|
Post by MojoJojo on Jul 13, 2020 14:25:19 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2020 17:20:44 GMT
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 16, 2020 19:35:49 GMT
I do recall gregs posting the death rate was 20%...and I always wonder when people post stuff like that, where did their information come from...do they just make it up, for dramatic effect, and think no one will question it...or did they actually hear it on msnbc, or CNN...when you press them for a simple answer, they never respond... Actually I've seen stats that the covid19 death rate is as high as 30%: for people aged 80 and above.
Are you OK with that?
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 16, 2020 19:36:20 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 15:26:22 GMT
And no one knows if they will have long term health problems. Open the schools! Is Barron Trump going back to school? Will Melania let him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:01:04 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, what adjustment needs to be made? Country 1 had a higher rate, period. The real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue?
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 18, 2020 16:04:57 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, the real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue?
OMG!!!
Someone Quick!
Alert the Office of Redundancy Redundancy!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:06:27 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, the real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue?
OMG!!!
Someone Quick!
Alert the Office of Redundancy Redundancy!!!
Insightful as usual.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:09:48 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, what adjustment needs to be made? Country 1 had a higher rate, period. The real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue? Bad writing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:17:07 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, what adjustment needs to be made? Country 1 had a higher rate, period. The real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue? Bad writing. Maybe that's it. I've pointed out before that journalism seems suffer more from bad/writing an editing as the desire to publish more content quicker and faster has increased. But if so, it's an odd mistake. I was wondering if someone who studied statistics more than I have would have an answer. There are things in mathematics that seem counterintuitive to the layman after all and I have no problem admitting that I'm a stats layman.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 18, 2020 16:19:05 GMT
OMG!!!
Someone Quick!
Alert the Office of Redundancy Redundancy!!!
Insightful as usual.
More than you, slowpoke.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:32:35 GMT
That's a strange response. My post expressed my confusion, explained why I was confused and asked questions that I hoped would clarify my confusion. Of course it wasn't insightful. What kind of loon would think it was supposed to be? I sarcastically said yours was "insightful" because the entire point of my post was to appeal for insight to others more knowledgeable than I. Your response was another insult. Lately, insults appear to be the extent to which you are willing to dialogue with anyone who disagrees with you on anything. You even unleashed your venom on Mojo, one of the most pleasant, intelligent and valuable posters here. But, as I said yesterday, you do you if you find it somehow helpful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:37:16 GMT
Maybe that's it. I've pointed out before that journalism seems suffer more from bad/writing an editing as the desire to publish more content quicker and faster has increased. Correct. See it all the time online, bugs me too.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 18, 2020 16:38:13 GMT
That's a strange response. My post expressed my confusion, explained why I was confused and asked questions that I hoped would clarify my confusion. Of course it wasn't insightful. What kind of loon would think it was supposed to be? I sarcastically said yours was "insightful" because the entire point of my post was to appeal for insight to others more knowledgeable than I. Your response was another insult. Lately, insults appear to be the extent to which you are willing to dialogue with anyone who disagrees with you on anything. You even unleashed your venom on Mojo, one of the most pleasant, intelligent and valuable posters here. But, as I said yesterday, you do you if you find it somehow helpful.
You are indeed slow witted.
Look back, a bit.
My response about redundancy was a BIG HINT.
Sorry you didn't get it.
But it's really not my problem.
As for the rest of your self-righteous outrage, you know where you can shove that. Maybe not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 16:56:55 GMT
That's a strange response. My post expressed my confusion, explained why I was confused and asked questions that I hoped would clarify my confusion. Of course it wasn't insightful. What kind of loon would think it was supposed to be? I sarcastically said yours was "insightful" because the entire point of my post was to appeal for insight to others more knowledgeable than I. Your response was another insult. Lately, insults appear to be the extent to which you are willing to dialogue with anyone who disagrees with you on anything. You even unleashed your venom on Mojo, one of the most pleasant, intelligent and valuable posters here. But, as I said yesterday, you do you if you find it somehow helpful.
You are indeed slow witted.
Look back, a bit.
My response about redundancy was a BIG HINT.
Sorry you didn't get it.
But it's really not my problem.
As for the rest of your self-righteous outrage, you know where you can shove that. Maybe not.
Fully aware of the low regard in which you, Odysseus, hold me, I must somehow dig deep and find the strength to muster on.
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jul 18, 2020 16:57:44 GMT
This quote from the article seems odd to me. Maybe my light education on statistics is interfering here, but why would a mortality rate need to be "adjusted" for population size? Isn't a rate is a rate, regardless of the sample size? If the mortality rate in country 1 is 1/10 and the mortality rate in country 2 is 1/100, what adjustment needs to be made? Country 1 had a higher rate, period. The real population sizes would normally be irrelevant as long as both are large enough to be meaningful, correct? If they aren't, then the data of the too-small population is useless anyway. Maybe this is a population density issue? Bad writing. Lol. Poor writing and an attempt to manipulate. Country 1 has 2 deaths and country 2 has 4 deaths. OMG country 2 has 100% more deaths than country 1, horrible!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 17:01:14 GMT
Maybe that's it. I've pointed out before that journalism seems suffer more from bad/writing an editing as the desire to publish more content quicker and faster has increased. Correct. See it all the time online, bugs me too. I’m not sure how to fix it. Hiring more editors, or allowing your competitors to outperform you in quantity and production speed both seem out of the question in what appears to be a financially struggling industry. You could aim for the most accurate content and cede the high ground of quantity and speed, and hope for the best, but I wouldn’t count on it working.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2020 17:46:05 GMT
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 18, 2020 18:07:12 GMT
You are indeed slow witted.
Look back, a bit.
My response about redundancy was a BIG HINT.
Sorry you didn't get it.
But it's really not my problem.
As for the rest of your self-righteous outrage, you know where you can shove that. Maybe not.
Fully aware of the low regard in which you, Odysseus, hold me, I must somehow dig deep and find the strength to muster on. And from that I guess I can conclude you still don't get what I posted.
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jul 18, 2020 20:06:17 GMT
New York wiped out it's nursing homes. They will probably be good for a while until they fill back up again.
|
|