A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Which, to be fair, is precisely zero.Each of us can read it for what it's worth.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Which, to be fair, is precisely zero.Each of us can read it for what it's worth.
Which, to be fair, is precisely zero.
If you’re going to keep waving your hominem around, you don’t get to whine when we point and laugh.
Lol. Ok.you could be correct that the message is totally hogwash. But you can’t make that determination by reading your Snopes link.
Let’s try this again: you propagated a chain email - attributed to an unnamed ID expert from Johns Hopkins - that contained “facts” about SARS-CoV-2 (which by the way the fake email describes the virus which is SARS-CoV-2 but instead titles it COVID-19 - a distinction that an ID expert from JH would appreciate).
You don’t get it. I. Am. Out.What are you talking about? The message doesn't use a name. COVID-19 is my intro.
Good information that I gleaned:
The difference between killing the virus and virus decay.
The importance of breaking the fat layer--which is why we now wash our hands with a squirt of Dawn.
Water must be at least room temperature.
Peroxide has staying power soap doesn't have. (Peroxide is in some cleaning supplies has staying power on surfaces)
Don't shake clothes that might be contaminated.
I already knew about UV light. I used that daily for watch, phone, TV remote, eye glasses and keys. Nice to read the confirmation though.
Once again the importance of hand washing. While I've been using hand cream, cuz of so much washing, I now know that there is a preventative reason for that.
The trivial things Snopes took the time and trouble to question tells me the remainder is accurate, and IMO, important information.
Again false. Snopes gives the link to the JH website with the correct expert data for dummies. Keep dodging.you could be correct that the message is totally hogwash. But you can’t make that determination by reading your Snopes link.
You don’t get it. I. Am. Out.
This one is rich. Your primary defense was that you hadn’t claimed something that you now admit to fabricating. Second you admit to having taking this from an email. That is hilarity defined. You took this from an email. Oh my God! What email list is that, one is curious to ask?Of course I get it. I just don’t agree with your take.
BTW, I do confess an error. I went back and reread my original email and it DOES NOT SAY it was produced by an assistant professor at JH. I didn’t catch that. Apparently Snopes made the same mistake I did.
This one is rich. Your primary defense was that you hadn’t claimed something that you now admit to fabricating. Second you admit to having taking this from an email. That is hilarity defined. You took this from an email. Oh my God! What email list is that, one is curious to ask?
Your OP was COVID-19 For Dummies. Indeed...
Ranger, insulted if I call you Sherlock from now on?!!
Lions and tigers and ad hominems, OH MY!!!You know what an optical illusion is? I’m talking about the kind that your mind deceived you, not the kind that are ambiguous and your mind switches back and forth between two interpretations. Well you have a mind that is highly susceptible to an illusion. When you see a post from me, you deceive yourself. I know this because you have no clue what I said in this thread.
Buh bye.
I'm regretting that I offered him advice in the grocery thread.Lions and tigers and ad hominems, OH MY!!!
4. CO posted it, so good chance it was BS anyways.Simple:
- Being an international business guy - I know that 25C ain’t hot
- The whole message is written like a typical social media / chain email and I’ve never found any of those to ever be true
- Citing an abstract “doctor” or expert without naming the doctor or expert is 99% of the time the alarm klaxon sounding fake news to follow
Now, now. He’s not the enemy. He just treats us that way...I'm regretting that I offered him advice in the grocery thread.
Now we know that for sure. Sheeessh. Seriously. Do you read any news from emails? I sure don’t. That was a genuine frontier eye-opener for me when he admitted that. That’s Ladoga territory. Sad.4. CO posted it, so good chance it was BS anyways.
Now, now. He’s not the enemy. He just treats us that way...
Truth.I would argue that people posting BS about Covid19 are hurting the effort.
I'm regretting that I offered him advice in the grocery thread.
ps It’s ok to be wrong once in a while. Trust me, it’s fine. Admitting “I was wrong” is freeing and cleansing.
It about discrediting the info because it’s unsourced, you dummy, not because of the platform. Why are you so dense?Trust me, it’s fine to not agree. You are way to invested in not only being correct, but having others acknowledge you are correct. If you think that should be the ending point of any discussion, you’ll go crazy.
Oh, discrediting the information because of the platform it appeared on is not a convincing argument.
My annoyance is that I fell for it here and even almost copied and sent it to others. Being inexperienced in such email chains, I hope I learned a valuable lesson today. I lived in Europe for two decades and am intimately aware of 25C and the metric system. I have no excuse. That’s why I’m thankful to you.Lol. Ok.
Let’s try this again: you propagated a chain email - attributed to an unnamed ID expert from Johns Hopkins - that contained “facts” about SARS-CoV-2 (which by the way the fake email describes the virus which is SARS-CoV-2 but instead titles it COVID-19 - a distinction that an ID expert from JH would appreciate).
the snopes article simply explained that this is not able to be proven to be from a JH expert, even one not communicating in their capacity as a JH scientist. In fact, as Snopes points out- other variants of this letter interject other fake names of intermediaries of this message. This unnamed expert description and the Snopes investigation to JH in and of itself completely and wholly renders what follows to be useless. Some of it may be right - but we don’t do science based on a broken clock being correct twice a day.
Again, I’m not using Snopes - who overtly stated they will not tackle the bullet points one at a time - to poo the points. We don’t need Snopes to poo poo the points. We know it didn’t come from a JH expert. We know that Listerine doesn’t kill SARS-CoV-2. We know that too need to wash hands with significantly hotter water than 25C. We know that chain email is bullshit.
ps It’s ok to be wrong once in a while. Trust me, it’s fine. Admitting “I was wrong” is freeing and cleansing.
Im done. You want to bury your head in the sand? Bring a respirator.
It about discrediting the info because it’s unsourced, you dummy, not because of the platform. Why are you so dense?
My arguments were posted much more cogently above. You are choosing to ignore them. You’re a lost cause. Enjoy your chain emails.."Dummy" and "dense" are not arguments. "Unsourced" and "wrong platform" are 6 of one and half-a-dozen of another.