Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

PS:  Looks like you have to subscribe - which I'm not going to do - to read the article.

I can read the article without subscribing (following the link given above), no problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Verified is a funny word , nowadays, perhaps always, but definitely nowadays.

The single greatest advance in medicine was the germ theory of disease. It's precursor was smallpox vaccination. There is no handling flu with vaccine, just the pretense, but the pretense is a ho

Indeed. I may be skeptical about aspects of the story, but not the story itself.

Posted Images

36 minutes ago, merjet said:

I keep a copy of Microsoft Edge on my desktop so I can occasionally read an article from the New York Times, Bloomberg, and other publications that allow a low number of N free articles per month w/o subscribing. If I reach N, I clear the browser history to reset the "articles read" to zero.

The Washington Compost doesn't allow any free articles.

I use an iPad, and I haven't read anything from the NYT in a long while - a couple things from Bloomberg when Trump was in the hospital.


 

32 minutes ago, Max said:

I can read the article without subscribing (following the link given above), no problem.

Doesn't look like I can access it without subscribing.  I have no idea why you in Germany can and I can't.  One of those mysteries of life.

Anyway, I don't think that reading the article is of any importance.

Talk about a quip buried by trivialities.  🙄

Ellen 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or go here:

Archive.today

Then copy the link address of the article and paste it in the second field: "I want to search the archive for saved snapshots."

You will be able to read almost all news articles behind paywalls, including WSJ.

I don't know about scientific articles and things like that, and I haven't messed with archiving content. Maybe someday... :) 

This is black hattish (I sometimes hang out at the wild side :) ), but fully legal.

This is a great site to bookmark.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

Looks like the ARI is ready to throw down with Krugman:

TG,

Wow...

They're going to do a tweet war.

That'll show Krugman. Make him squirm, by God.

He's already quaking in terror.

:)

Let's see if he said anything.

Well, there it is.

I think that's about as much sound and fury this thing is going to get.

Is it worth it?

Here's a way to use Rand's own ideas to correctly identify the problem before gearing up and going into battle to protect Ayn Rand from NYT smears.

Start with this:

A is A.

Law of identity.

Use that as the epistemological foundation when looking at NYT and Paul Krugman.

Then judge the situation in terms of what is real as opposed to what is pipe dream. The way I see it, there are only two evaluations possible.

1. No incentive, positive or negative, exists to get NYT to change or remove the article. The NYT did not break any laws and this was an opinion piece.

2. Paul Krugman couldn't give a fuck.

:)

All the rest is ARI bluster signifying nothing other than the ARI people are pissed. Imagine what the NYT and Krugman think of that. :) 

The ARI people could also use this "A is A" process to identify Twitter before judging it (in order to implement battle plans), but I think Twitter doesn't exist in reality as we know it. It's in some kind of 6th dimension, something like Schrödinger's cat.

So that's a bit more complicated when gearing up for war. 

Out here in normal reality, though, nothing will change. But at least the ARI folks will feel good.

:) 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, Ayn Rand was terrified of germs, having lived through a cholera epidemic in Russia.  She washed dishes wearing heavy-duty rubber gloves and using scalding water.

I think that she would have worn a high-filtration mask to guard against catching Covid, if she'd ventured out of her apartment at all, and that she'd have insisted that Frank wear a high-filtration mask if he ventured out.

Ellen

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

December vaccine rollout possible, BioNTech CEO says. BioNTech co-founder Ugur Sahin said on Thursday the frontrunner Covid-19 vaccine his German firm is developing with Pfizer could be rolled out before the year is over in the United States or Europe. end quote

A doctor on Fox was saying that older people between 70 and 80 have a twenty percent morality rate, and people between 80 and 90 have a sixty percent death rate if I remember correctly. The rate goes way down the younger you are, so stay young and keep exercising.

The shot / vaccine will be made available to first responders and people in critical medical and other jobs first, which seems reasonable and smart to me. Then it will be available to people with preexisting medical conditions and older Americans. Thank goodness you don’t need to show up at a hospital.

I am thinking about which shot to get, and when, and where. Three major drug stores are going to give it including Walgreens, CVS, and Rite Aid. Yesterday, at a local Walgreens they were giving the Covid 19 test and the parking lot was a mess with cars blocking everything. You had to park far away and walk to get a prescription. Someone called the Delaware State Police and at first they said they won’t show up on private property but then one did show up to help out.  

