Self defense against people who don't wear masks...

[jobo]

Do you understand how they got the 40 million number?

Yes, they plucked it out of the air at random, if you disagree try justifying it

 

[drop bear]

But there wernt 40 million deaths,that rather my point,

"Coronavirus Pandemic ‘Could Have Caused 40 Million Deaths If Left Unchecked,’ Study Suggests."

If left unchecked.

Context matters.

 

[drop bear]

Yes, they plucked it out of the air at random, if you disagree try justifying it

Ok. Here is the study.

The impact of COVID-19 and strategies for mitigation and suppression in low- and middle-income countries | Science

So not plucked out of thin air.

 

[jobo]

"Coronavirus Pandemic ‘Could Have Caused 40 Million Deaths If Left Unchecked,’ Study Suggests."

If left unchecked.

Context matters.

so who checked it ?

and there a very suspicious use of the word COULD in there

 

[jobo]

Ok. Here is the study.

The impact of COVID-19 and strategies for mitigation and suppression in low- and middle-income countries | Science

So not plucked out of thin air.

so what about the rich counties like the USA which has the most deaths

 

[drop bear]

so who checked it ?

and there a very suspicious use of the word COULD in there

No pretty normal use of the word could.

I can't think of a country that didn't act to mitigate covid.

 

[drop bear]

so what about the rich counties like the USA which has the most deaths

What about them?

 

[jobo]

No pretty normal use of the word could.

I can't think of a country that didn't act to mitigate covid.

mitigate ,,,, your changing track now, you said it needed to be CHECKED now its mitigated

 

[jobo]

What about them?

i ask for the study and you posted one that doesn't included the top tend nations for deaths, im struggling to see its relevance to the discussion

perhaps you could out line what you think it demonstrates ?

 

[drop bear]

i ask for the study and you posted one that doesn't included the top tend nations for deaths, im struggling to see its relevance to the discussion

perhaps you could out line what you think it demonstrates ?

It was a study that predicted the 40 million deaths or whatever. That you mentionedwas inaccurate.and so concluded that science was wrong.

Whether or not it includes whatever other stuff you want a study to include isn't really my problem.

It only has to include what it includes. And either the projection was wrong or right based on what the study was studying.

If you have a counter study you could present one that has whatever you want.

If you can find it.

Or you can reject reality and replace your own.

 

[drop bear]

i ask for the study and you posted one that doesn't included the top tend nations for deaths, im struggling to see its relevance to the discussion

perhaps you could out line what you think it demonstrates ?

Cool. Find that study and make your case.

 

[drop bear]

mitigate ,,,, your changing track now, you said it needed to be CHECKED now its mitigated

Yeah they are called synonyms. Which are different words that have the same or similar meaning.

So something that has been mitigated. would not be able to be left unchecked.

This was mostly because if I used checked specifically. It would just sound funny.

 

[jobo]

Yeah they are called synonyms. Which are different words that have the same or similar meaning.

So something that has been mitigated. would not be able to be left unchecked.

This was mostly because if I used checked specifically. It would just sound funny.

they are not interchangeable words, using one over the other completely changes the meaning of the sentence

 

[jobo]

It was a study that predicted the 40 million deaths or whatever. That you mentionedwas inaccurate.and so concluded that science was wrong.

Whether or not it includes whatever other stuff you want a study to include isn't really my problem.

It only has to include what it includes. And either the projection was wrong or right based on what the study was studying.

If you have a counter study you could present one that has whatever you want.

If you can find it.

Or you can reject reality and replace your own.

science is never wrong, scientists are frequently wrong,, if your going to support this study, then go ahead, it seems thats unlikely as you havent read it

 

[drop bear]

they are not interchangeable words, using one over the other completely changes the meaning of the sentence

Ok.

No pretty normal use of the word could.

I can't think of a country that didn't act to check covid.

 

[drop bear]

science is never wrong, scientists are frequently wrong,, if your going to support this study, then go ahead, it seems thats unlikely as you havent read it

You would have to show that the study is wrong in this case. Which I assume is to find countries that left the virus unchecked. And see if those numbers don't match up.

 

[jobo]

You would have to show that the study is wrong in this case. Which I assume is to find countries that left the virus unchecked. And see if those numbers don't match up.

well no it is obviously wrong, you would need to show it was substancialy correct

 

[jobo]

Ok.

No pretty normal use of the word could.

I can't think of a country that didn't act to check covid.

well yes unfortunely it, it is fairly normal, put the word could in any statment and it becomes vague to the point of being meaningless., any thing that is even remotely possible is covered
it could rain tomorrow, well yes it could

i could win the lottery . yes i could

40 million could die, yrs they could indeed


but the words in dispute were checked and mitigation

 

[drop bear]

well yes unfortunely it, it is fairly normal, put the word could in any statment and it becomes vague to the point of being meaningless., any thing that is even remotely possible is covered
it could rain tomorrow, well yes it could

i could win the lottery . yes i could

40 million could die, yrs they could indeed


but the words in dispute were checked and mitigation

Which I changed for you. So now it reads check covid where it once read mitigate.

So I don't know of a country that has left covid unchecked. As per the wording of the report.

 

[drop bear]

well no it is obviously wrong, you would need to show it was substancialy correct

No. That report is the evidence. So I can say the figure is right due to that particular modeling used. The report itself shows it was substantially correct.

Substituting that reality for your own and saying it is wrong because you think so isn't as convincing.

You would need to show why it is wrong.