Huh? Mods still not banning Say Two yet? Say what?

[Banquet_Bear]

@Max_S

This is an attempt to test SayTwo ’s general argument by applying it to specific examples.

…thank you for clarifying my point.

And just to expand on this further: this wasn’t the first time I had asked the very same questions to SayTwo. Without going back and counting: I think I had put the very same questions to SayTwo in three different threads, about fifteen different times, and this was the first time he actually answered me.

For example in the thread about Sweden:

@SayTwo

And here we are with yet more evidence to support the claim that every country that closed schools got it wrong , and Sweden got it right.

@Banquet_Bear

…nope. The study does not support this. The study says nothing at all about the countries that did close their schools. It only looks at the period between March and June in Sweden. It only looks at the children and doesn’t look at anybody who may have gotten Covid from the children.

And of course there is this.

[edited out link to cite that shows Sweden closed some schools in November]

Jump to:

@Banquet_Bear

…New Zealand closed their schools during Level 4 lockdown back in March. If we ever go back into Level 4 (which doesn’t look likely) we would close the schools again.

Did New Zealand get it wrong, and would it be wrong to close down again if we hit Level 4 again?

The UK have just closed schools again . Covid is wildly out of control over there. Were they wrong? Should they open the schools?

Sweden have closed some schools for the first time due to the pandemic. Are they wrong? Should they reopen?

The New Zealand experience showed that the best way to stop children being out of school for an extended period of time (and suffering from it) was to close almost everything down for a non-extended period of time to break the chains of transmission . Was that, in your opinion, the wrong thing to do? Did we get it wrong?

So to summarize: SayTwo claimed every country that closed their schools fucked up. (They later did concede that this was a “rhetorical rebuttal.”) In a thread about Sweden in which SayTwo argued that “Sweden hadn’t fucked up because they didn’t close their schools” I asked “but they did close some schools: were they wrong to do so?”

SayTwo didn’t answer me there. And didn’t answer me the many other times the same question was put to them. So the most recent exchange that has been quoted here lacks that additional context.

And SayTwo’s response to me when he finally did answer that question demonstrates the degree to which SayTwo’s participation in QZ is entirely disingenuous. After arguing for months that “Sweden got it right” for not closing their schools, when asked “were they right or wrong to close some schools in November” his reply was that he couldn’t answer it because he “can’t find a cite for it.” That he didn’t " know enough about the context."

Then SayTwo pivoted to “its not the context, but the leaders.” So I asked him did Boris Johnson get it right? The response:

@SayTwo

I already told you that I do not have an informed opinion on that. I still don’t.

And then we get another pivot:

@SayTwo

. It is long-term school closures, particularly in places without rampant or fast-growing spread, that are – in my opinion, which I hope you’ll allow me to have! – more harmful than helpful.

@Banquet_Bear

…which specific closures are you talking about?

@SayTwo

I’m talking about all of them. There are no long-term school closures that appear to be worth the devastation they are causing.

@Banquet_Bear

…name one .

For the record: SayTwo did not name one long-term school closure.

SayTwo has a very clear agenda. Its anti-mask, anti-lockdown, anti-public health, and SayTwo is using covid-truther talking points to obscure the fact that he has no facts. Its propaganda. And the boards shouldn’t be giving him a platform.