SJSUMFA2013 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Bob at the doctor doctor: bob, I’m sorry to say this, but you have cancer bob: no I don’t doctor: we’re going to put you on an aggressive treatment program, and that, along with early detection, will hopefully get you through this bob: but what about the economy [six months later] doctor: well bob, I know it wasn’t easy, but after a lot of hard work and a little luck, you are officially cancer-free bob: see doc, I told you I didn’t have cancer 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSanDiegan Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 1 hour ago, smltwnrckr said: Oh yes, you are absolutely right about partisans ignoring science when it suits their purpose. If anything, I am saying that means - at least on the back end - math and science are political... especially as soon as they are incorporated into any public discourse such as pandemic response. It's ignoring the realities of the human experience to suggest otherwise, or it is a political and rhetorical act to suggest otherwise. In terms of the math itself, saying something emerged in a particular political and cultural context, in my opinion, is not something that reflects poorly on that thing. It just helps us better understand knowledge. It is a fascinating take, I'll tell you that. Tbh, I really need to sit down with a cigar and a couple beers and really give it the contemplation it deserves. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSanDiegan Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 1 hour ago, NorCalCoug said: If only the people doing the science/math and presenting the findings were devoid of bias too. That's is a fair point. Hence the critical need for peer reviews as a mechanism of self-policing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSanDiegan Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 1 hour ago, Bob said: Thanks for the thoughtful post. You are able to type fast and put information into an easily comprehensible format in not much time. Well done. With all due respect you could have stopped at 2. The modellers didn't have sufficient data (or didn't interpret correctly what data was available), made assumptions that were wildly incorrect and mislead billions of people about the danger of the virus. Important decision that affected everyone on the planet were made based on these models. And thank you in kind for the respectful reply. We may choose to disagree as to whether or not the modelers (myself included) possessed sufficient data, but in the interest in carrying this hospitality forward, I think we can agree that we both want them to be wrong by orders of magnitude. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalCoug Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrofade Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 Halfway through the day, we've already hit a new high mark for deaths reported in a day at 1,530. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNLV2001 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJSUMFA2013 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 12 minutes ago, Bob said: Yup. This model was spot on. A fine example of modelling excellence. Good +++++ing Christ man. THE MODEL CHANGED BECAUSE ALL THE ECONOMY-RUINING SHIT YOU HATE IS ACTUALLY WORKING MY GOD I CANT BELIEVE YOU NEED THIS EXPLAINED TO YOU IM NOT EVEN A MATH GUY AND I UNDERSTAND THIS YOU ARE EITHER A TROLL OR SO INCREDIBLY DENSE THAT IF YOU WERE A CITY COVID-19 WOULD COMPLETELY +++++ING RAVAGE YOU 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mugtang Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 This is awesome: Quote thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJSUMFA2013 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 11 minutes ago, Bob said: Nope, the original projection was with strict social distancing. Try again. I can't believe you need this explained to you. Uh-huh. And it’s working better than anticipated. So +++++ the economy. We’re going to keep doing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncomare Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncomare Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean327 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 41 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said: I just called Mrs sean327, she is on the way to the store as we speak. Thanks for the heads up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrofade Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, SJSUMFA2013 said: Uh-huh. And it’s working better than anticipated. So +++++ the economy. We’re going to keep doing this. There's no point with him. You can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalCoug Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 40 minutes ago, Bob said: Yup. This model was spot on. A fine example of modelling excellence. Let’s be clear... all statistical models are wrong. The correct question is whether or not they’re useful. Are you sure the initial model here factored in social distancing? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJSUMFA2013 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, retrofade said: There's no point with him. You can't fix stupid. Are you sure? Cuz I was going to try it with a claw hammer next 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNLV2001 Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mugtang Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 https://m.facebook.com/100000730801950/posts/3161302707237392/?d=n Quote thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVGiant Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 I'm so relieved. This thing is just about over... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalCoug Posted April 7, 2020 Share Posted April 7, 2020 26 minutes ago, mugtang said: https://m.facebook.com/100000730801950/posts/3161302707237392/?d=n I’ve been impressed with Utah’s response so far. They already have a site set up that will house up to 1000 extra beds if needed (initially set up with 250 or so) at the Mountain America Expo Center. We’re nowhere near needing this at this point but it’s up and ready for when/if it is. https://www.kutv.com/amp/news/local/state-health-officials-prepare-temporary-hospital-they-hopes-to-never-use Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...