Jump to content

Elephant Tipper

Verified Member
  • Posts

    7,197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Elephant Tipper

  1. I was telling a buddy of mine the same thing a few weeks ago, that we are headed into a bad direction, although I prefer your phrasing of it being a "weird place". I think that the NCAA has uncorked something that's better kept in the bottle. I wonder what college player will earn more than a head coach in a given year ?
  2. Here are your scientific studies homer: Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of all 151 studies (c19ivermectin.com) Do yourself and the rest of the AUF a favor and bone up on the science instead of the political rhetoric.
  3. Every time you post I swear that your wife swapped your meds that day for M&Ms, the peanut kind.
  4. Ivermectin cured my nephew >>>>>>> all controlled studies, every day. As I said, his PHYSICIAN prescribed the medication, not a veterinarian. If a person is taking veterinary ivermectin for personal use, then he is a fool The prescriptions are vastly different, but a Bubba's gotta do, what a Bubba's gotta do. Since you mention learning about the scientific method from jr high, then you would know that "the study" you mention is questionable and it certainly isn't "the largest trial to date", not by a long shot. You should read more. If you are going to make a definitive statement that ivermectin "just doesn't help", then you shouldn't quote a study that uses faulty tools. The "rapid test", as used in Dr. Mills study, has issues. If a gold standard is desired, then the pcr test should have been used, which is 95%+ accurate. When used under the best conditions possible, a rapid test has at best an accuracy of only 75%+/-. That's a BIG hurdle to start. Then, the results depend on the brand of rapid test, which can drop accuracy way below 50%. Then, add to the equation that if the test is used before 7 days of infection, then the result is not reliable. Accurate results with a rapid test require at least a week of maturation of the infection. The wsj, nor Dr. Mills, make this info known. For all we know, those who tested positive for coronavirus, only had the common cold variety. In case you glazed over the above box of info, the results cited are from 81 studies, performed by 782 scientists, using 128,840 patients (not the tiny number Dr. Mills cites), from over 27 countries. This is an EXCELLENT spread of data. If ivermectin is taken as a prophylaxsis, then it has an 83% efficacy. Taken in the early stages of infection, then a 63% efficacy. Taken during late treatment, then ivermectin has a 42% success rate. The studies also determine fatality %, gives info about different stages of care and last, viral clearance. Here are the 81 studies. Knock yourself out. You have homework to do. https://c19ivermectin.com/ Oh, it's not me saying that ivermectin works against COVID-19, it's all 81 studies that do. Why is it primarily in America people claim that ivermectin doesn't work, when around the world scientists boast its benefits ? Money ? Ignorance ? Politics ? All 3 I believe, with the most important being the cost of the medication. Ivermectin is about 4 cents per pill, which makes it available even to the poorest. In America, the cost will be the $10,000 pill, which is not so available to the world. The more I read on this subject, the more I find that it's the scientists who need investigating, not ivermectin. Hang on to that bone, Mr. Gateway of Truth. I bet that you think it has some flavor left in it.
  5. Oooops ! I wonder if my nephew's physician has a money-back guarantee for having prescribed ivermectin ? My nephew, who is type-1 diabetic and has ankylosing spondylitis, both autoimmune disorders which put him in a high-risk category, was diagnosed with the delta variant, the most pernicious, was miserable and having to consider hospitalization. Within 48 hours after beginning his regimen, the symptoms were reduced SIGNIFICANTLY. Within 10 days he was symptom free. Keep on being the purveyor of that truth you're peddling there TT. You're like a dog with a bone about it. lol Oh, wait a moment. You don't accept anecdotal information, do you ? lol Remember everyone, TT says that ivermection "just doesn't help", so don't use it. You might get well.
