It would be nice if there was a long, Stickied thread relating to All Things Rona so this H dipshit could stop spamming the bored multiple times a day with a copy/paste thread.
This would be the proportional equivalent of California having more than 70,000 new cases and about 660 deaths in a day.
#BetterDeadandRed!
I think I’ve tried to help you on this before, but you’ve missed it or are deliberately being obtuse. You consistently employ a statistical fallacy called the Extrapolation Error. There are far too many variables at play when comparing a small population in one region to a large one in a different region. It’s part and parcel of the lefts’ “one-size-fits-all” thinking.
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
This would be the proportional equivalent of California having more than 70,000 new cases and about 660 deaths in a day.
#BetterDeadandRed!
I think I’ve tried to help you on this before, but you’ve missed it or are deliberately being obtuse. You consistently employ a statistical fallacy called the Extrapolation Error. There are far too many variables at play when comparing a small population in one region to a large one in a different region. It’s part and parcel of the lefts’ “one-size-fits-all” thinking.
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
It's just proportions. Undeniably true.
Nobody is stopping you from offering a cultural explanation for why the Dakotas are among the most infected places on the planet.
This would be the proportional equivalent of California having more than 70,000 new cases and about 660 deaths in a day.
#BetterDeadandRed!
I think I’ve tried to help you on this before, but you’ve missed it or are deliberately being obtuse. You consistently employ a statistical fallacy called the Extrapolation Error. There are far too many variables at play when comparing a small population in one region to a large one in a different region. It’s part and parcel of the lefts’ “one-size-fits-all” thinking.
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
It's just proportions. Undeniably true.
Nobody is stopping you from offering a cultural explanation for why the Dakotas are among the most infected places on the planet.
I like how you attempt to use proportions within the US to make your points about North fucking Dakota while ignoring all of the proportions I have provided you which show the US vastly outperforming Europe.
This would be the proportional equivalent of California having more than 70,000 new cases and about 660 deaths in a day.
#BetterDeadandRed!
I think I’ve tried to help you on this before, but you’ve missed it or are deliberately being obtuse. You consistently employ a statistical fallacy called the Extrapolation Error. There are far too many variables at play when comparing a small population in one region to a large one in a different region. It’s part and parcel of the lefts’ “one-size-fits-all” thinking.
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
It's just proportions. Undeniably true.
Nobody is stopping you from offering a cultural explanation for why the Dakotas are among the most infected places on the planet.
I like how you attempt to use proportions within the US to make your points about North fucking Dakota while ignoring all of the proportions I have provided you which show the US vastly outperforming Europe.
You know "outperforming" in the context of a pandemic is having fewer cases, not more. Don't you?
This would be the proportional equivalent of California having more than 70,000 new cases and about 660 deaths in a day.
#BetterDeadandRed!
I think I’ve tried to help you on this before, but you’ve missed it or are deliberately being obtuse. You consistently employ a statistical fallacy called the Extrapolation Error. There are far too many variables at play when comparing a small population in one region to a large one in a different region. It’s part and parcel of the lefts’ “one-size-fits-all” thinking.
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
It's just proportions. Undeniably true.
Nobody is stopping you from offering a cultural explanation for why the Dakotas are among the most infected places on the planet.
I like how you attempt to use proportions within the US to make your points about North fucking Dakota while ignoring all of the proportions I have provided you which show the US vastly outperforming Europe.
You know "outperforming" in the context of a pandemic is having fewer cases, not more. Don't you?
North Dakota has fewer cases than California.
Thanks for making my point for me. Tell me more about number of cases being the correct metric to use when comparing a country with 330 million people versus one with 10 million people.
Comments
Oh, wait...
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/70684/maximum-carnage-week-game-thread#latest
If North Dakota reported 13 deaths from lutefisk poisoning would you extrapolate this to 660 lutefisk poisoning deaths in CA? When using very small numbers from a small population one can’t responsibly make predictions about the same experience in a large population. Demographics, culture, economics, social norms, etc. are all way too different.
Nobody is stopping you from offering a cultural explanation for why the Dakotas are among the most infected places on the planet.
Thanks for making my point for me. Tell me more about number of cases being the correct metric to use when comparing a country with 330 million people versus one with 10 million people.