The social-distancing deniers have arrived

[Jack Hays]

I used to feel sorry for you; thought you were grinding out a paycheck with all the nonsense you spewed, and had no other choice. But now I realize that you dishonestly disseminate blatantly false information because you simply enjoy the attention of those who believe they can actually help you understand something that you have no interest in understanding. You just want the damned attention. Kinda' pathetic, actually.

Bye, now.

Please see #189 to try to understand the point that ecofarm missed.

 

[JasperL]

It took me too long to realize that ecofarm had so thoroughly missed the point. And the UW projection clearly suggested deaths would not increase much beyond April. It seemed clear to me that he was assuming continued straight line death increase, which the UW projection does not support. When he ridiculed the UW site I concluded he was data-averse. I forgot Talleyrand's wisdom: "Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."

You're still in the hole of your own making, digging away. He didn't say or imply continued straight line death increases - he made a claim about "this month" then repeated "this month." Which means April, ONE month, the month we are in, which is April. Then you cited IMHE to.....back up his claim, then called him a liar, and accused Lursa of joining in his lies.

And your last line applies to you in this case, so that's nice.

 

[Jack Hays]

You're still in the hole of your own making, digging away. He didn't say or imply continued straight line death increases - he made a claim about "this month" then repeated "this month." Which means April, ONE month, the month we are in, which is April. Then you cited IMHE to.....back up his claim, then called him a liar, and accused Lursa of joining in his lies.

And your last line applies to you in this case, so that's nice.

As you wish. If he was really only talking about one month then he had missed the point.

My #189 was an effort to raise what I thought was an intellectually interesting point. My regretful conclusion is that the forum is not up to the challenge.

 

[year2late]

I wonder how many of those social distance deniers were also Birthers, hmmmm.

Just a twist...a lot of birthers are now birther deniers....denying they were ever really birthers.:lamo

 

[JasperL]

As you wish. My #189 was an effort to raise what I thought was an intellectually interesting point. My regretful conclusion is that the forum is not up to the challenge.

Well, blaming others for your poor writing, arguing in bad faith including hilariously false accusations others weren't just wrong but lying, and inability to comprehend simple English such as "this month" is one way out of that hole I guess.

And now you're lying: "I never disputed his numbers, only their (lack of) importance." :shock: You "crushed" him with data, remember? Only problem is you didn't know the data backed his claims.

See #299

Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
I've said so since April 1st. 50k - 100k deaths in April was my expectation. I came to that conclusion via examination of the data and consideration for the number of days between a doubling of the number of deaths.

50k will die this month. There's no avoiding that. 30k have already died this month and we're barely half way through the month. I only hope we don't land closer to the top of my estimate.

You:

No, that's about 35K since the beginning, much more than one month. Latest estimate (on CNN about 15 minutes ago) projects 60K US deaths total.

Then IMHE backs up his claims you're now saying you didn't dispute! :lamo

 

[year2late]

What do the guns add?

I was wondering that myself. It was rather odd.

 

[yankintx]

Just a twist...a lot of birthers are now birther deniers....denying they were ever really birthers.:lamo

In Nov the day after polling many will deny ever supporting Trump.

 

[Jack Hays]

Well, blaming others for your poor writing, arguing in bad faith including hilariously false accusations others weren't just wrong but lying, and inability to comprehend simple English such as "this month" is one way out of that hole I guess.

And now you're lying: "I never disputed his numbers, only their (lack of) importance." :shock: You "crushed" him with data, remember? Only problem is you didn't know the data backed his claims.

See #299



You:



Then IMHE backs up his claims you're now saying you didn't dispute! :lamo

That's correct. You will not find an April total figure in any post from me. Why? Because it's unimportant.

 

[MTAtech]

You will never guess who?


View attachment 67278154
What Matters: The social-distancing deniers have arrived - CNNPolitics

These are his people -- as if we didn't know all the time.

 

[JasperL]

That's correct. You will not find an April total figure in any post from me. Why? Because it's unimportant.

