|
Post by aquaduct on Apr 3, 2020 14:59:31 GMT -5
For those who aren't comfortable with following the guidance of the most knowledgeable people out there, what do you suggest we do instead? Who are the most knowledgeable people out there given that nobody knows what the denominator is yet?
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Apr 3, 2020 15:02:57 GMT -5
John, none of what follows is mockery, let alone accusation of dishonesty or bad faith.
My point isn't that there's no hard place--it's that the rock and the hard place are both there, and there is no cushioning the hard place except to slow the approach velocity of the rock. Unless (as Jeff and Peter would seem to suggest) the epidemiologists (and virologists and infectious-disease doctors and public-health pros) are all wrong (or, to adopt Jeff's implied position, wrong enough to justify serious skepticism) and we're suffering some kind of irrational panic about the nature of the rock.
God, I hate arguing via metaphor.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 15:09:03 GMT -5
For those who aren't comfortable with following the guidance of the most knowledgeable people out there, what do you suggest we do instead?
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 15:16:07 GMT -5
John, none of what follows is mockery, let alone accusation of dishonesty or bad faith. My point isn't that there's no hard place--it's that the rock and the hard place are both there, and there is no cushioning the hard place except to slow the approach velocity of the rock. Unless (as Jeff and Peter would seem to suggest) the epidemiologists (and virologists and infectious-disease doctors and public-health pros) are all wrong (or, to adopt Jeff's implied position, wrong enough to justify serious skepticism) and we're suffering some kind of irrational panic about the nature of the rock. God, I hate arguing via metaphor. That gets back the the point I made some days back that caused such consternation. I remain amazed that we are simultaneously in a state of profound distrust/skepticism/hatred/pickem of our leadership, while also accepting that leadership's decision to shut down the global economy. I suspect part of this (and I take this to be John's point, in a way) is that we have no idea what we've done. And there may well come a day, reasonably soon, when we discover the hard way that this decision was far costlier than we expected. So to dust out a bit of a corner on Russell's encapsulation of my point: 1) I think the epidemiologists are doing the best they can, but "the best they can" at this point is only a notch or two above "flying blind" and 2) I don't think we respect nearly enough the possibility of horrifying, long-term, impacts to the global economy.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Apr 3, 2020 15:21:09 GMT -5
By showing that sudden, catastrophic-to-humans changes on a global scale are possible. But then we're being very loosey-goosey with what is meant by "catastrophe". You're changing categories. In the case of climate change, what is being suggested is the extinction of human life. Even if COVID-19 had simply run its course without response, we would have had a catastrophe to human life, but not to global existence. In fact, it wouldn't have even made a dent in it. And if cold hard science is correct, and we can judge this amorally, the human race would end up stronger after the virus than before it, right?
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 15:24:12 GMT -5
PS: But in any case, it doesn't matter much at this point. A month ago I said "the die is cast" in the sense that this virus is coming, like it or not. Today, I'll say that the die is cast in terms of our response.
We've made the international decision to stop the spread/infection/deaths at any cost. We've already begun the process of pumping money (and admit it: None of us have any idea where it is supposed to be coming from) into the economy with a fire hose to try to soften the economic impact.
All that will either work well, work a little, or not work at all.
We won't know what's what until after the dust settles, probably in a few years.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Apr 3, 2020 15:31:23 GMT -5
PS: But in any case, it doesn't matter much at this point. A month ago I said "the die is cast" in the sense that this virus is coming, like it or not. Today, I'll say that the die is cast in terms of our response. We've made the international decision to stop the spread/infection/deaths at any cost. We've already begun the process of pumping money (and admit it: None of us have any idea where it is supposed to be coming from) into the economy with a fire hose to try to soften the economic impact. All that will either work well, work a little, or not work at all. We won't know what's what until after the dust settles, probably in a few years. In a couple of years do you have any confidence that we will look back on it honestly?
