Reply With Quote
Bwahahhaha you can't read either. Keep proving science wrong karen.
But but but the lockdowns..
Cry cry cry
you tried to say Feb. 21 was "a few weeks ago" like it was earlier this month.
Karen
Bwahahhaha you can't read either. Keep proving science wrong karen.
But but but the lockdowns..
Cry cry cry
Bwahahhaha a few weeks ago.
But but but the February op-ed..
Cry cry cry Karen
Scary you know what I do.
Tell me more about asymptomatic spread....
Thread, dinner time.
Update (24 May 2020):::
Trump's Corona Plague dead: 99,268
Regular Flu dead: 23+k
Spanish Flu dead: 275k
Obama's H1N1 Flu dead: 12.5k
Let us proceed...
I thought we hit 100K. What happened, some people get resurrected?
Lol not even legit numbers how dumb.
What should the COVID-19 number be now?
NOW he wants an actual number. Now.
I've been asking this as long as you guys have been saying the number is wrong.
You never answered.
Do you have an answer now?
I challenged you to provide a number for acceptable deaths when it was said the current number indicates absolute failure, you never did. off
Knowing the count is wrong doesn't mean you know the right count. If someone says "we've been counting all deaths as covid deaths" then you should conclude the count is wrong because you already know the method was wrong.
needing this explained to you like a child
Yeah, you changed the subject.
I challenged you to provide a number for acceptable deaths when it was said the current number indicates absolute failure, you never did. off
Just say you don't have a number and never will. It won't kill you, will it?
Do you have a number to compare my number to to know it's right or wrong?
You're answering a question with another question.
If you don't have a number yourself, that's fine. Just say so. You can leave it there.
Goddamn you hit F5 every second, are you running a script?
No way in you even read the you're responding to.
He can't. If he would have read anything that I have responded with he would understand that the cdc has so many errors in data collection and presentation that he can't prove that it works. But its easily proven it doesn't enter wuhan. Enter non locked down states. He's not smart.
I challenged you to provide a number for acceptable deaths when it was said the current number indicates absolute failure, you never did. off
Knowing the count is wrong doesn't mean you know the right count. If someone says "we've been counting all deaths as covid deaths" then you should conclude the count is wrong because you already know the method was wrong.
Even Mike Pence's run CDC has 97k 'official' numbers. What a show.
Do you have a different number or not?
This is all it comes down to.
Do you have a different number?
A different number of what?
A different number of US deaths attributed to COVID-19 outside the 97k-100k range being currently reported.
What is your number?
First of all you asked me for a number, now your putting the cdc numbers into a range which means you're actually getting a clue and are understanding that these numbers are completely unreliable.
Next, I shold only have to say icfr. And then you should say, if you knew what that meant, wow the lockdown was not a good idea.
Next, you should just answer the question by posting your number and the link to your science.
You won't.
Good talk.
Icfr .26%
Here's what I asked for:
A different number of US deaths attributed to COVID-19 outside the 97k-100k range being currently reported.
What is your number?
If you can't do it, just say so.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
