calling the new variant the "Omni cold". I still maintain they have needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people, along with Trump, with their minimalization of the pandemic from the start. There are quite a few posters here that are also guilty of the "minimalization of the pandemic". I wonder if they are part of that Fox culture or fooled by it

---

You came back with:

Quote:

---

I believe quite the opposite: that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic, killed more people and made mode harm.

---

I think you just made that up with no regard to factual content. You are saying "that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic" killed "hundreds of thousands of people". I'm asking how you came up with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

For those still doubting why I'm dismissing this stuff, ^that was clearly meant literally. It's not some linguistic failing or rhetorical device. This is literally someone saying that fear has directly killed 5 million people. It wasn't covid, it was fear. They died because they got scared. Defend that.

---

That's why I don't usually answer to you (or even spend time reading), because you are simple a denier, you don't provide any argument/contra-arguments or nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

I think you just made that up with no regard to factual content. You are saying "that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic" killed "hundreds of thousands of people". I'm asking how you came up with that.

---

Fear is harmful. Period.

If people don't know that there is a virus, OK, inform them. If people feel fear, that would be normal.
But keep scaring the people every day, that is harmful.

Do I deny that 5 million are dead not because they caught covid but rather that they were afraid? Absolutely. That they had covid was chemically and biologically testable and they died of it. What more argument would you like me to bring?

I will expand a bit on the subject, because it is no simple.

I'm not denying that there is a virus and that it is dangerous and can kill people, and that in fact it did.

What I'm saying is that I think that fear (in that form of profound fear, that I called "panic") is more dangerous than the virus itself.

People died of covid, but people died also of many other things, depressed, because they didn't received treatments of other diseases because hospitals were attending only covid cases, it had many consequences.
People went bankrupt, started with mental issues, etc.

But I want to explain better about fear.
There are two actions that are often confused, and they are very different.

1) Bravery.
2) Daring.

I hope I'm choosing the right English words for each one, because as I say they are often confused.

1) Bravery, courageous, valiant. It is when someone acknowledge the danger, and overcomes the fear and sees how to confront the circumstance in order to be victorious, to end well with it.

2) Daring is reckless. Someone that don't care about the danger and go ahead anyway.

Many reckless people died of covid also, I know of many that they denied that there was a virus, they didn't care. Many were infected and died.

My thinking is that people that behave like that, denying an adverse reality, they have fears also, but they go ahead anyway like if nothings happens.

You need to be sober, there is a virus that is dangerous, yes. But not to fear, or try to fear as less as possible (because getting rid of fears entirely is not so easy many times).

You do what you can do, and that's all. Wear mask, keep distance, vaccine (if that is Ok with you), but that's all you can do.
It is a balance, and there is no recipe for everybody.

That's more or less what I think.

Of course there is something else, but it is only for believers. Because God can help you to take out fears. He is Almighty and cares about the ones that ask Him for help. But as I said, that is only useful for people who believe that.

Quote:

---

I will expand a bit on the subject, because it is no simple.

---

It is very simple...you just will not admit it. You said "I believe quite the opposite: that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic, killed more people and made mode harm.". You are saying as many people died from fear as they did needlessly from the minimalization of the pandemic from Fox News and Trump from the start. No matter what mental gymnastics you want to preform that is what you said and won't admit now.

I wouldn't mind if it was Fear of the DarkAttachment 183357

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

It is very simple...you just will not admit it. You said "I believe quite the opposite: that the media that made everyone fall on fear and panic, killed more people and made mode harm.". You are saying as many people died from fear as they did needlessly from the minimalization of the pandemic from Fox News and Trump from the start. No matter what mental gymnastics you want to preform that is what you said and won't admit now.

---

I don't know what Fox news said because I didn't watch it.
About what Trump said, I kind of agree on many things, but I don't know everything that he said.
I think it is your fear what makes you think he was so wrong (or perhaps, also, your political preference).
I don't follow everything that the president of my country says, less I'll follow president of other countries.

And about most mass media, CNN, BBC, NYT, including Tweeter, Facebook, Google, etc. And most news channels in most countries (at least to the point I know), yes, I think they made people to fear and it was harmful.
What part is not clear of what I'm saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

I've seen so many of the clips of a guy in his sixties that can barely breath telling people to get vaccinated and I can super impose his face over it. What breaks my heart is thinking of him beseeching medical staff for a vaccination and them saying "it is too late". He was proud of not getting one to start with.

---

I just talked to him...he speech is slow but he is complaining the hospital won't let him go home. I take that as he is much better than a couple days ago.

Quote:

---

What I'm saying is that I think that fear (in that form of profound fear, that I called "panic") is more dangerous than the virus itself.

---

Where have you seen profound fear/panic happening? I haven't noticed people in a panic. It's not hard to notice if someone is in a panic state. You think millions are dying of because profound fear/panic and it has went unnoticed? Is this another media and government cover up? I agree to much fear is unhealthy and the media plays to our fears but to state that is causing more deaths than the virus, just isn't even close to the truth.