  6. How did you come by this "fundraising" document Texas ?
  7. Glad to see that you have posted ICHY. Awwww, this must be sarcasm, or is it ? This wonderful American economy that you portray is because we are on a sugar high from the $7 trillion increase in national debt in just 2 years.....TWO YEARS. That much money released into the economy cannot help but give the appearance of making the economy "great again" because people and businesses have been able to literally dump it into the economy and make businesses flush with cash...for the interim. I'm sure you would be willing to give your children a similar credit card and then watch them spend you into oblivion, then gleefully tell you how much they helped everyone. This is the dilemma which Congress and the Presidents have placed us. We, the citizens of America, are bestowed with the dubious honor of paying for these horrible policies. Unemployment is seemingly low only because of the catastrophic drop in the labor participation rate. As of 2/20, the number was 63.4% which then dropped to a low of 60.2% in 4/20, which is a 5% drop in the total labor force of 2/20. America has not experienced such a drop since the Great Depression. The labor market was destroyed by the combination of covid and the overabundance of cash doled out by Congress. As of 2/22, the participation rate was 62.3%, which means that America remains significantly below the rate prior to covid. The 5.7% rate which you quote is not because of growth, it is because of replacement. The 5.7% figure you quote is primarily a rebound, not creation. The number of employment increase needs to be much, much higher than that to dig our economy out of the hole. America lost over 5 million jobs during covid and we are far from restoring those before even considering the idea of "growth". Many basic products have increased in price from 10-50%, petroleum is far worse. Oil, since election week 2020, has climbed from $37/bbl to $130/bbl, which is a 450% increase. Wholesale gasoline was $1.05 as of election day 2020 and was over $3.90 yesterday, a 470% increase. My favorite bacon has increased 50% since 1//22. Pick your grocery item......it has increased dramatically in price. Pick your items from Amazon.....the prices have increased, significantly. The costs of petroleum products alone will filter into the bottom line of ALL manufacturers and they will have to pass these costs to the public. Those in the lower economic strata are and will be suffering the most for a long time to come. Without cheap fuel, all suffer. America is headed for very troubled waters. To reiterate, yes, this economy SUCKS !!! It will only grow worse under a Democrat administration. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
  8. And Pelosi is also leading the charge to ban Russian oil. The idea of doing this without previously replacing that oil shows that many of these "leaders" are isolated from understanding the economic burden that this will place on the American public. Oil is climbing back to yesterday's high and will surpass it. $147 is the next target. After that price, history will be made.....probably soon.
  9. I think all of that info by flywareagle.com is stating was previously posted on AUFamily. Better to read AUF.
  10. You need to seriously back off with the incendiary language . AG was at best an okay hire. Jay Jacobs, a "good ol' boy" I guess, secured BP's hiring when Pearl was a hot potato and no one wanted anything to do with him. BP was not going anywhere unless he wanted to be starting over and that wasn't going to happen at his age, AT ALL. I don't follow volleyball but that program is batting .361 after 2 seasons. Is that a good record ? If his name were Harsin, then he'd be gone. Your use of the word "mediocre" applies.
  11. Yeah, I was never impressed with AG's hiring. Add Leath's hiring and dismissal and Harsin, IF for cause, then the BOT have made some serious errors and they will need to be examined..
  12. AG staying or departing will be your answer. Harsin was AG's hire. If for cause, he stays, if not, he leaves. Who then will make the next hiring decision, because the trust in AG's judgment will be compromised if for cause ?
  13. EXACTLY. AU is a premier program.
  14. Thank you for clarifying. I stand corrected re: you, but against those who are fomenting this firing I stand by my words. WDE !!!
