By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin said:
EricHiggin said:

At the very least ground them all temporarily. I mean, if you're going to help fund people from non essential sectors to stay home and refrain from working, then pay those aviators to stay on the ground and refrain from flying. All for the greater good. Clearly what flight tech and standards we have isn't up to the task. We need to take action and save as many lives as possible. 

If we weren't going to allow people out while social distancing because of possible transmission and death, then we sure shouldn't allow people to be airborne leading to possible altitude loss and death.

'Not that many people died from Covid 19', probably wouldn't be taken so well by more than a few, so suggesting small plane deaths are fairly meaningless wouldn't make much sense either in that case.

Professionals aren't always perfect or right and make mistakes. Sometimes big mistakes. What if the professionals doings led to major financial losses instead? Would that be acceptable? What if life was spared because of it?

SpokenTruth said:

You can bring back an economy.  You can't bring back dead people.  And you certainly can't bring back an economy with dead people.

EricHiggin said:

Can dead people fly planes? Will we ever be able to bring dead people back? People haven't always been able to bring an economy back. 

SpokenTruth said:

Well which one do you think we'll have a greater chance at?

1). Bringing the economy back from this pandemic?

2). Bringing dead people back from this pandemic?

EricHiggin said:

Bit of a trick/tricky question in a few ways, but for one, if the economy doesn't come back, then you can pretty much forget about bringing dead people back period, so it better be able to come back strong, if that's the point of course.

The question would be like asking, 'Which one would we have a better chance at? Saving people's lives from Covid 19, or keeping the economy quite strong?' The question to that answer is pretty obvious, yet that wasn't even up for debate because saving as many people as possible was seen as much more important. So really, is the question worth asking in the first place?

SpokenTruth said:

Doing nothing would have led to millions dying.  Why means the economy would have died too. 

EricHiggin said:

Funny you bring that up now. You didn't seem to have much of a problem with it prior, before others decided to join the convo.

I suggested? Perspective?

SpokenTruth said:

WTF?  You're saying I didn't seem to have much of a problem with you talking about cloning dead people as a viable strategy to keep the economy open until others decided to join the conversation?

Well considering I didn't suggest those things. I did ask some questions in reference to points made for those individuals to chew on.

Then there's the trick/tricky question, which my comparative question makes most of this null anyway since that question is off the table.

Why you didn't bring up reaching prior, seems odd that you did now, if I was indeed reaching and you thought that at that earlier time.

Since the main point was about a dead pilot and plane crash into a house due to flyovers to inspire during Covid 19, it seems a little odd we've ended up here. Maybe I should have spoken up sooner as well?

SvennoJ said:

Terrorism has motives and a common goal, achieved by directing anger to a particular group or nation. What could possibly be the goal by releasing a slow burning virus that mostly kills the elderly.

Never mind that it has already been shown multiple times that sars-cov-2 was not made in a lab or could have come from a lab. But perhaps there are a bunch of deluded terrorists somewhere angry at the whole world, injecting bat blood from thousands of bats into many thousands of civets for many years, praying for that random mutation to occur while feasting on civet cats for years until someone finally got sick and ran out into busy markets. Yep, that's what happened.



As for cause and effect, do too little, effect shit gets out of control
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-05-08-COVID19-Report-21.pdf

Well just look at what it's done to the world. If you wanted to go after a booming economy let's say, you've accomplished your task and more. Maybe you want to set up China on a worldwide level?

It wouldn't necessarily have to be made with evil intent. Now if it was terrorism, there's almost zero chance this get's told the the public for a while (if ever). You've already got a worldwide health crisis, panic, etc, so the last thing you would do, would be to inform the world it was a terrorist act. You would take care of the crisis at hand first, or do both but keep it quiet. If you didn't have great intel then you're not going to pull another "they have WMD's" again either. You would need to take the time to investigate and keep it quiet.

Now I do think this is quite unlikely, though not impossible.

Of course you would tell the world, Trump already tried to, China already tried to as well, Conspiracy theorist keep trying. Nothing like terrorism to rally people behind an idiot president to give him the power to do whatever he wants. Terrorism is as much a tool of the government as those hurt by governments. The first thing Trump tried was to direct anger at China. Not having great Intel doesn't matter at all.