asdkjh345fd

>how can you definitely say he was not suggesting to drink bleach?

I didn't. I said he did not say to drink bleach. If you want to believe that those words "suggest" drinking bleach, that is an entirely different argument.

>You're claiming that any attempt to clarify the incoherence is 'lying',

They are not trying to clarify. Read the transcript, a reported specifically did ask for clarification, and was given it. So no, there is no question he did not say to drink bleach, every reporter there knows this because of the one reporter that actually asked for clarification. They are not trying to clarify, they are trying to misrepresent. That's called lying.

And what does the headline say?

He didn't say it, that's the point.

No, I do not wish to assign that meaning, that meaning was already assigned a long time ago. And you don't need to be a prescriptivist to want a language that is capable of communicating our thoughts with each other.

Google for "Trump bleach". The entire first page is media either saying Trump said to drink or inject bleach or lysol, or the media saying "don't listen to Trump, drinking bleach is bad", which is clearly implying Trump said that. This should be a pretty big red flag, since the word bleach does not appear anywhere in Trump's remarks. You even have them doubling down on it in the face of people pointing out they are liars:

https://reason.com/2020/04/24/its-not-fake-news-trump-did-ac...

There is no way for them to pretend they don't know better here. They are outright saying "our lie isn't a lie" and repeating the lie.

Normalizing errors in language is how language degrades. We no longer have a word for literally, because people use literally to mean figuratively. We are losing the ability to talk about begging the question, because people think it means raising the question. The fact that English has degraded is not a reason to give up and let it get worse.

>To me it seemed clear that he was talking about a research idea, not about a home treatment.

Yes, the preceding paragraph makes that clear.

>On the other hand I don't think he made that point 100% clear.

Definitely not, most of what he said is barely coherent nonsense. So if the media wants to report on that, they should report what he said, or even "we have no idea what he is babbling about". But instead the media openly lies about what he said. We have huge numbers of people right here being outraged that Trump would give people the idea that drinking bleach is a good idea, yet it is the media giving people that idea, not Trump. Our media is not simply failing us, they are actively harmful. It is disgraceful.

It is being amplified by the media itself, not someone with media presence.

>"This begs the question" is same as "This raises the question"

No it isn't, that is a common error in modern English. Raising the question means bringing a question into focus. Begging the question means to assume the conclusion is correct in the premise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

What he said is just his usual incoherent gibberish. If the media didn't run an organized campaign of bleach drinking hysteria, absolutely nobody would have that idea in their heads. Now the media has created a situation where a small group of paranoid, low IQ people will think Trump actually did tell them to drink bleach, and that CNN is just trying to stop them from trying this great cure. The problem here is the media.

Many media outlets have claimed Trump told people to drink bleach. Unless you can provide a quote of Trump saying that, yes they are absolutely lying.

There is no whataboutism. You are creating a strawman, and then complaining about it being fallacious. I am not defending Trump, I am attacking the media. The media are the ones spreading the bleach drinking meme. That is bad. They should not do that. And all I get are these histrionic "omg u luv blumpf fox watcher!1111" responses, nobody actually addresses the issue. If the media did not run insane "don't listen to Trump, drinking bleach is bad!" stories, nobody would think Trump said to drink bleach, because he did not, and because nobody listens to anything he says in the first place, only to what the media says he says.

None of that is relevant to my post. A major symptom of Trump derangement syndrome is the inability to understand that criticizing the bad behavior of the press is not a defense of Trump. No matter how stupid Trump is, it in no way excuses the media intentionally lying about what he says.

>Within the span of a few seconds, Trump strings together "disinfectant" and "injection" and "sounds interesting".

So, you are fully and entirely aware that he said nothing of the sort, so much so you afraid to actually quote him and just want to pull individual words and say "these words were near each other!". And none of those words are drink or bleach. This supports my point.

>We've already seen someone drink chloroquine phosphate, after days of Trump mentioning hydroxychloroquine multiple times

And when the woman who poisoned her husband with fish tank cleaner is convicted, is that going to change anything in your mind? Or will you simply dismiss reality as inconvenient and cling to your media created fantasy?

>his statements in context showed such a complete ignorance of many basic facts that even the average 8th grader would know

How does that make the media lying ok? The president being a dumbass does not excuse the media lying, especially not with such dangerous lies.

>This begs the question of robustness of the whole scientific publishing process

It raises the question. Begging the question is an unrelated logical fallacy. Unfortunately, there have been a ton of examples of the peer-review process being essentially useless. Things like people deliberately putting things in to test if the paper is even being read and none of the reviewers notice it.

