Please, explain the science, especially the assumptions made to "model" that outcome.kalm wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 8:13 pmSeattleGriz wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 4:54 pm
Some pretty nasty uninformed shit right there. We even saw it on this board. Absolutely despicable behavior.
Coronavirus COVID-19
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
The study is in the link. Knock yourself out.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 9:44 pmPlease, explain the science, especially the assumptions made to "model" that outcome.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Don't need to. This "study" has already been ripped apart.kalm wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 5:09 amThe study is in the link. Knock yourself out.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 9:44 pm
Please, explain the science, especially the assumptions made to "model" that outcome.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Sure it has.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:32 pmDon't need to. This "study" has already been ripped apart.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
First. This is a mathematical model study. Someone had to make assumptions in order for the model to function.kalm wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:54 pmSure it has.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:32 pm
Don't need to. This "study" has already been ripped apart.
Second. This is also why you don't vaccinate the placebo arm of your RCTs. That's why it was such a big deal when Pfizer and Moderna both vaccinated their placebo arms at 4 months. That was one of the best forms of data.
The claims that are now being made are all done from the lower levels of evidence. Math models are near the bottom.
At least they didn't throw in car accidents prevented due to vax status like the other study people made fun of.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- BDKJMU
- Level5
- Posts: 28195
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
- I am a fan of: JMU
- A.K.A.: BDKJMU
- Location: Philly Burbs
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Lawl, looks like Kalm just got dunked on…
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions...But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Did I?
Guess I’ll have wait for the actual studies that paint a different picture.
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Thats probably exactly what the article tells you.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 9:44 pmPlease, explain the science, especially the assumptions made to "model" that outcome.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
By whom?SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:32 pmDon't need to. This "study" has already been ripped apart.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
The vaccine makers own phase III data. It showed there were more deaths in the vaccinated crowd than the unvaccinated. Pretty straightforward.houndawg wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 6:27 pmBy whom?SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:32 pm
Don't need to. This "study" has already been ripped apart.
Not to mention, a MODEL.
It's why I never posted the mathematical model showing 80% of the population has pre-existing levels of immunity when COVID hit. Models make multiple assumptions and it's hilarious to see what gets output when you have multiple teams creating their own models from the same data.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Woo boy…the first sentence in your last paragraph.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:09 pmThe vaccine makers own phase III data. It showed there were more deaths in the vaccinated crowd than the unvaccinated. Pretty straightforward.
Not to mention, a MODEL.
It's why I never posted the mathematical model showing 80% of the population has pre-existing levels of immunity when COVID hit. Models make multiple assumptions and it's hilarious to see what gets output when you have multiple teams creating their own models from the same data.
Show one recognized scientific org that supports exactly what it is you’re trying to lay down (and no…you don’t get to do a data dump to flood the disinformation pond).
Otherwise it’s pretty much the same as the climate debate 20 years ago. Contrarianism mixed with some politically driven funding.
Yawn.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Uh, the peer reviewed paper that was put out into the scientific libraries supports that modeling came up with 80% of the population had some level of pre-existing immunity to COVID.kalm wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:45 pmWoo boy…the first sentence in your last paragraph.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:09 pm
The vaccine makers own phase III data. It showed there were more deaths in the vaccinated crowd than the unvaccinated. Pretty straightforward.
Not to mention, a MODEL.
It's why I never posted the mathematical model showing 80% of the population has pre-existing levels of immunity when COVID hit. Models make multiple assumptions and it's hilarious to see what gets output when you have multiple teams creating their own models from the same data.
Show one recognized scientific org that supports exactly what it is you’re trying to lay down (and no…you don’t get to do a data dump to flood the disinformation pond).
Otherwise it’s pretty much the same as the climate debate 20 years ago. Contrarianism mixed with some politically driven funding.
Yawn.
