Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[willtravel]

Here is a straight on view where you can see the setup

Thank you I see they 6 ft apart now.

 

[Touchdown]

What is this weird fascination that people have with trying to take down the world's leading expert on this?

Are people about to start trying to pick apart his online posting history? His eating habits?

Can we stick to the subject matter of let's say Pandemic?

Because we live in a time where people believe science to be a political expression and just like any other political expression that does not confirm with your world view people feel the need to personally attack that person.

 

[DisneyCane]

As was reported over and over, even at 50% business, most won’t last 4-6 months. There are numerous interviews with business owners saying the same thing. That’s why when the damn business loans came through it was a help for the ones that got them. They could stay afloat while being closed. If there was another loan approved, which looks doubtful, the ones that are open would not be able to apply so they are stuck. One business owner even said he would rather have 0 business for 6 months with help from the government, then 50% business now. He can’t survive on that.

I'm glad that "one business owner" said that. Now it is settled. Also, the PPP loans do not require that the business is closed, only that you are effected by the pandemic. He can have 50% business AND a PPP loan to offset the lost revenue if the program is extended.

The big caveat is "with help from the government." It is not sustainable for any government to support all small businesses for months on end.

 

[ppete1975]

People “reminding” other people to put on their mask is likely Disney’s nightmare scenario. Nobody “forgets” to wear a mask. Nothing good will come from that. Step away and get a cast member.

really depends on how you approach it, hey bud put on your mask.. not going to go well. But if you strike up a conversation it can work, and i hate to say it.. but it works better coming from a female (guys and gals drop their attitude alot quicker... esp if its a mom) i would prob go more the, there are little kids around, i know they can be uncomfortable but everyone really needs to be wearing them to protect the older people and the kids. Ive worked alot of deescalations (from bouncing, security, managerial with customers) over the years its all approach. The other aspect is if you are one on one its not as effective (and i prob wouldnt do it) but if you are in a line or a "crowded area" and one person isnt wearing a mask, if you say something and everyone else is wearing them.. its usually the peer pressure gang mentallity and they will do basically anything (might be temp) but if it happens to them a few times they will decide its either easier to wear it or they will just give up and leave. Remember we all thought the designated smoking areas was going to be a disaster but people in general if they think everyone else is following the rules usually will.
sorry for the diatribe.

 

[kong1802]

Thank you I see they 6 ft apart now.

Where did you get that original screenshot you shared?

 

[ppete1975]

What is this weird fascination that people have with trying to take down the world's leading expert on this?

Are people about to start trying to pick apart his online posting history? His eating habits?

Can we stick to the subject matter of let's say Pandemic?

"im smarter than you" and i want my 5 mins of fame. both are way too common now. The delusions of grandeur (oddly learned that term from han solo) that we see now is absurd.

 

[DisneyCane]

That's not how plagiarism works. Plagiarism is a serious accusation and you should understand what it means before you accuse anyone else.

I used the word to make a point. Maybe it was a poor choice of words. I should have said that the author of the article lazily copied excerpts from the study and paraphrased others instead of doing the work to interview the study's author.

 

[kong1802]

"im smarter than you" and i want my 5 mins of fame. both are way too common now. The delusions of grandeur (oddly learned that term from han solo) that we see now is absurd.

Like somehow education and body of work can be undone by internet sleuths from a picture......

 

[Prince-1]

If you will note on my post I said I HOPE THEY ARE FT APART. and now i see they are. GEEEEEEZZZZZZ

Sorry, lack of coffee made me irritable! I’m now fully caffeinated.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

If you turn the computer screen, its kind of flat.

I looked at it in the mirror and now they're down to 0 cases!

 

[DisneyOutsider]

I used the word to make a point. Maybe it was a poor choice of words. I should have said that the author of the article lazily copied excerpts from the study and paraphrased others instead of doing the work to interview the study's author.

Do you feel that the author mis-represented the facts of the study in any way? Dismissing it because they didn't get a one-on-one interview with the practitioners isn't much of a critique.

 

[DisneyCane]

What is this weird fascination that people have with trying to take down the world's leading expert on this?

Are people about to start trying to pick apart his online posting history? His eating habits?

Can we stick to the subject matter of let's say Pandemic?

I personally don't want to take him down. I do want to call him out for his numerous contradictions over the course of the pandemic. I also want him to admit that he doesn't know everything and should answer "we don't know yet" to a lot of the questions posed to him.

He can then give his recommendations based on abundance of caution or what is known about other viruses.

For example, the comment he made that football can only be played if it is in a bubble format. That opinion contradicts what the data says about the virus' impact on healthy people that are in the age group of a football player. He should have said that the only way to keep infections out of football players would be to play in a bubble but the risk would be low to the players if they went with the current plan.

 

[DisneyCane]

Do you feel that the author mis-represented the facts of the study in any way? Dismissing it because they didn't get a one-on-one interview with the practitioners isn't much of a critique.

I never said he did. My comment was specifically about how lazy "journalists" have become and why I have very little respect for most of them. He could have just tweeted out a link to the study but that wouldn't have earned him or the website any revenue. You wouldn't have seen an article written like that in the New York Times circa 1995.

 

[Prince-1]

I personally don't want to take him down. I do want to call him out for his numerous contradictions over the course of the pandemic. I also want him to admit that he doesn't know everything and should answer "we don't know yet" to a lot of the questions posed to him.

He can then give his recommendations based on abundance of caution or what is known about other viruses.

For example, the comment he made that football can only be played if it is in a bubble format. That opinion contradicts what the data says about the virus' impact on healthy people that are in the age group of a football player. He should have said that the only way to keep infections out of football players would be to play in a bubble but the risk would be low to the players if they went with the current plan.