Then why did you call him a liar, repeatedly, for making claims about 30,000 deaths so far in April and 50,000 deaths total in April? The data you "crushed" him with refuted what claim?

You said, "I never disputed his numbers" then I quote you disputing his numbers. Only you were wrong, and hilariously cannot admit it and just slink away because you somehow read "this month" about 10 times and understood or stupidly assumed "every month" or my favorite "any" month!

 

[Jack Hays]

Then why did you call him a liar, repeatedly, for making claims about 30,000 deaths so far in April and 50,000 deaths total in April? The data you "crushed" him with refuted what claim?

You said, "I never disputed his numbers" then I quote you disputing his numbers. Only you were wrong, and hilariously cannot admit it and just slink away because you somehow read "this month" about 10 times and understood or stupidly assumed "every month" or my favorite "any" month!

He claimed a figure for April deaths thus far. I pointed out his figure was inaccurate and the total was from a count starting before April. Fair enough in my book.
I cited the UW projection to show that after April there would be very little increase, leading back to my point in #189. He ignored that, and those are the data that crushed him (because they did).

 

[Grand Mal]

I'm 68 years old. My husband is 74. We live in DC. In a downtown location.

From mid-January to mid-March, we traveled to three states, two of them hot spots, flew on 6 different plane flights, stayed in 4 hotels, rented 3 rental cars, ate in countless restaurants, attended two art festivals attended by thousands, went to about 15 museums, and shopped in various locations.

We aren't sick.

It's all hype and fear ginned up by the MSM to get Trump.

There's just over 7,000 Americans dying per day from all causes, on average.

FastStats - Deaths and Mortality

There's now over 2,000 Americans dying each day of Covid 19.

Coronavirus Update (Live): 2,280,365 Cases and 156,338 Deaths from COVID-19 Virus Pandemic - Worldometer

They die suffocating with a tube snaked down their throat and a machine pumping air into them and you're minimizing the importance of their deaths. You and your ilk consider their suffering and deaths to be acceptable and no cause for concern.
When did Americans get to be like you?

 

[JasperL]

He claimed a figure for April deaths thus far. I pointed out his figure was inaccurate and the total was from a count starting before April. Fair enough in my book.

Oh, so you did dispute his numbers, despite just claiming you didn't! OK, great, so that claim of yours was a lie. So how many deaths so far "this month" in April? You go look that up for us and show us how inaccurate he was.

Oh, wait, I'll do it.

Deaths on March 31 per IMHE: 3,874. Deaths through today per JHU: 37,084. Deaths this month: 33,210. Where's the error, the inaccuracy? What's hilarious is you've had time to look this up - it takes about a minute - know you're full of crap, and yet you STILL post allegations that ecofarm got the data wrong. I can't figure out if it's a deliberate lie or just your total disregard for facts and an arrogance that you somehow must be correct despite being obviously ignorant about what the data actually show.

I cited the UW projection to show that after April there would be very little increase, leading back to my point in #189. He ignored that, and those are the data that crushed him (because they did).

Only if he'd made a claim about total deaths that was substantially different than what IMHE showed, but he didn't. He made claims about 'this month' - i.e. April. If you think otherwise, quote the claim with a post #. We'll wait while you fail at that.

Keep digging that hole!

 

[Jack Hays]

Oh, so you did dispute his numbers, despite just claiming you didn't! OK, great, so that claim of yours was a lie. So how many deaths so far "this month" in April? You go look that up for us and show us how inaccurate he was.

Oh, wait, I'll do it.

Deaths on March 31 per IMHE: 3,874. Deaths through today per JHU: 37,084. Deaths this month: 33,210. Where's the error, the inaccuracy? What's hilarious is you've had time to look this up - it takes about a minute - know you're full of crap, and yet you STILL post allegations that ecofarm got the data wrong. I can't figure out if it's a deliberate lie or just your total disregard for facts and an arrogance that you somehow must be correct despite being obviously ignorant about what the data actually show.



Only if he'd made a claim about total deaths that was substantially different than what IMHE showed, but he didn't. He made claims about 'this month' - i.e. April. If you think otherwise, quote the claim with a post #. We'll wait while you fail at that.

