• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Of the 30% of adults currently not vaccinated just 20% say they probably/definitely will get the shot so 80% say they will likely not get it. So that’s roughly and additional 6% of adults which would max us out around 75%. I think that’s the best we will see in the US. No idea if that’s enough. On the delta variant front almost 2/3 of unvaccinated people don’t believe the vaccines work against variants. It is too bad the media and people in general have been so quick to latch onto these stories that question whether the vaccines work. Whether people realize it or not this is adding to the problem.

 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
It is too bad the media and people in general have been so quick to latch onto these stories that question whether the vaccines work. Whether people realize it or not this is adding to the problem.

Yes, we should only have State Approved media, that does not allow questioning or the presentation of any data that would suggest anything other than perfect 100% effectiveness of the vaccines as a virtual impenetrable shield, we must not allow people any unapproved thoughts, and we mustn't let reality or any inconvenient truths get in the way of the sanctioned narrative.

What some of you don't seem to get is that what you are suggesting is even more dangerous - because you are making people like me, who believe the vaccines are very effective, but accept the reality that they are 100% nothing, doubt and suspect the truthfulness of the information presented even more.

So in fact, what all this "shhhhh! we can't talk about that" stuff is doing is creating more skeptics, not less. The fact that the White House is being so cagey, so defensive about this topic sets off major alarm bells in my head - and it makes me believe the percentage of breakthroughs must be stratospheric, because if they were not - they wouldn't be gaslighting us into thinking the question is irrelevant.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
Yes, we should only have State Approved media, that does not allow questioning or the presentation of any data that would suggest anything other than perfect 100% effectiveness of the vaccines as a virtual impenetrable shield, we must not allow people any unapproved thoughts, and we mustn't let reality or any inconvenient truths get in the way of the sanctioned narrative.

What some of you don't seem to get is that what you are suggesting is even more dangerous - because you are making people like me, who believe the vaccines are very effective, but accept the reality that they are 100% nothing, doubt and suspect the truthfulness of the information presented even more.

So in fact, what all this "shhhhh! we can't talk about that" stuff is doing is creating more skeptics, not less. The fact that the White House is being so cagey, so defensive about this topic sets off major alarm bells in my head - and it makes me believe the percentage of breakthroughs must be stratospheric, because if they were not - they wouldn't be gaslighting us into thinking the question is irrelevant.
You have to remember that they're dealing with a massive disinformation campaign designed to stop people from wanting the vaccine.
  • Politicians are holding rallies and ridiculing the vaccines and telling their supporters not to get them.
  • Particular media outlets are telling people not to get them.
  • Certain talking heads are telling people not to get them.

Then there's the misinformed in Hollywood and elsewhere who have loud voices that are also doing their followers a disservice by telling them not to get them. (They're not part of the above list, as they aren't doing it for monetary gain or votes.)
 
Last edited:

AEfx

Well-Known Member
You have to remember that they're dealing with a massive campaign designed to stop people from wanting the vaccine.
I understand that - and what I am trying to explain is that they are pushing more people toward skepticism with their behavior than not.

Less face it, skeptics are already skeptics - what level of skepticism they have is pretty irrelevant in this case - they are already in that group, and will seek out information to reaffirm it no matter if the White House is truthful or not.

What the White House is doing right now is creating INCREASING distrust and creating MORE skeptics. My trust level in them on this has gone down quite a bit this past week, and it wasn't amazingly high to begin with.

Basically, what you guys are saying is "It's ok to hide the truth and just tell people what you want them to believe in order to manipulate them them to do what you want them to do". That is not OK. And frankly, both sides of the political spectrum should know by now - it also doesn't work. It's the reason that so many people have a strong distrust of the medical/pharma community to begin with - and all this does is make that distrust grow exponentially.
 

jkh36619

Well-Known Member
The difference between you and the people everyone is complaining about is that 1) you got vaccinated, and 2) your doctor prescribed you ivermectin because you were already infected with covid.

You aren't pushing misinformation about the vaccines...you are advocating for people getting them. You also aren't pushing people to take something off-label as a means of prevention.
Vaccine? Damit, I was promised nanobots!
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
I understand that - and what I am trying to explain is that they are pushing more people toward skepticism with their behavior than not.

Less face it, skeptics are already skeptics - what level of skepticism they have is pretty irrelevant in this case - they are already in that group, and will seek out information to reaffirm it no matter if the White House is truthful or not.

What the White House is doing right now is creating INCREASING distrust and creating MORE skeptics. My trust level in them on this has gone down quite a bit this past week, and it wasn't amazingly high to begin with.

Basically, what you guys are saying is "It's ok to hide the truth and just tell people what you want them to believe in order to manipulate them them to do what you want them to do". That is not OK. And frankly, both sides of the political spectrum should know by now - it also doesn't work. It's the reason that so many people have a strong distrust of the medical/pharma community to begin with - and all this does is make that distrust grow exponentially.
I'm not saying that at all. I wish they could be 100% honest without someone waiting in the wings to twist the information to the point where it's unrecognizable...but there are people doing exactly that...and they're making this whole ordeal way worse and way harder than it needs to be. I don't envy anyone in this administration and the mess they're dealing with.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
I'm not saying that at all. I wish they could be 100% honest without someone waiting in the wings to twist the information to the point where it's unrecognizable...but there are people doing exactly that...and they're making this whole ordeal way worse and way harder than it needs to be. I don't envy anyone in this administration and the mess they're dealing with.