My biggest problem with him is that he issues opinions and guidance in the form of edicts like he is the ruler of the country. I guess we should just cancel the 2020 elections and install him as President. We can even call him Supreme Leader Fauci.

Science isn’t flawless especially when it comes to a new and emerging virus. You can look at past outbreaks for baseline data but that doesn’t mean they are the same. Mistakes will and often do happen at the beginning of any pandemic and as the doctors and scientists test, research, and test some more they see some ideas they had were wrong and some were correct. Fauci is one of the worlds leading experts on what we are going through so perhaps if our government on both the federal and state levels listened to him and the others a little more we wouldn’t be where we are today.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

I'm glad that "one business owner" said that. Now it is settled. Also, the PPP loans do not require that the business is closed, only that you are effected by the pandemic. He can have 50% business AND a PPP loan to offset the lost revenue if the program is extended.

The big caveat is "with help from the government." It is not sustainable for any government to support all small businesses for months on end.

Was talking about the one interview I saw. Stop nit picking, you knew what I meant. If you think a business that is open. Has a good chance of getting a PPP loan over another that isn’t, I have a bridge to sell you. There are thousands that couldn’t even get one.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I personally don't want to take him down. I do want to call him out for his numerous contradictions over the course of the pandemic. I also want him to admit that he doesn't know everything and should answer "we don't know yet" to a lot of the questions posed to him.

He can then give his recommendations based on abundance of caution or what is known about other viruses.

For example, the comment he made that football can only be played if it is in a bubble format. That opinion contradicts what the data says about the virus' impact on healthy people that are in the age group of a football player. He should have said that the only way to keep infections out of football players would be to play in a bubble but the risk would be low to the players if they went with the current plan.

My biggest problem with him is that he issues opinions and guidance in the form of edicts like he is the ruler of the country. I guess we should just cancel the 2020 elections and install him as President. We can even call him Supreme Leader Fauci.

Science is not a set of facts written forever in stone. It is a process to accumulate the best available answers, based on current knowledge.

This virus is new. Experts made good faith, educated guesses about how it would behave and what measures we should take based on experience with known viruses. Some of these planned out, others didn't. If the current expert advice differs from that which was given 3 months ago, that is a good thing. It means the scientific process is working, because we can self-correct based on a better understanding of the emerging evidence.

I don't get why this concept is so hard for some to grasp.

I'm sure nobody wants this virus to go away more than Dr. Faucci. But his job is not to tell us what we want to hear, it is to tell us would we need to hear.

 

[kong1802]

I personally don't want to take him down. I do want to call him out for his numerous contradictions over the course of the pandemic. I also want him to admit that he doesn't know everything and should answer "we don't know yet" to a lot of the questions posed to him.

He can then give his recommendations based on abundance of caution or what is known about other viruses.

For example, the comment he made that football can only be played if it is in a bubble format. That opinion contradicts what the data says about the virus' impact on healthy people that are in the age group of a football player. He should have said that the only way to keep infections out of football players would be to play in a bubble but the risk would be low to the players if they went with the current plan.

Let's be real here, though.

He is the world's leading expert. It's easy to sit here after the fact and read opposing viewpoints from other sources and then criticize what we think he should have said or done, but unless you've got experience in virology or the education to back it up, in the end we are just parroting other opinions that we've seen. IMO, I feel more confident in what the world's leading expert says.

Your critique of the football comment seems to be more of semantics. Your issue is with the word "only". You think he should have said "can still play with low risks". I would have to look at it, but from your summary above he seems to be correct if he was talking about having no risk.

 

[kong1802]

Science is not a set of facts written forever in stone. It is a process to accumulate the best available answers, based on current knowledge.

This virus is new. Experts made good faith, educated guesses about how it would behave and what measures we should take based on experience with known viruses. Some of these planned out, others didn't. If the current expert advice differs from that which was given 3 months ago, that is a good thing. It means the scientific process is working, because we can self-correct based on a better understanding of the emerging evidence.

I don't get why this concept is so hard for some to grasp.

I'm sure nobody wants this virus to go away more than Dr. Faucci. But his job is not to tell us what we want to hear, it is to tell us would we need to hear.

The old "hypothesize, test, reevaluate your hypothesis" from the science fair?

There is too much "gotcha" now. "But three months ago you said x".

He's a scientist, not Miss Chloe.

 

[Kevin_W]

Your critique of the football comment seems to be more of semantics. Your issue is with the word "only". You think he should have said "can still play with low risks". I would have to look at it, but from your summary above he seems to be correct if he was talking about having no risk.

Re: his comments on football, I would agree that he's stepping a bit outside his lane here. I think he can summarize the information as we know it and present risk scenarios. Others (policymakers, sports organizations, etc.) can then make decisions based on that risk information.

Of all sports, football is definitely not a zero-risk endeavor. The decision to play is based on an assumption of that risk and for those that choose to participate that the reward is worthwhile. In that way, Covid isn't different than a concussion or leg injury - it's a risk determination that needs to be made by the players/leagues.

 

[kong1802]

Re: his comments on football, I would agree that he's stepping a bit outside his lane here. I think he can summarize the information as we know it and present risk scenarios. Others (policymakers, sports organizations, etc.) can then make decisions based on that risk information.

Of all sports, football is definitely not a zero-risk endeavor. The decision to play is based on an assumption of that risk and for those that choose to participate that the reward is worthwhile. In that way, Covid isn't different than a concussion or leg injury - it's a risk determination that needs to be made by the players/leagues.

Was he commissioned to do a full study on it or asked a question on it? I genuinely don't know.