I I feel since I’m commenting in layman’s term because I am just a simple person who works from home nowadays I am a care provider so I understand protocols and universal precautions I’ve worked through the H1N1 pandemic and other flu pandemics as well and understand the importance of universal precautions and distancing and protecting you and the person you’re serving when they are sick.

I think the most troublesome thing about this current pandemic is the insufficient evidence of it being the do-all end-all of all pandemics the way the media makes it sound if you watch the news everyday which I don’t. Coronavirus is the end of the world they only focus on the cases they don’t focus on the reality of it that it seems like it’s here to stay they don’t focus on keeping your immune system strong preventative measures they only focus on hiding yourself wearing the mask slow the spread it’s not slowing it’s here to stay it’s time to stop living in fear of it that’s how I feel that’s only my personal opinion and given the non-substantial evidence of the actual counts of the coronavirus and the actual real deaths of coronavirus alone I’m not convinced I feel like this is highly political and a money game and it’s very disturbing

which has been known for more than six months to give 90%+ false positives,
There are no tests being used, either RNA or antibody tests, that give such high false positive rates.

the CDC has already admitted was a lie.
The lie was by those making false claims about what the CDC actually said.

As for the rest of your comment, as soon as someone starts applying ideology to distort science you know they’re talking nonsense.

What’s going on here is that the CDC is still angry and still thirsting for revenge for when the Clintons politicized their agency 25 years ago, ordering them to treat the Second Amendment as a “public health emergency,” and Newt Gingrich shut them down and cut their funding. Ever since they’ve been yearning for revenge for that humiliation, by which I mean, more money and more statutory power over the lives of the hoi polloi. And with the Wubonic Plague–a disease that is approximately equal in severity to the common cold, harmless to anyone who doesn’t already have one foot in the grave and one on a banana peel–they’ve found their perfect instrument, the perfect tool to give them political cover for their outrageous demands and even more outrageous plans. If the Chinese Flu didn’t exist they’d have had to invent it. And it’s not entirely impossible that they did just that.

David: I honestly do not wish to ban Bernard, which is why I only suspended him this time. However, unlike you, who disagrees with me strongly but always discusses the issues with respect and decency, Bernard goes out of his way to cross the line. As sippin_bourbon mentions above, Bernard wants to be banned. He has been trying to bait me so that he can play the victim card.

And what you also do not know is the comment he tried to post since I suspended him. Trust me, he has no interest in a civilized debate, only hate and slander. And I will not have slander on my website, especially against myself. Too often the left has used it to smear decent people so that they become ostracized and “canceled.”

You might wish to read my essay, Obama’s Legacy of Hate. I will not have done to me what people like Bernard have done to the Proud Boys.

The comments section on your writings that delve into politics tend to be an echo chamber. Bernard and others who differ provide a needed breath of fresh air.

My two cents…

He WANTS to be banned.
I figured that out weeks ago.

He has been baiting you to do it.
That way he can play the victim card.

Edward: Well, he will have to sit for a week. I can’t have someone coming on this site and accusing me of “fabricating” lies. For my readers, I agree, you can take it, but I have to think about the webpage. As they say, a lie will circle the globe before the truth has even gotten out of bed. Such slanders can do me real harm. I cannot look the other way.

In my not-so-humble opinion, in his ignorance he cannot recognize the difference. What are they teaching in school, these days? I think that we are thick skinned enough to cope with Bernard’s disagreeable demeanor, lies, and even his slander. It is kind of fun to argue with him, as he clearly does not understand what we are saying. It lets us get away with so much that we couldn’t say to another person. As Eddie willers pointed out: “Bernard’s funny.“.

I do not think that he has yet written anything that violates your rules, so until he crosses that line, my opinion is to let him continue.

Just this afternoon a customer told me that she and her husband were thinking of selling their house and moving because local members of ANTIFA who her husband has had on going local political / social media confrontations with which have escalated into legal action against them are using various city agencies / departments and frivolous reports of violations to harass them. Fits their MO perfectly, aggression once removed.

(This is one reason that I do not participate at all on social media, especially the likes of Facebook. It can only escalate in intensity and develop into a dark shouting match instead of communicating and resolving anything. PS: I get along with both sides, I know them all. And truth be told I like them all. Some a bit better than others, but I generally like and get along with them all.)

Face to face, up close and personal these young, sensitive, always offended, 30 something, “Politically correct”, millennial, “men” would crap their pants. And where does this all stem from? A fundamental lack of understanding and respect IMO.

Bernard sounds like he would get along with them just fine.

Bernard wrote: “Ban me if you wish. Obviously it is your prerogative to silence dissenting opinions.”

There you go again, implying evil when there is none. I have made it very clear, repeatedly, that I have no problem with dissenting opinions. (You are still here, I must note.) What I also made clear was that I will ban you if you cannot control your tendency to be insulting and to imply evil of others.

Obviously, you still don’t get it. Maybe a week’s ban will make you rethink. Give you time to consider the manner in which you treat others.

You will be welcome to comment here again and express dissenting opinions, come November 6th. Until then find somewhere else to comment.

Exactly what did I say to Johann to force him, apparently against his will, to accuse me of being subhuman garbage that gets pleasure out of the suffering and deaths of others? I don’t recall ever having a prior interaction with Johann, but perhaps you could refresh my memory. My only response was to point out the disgusting nature of the comment and then refused to dignify it with a further response. Which, given the situation, is a very civil response.

You very well know that his comment was not about Democratic policy and the efficacy of the lockdowns. His comment was a personal attack that accused me of taking pleasure in human suffering and death. If that doesn’t warrant at least moderation I don’t know what would.

Ban me if you wish. Obviously it is your prerogative to silence dissenting opinions.

Bernard: No, you did not prove anything posted on this site is a “fabrication.” You illustrated some data that might disagree with the real data I posted, demonstrating quite clearly what I certainly recognize as the uncertainty of what we know about this epidemic. That uncertainty is why I have no problem with people who disagree me from commenting on Behind the Black.

However, that some real data contradicts your narrow view of the world is not a “fabrication.” To call it that is what I said it was, a slander and a lie.

If you can’t recognize the difference, your time here will be very short. I am very much ready to ban you (though I would be interested in what my other readers think). You seem incapable of discussing any issue without accusing others of evil, simply because they don’t buy your arguments or data.

As for Johann’s post, I must repeat, your complete unwillingness to recognize the terrible cost of the lockdowns and the bad policy of many Democratic Party governors, leading to thousands of unnecessary deaths, makes his statement a reasonable one. In order to counter him, you need to address those facts. That you never do, but simply accuse others of “lying,” of “fabricating facts,” and of having an inability of seeing “your truth,” makes your arguments most unconvincing. It also makes everyone wonder about your real motives.

Please note: Except for you, the discussion here among everyone is quite civil. People respond badly to slander and insults. You routinely do that. You should not be surprised if you thus get slandered and insulted in turn.

I don’t like any of this. I could ban Johann, but in the end I would have to ban almost anyone who posts a comment who disagrees with you, because inevitably your insulting manner to them causes them to respond in kind.

Get your act fixed. Show some respect for others. Ask yourself repeatedly, “Is it possibly I might be wrong?” Do that, and you will find yourself pausing before posting something that is an insult or slander to those who disagree with you. You will recognize, they may have a point.

If you don’t, you will be gone. I don’t need the kind of ugly smears you like to spread. Neither does my website.

From Johann’s post:
“You’d never admit it, but deep down, you’re happy that lots of Americans have died, and not just because you see it as helping your political tribe. After all, don’t Americans deserve punishment for America’s original sins? Isn’t America a systemically racist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic society?”

Exactly what in that statement could you possibly ever interpret as not caring “about the many who have died because they couldn’t get health care for chronic health issues not involving COVID-19”? It is pretty clear what he meant – that I take joy in the deaths of thousands because it politically hurts conservatives and that for some reason I believe that they deserved to die. This is an indefensible statement and clearly does not conform to your requirements of adult, civil discourse. You deride me for “slander and character assassination” but express nothing but support for this kind of statement? It is beyond hypocritical for you to ignore the clear intent of this statement simply because the poster is a fan of yours.

And with regard to accusing you of posting fabrications, I presented my argument that the entire premise of this thread is a fabrication as well as a clear rebuttal of your position that only people who are already essentially dead succumb to this virus. Do not accuse me of not backing up my claims when I have done so. Just because you choose not to believe the data and sources that I presented does not make me guilty of making baseless accusations.

https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/02/the-swine-flu-epidemic-that-was-not-as-cdc-advertised-podcast/

https://youtu.be/wIFnmuiW7I8

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/29/these-12-graphs-show-mask-mandates-do-nothing-to-stop-covid/

The last 8 years will be a slow methodical transition from a once normal world to a dystopian nightmare before it is cleansed:

https://sumofthyword.com/2016/10/04/the-rapture-of-the-church-is-after-the-tribulation/

The Universe in a Mirror:
The Saga of The Hubble Space Telescope and the Visionaries Who Built It
Robert Zimmerman
WGBH Forum June 30, 2008
https://youtu.be/5mNJAf83YTs
1:24:20

(Not Mr. Z’s favorite presentation, but one that is easily found.)

I really started to notice the problem 15 years ago or more.
People who supported the Global Warming cause would link to 5 different opinion articles that all referenced the same three disproved research papers. For 10 years or more those same three papers were referenced in EVERY single GW article.
Now instead of real science and evidence they just claim its settled science and their is no more research that needs to be done to prove or disprove it. All scientists and governments finally agree its real so dissension is heretical.

The Covid panic is starting to go the very same way.

CBS: “Covid cases continue to rise in 25 states, setting new infection records”, is misinformation or tweeked information in the efforts to tag trump with them as we grind towards the last days of this presidential election.

Are the cases rising in general as a function of the “Second wave”? Or are there generally just more and more tests being given?

I spoke with a doctor this evening, she works in the belly of the beast in NYC, she checked the Covid list this morning and told me there were 5 cases in the hospital.

I trust none of them, especially at this particular moment in time.

The actual truth is a rare animal in this jungle.

Actually, we don’t attack the sources that you present, we have pointed out that they do not present the evidence that you claim that they do. We are attacking your ignorance of the topic. Your sources are still sources, but they are not facts or science, just opinions. Opinions can be influenced by a number of things, such as science, biases, self-interest, or politics. Decades of science pointed one way, up until the Wuhan Plague became political, then the opinions pointed a different way after that politicization, so most of us here at BtB believe the pre-Wuhan science rather than the post-Wuhan opinions.

“My arguments are for anyone who happens on this place looking for information on COVID – those people should know the truth about what is happening and the lies and misinformation should not go unchallenged.”

You, Bernard, do not come here for knowledge. You come here to try to spread your own lies and misinformation.

Fortunately, your target audience comes to the right place, because they quickly understand that what you say is wrong, often lies and always misinformation, and it does not go unchallenged, as we continually challenge it. You, on the other hand, have been consistently unable to back up your lies and misinformation. You have failed to successfully challenge what we have been saying. Your best has been to provide opinion, rather than fact, data, or science, and to claim that unspecified experts agree with you. Which experts agree with you, and did they have that same opinion before March?

“Every public health official, medical organization, infectious disease specialist, and the CDC themselves have debunked this falsehood. All of them.”

Except that you are unable to find a single one to link to in order to support your point. Your problem is that the data speaks for itself. The actual CDC data shows that not all the deaths that have been attributed to Wuhan Plague were caused by it. The distinction is important. In your ignorance, you argue to the contrary.

Meanwhile, each time you comment, you prove Mike’s position that you project your own actions onto the rest of us.
You also prove Wayne’s point that you don’t know diddly and Robert Pratt’s point that you are suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect. You don’t understand the experts that you rely upon; they are misinforming you.

You cannot win your argument, Bernard. The horrific reaction to the Wuhan Flu has caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans, and no one knows how many have died worldwide, or how many will die in the near future, all because your experts are wrong. The World Trade Organization fears that a hundred million children will starve because of the devastated distribution systems and the reduced charity due to the damaged economy. These are truths that you have not been willing to tell your target audience. There deaths are not something that seem to concern you at all.

You say that you don’t know the solution, but in your ignorance you are willing to deny the solutions offered here. You defend experts who have brought more death and destruction than the flu ever could have done. Your position is one that defends a monster that has devoured our lives, our livelihoods, and our liberty. That is the truth about what is happening.

“I do not have time to try and make sense of a manifesto.”

You don’t have the time, or you don’t have the sense?

As it has been clearly demonstrated here on BTB that, TRUTH, is a matter of perspective and interpretation.

Bernard: I’ve told you before, please don’t double post if your comment doesn’t appear immediately. My spam filter sometimes dumps things improperly in the trash or spam folder. I get to them when I can.

Also, accusing you of not caring about the many who have died because they couldn’t get health care for chronic health issues not involving COVID-19 is not name-calling. It is calling you on your position, as you really have appeared to be only focused on stopping COVID-19 (an impossible task regardless), even if it means the cure will be worse than the disease. I am sure this is not true, but it is the impression you leave.

Also, your tendency to be insulting is illustrated by this quote in the comment above:

It’s impossible to keep up with all of the fabrications that are posted here.

If you are going to accuse me or anyone of fabricating facts, you had better immediately back that accusation up. Otherwise, it is simply slander and character assassination.

Edward,
I followed your link, which linked to you linking yourself linking yourself in kind of a nonsensical diatribe roundabout. If you have a point, please try and be a little more succinct. I do not have time to try and make sense of a manifesto.