This statements

Quote:

---

And about most mass media, CNN, BBC, NYT, including Tweeter, Facebook, Google, etc. And most news channels in most countries (at least to the point I know), yes, I think they made people to fear and it was harmful.

---

I have no problem with.

I'm not sure that I have exactly the same definition for fear, but much of that is reasonable enough, as far as I'm concerned. I do think that fear can be bad, even debilitating. Fear can also cause stress, and extended stress can shorten your life. I don't think it is likely to kill directly, but it can shorten your life...and certainly make it worse.

When it comes to COVID, though, I'd say that there isn't enough fear, at least not in the US. People are acting like it doesn't exist, and plenty are dying from it. That's not an excess of concern, let alone fear.

Quote:

---

When it comes to COVID, though, I'd say that there isn't enough fear, at least not in the US. People are acting like it doesn't exist, and plenty are dying from it. That's not an excess of concern, let alone fear.

---

Yeah, it's amazing. We still have 1,200+ people dying from COVID each day but I don't see a lot attention paid to the daily lose of life. The streets are busy, stores are full, sport stadiums are full. I certainly don't hear a lot of conversation about the high number of daily deaths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wes4dbt

Where have you seen profound fear/panic happening? I haven't noticed people in a panic. It's not hard to notice if someone is in a panic state. You think millions are dying of because profound fear/panic and it has went unnoticed? Is this another media and government cover up? I agree to much fear is unhealthy and the media plays to our fears but to state that is causing more deaths than the virus, just isn't even close to the truth.

---

I think it is a matter of words. I wouldn't find the right words in Spanish either, because there are not words to explain the kind or degree of fear. But I think I already explained well enough what I meant.

And yes, many people had this kind of "deep fear" (unfortunately) to some degree IMO.
They weren't running in panic like in a fire or a shooting. That of course was not what I meant and nobody could understand my words like that because of course make no sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I'm not sure that I have exactly the same definition for fear, but much of that is reasonable enough, as far as I'm concerned. I do think that fear can be bad, even debilitating. Fear can also cause stress, and extended stress can shorten your life. I don't think it is likely to kill directly, but it can shorten your life...and certainly make it worse.

---

To say it more clearly, the really bad fears are the ones that makes you believe that something bad will happen to you.
When you believe (accept deep in your mind) that something bad will happen... OK, you are defining what will happen.

That have close relation with what you confess (express) with your mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

When it comes to COVID, though, I'd say that there isn't enough fear, at least not in the US. People are acting like it doesn't exist, and plenty are dying from it. That's not an excess of concern, let alone fear.

---

And between, there are all degrees of fears that even no so dramatic, they are still harmful or cause different degrees of problems.
I don't think that USA is the exception. No from what I see. But you know better because you live there.

At the end, most negative things are fears: anxiety, prejudice, most if not all negative things have a background of fear.

It is no good to make people fear as most of the media did, that was my point.

Fear is sensational. Fear sells. That's where the, "If it bleeds it leads" phrase comes from. That's why news isn't just about puppies, even though most people like puppies a whole lot. It's also why so many amusement parks exist. That would be safe fear. Rock climbing is a different form. Free soloing is a more extreme form.

I agree that a lot of our problems arise from fears. Sometimes it's even displaced fears, but still fears. Still, I think it's overly simplifying to say that all fear is bad or that fear isn't desirable. The evidence is pretty strong that some fears are bad, but some fears are good, and still more are sought eagerly. It's really complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Fear is sensational. Fear sells. That's where the, "If it bleeds it leads" phrase comes from. That's why news isn't just about puppies, even though most people like puppies a whole lot. It's also why so many amusement parks exist. That would be safe fear. Rock climbing is a different form. Free soloing is a more extreme form.

I agree that a lot of our problems arise from fears. Sometimes it's even displaced fears, but still fears. Still, I think it's overly simplifying to say that all fear is bad or that fear isn't desirable. The evidence is pretty strong that some fears are bad, but some fears are good, and still more are sought eagerly. It's really complicated.

---

The "good" fears are the ones that serve to preserve you, like fear to walk in a cornice, for example.

Fear is a natural reaction to the unknown too. So having proper information is a step to get rid of them.
Confidence also displaces fears. The topic is wide.

Quote:

---

The "good" fears are the ones that serve to preserve you, like fear to walk in a cornice, for example.

---

True, fear of hospitalization/death from COVID is why people wear a mask and get vaccinated. (Some might do it just to protect others) So that would be a "good" fear. Maybe the media should scare us even more. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wes4dbt

True, fear of hospitalization/death from COVID is why people wear a mask and get vaccinated. (Some might do it just to protect others) So that would be a "good" fear. Maybe the media should scare us even more. lol

---

For some people that might be true. But the real reason I wear masks is because I don't want to get charged $1000 by the courts if the police catch me without one. And the reason I got vaccinated is so I don't get gated from certain places and activities in the future that requires proof of vaccination. If I'm being honest, I really don't give a rat's ass about Covid.