But really, that is what you are saying - they shouldn't release the accurate information because it doesn't support their narrative and goal. That's the crux of it all.

The people that are going to twist things around, are going to find something to twist around no matter what.

Personally, the one way to really get under my skin is to treat me like a child - I didn't like being treated like a kid when I was one, I certainly don't now as a middle-aged man. And when they say "Don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain!" the first instinct I have is to rip that curtain down.

Not being honest with the numbers and what we are really facing is just mucking up things even more.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
But really, that is what you are saying - they shouldn't release the accurate information because it doesn't support their narrative and goal. That's the crux of it all.

The people that are going to twist things around, are going to find something to twist around no matter what.

Personally, the one way to really get under my skin is to treat me like a child - I didn't like being treated like a kid when I was one, I certainly don't now as a middle-aged man. And when they say "Don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain!" the first instinct I have is to rip that curtain down.

Not being honest with the numbers and what we are really facing is just mucking up things even more.
I hear you. And to a point I agree with you. But if there's anything I've learned throughout this whole thing it's that there's an awful lot of stupid people out there who need to be treated like children.

Be glad that you aren't one of them.
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
Yes, we should only have State Approved media, that does not allow questioning or the presentation of any data that would suggest anything other than perfect 100% effectiveness of the vaccines as a virtual impenetrable shield, we must not allow people any unapproved thoughts, and we mustn't let reality or any inconvenient truths get in the way of the sanctioned narrative.

What some of you don't seem to get is that what you are suggesting is even more dangerous - because you are making people like me, who believe the vaccines are very effective, but accept the reality that they are 100% nothing, doubt and suspect the truthfulness of the information presented even more.

So in fact, what all this "shhhhh! we can't talk about that" stuff is doing is creating more skeptics, not less. The fact that the White House is being so cagey, so defensive about this topic sets off major alarm bells in my head - and it makes me believe the percentage of breakthroughs must be stratospheric, because if they were not - they wouldn't be gaslighting us into thinking the question is irrelevant.
The White House doesn't control that kind of information. The fact that a press secretary didn't know something isn't exactly proof of a conspiracy.

Unfortunately, it appears that unlike raw case numbers, breakthrough cases are being logged nationally in a rather haphazard fashion. There doesn't seem to be any one consistent database or methodology. This obviously needs to improve.
 
Last edited:

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member

huwar18

Well-Known Member
Sorry if this is off topic. However, we just got back from Disney. I am just curious about these long lines. I have been to Disney when Space Mountain was 90 minutes and the line never reached out into Tomorrowland. However, now a 60 minute line loops throughout Tomorrowland multiple times. When talking to people, they say social distancing. However, there was no social distancing when we were there.
 

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
Sorry if this is off topic. However, we just got back from Disney. I am just curious about these long lines. I have been to Disney when Space Mountain was 90 minutes and the line never reached out into Tomorrowland. However, now a 60 minute line loops throughout Tomorrowland multiple times. When talking to people, they say social distancing. However, there was no social distancing when we were there.
Was it actually 60 minutes or was that just the posted time? When I was at WDW in April there was social distancing still going strong for the most part. But the wait times were under what was posted. Granted that was well before they opened it up to higher attendance.
I’ve heard reports from a few of wife’s clients that it’s not the most enjoyable vacation right now. April wasn’t either but had to use points.
 

Disney Experience

Well-Known Member
Sorry if this is off topic. However, we just got back from Disney. I am just curious about these long lines. I have been to Disney when Space Mountain was 90 minutes and the line never reached out into Tomorrowland. However, now a 60 minute line loops throughout Tomorrowland multiple times. When talking to people, they say social distancing. However, there was no social distancing when we were there.
Was there a line inside? Did they use all of queuing areas? I an wondering if they are trying to minimize indoor time.
 

huwar18

Well-Known Member
Was it actually 60 minutes or was that just the posted time? When I was at WDW in April there was social distancing still going strong for the most part. But the wait times were under what was posted. Granted that was well before they opened it up to higher attendance.
I’ve heard reports from a few of wife’s clients that it’s not the most enjoyable vacation right now. April wasn’t either but had to use points.
Most were over reported times. However, SM was all of 60 minutes. It’s just weird that the physical lines are that long when they are not social distancing. I’m not complaining. I’m just curious. We lucked out. The first 6 days of our trip were very enjoyable. The lines were super short and the waits were not bad. However, the last three were almost unbearable.
 

Disney Experience

Well-Known Member
Sorry if this is off topic. However, we just got back from Disney. I am just curious about these long lines. I have been to Disney when Space Mountain was 90 minutes and the line never reached out into Tomorrowland. However, now a 60 minute line loops throughout Tomorrowland multiple times. When talking to people, they say social distancing. However, there was no social distancing when we were there.
They usually determine estimated wait time by giving someone in line an item that a cast member takes back before they get on the actual ride. The time between these two events is used to calculate the wait time. Perhaps they are not doing this as much post covid
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom