Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > COVID-19 Pandemic has Exposed Intellectual Bankruptcy of Liberals

COVID-19 Pandemic has Exposed Intellectual Bankruptcy of Liberals

In the previous post, I wrote about how the COVID-19 pandemic exposed many of the chronic problems and systemic dysfunctions in West for all to see. While writing that post, I started thinking about another one on how this pandemic also exposed the mind-boggling levels of intellectual bankruptcy among liberals. And yes, I wrote two very similarly titled posts a few months ago (link 1, link 2). As far as my ideological roots are concerned, those who have read enough of my older posts know that I despise ideologies of all flavors- from CONServatism to LIEbralism. Sure.. some are a bit worse than others, but not by much. While many of early posts were about the intellectual bankruptcy of CONservatism, it has became increasingly obvious to me that LIEbralism has gone from being a little better than CONservatism to significantly worse- especially in the past five years.

1] The first serious instance of how the pandemic exposed LIEbral idiocy came pretty early. You might have heard something about how tests for antibodies against COVID-19 show far more widespread infection than PCR- and LAMP- based tests. It was also well known, rather early on, that infection in younger age groups was largely asymptomatic. This would suggest that the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) for this virus was much lower than the high Case Fatality Rate (CFR) as measured before extensive testing was deployed. But LIEbrals would have nothing of that. These dumbfucks tried to discredit and suppress any evidence that it was far less dangerous than the equally intellectually bankrupt MSM was trying to push.

What makes this, however, especially interesting is the arguments used by LIEbrals in their attempts to discredit the results of antibody testing. One of their main arguments was that these antibody tests had very high false positive rates. Well.. any person who understands the science behind these tests and laboratory techniques will tell you that even the most poorly designed modern antibody tests have false positive rates below 2%. In fact, a false negative result is far more likely than a false positive for these tests. And yet there was no shortage of self-proclaimed experts on Twatter, FakeBook and MSM who claimed that these tests were “wrong”. It is as if LIEbrals had close to zero understanding of STEM subjects, which is not surprising as most of these losers credentialed in “liberal arts” at university.

And it gets worse. Once it became obvious that their lies about antibody test results were making them look like idiots, they started claimed that antibody titres were the only predictors of immunity to viral infections. But as anybody with a proper undergraduate-level education in Microbiology can tell you, immunity to viral infections has much more to do with memory B-lymphocyte, helper T-lymphocyte and Dendritic cells activated in response to infection than the persistence of antibody levels. That is why immunity to many viral infections can often last a lifetime. Now, it harder and significantly more expensive to measure these post-infection responses than a simple antibody test- but they are far more important for lasting immunity to a specific virus than antibody levels.

2] Let us move on to non-specialized face masks, a topic which I have touched on in another previous post (link 3). In case you haven’t heard, a recent large RCT Danish study of mask efficacy which many journals were initially unwilling to publish clearly shows that surgical-grade face masks have virtually no effect on rates of COVID-19 infection. And this is not surprising, since similar studies done on the efficacy of surgical masks at prevent Influenza infection (caused by a virus of roughly similar dimensions) in the past had yielded similar results. In other words, unless you are wearing N95 or better face masks, such measures are not effective at preventing infections. But liberal idiots continue defending this dubious talisman, once again demonstrating their ignorance of experimental science.

To make matters more interesting, these LIEbral idiots still haven’t explained why dense and crowded cities in Asia and some parts of Africa have only a tiny fraction of the COVID-19 deaths which many of these same racist idiots were happily anticipating. Isn’t it interesting that almost none of these LIEbral idiots are even considering the possibility that.. maybe.. people in some countries have partial cross-immunity to COVID-19 due to previous infection by other coronaviruses. Or why states with mask mandates don’t have lower rates of infection that neighboring ones with far fewer restrictions. Then again, liberals would rather stick their head up their behind than care about anything which contradicts their belief system.. you know.. like real life. Having said that, it is fun to watch them make up explanations which are rationally inconsistent with their previous ones, while pretending that they aren’t doing so.

