On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 10:04:58 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 7:17:19 PM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:18:53 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:30:38 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I have a very low respect for doctors because so few
of them
want to be competent. Top of the list in that category
is Dr. Fauci
of the CDC who has continually acted an expert at
things he knows
very little about.

Dr Fauci has been director of the NIAID (National
Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases) since 1984. He does NOT work
for the CDC.
NIAID is part of the NIH (National Institute of
Health). He's has
been involved with controlling several previous
epidemics, which I
presume qualifies as experience:
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/director
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/niaid-history

Can you provide the name of someone in the US who is
better qualified
to discuss pandemics than Dr Fauci?

There is a place for those who sit around, think and
read papers.
I do not deny Fauci that much. But he is not working in
the real world
as many other epidemiologists are and they often
interview them on
FOX and they ALL say what I've been saying. There isn't
much you can
do about a pandemic with a linear growth rate.

I see. You want to be advised on how to protect yourself
from a viral
epidemic by an epidemiologist via Fox News. I don't
think that's what
you intended to say, but that's what you wrote. You also
seem to have
changed your position on Dr Fauci from:

"Dr. Fauci of the CDC(sic) who has continually acted an
expert at things he knows very little about."

to:

"I do not deny Fauci that much."

That's quite a change from calling the leading expert on
infectious
diseases in the US an incompetent, to not denying him
something you
didn't bother to specify. Of course, you're entitled to
have an
opinion about anyone and anything, but I'm also entitled
to discount
your opinion as rubbish. Anyway, kindly stabilize your
opinion about
Dr Fauci. If it's critical, please provide the name of
someone in the
US that is equally or more qualified to advise on how to
handle a
pandemic. Incidentally, I could probably provide some
names in China
that are substantially more qualified and equally
experienced, but
such experts would not be considered as candidates for
advising our
president, who knows more than any or all of them,
Here's one
candidate that might have qualified had he not resigned
for having is
bureau eliminated by the Trump administration:
"A top pandemic expert is leaving the Trump
administration amid the
coronavirus crisis"
https://www.businessinsider.com/top-pandemic-expert-leaving-the-trump-administration-amid-coronavirus-2020-5



No bicycle related content this time. Sorry(tm).

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

The leading expert? Jeff, that is about the most foolish
thing that you could say. Fauci is NOT an expert. Sitting
around in hallowed halls of government does NOT make you
an expert. The epidemiologists in the field say the
opposite and that you like some sort of moron deny that
they know anything for the simple reason that they are
interviewed on FOX shows that you are nothing more than
some stupid biased punk.

Your homework, Tom:

!) Find or assemble a CV for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I say that
because you obviously know very, very little about him.

2) Find or assemble a CV for the guy you allude to whom Faux
News managed to dig up.

Analyze and compare those to prove to us that your guy with
his predictable complaints is more qualified than Fauci.

We'll even give bonus points for a little more work:

3) Give us your own CV. Show us why we should listen to your
opinions on epidemiology... and history, genetics, theology,
ballistics, human anatomy, politics, engineering, medicine,
sociology, geology, meteorology, technology, etc. You know -
all the other things about which you, as a high school
dropout, claim to be much smarter than hundreds of trained,
experienced, and recognized experts.



Further to my last reply, I am not an expert. I do not work
in relevant fields nor read much beyond general coverage and
Science News.

However, confidence in CDC (and most Governors) is lacking
out here among the population of punished innocents:

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horow...e-is-the-media

I understand that government employees relaxing at home with
full pay and retirees have a much less urgent interest than
people running out of resources right now.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Very unfortunately Science News has turned into a garbage pit of political correctness that spouts pages of absolute crap that is entirely in disagreement with things such as the National Meteorological Department, The animal census and virtually everything.

We have them "reporting" that Svalberg was ice free this winter when the levels, extent and thickness were at record levels. The extent and thickness of the arctic ice sheet are also above normal and they will still publish pictures from 5 or so years ago when the ice was near record levels but unusual winds had blown the ice about a mile offshore making for dramatic pictures of "global warming".

I have had a long term subscription to Science News but now that over half of the articles appear to be written by someone who is attempting to score political points I will let it lapse. Even Science no longer reports science.