Masks in the Mountains

Colorado peak questions, condition requests and other info.
Forum rules
  • This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
  • Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
  • Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
  • Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
    For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
Locked

Will you wear a mask on your next 14er ascent?

Yes. I will wear 2 masks until told otherwise.
3
2%
Yes. My mask shows that I care for your health.
13
8%
Yes. I don't know up from down, but it is important to signal virtue.
3
2%
Maybe, depends on what the person in front of me is doing.
14
8%
No. My face is too pretty to hide.
12
7%
No. The mask thing is so 2020.
6
3%
No. I read the science and masks outside are absurd.
111
64%
No. I voted for Trump and I don't think he would approve.
11
6%
 
Total votes: 173
User avatar
Somewhat of a Prick
Posts: 745
Joined: 8/4/2012
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 84
Trip Reports (17)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Somewhat of a Prick »

justiner wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:08 pm Find this on a person's profile, click it, confirm, and move on. Life is too short for pointless internet arguments.

block_list.gif
Silencing opinions you don't like is fun. Especially ones you have no data to refute.
User avatar
Somewhat of a Prick
Posts: 745
Joined: 8/4/2012
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 84
Trip Reports (17)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Somewhat of a Prick »

Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:08 pm
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 1:59 pm
Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 1:53 pm Please provide a peer reviewed population and healthcare access controlled study to make your point. Also, here's a doll with a spritz bottle, masks work. The end.
If you want to complain about obnoxious arrogance, you really ought to look in a mirror. You're always the first one to make things personal and act like you are the sole science god on this forum.

Can you provide anything remotely close to what you are demanding from me? By all means, demonstrate where I am wrong. Telling me that I am wrong and stupid because I won't parrot the party line, while contributing no independent thought of your own isn't gonna cut it.

I notice that you declined to take my bet. Guessing that means you aren't nearly as confident in your hypothesis as you act.
You're god dammed right I'm arrogant, at least I know what I'm talking about.
You dont, though.

Shame the other covid threads were memory-holed. It would have been a lot of fun to point out how you've been wrong on this every step of the way for over a year
Last edited by Somewhat of a Prick on Tue May 11, 2021 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
crossfitter
Posts: 901
Joined: 7/7/2009
Trip Reports (7)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by crossfitter »

Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:08 pm
You're god dammed right I'm arrogant, at least I know what I'm talking about.
One would think that if you knew what you were talking about, you'd be able to make your point without throwing a hissy fit and resorting to name calling. Glad you agree on the arrogance though, we have finally found common ground.

By the way, 64% of users of this forum agree with me. The science says outdoor masks are absurd.
- A mountain is not a checkbox to be ticked
- Alpinism and mountaineering are not restricted to 14,000 foot mountains
- Judgment and experience are the two most important pieces of gear you own
- Being honest to yourself and others about your abilities is a characteristic of experienced climbers
- Courage cannot be bought at REI or carried with you in your rucksack

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 2390
Joined: 6/14/2010
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Dave B »

crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:11 pm
Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:08 pm
You're god dammed right I'm arrogant, at least I know what I'm talking about.
One would think that if you knew what you were talking about, you'd be able to make your point without throwing a hissy fit and resorting to name calling. Glad you agree on the arrogance though, we have finally found common ground.

By the way, 64% of users of this forum agree with me. The science says outdoor masks are absurd.
No s**t! Go back to page one of this thread and see where I stand. Outdoor masks are absurd. But that is a different topic than whether or not masks are effective elsewhere...

You should also go back and read your own posts, you're not exactly the Dalai Lama when it comes to name calling and insinuation.

"Why am I being persecuted?"
- every a**hole, ever
Last edited by Dave B on Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Make wilderness less accessible.
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 2390
Joined: 6/14/2010
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Dave B »

Somewhat of a Prick wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:10 pm
You dont, though.

Shame the other covid threads were memory-holed. It would have been a lot of fun to point out how you've been wrong on this every step of the way for over a year
Enlighten us? Use your memory.
Make wilderness less accessible.
User avatar
crossfitter
Posts: 901
Joined: 7/7/2009
Trip Reports (7)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by crossfitter »

Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:19 pm
No s**t! Go back to page one of this thread and see where I stand. Outdoor masks are absurd. But that is a different topic than masks being effective...

You should also go back and read your own posts, you're not exactly the Dalai Lama when it comes to name calling and insinuation.

"Why am I being persecuted?"
- every a**hole ever
I respond in kind. If you can go back to all the memory-holed threads you would see that I'm never the first one to lob the ad-hominem bombs. But I'm plenty capable of arguing in multiple styles. You get to choose which one it's gonna be. I'm happy to go back to civil discourse on the evidence if you are. I'll even let you land the last personal jab.

