Jump to content

vtdavis4321

Members
  • Content Count

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

vtdavis4321 last won the day on December 28 2020

vtdavis4321 had the most liked content!

About vtdavis4321
 
 
  • Rank
    Midget
 
Recent Profile Visitors
 
 
439 profile views
 
  1. Arcane- "understood by few, mysterious, or secret. Did you mean "archaic"? As in, old fashioned? I felt obliged since you played grammar police on me yesterday. If "arcane" LMAO is fair, then we need to be "arcane".
  2. Agree, but there are those on the left who WANT problems. The WANT chaos. It's part of what a guy like Marx taught. It's what Lenin preached. Common sense would tell us that unless you are outside of the country, or military, etc, no mail in ballots. You get to the polls physically or you do not vote. That would immediately stamper out 95% of corruption. Which party do you think has proposed that and which one had continuously not allowed it to get to vote out of its house committee? You guessed it. In order to have goodness and fairness, we can no longer assume that a certain group wants that. Years ago, we knew that. It's no longer the case. The Democratic Party has gone over the edge. They have been taken over my Marxists and fools. They hate America. They want the system to fail and or crush it, and to start it over in their image. When you get to this point, there is no reasoning with these people. Facts mean nothing. Fairness means nothing.
  3. With the schedule the Beavers play, they are going to be battle tested come playoff time. With what Bluefield returns, the Beaver fans have to feel good about the chances of not just making a deep run, but finishing it. Graham's schedule will also be tough. I don't know the full schedule yet. I am talking about the fall, not this coming spring, but in the fall, I think Bluefield Researcher mentioned Graham picked up George Wythe and Blacksburg, and dropped Fort Chiswell and Princeton. So, for the fall, the GMen I know have Bluefield, Richlands, Blacksburg, George Wythe, Tazewell, and I am not sure if we play Union again. If we do, that's 6 very solid opponents. P.S. I think Tazewell's senior laden football team is seniors this year.......as in.....this spring. If I'm not mistaken, the Dogs lose a bunch with graduation this spring and they may not/should not be quite as good this coming fall.
  4. If the Beavers were in Virginia, 2A they would be.
  5. Now that is a good looking schedule. Graham, much improved Princeton, Pulaski and Dixon who is only going to have that program rolling in short time, Richlands, Tazewell, Ridgeview, and Mingo Central. There are 7 good schools on that schedule, assuming Beckley remains in the dumps. Way to much talent at Beckley to only have won about 5 games in three years. It's beyond belief to me.
  6. I'm glad you agree with the point Hokiebird7. I notice you didn't disagree, and the post was directed at him. It was directed at the idiotic statement that anyone can clearly see. Not picking Union in the top 4 and saying the others were clearly a notch above, that's insanity.
  7. Union and Graham can both play with Radford this year. Especially Union. Radford is very good, but a slight notch down from where they have been. Not saying they can't win a state title, but Union and Graham (Union especially), can play with Radford and maybe wins. It will not be a route. Union and Graham have a golden opportunity with John Marshall and Brunswick not playing. John Marshall is basically a glorified AAU team and would walk through the Virginia AA state title if playing Brunswick, a traditional basketball power returned 4 of 5 starters and would have been a problem. East Rock I know little about. The biggest threat for the Region D teams from Region C will likely be Dan River more than Radford. Dan River is loaded again as always and may be the team to cut the nets down over the rest. Also, Scotty V from Gate City may have had a good point last year with his remarks about John Marshall. They have apparently opted out of competition, BUT, they have basically formed a travel team and are playing out of state schools and STILL playing. They are functioning literally like an AAU team of which Scotty V kind of accused them of being. They have 3 more games lined up in the over the next 2 weeks with NC schools. Although Scotty V received a lot of slack at the time and his statement seemed like sour grapes after the GC loss to John Marshall, he was actually right. The VHSL needs to do something about this.
  8. Wow. You know, based on this history of Union and what they have done to Richlands of recent, and not picking or even giving them consideration as being a top 4 team in the Region, I automatically deduct 30 IQ points from anyone making such a claim. I'm beginning to wonder if you actually watch Region D football. To actually make the statement as you did listed above may be the most asinine pick, or least the most asinine level of disrespect towards Union that I've read on the board this year.......and it's Dec 31st (that's a lot of year). Fact is, based on their history, based on having the upper hand with Richlands of recent, based on beating Graham as recent as last year, there is no way in hades a reasonable human being that watches and half way understands Region D football would make such a statement that not only leaves Union out of the top 4 in Region, but states the other 4 are a clear notch above.
