Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
As predicted, hopefully it ends up not coming true.
www.google.com
Study shows Americans missed out on cancer diagnoses during Covid
American Cancer Society researchers collected data from the 2020 national registry data, the most recent available, to identify 2.4 million American adults with newly-diagnosed cancer from 2018 to 2020.
The come fallacy for those reading is the belief that because someone has a hot hand the dice will continue to be hot. The don’t come fallacy is the belief that because a hot hand has gone on for a long time on this roll it is due to crap out.A logic argument on the soccer forum! How fun!
that word “respect” is awfully loaded especially given some of the authoritarian prescriptions that at a minimum tickled your fancy. In fact that word “respect” and what it means is the entire ball of wax in this argument. You are doing the same handwaiving over the difficult issue that you accuse the article (and kicking has conceded is done in that article) of doing with respect to extinctions.
further it does not logically follow that because ic got something right and osterholm got something wrong that the next time it will be the same (or more/less likely to be the same). That’s the coin flip fallacy (otherwise known as the come fallacy for craps players and it’s corollary the dont come fallacy). Your proof skips over the step of why they got it right/wrong and how that would impact future events. A geometry teacher would downgrade you for making assumptions and skipping over reasoning in your proof.
apes with diarrhea arguments can be useful. For example if you are trying to persuade someone to wear a seatbelt: if you don’t wear a seat belt you could have an accident and be thrown through the windshield. So long as we logically acknowledge that it doesn’t follow if you don’t wear a seatbelt you will be thrown through the window. The argument then turns of assessing risks and probabilities for which you need proper inputs (again where the math guys usually fail since they are obsessed with the process of the proof rather than questioning the given).
that’s why a marketplace of ideas is the best remedy for any misinformation rather than censorship. Have the discussion and have the argument weighted appropriately in each adults estimation.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Yes! But this only works if you believe each person is capable of coming to their own conclusion AND are willing to accept that another's conclusion may be different from your own conclusion. Those with an authoritarian, elitist bent have trouble with this - as we have seen during COVID. This will never give us "perfect" results. However, I'll gladly take these imperfections over the ones we see with centralized authority and a de-facto ministry of truth.
Might want to do a quick Google search for summer high temperatures in Mesquite NV. 116 is a good ten degrees above what they usually hit in August.
If only we had people who study things like this....
(I know. The six of you are smarter than the scientists who have been studying this for the last half century.
)We have some ideas of why one was right and one was wrong:A logic argument on the soccer forum! How fun!
that word “respect” is awfully loaded especially given some of the authoritarian prescriptions that at a minimum tickled your fancy. In fact that word “respect” and what it means is the entire ball of wax in this argument. You are doing the same handwaiving over the difficult issue that you accuse the article (and kicking has conceded is done in that article) of doing with respect to extinctions.
further it does not logically follow that because ic got something right and osterholm got something wrong that the next time it will be the same (or more/less likely to be the same). That’s the coin flip fallacy (otherwise known as the come fallacy for craps players and it’s corollary the dont come fallacy). Your proof skips over the step of why they got it right/wrong and how that would impact future events. A geometry teacher would downgrade you for making assumptions and skipping over reasoning in your proof.
IC was running a standard SIR model and publishing their results in a peer reviewed journal.
Osterholm was skipping that process a MOnd talking directly to the press, apparently without bothering to do the modeling work.
Most geometry teachers would be just fine with that distinction. I'm respecting the quants and laughing at the administrators. No bias here.
I point out further that the entire climate change movement is based on an ape with diarrhea argument. As Greta is constantly argue, they rush to the end of civilization and life on earth as we know it. It doesn’t follow. Outcomes range from mild adaptations offset with technology; to big adaptions with positives and negatives depending on where you live (Canada becomes more pleasant; the Marshall Islands go under water); to large scale economic disruption; to floods and famine: to end of civilization.We have some ideas of why one was right and one was wrong:
IC was running a standard SIR model and publishing their results in a peer reviewed journal.
