atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#7650: Science, alas

Throughout the whole Wuhan Flu fiasco</a> we have been endlessly hectored about science. First we shouldn't wear masks because they don't help, then we should because science showed how effective they were. Lockdowns were implemented on the basis of science. We were told that we should stand six feet apart and never shake hands because of what science told us. Shut down the schools and whatever businesses that science said were nonessential.

CDC's decided to change the test thresholds again so that there are almost no new cases detected. Based--of course--on science.

The simple fact is that the word "science" has become nothing but a shibboleth, something raised by our government as the reason for taking steps which are disastrously ineffective and incompetently selected. Not just for Wuhan Flu, but for everything, from energy policy to social policy to financial policy.

But science is not something that justifies whatever you feel like doing, not real science. The scientific method demands that you take into account what reality has to say about your theory. Your theory must match reality, not the other way around, in order for you to be doing science--and if your theory doesn't match what the data show, you must change the theory rather than the data.

Climatology is the most egregious example, but Lord, it's not the only one.

In this case, CDC is arranging things so as to "...continuously inflate one number [test positives in unvaccinated people], and systematically minimise the other [test positives in vaccinated people]."

This isn't science. It's not medicine. It's just people with an agenda fucking with the numbers to show whatever it is that they want to show.

* * *

This is actually a similar story. The left wanted cops to be forced to wear body cameras, because the left thought they'd get all kinds of "red meat" from it--propaganda they could use to, among other things, stir unrest in the black community.

The thing is, though, the bodycam footage usually does not show that. There are some bad cops, but by far and away police are shown to be calm, collected, and reasoned in the face of outrageous provocations, and also to follow established procedure. They do not--as the left had hoped to show--go right to shooting black people dead, and the "systemic racism" that they'd hoped to prove with body camera footage has failed to materialize.

And so?
Body cams have shown an inconvenient truth: ACAB--all cop aren't bastards. Leftists are actually disappointed that body cameras show police officers are NOT oppressing people of color. What we HAVE seen is heroic police work while officers deal with horrific criminal behavior.

Police reality shows have long shown the truth, and have paid the price. A&E canceled their highly-rated Live PD, which followed cops on patrol from 9 pm to midnight, after they filmed a black man resisting arrest, getting tasered 4 times, and dying. Cops and Body Cam were also suspended for showing the truth of criminal behavior.
And that is why those shows were canceled. I've been saying it and saying it: Cops wasn't canceled out of any kind of "sensitivity" or "compassion" but because they showed what cops do and have to deal with. How can the left sell the narrative that policing is racist if there are real-world examples of criminal behavior being shown on TV every night?

The examples were legion: cop pulls over a car for something like a busted taillight or something similar. Driver turns out to have a warrant out for his arrest. (Or he's carrying lots of drugs. Or a weapon. Or--) Cop goes to arrest driver, driver resists arrest and/or tries to flee. And so the cop apprehends the criminal, sometimes needing to use a taser.

What you do not see is the cop pulling over a black man and immediately putting him in cuffs and then roughing him up, while laughing and calling him racial slurs, which is the scenario the left expected to see.

Cops showed that police generally dislike using force to apprehend people, and do their best to avoid it; and when necessary they try their utmost to use the minimum amount needed. Cops who are itching to get out there and "bust heads" typically do not last long, and the ones that do usually have a list of prior complaits longer than their arms by the time they have their "shooting an unarmed black man" moment.

The left hates the police because the police follow a fair and simple rubric: "Is that person committing a crime? Is it serious enough to arrest him for, or do I issue a citation for it?" It doesn't matter who the person is nor does it matter what the crime is; the police officer's job is to apprehend criminals and remand them to the courts for further action.

The left, however, want their own people to do the job of the police, and their rubric is even simpler but utterly unfair: "Is that guy on my side? If so, he walks. Otherwise, we'll kill him."

And they can't do this if they're hampered by the justice system.

* * *

Why should I believe anything the press says about Palestine and Hamas? It's perfectly simple to take a picture from last year (or last decade) and tell people it was taken in Gaza a few days ago.

I trust nothing that the mainstream media tells me, because they have an obvious agenda, and their agenda is not supported by the truth.

* * *

So, big surprise, the mayor of Chicago turns out to be a huge racist. She's not giving interviews to white reporters. The white reporters are, of course, perfectly fine with this. let a white republican try saying he won't give interviews to black reporters and see how that goes.

I was going to say "white politician" but then I realized that if a white democrat is deemed sufficiently necessary to the cause, he can do whatever he wants and the press won't call him on it. Like, say, if Joe Biden were to say something like that, the press would spin it and quietly drop it after a day or two. "He meant to say 'black publications, because in the past such-and-such was unfair to democrats." You mean, like, in the 1950s, a black-owned newspaper said that democrats were the party of Jim Crow, or something.

What makes you think she won't get away with this? Politicians who get farther than local office generally have enough brains not to say egregiously stupid things like "my interviews are granted solely on the basis of race" unless they know it's not going to hurt them.

* * *

So, basically, I am now fasting.

All I'm allowed to have is liquids. That includes gelatin and broth, of course, but no real solids whatsoever.

We went out to the mexican place yesterday for fajitas; I stuffed myself to the gills, to the point that I was not even remotely hungry even at 2 AM, which--as I type this--was 12 hours ago.

I have three hours until I take the first round of colon blow. It's basically epsom salts; take a 6 oz bottle of solution and mix with 16 oz of water (or lemon-lime soda, or white grape juice; I'm intent on using ginger ale) and then drink it, plus sixteen more ounces of fluids.

And let the games begin!


But, hey! It's all for science, right?

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.