Who is it that really bears the blame for these unsubstantiated bleach drinking incidents? Trump, who did not say anything like "drink bleach", or the media who openly lie and run headlines like "Trump tells everyone to drink bleach!"? Or even non-media hucksters trying to get publicity by tweeting things like "I can’t believe I have to say this, but please don’t drink bleach"?

There is overwhelming evidence. Dozens of studies, all show significant reduction the spread of viral diseases simply by tying a folded piece of cotton over your face. And if you need to back peddle this hard, maybe you should be so quick to snark in the first place?

>Does that say it's harmful to wear masks?

Yes, it does. "In fact, there's some evidence to suggest the opposite". But that is irrelevant, since that is not what I claimed. I said the WHO says masks don't work. I quoted them saying it to CNN for you, and linked it. How much more in denial can you get?

>The WHO's guidance has been that it isn't necessary for individuals to wear medical PPE

I just showed you their guidance, which says they will not help. The overwhelming evidence unanimously says that it does help.

>There are valid concerns about this, both related to shortages and improper care.

There are not. There is no shortage of cotton fabric. Improper use of masks is still superior to no masks.

On their website and twitter and through press outlets like CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-r...

"There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit."

That is completely and totally wrong. It is INSANE to suggest something so horrifyingly stupid and dangerous with a virus that has a two week asymptomatic, contagious incubation period. All the infected but don't know it yet people would lower the number of people they infect massively if they work masks. Every single country where mask wearing in public is the norm has a much lower fatality rate than every single country where it is not the norm.

>I’d love to try this variety!

It sounds like a telephone game re-telling of these: https://www.johnnyseeds.com/vegetables/tomatoes/heirloom-tom...

They aren't really anything special, you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them and amish paste or san marzano in a taste test.

>Seems to follow that apple varieties ended up lost to the dustbin of history because they didn't taste very good?

Nope. Cider varieties fell out of favor because cider fell out of favor, and most don't taste very good for eating. But heritage eating apples fell out of favor because they do not ship well, or don't grow well in synthetically fertilized dirt, or due to marketing. Most heritage varieties of eating apples taste WAY better than bland crap like honeycrisp. Red delicious were the most produced apple for many years even though basically nobody likes them. Because they look very appealing, and they are very durable so they can be handled roughly and shipped all over. Try a Cox's Orange Pippin and you'll never be able to eat grocery store apples again.

That masks work.

This is precisely why this sort of "helpful" censorship is not helpful. The WHO is wrong, plain and simple. There's dozens of studies that very clearly show even home made masks are highly effective in spreading viral diseases.

Every strain identified so far has been found in the US. You have provided absolutely nothing to support the claims that the US has handled this badly, or that they have ignored advice from experts. And you simply dismiss the evidence that proves objectively that you are wrong with "the US has better healthcare", despite the US ranking low in healthcare.

>I know this will likely go in one ear and out the other, but you should really stop listening to Fox news

Do you think that meets the HN posting guidelines? Do you think that is a constructive thing to post? Does assuming anyone who presents information you dislike is ignorant create better, more informative discussions? Perhaps you should start listening to the WHO.

From who then? Please provide an example. Show me what the US did differently from European countries, and explain why the US fatality rate per capita is better than many European countries despite apparently doing everything wrong.

Can you give an example of this though? Everything I can find shows the US did follow recommendations, just like the rest of the west, and that's precisely why it has been so bad here. The WHO said there was no human to human transmission. The WHO said not to wear masks. The WHO said not to close borders. The WHO said not to "overreact" and shut anything down. I seem to recall people complaining that the US was taking things TOO seriously because they stopped flights from China during the phase where the WHO was still downplaying things.

Pinterest is the worst thing on the web. I do not understand why google puts pinterest links as the top search results constantly, even though it is a completely shallow and pointless page that merely obfuscates the content I would actually want to see from some other site. Why would i want to see what is effectively a notice of someone saying they like a webpage, rather than the webpage? And considering google claimed they would penalize sites for giving one set of content to googlebot and something else completely to users, pinterest shouldn't be in search results at all.

>so that one email address still can't create multiple accounts?

You can not do that. You have no way of knowing how my mail server handles username portions of the address. Maybe bob+123@ is the same account as bob@, maybe it isn't. It is entirely up to the mail server to decide what it wants to do with it. And likewise, you have no way to know any other username portions are not the same account. I can set my email server up to use "x" as a delimiter, and make bobx1 and bobx2 both go to bob if that's what I want.

People don't seem to understand just how common this problem is with any sort of initial.lastname@gmail address. It is insane to me that so many major big name companies do ZERO email verification on signups and just start spamming me with with garbage every time some idiot uses my email address and expect me to "unsubscribe" to something I never subscribed to in the first place.