These same idiots keep pushing worthless measures that sound effective such as “circuit breaker lockdowns” with no evidence that they do anything other than temporarily suppress case numbers a little. Why do you think that something which didn’t work in Italy, Spain, France and UK in the spring is going to work again? Because you want it to work? Seriously? Also why haven’t all those Asian countries which have very low case numbers and kept it in control done so without lockdowns? Also how long are you going to keep up this shit? How do you plan to compensate all those business owners who will be bankrupted by this ineffectual bullshit? What about all the people who have lost their jobs- in many cases, permanently? I would rather have excess mortality among the 80+ crowd in nursing homes than destroy the lives of many tens of millions more in the prime of their lives.

3] Let us now talk about all those measures to control COVID-19. Given that most outbreaks occur in places that are indoors, crowded and poorly ventilated- why are we pretending that normal outdoor and indoor activities are risky? Given that this virus is airborne, what is the whole point of “social distancing”? Given what we know about Vitamin D levels and severity of disease, wouldn’t giving Vitamin D supplements to dark-skinned and older people be a far better use of resources. And why not give the older and otherwise vulnerable people free N95 facemasks rather than pretending that ersatz cloth facemasks are equally effective? And we have not even touched on the issue of how mortality strongly correlates with advanced age and presence of multiple chronic disease conditions. But try telling any of this to a STEM-illiterate LIEbral retweeting make-believe bullshit on Twatter and FakeBook.

Since we are past a thousand words, I will wrap up this post here. Based on your feedback, I might write another post. Here is a parting question.. Do the governors and administrations in democrat-ruled cities and states have a realistic plan to cover their massive upcoming revenue and tax losses? Do they think Biden will be able to bail them out?

What do you think? Comments?

  1. ...this blog has gone down in qiality as of late...
    November 21, 2020 at 6:57 pm

    “Do the governors and administrations in democrat-ruled cities and states have a realistic plan to cover their massive upcoming revenue and tax losses? ”

    IDK but that cocksucker Gavin Newsom sure likes his restaurant meals…

  2. ...this blog has gone down in quality as of late...
    November 21, 2020 at 6:59 pm

    …just a thought, why didn’t shit companies like Amazon give their disposable drivers, uh, I mean 3rd party contracted drivers real PPE, as in N95 masks?

    Because they don’t think all those “little people” are worth it?

  3. Let's psychoanalyze AD
    November 21, 2020 at 7:37 pm

    okay, I am gonna be your buddy Jordan Peterson,

    and you are gonna be on the couch… no, not with an escort, put your pecker back in your pants you freaking pervert…

    Okay, as far as the big 5…

    AD is low in openers to experience, he is dogmatic and unable to accept new information. His taste in movies, art and music is conventional and more for a conversation piece that an true appreciation of asthetics.

    AD is low in agreeability, he doesn’t trust others much. He thinks the world is out to get him as he schemes.

    AD is moderately high in extroversion, he gets “lonely” if he doesn’t get any pu$$y and often visits bars although he is made fun of at such establishments

    AD is high in neuroticism, he wishes he could be a psychopath but he is not cool and collected, he is more like Woody Allen

    AD is moderate in conscientiousness, he keeps his science “job” whilst going on long fap breaks in the rest room.

    As far as pathologies…

    AD is an extreme narcissist, more likely a vunerable narcissist.

    AD is machiavellian, his attitude is “what have you done for me today?”

    AD wished he could be a psychopath but he is likely high on sensitivity to disgust, he fantasize about committing violent crimes but lacks the mental and physical toughness to carry them out. He is scarred of guns and knives. He has “tough guy” fantasies involving being car jacked but stymying the robbers and shooting them.

    AD is addicted to caffeine and is a fixture at the local starbucks. He occasionally smokes ciggerretes to appear sociable but is afraid of marijuana and psychedelics. He has tried cocaine and meth while visiting homeless ladies. The “euphoria” that some experience was replaced by intense paranoia.

  4. doldrom
    November 21, 2020 at 8:41 pm

    I have yet to hear a liberal mention the word zinc or ionophore in connection with hcq, only, c’mon, a malaria medicine, how dumb can you be. Nor an explanation of why Fauci is on the author list of an article from 2005 calling it promising as an anti-viral.
    They bray about science and trust in authority (authority?) and institutions, but will never say a word about what social media censorship means or how the trusty old Press can still be flogging the Trump was put in power by Putin (elections are illegitimate).
    Despite their pretension, the liberals are just serving interests, and the rest of the population has long ago figured out they are being gaslighted across the board. The left has completely abdicated to policing thought and suppressing questions, instead of digging in and trying to answer them.

  5. MikeCA
    November 22, 2020 at 8:38 am

    “In case you haven’t heard, a recent large RCT Danish study of mask efficacy which many journals were initially unwilling to publish clearly shows that surgical-grade face masks have virtually no effect on rates of COVID-19 infection.”

    You are overstating and misrepresenting the findings of this study. The abstract says:

    “Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates SARS-CoV-2 transmission, but whether this observed association arises because masks protect uninfected wearers (protective effect) or because transmission is reduced from infected mask wearers (source control) is uncertain.”

    “In this community-based, randomized controlled trial conducted in a setting where mask wearing was uncommon and was not among other recommended public health measures related to COVID-19, a recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, incident SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no mask recommendation.”

    You do realize that the ineffectiveness of cloth and surgical masks against viruses of similar size (Influenza A etc) has been known for a long time. So, it is not surprising that they wouldn’t work.

    “These findings do offer evidence about the degree of protection mask wearers can anticipate in a setting where others are not wearing masks and where other public health measures, including social distancing, are in effect. The findings, however, should not be used to conclude that a recommendation for everyone to wear masks in the community would not be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections, because the trial did not test the role of masks in source control of SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

    From the beginning when the CDC first recommended masks it was because masks would provide source control. People who were already infected would shed less virus into the environment when they were wearing a masks. That is why everyone needs to wear a mask when outside the home.

    You are misrepresenting the conclusions of this study to spread dis-information and propaganda.

    The conditions they are describing are those encountered in something called ‘real-life’, a concept increasingly foreign to liberal idiots. The sad reality is non-specialized masks don’t work and even those are not close to perfect.

    • doldrom
      November 22, 2020 at 6:34 pm

      Never take to heart obligatory nostrums that people include in their conclusions and abstracts to preempt ostracism and political correctness. Just look their data, which speaks for itself.
      The sudden emergence of the source control theory tries to deflect the decades of research and communis opinio about the inefficacy of masks. However, there is virtually no strong evidence for any source control efficacy. Not even for surgical teams in the operating theatre!

  6. MikeCA
    November 22, 2020 at 12:11 pm

    “The conditions they are describing are those encountered in something called ‘real-life’,”

    Well, I live in California. When I go out shopping to grocery or hardware stores, everyone is wearing a mask. Not the conditions of this study.

    People, including the governor, have not been wearing masks in restaurants but they have just closed restaurants for indoor dining again. I have only gotten take out from restaurants.

    “The sad reality is non-specialized masks don’t work and even those are not close to perfect.”

    Non-specialized masks are only suppose to provide source control which this study did not attempt to address. Clearly some masks are better at source control then others,

    You are just spreading propaganda.

    Since I don’t have time to retype it, here is a link to my post on that topic.

    To quickly summarize, masks rated lower than N95 are not effective against other airborne viral infections (where virus particles are of similar size to COVID-19), so it hardly surprising they don’t work against COVID-19.

    If you want an effective facemask, get something rated N95 or better which fits properly.


  7. MikeCA
    November 22, 2020 at 2:35 pm

    It is believed that most COVID-19 is carried by aerosol particles in human breath, not the individual viruses. The question is do masks reduce the spread of aerosol particles:


    You know all of this, you are just spreading propaganda.

