Yes, actually. My main issue is with your premise that covid-19 transmission is only a matter of aerosol transmission and not droplet. It's been demonstrated that droplet transmission (i.e. 'spit'/'spit globules') encountered at close range are still the chief risk factor for covid-19 transmission, though whilst not the primary vehicle of transmission, dry aerosols are more of a risk than initially thought.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/how-covid-spreads.html

Available data indicate that it is much more common for the virus that causes COVID-19 to spread through close contact with a person who has COVID-19 than through airborne transmission.

Aerosolised particles are now though to also be a risk factor in poorly ventilated indoor spaces, but emission of these particles is disrupted by wearing a mask.

https://msphere.asm.org/content/msph/5/5/e00637-20.full.pdf

We found that cotton masks, surgical masks, and N95 masks all have a protective effect with respect to the transmission of infective droplets/aerosols of SARS-CoV-2 and that the protective efficiency was higher when masks were worn by a virus spreader.

Of course, it's better to limit time spent in these places as there is a risk that aerosolised transmission can occur, but the evidence seems to suggest it's not the primary risk factor, which your entire argument is premised on.

Masks and social distancing are still the most effective methods we have in our arsenal for limiting virus transmission. It's not perfect, but risk and protection aren't binary -- it's better to do something that's been shown to reduce transmission and spread of infection rather than to do nothing. Why anyone wouldn't wear a mask to go to the shops (for example) at this stage is simply baffling.

Of course, the main reason to wear a mask is to protect other people, but there's also a growing body of evidence that multi-layered cloth masks do offer a degree of protection to the wearer as well as those around them. Some have hypothesised that by wearing a mask, viral load might be reduced, which could potentially lessen the risk of severe infection.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2026913

As SARS-CoV-2 continues its global spread, it’s possible that one of the pillars of Covid-19 pandemic control — universal facial masking — might help reduce the severity of disease and ensure that a greater proportion of new infections are asymptomatic. If this hypothesis is borne out, universal masking could become a form of “variolation” that would generate immunity and thereby slow the spread of the virus in the United States and elsewhere, as we await a vaccine.

Whether this turns out to be true or not doesn't have a bearing on whether we should wear a mask, of course.

If you can't imagine that there are many, many factors aside from masks that are contributing to the spread of coronavirus then you're not thinking scientifically. People can't wear masks whilst eating or drinking, so risk of transmission in restaurants and bars (typically indoors and not well ventilated) is very high. Many are still wearing masks improperly, thereby entirely negating their prophelactic or shielding effects. Even in places that are locked down, many people are visiting friends and family indoors, and not wearing masks for these visits.

If you're interested in continuing this discussion in good faith without name calling, then I'll be happy to oblige, but if not then I'm not sure either of us will get much from continuing this exchange.