patrick.net

mostly reader says

Unless you have a reasonable resource to show that exposure in same controlled environment is the same. Do you? I doubt it.

OK. Forget the study. Link to your "resource" or you're making shit up.

mostly reader says

Show them.

Yes, show them!

Onvacation says

mostly reader says

. Then of course there's matter of statistics and other parameters, but there's no doubt that in a lab-controlled environment exposure of a person wearing a mask is lesser than the one who isn't, and significantly so.

Link to study please.

Or are you making shit up?

I already provided a few in this thread: https://patrick.net/post/1344073&80#comment-1826854

Sheesh

mostly reader says

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7?source=patrick.net

From your article

Recent studies suggest that wearing face masks reduces the spread of COVID-19 on a population level and consequently blunts the growth of the epidemic curve (7, 8). Still, determining mask efficacy is a complex topic that is still an active field of research [see, for example, (9)], made even more complicated because the infection pathways for COVID-19 are not yet fully understood and are complicated by many factors such as the route of transmission, correct fit and usage of masks, and environmental variables. From a public policy perspective, shortages in supply for surgical face masks and N95 respirators, as well as concerns about their side effects and the discomfort of prolonged use (10), have led to public use of a variety of solutions that are generally less restrictive (such as homemade cotton masks or bandanas) but usually of unknown efficacy. While some textiles used for mask fabrication have been characterized (11), the performance of actual masks in a practical setting needs to be considered. The work we report here describes a measurement method that can be used to improve evaluation to guide mask selection and purchase decisions.

Can you link a study that actually shows that masks are effective against viruses?

The main purpose of masks is to dehumanize is.

mostly reader says

Onvacation says

mostly reader says

. Then of course there's matter of statistics and other parameters, but there's no doubt that in a lab-controlled environment exposure of a person wearing a mask is lesser than the one who isn't, and significantly so.

Link to study please.

Or are you making shit up?

I already provided a few in this thread: https://patrick.net/post/1344073&80#comment-1826854

Sheesh

I looked up the first one - here's something I pulled out which kind of is saying "well, this was pretty pointless" - at least in my opinion.

The above studies all indicate a strong potential for masks to help reduce transmission of respiratory illnesses. To date, however, none have investigated the effectiveness of masks across a range of expiratory activities, and limited consideration has been given to different mask types. Furthermore, no studies to date have considered the masks themselves as potential sources of aerosol particles. It is well established that fibrous cellulosic materials, like cotton and paper, can release large quantities of micron-scale particles (i.e., dust) into the air39,40,41,42. Traditionally, these particles have not been considered a potential concern for respiratory viral diseases like influenza or now COVID-19, since these diseases have been thought to be transmitted via expiratory particles emitted directly from the respiratory tract of infected individuals43. Early work in the 1940s indicated, however, that infectious influenza virus could be collected from the air after vigorously shaking a contaminated blanket44. Despite this finding, over the next 70 years little attention focused on the possibility of respiratory virus transmission via environmental dust.

All they need is a control group.

There's states that had no mandates for the masks and some that didn't - the masks seemed largely worthless based on that. Florida has been over this nonsense for a long time.

Florida however, more sunshine than NYC. Should have just been a personal choice, stupid to make it a mandate. The people making the mandates sure as heck didn't believe the masks were useful.

Onvacation says

Can you link a study that actually shows that masks are effective against viruses?

You are moving the target. My statements are:

1) Masks indeed work in lab environment
2) Life is not lab environment.

I'm responsible only for what write. I'm not responsible for your mental process which transforms it into something else.

mostly reader says

> Onvacation

You are moving the target. My statements are:

1) Masks indeed work in lab environment
2) Life is not lab environment.

I'm responsible only for what write. I'm not responsible for your mental process which transforms it into something else.

So you're saying, "masks don't work in the real world"?

Agreed.

mostly reader says

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7?source=patrick.net

None of these are actual real world results on a public health level, but laboratory experiments.

