If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
The variances in Death per millions is simply
a function of those areas that took advantage of a variety
of early treatments available to treat COVID early
and those that did not.
Early intervention negated the need for a vaccine.
It does not take a genius to understand the ramifications
of why the solution was ignored a year ago and still is
today in all but a handful of countries with even more
therapeutics now available at all stages of the disease.
Top three US, Brazil and Mexico have over a million deaths (together). Mexico has a death to case ratio of 9%, the highest by a large margin of any country. Do they not have access to Zinc, Vitamin D and Vitamin C tablets?
Top three US, Brazil and Mexico have over a million deaths (together). Mexico has a death to case ratio of 9%, the highest by a large margin of any country.
Mexico has one of lowest tests per capita rates in the world, which explains why their case rates are so low...and hence the deaths to cases ratio so high, despite the deaths per capita being only 17th in the world...
Top three US, Brazil and Mexico have over a million deaths (together). Mexico has a death to case ratio of 9%, the highest by a large margin of any country. Do they not have access to Zinc, Vitamin D and Vitamin C tablets?
Do they not have access to Zinc, Vitamin D and Vitamin C tablets? The poor souls in eldercare facilities around the world and here in Ontario were
denied nutraceuticals or any other early or prophylactic intervention. Do your own due diligence if you have any doubts and then ask yourself
why?
In the late 1970s I attended a Shakti concert and sat in the front row when John McLaughlin and his band all sat in lotus positions for two hours while they performed. Regularly I made eye to eye contact with McLaughlin while he was playing and I sought to propel him to madness.
The opening act was not Jimi Hendrix but rather a local female country and western singer whose name I never did take note of. Where was Max when we needed him?
An "official" report is now telling us that a lab leak is very unlikely. Thus, they are trying to tell us that the very close proximity of the lab to the location of the outbreak is purely coincidental. This reminds me of the "official" 9/11 report that failed to mention the fact that a third building, one that was hit by nothing, came down that day in New York, meaning that the collapse of a large building on the same day at the same location was a purely coincidental event unrelated to the other events of that day. Yet most people still believe that "official" story. What do the words "stupid" and "gullible" mean?
We are in very serious trouble. Some of us are getting older now, and have lived many good years. I fear for the young who may never get that chance.
This reminds me of the "official" 9/11 report that failed to mention the fact that a third building, one that was hit by nothing, came down that day in New York, meaning that the collapse of a large building on the same day at the same location was a purely coincidental event unrelated to the other events of that day.]
What was the cause of the collapse of the 7th building in your opinion? Though, in this case opinion is not enough, you'll need more to prove your point.
What was the cause of the collapse of the 7th building in your opinion? Though, in this case opinion is not enough, you'll need more to prove your point.
My point is simply that the collapse of Building Number 7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not mentioned in the final "official" report. This strikes me as odd. One would think that the collapse of Building Number 7 would have at least been mentioned in the report, since it happened on the same day at the same place. The omission seems somewhat glaring. Do you not agree?
Given the fact the the building suddenly collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speed after undergoing a crimp exactly in the manner of a controlled demolition, it may be the case that the building suddenly collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speed after undergoing a crimp as a result of a controlled demolition. May I ask your opinion?
Any report about the origin of the pandemic that fails to take into account the close proximity of the lab cannot possibly be trusted, any more than we can trust the 9/11 report when it neglects to note the collapse of Building Number 7. Agreed?
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Tuesday, 30th March, 2021, 11:51 AM.
My point is simply that the collapse of Building Number 7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not mentioned in the final "official" report. This strikes me as odd. One would think that the collapse of Building Number 7 would have at least been mentioned in the report, since it happened on the same day at the same place. The omission seems somewhat glaring. Do you not agree?
There all kind of reports. Do you mean the 9/11 commission's one? I think this one was on "what and how" on human factors. One one the reasons the 7th building was omitted could be that it was just a building loss. The collapse is an engineering problem. It had own reports.
Given the fact the the building suddenly collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speed after undergoing a crimp exactly in the manner of a controlled demolition, it may be the case that the building suddenly collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speed after undergoing a crimp as a result of a controlled demolition. May I ask your opinion?
Of course I'm not a structural engineer, just an armchair expert in videos LOL There are tons of controlled demolishing videos. They start with a wonderful firework and blown out windows. 7th did not performed that. However it had a bonfire going for awhile before collapsing and taking down several around buildings. As for falling down (and not bending) - it requires a lot of force to move a big rock. Even each plane at high speeds did not do much immediate damage to twins. "Free-fall speed" -- those builds are not design to withstand dynamical loads of crashing floors.
Any report about the origin of the pandemic that fails to take into account the close proximity of the lab cannot possibly be trusted, any more than we can trust the 9/11 report when it neglects to note the collapse of Building Number 7. Agreed?