  15. So you're saying McGlynn, et al, failed in their due diligence of Harsin ? Please elaborate.
  16. I'm on the Toomer's Corner cam. Where is everyone ? Wish I could be there but I'm a far distance from campus.
  17. Thank you sir and I agree with your comments. I was happy/eager with the results of the first half of the season as I think most AU fans were, but then it tanked. Why did that happen ? I still haven't read any satisfactory explanations other than Bobo's mismanagement, then the program really hit a wall post season. Is Harsin's program management so different and many players were unable to adjust ? My solace in this matter has been reflecting on the first season records of several well-respected coaches. There are counter arguments to my analogy: Pat Dye- 5-6 at AU; Bear Bryant- at aTm 1-9 and at UA 5-4-1; Bobby Bowden 5-6 at FSU; Saban 7-6 at UA. One undercurrent not being discussed in the matter of successful seasons is that college football is a money sport today, in fact, the spirit of the game has diminished greatly because of $$$. Football is now dog-eat-dog for the $$$. We brag about how much money our program brings in to the school. Never in all the years of my support of AU had I heard talk like this, but it's now almost a competition unto itself. Another undercurrent is the success that Chizik had by winning the NC in his 2nd season and Malzahn competing for it in his 1st season, both unbelievable for any school and has only whetted our appetite for more, and believing that one team under one head coach is certain to be continuous with the next coach. In the real world that rarely happens, but that has become our expectation. When Harsin was hired there were many predicting that AU would have a 9-3 record the first season. Unrealistic. A third undercurrent is keeping up with the UpDykes. Saban has been the most successful coach in history at the dismay of all the other SEC schools and has caused fan bases to turn on their coaches for not being as successful. Jawja dumped Richt, a fine coach with a 73% win average, only because he wasn't winning the NC. Some fans were ready to dump Kirby Smart because he hadn't won a NC in his first two seasons. UT dumped Fulmer, Clempson dumped Bowden and others. Saban's success has driven others unreasonably mad with the desire for a near-instant NC. The SEC schools are expecting immediate success, partly because the belief is that the money that the programs generate should be able to pay for that NC. Unfortunately, aTm has worsened this idea with their NIL scheme. This drive for a NC is only going to become worse. Last, add the transfer rule into the mix and you see players leave a program after only one season for what they believe will be greener pastures. This undermines program stability as AU's mass exodus is showing. Some players are switching to as many as 3 schools with the hope of fulfilling their dreams. To bring this full circle, I think AU fans have unreasonable expectations given the greater number of fluid factors at play in today's football environment and having to compete with a very mature program like UA. To develop a solid program will take years at AU. Do we have the patience to let a coach develop the program as he sees it should be or will we demand that Yella Fella fix it with his wallet ? Apparently part of our fan base does not. I believe in Auburn and love it. WDE !!!
  18. Harsin was thoroughly vetted before being hired by AU which would have included his "relationships". You praised McGlynn's work re: "the Newton Investigation" in the Zak Hill thread and now one would think that you believe McGlynn was incompetent in a standard investigation of the simplest of matters about Harsin's Boise "relationships". That is the crux of the matter at hand in AU's investigation of Harsin, but you conflate the poor 2021 season record with this issue as many others are doing, which belies your true motives, and of those pressing for him to be fired. Let's be clear, you want Harsin removed because of your accusation of "mismanagement", not because of the allegations at hand. Until there is real evidence, not rumors, against Harsin, he has my full support. WDE !!! EDIT: And for those dragging Harsin's daughters into this matter by slandering their conduct should be ashamed.
  19. That's funny. Reminds me of a line from Zero Dark Thirty, "okay, you got me", which may be a premonition. Look, I'm being facetious about the demotion idea. That idea came from an Italian friend of mine who knew that I was pissed about the renewal of Gus' contract. He told me of how an Italian soccer coach who had an outrageous salary was demoted because of his incompetence in coaching and my friend suggested that would be a good dose of medicine for self-serving coaches like Malzahn. That stunt set Italian soccer on fire and all the team's coaches got the message is what I was told. Everything that I've said about coaches' contracts I am adamant about. AU is being destroyed by poor negotiations. They (AD Greene et al, Gouge ?) have written bad contracts and rely on 1 (800) Yella Fella for the wrong reasons. WDE !!!
  20. And you don't know what stipulations were in his contract. The financial promises made in this current OC search will be most important. AU has to hold these hires more accountable and less liable to AU. AU cannot be seen as the "buyout university" of America. This applies to the current OC search and also the contract we sign with Schmedding. In an effort to fill the position will AU decision makers (AD Greene, et al) promise potential multi-million dollar buyouts, even for Schmedding ? We just hired/fired Cornelius Williams, a receivers coach, with a buyout ($600K for 4 games). A wr coach with a buyout ? Ridiculous. Why should a receivers coach have a buyout except for incompetent negotiating ? And then Bobo with a multi-million dollar buyout ? Bobo was lucky to even have a job and should not have been given such a generous buyout, if any. He failed in Coloradao and then he failed at USCe, but what does AU do ? We promised him $2.5 million to tryout as the OC. And Steele with his partial buyout ? (Thank you UT, for saving us $900K). Malzahn, $23 million. Dave Aranda's contract at LSU had a minimal buyout and he has been one of the best DCs in the nation. Each of these contracts was poorly designed by AU, first by Leath/Greene and now by Gouge(?)/Greene, which have compromised AU's future contracts. AU is going in the WRONG direction with its contracts which consequently has attracted inferior coaching talent. Holding these coaches more accountable in their contracts is the answer for better results, rewarding them for incompetence isn't. Demoting a coach should certainly be an option, it's AU's money and AU's job to offer. AU is a premier program, and has the leverage to demand such stipulations, but many in this forum don't believe it. Whoever signs the contracts will probably succumb to desperate deal making, as usual. smh WDE !!!
×
×
  • Create New...