A Public Health level study is "In DeBlasio Land, rigid mask wearing rules resulted in X rate of COVID (or Flu or any Respiratory Virus) cases vs. in DeSantis Land".

or "1000 people who wore masks had a rate of Flu infection of X, versus 985 people who didn't wear masks having a Flu infection rate of Y, over a 3 month, seasonal period."

Onvacation says

So you're saying, "masks don't work in the real world"?

I said nothing that would imply my understanding of how masks work - or don't - in real life. You are making shit up, again.

mostly reader says

I said nothing that would imply my understanding of how masks work

So do you think masks work to stop Wuhan contraction and spread or not?

It's quite amazing how people who try to challenge me on my masks comment literally repeat one of my points. While they think that they are arguing against me. Amazing.

Just so you know: in public, invalid argument that you make against masks immediately labels you as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. This discredits your position and makes it a lot harder to submit valid argument.

mostly reader says

Just so you know: in public, invalid argument that you make against masks immediately labels you as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

So you're saying, "masks do work in the real world"?

What are you saying?

I think masks are harmful in many ways. CO2 concentration, oxygen restriction, micro-expression suppression, dehumanization, and little effectiveness against viruses.

Can you clearly state your opinion on mask effectiveness in the real world? Not expecting corroborating evidence just curious about your opinion.

mostly reader says

Just so you know: in public, invalid argument that you make against masks immediately labels you as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. This discredits your position and makes it a lot harder to submit valid argument.

Who are you talking to and what "invalid argument" are you talking about?

Not that I really care. I think you just like to argue,

Onvacation says

Can you clearly state your opinion on mask effectiveness in the real world? Not expecting corroborating evidence just curious about your opinion.

Mask effectiveness in the real world no longer matters. Whatever it is, it's been offset by overall harm that they bring along. You are asking my opinion on the question which doesn't need to be answered.

mostly reader says

You are asking my opinion on the question which doesn't need to be answered.

Yep. But I was not expecting a cogent answer.

From another thread:

Patnet has been accused of lots of things wrt the "housing boom," "Covid pandemic," "election fraud," etc. If people think that Patnet is about uncritically embracing the establishment narrative, then they are either:

a) very new here
b) an internet troll
c) sadly suffering from mental decline/alzheimers/long covid
d) incapable of using the Socratic method or logical argument
e) never really grew up

Perhaps others can add to the list here. Perhaps a poll using a modified of the above list can be used to "vet" members as far as credibility is concerned. They are free to debate their designation using rational arguments or the Socratic method, with full supporting links that others can vet.

I defy any reasonable person, in a reasonable environment such as Patnet, to claim that this is anything other than a call out to basic Patnet principles.

This is not a call to censorship. It is a call out to the dishonest to admit your mistake, or put up the evidence supporting your claims (you know who you are).

Onvacation says

Yep. But I was not expecting a cogent answer.

I'm pointing out that 1) either you don't realize that the question is obsolete 2) or you wish to discuss my current beliefs for the sake of entertainment, 3) or this is intended as a bait for friend/foe classification in the current playground.

If it's the first, I'll elaborate (although I think it's been covered)
If it's the second, I'm not your entertainment bitch.
If it's the third, the answer is a loud and profound FU. Even if my beliefs match the "friend" profile in this regard. Still FU.

Which one was it? Or am I missing something, is there another option? Don't be shy.

mostly reader says

Which one was it? Or am I missing something, is there another option? Don't be shy.

So you don't want to share your opinion on masks. It would have been easier than your long multiple choice non answer.

Cool. I was not expecting a cogent answer.

I think masks are harmful.

HunterTits says

Mitt Romney

HunterTits says

original link

This woman is good!

Just for general propaganda, I wanted to post something I've posted a few times before:


original link


Corbett isn't either left or right, but he's often thought of as being "left". I think he did a good job demonstrating how dishonest and worthless our news media is. I know it's hard to get out of the habit of listening to it, but when it was clear they would NEVER reform, it got a lot easier to ignore it. I don't think anybody should waste their time listening to it. It's not even worthwhile to prove them to be dishonest. I think that proof has been given many many times, and it should be particularly obvious in the last few years.

Kyle Rittenhouse, mostly peaceful protests, the January 6th insurrection, our free and fair election of Biden, the pandemic, Darrell Brooks, Qaddifi about to cause a humanitarian crisis, Assad using chemical weapons, Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. Literally everything in our news media is a lie. It is all a lie.

https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/balancing-fear-covid-19-and-ukraine?source=patrick.net

There they go again! We have a new web of politics, strategies and fear-porn to shape and control the minds and thoughts of the gullible public. A propaganda forever war against the general populace, waged by our elected leaders and their deep state allies. The purpose of this particular Substack article is to help untangle the fabric of relevant recent Congressional bills, defunding future COVID-19 aid, funding the Ukraine war and the supporting White House and state funded media (MSM) fear-based thought shaping (fear-porn).

The superficial history of the 1.5 trillion spending bill that Congress debated, modified and passed last week included $14 Billion For Ukraine Aid. What is not in the spending bill is the money the White House and Nancy Pelosi wanted for COVID-19 Aid. Specifically, about $16 billion for COVID relief, which was for tests, vaccines and treatments. That money was stripped from the bill following last-minute disagreements over this provision. The MSM likes to assert that these disagreements were how to fund this provision, many House Republicans apparently assert that it was over vaccine mandates. The money for COVID-19 has now been put into separate legislation slated for a vote as early as next week. What is interesting is that funding for Ukraine war operations is almost the exact amount removed for COVID funding. That is no coincidence.

During these negotiations, a group of conservative legislators demanded a vote on defunding Biden's vaccine mandates in exchange for speeding up any government funding legislation.

The virus fraud is currently replaced by the Ukraine fraud. They are both frauds because neither of them are actually important to ordinary citizens, who are mostly immune from harm from both the virus and Ukraine. They are important only to the elite who are skimming tax money and using these supposed "emergencies" to further totalitarianism.

https://notthebee.com/article/the-white-house-briefs-not-one-not-two-but-30-tiktok-stars-about-ukraine-war?source=patrick.net

So the White House used not one, not two, but THIRTY TikTok stars to spread propaganda about the Russia-Ukraine war

Patrick says

https://notthebee.com/article/the-white-house-briefs-not-one-not-two-but-30-tiktok-stars-about-ukraine-war?source=patrick.net

So the White House used not one, not two, but THIRTY TikTok stars to spread propaganda about the Russia-Ukraine war

Agreed. This is not a quest for world domination, both sides should come to the table and fix up a deal so that the murderous US and mainstream media propaganda stops.

Patrick says

https://notthebee.com/article/the-white-house-briefs-not-one-not-two-but-30-tiktok-stars-about-ukraine-war?source=patrick.net

So the White House used not one, not two, but THIRTY TikTok stars to spread propaganda about the Russia-Ukraine war

The more obvious the propaganda, the better.

How easy was it for you to tell, I don't know, that David Letterman was a propagandist back in the 1990s? Now it's possible spot it instantly.

richwicks says

Just for general propaganda, I wanted to post something I've posted a few times before:


original link


Corbett isn't either left or right, but he's often thought of as being "left". I think he did a good job demonstrating how dishonest and worthless our news media is. I know it's hard to get out of the habit of listening to it, but when it was clear they would NEVER reform, it got a lot easier to ignore it. I don't think anybody should waste their time listening to it. It's not even worthwhile to prove them to be dishonest. I think that proof has been given many many times, and it should be particularly obvious in the last few years.

Kyle Rittenhouse, mostly peaceful pr...

Yeah I noticed it too, our media constantly full of shit. So make fake videos and pictures from “Ukraine”. Iraq and Libia were like that too. Too much propaganda

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/the-problem-with-that-stalled-russian-convoy/?source=patrick.net

Setting aside that no one on earth absent some Russian generals actually knew why the convoy was not moving, the media created a reason and then confirmed itself. If you follow the right people on Twitter, you can sometimes watch them form a consensus in real time, journalists thousands of miles away from the scene with no information nudging one another into the narrative. It’s kind of like watching a time-lapse film of water freezing into ice.