Osterholm was skipping that process a MOnd talking directly to the press, apparently without bothering to do the modeling work.
Most geometry teachers would be just fine with that distinction. I'm respecting the quants and laughing at the administrators. No bias here.
So if we move the Marshall Islanders to Canada, it's all ok?
As you may be aware, an average is based on a set of temperatures, both high and low. Is 116 outside a reasonable range? IDK, neither do you. Is the 116 because of global warming or just weather? IDK, neither do you. The point of my sarcasm, is that any weather anomaly is blamed on global warming. I think we have some global warming issues, but I don't believe in the global warming hysteria. The scientists you hold in such high esteem, many have been wrong about their dire global warming predictions. These dire predictions are being used to in an attempt to implement a "green new deal" which will do little to nothing to stop global warming and will only increase costs we pay for housing, vehicles, energy and many other things. I'm normally "a trust, but verify" type of guy, but science no longer gets the benefit of the doubt. I'm going to stick with reality. Good luck with your blind faith in science.Might want to do a quick Google search for summer high temperatures in Mesquite NV. 116 is a good ten degrees above what they usually hit in August.
If only we had people who study things like this....
(I know. The six of you are smarter than the scientists who have been studying this for the last half century.
"
Something I read on the web recently -- this will be the first society to fail because success was not cost-effective.
I'm well aware of the statistics needed to answer whether 116 is or is not within the normal range of temperature for August in NV.
I'm also aware that people who do this for a living say "no, these weather patterns are not normal. And this rate of melting isn't normal either."
That's not blind faith or hysteria. It is merely keeping my head out of the sand.
World is warming. Eventually, some regions will become submerged and others will become too hot to live in or to grow food.
You can face facts, or you can pretend this happens every summer. But it won't change whether it's a good idea to buy a beach house on a barrier island.
Did you read it in the same place you read about Florida's deaths pre and post booster? It's a cute sentiment, but virtually meaningless. Our problem today is not that were making "cost-effective" decisions, the problem is that were not making "cost-effective" decisions. Exhibits A and B are the extended closures of schools during covid and the restrictions on medical treatment during Covid.
Actually continuing to believe dire predictions after most them haven't come true is blind faith. Science has been corrupted by politics and arrogance.
So we had drought level precipitation in many parts of the West during winter/spring of 2021-2022. It was blamed on global warming. Winter 2022-23 we had unprecedented record precipitation and snowfall. It was blamed on global warming.
Are both correct, maybe (global warming scientists blame all weather extremes on global warming), but it seems to defy logic. I'm sticking with logic and reality as opposed to science that has been infected by outside influences.
The primary theory behind submerging regions is a 20ft rise in sea level. According to NASA, since July 1993, sea levels have risen 93.8 mm, or 3.13 mm per year with a very straight trendline. At that rate, it would take over 1,900 years to reach 20 feet. Fortunately for you, you want have to worry about drowning with your head in the sand because the water isn't going to make it that high in your lifetime.
Might want to do a quick Google search for summer high temperatures in Mesquite NV. 116 is a good ten degrees above what they usually hit in August.
If only we had people who study things like this....
(I know. The six of you are smarter than the scientists who have been studying this for the last half century.
I'm still waiting for Espola Fudd to name some climate change deniers. Do you know of any?
Why should anyone listen to your opinions on science matters given the content of your last post?
Obama cried about rising seas and subsequently bought a $12M island that's 43' above sea level. You think he's a believer, Fudd?
And if you bet the "don't come" you are anti-social and won't make any friends at the table.
Yes, I do, including the lady next door. But her take on matters is a little suspect given her other habits. Some that I don't know personally but have heard of are listed here --
Top 11 Climate Deniers: Key Players Revealed - Before The Flood
Unmask the top climate change deniers who are influencing public opinion and policy. This article sheds light on the individuals and organizations that have played significant roles in climate disinformation.
www.beforetheflood.com