  9. Analogous to the Communist Chinese Government. An invasive species of which is crippling our system. I also, have no clue how to eliminate the Chinese Communist Government without nuking the Communist Party Headquarters in China.
  10. I don't think GC is athletically better than Graham. Union will be and should be the favorites to win the Region. Graham's defense and speed alone will keep them well within 20 points of any team they play. We will have to wait and see.
  11. With Graham, teams they face better have fantastic and superb ball handling skills because often, when the ball is on the floor, the G-Men will take it. With Xay Bradshaw, he is going to take the majority of the opponents point guard or two guard out of the game. Just complete lockdown. Union is fantastic I'm certain from what they return from last year and Virginia Preps had them preseason 4th for a reason, but based on what they return from last year and what Graham returns and has, I feel confident Union is not 20 points better than Graham. Graham has been very good the past few years and the difference with them and the great teams of Radford and Gate City wasn't anything close to 20 points, and Graham has another typical Graham type team.
  12. As GMan wrote, you don't have to be Catholic to attend Notre Dame as a student, athlete or not. Notre Dame has always hovered about 15% non Catholic and when counting the graduate school, up to 20% non Catholic. You also do NOT have to attend Catholic Mass weekly. With around or just under 9,000 undergrads, Notre Dame is prestigious enough to be very selective and only admit a small percentage of non-Catholics like 5% or 1%. It's historically been this way around 85% due to missionary efforts/potential for gaining Catholic Church Members according to what Catholics have told me over the years. BYU is similar to Notre Dame in that you don't have to be LDS to attend BYU and if you attend BYU, you do NOT have to attend Church services weekly. You do have to comply with the honor code. BYU has been around 98 to 99% LDS largely not by choice. The amount of non-LDS applications is incredibly, incredibly low. The acceptance rate hovers in the mid 60's for LDS students, but hovers around 65% for non-LDS. I know there is a perception that African-Americans are largely not Mormons and statistically, I imagine that's true, but that perception often carries over to fans across the country seeing many black kids on the BYU football team and many thinking, those kids aren't Mormon. I have been told this. The fact is, they overwhelmingly are LDS Church Members who were not just converts, but were born and raised in the Church.
  13. https://nypost.com/2020/10/20/swedish-expert-still-wont-budge-on-no-mask-approach-to-covid-19/ Sweden. A graphic chart of Mask Use Mandates versus C-19 cases in multiple countries shows Mask are not effective https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/29/these-12-graphs-show-mask-mandates-do-nothing-to-stop-covid/ These 12 Graphs Show Mask Mandates Do Nothing To Stop COVID No matter how strictly mask laws are enforced nor the level of mask compliance the population follows, cases all fall and rise around the same time. By Yinon Weiss OCTOBER 29, 2020 Masks have become a political tool and a talisman. When COVID-19 hit, governments panicked and created enormous fear. The Centers for Disease Control currently estimates a COVID-19 survival rate of 99.99 percent for people younger than 50, but the damage created by the panic was too great to undo. It is likely that some politicians eventually realized their mistake and needed a way to back-pedal without admitting their lockdowns were a policy disaster. Their solution was for people to put any old piece of cloth across their face and magically believe that it’s okay to go out shopping again. Masks are not merely a small inconvenience. They have inadvertently become a key impediment to returning to a more normal life, a desirable goal for those seeking to twist the pandemic for political and electoral purposes. Masks dehumanize us, and ironically serve as a constant reminder that we should be afraid. People can now be spotted wearing masks while camping by themselves in the woods or on a solo sailing trip. They have become a cruel device on young children everywhere, kindergarten students covered by masks and isolated by Plexiglas, struggling to understand the social expressions of their peers. Face coverings are causing real harm to the American psyche, provide little to no medical benefit, and distract us from more important health policy issues. The mask dogma had many cracks in it from the start. For one, the U.S. surgeon general and the Centers for Disease Control both previously said that “masks are NOT