Keep digging that hole!

As of 17 April, the date of the exchange, there had been fewer than 29,000 deaths in April.
If he were not extending that death rate into the future beyond April then he had no point. That is why he had to dodge the projection.

 

[JasperL]

As of 17 April, the date of the exchange, there had been fewer than 29,000 deaths in April.

Cite your work. And he claimed 30,000. Are you seriously asserting that there's a substantive difference between 30,000 and 29,000? :shock:

Besides, here's what you claimed: "No, that's about 35K since the beginning, much more than one month." If there were 35k as of YOUR writing, which is what YOU claimed, deaths in April alone > 30,000. So you're just lying. It's hilarious to watch this dishonest crap, all because you can't admit you were wrong, so resort to fabricating claims, denying claims, changing the facts, to defend your ignorance and inability to understand "this month" means what it says.

It's really fascinating. I can't possibly guess what your motivation is to take a wrecking ball to your credibility over something this stupid.

If he were not extending that death rate into the future beyond April then he had no point. That is why he had to dodge the projection.

Keep digging that hole. You're doing great.

 

[Jack Hays]

Cite your work. And he claimed 30,000. Are you seriously asserting that there's a substantive difference between 30,000 and 29,000? :shock:

Besides, here's what you claimed: "No, that's about 35K since the beginning, much more than one month." If there were 35k as of YOUR writing, which is what YOU claimed, deaths in April alone > 30,000. So you're just lying. It's hilarious to watch this dishonest crap, all because you can't admit you were wrong, so resort to fabricating claims, denying claims, changing the facts, to defend your ignorance and inability to understand "this month" means what it says.

It's really fascinating. I can't possibly guess what your motivation is to take a wrecking ball to your credibility over something this stupid.



Keep digging that hole. You're doing great.

Check the UW website.

3,874 deaths through 31 March. 32,703 deaths through 17 April. "About 35K" is what I said.
These figures were not central to my point, but they were to his.

[h=3]COVID-19 Projections[/h]COVID-19 Projections. GHDXViz Hub ... 3,130COVID-19 deaths ...

 

[Jack Hays]

Before anyone starts complaining about right wingers, please note the professor was an advisor to a Social Democratic Chancellor.

Prominent German Prof Says COVID-19 Lockdown “Completely Unnecessary”, “Unbelievably Damaging To The Economy”

By P Gosselin on 18. April 2020
Share this...


In an interview with Punkt.Preradovic, finance Prof. Dr. Stefan Homburg of the Leibniz University of Hanover said Germany’s lockdown has “amounted to nothing”, has had no effect on the spread of the corona virus and that the spread had already slowed down below a reproduction number of 1.0 before the lockdown.
Citing data from Robert Koch Institute (RKI)
In the interview, the prominent professor, once an adviser to former chancellor Gerhard Schröder, cited a chart from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) that was issued on April 15th:

As the RKI chart shows, in early March the reproduction number had risen rapidly before reaching a peak on about March 10. By March 21st, the reproduction number dropped below 1.0.
“Ineffective”, “completely unnecessary”
It wasn’t until March 23 that the German government decreed a lockdown. As the chart shows, since the lockdown was enacted, the reproduction number did not change at all. It’s had no effect.
“It is not the case that the reproduction number went down after the lockdown”, Professor Homburg says. “There are two points we can draw from this: First, the lockdown was not necessary because the number was below 1, and secondly, the lockdown was not effective because the number didn’t drop afterwards.”
“Enormous economic damage”

Homburg agrees that the lockdown led to “enormous economic damage” and was “completely unnecessary”. In view of the data, Homburg does not know why the lockdown continues even today. Currently the reproduction rate stands at 0.7.
Homburg tells Preradovic that the politicians issued the lockdown in panic, came too late and thus so served no purpose. “It was not only unbelievably damaging for the economy, but also for other human factors. It’s about suicides and delayed operations.”. . . .

 

[JasperL]

Check the UW website.