If you have any contrary information please correct me, and if you have anything to add I will be listening. If I have a choice of 2 or 3 vaccines I will need more info to know which one to take.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

December vaccine rollout possible, BioNTech CEO says. BioNTech co-founder Ugur Sahin said on Thursday the frontrunner Covid-19 vaccine his German firm is developing with Pfizer could be rolled out before the year is over in the United States or Europe. end quote

A doctor on Fox was saying that older people between 70 and 80 have a twenty percent morality rate, and people between 80 and 90 have a sixty percent death rate if I remember correctly. The rate goes way down the younger you are, so stay young and keep exercising.

The shot / vaccine will be made available to first responders and people in critical medical and other jobs first, which seems reasonable and smart to me. Then it will be available to people with preexisting medical conditions and older Americans. Thank goodness you don’t need to show up at a hospital.

I am thinking about which shot to get, and when, and where. Three major drug stores are going to give it including Walgreens, CVS, and Rite Aid. Yesterday, at a local Walgreens they were giving the Covid 19 test and the parking lot was a mess with cars blocking everything. You had to park far away and walk to get a prescription. Someone called the Delaware State Police and at first they said they won’t show up on private property but then one did show up to help out.  

If you have any contrary information please correct me, and if you have anything to add I will be listening. If I have a choice of 2 or 3 vaccines I will need more info to know which one to take.   

Peter, I would track side effects of all offered and choose accordingly. I've heard of a dr who took the Pfizer beta or trial version and had migraines then was sick for 2 weeks. After that he said he feels great. My question is if living in a locked down state you're suddenly free of worry over health but cannot do much about a lock down. Im wondering if a vaccination makes a young person feel lousy for 2 weeks hows an older persons' toleration.

Also why would anyone get a vaccine and suffer through having to wear a mandated mask? I cant stand having anything on my face. Was the same way with a ring on my finger.

Have you considered how taking it will free you up from your behavior avoidance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turkeyfoot wrote, “Have you considered how taking it will free you up from your behavior avoidance?

I didn’t watch the video but an older lady asked a couple to wear masks before they stepped into the elevator with her and they badly beat her up. Since it was all caught on the elevator camera, the perpetrators may be found and prosecuted.      

I think once the vaccine Krakens are released there will be a reasonably fast withdrawal of all mask laws, quarantining, restrictions on the number of people who can gather at restaurants, and the reopening of theatres and malls. And of course everyone who gets the shot and feels invincible will toss the mask immediately, no matter what the governor or mayor says.

Around here governors are restricting the number of Thanksgiving diners to ten even if they are close relatives. Perhaps Christmas dinners or get-togethers will be freer, more optimistic, and lawless. And remember, you first time turkey cookers, the inner meat must reach 165 degrees or you will get sick.  Joke.

On the news they just said mid-December may be the first vaccine release date. I suppose a lot of people will claim to be infirm to get the first shots while others will refuse to get the shot. Maybe the governor’s minions will show up at your door and hold you down to give you the shot like a screaming, reluctant 3 year old. That’s another joke. I think. Peter      

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Peter said:

I think once the vaccine Krakens are released there will be a reasonably fast withdrawal of all mask laws...

Peter,

Scott Adams said the best thing we can possibly do right now is follow the science.

Yesterday (or the day before), a scientific study came out proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that masks work. And to reinforce that, another scientific study came out proving conclusively that masks do not work.

So the best, most rational, thing we can all do right now is follow the science.

:)

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

So the best, most rational, thing we can all do right now is follow the science.

That is funny. I don't know if anyone mentioned it but the medical scientists think a person has at least four months of immunity if they got Covid-19 and that time is growing and provable . . . hopefully. If you get it you may not get it again, but it may also become a "yearly shot" like the flu.    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. I think I saw at a glance that Georgia was calling the race.

And I thought our Maryland Governor Hogan’s “leash laws” were a bit harsh, but it may be worst elsewhere.   

