Rants Raves and Stupid Shit in Seattle.

[Admin2]

To the Mod-Gods. This is the "rant" area, and this is a "rant", so I trust this will be okay, but how on Earth do you tolerate this WillShookSpear fool? At best, he twiddled a toothpick!

You're good, this is the correct forum.

As to Will whatever so long as he confines his douchbaggery to this thread it's ok.

[Admin2]

Really, I should know better.

I'm not "looking for a fight"; I simply believe the information I get from mainstream sources, while others get theirs from the fringe because they have a deep-seated need to find conspiracy everywhere. The two perspectives are irreconcilable.

Which is why this is how these wackadoodle conversation go. "All the experts" turns into a fringe ex-journalist and spy novel author, Brazil being 8th in the world (and moving up fast) becomes a discussion about map projection models and perception. And the next credible source is a diet doc off of Oprah. It's a bunch of unrelated information that could be seen to support a perspective. So that's how it's used.

So. No, I won't be listening to Dr. David Katz, a nutritional expert with absolutely no infectious disease credentials who is just managing his brand and getting on TV as much as he can talk about a pandemic. He even hash tagged his perspective to "get the hits". You can go to your proctologist for investment advice, but don't be surprised when the results are shit. The question isn't why won't I watch it. The question is why would you? Ah, because he supports your fringe perspective. And maybe because you watch a lot of Oprah.

Nor will I be paying any attention to a former newspaper reporter and spy novel author for my pandemic information. The question is: why are you? Ah, because he supports your perspective.

Let the hilarity resume. Should be interesting to see what happens with the re-opening.

You said that if the US did as Brazil did they would be in worse shape. Brazil clearly by any measure is not doing worse than the US. 8th what? Cases? Deaths? What?

Brazil has registered 12,000 deaths with a population of 200,000,000 people while the US has 80,000 with a population of 331,000,000 how is that worse?

Diet doctor on Oprah that's kinda funny how you reduced an Ivy League educated physician to a diet doc on Oprah.

Like I said, you just want to fight.

Who the fuck is the spy novel author? What the fuck are you even ranting about?

[Rousse]

Really, I should know better.

You apparently don't know better, or anything else really. I don't know to whom you were responding, so I don't know if it was me or admin2, but if it was me.

1. I don't know the references to fringe sites you're making.

2. I've actually worked in medical research and medical devices for years. I know how to read the papers, and I get papers the media generally either doesn't see or just ignores. My guess is the papers are just too dry for their short attention spans, even though if they read them, they might be able to make a really punchy headline.

3. Except that they would never publish a headline such as "CV is more contagious, but so much less dangerous, than expected. We're all going to live! Because "life is good" doesn't sell.

4. I didn't quote any crackpots; I gave you actual data. Which you ignored and avoided. Perhaps I should have used shorter words and sentences.

5. Which is precisely why I knew you didn't care about sources initially.

You're a pathetic mindless follower of the far-left. You don't have facts or figures, but just (as you admit), the inability to distinguish reality from the mass media. You can't play with the big boys, at least not in this arena. I'm sure you have your areas of expertise. Judging from your mental acuity and your overly-inflated self-worth, I suspect you are one heck of a great Monster Truck builder, who hasn't yet learned that you should only tune the engines in areas with good ventilation, nor that home-brewed alcohol ain't so good for you.

If you feel the need to reply, how about starting with reading my post again. Rebut it. (For you and your twelve toes, that means "find sources that directly address and disprove it. ") For example, prove that Ferguson was correct in his models for Mad Cow. Or perhaps that my claims of his projections were inaccurate. (Good luck with that. They're his, not mine.) Or prove that he did not revise his initially published "Coronavirus" model, after admitting (on Twitter, you FN Twit) that it was his old FLU model and was undocumented.

I'm unclear on why you are participating while not adding any value other than an Adam Sandler-like idiocy. If Coronavirus ate brains, I would suspect it had hit yours. Unless it starved to death in the attempt.

To the Mod-Gods. This is the "rant" area, and this is a "rant", so I trust this will be okay, but how on Earth do you tolerate this WillShookSpear fool? At best, he twiddled a toothpick!

[Member #6240]

Really, I should know better.

I'm not "looking for a fight"; I simply believe the information I get from mainstream sources, while others get theirs from the fringe because they have a deep-seated need to find conspiracy everywhere. The two perspectives are irreconcilable.

