"AT THE TIME."
"At the time" you were referencing a different CNN article. Neither you nor I was talking about the CNN article you just linked. I didn't even quote that. Clearly, since I emphasized "AT THE TIME," I was talking about the one you linked back in January. You know:
All the experts in the CNN article were very careful not to say that masks were ineffective. In fact, they even suggested that surgical masks can "offer some protection." None of those experts blamed Americans panic-buying for the mask shortage. That was all CNN, which is why I was compelled to point out that CNN is just a news organization prone to assumptions and certainly were not "experts." I also pointed this out to you way back then but you rejected it and called me an Alex Jones conspiracy nut. Point is, when you exasperatedly told everyone to stop buying masks, you weren't "simply passing on the advice of experts at the time."
*facepalm*
Where do you get that from Amused referencing the advice he shared "at the time" and still somehow getting confused about which CNN article we were talking about? I made it pretty clear which one I was talking about in response to his assertion that he was merely passing along expert opinions at the time.
He wasn't. He was getting vindictive and judgemental while mocking others based on CNN's non-expert slant. None of the experts in that article supported CNN's slant. Their slant was based on an assumption we already knew was false (that the January shortages were from Americans panic-buying). All the experts back then would say was that there was no evidence "yet" and they wouldn't recommend using them "yet" since they were not aware of community transmission in the USA... yet.
If hal2kilo and Amused's posts above are anything to go by, I guess we aren't past that. Somehow, this always happens. It's pretty darn clear what CNN article I was talking about.
The article you linked in January clearly says that is the primary purpose for non-N95 surgical masks, yet here you are trying to use that to distinguish now from then.
...but, hey: I never wanted to make this about you changing your mind. I wasn't trying to contrast your position now vs. then. You're the one dragging us back through all that. I was pointing out the lack of contrast in my own position to establish that my opinion on masks predates this thread.
...and I didn't say anything about him changing his views. Again, I only tagged him so he could validate that my position was consistent from before this thread existed so the accusation that I "backflipped" is demonstrably incorrect. I did not criticize him for changing his mind. I didn't even mention that he changed his mind. He came in here assuming that I had resumed an argument with him when I had not. All he had to do was verify that, yes, my position on masks predates this thread. It was a response to an demonstrably-false insinuation that I had backpedaled so hard in this thread that I "backflipped." Not true at all.
So, which is it? Am I a Trump apologist living in Trumplandia who only cares about myself, opposes mandates, and refuses to wear a mask while daring people to make me?
...or did I vote against Trump, criticise Trump's stubborn refusal to wear a mask, secure my masks back in January, help others secure their masks, wear my mask, encourage others to wear masks, and object to Kemp overturning mask mandates?
The later one is all verifiably true with a public post history predating the thread.
This is a tangent caused by me DARING to say that we undermine our credibility as Trump critics when we scrape the bottom of the barrel for pointless critiques about breaking Atlanta law when their are mountains of valid criticisms regarding Trump's mask policy/behavious.
Just take the feedback. It doesn't mean I'm anti-mask or pro-Trump. It's pretty freakin' funny that explicitly stating that I am pro-mask and anti-Trump results in the assumption that I must've just backflipped from my position earlier in this thread... since I can prove I didn't. It's impossible to have a nuanced position without triggering that knee-jerk reaction from people here... and it really wasn't that nuanced, people (against Trump but also against extreme hyperbole that undermines our valid criticisms).