HockeyRef
Well-known member
The nerve of those hospitals to want more than 2 ventilators...they got by just fine with those. Now they want 30,000 of them? (Paraphrased from today's presser)
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
COVID-19 - Part 2
- Thread starter Chuck Murray
- Start date
- Status
The nerve of those hospitals to want more than 2 ventilators...they got by just fine with those. Now they want 30,000 of them? (Paraphrased from today's presser)
Berkshire BU Fan
New member
Mine did, too! On a 3" x 5" postcard which will neatly fit in my shirt pocket. I will sleep well tonight.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
You’ve no doubt heard of “fine hair” markets. How about “minimum hair”?
if you gonna eat a bat, what’s the stretch??
How come only 3,500 or so total deaths? Even if we generously round this up to say, 250,000 dead, where are the other 4,520,000 buried? Maybe those US projections could be "slightly" (probably not the proper term) optimistic? We have satellites that can take bikini photos from low earth orbit so clear that even Crazy Bernie would see evidence of gulag mass graves being prepared for that number of comrades.
You’ve no doubt heard of “fine hair” markets. How about “minimum hair”?
if you gonna eat a bat, what’s the stretch??mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Ah, he’s a pu$$y. Fatty backed away from the “Chinese virus” quicker than a trump Corp bond holder runs to hedge with a cds. Just wonder what Xi threatened him with yesterday
Ah, he’s a pu$$y. Fatty backed away from the “Chinese virus” quicker than a trump Corp bond holder runs to hedge with a cds. Just wonder what Xi threatened him with yesterday
Ah, he’s a pu$$y. Fatty backed away from the “Chinese virus” quicker than a trump Corp bond holder runs to hedge with a cds. Just wonder what Xi threatened him with yesterday
Xi is a commie
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Appears that the London Imperial College scientists who predicted catastrophic Wuhan Virus death totals in the UK have slightly adjusted their "figures". The prediction for 500,000 coronavirus deaths has been nudged just a bit lower to 20,000 or fewer.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/26/uk-epidemiologist-radically-lowers-his-predicted-c/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ronavirus-deaths-in-uk-revises-to-20k-or-less
The US prediction in the same report was 2,200,000, but can't confirm where this has been officially adjusted (CNN and MSNBC probably reported the revised figure after I left for work this morning). Will wait for BassAle to update us on this figure against the exponential growth statistics that many of us failed to grasp a few pages earlier. In the meantime, I will continue to wait for the $1,000,000 that Brian Williams and the NYT Editor claimed Bloomberg could have given to each American (with plenty left over) vs wasting it on his campaign.
Appears that the London Imperial College scientists who predicted catastrophic Wuhan Virus death totals in the UK have slightly adjusted their "figures". The prediction for 500,000 coronavirus deaths has been nudged just a bit lower to 20,000 or fewer.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/26/uk-epidemiologist-radically-lowers-his-predicted-c/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ronavirus-deaths-in-uk-revises-to-20k-or-less
The US prediction in the same report was 2,200,000, but can't confirm where this has been officially adjusted (CNN and MSNBC probably reported the revised figure after I left for work this morning). Will wait for BassAle to update us on this figure against the exponential growth statistics that many of us failed to grasp a few pages earlier. In the meantime, I will continue to wait for the $1,000,000 that Brian Williams and the NYT Editor claimed Bloomberg could have given to each American (with plenty left over) vs wasting it on his campaign.
Darius
Go 'cats!
Darius
Go 'cats!
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Nice of you to join. It was getting dull.You’ve no doubt heard of “fine hair” markets. How about “minimum hair”?
I wouldn't chit you Darius
NCAA watcher
Registered User
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
I know. Glad you finally came around to supporting the enforcement of lockdowns here in the US. It's a great credit to quick responses and lockdowns.
I know. Glad you finally came around to supporting the enforcement of lockdowns here in the US. It's a great credit to quick responses and lockdowns.
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
the 20,000 number also assumes 50% of the UK population has already been infected and recovered. It would be great news if it were really that mild that most people have had it and didn't even know it. I'd wait for more data to support that though. Antibody tests might help quantify the size of the population that has already been infected.
the 20,000 number also assumes 50% of the UK population has already been infected and recovered. It would be great news if it were really that mild that most people have had it and didn't even know it. I'd wait for more data to support that though. Antibody tests might help quantify the size of the population that has already been infected.
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Well, the latest Fake News narrative has rolled ashore over the last 24 hours … how the US has now purportedly surpassed China as "world leaders in reported COVID-19 cases" (quick test - pick the key word in the quoted section?). MSM seems to have gotten their marching orders from Beijing, they're in lockstep now … advancing yet another propaganda-fueled pro-China bogus narrative, which (of course) hinges on the accuracy and honesty of the Chinese Politburo and its toadies, so well-known as those enlightened champions of transparency.
It's remarkable … it might even be admirable (in some context) for its total exhaustive focus, except for the inconvenient fact it's always advancing an anti-Trump (and by extension, an anti-American) agenda. It just comes in waves, one after the next, and as soon as one gets knocked down, the next tide of BS flows in. For 3+ years, it's "Russia-Russia-Russia", then flipping the Ukraine-Biden situation to try to <s>overthrow</s> <s>soft coup</s> impeach the President … eventually taking China's side (along with the NBA and other abhorrently selfish "woke" entities) in its putdown of the protesters in Hong Kong, and now swallowing blatant propaganda on numbers to cast the totalitarian commies in the best possible light.
I mean … yesterday or the day before (hard to keep track of days when there's no discernable weekends), I had someone on here lecturing me about the veracity of some medical study being elevated on Bloomberg originating out of (drum roll please) … China. As if there's anything that's emanating from China independently, and without some purpose to serve the best interests of China.