From MSN News. THANKSGIVING AMID CALLS TO DOWNSIZE GATHERINGS . . . . Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo Thursday issued a "social gathering limit" that bars anyone in the state from spending time in a social setting with anybody from outside of their household. Other states have limited gatherings to two or three households, but Raimondo joins just Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in barring social gatherings of any different households. This, according to Raimondo, means family members that don't live together may not spend Thanksgiving together. "Starting today, we’re lowering the social gathering limit to a single household," she said. "This means you should not be spending time socially with anyone you don’t live with -- this includes on Thanksgiving." Raimondo also gave notice of a plan to start what she termed a "two-week-pause" on Nov. 30, which is the Monday after Thanksgiving. That pause includes closures of bars, offices where workers can telecommute, in-person college classes, indoor sports facilities besides NCAA and professional sports, and more . . . . Pushback to the lockdowns and coronavirus orders has been fierce from some, as frustration builds over the side effects of things like stay-at-home orders, an apparent desire by some officials to have measures like masks continue even after widespread vaccination and alleged hypocrisy from the politicians implementing the rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap. 2000 deaths in one day caused by The Black Death from China!. We actually have a local Chinese food restaurant called Hunan. I wonder how they are doing? Cue the ending music from Forrest Gump. I like the symbolism of the feather floating away.

From CNN. Nearly 80,700 people were hospitalized with Covid-19 in the US on Thursday, an all-time high, according to the Covid Tracking Project. As of Friday, the US was averaging 74,063 current hospitalizations over the last 7 days -- up 19.13% compared to the week prior. Over half of the country is now in the "red zone," Dr. Deborah Birx, a White House Coronavirus Task Force member told CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta in an exclusive interview, warning that this surge was unlike those in the past. "When you look at what's happening now, the rate of rise is dramatically different," Birx said. "This is faster. It's broader. And what worries me, it could be longer."

More than 2,000 American deaths were recorded by Johns Hopkins University on Thursday -- the highest number since early May. And by December 18, more than 2,300 Americans could be losing their lives daily, according to the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) . . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tmj said:

I just looked and in 2017 the average number of deaths per day in the US was 7700~, is the 2K in addition to or a function of ?

I would guess a lot of people die of old age and disease every day but that 2000 was attributable to Covid. Statistics, and damn lies as Twain may have said.

Pet peeve? Those white ear-buds guys wear on the news. I see them  and wonder if they are all wearing “kinky boots” too. I just saw a guy on Fox Business with black ear-buds and they didn’t look so bad in black. And of course since they look like earrings the gals do NOT look odd in them. No offense meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fauci gets frustrated: 'Get rid of these ridiculous conspiracy theories' Kaelan Deese . . . .  Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, noted that the U.S. has now seen 250,000 deaths from COVID-19. The nation has recorded more than 11 million cases. "I tell the people who deny or think that this is nothing, do you mean that every single country in Europe is doing the same thing, is making things up? They're not. I mean, it's so obvious," Fauci added. Fauci has expressed hope about coming vaccines, saying Thursday that "the cavalry is coming." But the nation is in the midst of a serious spike in COVID-19 cases that are likely to greatly add to the country's death total before vaccines are widely available.

Notes. Real life stories from the Great Ellen Stuttle.

From: Ellen Stuttle To: atlantis Subject: ATL: Evasion (was: Re: Re: Re:  Hypothetical Question) Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 15:11:53 -0400. Well, at least something is coming clearer here.  I'm not going to quote Gayle's remarks, since I'm not going to argue with her further, but it's become evident that indeed she doesn't understand what "evasion" means. Simply put, evasion is willful blindness.  It's the inner act of turning one's consciousness away from recognizing something that one could recognize if one attended to it. I'll give an analogy from external behavior which I think is of help in understanding the process of evasion.  The analogy comes from something which happened earlier this year when the issue of determinism was being discussed on the list.  I was thinking then of writing a post about it, but I didn't have time.

The incident occurred when I went to the ladies' room during intermission at a chamber orchestra concert.  I started to walk into one of the stalls, but as I was opening the stall door I just barely glimpsed that someone was already in there -- either the lock didn't work, or she'd forgotten to lock the door.  I promptly did the polite thing in such circumstances, which was quickly to avert my eyes even further from focusing on seeing the woman, while I backed out the door.

If you extrapolate from this example to an inner process, you'll get the idea of what evasion is.  With evasion, the person is dimly -- non-focally -- aware that the person is just about, if the cognitive processing continues, to become aware of something which the person senses would be disconcerting, unpleasant, or in some other way threatening to be fully aware of; and so the person averts the inner gaze, as it were, turning the thought process to something else, turning it away from the threatening material, thus preventing focal recognition of the threatening material. Ellen S.

