(September 7, 2021 at 12:14 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:At this point, he's arguing simply for the sake of arguing. He takes educated estimates as certainties then whine when those are modified then the vaccine failed. How silly is that? He also confuses principle with proportion . The principle of herd immunity can't be argued against it's been proven multiple times. The fact estimates of percentages have changed alters nothing. Also of course people like him are an undermining factor as their the reason herd immunity has not been met or variants exist, to begin with.(September 7, 2021 at 4:34 am)Ronaldo Wrote: But for now im focusing on the fact that the vaccines haven't provided immunity like they said it would and hasn't ended the pandemic and lockdowns
And we’re ignoring that not enough people have taken even a single dose for herd immunity to kick in, even with the conservative estimate of about 70%?
Disagreement about the nature of the virus among experts is one thing, but when one side legit does not understand how herd immunity or vaccination work and the other one does, I know which side I’m going to back.
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM