Masks don't prevent transmission of Viruses

Evmetro said:
If brownian motion is what you claim stops viruses from passing through masks, please explain what happens at the overlap threshold. 0.3 is a size that is tougher, since net filtering of larger sizes can barely touch it and brownian motion hardly touches sizes this big. Are you really sure you want to claim brownian motion allows masks to stop transmission of viruses?

Also, why do you keep referring to n95 when you reference mask specs, when the general public is actually using surgical or cheap cloth masks? Quit trying to scam.
Click to expand...
You're always scamming!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Evmetro said:
The size and color of your font is not clarifying which mask you are referring to, and it certainly is not a quote of something you dispute from the article that the thread is about.
Click to expand...

Actually, it points out that the author failed to include 19 studies that show that masks work in his research that claims that no studies show they work.
Here is another one he didn't include -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7094236/
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Actually, it points out that the author failed to include 19 studies that show that masks work in his research that claims that no studies show they work.
Here is another one he didn't include -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7094236/
Click to expand...

So no dispute of the article as written, other that you wish he had written something else. If you post 100 more things that you wish he had posted, it won't be a dispute of anything that is actually in the article.
 
Evmetro said:
So no dispute of the article as written, other that you wish he had written something else. If you post 100 more things that you wish he had posted, it won't be a dispute of anything that is actually in the article.
Click to expand...

IOW you're just denying the fact that your article lied. Your usual "Dodge, deflect, invert, convert, divert, redefine, or otherwise evade,".

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Evmetro said:
So no dispute of the article as written, other that you wish he had written something else. If you post 100 more things that you wish he had posted, it won't be a dispute of anything that is actually in the article.
Click to expand...

So Marburg & Ebola viruses would have spread even more if health care workers went by "Masks-don-t-prevent-transmission-of-Viruses"....
 
saltydancin said:
If "Masks-don-t-prevent-transmission-of-Viruses"....why aren't there more virus cases of Ebola & Marburg in the USA ?
Click to expand...

That is not a quote like the opening post asks for, it is just part of the title of the article. You have not even demonstrated that you read and understood the article that you are commenting on. The opening post does not ask if you dispute the title of an article that you have not read. Is there something in the article that you dispute? Quote it here.
 
Evmetro said:
That is not a quote like the opening post asks for, it is just part of the title of the article. You have not even demonstrated that you read and understood the article that you are commenting on. The opening post does not ask if you dispute the title of an article that you have not read. Is there something in the article that you dispute? Quote it here.
Click to expand...

So if quoting the topic thread doesn't meet requirements nor does this "And absent some miraculous suspension of decades of hard science on the transmission of viruses," doubt there's any validation with this link in comparison : https://zdoggmd.com/monica-gandhi/
 
saltydancin said:
Been there, done that as You have not even demonstrated that you watched and understood the video that you are commenting on showing the article was in error.
Click to expand...

I am not in the least bit surprised that you were unable to quote ANYTHING from the article here to this thread with an explanation as to how it is flawed. There are plenty of lefties who can dispute something as general as the article title, but they can't actually retrieve flawed information from the actual article and post it here. Your inability to post a quote of what you dispute from the article is an excellent endorsement of it. Thanks.
 
Evmetro said:
I am not in the least bit surprised that you were unable to quote ANYTHING from the article here to this thread with an explanation as to how it is flawed. There are plenty of lefties who can dispute something as general as the article title, but they can't actually retrieve flawed information from the actual article and post it here. Your inability to post a quote of what you dispute from the article is an excellent endorsement of it. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Dude, are you under the delusion you get paid everytime you post that particular lie or do you just like to jerk off while doing it?

How many times have you posted such a thing here? Two dozen? Three? The fact remains people have refuted the twist you've put on the data or the twist the article itself put on the data. You denying those posts exist is on you.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Dude, are you under the delusion you get paid everytime you post that particular lie or do you just like to jerk off while doing it?

How many times have you posted such a thing here? Two dozen? Three? The fact remains people have refuted the twist you've put on the data or the twist the article itself put on the data. You denying those posts exist is on you.
Click to expand...

what posts?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Dude, are you under the delusion you get paid everytime you post that particular lie or do you just like to jerk off while doing it?

How many times have you posted such a thing here? Two dozen? Three? The fact remains people have refuted the twist you've put on the data or the twist the article itself put on the data. You denying those posts exist is on you.
Click to expand...

But you can't quote wear anybody has actually retrieved what they see as flawed information from the article and posted it here to dispute. Only poor Richard has given it a shot. All we have seen are lefties who are only able to dispute the title of an article that they haven't even read.
 
Evmetro said:
I am not in the least bit surprised that you were unable to quote ANYTHING from the article here to this thread with an explanation as to how it is flawed. There are plenty of lefties who can dispute something as general as the article title, but they can't actually retrieve flawed information from the actual article and post it here. Your inability to post a quote of what you dispute from the article is an excellent endorsement of it. Thanks.
Click to expand...

For the cognitive dissonance I'll quote it again "And absent some miraculous suspension of decades of hard science on the transmission of viruses" which is pretty much self explanatory as miraculously having left out hard science from the article....
 
saltydancin said:
For the cognitive dissonance I'll quote it again "And absent some miraculous suspension of decades of hard science on the transmission of viruses" which is pretty much self explanatory as miraculously having left out hard science from the article....
Click to expand...

I scrolled through the article that this thread is about looking for that tiny tidbit but couldn't find it. Can you give some more context so I can see the full context of what you quoted from the article?
 
Evmetro said:
I scrolled through the article that this thread is about looking for that tiny tidbit but couldn't find it. Can you give some more context so I can see the full context of what you quoted from the article?
Click to expand...

It's in there, it's one of the very first things in there. before the abstract. salty just misunderstood what it meant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top