From: Ellen Stuttle To: atlantis Subject: ATL: Re: Evasion Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 23:41:10 -0400. I wrote: >"Simply put, evasion is willful blindness. It's the inner act of turning one's consciousness away from recognizing something that one could recognize if one attended to it. "If you extrapolate from this example to an inner process, you'll get the idea of what evasion is.  With evasion, the person is dimly -- non-focally – aware that the person is just about, if the cognitive processing continues, to become aware of something which the person senses would be disconcerting, unpleasant, or in some other way threatening to be fully aware of; and so the person averts the inner gaze, as it were, turning the thought process to something else, turning it away from the threatening material, thus preventing focal recognition of the threatening material."

Keyser asks a series of questions, which I'll address in sequence (except the last two, which I'll skip).  > Ellen, Is evasion actually willful ~blindness~?

Incidentally, I should have said "willful inner blindness." Though I used an external process to illustrate, I'm talking about what one does with a cognitive process.

> Or is it a lie based on a very ~clear vision~ of an unwanted reality? Is evasion even possible?

I distinguish between "lying" and "evading."  Although in one of my posts, I spoke of "consciously lying," because I was emphasizing a particular point there, the way I use the term "lying," "conscious" is redundant.  I define "lying" as the statement of something which one knows to be false, a deliberate attempt to deceive.  Thus, I think that "lying" can only be done in regard to someone else, not in regard to oneself, because I think that if someone *knows* clearly that X is true, one can't at that same moment believe that X isn't true.  Thus what one has to accomplish, if one doesn't want to believe X, is to avoid knowing it.

>It seems to me that, unless a person is severely mentally ill, she would have to be very consciously aware of why the truth is disconcerting in order to construct a safe or heroic false alternative.

I don't see that at all.  There are many different degrees of awareness.  If you're paying attention to one thing, most else isn't in your central awareness, but there's much else of which you're peripherally aware.  And often one can sense the direction one's thoughts will take -- or certainly, I can.  And in many circumstances (though not all) it's possible to change the direction.  For instance, think of an experience such as ... oh, say, you're about to have a flu shot.  And maybe you're nervous about shots.  So you try to distract yourself by looking out a window or by thinking about some subject other than the needle approaching your skin.  Have you never done anything like this?  In that circumstance, it wouldn't be evading, just intelligently avoiding unnecessary pain.  But suppose instead that maybe you suspect you have a medical problem and you should go to a doctor, but each time the thought of making an appointment starts to arise, you change the subject in your mind (one way of doing that is to tell yourself, in effect, I'll think about it tomorrow, but then you keep putting off "tomorrow"). Or you might say to yourself, "Really, everything is perfectly fine; it's just that I'm a bit tired," etc., etc.  There you're creating an alternate explanation, which you keep your mind on, attempting to believe it.  But if you directly attended to the symptoms you're experiencing, you wouldn't believe the story you're telling yourself.

>What are your reasons for concluding that a person prevents his own "focal recognition" of an unpleasant reality?

I'm not sure if you're asking why I would think it's possible to prevent "focal recognition," or how I would know if some particular person is doing that.  The first I know is possible to at least one human, on the basis that I can do it -- and thus (here we go again with, what can we know about other minds?), I assume that others can, too.  Furthermore, I observe behavior where it looks from the way the person responds as if that's what the person is doing. (See next question.)

>How would you know that he is not simply lying based on his clear understanding of reality?

As I said, "lying" I take to mean a deliberate attempt to convince someone else of something one knows is false, whereas evasion is directed toward keeping oneself from knowing. So I don't see the two as alternates, though it can happen that a person has to evade in order to be able to lie.  (For instance, if the person thinks that lying is immoral and hence has to come up with an excuse via evasion in order to lie.)

As to the specifics of how I would tell...what, you want a treatise here, do you?  I mean, Keyser, that's an enormous question involving an enormous range of behavior, varying from people who lie characteristically to people who lie about a particular situation; from people whose whole personality I'd describe as evasive to people who seldom to never evade (near as I can tell).  I'd really have to have the details of the particular circumstance before I could assess it. But the starting point of assessing is going to be something which seems "off," something which doesn't add up.  One such starting point would be if someone tells me something which I myself have reason to know isn't true.  Another would be evidence of discomfort when someone tells me something. Another would be that the person's behavior and how the person describes his or her behavior don't jibe.  Another would be defense mechanisms being kicked into gear when a particular subject arises.  And in terms of how I'd be sure if I was judging the person correctly...in the vast majority of cases I'm not sure.

>Isn't personal experience of one's own mind the only evidence that could lead to such a conclusion about others? I don't mean to make this personal, but have you ever willfully unfocused your awareness in order to avoid a harsh reality?

