DaptoFunlandGuy

The question that should be asked is - why is it a pile on? Are people bullying those with views different to theirs, or are people simply calling into question a questionable statement with facts and evidence that disprove that statement? I've been away for a week, and yes Gaz, looks like Mic drop! I would like to make a contribution here (and just to add - my first day back at work today so i've been writing this most of the day - well before the rest of today's comments were added!) I'll try not to reagitate the same ideals already mentioned... @Slick has spent a lot of time providing well researched sources, so in those respects i'll just say 'ditto'. I would like to add: Just going to say 'citation needed' on this 90% figure. If you're against getting this particular vaccine then you are "anti-vaccine" regardless of your reasons why. That's how words work. It is getting a bit over-used, and some may find the label distasteful, but i'm pretty sure that it is a label that is meant to be seen as distasteful for a reason. I just want to back this one up with a personal story to share my own experiences... About 7 weeks ago, my wife experienced an episode that scared the crap out of our whole family, and spent a week in hospital*. We were questioned at initial triage whether we had been vaccinated, when, where, did we have the vac card showing the dose and batch numbers, and all of this was logged by the registrar. This was double checked and verified by several wonderful medical professionals in the ED during the initial days. Nothing was eliminated at that time. Nothing was palmed off. Everything was explored. CT scans, MRIs, even lumbar punctures were explored to try to determine what was at play. Even days later while she was on ward - they were still seeking opinions of specialists in various fields - including vax related fields - as to possible causes as nothing they did was turning up results. Fast forward a little and we've ruled out at this point that the vax was a factor (completely ruled out) but we discussed this with the doctors and they even had a specialist in immunology come down to discuss with us at length what the possibilities were before finally ruling it out. Nothing was palmed off, and everything was explored to find the answers. TL:DR - wife had a medical episode and one of the first things the ED did was check vax status and any possible impacts it may have had, and continued to explore the possibilities that the vax had contributed until they were able to determine - with evidence - that it had not. (*She isn't fully recovered at this point, but we have a fair idea of the cause and the treatment and its just now a matter of time for everything to work out and fingers crossed no lasting impacts) I felt the need to share this story because I am getting sick of generalised statements without even basic details given to support the events. Medical Professionals Silenced? 😮 Sounds like a black bag job. Cold war era stuff. Can you provide any links showing any of these suspensions or sackings? Are they being silenced? Or are they being discredited by being unable to support their assertions? Are the accreditation organisations revoking the accreditation because their allegations have no basis in science, as opposed to a coverup? More generalisations without basic details. Heart Related Reactions? What about these heart statistics? Are they in Australia? Worldwide? Other countries more prone to heart disease? Were those cases medically susceptible to heart disease or defect? What sort of reactions were they? How many died? What was the total pool? 870 out of 1000 is huge, but 870 out of a million isn't much different to some side effects of other proven vaccines in long term use... It sounds like a scary number, but it reminds me of this meme: 870 sounds like a big problem - but it becomes the trolley problem. Chief Health Officers Backtracked! CHO's should backtrack. They should act on the best information they have available at the time. In the early days, the advice was that masks were not required except in a medical setting, this was later expanded to a point where for many, mask wearing is part of the daily routine - even outside. Even now that the restrictions have eased. We should not point to the CHO changing their advice as a sign of weakness, but of the strength of our systems changing the outcomes based on new evidence. The honesty and transparency is why they "backtrack". They've acted on the strength of the evidence put before them at the time. Remember - a recent Prime Minister of Australia was once quoted saying that you can only hold him to his words when they are prepared statements, and anything said 'off the cuff' when asked a question in a press conference shouldn't be treated as 'gospel truth'. The only weakness is continuing to blindly argue something despite all evidence pointing otherwise. Force and Coercion Polio. Smallpox. Things of this nature. People saw it as a duty to their community to get vaccinated. Nobody needed to be coerced or forced to do anything because the advice came from the experts and people listened to them and trusted them. <its post edit me here saying I really got carried away on this one. suffice to say the paragraphs of arguments would have fallen on deaf ears> Put simply - those who willingly support their community should be allowed to benefit from it. Those who do not wish to support their community by doing their part, should not be allowed to participate beyond their human right entitlement. access to food, clothing and shelter is paramount. Access to medical care is permitted, but probably unnecessary. However - employment is not a right, and that is why those folks are entitled to claim welfare if they cannot work. Average testing and data collection periods The covid vaccine has had some development ongoing for a decade. This is not the first coronavirus. Researchers learned a lot from SARS and from MERS. Covid-19 was far more highly transmissible but less deadly than some other coronaviruses, but the research was ongoing. The next coronavirus was expected, although perhaps not as soon. Combine that with the fact that world governments (and the WHO) labelled this a pandemic, and literally THREW money at the researchers to continue development. The covid-19 vaccine vector was developed in about 12 months off the back of years of coronavirus vaccine research. But so is the annual flu vaccine. Every year new flu strains show up and the jab they offer next winter is based off of the strains seen in the northern hemisphere right now. That's 6 months development of a new vaccine for a strain of Influenza - which will be worthless in another 12-24 months when the new strains come along. These days the fluvax is a quadrivalent vaccine based on the most prevalent FOUR strains. All of them, a different vaccine. Almost all of them, observed in the wild for the first time in the prior 2 years or so. And again (and i've said this before) they didn't start from scratch for Covid-19. They already have vaccines in testing and development for other coronavirus variants. modifying it based on years of research to fit a new strain isn't anything new in immunology. "It was rushed and hasn't been properly tested" is a bullshit argument.