My contention is and always has been that if masks "work" at all, its a sufficiently negligible effect in the real world that it doesn't make a difference. Texas and Florida were our control groups, they opened up and there is no apparent difference in outcome, despite Florida having the second oldest population in the country. I don't know how anyone can look at what actually has happened in the real world and conclude that very idealized laboratory studies are the more meaningful data point.
- A mountain is not a checkbox to be ticked
- Alpinism and mountaineering are not restricted to 14,000 foot mountains
- Judgment and experience are the two most important pieces of gear you own
- Being honest to yourself and others about your abilities is a characteristic of experienced climbers
- Courage cannot be bought at REI or carried with you in your rucksack

User avatar
GreenHorn
Posts: 201
Joined: 8/5/2009
Trip Reports (4)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by GreenHorn »

Fitter, I have no dog in the fight and don't support Dave's name calling, but to lend another voice here it seems you intentionally ignore Dave's points that you don't agree with. If you spent time in academia you know the following to be correct about the "weasel words":

<b>"Hypothesis testing returns probabilities that support or refute a hypotheses, not binary conclusions. Any scientific paper that doesn't use those "weasel words" gets rejected during review for drawing conclusions the data and analyses don't support..."</b>

Also, you guys missed the fact that the Italy study does provide a control group. It was a regional study in which some regions of Italy implemented restrictions while others did not. Correlation doesn't prove anything and there may be other variables at play, but disregarding the study you don't agree with isn't logical for either side of the argument.

For the record, I don't mask outside but am in Bill's camp when inside. If there's a chance it reduces exposure for me or someone else, it's a small ask. It covers up my ugly mug anyway. :)
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 2390
Joined: 6/14/2010
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Dave B »

crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm I respond in kind. If you can go back to all the memory-holed threads you would see that I'm never the first one to lob the ad-hominem bombs.
I stand corrected, Prick was the first to lob the ad-hominem bomb on page one of this thread. Your first post was just smarmy, but then again so was mine.
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm But I'm plenty capable of arguing in multiple styles.
I am very impressed
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm I'm happy to go back to civil discourse on the evidence if you are. I'll even let you land the last personal jab.
Nah, I'm good.
Make wilderness less accessible.
User avatar
Somewhat of a Prick
Posts: 745
Joined: 8/4/2012
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 84
Trip Reports (17)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Somewhat of a Prick »

Dave B wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:31 pm
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm I respond in kind. If you can go back to all the memory-holed threads you would see that I'm never the first one to lob the ad-hominem bombs.
I stand corrected, Prick was the first to lob the ad-hominem bomb on page one of this thread. Your first post was just smarmy, but then again so was mine.
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm But I'm plenty capable of arguing in multiple styles.
I am very impressed
crossfitter wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:26 pm I'm happy to go back to civil discourse on the evidence if you are. I'll even let you land the last personal jab.
Nah, I'm good.
Faith militant reference got under your skin? Thats all it took? My post was not directed at anyone, you know this. If you felt attacked by it, well then...
User avatar
Matt
Posts: 2669
Joined: 7/26/2005
14ers: 58 
13ers: 208
Trip Reports (32)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Matt »

Somewhat of a Prick wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:10 pm Shame the other covid threads were memory-holed. It would have been a lot of fun to point out how you've been wrong on this every step of the way for over a year
Not all of them disappeared. Careful what you wish for.
We are all greater artists than we realize -FWN
A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone. -HDT
Peak List
User avatar
crossfitter
Posts: 901
Joined: 7/7/2009
Trip Reports (7)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by crossfitter »

GreenHorn wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:27 pm Fitter, I have no dog in the fight and don't support Dave's name calling, but to lend another voice here it seems you intentionally ignore Dave's points that you don't agree with. If you spent time in academia you know the following to be correct about the "weasel words":

<b>"Hypothesis testing returns probabilities that support or refute a hypotheses, not binary conclusions. Any scientific paper that doesn't use those "weasel words" gets rejected during review for drawing conclusions the data and analyses don't support..."</b>

Also, you guys missed the fact that the Italy study does provide a control group. It was a regional study in which some regions of Italy implemented restrictions while others did not. Correlation doesn't prove anything and there may be other variables at play, but disregarding the study you don't agree with isn't logical for either side of the argument.

For the record, I don't mask outside but am in Bill's camp when inside. If there's a chance it reduces exposure for me or someone else, it's a small ask. It covers up my ugly mug anyway. :)
I don't bother to respond to minor points that don't affect the central thesis. Sure you can use weasel words in the proper context, but the way they were being used was to infer consequences far beyond what the study actually investigated, and that one liner speculation was being seized on by someone as proof that masks matter in the real world. I'm not going to get lost in 1000 side arguments on a point that doesn't matter. If you want to say, "See gotcha, papers use the words "may" all the time!" Then, ok whatever dude.

And the Italy study didn't control for seasonality at all, nor does its conclusions explain what happened the following fall. There is quite clearly a major problem with that paper since what actually happened after the paper was published runs entirely contrary to their conclusions. An intellectually honest person would have admitted that the study doesn't look so good once you include the period after it.
- A mountain is not a checkbox to be ticked
- Alpinism and mountaineering are not restricted to 14,000 foot mountains
- Judgment and experience are the two most important pieces of gear you own
- Being honest to yourself and others about your abilities is a characteristic of experienced climbers
- Courage cannot be bought at REI or carried with you in your rucksack

User avatar
Somewhat of a Prick
Posts: 745
Joined: 8/4/2012
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 84
Trip Reports (17)
 

Re: Masks in the Mountains

Post by Somewhat of a Prick »

Matt wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:34 pm
Somewhat of a Prick wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 2:10 pm Shame the other covid threads were memory-holed. It would have been a lot of fun to point out how you've been wrong on this every step of the way for over a year
Not all of them disappeared. Careful what you wish for.
Darn, no Dave B in that one
Locked