It's just the flu!
06-07-2020 | 01:27 PM
#341
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 462
Likes: 8
"Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony."
Like it or not, your evidence is anecdotal. This isn't to say that anecdotal evidence is always wrong or can't be relied on, but rather that it cannot be used to extrapolate the bigger picture. Your evidence is anecdotal because it is entirely based on your personal experience. That's what anecdotal means.
First, I don't think you could find a scientific study that advocates for an immediate transition to unmanned aircraft. Automation isn't there yet and couldn't be applied at that level to existing airframes. Show me an example of a scientific article getting it this wrong. Secondly, this is a false parallel. There's a big difference between the Channel 7 news reporting on an aviation incident and an epidemiologist from Yale offering his assessment of data from the pandemic. Thirdly, I choose to use critical thinking when assessing a source. That means being suspicious of what they argue. This does not mean rejecting news sources with information I don't like simply because I don't like it. I also don't think any of the articles I posted qualify as clickbait
The Covid worst case scenarios were based on society continuing on as normal during the pandemic. Of course the estimates are off, because society drastically altered course and there has been a prolonged shutdown. That doesn't mean the models are wrong, just that the assumptions underpinning them are no longer accurate. It's disingenuous and dishonest to point to those models as being so far off when they were meant to predict what was going to happen if nothing was done.
In any case, I don't understand how 100,000+ deaths over the course of three months can be looked at as something insignificant. We started a 19 year long war in Afghanistan after 9/11, which resulted in 2,000 deaths, but now these 100,000 don't matter? Fewer people died in Vietnam, so I guess we can get rid of the memorial and forget about that conflict because it was just a blip in the grander scheme of things, right?
And the final strawman. Because I care about the unnecessary loss of my countrymen's life and relying on data rather than emotion, I'm a coward? Really? Nothing I've said has advocated that we all need to be afraid. I've merely disputed the notion that the death toll is inflated, because the data does not bear that out.
In fact, I'm all for starting the economy backup, and I think the shutdowns should be lifted. I am not afraid, but I also think reasonable precautions should be taken, such as wearing masks and social distancing when possible. There is a middle ground between hysteria and denial, but it seems like you guys think it has to be one or the other. Things don't have to be so black and white, and just because I don't think 100,000+ dead Americans is insignificant doesn't make me a coward.
Like it or not, your evidence is anecdotal. This isn't to say that anecdotal evidence is always wrong or can't be relied on, but rather that it cannot be used to extrapolate the bigger picture. Your evidence is anecdotal because it is entirely based on your personal experience. That's what anecdotal means.
First, I don't think you could find a scientific study that advocates for an immediate transition to unmanned aircraft. Automation isn't there yet and couldn't be applied at that level to existing airframes. Show me an example of a scientific article getting it this wrong. Secondly, this is a false parallel. There's a big difference between the Channel 7 news reporting on an aviation incident and an epidemiologist from Yale offering his assessment of data from the pandemic. Thirdly, I choose to use critical thinking when assessing a source. That means being suspicious of what they argue. This does not mean rejecting news sources with information I don't like simply because I don't like it. I also don't think any of the articles I posted qualify as clickbait
The Covid worst case scenarios were based on society continuing on as normal during the pandemic. Of course the estimates are off, because society drastically altered course and there has been a prolonged shutdown. That doesn't mean the models are wrong, just that the assumptions underpinning them are no longer accurate. It's disingenuous and dishonest to point to those models as being so far off when they were meant to predict what was going to happen if nothing was done.
In any case, I don't understand how 100,000+ deaths over the course of three months can be looked at as something insignificant. We started a 19 year long war in Afghanistan after 9/11, which resulted in 2,000 deaths, but now these 100,000 don't matter? Fewer people died in Vietnam, so I guess we can get rid of the memorial and forget about that conflict because it was just a blip in the grander scheme of things, right?
