Anti-mask wearers are smarter than mask wearers, concludes MIT study.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

I Saw a Laughing Sea Gull Tangled up in a Thrown Away Mask today , they Litter the City in Streets and Parking Lots . Thanks Dems for Polutinng My Local Enviorment .................

I live in a very liberal area and I see the same... WTF is up with people throwing their masks on the ground...lol They do the same thing with dog crap, put it in a bag and leave it on the side of the trail like someone else is going to come by and throw it away for them.

When you look at the way liberals talk to the way they really act and live it doesn't take long to understand they are full of crap not even coming close to the standards they expect everyone else to hold.

originally posted by: carewemust

He is one of those people whom the CDC says is suffering from too much Carbon Dioxide re-inhalation. It dulls the mind, the senses, and the reaction. (I started a thread on it in mid 2020.)

I'd like to know how many serious accidents occurred in the USA since March 2020, where the driver was wearing a mask.

IDK his Prius looked older than a year, so maybe already dulled...

a reply to: IndieA

Is this the best MIT can do? Instead of assisting with studies of fraudulent PCR tests, phony CoVid deaths and death certificates, or assisiting with studies concerning the dangers of nationwide, international nation wide lockdowns, or studying biological mind-body terror and torture, mind-body mind control in hospitals and residences, studying bio medical dictatorships and their nefariously brought on tyrrany, instead of proposing these, a few at MIT muster up the courage to study the logic levels, compare contrast of general public anti Maskers vs. Maskers..?


I'm sorry, but that's just a bit too mundane for me. This is Mind Control, Mind Abuse and Mental Physical Terror, Torture OFFICIALLY, MEDICALLY on victims of this purported "Virus," s virus that doesn't even genuinely exist. (Thus the on going psychological operation, in continuance each terrifying waking day, as in a moving, horror movie..)

Hopefully Colin Ross, author of The CIA Doctors: Human Rights Violations by American Psychiatrists, will be able to write THE BOOK on the CoVid deception and manipulation we are currently living, surviving, contesting and denouncing.

www.scribd.com...
www.amazon.com... CIA MIND CONTROL

And now there is the The CoVid Deception-- instead of psychiatrists, we have general medical practicioners


The C.I.A. Doctors, (Manitou Communications, 2006), uncovers the truth about violations of human rights by American Psychiatrists in the twentieth century. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and cross-referenced research published in leading medical journals expose the existence of mind altering experiments on unwitting human subjects, paid for by the U.S. government, the U.S. Military and the C.I.A. These experiments which inlcude '___' experiments, sensory deprivation, electroconvulsive treatment, brain electrode implants, radiation experiments and prostitution rings were perpetrated not by a few renegage doctors but by leading psychiatrists, psychologists, neurosurgeons, universities, medical schools and maximum security prisons on American soil. Dr. Ross takes you on a mind-blowing fact finding adventure into the secret world of espionage and Manchurian Candidates. Given our situations in Guantanamo and Abu Graib the only question left unanswered is what are the U.S. Government, psychiatrists and medical schools doing today? The C.I.A. Doctors was originally published as BLUEBIRD: Deliberate Creation of Multiple Personality by Psychiatrists in 2000.

a reply to: ArMaP

I think it's more likely they were already idiots before CoViD-19.

The new situation only makes them more noticeable.

I think that was the point of the thread.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I think that was the point of the thread.

The obvious point was that the creator of the thread spectacularly failed to read/understand the cited MIT paper, and thought it to meant the opposite of what it did.

originally posted by: EvilAxis

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I think that was the point of the thread.

The obvious point was that the creator of the thread spectacularly failed to read/understand the cited MIT paper, and thought it to meant the opposite of what it did.

Yup..exactly!

a reply to: vonclod

Just wanted to share my opinion, on your opinion, about EvilAxis' opinion, about TheRedneck's opinion, about IndieA's opinion, about the opinions of the research-paper.

Perhaps they are trying to figure-out how to control the narrative, and only feed the public such information, so as to everyone capitulates, and no pesky independent thinkers would be able to make-up their own minds.

... Powerful research and media organizations paid for by the tobacco or fossil fuel industries [79, 86] have historically capitalized on the skeptical impulse that the “science simply isn’t settled,” prompting people to simply
“think for themselves” to horrifying ends. ...

( Taken from section 6 of the study linked in the OP. )

Have any good ideas on how we can stop thinking ?
Cheap booze and legalized canabis ?
Distractions ?

How can we be sure that our thoughts are not influenced by lobby-groups, or powerful industries ?
Sure they're scumbags, but could they also not be scapegoats sometimes ?

How can we ... SQUIRREL !!!

a reply to: EvilAxis

the creator of the thread spectacularly failed to read/understand the cited MIT paper

I never claimed otherwise. I just agree with the OP that face masks have become the new version of an "I'm stupid!" sign.

The study is about how to control the narrative in the face of sometimes-conflicting information. I don't believe in controlling a narrative. I state facts and leave it at that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's the part that makes me so suspicious - the blatant attempts to control the narrative. There's no attempts to explain why this or that information is or may be wrong, no discussion. It's all censorious.

a reply to: ketsuko

Of course. The basic assumption is that masks effectively control the spread of the virus. So here is a study to find out why people disagree with our base assumption, which, of course, is assumed to be true.

Circular reasoning, all neatly wrapped up as an assumption in a "scientific" paper. Certain scientists have done the same with the Global Warming hoax: write a paper about how something contributes to ecological balance, with the assumption built in that Global Warming is real and about to throw this precious balance off and destroy all we hold near and dear. That's a neat way to get around proving anything, as assumptions by definition do not need to be proven.

Any peer reviewer worth his salt would rip this paper to shreds over that one bad assumption. A few probably have. But they won't get their reviews published, of course, because they didn't "follow the science."

That's why I never mentioned the article in the first place. It's scientific junk mail.

TheRedneck

While masks can initially vastly reduce viral infection, virus evolves to overcome masks by becoming more and more contagious. Evolution and adaptation is what drives all life on this planet.

However, masks are harmful if worn for extended periods of time, because reduction in oxygen intake and increase of carbon dioxide damages brain.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

I just agree with the OP that face masks have become the new version of an "I'm stupid!" sign.

To me it's the other way around.

If the numerous scientific mask studies, which almost unanimously supported a positive efficacy in protecting the lives and health of others during the pandemic are wrong, the only risk of wearing one is 'looking stupid'. If the science is correct, not wearing one is worse than stupid - it's selfish and callous.

Refusing such a minor inconvenience on the assumption you're right, and they're wrong, also seems ignorant and arrogant.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

The study is about how to control the narrative in the face of sometimes-conflicting information. I don't believe in controlling a narrative. I state facts and leave it at that.

It isn't. It's about how anti-maskers try to control the narrative by misappropriating the science. Just like the OP of this thread did.

originally posted by: SuperSuperSoldier
While masks can initially vastly reduce viral infection, virus evolves to overcome masks by becoming more and more contagious. Evolution and adaptation is what drives all life on this planet.

Greater contagiousness does not alter a mask's effectiveness as a barrier to virus-carrying water droplets expelled from the mouth. The droplets don't evolve.

originally posted by: SuperSuperSoldier
However, masks are harmful if worn for extended periods of time, because reduction in oxygen intake and increase of carbon dioxide damages brain.

There's no published evidence supporting that claim. Carbon dioxide molecules are much smaller than droplets containing coronavirus and won't be trapped by a breathable material. When you breathe out, it will go through and round the mask, rather than building up. Surgeons wear them for hours and have done so for years. There's no published evidence of brain damage as a hazard of the surgeons' job.

originally posted by: Nothin

Have any good ideas on how we can stop thinking ?
Cheap booze and legalized canabis ?
Distractions ?

I think the point made was that anti-vaxers and anti-maskers employ the same tactics that, "powerful research and media organizations paid for by the tobacco or fossil fuel industries" use to create a false impression that there is no scientific consensus on a particular issue. By exploiting and amplifying areas of uncertainty, grey can be made to look like black. When such propaganda succeeds, people give up on the experts and 'think for themselves', (i.e., choose what they wish to believe). A better alternative is to think for yourself informed by expert opinion and empirical data.

originally posted by: Nothin

How can we be sure that our thoughts are not influenced by lobby-groups, or powerful industries ?

We can be sure they are, but a degree of vigilance helps, and reputable scientific journals require contributors to declare interests.

a reply to: EvilAxis

Refusing such a minor inconvenience on the assumption you're right, and they're wrong, also seems ignorant and arrogant.

Minor inconvenience?

I could easily become comatose from wearing one of the things. I would become immobile and unable to stand; that has actually happened. How exactly do you define "minor inconvenience"?

Do you consider death a full "inconvenience"? Or is it "minor" as well?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Minor inconvenience?

I could easily become comatose from wearing one of the things. I would become immobile and unable to stand; that has actually happened. How exactly do you define "minor inconvenience"?

That's the problem with things like this, for most people it's really a minor inconvenience, while for a few it's a real life and death problem.

a reply to: ArMaP

Thank you for recognizing that.

That's one of the reasons why I consider face masks as such a mark of unintelligence. Many people don't take into consideration that their experience is not the experience of others, and this has led to the social phenomenon of anyone unable to wear a face mask as being seen as some sort of undesirable. The post I responded to is a prime example of that.

Also, a large part of my heritage is making people feel welcome when they visit... the "Southern Hospitality" thing. In order to make people feel welcome, one must allow them to be who they are, flaws and idiosyncrasies included. For example, I don't wear shoes inside my house; the floor is clean and I am more comfortable without them. Company is free to remove their shoes or not, as they please. However, I have been to homes where simply walking in the door without removing one's shoes is met with an angry rebuttal. To me, that is akin to calling me dirty and unclean, a definite insult. So I do not visit those places. The same with those who have nice furniture covered completely in plastic sheeting... that tells me they consider me as something less than they are, unworthy of touching their furniture.

Demanding I wear a face mask is not only dangerous for me, but it is also akin to saying "You're diseased! How dare you breathe in my presence?"

TheRedneck

Anti-mask wearers are smarter than mask wearers, concludes MIT study.

The Plandemic is a global IQ test.It remains to be seen who do They want to keep,the ones that pass or the ones that fail?