|
|
|
Post by james on Apr 3, 2020 15:39:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Apr 3, 2020 15:41:29 GMT -5
In a couple of years do you have any confidence that we will look back on it honestly? In a couple of years, it will be just as it is today -- you will have your take on which views are being expressed "honestly," I will have mine, and millions of other Earthlings will have theirs. And thus the human experiment will move on.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 15:43:32 GMT -5
PS: But in any case, it doesn't matter much at this point. A month ago I said "the die is cast" in the sense that this virus is coming, like it or not. Today, I'll say that the die is cast in terms of our response. We've made the international decision to stop the spread/infection/deaths at any cost. We've already begun the process of pumping money (and admit it: None of us have any idea where it is supposed to be coming from) into the economy with a fire hose to try to soften the economic impact. All that will either work well, work a little, or not work at all. We won't know what's what until after the dust settles, probably in a few years. In a couple of years do you have any confidence that we will look back on it honestly? Yes and no. Lets say three years from now the world is in wholesale economic collapse, and hundreds of millions, or even billions, globally are dying of starvation. If that happens, we'll blame the present. (Although even then, there will be those who say "Wow! Just think how much worse it would have been....") Here are some things absolutely no one has any idea the answer to: - If we had done nothing extraordinary, how many people would have died from the virus? - If we had done nothing extraordinary, how much, if at all, would the global economy have contracted? We tell ourselves, today, that the answers are "Too many to contemplate" and "Whatever it is, we'll get through it". Maybe we're right. Maybe we're wrong. We're guessing.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Apr 3, 2020 15:53:07 GMT -5
By showing that sudden, catastrophic-to-humans changes on a global scale are possible. But then we're being very loosey-goosey with what is meant by "catastrophe". You're changing categories. In the case of climate change, what is being suggested is the extinction of human life. Even if COVID-19 had simply run its course without response, we would have had a catastrophe to human life, but not to global existence. In fact, it wouldn't have even made a dent in it. And if cold hard science is correct, and we can judge this amorally, the human race would end up stronger after the virus than before it, right? Those are interesting lines to open up for discussion, but really all I wanted to do was make a simple observation. Most things in nature happen gradually: leaves turn, water evaporates, etc. But some things happen suddenly, like lightning and earthquakes. I was just making the point that the outbreak began relatively suddenly, and on a global scale. It doesn't take an epidemiologist to figure out that one of these days one of these bugs may indeed wipe out the human species. An airborne virus with a very long period between infection and symptoms, for example. We could all be walking around dead before we even knew it. The deniers have been wont to say it can't happen, the earth is too big to not self-correct to the satisfaction of us hominid planetary hitchhikers. Here is evidence that our world can certainly be suddenly upended on a scale few of us alive today have seen. That should put a dent in the smug self-assurance of deniers, in my opinion. I really didn't think my post would get any push-back here, and it wasn't meant to start an argument. I should have signalled that I was switching subjects. But I hope the truth of what I opined wakes up the denier community to the fact that big shit can happen in a hurry, whether human caused or not, and maybe they should have a little more respect for hard science, which is our friend, not our enemy to be scoffed at.
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on Apr 3, 2020 16:01:20 GMT -5
I would just like to state for the record that while as a proud Wisconsin native I have eaten innumerable brats over the years (even some that were probably undercooked), I have never eaten bats -- undercooked, overcooked or "just right."
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 16:04:35 GMT -5
But then we're being very loosey-goosey with what is meant by "catastrophe". You're changing categories. In the case of climate change, what is being suggested is the extinction of human life. Even if COVID-19 had simply run its course without response, we would have had a catastrophe to human life, but not to global existence. In fact, it wouldn't have even made a dent in it. And if cold hard science is correct, and we can judge this amorally, the human race would end up stronger after the virus than before it, right? Those are interesting lines to open up for discussion, but really all I wanted to do was make a simple observation. Most things in nature happen gradually: leaves turn, water evaporates, etc. But some things happen suddenly, like lightning and earthquakes. I was just making the point that the outbreak began relatively suddenly, and on a global scale. It doesn't take an epidemiologist to figure out that one of these days one of these bugs may indeed wipe out the human species. An airborne virus with a very long period between infection and symptoms, for example. We could all be walking around dead before we even knew it. The deniers have been wont to say it can't happen, the earth is too big to not self-correct to the satisfaction of us hominid planetary hitchhikers. Here is evidence that our world can certainly be suddenly upended on a scale few of us alive today have seen. That should put a dent in the smug self-assurance of deniers, in my opinion. I really didn't think my post would get any push-back here, and it wasn't meant to start an argument. I should have signalled that I was switching subjects. But I hope the truth of what I opined wakes up the denier community to the fact that big shit can happen in a hurry, whether human caused or not, and maybe they should have a little more respect for hard science, which is our friend, not our enemy to be scoffed at. I ran that one past my evolutionary biologist friend. It's been the subject of a fair amount of study, but at present, there is no evidence that any species, ever, has been driven to extinction by a viral infection. Here's some science.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 16:08:08 GMT -5
And really, Don, you repeatedly use the highly loaded term "denier", and are surprised at pushback?
Come on.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Apr 3, 2020 16:21:06 GMT -5
And really, Don, you repeatedly use the highly loaded term "denier", and are surprised at pushback? Come on. Fair point, but the term saves a lot of words. How about, "people who don't believe in science"? I'm trying hard here.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Apr 3, 2020 16:22:32 GMT -5
And really, Don, you repeatedly use the highly loaded term "denier", and are surprised at pushback? Come on. Fair point, but the term saves a lot of words. How about, "people who don't believe in science"? I'm trying hard here. You can't be serious.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Apr 3, 2020 16:36:00 GMT -5
Fair point, but the term saves a lot of words. How about, "people who don't believe in science"? I'm trying hard here. You can't be serious. I've given it some thought, and I really can't think of a better term to describe the kind of people I'm talking about. None of whom live on this forum. But they do exist, in great numbers.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Apr 3, 2020 16:51:41 GMT -5
Well, I'm disappointed no one is running with me on Marshall's post about "horsehoes". Horses with hoes is funny. As is bear suits and penguins in tuxes.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Apr 3, 2020 16:53:29 GMT -5
Do horses pull hoes? I know they pull ploughs, but hoes?
|
|
|
Post by sidheguitarmichael on Apr 3, 2020 16:57:07 GMT -5
I've given it some thought, and I really can't think of a better term to describe the kind of people I'm talking about. None of whom live on this forum. But they do exist, in great numbers. In that case, have you tried "fricking morons" on for size yet?
|
|