mhaze,

After all that I said, I’m glad we’re just down to that one little point of contention.

Your claim that the 6-foot rule was "just made up" is incorrect. There was limited knowledge about how covid spread early in the piece, so the 6-foot rule was based on the best available data at the time regarding droplet transmission.

Yes, it was later revised as more was learned about aerosol transmission, but this doesn’t mean it was entirely baseless. Many studies showed that distancing helped to reduce transmission, especially in indoor settings.

Also, while Fauci and others acknowledged that the specifics of the rule were not exact, the general principle of distancing (along with masking) was supported by evidence, especially before vaccines were widely available.

Nothing was “made up” - it was an evolving response to a rapidly changing situation.

indy,

There's a concept in philosophy called obscurantisme terroriste.

Basically it means that the fool writes something so obscure, so unintelligible that no one can understand the point. (That's the obscurantisme part) And when its pointed out that it makes no sense, they simply claim to be too smart to even bother to explain it (that's the terroriste part).

If you think your comment makes any sense, explain it in intelligible prose - if you can.

________________________________________________________________

JD "Nothing was “made up”"

Well I was just passing on what Fauci et al said. But I can see that if the authorities told you it was factual, you are going to believe them, no questions asked.

"“It sort of just appeared, that six feet is going to be the distance,” Fauci testified to Congress in a January closed-door hearing, according to a transcribed interview released Friday. Dr. Anthony Fauci characterized the recommendation as “an empiric decision that wasn’t based on data.” Francis S. Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health, also privately testified to Congress in January that he was not aware of evidence behind the social distancing recommendation, according to a transcript released in May. "

"Dr. Anthony Fauci said in congressional testimony that he reviewed no scientific evidence behind the specific recommendations for masking"

Yes, I can agree that the period was one where they were all flying blind. But they weren't saying they were flying blind, instead telling all those who'd fall for it (remind you of anyone JD?) that they knew exactly what to do. That's bad enough. But there were other voices who , we now know, were advocating better science and better policies. And those people were being censored, fired, pushed out of academia, having careers destroyed. All while trying to alter everyone to the disasters the lockdowns were bringing.

mhaze,

You’re taking Fauci’s comments out of context. The 6-foot rule wasn’t about being "made up" as much as it was about acting quickly with the best knowledge at the time.

There wasn’t the time to wait around for perfect data. Something had to be done to slow the spread, and distancing seemed like the best option based on what was known about droplet transmission at that time. Later, as we learned more about aerosols, the guidance shifted, but that doesn’t mean they were just guessing.

Same thing with masks - early on, there wasn’t concrete proof on every detail, but common sense and existing knowledge about how respiratory viruses spread made masking a logical precaution. Over time, studies showed they worked, especially before vaccines were available.

The dissenting voices supposedly being "silenced" weren’t coming from people who had solutions that were known to be better or based on more reliable data, they were just different opinions on what should be done. Public health measures adapted as new data came in, and changing recommendations doesn’t mean authorities were wrong - it just shows they were willing to change course as needed.

Science isn’t about certainty; it’s about responding to what we know and making adjustments when new info comes in. That’s what happened here.

I realise none of this is as exciting as a grand conspiracy, but the truth is often more dull than fiction in this context. If you want it to be stranger than fiction, then get into quantum physics or any science disproving religious accounts of origins.