Whalers has been doing great work on the data side (and elsewhere), and reminding us that models are just models - created by people, and subject to the creators' assumptions and biases that sometimes fit either with their world view or a desired outcome. Sometimes manipulation of models arises from an honest error … other times, it's an attempt to produce a desired result. How it all shakes out here will likely have a carry-forward effect on how similar modeling is perceived in other areas where they're applied to justify OR refute projections, arguments or agendas. I hope people are paying attention, though, as this won't be the last time we encounter a situation where the possibility of bad-faith modeling is used to advance an agenda ...
Well, the latest Fake News narrative has rolled ashore over the last 24 hours … how the US has now purportedly surpassed China as "world leaders in reported COVID-19 cases" (quick test - pick the key word in the quoted section?). MSM seems to have gotten their marching orders from Beijing, they're in lockstep now … advancing yet another propaganda-fueled pro-China bogus narrative, which (of course) hinges on the accuracy and honesty of the Chinese Politburo and its toadies, so well-known as those enlightened champions of transparency.
It's remarkable … it might even be admirable (in some context) for its total exhaustive focus, except for the inconvenient fact it's always advancing an anti-Trump (and by extension, an anti-American) agenda. It just comes in waves, one after the next, and as soon as one gets knocked down, the next tide of BS flows in. For 3+ years, it's "Russia-Russia-Russia", then flipping the Ukraine-Biden situation to try to <s>overthrow</s> <s>soft coup</s> impeach the President … eventually taking China's side (along with the NBA and other abhorrently selfish "woke" entities) in its putdown of the protesters in Hong Kong, and now swallowing blatant propaganda on numbers to cast the totalitarian commies in the best possible light.
I mean … yesterday or the day before (hard to keep track of days when there's no discernable weekends), I had someone on here lecturing me about the veracity of some medical study being elevated on Bloomberg originating out of (drum roll please) … China. As if there's anything that's emanating from China independently, and without some purpose to serve the best interests of China.
Whalers has been doing great work on the data side (and elsewhere), and reminding us that models are just models - created by people, and subject to the creators' assumptions and biases that sometimes fit either with their world view or a desired outcome. Sometimes manipulation of models arises from an honest error … other times, it's an attempt to produce a desired result. How it all shakes out here will likely have a carry-forward effect on how similar modeling is perceived in other areas where they're applied to justify OR refute projections, arguments or agendas. I hope people are paying attention, though, as this won't be the last time we encounter a situation where the possibility of bad-faith modeling is used to advance an agenda ...
NCAA watcher
Registered User
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Your lauding of Whaler seems to ignore everything. The only "great work" on the "data side" is that Whalers showed was that you get very different results when you change one assumption in the model, one assuming quarantines, and one not. That this greatly changes the death rate does not suggest the "model" is unreliable (as you seem to want to conclude). it actually proves the opposite: that the variable is pretty **** important.
That's science. It's like saying "If I shoot you I assume you will die, but if I don't shoot you I assume you will not die." The "model" comes up with two very different results. But that doesn't undermine the model: it just shows that shooting is a major variable in the outcome.
The fact that you treat basic logic as "bad faith modeling" with an "agenda" is .... I can't even fathom viewing everything through such a skewed political prism that cites facts that actually prove the opposite point, without even taking the first step in understanding what the fact means, just because they seemingly support a formed world view.
Your lauding of Whaler seems to ignore everything. The only "great work" on the "data side" is that Whalers showed was that you get very different results when you change one assumption in the model, one assuming quarantines, and one not. That this greatly changes the death rate does not suggest the "model" is unreliable (as you seem to want to conclude). it actually proves the opposite: that the variable is pretty **** important.
That's science. It's like saying "If I shoot you I assume you will die, but if I don't shoot you I assume you will not die." The "model" comes up with two very different results. But that doesn't undermine the model: it just shows that shooting is a major variable in the outcome.
The fact that you treat basic logic as "bad faith modeling" with an "agenda" is .... I can't even fathom viewing everything through such a skewed political prism that cites facts that actually prove the opposite point, without even taking the first step in understanding what the fact means, just because they seemingly support a formed world view.
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Whilst Joe Biden accused of sexual assault.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/joe-biden-faces-sexual-assault-211641946.html
Whilst Joe Biden accused of sexual assault.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/joe-biden-faces-sexual-assault-211641946.html
Darius
Go 'cats!
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
I guess at this stage of his life/campaign, he can honestly say, "I don't remember".
I guess at this stage of his life/campaign, he can honestly say, "I don't remember".
Darius
Go 'cats!
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 1,057,000 - 2,265,000 deaths.
New York (CITY) with 365 is #8 in the deaths by COUNTRY/REGION/CATEGORY list.**
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
** I misinterpreted this category. it is not a country list. I think it has to do with statistical areas geographically (a European country in the EU equates to a state in the US) or an interpretation of sovereignty. I am going to remove it going forward.
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 1,057,000 - 2,265,000 deaths.
New York (CITY) with 365 is #8 in the deaths by COUNTRY/REGION/CATEGORY list.**
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
** I misinterpreted this category. it is not a country list. I think it has to do with statistical areas geographically (a European country in the EU equates to a state in the US) or an interpretation of sovereignty. I am going to remove it going forward.
HockeyRef
Well-known member
I guess at this stage of his life/campaign, he can honestly say, "I don't remember".
Or...to use a line right out of DJT's playbook "I dont take any responsibility at all". If this is true he should be held accountable...as should DJT.
- Status