    • doldrom
      November 22, 2020 at 6:31 pm

      What happens to the virions when the particles carrying them are wicked away or evaporate? You blow them into the environment, probably transporting them from one space to another, or passing them on via touch/contact.
      Respiratory spread peaks when absolute humidity is lowest. When you exhale, droplets condensate from your breath after passing through your mask.
      Masks may alter the trajectory of the virus particles you exhale, but they do not decrease their number.

  8. Yussef
    November 22, 2020 at 5:36 pm

    If you accept the easily observably fact that AD is a narcissist who wished he was a sociopath, it is much easier to understand why he writes what he writes. He has downplayed Covid 19. He may be “technically correct” that 18-50 year olds with no pre-existing conditions are unlikely to die of Covid, it is still something you probably don’t want to get. The are many stories of “long haulers”-those who have had problems months after having the “2 week flu.” There is also very real possibilities of long term damage to your organs. So with that being said, it is pragmatic to take reasonable precautions to protect yourself. Remember, AD is a sadistic fuck who would laugh if someone was hurt because of bad information he gave out. He is safely sitting this one out with his WFH make-work job, his takeout, his pronhub and maybe a few escorts that he has tried to talk down in price touching his pee pee.
    Mike CaCa is most likely wrong about AD being a Wussian Twoll. It is ironic that after Mr.CaCa spent months (or was it years whinging at crooked Hillary’s defeat) that reich wingers wouldn’t similarly claim that trump da chump lost due to voting fraud.

  9. NickSwift
    November 22, 2020 at 8:20 pm

    The “CONservatives” were right about this virus hysteria, so what?

    A broken clock, etc.

    They were only accidentally right, and for totally wrong reasons. The CONmen were right for the wrong reasons while the “LIEberals” really have been wrong for all the right reasons. Which side is really worse here?

    Besides this admittedly severe blunder, how can the CONmen not be still be catastrophically worse?

    You are simply lobbing petulant and sophomoric invective like a jilted lover. The only people who could favor the CONmen now are those lovable accelerationists I’ve been hearing so much about who fantasize about beheading TV doctors and drowning women in pantsuits in acid.

    Surely, you are not one of them…unless?

    Uncritical belief in any ideology is a mark of mental retardation. This applies for everything from traditional regions and cults to secular religions such as capitalism and scientism.

    • your mom was good last nite
      November 22, 2020 at 9:40 pm

      “Surely, you are not one of them…unless?”

      Carefully read dudebro’s blog especially some of his older posts…

      he is a narcissist playing sociopath…

      don’t think for a second that he would hesitate to give you bad advice and then laugh his are off if it cause you hardship…

      • P Ray
        November 23, 2020 at 4:44 am

        I dunno, the advice he is giving is pretty sound:
        -Look at the angle of everybody else who gives you advice
        -Society relies on idiots to keep it ticking over while those at the top are looting
        -Women like to exploit men but lie about it
        -A lot of skilled people are just skilled at covering their ass or playing politics
        -Stop thinking that you can rely on just one source of information

        those are all pretty sound principles.

    • NickSwift
      November 23, 2020 at 7:59 am

      It’s fine and good to be skeptical towards all sides, but it is a fallacy to suggest that all sides are equally bad.

      And the advice given here can be good, but it can also be quite erroneous and more toxic cynicism than thoughtful meditation. I would hope that that balance tends more to the latter than to the former.

    November 24, 2020 at 9:11 pm

    • Gay white Nationalist
      November 29, 2020 at 8:40 pm

      on another note, look at the fashionable mask AD is paying his favorite escort for…

    November 26, 2020 at 1:19 am

    “wouldn’t giving Vitamin D supplements to dark-skinned … people be a far better use of resources”

    • Aryan Gay Safespace
      November 26, 2020 at 8:37 pm

      so when are you gonna write about where the word motherfucker comes from?

  1. February 3, 2021 at 10:05 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: