... Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, SwampD said: I have worked in TV news for 30 years. I have seen our country get played before. It just has that feel to it for me. Having worked in the news business myself, I would say that working in TV news generally (as in broadly speaking) makes one less qualified to identify discrepancies, and even less inclined to act on those discrepancies if identified, depending on the nature of the discrepancies and the players involved in the narrative.
nfreeman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 6 minutes ago, SwampD said: I have worked in TV news for 30 years. I have seen our country get played before. It just has that feel to it for me. Do you think the number of cases and/or the number of deaths has been intentionally distorted? By a bunch of different sources?
SwampD Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 7 minutes ago, ... said: Having worked in the news business myself, I would say that working in TV news generally (as in broadly speaking) makes one less qualified to identify discrepancies, and even less inclined to act on those discrepancies if identified, depending on the nature of the discrepancies and the players involved in the narrative. As I am in no way responsible for the narrative, I am able to see it from just as much of an outside view as anyone else. 12 minutes ago, nfreeman said: Do you think the number of cases and/or the number of deaths has been intentionally distorted? By a bunch of different sources? The numbers are probably true. What they mean is absolutely distorted. I’ve already stated that we’ve lost 14000 people in a population of 330 million. With a population of 1.4 billion, the numbers so far are incredibly small. Fear sells.
inkman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 8 minutes ago, SwampD said: As I am in no way responsible for the narrative, I am able to see it from just as much of an outside view as anyone else. The numbers are probably true. What they mean is absolutely distorted. I’ve already stated that we’ve lost 14000 people in a population of 330 million. With a population of 1.4 billion, the numbers so far are incredibly small. Fear sells. And wins elections
SwampD Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 11 minutes ago, inkman said: And wins elections Absolutely, like, all of them.
Stoner Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 1 hour ago, ... said: There's a reason best was in italics.
nfreeman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 55 minutes ago, SwampD said: Fear sells. Now this I agree with.
Weave Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 1 hour ago, ... said: Bravo on getting in your political commentary, as anti-intellectual as you think it is. What does this even mean?
sabresparaavida Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 3 hours ago, SDS said: Are you a Yellowjacket? Yes I am.
Eleven Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, nfreeman said: OK, but this post was specifically about coronavirus. Let's try not to sling unrelated mud around so the thread doesn't get derailed please. You're the moderator. You are welcome to censor content that has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics. You can cut that crappy link to an alt-right anti-science blog, and the comments that follow, anytime you'd like to. Also, the last time 5th line Wingnut or whatever it is posted about hockey was last year April. Be real. Edited February 15, 2020 by Eleven
SDS Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 1 hour ago, sabresparaavida said: Yes I am. ✋ we are UR...
inkman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 19 minutes ago, SDS said: ✋ we are UR... I know UR but what am I... 1
nfreeman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 55 minutes ago, Eleven said: You're the moderator. You are welcome to censor content that has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics. You can cut that crappy link to an alt-right anti-science blog, and the comments that follow, anytime you'd like to. Also, the last time 5th line Wingnut or whatever it is posted about hockey was last year April. Be real. The linked article was about coronavirus and nothing else. Do you think it was political?
nfreeman Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 5 hours ago, Weave said: Real science requires peer review, which does entail consensus. But isn't this article a form of participation in peer review? Kind of like a crowd-sourced analysis of what is currently known? I know nothing about the author (or that website, for that matter) -- only that the linked article seemed to be written in a pretty dispassionate and objective manner. If you knew, say, that the author was a contagious disease specialist at a prestigious hospital, would you be inclined to consider his views in formulating your opinion about the gravity of the coronavirus situation? Or are the author and the article disqualified due to it being posted on that site?
Indabuff Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 16 minutes ago, inkman said: I know UR but what am I... Impressive
5th line wingnutt Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 1 hour ago, Eleven said: You're the moderator. You are welcome to censor content that has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics. You can cut that crappy link to an alt-right anti-science blog, and the comments that follow, anytime you'd like to. Also, the last time 5th line Wingnut or whatever it is posted about hockey was last year April. Be real. These are pejoratives, not arguments.
Weave Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 37 minutes ago, nfreeman said: But isn't this article a form of participation in peer review? Kind of like a crowd-sourced analysis of what is currently known? I know nothing about the author (or that website, for that matter) -- only that the linked article seemed to be written in a pretty dispassionate and objective manner. If you knew, say, that the author was a contagious disease specialist at a prestigious hospital, would you be inclined to consider his views in formulating your opinion about the gravity of the coronavirus situation? Or are the author and the article disqualified due to it being posted on that site? Yes, I’d consider his views if he were presenting him/herself as a scientific specialist, or presenting legit scientific data of someone else’s origin. But I see nothing of the sort here and given the site it is more than reasonable to assume that none is forthcoming.
Eleven Posted February 15, 2020 Report Posted February 15, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, nfreeman said: The linked article was about coronavirus and nothing else. Do you think it was political? 1 hour ago, nfreeman said: But isn't this article a form of participation in peer review? Are you kidding? 41 minutes ago, 5th line wingnutt said: These are pejoratives, not arguments. I prefer "descriptions," but whatever. What are you doing here? Your last post about hockey was ten months ago. Edited February 15, 2020 by Eleven
... Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 1 hour ago, Eleven said: I prefer "descriptions," but whatever. What are you doing here? Your last post about hockey was ten months ago. What hostility. Very unwelcoming. I'm reporting this post. 2
SwampD Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 Quick count! Who’s gotten their flu shot? One!
Weave Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 29 minutes ago, SwampD said: Quick count! Who’s gotten their flu shot? One! Two
shrader Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 10 hours ago, nfreeman said: There is a link to a WHO report in the 4th paragraph. There is also a link to a NEJM report in the paragraph immediately above the "Diamond Princess" section. How reputable can NEJM be if I’m in there??
Eleven Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 2 hours ago, ... said: What hostility. Very unwelcoming. I'm reporting this post. Report whatever you'd like, sizzle.
Stoner Posted February 16, 2020 Report Posted February 16, 2020 1 hour ago, shrader said: How reputable can NEJM be if I’m in there?? Nah... Too easy.
Recommended Posts