To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

RJ inserts himself into the discussion either way. For obvious reasons folks here wanted to discuss breakthrough infections. RJ responded to those posts arguing breakthrough infections mean vaccines don't work even though the data clearly shows vaccines continue to be lifesavers. Whether trolling or echoing what he's read elsewhere, it's all part of a concerted disinformation effort on social media.

well you only have 2 choices

try not responding

but some one alwasy does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Believe it or not, pretty sure he is telling the truth about his snowboarding. Doesn't make him not a turd.

---

I'm calling bullshit. My bet is on some shitty midwest hill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

You rocket biologists realize if you don't talk to ron he just drops off the page right ?

---

There’s your problem,Dentalologists always need to have the last word.

If they were rocket biologists they’d have some sense.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

but some one alwasy does

---

Aww, look at you not responding…so cute

Good luck with your response! [emoji41]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfcf13

I've thought about this. The big problem for number 1 is what if an unvaccinated person shows up at the hospital with pneumonia but a negative covid test. Does the hospital treat them?

---

Of course the hospital treats them but the bill is paid by the patient and their insurance company rather than the Federal government's general fund. You might not be aware of but 100% of covid hospital care is paid for by the government at this time as part of the pandemic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

You might not be aware of but 100% of covid hospital care is paid for by the government at this time as part of the pandemic.

---

I'm not one of those people who get all upset about "where my tax dollars are spent", but in this case, that sucks. I don't particularly want my tax money spent on someone who didn't get vaxxed and ends up in the hospital for a month on a vent. Lame.

Just your opinion, man.

Oh, boy…(but it only afflicts the elderly, right?)

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=...AAAAAdAAAAABAD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goldenboy

I'm not one of those people who get all upset about "where my tax dollars are spent", but in this case, that sucks. I don't particularly want my tax money spent on someone who didn't get vaxxed and ends up in the hospital for a month on a vent. Lame.

---

100k+ easy

I assume the government is still covering the costs but honestly billing and funding is not my department so maybe it's not that way anymore I could Google it but I'm going to go ride my bike instead

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

There isn't a good snowboard forum AFAIK. I snowboard 100+ days a year, doubt there are many on this forum better than me.

---

Attachment 382362

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

For all RJ's backpedaling and incredibly bad retroactive explanations, now he’s blaming the table, RJ's quote essentially summarizes his lies over the past two weeks.

Even after being told the table contained bad data due to an error and presented with normalized July data showing 3 times more unvaccinated cases vs vaccinated, he continued to push his narrative instead focusing on a news article that also contained bad data.

Now that his position is clearly untenable, he's resorted to saying he never said the things he said.
Because from his perspective it doesn't matter. The goal is to lie so garishly, so gratuitously, in order to muddy the waters so the casual observer throws up their hands and walks away. Ron's frauds offer easy fantasy fiction but never hold up to scrutiny.

---

More lies

1) Yes you suggested the table was based on bad data, but never presented any evidence.
2) I never continued to push that vaccinated and unvaccinated are catching COVID at the same rate because that table is the only data point that suggests that. My claim has been that vaccinated are catching and spreading COVID at a much higher rate than previously thought. For example: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delt...e-illness.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

RJ inserts himself into the discussion either way. For obvious reasons folks here wanted to discuss breakthrough infections. RJ responded to those posts arguing breakthrough infections mean vaccines don't work even though the data clearly shows vaccines continue to be lifesavers. Whether trolling or echoing what he's read elsewhere, it's all part of a concerted disinformation effort on social media.

---

Just ridiculous. Can you find one instance where I said vaccines don't work?

Um, read your previous post. Ban hammer please.