3,874 deaths through 31 March. 32,703 deaths through 17 April. "About 35K" is what I said.

Notice the "*Projected" then "Total deaths*"? That means it was what was projected. Actual tell a different story. And it's hilarious you are claiming someone else was wrong by saying "30k deaths" (which is obviously an 'about' round number) so far in April, you said "35k" deaths in total, and now you're backing up YOUR claim by 2,703 deaths, which is OK, by saying you didn't actually mean 35k, it's just what you claimed.

These figures were not central to my point, but they were to his.

LOL, that's total BS. 29k versus 30k was central to what point of his? That we'd have 50k deaths "this month?" Which IMHE predicts?

Keep digging. You'll be fully underground before you give up with the lame excuses.

 

[Top Cat]

No, the flu does NOT kill 250K-600K a year, every year, and you cannot provide a legitimate source that says otherwise.

Unbelievable.

Let's just make **** up? Jeeezus H Keeeerist on a cracker.

 

[Top Cat]

I jam people up constantly for the lies/incompetence that they post here...as you should both be able to understand and be able to be honest about.

Apparently Not!

 

[Mashmont]

"Global deaths annually: between 291,000 to 646,000; death rate around 0.1 percent"

Here's How COVID-19 Compares to Past Outbreaks
Seasonal flu death estimate increases worldwide | CDC Online Newsroom | CDC

...but don't let facts get in the way of your fear-mongering. Gotta keep those sheep scared in order to control them :2wave:

Leftwingers constantly make up stuff.

 

[Top Cat]

Actually, I'm positive there have already been more than 250,000 global deaths. China is lying, and the whole world knows it. Probably India as well. A pandemic does not run through countries with over a billion people and result in less than 500,000 global deaths between them.

Do expect common sense from scientific deniers.

 

[Top Cat]

Maybe, but we need hard data, no speculation.

Perhaps you should just fly over to China and ask them?

 

[Top Cat]

You might wanna try using that noggin just a little more.

To add to a pile of rocks?

 

[Lakryte]

Before anyone starts complaining about right wingers, please note the professor was an advisor to a Social Democratic Chancellor.

Prominent German Prof Says COVID-19 Lockdown “Completely Unnecessary”, “Unbelievably Damaging To The Economy”

By P Gosselin on 18. April 2020
Share this...


In an interview with Punkt.Preradovic, finance Prof. Dr. Stefan Homburg of the Leibniz University of Hanover said Germany’s lockdown has “amounted to nothing”, has had no effect on the spread of the corona virus and that the spread had already slowed down below a reproduction number of 1.0 before the lockdown.
Citing data from Robert Koch Institute (RKI)
In the interview, the prominent professor, once an adviser to former chancellor Gerhard Schröder, cited a chart from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) that was issued on April 15th:

As the RKI chart shows, in early March the reproduction number had risen rapidly before reaching a peak on about March 10. By March 21st, the reproduction number dropped below 1.0.
“Ineffective”, “completely unnecessary”
It wasn’t until March 23 that the German government decreed a lockdown. As the chart shows, since the lockdown was enacted, the reproduction number did not change at all. It’s had no effect.
“It is not the case that the reproduction number went down after the lockdown”, Professor Homburg says. “There are two points we can draw from this: First, the lockdown was not necessary because the number was below 1, and secondly, the lockdown was not effective because the number didn’t drop afterwards.”
“Enormous economic damage”

Homburg agrees that the lockdown led to “enormous economic damage” and was “completely unnecessary”. In view of the data, Homburg does not know why the lockdown continues even today. Currently the reproduction rate stands at 0.7.
Homburg tells Preradovic that the politicians issued the lockdown in panic, came too late and thus so served no purpose. “It was not only unbelievably damaging for the economy, but also for other human factors. It’s about suicides and delayed operations.”. . . .

Stefan Homburg, the professor referenced, is an economics professor. He is not a healthcare professional or expert. We should listen to those who actually study viruses and pandemics. And their opinion is that social distancing and stay at home orders are the best we can do right now to control this virus.