Which is why this is how these wackadoodle conversation go. "All the experts" turns into a fringe ex-journalist and spy novel author, Brazil being 8th in the world (and moving up fast) becomes a discussion about map projection models and perception. And the next credible source is a diet doc off of Oprah. It's a bunch of unrelated information that could be seen to support a perspective. So that's how it's used.

So. No, I won't be listening to Dr. David Katz, a nutritional expert with absolutely no infectious disease credentials who is just managing his brand and getting on TV as much as he can talk about a pandemic. He even hash tagged his perspective to "get the hits". You can go to your proctologist for investment advice, but don't be surprised when the results are shit. The question isn't why won't I watch it. The question is why would you? Ah, because he supports your fringe perspective. And maybe because you watch a lot of Oprah.

Nor will I be paying any attention to a former newspaper reporter and spy novel author for my pandemic information. The question is: why are you? Ah, because he supports your perspective.

Let the hilarity resume. Should be interesting to see what happens with the re-opening.

[Admin2]

Sources, please.

Here's a guy who's an MD that was working in emergency rooms in NYC during the height of the cases there, has a masters in public health talking about how the early projections were wrong. They clearly were.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lze-rMYLf2E

He's also a lefty so you can't say he's supporting Trump.

I know you won't bother watching it because you're just here to fight but maybe somebody else will. It's 15 minutes long but worth the time.

[Admin2]

The models were all based on a maximum of 50% compliance with social distancing, including sheltering place, directives. Compliance far exceeded that especially in hard-hit areas.

There's no question this had a huge impact on the spread, but it was always the case that if it worked, for some that would be proof that it wasn't needed. We can look to countries like Brazil to get a glimpse of what could have been in the US without it.

I get it, because you still view the world through the lens of the Mercator Projection and not the Peters Projection (google them) you don't know some basic facts about Brazil.

Brazil is a massive country, it has nearly the same landmass as the USA, and it has about 66% of the population (US 331,000,000 Brazil 209,000,000) The US has 80,000 corona deaths and Brazil is reporting 10,000 (which is probably a ridiculously low number so triple it and call it 30,000) which means with more than 50% of the population they have less than half the deaths, if we triple what they reported, if we take just their number it's 12% of the US. So how exactly is the US faring better?

[Rousse]

The models were all based on a maximum of 50% compliance with social distancing, including sheltering place, directives.

Alex Berenson, who is in a much better position than you to know, says you're wrong. Most of the models had social distancing baked in, at least into the ranges.

The initial models that the draconian lockdowns were based on, were from Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College. He included ranges for behaviors. And then.

On March 22nd, he admitted that his models weren't even Coronavirus-specific. Instead, he used an opaque 13,000 line computer program he described as "undocumented", which he wrote to model flu, not CV, pandemics.

Six weeks later, still never having let anyone review his code or models, he revised it heavily. Yes, he "corrected" it. Not due to new data so much as due to the fact that the Coronavirus IS NOT THE FLU. He had previously not even modeled the Coronavirus.

To your claim that the lower deaths were due to Social Distancing, his later model had Sweden paying a huge price for no lockdown, with 40,000 COVID deaths by May 1, and 100,000 by June. As you (hopefully) know, Sweden has not done a lockdown, and as of today, it's had 3,220 deaths. And it crested last month.

Ferguson has a greatest hits of failed models.

• 2002: He said up to 150,000 people could die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease.) So far, 177 people have died. Not 177 thousand, just 177.
• 2005: He predicted "up to 150 million people" could die from bird flu. The tally after six years: 282. Not 282 thousand, just 282.
• 2009: He was in a U.K. government committee that, with his advice, estimates that "up to" (or "worst case") swine flu would be 65,000 just in the UK. They lost 457.

Now, with your demonstrated dishonesty, I fully expect you to say, "well, he said UP TO each time. He wasn't wrong, just overly cautious. " No, he's been so far off, every time, including with COVID in Sweden this time, that if you were less of an apologist you would understand that the other lower deaths have ALSO been due to his models being flat-out wrong.

Brookings, by the way, admits the models were wrong but values the conversation. "Despite some notable flaws, the epidemiological models have cumulatively had a beneficial effect on the national conversation. " In other words, similar to when false accusations against white men happen, there's no need to apologize because being a white man is, intrinsically, to be guilty.

For better honesty, try epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center "That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool. " Yeah, you know more about models than an actual epidemiologist at a top research center.