So, according to post 9097, you are basically advocation for strong mask and distancing mandates. Or you are simply muddying the waters for some nefarious purpose. Got it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

Why is it so hard to just toss him?
Zero people are standing up for him.
He’s not working from a position of good faith.
He just shows up to be a purposeful contrarian and fuels off the responses.
IE a troll

This thread is already sideways because of this

---

Because banning someone who has been here a while isn't taken lightly; we give everyone, including the douchenozzles, a long leash. So banning decisions usually take discussion among all the mods, who are volunteers with lives. So it often takes a while to get everyone's thoughts and make sure everyone is on board, even if it seems like an obvious snap decision to you.

Okay here we go. I only have 2 crappy cell phone clips of me riding. Not any ripping, but clearly I don't suck. First one I took some time above the cliff because I was riding blind and snow wasn't nearly as good as it looks. Dust on crust and the landing was refrozen bomb holes (turn sound on).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyjTr8JsGJU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6hRBT7B0yw

Hunh, I have known many a pro snowboarder who were dumber than hammers, too.
But no-one here cares that you can tiptoe through a few rocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

So, according to post 9097, you are basically advocation for strong mask and distancing mandates. Or you are simply muddying the waters for some nefarious purpose. Got it.

---

No idea how you reached those conclusions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

No idea how you reached those conclusions.

---

Countering specious bullshit with the same is fun, duh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

Remember these?
https://medicine.missouri.edu/news/s...severe-illness
https://ehrn.org/articles/covid-19-t...e-reinfections

And we can add this one thanks to MV: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...051v1.full.pdf

---

This again is where you are using real data but you are too ignorant and stupid to understand the difference between a limited study that can be used only as a single data point vs a definitive study. means that the .4% reinfections they measured (which is defined as only positive tests beyond 90 days from one another) only consider positive tests they could link to another of the 63M patients in their system. If a patient used another healthcare provider for the first or subsequent test they wouldn’t pick it up. If the patient gave new information (name etc) they wouldn’t pick it up. Anyone who didn’t get a Covid test for the first or second infection wouldn’t be included. The study lacks completeness. The study probably understates the true reinfection rate by many orders of magnitude.

You linked an article to Epic Health Research. Which is intentionally a fast and loose data source / publisher. They are not peer reviewed. Their study likely included only Epic data. Any scientist who studies this would know this is a “problem” with the study but would use this as a data point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wooley12

Um, read your previous post. Ban hammer please.

---

Heh, a sampling:

"practically no difference in the infection rate between vaxxed and non-vaxxed" -- ron johnson

"These mRNA vaccines aren't very effective at preventing spread." -- ron johnson

"Is it really worth trying to improve on 99% immunity with the side effect profile of these vaccines?" -- ron johnson

"Where did I say natural infection has 99% efficacy?" -- ron johnson

RJ pretends to understand statistics. A few THOUSAND people (and a billion more would if they read this drivel) on here think he is wrong, without a single cohort defending him. What are the statistical chances he is correct?

Infinitesimal.

All of the evidence points to ‘agent provacatuer’

Attachment 382376

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Because banning someone who has been here a while isn't taken lightly; we give everyone, including the douchenozzles, a long leash. So banning decisions usually take discussion among all the mods, who are volunteers with lives. So it often takes a while to get everyone's thoughts and make sure everyone is on board, even if it seems like an obvious snap decision to you.

---

It seems like this particular long-timer only got this far because of the long leash. I appreciate the logistics and obviously the odd bozo is going to slip through, etc. You could issue a timeout pretty easily, right?

That's not a request or advice, you do what you need to do to avoid a step toward anything ugly. It just seems like if these are the rules you don't need an exception for the asshole who won't even keep his asshattery in a (slightly) more appropriate forum:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tgrweb

And we must mention a few special circumstances:
-Accounts started for the purpose of posting predominantly in Political Asshattery will be banned. The PoliAss forum is for existing members to discuss politics, not for aliases/users to simply stir up shit and hide their identities while doing so.
-Any new account that looks to the mod team to be an alias with an axe to grind, or that is just an asshole, will be banned. This and other situations may be banned immediately, with none of the 'strikes' afforded other posters.

---