And the final strawman. Because I care about the unnecessary loss of my countrymen's life and relying on data rather than emotion, I'm a coward? Really? Nothing I've said has advocated that we all need to be afraid. I've merely disputed the notion that the death toll is inflated, because the data does not bear that out.
In fact, I'm all for starting the economy backup, and I think the shutdowns should be lifted. I am not afraid, but I also think reasonable precautions should be taken, such as wearing masks and social distancing when possible. There is a middle ground between hysteria and denial, but it seems like you guys think it has to be one or the other. Things don't have to be so black and white, and just because I don't think 100,000+ dead Americans is insignificant doesn't make me a coward.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with numbers that are slightly off but the numbers we were given in my state were wildly off. I do have a problem with that. We were told with no action or precautions 70,000 would die, with lockdown and social distancing measures 50,000 would die. To date we are at about 1100. That gives me a lot of heartburn when experts numbers are so ridiculously off.
Also, over 80% of the deaths here have been in nursing homes or other assisted living facilities. Over 99% had preexisting conditions with a median age over 80.
Id be very interested to see a follow up study which shows what the actual life expectancy would have been for the deaths in my state had they not contracted Covid. In other words, how sick were these people. My guess is with most of them, factoring in age and co-morbidity, it wasn’t terribly long anyway. That’s a far cry from comparing them to Vietnam era soldiers in their late teens who had full and complete lives in front of them.
06-07-2020 | 02:56 PM
#342
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
I don’t think anyone has a problem with numbers that are slightly off but the numbers we were given in my state were wildly off. I do have a problem with that. We were told with no action or precautions 70,000 would die, with lockdown and social distancing measures 50,000 would die. To date we are at about 1100. That gives me a lot of heartburn when experts numbers are so ridiculously off.
Also, over 80% of the deaths here have been in nursing homes or other assisted living facilities. Over 99% had preexisting conditions with a median age over 80.
Id be very interested to see a follow up study which shows what the actual life expectancy would have been for the deaths in my state had they not contracted Covid. In other words, how sick were these people. My guess is with most of them, factoring in age and co-morbidity, it wasn’t terribly long anyway. That’s a far cry from comparing them to Vietnam era soldiers in their late teens who had full and complete lives in front of them.
Also, over 80% of the deaths here have been in nursing homes or other assisted living facilities. Over 99% had preexisting conditions with a median age over 80.
Id be very interested to see a follow up study which shows what the actual life expectancy would have been for the deaths in my state had they not contracted Covid. In other words, how sick were these people. My guess is with most of them, factoring in age and co-morbidity, it wasn’t terribly long anyway. That’s a far cry from comparing them to Vietnam era soldiers in their late teens who had full and complete lives in front of them.
Who knows, maybe it isn't that bad and only fatal if you're over 80. Maybe the numbers are correct and it really killed 100k out of the 2M people who got it. Regardless of how you feel about masks and social distancing, they do reduce the spread of communicable disease and stopping the spread would be the quickest way to solve this problem. This'll sound callous, but the people with the virus are the biggest threats to our careers and economy, not to mention health.
06-07-2020 | 04:21 PM
#343
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Bang on. I know me, cousin, neighbour, sister, parents, friends brother....... All smashed (devistated) by the economic impact due govt intervention.
I know zero people impacted by the actual virus less fear. That includes grandparents, parents and freinds there of.... all old.....70 plus
My experience means zip.....but it is a perspective nevertheless.
I know zero people impacted by the actual virus less fear. That includes grandparents, parents and freinds there of.... all old.....70 plus
My experience means zip.....but it is a perspective nevertheless.
06-08-2020 | 02:32 PM
#348
Gets his house in order
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
ooof! I admit I laughed out loud, sighed and then felt badly for having a laugh. But yeah, I mean he kinda did. The “news” really effed us on this one and it seems like they’ll have lots of material to spew for a while now.
06-08-2020 | 06:50 PM
#350
Banned
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