So are the Russians out of gas?

Consider the lack of supporting evidence. Fuel travels through the same logistics chain that beans and bullets do, and the Russians do not seem to lack for ammunition. Artillery shells are big heavy things, and there seem to be plenty of those making it to the troops on the ground. The Russians have over a million men in the field, and absent one blurry TikTok purportedly showing some shoplifting, seem to be feeding them. If a million men needed to shoplift three meals a day, it would not be hard to discover. We have also seen no evidence that Russians are looting fuel dumps as they make their way across Ukraine. ...

There is literally nothing to support the MSM’s contention that the convoy ran out of gas. ...

One convoy and one falsely reported story matter little in the middle of a vast war. But they serve as a clear example of how far the media has fallen. Once-proud outlets like the BBC and CNN are creating fake narratives and peddling them to an increasingly uncritical media consumer.

https://t.me/greatreject/32430?source=patrick.net

Ukrainian soldier filmed by a resident laying a bottle of incendiary explosive on a kid’s playground to organize a false flag on peaceful targets... now imagine what else they're doing..

They got caught red handed planting explosives and then taking pictures.

https://t.me/greatreject/32417?source=patrick.net

Ole Dammegärd explains how false flags are planted with the help of the crisis actor industry. On that FALSE note, LAWS are being rigged. The WEF also uses crisis actors to manipulate politics.

Putin Rally. Had to dig hard to find just a minute of raw footage without the Globalist Propaganda Filtration commentary from "Former Intelligence Officials who said Iraq had WMDs, Wuhan Lab had nothing to do with COVID, and the Hunter Laptop was Russian disinfo." types:

70,000 at the Rally, chanting "Russia, Russia, Russia."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZL1V8bx5Bc

The despot took to the stage at Moscow's Luzhniki World Cup stadium dressed in a £10,000 Loro Piana jacket - despite his country's economy crumbling under the weight of Western sanctions - to address a crowd waving Russian national flags and banners marked with the letter 'Z', which has become a potent symbol of the invasion.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10627555/Vladimir-Putin-holds-huge-rally-thousands-Z-flag-waving-Russians.html

Despot! I'm building a DEPOT myself.

It's now posted everywhere that putler phoned Trump and - amongst other things - explained that that hospital was (also) a bioweapons (storage) lab and they got 24 hours notice to remove everyone. Impossible to verify, possibly fake, esp. the phone call part, but the fact that this "disinfo" is left to stand for now makes one think there could be some truth to it. Will def be interesting to see how orange man will navigate those hot waters now being associated as "putler fan". And always remember kids, everything you hear on the side of Eurasia are 100% lies and everything you hear with us benevolent overlords - such as that we've always been at war with Eurasia - is 100% truth!

Take a look at the "Institute for the Study of War", quoted extensively in the Pro-Globohomo Press.

Kagan, Bill Kristol, General Kean, Liesberman - all Hawks and Surgers - plus Betrayus (the Surge Author later made Director of the CIA but it didn't last when he was sleeping and sharing classified info with his biographer) and lots of other characters like a former Executive of the Kyiv Post during the 2014 Maidan Coup and various Media tie-ins.

https://www.understandingwar.org/who-we-are?source=patrick.net

Patrick says

Once-proud outlets like the BBC and CNN are creating fake narratives and peddling them to an increasingly uncritical media consumer.

This is false.

First of all, CNN and BBC have ALWAYS been full of shit. This is Operation Desert Storm from 1991, recorded off from a direct satellite feed - which means, no commercial breaks, just raw footage:


original link


Second of all, I would say at least 50% of the western world, and I'm being conservative, realize that our "news" media is garbage today. What they don't realize I think, is that it's always been this way. Nothing has changed in our media, people are just becoming aware of it.

It's no worse than it was 3 decades ago.

The media is surprised that people are rejecting it, because they haven't changed.