I agree with this. What, however, is wrong with asking those who have chosen differently to you “why”? What is wrong with well reasoned, supported by evidence discussions to ensure those choices are being made based off of the best possible Information? if Joe Rogan can give his views, why can’t I? I’m just as qualified..

I’m not trying to change it, I’m trying to reconcile it in my own mind. I’m a ‘why’ personality - I need to understand the why if things. I’m happy to go off and do my own reading - I’m not asking for it to be explained to me, but to read “there’s a cure the government won’t tell you about” - I want to know what it is so I can explore the veracity of the claim and test it (theoretically, not literally) for myself. if I came in here and said “dreamworld is building a b&m in 2022!” Countless people would respond with “source?” And a few @New display name would respond with “bullshit”… …so why is it such an issue for me to ask for a source, or call bullshit now?

This for me is the crux of the issue many (including myself) are taking with your unfounded statements - and they are “unfounded” - because you continue to avoid any suggestion of supporting your statements with verifiable fact. you claim that the government have shunned and gagged critics, and refused to invest in alternative treatments and cures because of some deep conspiracy with big pharma, yet you won’t even name what this cure is, or who these doctors are, so people have a starting point for their own research. if MSM is obfuscating the facts - tell us what we’re missing so we can be enlightened!

What do you consider a long time? The concept of mRNA was first published in 1989. The first human trials were conducted targeting cancer patients in 2001. The results of those trials published in 2008. BioNTech (behind the Pfizer jab) was founded in 2008 off the back of those trials. Moderna in 2010. mRNA based (viral) vaccines for the Rabies virus began clinical trials in 2013, and development for several other viruses including the flu, and zika virus. Sure, the covid vaccines have been accelerated, but for mine, I think a worldwide pandemic is a pretty good reason to work faster. If you're talking about horse dewormer, anti-malarial treatments and drinking bleach, I think theres a reason why some doctors are shunned and gagged. Next you'll be telling me mRNA vaccines cause Autism too. How do you think they got decades of data in the first place? The flu vaccine offered this winter was based on a viral strain that was seen last year. The flu vaccine isn't a decades old tried and true jab - because every year it changes, and every year they have to change the vaccine, and test it, to determine if it works on the latest strain. This is an interesting point. You've put forth many reasoned arguments for your position. You've challenged others on theirs. Why then, is it such an issue for someone with a different opinion to yours to challenge your position? You've made several broad statements like 'other effective treatments not being acknowledged by government' but you're not supporting these statements with evidence (or even simply stating what they are so that others can research or debunk). If what you are saying is true enough that you believe it (and I don't believe you to be an idiot - you've been here a long time and shown you are intelligent) - why is it such a hardship for you to support what you are saying with empirical evidence - would that not help convince others to be more cautious, if caution is in fact what is needed?

Clothing doesn't spoil in a week though. Many retailers had online shopping options available, and the shopfronts that were open were either dead, being used to despatch online orders, or people were browsing and window shopping instead of buying 'only essentials', which is why they made that change. We defined 'essential' way too broadly early on, because the impacts of shutting down everything seemed too horrendous at the beginning. Also, I doubt you'd get naked protests in melbourne - you'd be hard pressed scheduling it into the 20 minute window when the weather is warm enough to get your kit off.