It is a food for skepticals. If writers had nothing to prove a point (a virus origin in the lab), they did not include anything. As I hear the lab is still a top-secret one without a "proper" investigation by foreigners. Adding a taint on the Chinese government might mean that everyone will be kicked out. The theory of a natural origin of the virus is not debunked yet too.
Yes, the "official" 9/11 Commission Report failed to make note of the fact that Building Number 7 came down. This strikes me as curious. And any report on the pandemic that does not take seriously the close proximity of the lab is also in my opinion curious. I do not personally believe that the collapse of Building Number 7 was unrelated to the other events of that tragic day, nor do I believe that the close proximity of the lab to the centre of the outbreak of the pandemic is purely coincidental. I am of the opinion that both of these omissions stretch credulity.
Yes, the "official" 9/11 Commission Report failed to make note of the fact that Building Number 7 came down. This strikes me as curious. And any report on the pandemic that does not take seriously the close proximity of the lab is also in my opinion curious. I do not personally believe that the collapse of Building Number 7 was unrelated to the other events of that tragic day, nor do I believe that the close proximity of the lab to the centre of the outbreak of the pandemic is purely coincidental. I am of the opinion that both of these omissions stretch credulity.
Brad, if the following relates to the building you're talking about then it appears some people think there is a rational explanation.
"On September 11, 2001, the structure was substantially damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed. The debris ignited fires on multiple lower floors of the building, which continued to burn uncontrolled throughout the afternoon. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires. The collapse began when a critical internal column buckled and triggered cascading failure of nearby columns throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of a rooftop penthouse structure at 5:20:33 pm. This initiated progressive collapse of the entire building at 5:21:10 pm, according to FEMA,[5]:23 while the 2008 NIST study placed the final collapse time at 5:20:52 pm.[6]:19, 21, 50–51 The collapse made the old 7 World Trade Center the first steel skyscraper known to have collapsed primarily due to uncontrolled fires.[7][8]"
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Thanks, Peter, this is the what I refer to. The event was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. But there is no need now to get into a debate over this. My principal concern is that a report on the pandemic does not see fit to suggest that the proximity of the lab was relevant, rather that it was a pure coincidence that the lab happened to be so close to the heart of the outbreak. Personally I find this impossible to believe.
The quote below is from today's online Vancouver Province. How the heck is anybody supposed to have any confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine??? It's good for this age group, it's not good for this age group, it's up, it's down, it's up, it's down - wtf!! And look at the list of symptoms that something may be wrong: "difficulty moving parts of your body?" Why is the gov't continuing to flog this vaccine?
Q: I got the AstraZeneca vaccine. What should I do?
A: If it has been more than 20 days since you received your AstraZeneca vaccine, you don’t need to worry.
If it has been less than 20 days, monitor yourself for symptoms and if you develop the following symptoms starting four to 20 days after receiving your shot, go to the nearest emergency department:
Severe headache that does not go away
Seizure
Difficulty moving parts of your body
Blurry vision that does not go away
Difficulty speaking
Shortness of breath
Chest pain
Severe abdominal pain
New severe swelling, pain, or colour change of an arm or a leg
Abnormal bruising, reddish or purple spots or blood blisters under the skin, or bleeding beyond the site of vaccination.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
According to WHO Ivermectin reduces mortality by over 80%. None the less they issue a recommendation against it. https://www.who.int/publications/i/i...peutics-2021.1. WHO the same organization that covered up for the Chinese Communist party with respect to the origin of the Corno Virus and continue to push experimental Gene Therapies under the thinly disguised veal of vaccines that have zero longitudinal data as to their safety even though normal vaccines often take over 5 years or more to get approved.
By the way, in 2020 China was the only major economy that experienced economic growth. https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-i...20-11610936187
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 31st March, 2021, 11:24 PM.
........... "Natural selection balances this trade-off, selecting for pathogens virulent enough to produce many offspring (that are likely to be able to infect a new host if the opportunity arises) but not so virulent that they prevent the current host from presenting them with opportunities for transmission."
Hi Sid, I thought it might be a good time to revisit this from a few months ago because the news this weekend has the following to say about the the virus variants in Canada right now in early April:
Ontario, in particular, has reported an influx of much younger patients in ICUs. Nearly half of the province's COVID-19 ICU patients are under the age of 60, officials announced this week.
"It's getting pretty alarming here. It's spreading quickly, and it's much faster than the last two waves," Dr. Kashif Pirzada, an emergency physician in Toronto, told CNN. "The people filling the ICU right now are all in their 30s, 40s, and 50s."
"As the new variants spread, you will see that COVID-19 is killing faster and younger," Adalsteinn Brown, a senior science advisor to the Ontario government, said in a press conference this week. "It's spreading far more quickly than it was before and we cannot vaccinate quickly enough to break this third wave."
Killing faster and younger, that doesn't sound like a virus that is optimizing its chances for spreading by killing slower and older. I do wonder about all this because we still don't know if viruses are alive or not and if we should be comparing their evolution to the evolution of living things.
Tweet
Comment