Science will win eventually, you know.
- Thread starter HHusky
- Start date
MELTDOWN
PAY ATTENTION TO ME WHILE I RANDOMLY POST BULLSHIT WITH NO COMMENT OR CONTEXT!!!!!!
PAY ATTENTION TO ME WHILE I RANDOMLY POST BULLSHIT WITH NO COMMENT OR CONTEXT!!!!!!
doogie
New Fish
It's Science!!!!!! SCIENCEEEE!!!!!
MikeDamone
Well-known poster
Next week? Peak oil next near?
jhfstyle24
New Fish
HHusky, with all due respect, you are one of the people trying to politicize this. Many in the Tug are guilty of this, it's not just you, but that doesn't make it better. I encourage you to read this post.
We know the deaths are higher than reported bases on excess death data (citation below). But so are the cases[/b]. Which is why you are now guilty of spinning this out of proportion to fit your viewpoint.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/
Here are some basic numbers for you, based on legitimate NYC data.
1.4 percent fatality rate to infection, and double the deaths reported (which means like quintuple the cases, minimum).
Assuming that rate extends out to the whole of the US, which it doesn't (it's probably a little lowered), we have about 14,850,028 cases and 207,906 deaths.
Of those deaths, 26% are in the 65 and under age bracket. Extrapolate that out. 54,055 deaths under 65.
89% of those are people with at least 1 underlying health condition. Of those 54,055, 48,109 had a pre-existing condition.
That means, in the entire country, 5,946 deaths in under 65's with no pre-existing condition. Out of millions of cases.
You see how easy it is to spin numbers now?
If you're on the right, you point at the pre-existing condition numbers and say wow, nothing at all here! Open this shit!
If you're on the left, you go hey what about the 200k already dead? And what happens to the fatality rate once hospitals get overloaded? Use restrictions or don't open!
I understand that people love to be partisan, but please at least understand your bias before you post some stupid shit. When you just post numbers without understanding their context, you do more harm than good to yourself and your point. For fuck's sake.
We know the deaths are higher than reported bases on excess death data (citation below). But so are the cases[/b]. Which is why you are now guilty of spinning this out of proportion to fit your viewpoint.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/
Here are some basic numbers for you, based on legitimate NYC data.
1.4 percent fatality rate to infection, and double the deaths reported (which means like quintuple the cases, minimum).
Assuming that rate extends out to the whole of the US, which it doesn't (it's probably a little lowered), we have about 14,850,028 cases and 207,906 deaths.
Of those deaths, 26% are in the 65 and under age bracket. Extrapolate that out. 54,055 deaths under 65.
89% of those are people with at least 1 underlying health condition. Of those 54,055, 48,109 had a pre-existing condition.
That means, in the entire country, 5,946 deaths in under 65's with no pre-existing condition. Out of millions of cases.
You see how easy it is to spin numbers now?
If you're on the right, you point at the pre-existing condition numbers and say wow, nothing at all here! Open this shit!
If you're on the left, you go hey what about the 200k already dead? And what happens to the fatality rate once hospitals get overloaded? Use restrictions or don't open!
I understand that people love to be partisan, but please at least understand your bias before you post some stupid shit. When you just post numbers without understanding their context, you do more harm than good to yourself and your point. For fuck's sake.
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
@HHusky is one of a disturbing large many who have emotionally bonded with crisis, and pine for more crisis. I honestly don't understand it. This Stockholm Syndrome is warped.
Pitchfork51
Active poster
the dumbest of all the climate stuff is "there will be millions of climate refugees, then you'll regret it when all of them are in the US!"
it's like no bro. we'll build a wall and shoot people that try to storm it.
In 1968 an estimated 100,000 Americans died from the Hong Kong flu. US population was 201 million. In 2020 we have 330 million. Extrapolated deaths from 1968 would equate to 164,000 deaths and we didn't shut down sh*t. In 1958 the Asian flu killed an estimated 116,000 Americans. Population was 175 million. That extrapolates out to 219,000 deaths. We didn't shut down sh*t. Anyone arguing that laying off 40 million Americans for a non-unprecedented virus is either a partisan Trump hating hack or a moron who can't do numbers and sh*t. At best, it should have been a localized shut down in like NYC for a month and heavy protection for the elderly with underlying medical conditions. People like the dazzler were free to shelter in place in their basement until hell freezes over or there is a vaccine. But just like paying taxes, the dazzler feels better when everyone is suffering.
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
Science is a process, fuckwad.
jhfstyle24
New Fish
"Death isn't the only issue here and having to shut down twice will be far worse than enduring this short term pain."
This is a strawman argument. I specifically showed the scope of cases, which you ignored.
You said this as an argument against nothing I actually said. I didn't say death was the only issue. I also didn't bring up shutting it down twice. Hence, you build a strawman to argue against, so you can disagree without actually being wrong.
"Science is only right, not Left-Right."
Again. I didn't say "science" had bias. I demonstrated how you could use the SAME SCIENTIFIC NUMBERS to reach different conclusions. In other words, you again refuted something I didn't say.
At no point did I state that science was being shifted by political bias. I showed you how political bias can lead to different interpretations of the exact same statistic, which, mind you, is from science.
You are welcome to give your opinion on the numbers, but you can't use numbers without context as your opinion.
If we were more like Oregon we would have a lot less dead. So, you have a point? Banning fishing in eastern Washington isn't science counselor. Neither is stuffing New York nursing homes with chicom crud victims. Laying off 40 million Americans isn't science. Like I said, just because you want to hide in your basement doesn't mean that I should have to. I know one person that had the crud, a friend of my daughters. She had mild symptoms and is recovered.
doogie
New Fish
There are people on all sides who did what the Experts said.
Wash your hands, limit contact and wait for the Science and Data to either Confirm or Disprove the Urgency of the Experts.
That phase is over. The Science and Data won. Public education teaching its citizens to read, process and think, won.
The rest is goal post repositioning
Wash your hands, limit contact and wait for the Science and Data to either Confirm or Disprove the Urgency of the Experts.
That phase is over. The Science and Data won. Public education teaching its citizens to read, process and think, won.
The rest is goal post repositioning
Or criticism
HHusky
Active poster
The data is a fucktarded, manipulated mess. Still, Washington, which had irresponsible partners in the Feds and an out-of-state nursing home operator, has done remarkably well given what it was faced with. (And I'm not ignoring the fact that Inslee is fucking up communications right now when it comes to allowing businesses to plan whether they are or are not reopening next week.)
Pitchfork51
Active poster
Blue states did worse because they have more poor people living in close quarters. This isn't hard.