Kansas Crimson

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:16 pm failed leap of logic

You're the one who responded to the statement about the recall efforts in California with that leap.

JKLivin wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:28 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:16 pm failed leap of logic

You're the one who responded to the statement about the recall efforts in California with that leap.

nope

zsn (rightly) pointed out that just because a “sizeable number” of people get behind an idea, doesn’t mean that the idea has merit, is worthwhile or is reasonable

you and TDub, for whatever reason, chose to go all “bay elite bashing”

i just found your responses odd. rather than talk about newsome, you’d rather attack zsn for pointing out your failed logic

tbh, we’re all guilty of doing what you’re accusing zsn of

everyone holds their own views because they think/feel they’re right

I hate this website

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:50 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:28 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:16 pm failed leap of logic

You're the one who responded to the statement about the recall efforts in California with that leap.

nope

zsn (rightly) pointed out that just because a “sizeable number” of people get behind an idea, doesn’t mean that the idea has merit, is worthwhile or is reasonable

you and TDub, for whatever reason, chose to go all “bay elite bashing”

i just found your responses odd. rather than talk about newsome, you’d rather attack zsn for pointing out your failed logic

Yes, and zen’s response was to the recall issue. Thus, yours was as well.

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:50 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:28 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:16 pm failed leap of logic

You're the one who responded to the statement about the recall efforts in California with that leap.

nope

zsn (rightly) pointed out that just because a “sizeable number” of people get behind an idea, doesn’t mean that the idea has merit, is worthwhile or is reasonable

you and TDub, for whatever reason, chose to go all “bay elite bashing”

i just found your responses odd. rather than talk about newsome, you’d rather attack zsn for pointing out your failed logic

because those types of statements "sizable, about, millions" are made on here everyday. It's only when he disagrees with the premise or the politics does he get all Holier than thou "well actually" and pretend to care about the specifics of the statement

Quarter million kids (fine, 251,781 for you assholes that need the specification to the individual) tested positive in the last week. I thought kids were immune from the fungus

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/p ... hvJPvFXp-8

and 251,700 of those positives exhibited no symptoms at all.

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:28 pm and 251,700 of those positives exhibited no symptoms at all.

Link?

TDub wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:10 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:50 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 12:28 pm

You're the one who responded to the statement about the recall efforts in California with that leap.

nope

zsn (rightly) pointed out that just because a “sizeable number” of people get behind an idea, doesn’t mean that the idea has merit, is worthwhile or is reasonable

you and TDub, for whatever reason, chose to go all “bay elite bashing”

i just found your responses odd. rather than talk about newsome, you’d rather attack zsn for pointing out your failed logic

because those types of statements "sizable, about, millions" are made on here everyday. It's only when he disagrees with the premise or the politics does he get all Holier than thou "well actually" and pretend to care about the specifics of the statement

given that zsn seems to be the only one on here that actually has skin in the game, i’m not surprised that particular interest would be payed to this issue

i obviously don’t have the same general impression you do

Hippie libruals in WV.

sdoyel wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:48 pm

best thing i’ve seen today

sorry, psych, for the pay wall

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/35/e2105482118


Intensity and frequency of extreme novel epidemics


...Recent analyses of small-scale infectious disease emergence events document a significant increase in the yearly rate of emergence in the period 1940 to 2000 (17). Specific mechanisms of increase in the rate of disease emergence have been identified and connected to anthropogenic environmental change as one of the major drivers (18). These effects of anthropogenic environmental change may carry a high price. Using the MEVD model, we find that a tripling of the rate of disease emergence, an increase consistent with the recorded recent changes, implies an approximate tripling of the probability of extreme epidemics, H1(i), with respect to present values. Such a change would bring, possibly over decadal time scales, the average recurrence interval of a Spanish flu–like event down to 127 y (95% CI 115 to 141 y), comparable to the value it had around 1918 (i.e., 91 y).

Our analysis also quantifies how frequently a COVID-19–like event may occur in the future. Current information (19) indicates that the epidemic progresses at a rate of about 2.5 million deaths/ year (3,549,710 in 72 wk), which, normalized by the global population, corresponds to an intensity of the epidemic of 0.33 ‰/year. Using the number of epidemic occurrences observed in the past 20 y (i.e., 2000 to 2019) in the MEVD model, this intensity corresponds to an average recurrence time of 59 y (95% CI 55 to 64 y). This value is much lower than intuitively expected. However, in many countries, drastic nonpharmaceutical interventions, contact tracing, and quarantine have significantly reduced the number of deaths that could have otherwise occurred. Detailed modeling work suggests that unconstrained epidemic spread would have led to as much as eight times the number of deaths that actually occurred in some countries (20). Assuming this amplification factor, one obtains an intensity of 2.63 ‰/year, which corresponds to an average recurrence time of 209 y (95% CI 182 to 244 y). To better appreciate the significance of this value, it may be useful to compute the probability of experiencing an event of this intensity in one’s lifetime (here taken, for simplicity, equal to 100 y), when a constant likelihood is assumed: this probability is = 0.38. Assuming a tripling of the rate of disease emergence, as suggested by the evidence discussed above, this probability may increase to = 0.76. These probability values should be a sufficient warning of the urgency of global preparedness to future pandemic events...

Overlander wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:40 pm

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:28 pm and 251,700 of those positives exhibited no symptoms at all.

Link?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Literally can’t pay the morons to get the shot…

A sizable number of Californians have done some pretty stupid things and continue to do so. While the recall attempt may be a lawful act it’s somewhat bizarre that the recall supporters decided that the best timing was about a year from a regular gubernatorial election? Also they think that this the best use of $250-300 million of taxpayers’ money? We have raging wildfires and an intractable homeless problem and this the way they chose to spend the money?. Sore losers throwing a tantrum is really what the recall is about. I would be saying this regardless of party affiliation - I thought that the recall efforts in Wisconsin were a waste of resources.

Credit where credit is due: kudos to the WV Governor

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-ac ... e38872d3d5


what the fuck is happening in Australia?