As I hope I made clear above, I don't actually think that the process occurs through "unfocusing" one's awareness, but instead through shifting one's awareness away from impending focal awareness on X.  And, yes, I've done that willfully, though not often in a circumstance which I'd describe as evading, usually in a circumstance like the flu-shot example.

>I don't think that I have (or could). Any "evasion" that I've caught myself creating had been based on a very clear understanding of what the truth actually was, and what consequences I had contemplated avoiding (note the ~very~ past tense of this sentence :-)).

I'd need further details to have a sense of what you're meaning here.  Do you mean making excuses for not doing something?  Or trying to talk yourself into believing what you suspect isn't true?  But how would you succeed at either of those without preventing yourself from looking too closely at what you're trying to avoid?

Please excuse my not answering the two specific questions you asked, one re Peikoff and one re Rand.  I'd rather not get into that subject again now.  (Also, I'm aware that I'm merely brushing the surface here.  I sense that you're really interested in knowing, so I feel frustrated that (a) sitting in front of a computer screen is too hard on my eyes for me to do it very long; and (b) exploring the issues would need delving into lots of case examples, and such delving is outside the parameters of this context, since the only examples you and I have in common as reference cases are other list members.) Ellen S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From The New York Times Sunday Crossword Puzzle. Clue: Work done on the premises. Five letters. The answer is: logic. Get yer toilet paper here. Copies of The York Times for only a buck. Get yer toilet paper here.

You know, I may go buy or order some other stuff too . . . just to be safe.

LOS ANGELES/NEW YORK (Reuters) - Toilet paper aisles are emptying again as COVID-19 curfews and shutdowns in states from California to New York send pandemic-weary shoppers on a new scramble for essentials. Walmart on Friday said it was "seeing pockets of lower than normal availability" for toilet paper and cleaning supplies in some communities as infections rage virtually unchecked across most of the United States. As of Friday afternoon, 22 states have imposed restrictions aimed at decreasing spread of the virus - giving rise to a new round of panic buying from shoppers and purchase limits from retailers including Target and Kroger, the nation's largest supermarket chain. Shoppers in a half dozen cities around the United States told Reuters that disinfecting wipes were sold out at discount retailers like Walmart and Costco , as well as at Cerberus Capital-owned grocery chains Albertsons and Vons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The upshot. Masks work.

"Only recruits who shared rooms and were part of the same platoon spread the disease. In particular, even recruits who were close by and shared a bathroom with those infected didn’t get infected. Hence, only those who lived two to a room and who worked closely together got this virus."

https://regenexx.com/blog/new-nejm-article-covid-19-disease-transmission-is-close-contact/

"The upshot? This military recruit study is about as good as it gets, which is why it was published in the New England Journal. Meaning, it’s rare to find a real-world study where this number of variables was strictly controlled. I’m very thankful we’re actually starting to get some real science published!"

“All recruits wore double-layered cloth masks at all times indoors and outdoors, except when sleeping or eating; practiced social distancing of at least 6 feet; were not allowed to leave campus; did not have access to personal electronics and other items that might contribute to surface transmission; and routinely washed their hands. They slept in double-occupancy rooms with sinks, ate in shared dining facilities, and used shared bathrooms. All recruits cleaned their rooms daily, sanitized bathrooms after each use with bleach wipes, and ate preplated meals in a dining hall that was cleaned with bleach after each platoon had eaten. Most instruction and exercises were conducted outdoors. All movement of recruits was supervised, and unidirectional flow was implemented, with designated building entry and exit points to minimize contact among persons. All recruits, regardless of participation in the study, underwent daily temperature and symptom screening. Six instructors who were assigned to each platoon worked in 8-hour shifts and enforced the quarantine measures. If recruits reported any signs or symptoms consistent with Covid-19, they reported to sick call, underwent rapid qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2, and were placed in isolation pending the results of testing.”

I live in a petri dish part of Roanoke Va. Since the middle of April and up to last night I've played mask free with 25 regulars and frequent others coming from up to an hr away. No telling who is in their circles. This happens at least 3 times a week for up to 3 hrs per. There's been 4 tournaments with upwards of 30 friends or guests of players occupying a gym for hrs at a time without masks. Have heard of 2 cases from people who played at the same facility though it is unlikely either caught SARS-CoV-2 where the playing occurred. 

29 deaths have occurred since the onset in Roanoke attributed to C19.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now