If you've got a loved one who's fallen under the spell of Qanon, the next few days could be a crucial window to reach out to them. Their whole world is collapsing around them. They need help & support not mockery & derision. Try to show them a way out of this madness.

Remember: Just because an idea is old doesn't mean it's good.

Knowing whether old ideas are more likely to be good requires understanding whether conditions have changed in important ways.

Horse archery was an amazing method of warfare for over a thousand years...then people invented guns, and suddenly this great idea that had stood the test of time became obsolete.

Then again, when underlying conditions don't change much, tried-and-true approaches are probably better.

"Learning the lessons of history" usually just means assuming ergodicity and stationarity in an informal time-series model...

(end)

COVID Masks: Mechanistic View: Part 2: Fine Aerosol Emissions:

Masks may increase fine aerosol emissions from: 1) nebulization of large droplets into fine aerosols, or 2) friability of certain mask materials creating "aerosolized fomites."

Please share:

Here are the studies:

The question is whether facemasks are actually a source for viral aerosols by:

1) Masks get saturated by large "respiratory droplets" containing viral molecules. Air turbulence against trapped droplets may create aerosols that eventually diffuse around edges. Continued...

Trapped droplets potentially get pushed through the filter media of the mask, getting nebulized into aerosols.

Particles don't always stay in the mask:

Study: Ha'eri 1980

Title: The efficacy of standard surgical face masks: an investigation using "tracer particles"

Albumin tracer particles put inside a surgical mask were dispersed into the room by breathing.

Viral molecules can get airborne from air turbulence.

Study: Liu 2020
Title: Aerodynamic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in two Wuhan hospitals.
SARS-2-COV sub-micrometer aerosols not tightly bound to surfaces, get airborne when PPE is taken off.

1/ The “I Have a Dream" speech is one of the most extraordinary speeches in American history. You should read it again. First, a few thoughts about the common American heritage Dr. King relied upon in calling Americans to rededicate themselves to the unfinished work of freedom.

2/ Dr. King delivered his speech in what he called the “hallowed spot” of the Lincoln memorial. More than a picturesque backdrop, King relied on America’s reverence for Lincoln and the common celebration of Lincoln’s words and acts, especially the Emancipation Proclamation.

3/ “Five score years ago…” King echoes the words of the Gettysburg Address. Like Lincoln, King invokes the Declaration of Independence and the fundamental principles of American freedom, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Every person in that crowd knew these words.

4/ The Declaration, Constitution and Emancipation Proclamation declared and established the fundamental American principles of freedom that all Americans knew and believed in. But these principles and promises remained unfulfilled for black Americans.

5/ Lincoln’s audience knew the history of slavery and many had suffered personal loss in the ongoing war. Dr. King’s audience knew the history of violent racism, segregation, and unequal economic opportunity. The Proclamation freed the slaves, “but the Negro still is not free.”

Overall I think Labour will be a bit disappointed with how the ‘relaunch’ has started. Labour have given themselves a mountain to climb anyway through a year of inaction but the speech today lacked coherence, purpose and distinction from the government.

Starmer is (funnily enough) making a lot of the same mistakes Corbyn made in 2019. He is listing a ‘bold’ set of policy proposals that come across as disjointed and lacking connection to Britain’s priorities.

The policies themselves were basically good, I wouldn’t argue against them. But I would cringe whenever Labour came out with spending proposal after spending proposal in 2019 without any rationale or connection to a larger economic strategy. That’s what Starmer did today.

The questions that voters will have about Starmer’s speech are the same ones that voters will have had about Corbyn’s 2019 manifesto: why are these policies your priority, how can we afford them and why aren’t we doing these already?

The first one needs to be answered by diagnosing Britain’s problems and their causes. He doesn’t have to diagnose all of them. For the purpose of today he could have picked three that feed off each other: inequality, stagnant income growth and stagnant productivity.