RE: OT - The New Coronavirus

RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Lobster -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:35:41 PM)
Bob's numbers are accurate given the data he is using. Roadrunners numbers are accurate given the data he is using. No one's numbers are accurate given the data that is missing. If you can't wrap your head around that then I can't help you.

warspite1 -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:36:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lobster quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Lobster So I guess no one has died of the virus. They have all died of pneumonia and/or organ failure. My daughter says everyone they send home from the hospital on their feet is a victory. She also said the deaths vs recovered is far worse than they imagined it would be. My wife has contact dermatitis so we keep a good supply of nitrile gloves on hand. We sent them all to my daughter to help her out. So while you are all worried about how many have the virus total my daughter is only concerned about those who come to her hospital vs those that walk out. She said the ones not serious enough to be in a hospital are not what she is concerned about. Maybe she is simply delirious from lack of sleep and all of you are much more knowledgeable about what is going on than she. warspite1 So who are you attacking now? All of the thread? And for what? WTH?? I would suggest you try something to chill out. warspite1 As my light hearted posts have shown, I am perfectly chilled out. So why the need for the pointless lashing out at YOU ALL? What is the point of that and moreover, what is that even in response to? You just sound hysterical when you last out at everybody.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:37:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lobster So I guess no one has died of the virus. They have all died of pneumonia and/or organ failure. That's creative accounting and it's happening everywhere. The Germans in Europe... they want us to believe the number of deaths is circa 1/3 South Korean numbers. Ridiculous, well... creative accounting [;)]

MrRoadrunner -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:40:31 PM)
78,269/1,381,014 = 5.7%

z1812 -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:43:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: z1812 @ warspite and lava, are you including presumptive cats and bikes, or only confirmed ones. What about ex-cats and broken bikes? We have 2 actual bikes and no cats, but we may get may get one more bike or even a cat. Perhaps both. I just want to be sure of my percentage calculations. Thanks in advance for any clarity you can provide. [:D] [;)] warspite1 Z1812 why do you have to complicate things with additional data points?? I've given you the facts for the UK. 0 Cats and 3 Bikes. Then loki had to complicate things by bring in more data and suggesting a time thingy - how the hell do I model that in excel? I've only got a little brain... [:(] And now you are bringing in more data to analyse. No this is not fair, it's not, it's not. I'm sorry but I'm only dealing in facts (my facts are the facts and everything else is white noise and shall be disregarded). In the United Kingdom at present there are 0 cats and 3 bikes and they all reside chez warspite. Psst - could you work out some percentages to go with my pie chart please? Yes of course. I am happy to help. I will try to keep it so simple that cats can understand.....I am not sure bikes will......or any creatures with spinning wheels. Here you are. 0 percent of 3 is the same as 0 per hundred of 3. We can therefore make the following equation: 0/100 = X/3 To solve the equation above for X, you first pull on your left ear, then switch the sides to get the X on the left side, then you stick out your tongue and multiply each side by 3, and then hop on your right foot and divide the numerator by the denominator on the left side to get the right answer. Here is the work to illustrate: 0/100 = X/3, left ear pull X/3 = 0/100 X3/3 = 03/100, stick out tongue X = 0/100, right foot hop X = 0 The work above shows the long way to explain how to calculate 0 percent of 3 in order to give you a foundation and better understanding of how to calculate percentage. In the future, you could use this simplified formula: (Y * P)/100 In our problem "What is 0 percent of 3?", Y is 3 and P is 0: (3 * 0)/100 = 0 And once again you see that the answer is 0. I do hope this furthers your appreciation of cat to bike ratios ..... and vice versa

MrRoadrunner -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:44:58 PM)
[/quote]warspite1 Fetch me my angry trousers - I'm madder than I've ever been [:@] Are you seriously questioning my numbers Mr RR?? Seriously? But I've dealt in facts. The total number of cats to bikes for the whole of the UK... except at the time of writing I only knew the numbers for my house... BUT never mind, them's the facts so that must be right mustn't it! I mean, no need to caveat my numbers or actually give any information [:D] But that's it, I've had enough. I'm going to Green Button the entire world - including my little green button MWahahahahahahahaha [/quote] Huh? Whew! If I did not hit the green button I might have seen this and would of had to respond? As the Italian Admiral said, "steward, fetch my brown pants." [&o] RR

Zorch -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:45:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch The validity of Curtis' metric is called into question because the # of Deaths can exceed the # of Recovered. In that case, his metric would say that >100% of cases are fatal. False. My figure is total deaths / total resolved. Total resolved = total deaths + total recovered. I'm sorry - I misunderstood. But how can a metric that excludes total cases be meaningful? How could a metric that includes total cases be anything but nonsense, since we don't know how they will resolve. Dealing with uncertainty is part of life (and wargaming). Is there a way you could include # of cases without diminishing the relevance of your result?

Zorch -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:48:48 PM)
What would a (possibly brown) bike do in this situation? [image]local://upfiles/34241/A5D55923251240EE8FA45E26568C45C8.jpg[/image]

Red2112 -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 5:58:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RichG quote: ORIGINAL: Red2112 60 Ghz and Oxygen absorption... https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2020/02/5g-60-ghz-oxygen-absorption-you-and-coronavirus/ Interesting how Wuhan was the first city to test 5G. Rub this on for awhile. Thanks for returning the laugh [:D] https://fullfact.org/online/wuhan-5g-coronavirus/ No evidence either that it dosent harm us, so whats your point? Do you really belive they would tells us? Monsanto, Bayer and alot more who lied, and this is true? It�s a joke on humanity, as austerity is.

MrRoadrunner -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 6:04:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lobster Bob's numbers are accurate given the data he is using. Roadrunners numbers are accurate given the data he is using. No one's numbers are accurate given the data that is missing. If you can't wrap your head around that then I can't help you. Amen. Two ways of looking at the data but there is more than two. I find it difficult to be told that there is a total number but then we are only to look at resolved or dead. How did they get that way? Either resolved or dead means that both groups had gotten the virus and the total number who got it establish a base number? Well, there has to be a base to establish a basis point? The comparison is total to recovered. Bob's Or, total to deaths. RR's In my opinion comparing recovered to deaths leaves out the base? Do I disagree with Bob's math? No. Do I disagree with Bob's statistical model? Yes. Though, if you compare the two models you can see that the curve is still going up? No flattening. Atlas shrugged. To Lobster's main point; we have not taken into account those who have it that did not report it, those that recovered but did not know they had it, and those that died who were not counted as dying from it. We can only rely on what we know? RR

RichG -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 6:34:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Red2112 Do you really belive they would tells us? Monsanto, Bayer and alot more who lied, and this is true? It�s a joke on humanity, as austerity is. I'm not sure who the 'they' are you refer to, but I do believe rational scientists over a "synthesizer of facts" as the author of the article describes herself. Also, not sure how Monsantos' and Beyers' lies figure in 5G, but I do agree with you about austerity and probably plenty more. More discussion on 5G here: https://www.metabunk.org/forums/5g-and-other-emf-health-concerns.59/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2t1dUCyE0I

Curtis Lemay -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 6:39:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch Dealing with uncertainty is part of life (and wargaming). Is there a way you could include # of cases without diminishing the relevance of your result? Not without making assumptions about how the unresolved cases are going to resolve. There are plenty of those on this board who are doing just that. I'm choosing not to do so.

Red2112 -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 7:08:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RichG quote: ORIGINAL: Red2112 Do you really belive they would tells us? Monsanto, Bayer and alot more who lied, and this is true? It�s a joke on humanity, as austerity is. I'm not sure who the 'they' are you refer to, but I do believe rational scientists over a "synthesizer of facts" as the author of the article describes herself. Also, not sure how Monsantos' and Beyers' lies figure in 5G, but I do agree with you about austerity and probably plenty more. More discussion on 5G here: https://www.metabunk.org/forums/5g-and-other-emf-health-concerns.59/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2t1dUCyE0I I refer to your articles (links). Were does Monsanto fit? Same place 5G will, we wont know till something bad happens, like with Monsanto. Either way, I never asked for 5G and could care less for it or all the new tech, but the plan was set many years ago when they would give you a free mobil phone when buying the newspaper! And here we are! I guess you don�t follow Noam Chomsky. Even at 90 he is still a brilliant mind that dosen�t ware the facemask over his eyes! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-N3In2rLI4 BTW, how pays these rational scientist? Come on, no kids here...

Zorch -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 7:21:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch Dealing with uncertainty is part of life (and wargaming). Is there a way you could include # of cases without diminishing the relevance of your result? Not without making assumptions about how the unresolved cases are going to resolve. There are plenty of those on this board who are doing just that. I'm choosing not to do so. The # of cases is so much larger than the # resolved that it dwarfs whatever meaning is contained in your 'mortality rate'. If I ask, "what % of those infected will die?", your rate is not helpful. Your rate is a retrospective, which has little meaning when there are large numbers of new cases.

RichG -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 7:25:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Red2112 quote: ORIGINAL: RichG quote: ORIGINAL: Red2112 Do you really belive they would tells us? Monsanto, Bayer and alot more who lied, and this is true? It�s a joke on humanity, as austerity is. I'm not sure who the 'they' are you refer to, but I do believe rational scientists over a "synthesizer of facts" as the author of the article describes herself. Also, not sure how Monsantos' and Beyers' lies figure in 5G, but I do agree with you about austerity and probably plenty more. More discussion on 5G here: https://www.metabunk.org/forums/5g-and-other-emf-health-concerns.59/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2t1dUCyE0I I refer to your articles (links). Were does Monsanto fit? Same place 5G will, we wont know till something bad happens, like with Monsanto. Either way, I never asked for 5G and could care less for it or all the new tech, but the plan was set many years ago when they would give you a free mobil phone when buying the newspaper! And here we are! I guess you don�t follow Noam Chomsky. Even at 90 he is still a brilliant mind that dosen�t ware the facemask over his eyes! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-N3In2rLI4 BTW, how pays these rational scientist? Come on, no kids here... Funnily enough, I've followed Noam for about thirty years (since I first read Manufacturing Consent) and watched that interview last week. But I don't recall him every saying that 5G was the cause of Covid-19, or any other health issue. The fact is that the powers will use the crisis for their own gain, like they use any major crisis, does not mean they manufactured the crisis in the first place. It's far to easy to get distracted by the arguments over the cause and not pay enough attention to the final outcome. And I'm a strong believer that all these crazy theories are intentionally planted to cause people to divide - as is easily seen in this thread. Oh, and I still haven't got a free mobile phone - but then I stopped buying physical newspapers long ago [;)]

PipFromSlitherine -> RE: OT - The New Coronavirus (4/7/2020 7:45:50 PM)
I'm going to lock this up. It feels like it has outlived its usefulness, and then some... Feel free to start a new thread if you like, but let's try and keep it a little less fractious, and avoid the non-science conspiracy bunkum. Cheers Pip

Page: << < prev 31 32 33 34 [35]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.453125