effective in preventing [the] general public from catching coronavirus,” so they were already starting with a credibility deficit. Furthermore, many officials have been frequently caught without masks when they think the cameras are off them. Dr. Anthony Fauci, for example, has been caught doing this multiple times. Chicago’s mayor and local media were all caught taking off their masks and violating social distancing as soon as a press conference ended. This was caught in a now deleted YouTube video that was shared by a now deleted Twitter account after being retweeted more than 26,000 times. As of the date of this publication, it is still available to view in a crude video of a video that has yet to be deleted on YouTube. Clearly, some people do not want you to see what politicians do behind the scenes. Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, a strong advocate for mandatory masking, was caught off camera laughing about how wearing masks is an act of “political theater.” Faking ‘Science’ to Achieve Political Goals These same politicians and health officials are so desperate to make people believe in masks that they doctor charts to make their case, even when their own data actually undermines them. So what is the actual science behind masks? Let’s begin by reviewing the leading scientific studies. The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University summarized six international studies which “showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.” Oxford went on to say that “that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” They prophetically warned that this has “left the field wide open for the play of opinions, radical views and political influence.” A study of health-care workers in more than 1,600 hospitals showed that cloth masks only filtered out 3 percent of particles. An article in the New England Journal of Medicine stated, “[W]earing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection” and that “[T]he desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” There are many other credible studies showing lack of mask efficacy, such as studies published in the National Center for Biotechnology Information, Cambridge University Press, Oxford Clinical Infectious Diseases, and Influenza Journal, just to name a few. Studies do show masks can help in the case of direct respiratory droplets, which would matter if somebody is coughing, breathing, or sneezing directly on your face. That happens normally in a tight and highly confined space. But the plentiful evidence we have indicates masks would not meaningfully help with aerosol transmission, where two people are just in the same area, or even the same room. This is because the two people end up breathing the same air, with or without a mask, as visually demonstrated in this video. Now for Graphs about International Mask Mandates Historical scientific studies do not make a compelling case that universal masking would meaningfully help, so let’s explore real-world situations to see where data leads us. Austria was one of the first governments to require masks, and it did so about 10 days after its cases began to go down. The level of downtrend did not change or improve after masks were required. After the nation’s people wearing masks for an extended period, cases are currently four times where they were when Austria mandated masks, and cases continue to climb. Germany mandated masks about halfway down its original recovery. Their cases are now similarly climbing quickly. The French now have around 1,000 percent more daily cases they had when they mandated masks, despite having one of the highest mask compliance levels in the world. Spain was not far behind its French neighbor with a mandate. Spain required masks when cases were near zero and has the highest compliance with mask-wearing in all Europe. Now Spain is at around 1,500 percent the level of cases compared to when it mandated masks. After three months of requiring masks, the United Kingdom is at around 1,500 percent more cases despite having one of the highest mask compliance records in Europe. Belgium required masks shortly after the British did, and now possibly has the highest rate of cases in the world. Italy had extremely high levels of mask-wearing despite no national mandate. Recently skyrocketing cases finally compelled them to create one of the strictest mask laws in the world, but the results have predictably failed to slow the rise in coronavirus cases. In fact, cases skyrocketed immediately after the mask mandate went into effect. Similar results have been found in Ireland, Portugal, Israel, and many other countries. No matter how strictly mask laws are enforced nor the level of mask compliance the population follows, cases all fall and rise around the same time. How about the United States? Americans have proven to be highly compliant with mask wearing, even higher than the Germans. It is therefore no surprise that the same trends found in Europe are also found in U.S. states. For example, California required masks in June but cases still went up by more than 300 percent and