This probably depends on whether you're looking at a) utterly conclusive data and an overwhelming consensus amongst experts, who are impartial because they have nothing to gain from climate change, or b) some random fossil fuel lobbyist who likes his $$$.

Personally I tend to consider option 'a' as more relevant, so I'm somewhat skeptical of the sunspots misdirection idea.

I don't choose a party to call my own. I vote according to which party appears to be the best (or least worst) according to my own priorities, perspectives and ideals. It's not always the same party.

In my country I was a member of a party, and voted for them - until they recently changed direction somewhat. Since then I've left the party, and not joined another one. I'm unsure how I'll vote in the next election.

Identifying with a party early on in your life, and then sticking with it irrespective of how it, you, or society changes - is ridiculous, and a wasted vote. It's akin to religion.

Really bad result for Atletico. I think now that Barca will win the title. They are winning all their games, the only exception was their defeat in the Clasico. Atletico's only chance now is to beat BArca when they play them, otherwise I think their chances are over for this year.

One thing to remember is that Real Madrid have the advantage in head-to-head results should these teams finish level on points.

TBH I'm a bit surprised that Chelsea won. I thought the backlash from their own fans over the aborted ESL idea might cause them to lose focus in this match. It may have been a contributing factor in Liverpool's and Arsenal's poor results over the last few days - particularly Arsenal, I read there were over 1,000 fans protesting at the stadium ahead of their game.

That seems a preposterously unlikely explanation. Are you sure it doesn't have more to do with the fact that the entire country is basically a river delta? Two thirds of Bangladesh is less than five metres above sea level.
The high population density will certainly contribute to the effects of climate change, but is not the driver.

It's partly due to it being a novel virus, i.e. no pre-existing immunity to slow its progress.

And it's partly due to the fact that the world runs on money. Politicians rarely do what's best for the people, they do what's best for the money instead. Or what they think is best for the money. They didn't want to implement strict quarantining and lockdowns immediately, because it would hamper commerce. Instead they waited and hoped it would all go away. Of course it didn't go away, it spread, and by the time they reluctantly started shutting countries down, it was already far too late.

If politicians worked for the benefit of the people, I suspect the pandemic would have had much less of an effect.

I don't know. I think the absence of Grealish is the main reason. They were doing really well when he was playing, but since he's been out I think they've only won two. He completely transforms them when he plays, and he makes everyone else on the team look better, too.

West Brom is a difficult one to call, with it being a local derby.

Well, it's over at West Ham - Chelsea win 1-0. So all the contenders below Leicester have now played 33 games, with Chelsea in fourth 3 points clear of West Ham in fifth.
Is it enough?
Well, it will be tough. Chelsea not only have those two Champion's League semis to get through, they also have 3 really tough games in their remaining 5 league matches (Man City, Leicester, Arsenal).
They've put themselves in a decent position today, but it's still all to play for.

Okay, I've now done a little research. The British Medical Journal have some data on it. Apparently the main vaccine used in Chile is Sinovac's CoronaVac... which appears less effective than the British AZ vaccine on a single dose basis (and the Chileans who have been vaccinated have overwhelmingly only had a single dose). Looks disturbingly like rich nations get the best vaccines, poorer nations are forced to choose from whatever is left, as you might anticipate:


Also it is considered likely (anecdotal unless someone has seen the figures?) that the Brazil variant is a contributor:


Also there is an opinion that:


Quotes from the link above. Reasons appear to be as you'd expect - although I wasn't aware that the Sinovac vaccine had such low efficacy after single dose. As a second point of reference, CNN has an article with similar conclusions.

If Chelsea hold on to win, that's makes it even tighter in that race for fourth spot. Liverpool and Spurs have played a game more than Chelsea or West Ham, which could yet prove crucial with only a few games left until the end of the season. I am starting to think though that Leicester look strong favourites to secure third place, it's still open, but they really look a decent bet.

To me, it seems likely, given how widespread it is around the globe, and how easily it is transmitted (including asymptomatically), that it will not be eradicated entirely.
I believe that over time it will become an endemic virus, managed in a similar manner to flu, with periodic vaccines to counter troublesome new variants. Note that data so far suggest that current vaccines are effective at least to an extent against many variants... it's unlikely as far as I can see that we will ever return to pandemic status with this particular virus (in sufficiently vaccinated nations).

But certainly lockdowns and masks will go, these are purely temporary measures that are required until effective herd immunity is achieved in the population - which is the point of the vaccines. The two routes to herd immunity are a) take the vaccine, or b) become infected with the virus.

Infections, deaths and long-term health effects around the globe over the last year have been horrific. The unprecedentedly rapid vaccine development has saved countless lives, and is a huge success story. It offers a route out of this. Hopefully lessons will be learned, and we will be better prepared if there is a 'next time' with a new virus in the years to come.

You mean the data I linked to here, right? Summarised again below for convenience. The main fear at the moment is that there are sufficient numbers of anti-vaxxers to prevent effective herd immunity.

Unknown, I haven't looked into it. Geographical proximity to Brazil and hence the Brazilian variant may be a factor. Might also depend on whether the vaccine was stored and transported properly - could be a factor given the extreme geography of the country. Might also depend on any lifting of lockdowns, and people becoming infected in the several week window before the vaccine starts to really take effect in the body. As I say though, these are guesses.

I'm more familiar with the story in my own country, the UK... case numbers have been dropping steadily since the last lockdown was lifted (and schools re-opening in March), contrary to the normal pattern over the last few lockdowns. The difference this time being the high degree of vaccination.


Sure. We can talk about what the data show. In fact that's all we can really talk about. What we can't do is make baseless claims in the absence of data, as per the quote below - that's what I take issue with.


You just can't say that and expect to be taken seriously, if you can't back it up. This is a statement that the case is closed, it's confirmed, they don't stop infection or transmission... and the statement is unsupported by evidence, and indeed flies in the face of the evidence that is available.

The point is that if you present baseless conclusions like that, it's difficult to differentiate you from certain other posters.

---

What, what, what and what?

It would be like that if you think that 'National Enquirer Bat Boy' evidence is equivalent to all combined evidence from the CDC, the FDA, the Lancet, Nature, numerous universities, numerous independent scientific studies based in different places around the world, and numerous experts in the field.
Basically you are saying that any evidence from any source is disreputable... which presumably is why you have failed to provide any evidence to back up your own claims.

When people make an argument, but refuse to back it up with data, then you have to question their sincerity.
I said earlier that preliminary studies did show reduced transmission, and I'd linked to the data in a previous post. Since then, we now have more data from more studies... current understanding is neatly summarised here.

I do get tired of posting links to data, papers, meta-analyses, etc... I do get tired of continually having to post facts ... when really anyone with an interest in a topic should be able to seek these things for themselves. But here we are. Yet again. All quotes below are from the link above, which then links out to each specific study and dataset.


... but feel free to counter all of this by either a) not supplying any supporting evidence for your claims, or b) linking to some random nut-job on youtube who is ranting from his basement.

They are in good from recently, they've won the last two. They also have a game in hand on Burnley.
Agree though that it looks difficult for them to escape... it's a 9 point gap, plus West Brom have much worse goal difference. All it takes is a couple of good results from Burnley, and they're effectively safe (and they do still have to play Fulham and Sheff U, for which they'd be favourites).

Not his ideology, but his action. If a police officer thinks that someone who is on trial for homicide is innocent, that's one thing... if he actively funds them, that's obviously different. Especially given the Jacob Blake context, and the wider George Floyd / BLM context. Don't you think it makes it look like the police department is full of white supremacists?

I imagine it would depend on the situation. Perhaps if he'd donated to BLM the group rather than an individual, he might have been fine, or he might have got in a bit of trouble.
But if he'd donated specifically to a BLM individual who was on trial for gunning down innocent people in the street... then I think he would still have got fired.

Irrelevant. If you are kneeling on someone's neck, and they're telling you they can't breathe, then maybe you should just get off their neck? Rather than thinking "well, I'm only kneeling kind of lightly, it's probably not fatal pressure..."

The race for the final two Champions League places is wide open. Anyone down to Liverpool could finish in the top 4. I'd say Everton are an outside bet because of their poor recent form, and Arsenal and below are just too far back. It looks like any 2 from 5 will get the places. None of them have outstanding form at the moment, they've all been patchy... so really any of them could succeed.

Data to support this assertion? AFAIK preliminary studies do show reduced transmission (I've linked to this previously).


You've said you're not an anti-vaxxer... so you would concede that vaccines work in general... except for some reason in this case, where you are making a baseless, data-free claim that the Covid vaccines don't work? Polio, Smallpox, Measles, Mumps, etc all work? Covid, though, doesn't - despite overwhelming evidence of dropping case numbers in highly vaccinated nations?

Or is the claim that the Polio vaccine has eliminated Polio, whereas the Covid vaccine merely diminishes Covid and doesn't eradicate it entirely? Which would be a bad faith argument, akin to the anti-mask anti-lockdown argument of something being pointless unless it is 100% effective, a masks-only-give-you-90%-protection-so-are-therefore-worthless kind of thing.


I'm not using derogatory terms... I'm just asking for data to support your claims. Otherwise it just looks like backwards reasoning where you start from a pre-determined conclusion.

I take your point, but it doesn't cover all cases. Some healthy young people with no pre-existing health conditions who contract Covid do still sometimes suffer severe symptoms, and sometimes die. It's certainly not the case that everyone who has any non-zero risk of suffering severe symptoms or death has already been vaccinated, even here in the UK. And if if we reach the case where vaccines have been offered to 100% of the population, there are still new, unvaccinated people entering the country each day.



Mechanisms such as that used by the AZ vaccine, where an adenovirus is used as the vector, are tried-and-tested. It's not like this is an experimental medical procedure.