What's new
By:
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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

Slap Shot said:
The bar was very low. Be best.
Click to expand...
Gotta say that if I were not curious, didn't like stats/math, politics or KNOWING facts/truth/history of things and had the TV on in the background while preparing dinner, I'd vote for him in November based on what I casually observed yesterday. The President had his cringe worthy (for me) moments (China, media), but overall he came across well. They've got the process under control where he speaks, takes a few questions and splits, leaving TV to go back to regular programming while VP Pence speaks and cutting back to the White House for Drs. Fauci and Birx. The fact that if one repeats something enough, over and over again, it becomes "fact" is a HUGE problem. Incredible, really.

As a point of balance, I heard Bernie Sanders interviewed today. If Covid-19 goes really bad for the US, the fact that we NEED government to be in a position to react quickly to health crises will become a mainstream thing. If Covid-19 goes "well" for the US then we will have to wait until methane flows from our spigots, our rivers burn and our food poisons us more than it already does.
 
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

HockeyRef said:
Yeah...let's joke about the Me,too movement..
Click to expand...
That's our reality. It will be interesting to see if, when they die, the old bald white guys are replaced by enlightened sensitive millennial/gen Z males or by old bald white guy progeny males.
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

e.cat said:
Plausible deniability;) Or he could just say, "What, me too?"!;)
Click to expand...

An easier explanation for Joe - Dementia.

If the charges were to ever stick, do you think Forgetful Joe could borrow Harvey's walker with the tennis balls on the bottom? Not sure Jill would go for that look.:D
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson

Let me be clear. This virus has a lethality substantially in excess of “seasonal” flu. Yes, up to half of those infected might not show symptoms. But that is accounted for in our estimates and always was. There is no credible data supporting the idea that 90% are asymptomatic.

I think it would be helpful if I cleared up some confusion that has emerged in recent days. Some have interpreted my evidence to a UK parliamentary committee as indicating we have substantially revised our assessments of the potential mortality impact of COVID-19.

My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing and other public health interventions now in place.

Without those controls, our assessment remains that the UK would see the scale of deaths reported in our study (namely, up to approximately 500 thousand).
 
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

mookie1995 said:
All he did was grab her in the pu$$y. That’s allowed, no? :confused:
Click to expand...

If you are referring to your cat, then yes.

A better idea would be to just tell Juanita, "put some ice on that" and then have your ever supportive wife tweet (was twitter around in 1978??) “every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported.” Oh wait, my bad, we are talking about two totally different cases. One was a nobody from the wrong side of the tracks in Little Rock (currently alive so must still be self-quarantining from the Arkansas Flu) with physical evidence and the other a nobody from the lush green side of the country club with a fuzzy, time-line challenged story about a REPUBLICAN Supreme Court Candidate.
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

NCAA watcher said:
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.
Click to expand...

'Watcher, now don't you go being obtuse on me … ;)

I'm pretty sure I laid out the alternate possibility of "honest mistake" in addition to "bad faith modeling". That's a big difference, and doesn't accuse one of the latter when it could easily be the former. I'd like to think most modeling disconnects are from the former scenario, but it's hard to rule out the latter motive when huge gobs of money get attached to the outcomes. I doubt you are naïve to the point you don't believe bad faith modeling to achieve a desired agenda doesn't happen in the real world - and it can happen as easily with the (domestic) good guys and the bad guys.

But when even perfect modeling incorporates <s>bogus</s> suspect data - as in the case of the altruistic lovers of transparency over in China - well, those ARE the bad guys, and the data renders the modeling moot, no? I think that's kind of where I was driving at. Now … if you think I was extending the framework of that argument into other areas, you may be onto something. :)

++++++++++

On the Biden thing this morning … listen, I'm not an admirer of the guy, but we have statutes of limitations in place for a reason, and it's to prevent folks from hatching un-rebuttable stories that are decades old, especially where there was nothing to prevent them from making a (much) earlier disclosure. Show me some contemporaneous evidence and extending circumstances, if you want me to even believe your story to begin with … but beyond that, if you're a late accuser of anyone, you'd better have a very good explanation for why you sat on your story for so long. Ulterior motives are very real, as we've seen with Justice Kavanaugh's appointment not too long ago … and in total fairness, this latest Biden thing is WAY too late for me to give it any real credence.

Might it have really happened? It's possible, sure. But if it did, who's to say it wasn't consensual?

I'll leave it at that … and HR, I'll match your DJT with JFK, LBJ and WJC. What you got now? ;)
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

Sorry I just couldn't resist..:D

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Joe Biden went on the View and reminded everyone why he has been in hiding. <a href="https://t.co/esMUEkePUu">https://t.co/esMUEkePUu</a></p>— thebradfordfile™ (@thebradfordfile) <a href="https://twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1242495984040652800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

I know, I couldn't believe it when Joe went on the rant about how hospitals suddenly needed so many more ventilators then they needed before for some mysterious reason.
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

SteveO said:
Sorry I just couldn't resist..:D

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Joe Biden went on the View and reminded everyone why he has been in hiding. <a href="https://t.co/esMUEkePUu">https://t.co/esMUEkePUu</a></p>— thebradfordfile™ (@thebradfordfile) <a href="https://twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1242495984040652800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

"We have to take care of the cure." - We need to cure (or at least treat) the virus first and foremost.
"That would make the problem worse no matter what." - "That" in this case being the call on the right to put people back to work before things are properly treated, as the lady asked about.

Seems to make sense and be consistent to me.

But I can understand how you and the Breitbart worker might have difficulty with basic comprehension.
 
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2

French Rage said:
"We have to take care of the cure." - We need to cure (or at least treat) the virus first and foremost.
"That would make the problem worse no matter what." - "That" in this case being the call on the right to put people back to work before things are properly treated, as the lady asked about.

Seems to make sense and be consistent to me.

But I can understand how you and the Breitbart worker might have difficulty with basic comprehension.
Click to expand...

:D Oh you understand? I had to chuckle at the way it was framed out of context in the tweet. I don't have an affinity for political "rock fights".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top