[Member #6240]

Models and projections change over time as they're fed new data. It's not so much being "wrong" as being "more precise". The quarantine has helped reduce the spread immensely. The stay-home mandate has provided new data for the models (amongst a host of other new data), and the models are changing accordingly.

The models were all based on a maximum of 50% compliance with social distancing, including sheltering place, directives. Compliance far exceeded that especially in hard-hit areas.

There's no question this had a huge impact on the spread, but it was always the case that if it worked, for some that would be proof that it wasn't needed. We can look to countries like Brazil to get a glimpse of what could have been in the US without it.

[Efurufe]

It wasn't the quarantine, it was that they were flat out wrong about the seriousness.

Models and projections change over time as they're fed new data. It's not so much being "wrong" as being "more precise". The quarantine has helped reduce the spread immensely. The stay-home mandate has provided new data for the models (amongst a host of other new data), and the models are changing accordingly.

Some of them haven't self-corrected all the way to the data-proven situation, but all have corrected significantly. Except, apparently, you. Still relying on that whole flat-earth model too, I presume

Quite the opposite. While I want to get back to "normal" as much as anyone else (though I don't think it will ever be the same again), I am completely with the round-earth scientists who are saying that, until we can actually do viral and anti-body testing (or develop a vaccine), we need to be very cautions and maintain the self-quarantine / social distancing approach to limiting the spread. Granted, this is just a brute-force, shotgun approach, but without testing it's hard to have a more precise method of limiting the spread. But since it's all we have right now, we need to do it. Otherwise it will just flare up again according to the most recent data. The virus hasn't gone away, we've just been hiding from it.

[Chingados]

https://www.mic.com/articles/72705/7...ong-in-history

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-o...51371Q20090204

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...state-of-union

Has there ever been any admin that has lied to the American public this often? About things as insignificant as crowd sizes from day 1 just to feed the ego of one insecure person?

Has there ever been any admin that would admit it was wrong.

[Member #6240]

Content-free rant.

There really isn't anything quite as precious as someone saying "this thing is true", and then when asked to back it up resorts to a long rant consisting alternately of "you could search and find it" and childish insults.

Other than being intellectually dishonest, it demonstrates that in fact the individual has done no research, and the reason that it smells like bullshit is that they've pulled it out of their asses.

This is why this forum isn't much more than fun; a rational discussion can't be had with irrational people.

[BarryMyRutner]

Actually, I haven't seen any of the articles where the "experts" admit they were wrong either. They modeled their predictions, as you mentioned, based upon the available data at the time, but of course we had States institute shelter in place orders which may have flattened the curve and lowered the fatality rate. But even now the administration is admitting that there may be more fatalities as states open up. But, this admin will never admit it was wrong.

Has there ever been any admin that would admit it was wrong.

[Chingados]

Actually, I haven't seen any of the articles where the "experts" admit they were wrong either. They modeled their predictions, as you mentioned, based upon the available data at the time, but of course we had States institute shelter in place orders which may have flattened the curve and lowered the fatality rate. But even now the administration is admitting that there may be more fatalities as states open up. But, this admin will never admit it was wrong.

Sources, please.

[Camhole]

Seriously? Clarify this for me. Are you honestly a brain-dead sheltered moron with no social and even less intellectual skill and ability, unexposed to the news about the changing models, the random-sampling antibody results and the subsequent re-evaluation of even when CV started, somehow able to use a web browser but incapable of grasping even the simplest of searches or news pages? Or are you instead a pathetic mouth-breathing internet troll, living in an abandoned house's basement because even your mother kicked you out, as you fantasize about what it must be like to see sunshine and not instantly burn, or see people and not have them instantly repulsed, who simply has a macro replying "Sources, please" because you saw it somewhere and realized it allows you to get your post count up without being too obvious about your illiteracy on the current, and indeed every conceivable, topic?.

Don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

[Rousse]

Sources, please.

Seriously? Clarify this for me. Are you honestly a brain-dead sheltered moron with no social and even less intellectual skill and ability, unexposed to the news about the changing models, the random-sampling antibody results and the subsequent re-evaluation of even when CV started, somehow able to use a web browser but incapable of grasping even the simplest of searches or news pages? Or are you instead a pathetic mouth-breathing internet troll, living in an abandoned house's basement because even your mother kicked you out, as you fantasize about what it must be like to see sunshine and not instantly burn, or see people and not have them instantly repulsed, who simply has a macro replying "Sources, please" because you saw it somewhere and realized it allows you to get your post count up without being too obvious about your illiteracy on the current, and indeed every conceivable, topic?.