Honestly the toboggan is a bit underwhelming as it is - probably the most boring Toboggan\Luge style attraction i've ever done... Hopefully the alpine will allow them to have some elevated sections, but overall, the hill isn't that big to start with. Hopefully it inspires some other operators in the country to buy into it though.

Risk management sometimes involves accepting certain levels of necessary risks, while eliminating unnecessary risks. This is why unvaxxed will be able to go to the doctor or the supermarket. Unlike the definition we've given the word 'Essential' over the past two years, those ones actually are.

I've always disliked the back of these. It always looks like shopping centre hoarding around a closed shop.

But the legal precedent is not. The events of Hair Raiser and the subsequent legal challenges were the final nail in the coffin. The government and the relevant bodies are firmly on the Park's side and the residents have no further legal recourse, provided the park is staying within the guidelines set forth by the regulations. The park is being a little antagonistic about it (and after 17 years in their current form, I can't blame them), but so long as they stay on the right side of the law, the resident's issues amount to not much more than hot air.

Is THAT where the horse is? I mean "scream leader" and encouraging people to scream is probably rubbing the resident's faces in it - not exactly good sportsmanship in the scheme of things - but if they're in the limits of the noise rules, there's not really anything they need to fix. I remember the scream shields on Mali-Boomer and I REALLY hope this isn't a path they need to go down. Free ERT is included with every DAS pass.

They've gutted the entire building, but left the lego-brick shaped light fixtures in place. My money is just a refurb. It's been 5 years - some shopping centres require retail stores to revamp their look at the end of every lease to keep the stores fresh so it could be similar motivation from Lego to freshen things up, or to implement new elements they didn't previously have. There's been no announcement by the park of an ending to the partnership also...

I was going to say 'nah, he only pulls the cannon out on weekends' - but that is clearly an inferior 'Nikon' ...shots fired....

i swear every time I see a picture of this guy - he always looks like that. While we're on the topic though - congrats on finishing high school dan!

sedan or hatch?

You said it. I think this is a bit disengenuous as an argument. What does a pro-vax 'crazy' or 'radical' at the 'extreme end' do - take every vax? :s

Hopefully they get the same guy to do the park map.

*eyes doubtfully* Which of your sources gave you this information? *questions suspiciously*

He didn't suggest killing anyone. The sovereignty of our states is a funny thing. If you've ever studied constitutional law, its amazing what the states have the power to do. If the states were overreaching or overexerting, wouldn't you think the commonwealth government would have done something about it? (Hint: ADF personnel have deployed to several states with higher restriction levels to assist the states in managing the situation. Force Majeure and other rules would come into play. Many tourism operators have changed their cancellation policies to give guests more confidence in making a booking should something come into play that prevented them from checking in, but don't kid yourself - they did this to lure people back, not because they are obliged to do so for things beyond their control such as government orders. Also note, they didn't 'now decide' to implement a vax rule - if they fall under the government's category that requires it - they made no such decision. I suspect many operators will be moving back to their pre-covid refund policies - a place I stayed at a month ago already had for stays 'on or after 6 December'. Some even have different rates depending on the cancellation policy you choose.

Let's be clear. The parks haven't changed their terms and conditions. These entry requirements are government orders, and they don't get a choice whether they follow it or not. The existing terms and conditions cover this, and don't require the park to compensate you for circumstances beyond their control They can, and have made good faith gestures, both en-masse when the parks were closed, and case-by-case for NSW passholders when the borders locked them out They are not required to do diddly squat.

As has been pointed out, the rule did exist. However, If the parks are going to allow passholders to pause the clock on their expiration dates because they made an informed decision not to meet the government mandated entry requirements for whatever reason, how is that any different from me pausing my pass because I don't wish to visit the parks during the winter flu season? If you're thinking "but that's ridiculous!" then i've made my point.

if you scan that QR code, you get a link to the manufacturer's product sheet for the boats showing the new restraint designs. https://www.whitewaterwest.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/SuperFlumeVehicles_SalesSheet.pdf

I'm choosing not to visit theme parks for 6 months between April and September. I'd like a pause on my pass during that time also.

No

...because we're lead to believe only the green dates in the above calendar are an option?