The proponents of this test would applaud that kind of sensitivity. If you want to laugh at this with people who agree with you, this video is fine, but if you want to debate someone with this it's a waste of time unless he does it correctly.
it's still useful for exactly the points that are being brought up:
if covid is so prolific, on the table, on the fingers, etc, infection rates would be much higher.
masks won't help. social distancing won't help. bubble suit is only answer.
coke is sick.
Ok then use this video to discredit all social distancing? Why do that when we have data that masks and all have had no effect on the spread, and that mortality vs infection rates have plummeted? Just seems like a sloppy distraction to me.
I think the point is that the coke IS the control subject, but it. is. contaminated.
Skeptics can still argue he's in a room full of people and could have inadvertently touched someone with the virus, or any amount of mental contortion to try and convince themselves he's wrong and the test that makes them feel in control is still valid.
So he left reasonable doubt that he or the podium shared by other maskless speakers does and this does nothing to convince a skeptic. I wish he had done it properly.
I agree with you, but on the other hand that brings up a compelling argument that masks are retarded. If that invalidates the test, then surely you could make a super easy argument that constantly touching your face with a mask would give you the coof...
Then you're not discrediting the test as originally proposed. It might be a bit of a leap to use this video to discredit masks specifically. It doesn't talk about masks at all, it talks about the tests.
He touches the swab with his fingers, loses credibility that way.
Ok but how about Elon Musk and others? These tests are less consistent than a leftist's belief system
Sure I think the tests are stupid, but don't reference someone who's using them like an idiot. It discredits us.
So if he can get a positive result off his fingers, why do they to shove a stick practically into someone’s brain to get a result?
You're preaching to the choir, but don't expect to convince a skeptic with this video. They're going figure this guy doesn't know what he's doing.
And sets it on the table where others have (presumably) spoken before him.
I want to see him redo it properly. I bet he's still correct.
Exactly. We are correct, we shouldn't rely on sloppy evidence.
isn't this the super invasive test that only works if you scrape the underside of your brain?
either way, if a light brush is enough to trigger this test it seems like something is broken.
The proponents of this test would applaud that kind of sensitivity. If you want to laugh at this with people who agree with you, this video is fine, but if you want to debate someone with this it's a waste of time unless he does it correctly.
it's still useful for exactly the points that are being brought up:
if covid is so prolific, on the table, on the fingers, etc, infection rates would be much higher. masks won't help. social distancing won't help. bubble suit is only answer. coke is sick.
Ok then use this video to discredit all social distancing? Why do that when we have data that masks and all have had no effect on the spread, and that mortality vs infection rates have plummeted? Just seems like a sloppy distraction to me.
He also doesn't have a control subject. It's a demonstration to make a point not a controlled science experiment.
I think the point is that the coke IS the control subject, but it. is. contaminated.
Skeptics can still argue he's in a room full of people and could have inadvertently touched someone with the virus, or any amount of mental contortion to try and convince themselves he's wrong and the test that makes them feel in control is still valid.
So he has covid fingers?
So he left reasonable doubt that he or the podium shared by other maskless speakers does and this does nothing to convince a skeptic. I wish he had done it properly.
I agree with you, but on the other hand that brings up a compelling argument that masks are retarded. If that invalidates the test, then surely you could make a super easy argument that constantly touching your face with a mask would give you the coof...
Then you're not discrediting the test as originally proposed. It might be a bit of a leap to use this video to discredit masks specifically. It doesn't talk about masks at all, it talks about the tests.