Johann,
Your statement that I am pleased with the deaths of nearly 1.2 million people worldwide is beyond despicable. I would argue that statement goes well beyond the ‘name-calling’ that Zimmerman so despises, but doubt that anything will come of it. I will not further dignify your comment with a response.

Regarding my comment about my family member, I guess I should’ve written that clearer. That it’s not just their opinion, but a combination of their observations of treatment and their constant review and analysis of the rapidly changing research and statistical data being developed on this disease. Some of what they are explaining to me matches up with a some of the points Bernard has tried to make on the various writings of Mr. Zimmerman. Some matches up with points Mr. Zimmerman puts forth.

Pandemics are not in my wheelhouse, so like us all I’m trying to learn what I can and sort through the flood of information.

As always, I wish you and everyone here good health in this trying time.

If there is evidence that the data points are in question (and their is), then the data should be questioned.
I did not reject it, but instead, suggests it needs to be re-examined.

Mr Z nailed it tho, you are all or nothing.
I am questioning.
One of these two stances is acceptable in science.

It’s quite clear that your primary objective is not to correct misinformation about Covid but rather to promote your political agenda. You’re likely thrilled about the pandemic in that you see it as damaging to President Trump and also an opportunity to show conservatives how much smarter (and morally superior) you are. You’d never admit it, but deep down, you’re happy that lots of Americans have died, and not just because you see it as helping your political tribe. After all, don’t Americans deserve punishment for America’s original sins? Isn’t America a systemically racist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic society?

Recent data shows that death rates for people sick enough to be hospitalized with Covid have plummeted around the world. The vast majority of people who get infected recover. We know who is vulnerable and who is not. Protect old folks and sick folks, open the schools and businesses. That, however, would be less advantageous to your political tribe than keeping people in general terrified of the virus.

So in your calculus, what’s an acceptable number of dead Americans, to you, if that figure would guarantee Trump’s defeat next week?

David. – see comments to Bernard from Edward and others.
Read the book – How Doctors Think – Jerome Groopman MD.

Also, please note the point made here over and over:
We deal in data – not opinion. When you point to a “healthcare professional in our family who is right there on the front line” that’s a single opinion. That person may be knowledgeable and experienced …etc. But it is a single opinion – not accurate data and a proven or indicated conclusion.

Hope you’ll keep the good fight.

None of the regulars here reject data .What we reject is the fear mongering in the media driven by numbers. When this started, they were broadcasting the raw numbers, which aren’t really relevant. X number of people died per day from Y…..when the numbers were shifted by an economic policy rewarding the health system for recording deaths by COVID. What is relevant is the average death rate for all causes per day……COVID, with the exception of the nursing home deaths brought by terrible public policy barely shifted the needle. The morgues being unable to handle the death toll in NYC? Well, the morgue can’t handle the daily death toll in NYC anyway, so any uptick is going to cause problems. Why do you think trailer companies had the extra reefer trailers to rant to morgues? They’re used to having to do so.

If you look at data, not numbers, and wait for the data to be screened and sorted, there’s no need to panic. (which is why the media constantly pushes numbers and ignores data)

No you’re not. As for not knowing the solution, you have advocated listening to “the experts,” who keep advocating solutions that we have shown to be more harmful than helpful. Yet you have argued that what we have argued is wrong, solely on the basis that it differs from the experts. We are fully aware that you are ignorant about any solutions to any of the problems, those you think we are unaware of as well as those that we have informed you of. Yet when we present our own solutions to all the problems you complain that we do not listen to the experts.

The experts have been proved to be wrong.

“The people here are not willing to accept the science and even admit there is a problem.”

Well, now you are lying. We have described a multitude of problems, but you reject all of them, because they differ from the only problem that you feel like considering. One of the problems is that the experts are only considering the Wuhan Plague From Hell and not considering the terrible side effects of the solutions they have imposed upon us. When we point out the results of these side effects you just complain that we have ignored the only problem that you consider to be important.

As for accepting the science, we are the only ones presenting any science. You only present opinion. You have presented some data, but your comments on that date demonstrate that you fail to understand the data you presented. You describe everything that you disagree with as anti-science, but we are the ones that have presented and understand the science. Unlike you, we know what science is. Indeed, the lies have come from you, because you have no idea what is going on, in addition to not having any idea as to solutions. We regulars here have been studying this for the entire year, reading science papers dating back decades, but you think that listening to what the experts are saying today is the correct thing to do.

But your experts have failed to present you with solutions. You are the one who rejects the empirical evidence that we have presented to you for solutions.