CD - Don't take this the wrong way because you are one of the posters on this board that I value the most, but your answer really is full of a bunch of non-sequitors. It seems you are looking for 100% certain answers on questions where that is impossible. Then twisting the fact that we don't have certainty into conclusions that are counter to what we do know.
Example - do we know that people can transmit the virus to each other? Yes. Is it easier in closed areas? Yes. Do masks help slow the diseases? Yes. Does closing things down help slow the disease? Yes. We know all those things so when the states that opened up earlier have higher transmission rates we don't know that masks are the only reason, but there is pretty good evidence that it is part of the reason.
Then all the data on old people dying at a higher rate and healthy people being asymptomatic is just a diversionary tactic. Because we do know that if more people sick, more people will die. It is like saying an extra 100,000 deaths are OK just because we don't know if it is 25,000 or 200,000.
People can over-react certainly, but in a public health crisis that is understandable. Hey, I am open to letting industries like baseball open up if similar industries in a state are allowed to do so if baseball does it on an elective basis. There are reasons behind each question you ask even if we don't know the exact answers. PA had more cases than FL and TX likely because they had more population density, proximity to hotspots in NY, and colder weather in March. We don't know that for certain, but there is a logic to it. Probably some luck too.
Your logic just seems to combine lots of misleading hearsay to make it OK for someone to not wear a mask in a crowded public place if they don't want to.
