Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#90,776
#90,776
evillawyer said:
I hope Texas is successful, but I unfortunately think Gov Speedy's actions will simply show what I've been arguing for the past few days -- we're not sufficiently close to herd immunity such that Texas cases will continue to decrease to near zero. There will be another wave (probably modest in size). But hey, it's Texas. Dollar is king.
Click to expand...
Anything you type like this, while illegal immigrants are coming across our borders in Biden shirts, is asinine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, RavinDave, SpaceCoastVol and 1 other person
#90,783
#90,783
volinbham said:
define wave - how many do you see in this chart from Texas?

View attachment 355521
Click to expand...
I don't think wave is precisely defined in epidemiology. Based on this chart, I'd say at least two (May-Sept and Oct-early Feb), arguably three (the November through Jan period shows a starting point, a crest, and then a return to roughly the same starting point, before the next surge. The blip in September seems to be an anomaly from a one day data dump.
 
#90,785
#90,785
evillawyer said:
Completely inexcusable that, when faced with a novel virus killing hundreds of thousands, many people would want to error on the side of safety before knowing what the science says. What a bunch of poons!
Click to expand...
Most of us knew early on this was bogus. Serious question, why do you libs enjoy this virus so much? I believe I already know but I want to see if you will admit it
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, davethevol, kiddiedoc and 6 others
#90,787
#90,787
evillawyer said:
Completely inexcusable that, when faced with a novel virus killing hundreds of thousands, many people would want to error on the side of safety before knowing what the science says. What a bunch of poons!
Click to expand...
Hundreds of thousands of people weren't dead at that point. Nice try at revisionist history though. You should probably just triple mask up, stay inside, and quit bothering people.
download (66).jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC, GSD82 and SpaceCoastVol
#90,791
#90,791
evillawyer said:
I don't think wave is precisely defined in epidemiology. Based on this chart, I'd say at least two (May-Sept and Oct-early Feb), arguably three (the November through Jan period shows a starting point, a crest, and then a return to roughly the same starting point, before the next surge. The blip in September seems to be an anomaly from a one day data dump.
Click to expand...

so Texas has had 2 waves

your prediction is another wave so basically for you to be correct we would need to see a) some rise (how much) in daily cases and b) that rise be sustained for some period of time (4 weeks? 6 weeks?)

a couple days ago you told us Texas was experiencing a "bump" but newer data shows that more likely a testing artifact rather than real trend.

So please put some parameters on what you are predicting in Texas rather than words like bump, surge or wave.
 
#90,792
#90,792
evillawyer said:
Completely inexcusable that, when faced with a novel virus killing hundreds of thousands, many people would want to error on the side of safety before knowing what the science says. What a bunch of poons!
Click to expand...
Well ya didnt. Anybody with a sliver of intelligence that used their brain over buying into the fear porn knew 95% of the BS the media was spewing was wrong. Congrats though yall got what you wanted which was dementia joe and his ho in the white house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sea Ray and Electric Orange
#90,799
#90,799
OHvol40 said:
The point is that it would have taken proactive measures, and money for state and local governments. We all know that was never going to happen. So if you think it should, write a letter to your elected leaders.
Click to expand...
Oh I dont believe any of it, but it just doesnt seem consistent for the coronabros to completely ignore part of the chain.
 
#90,800
#90,800
volinbham said:
you are the undisputed king of the strawman argument
Click to expand...
No, I'm plumbing the principle upon which his argument is based. He says always error on the side of freedom. If he truly subscribes to that principle, he should believe that all safety and environmental regulations (which, through the force of law, constrain somebody's freedom) should be done away with (as we should "error on the side of freedom").
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top