- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
So the Model that Predicted Outright Mass Death
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:43 pm
Is now predicting flu-like death numbers (way lower numbers). Dr. Birx mentioned this model and these vast discrepancies in today's press conference.
Question #1: why the frick did we listen to this model in the first place, causing enormous economic loss and $Trillion "Rescue" legislation.
Question #2: why are we listening to this same model now and assuming it may be right this time? Is it because there is more data?
Let's just say the administration overreacted. Will they then be blamed for overreacting causing enormous economic hardship?
Question #1: why the frick did we listen to this model in the first place, causing enormous economic loss and $Trillion "Rescue" legislation.
Question #2: why are we listening to this same model now and assuming it may be right this time? Is it because there is more data?
Let's just say the administration overreacted. Will they then be blamed for overreacting causing enormous economic hardship?
8
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:44 pm to Friedbrie
quote:
$Trillion "Rescue" legislation.
because powerful people wanted it
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:44 pm to Friedbrie
Andrew Cuomo said they didn’t go far enough.
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:45 pm to Friedbrie
quote:
Question #1: why the frick did we listen to this model in the first place, causing enormous economic loss and $Trillion "Rescue" legislation.
For the same reason the OT goes into mass orgies of masturbatory wishcasting every year when there’s a thunderstorm off West Africa and one model has it entering the gulf.
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:45 pm to Friedbrie
quote:
Will they then be blamed for overreacting causing enormous economic hardship?
If they (media) start their bullshite, I can't wait for Trump to drag his nuts all over their face about what they've been doing.
This post was edited on 3/26/20 at 5:46 pm
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:46 pm to Friedbrie
quote:
Let's just say the administration overreacted. Will they then be blamed for overreacting causing enormous economic hardship?
The administration will be blamed regardless, whether the end results are positive or negative.
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:47 pm to Friedbrie
From Neil Ferguson’s Twitter LINK
quote:
1/4 - 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.
quote:
2/4 -This is not the case. Indeed, if anything, our latest estimates suggest that the virus is slightly more transmissible than we previously thought. Our lethality estimates remain unchanged.
quote:
3/4 - 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.
quote:
4/4 - 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).
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:49 pm to Friedbrie
quote:
Let's just say the administration overreacted.
The scientists and media panic triggered an understandable, but perhaps "reasonable" (at the time, under the circumstances) overreaction. (Recall he tried to urge calm early on, but the media and the public were having exactly NONE of it. Nobody will be allowed to forget that.)
It is arguable that the "overreaction" (which it clearly is) has saved some lives. Probably not justifiable on a cost basis, but it is what it is.
quote:
Will they then be blamed for overreacting causing enormous economic hardship?
I'm not sure - even at this late date, HRC is calling for more, other Dem leaders are calling for more - Trump knows he has to win and win bigly over the virus. He's doing that.
I like how he dunks (in his charming way) on S. Korean testing (which they hounded him about for almost 2 weeks, "When are we going to test like S. Korea?").
I'm halfway wondering when they're going to ask, "Mr. President, why didn't we do as well as Italy at getting rid of old people with this? Are you not thinking about the Social Security trust fund? Are you that irresponsible with Seniors' retirement resources?"
This post was edited on 3/26/20 at 5:50 pm
Posted on 3/26/20 at 5:52 pm to Friedbrie
The model didn't change. It predicted an outcome that would happen without lockdowns. With lockdowns, the model predicts much lower numbers. Why would we be doing lockdowns if nobody thought they did anything?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News