Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Science will win eventually, you know.

2

Comments

  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,486 Standard Supporter
    One thing the VID has made clear is how few people know what science actually is. And fewer still understand how the various scientific disciplines relate to the human condition.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,953
    HHusky said:

    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.

    Oregon's biggest asset in this pandemic was having Washington for a neighbor. You'll have to look elsewhere for praise of Cuomo.
    This is where the Dazzler says nothing against Cuomo and offers no criticism of the people on his team who did and are supporting Cuomo, while continuing to attack Republicans.
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,357 Founders Club

    HHusky said:

    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. 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.

    Death isn't the only issue here and having to shut down twice will be far worse than enduring this short term pain.

    Science is only right, not Left-Right.
    "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.
    He's' a lawyer. Double speak and using many of words while saying nothing is deeply ingrained in him.
  • UWerentThereManUWerentThereMan Member Posts: 3,475
    Sometimes science is more art than science. A lot of people forget that.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,200 Standard Supporter
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited May 2020
    HHusky said:

    Next week? Peak oil next near?

    "It's a big joke!" - MikeDamone
    “I’m a lying idiot who also hopes people will die” - HHuksy
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,849
    I'm gonna trust the experts, Thanks!
  • doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072

    If you’re Jay Inslee, science is most definitely political.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-covid-science-is-a-smokescreen-11590600067

    Just as I predicted when the great Left coast alliance was formed, Gavin opens leaving Jay on the street corner with his dick in his hand with no political cover
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    What is science that is always wrong called?
  • hardhathardhat Member Posts: 8,343
    Great thread, and thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.