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/not-out-woods-yet-assessing-operational-situation-ukraine?source=patrick.net

The war in Ukraine has been dominated by an effective and far-reaching information campaign led by the Ukrainian state. The Ukrainian narrative is dominating both the news and social media cycles, which are now of equal importance in forming public opinion. The narrative is littered with broken Russian convoys, farmers triumphantly towing boutique Russian air defence systems away from their hiding places, and harrowing footage of Russian tank formations being destroyed. And yet, by analysing three maps depicting the operational picture, including one released by the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) and two curated by open-source investigators – the Twitter account Jomini of the West and Konrad Muzyka’s Ukraine Conflict Monitor – it is apparent that Russian forces are making progress.

"information campaign" lol.

That means propaganda campaign with massive assistance from the US elite, whose corrupt interests are at threat in Ukraine. For example, Hunter's monthly payments from Burisima.

https://charleseisenstein.substack.com/p/reinventing-progress?s=r&source=patrick.net

In turbulent times, society becomes vulnerable to false meaning-makers who would rescue us from our bewilderment. They offer to collapse complication and chaos into simple explanations for what is happening. They tell you what is real and what is not, who is good and who is bad. They pose a single explanatory logic to tidy up the messiness of a chaotic world.

In arenas of dispute, all sides typically attempt this, pitting one narrative against another in what we now recognize as narrative warfare.

The most prevalent simplifying strategy is to identify a villain and blame everything on him. In geopolitics, this means erasing entire histories in order to blame Saddam Hussein, Bashar Al-Assad, Nicolas Maduro, or Vladimir Putin for the latest crisis. ...

A telling sign of this mentality is, when anyone reintroduces history or nuance into the conversation, to accuse them of “making excuses” for the narrative’s bad guy. When someone is obsessed with pinning causality onto the evil character of the story, they will hostilely reject any confounding context that dilutes that identification.

Side A: PUTIN BAD! PUTIN BAD!

Side B: Well, there's a lot of history to consider, such as the US-funded Maidan coup...

Side A: YOU ARE AN APOLOGIST FOR PUTIN! YOU ARE BAD! PUTIN BAD! PUTIN BAD!

https://mobile.twitter.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1505297342936670208?source=patrick.net

https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/18/bombing-mariupol-theater-ukrainian-azov-nato-intervention/?source=patrick.net

Civilians that escaped the city through humanitarian corridors have testified that they were held by Azov as human shields in area, and that Azov fighters detonated parts of the theater as they retreated. Despite claims of a massive Russian airstrike that reduced the building to ashes, all civilians appear to have escaped with their lives.

Video of the attack on the theater remains unavailable at the time of publication; only photographs of the damaged structure can be viewed. The Russian Ministry of Defense has denied conducting an airstrike on the theater, asserting that the site had no military value and that no sorties were flown in the area on March 16.

While the Russian military operation in Ukraine has triggered a humanitarian crisis in Mariupol, it is clear that Russia gained nothing by targeting the theater, and virtually guaranteed itself another public relations blow by targeting a building filled with civilians – including ethnic Russians.

Azov, on the other hand, stood to benefit from a dramatic and grisly attack blamed on Russia. In full retreat all around Mariupol and facing the possibility of brutal treatment at the hands of a Russian military hellbent on “de-Nazification,” its fighters’ only hope seemed to lie in triggering direct NATO intervention.

The same sense of desperation informed Zelensky’s carefully scripted address to Congress, in which he invoked Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have A Dream” speech and played a heavily produced video depicting civilian suffering to make the case for a no fly zone.

By instigating Western public outrage over grisly Russian war crimes, Ukraine’s government is clearly aiming to generate enough pressure to overcome the Biden administration’s reluctance to directly confront Russia’s military.

But Kiev’s most emotionally potent allegation so far – that Russia deliberately bombed innocent children cowering inside a theater – has been undercut by testimonies from Mariupol residents and a widely viewed Telegram message explicitly foreshadowing a false flag attack on the building.

The first casualty of war is truth.