the state remains heavily locked down four months later with still higher cases. Hawaii suffered one of the most economically devastating lockdowns of all the U.S. states. It was also an early mover on mandating masks both indoors and outdoors, but cases still went up by almost 1,000 percent. With and without mask mandates, Texas and Georgia followed nearly identical case development. For those more interested in comparing deaths than cases, we again don’t see a pattern of masks meaningfully helping. Why Don’t Masks Work? Why don’t masks work on the general public? For one, if you read the fine print on most consumer masks you will see something along the line of “not intended for medical purposes and has not been tested to reduce the transmission of disease.” Masks can work well when they’re fully sealed, properly fitted, changed often, and have a filter designed for virus-sized particles. This represents none of the common masks available on the consumer market, making universal masking much more of a confidence trick than a medical solution. If we actually wanted effective masks, then manufacturers should be conducting scientific tests evaluating masks specifically for their ability to reduce the spread of coronavirus. The Food and Drug Administration and CDC should be making recommendations on which masks to use and approving masks based on their scientific efficacy rather than promoting the wrapping of any piece of miscellaneous cloth around your face. Many powerful institutions have too much political capital invested in the mask narrative at this point, so the dogma is perpetuated. Effective masks, if they exist, should then be distributed to highly vulnerable groups for use only in rare and extenuating circumstances. There would be little point for the population at large to wear masks all the time because while focused protection may be possible, it is not possible to eradicate the virus at this point or stop its spread. Our universal use of unscientific face coverings is therefore closer to medieval superstition than it is to science, but many powerful institutions have too much political capital invested in the mask narrative at this point, so the dogma is perpetuated. The narrative says that if cases go down it’s because masks succeeded. It says that if cases go up it’s because masks succeeded in preventing more cases. The narrative simply assumes rather than proves that masks work, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. The narrative further ignores places like Sweden and Georgia, which never required masks in the first place, and it suppresses new scientific evidence if it doesn’t support desired political results, such as data from the world’s only randomized trial investigating if masks actually protect from COVID-19. Even a Nobel laureate has been canceled because his COVID charts and data were found to be undesirable. History does not bode well for times that politics meddles with science. Martin Kulldorff, a professor at Harvard Medical School and a leader in disease surveillance methods and infectious disease outbreaks, describes the current COVID scientific environment this way: “After 300 years, the Age of Enlightenment has ended.” In the end, it will be the loss of credibility in our scientific institutions, and the unnecessary division they have sowed among us, for which masks will be remembered.
  14. 1. Harris Poll finds that in October, Facemask use in the USA is 90% https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-10-mask-americans-tops-poll.html 2. National Geographic Survey in October, 92% of Americans wear a facemask when leaving their home https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/10/poll-increasing-bipartisan-majority-americans-support-mask-wearing/ A. New England Journal of Medicine. "We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372 B. California- OSHA, Occupational Safety and Health ..... "Cloth facemasks do not protect against Covid-19" https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372 C. California Dept of Health (not exactly ultra conservative) "Face coverings may increase risk if users reduce their use of strong defenses." "There is limited evidence to suggest that use of cloth face coverings by the public during a pandemic could help reduce disease transmission https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/Face-Coverings-Guidance.aspx D. The Surgeon General of the United States of America....."Masks are not effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus." https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160 E. World Health Organization an Infection Disease Expert Dr. Mark Ryan https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html ”There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly. G. Facemask use in the USA. Reported by the CDC's very own surveys The proportion of U.S. adults reporting wearing face masks increased from 78% in April to 89% in June, according to the nationally representative survey released by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tuesday.
×
×
  • Create New...