Oh,I forgot. You support that liar on the climate side. Mr Hockey stick. Won't show his data or methodology.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
So you’ve got nothing but your own speculation.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:16 pmUh, the peer reviewed paper that was put out into the scientific libraries supports that modeling came up with 80% of the population had some level of pre-existing immunity to COVID.kalm wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:45 pm
Woo boy…the first sentence in your last paragraph.
Show one recognized scientific org that supports exactly what it is you’re trying to lay down (and no…you don’t get to do a data dump to flood the disinformation pond).
Otherwise it’s pretty much the same as the climate debate 20 years ago. Contrarianism mixed with some politically driven funding.
Yawn.
Oh,I forgot. You support that liar on the climate side. Mr Hockey stick. Won't show his data or methodology.
BTW, Mann’s work was validated years ago. He’s still working in climate science in fact.
You’ll get there someday, son. I’m rooting for ya!
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
What specifically are you asking for? The study that modelled 80% of the population had some level of COVID immunity, or a scientific group that supports cross reactivity due to similarities of other viruses?kalm wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:40 pmSo you’ve got nothing but your own speculation.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:16 pm
Uh, the peer reviewed paper that was put out into the scientific libraries supports that modeling came up with 80% of the population had some level of pre-existing immunity to COVID.
Oh,I forgot. You support that liar on the climate side. Mr Hockey stick. Won't show his data or methodology.
BTW, Mann’s work was validated years ago. He’s still working in climate science in fact.
You’ll get there someday, son. I’m rooting for ya!
If Mann's work was validated, and by whom, then why didn't he use it in his trial? Because nobody outside his group has seen the data or methodology, that's why.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 59651
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Any substantive rebuke from a legitimate source of the Lancet Journal’s findings.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 9:09 pmWhat specifically are you asking for? The study that modelled 80% of the population had some level of COVID immunity, or a scientific group that supports cross reactivity due to similarities of other viruses?
If Mann's work was validated, and by whom, then why didn't he use it in his trial? Because nobody outside his group has seen the data or methodology, that's why.
You obviously haven’t read up much on the whole history of Mann’s research and litigation. Apply the same scrutiny you show with defending Trump and Putin but again, use unbiased sources. His work was validated quite awhile ago regardless of the obvious smear campaign by Nat. Review, CEI and others.
This has been discussed before.
But don’t take my word or Heartland Institute’s word for it. Here’s a relatively recent update from the National Academy of Science….
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2112797118
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
https://brownstone.org/articles/more-fl ... ves-saved/kalm wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 5:12 amAny substantive rebuke from a legitimate source of the Lancet Journal’s findings.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 9:09 pm
What specifically are you asking for? The study that modelled 80% of the population had some level of COVID immunity, or a scientific group that supports cross reactivity due to similarities of other viruses?
If Mann's work was validated, and by whom, then why didn't he use it in his trial? Because nobody outside his group has seen the data or methodology, that's why.
You obviously haven’t read up much on the whole history of Mann’s research and litigation. Apply the same scrutiny you show with defending Trump and Putin but again, use unbiased sources. His work was validated quite awhile ago regardless of the obvious smear campaign by Nat. Review, CEI and others.
This has been discussed before.
But don’t take my word or Heartland Institute’s word for it. Here’s a relatively recent update from the National Academy of Science….
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2112797118
Here ya go. Some of the incorrect assumptions that were incorporated into the model. It's a table and looked horrible when I tried to paste.
By the way, while it doesn't make me an expert on the topic, I worked as a Product Manager for a team of data scientists, so I know a thing or two about assumptions and what it can do to a model.
Switching topics. How come all the current weather models are incorrect and don't match reality? Proxy data (calculated) and assumptions.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
This will not affect SeattleGriz. He will just say, again, the you can't trust mediabiasfactcheck. But I do consult mediabiasfactcheck. And I thought the rest of you may be interested in what it has to say about the source SeattleGriz chose to rebut the modeling study on COVID-19 vaccinations:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownsto ... tute-bias/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownsto ... tute-bias/
It's just ridiculous. Don't believe credible sources like the CDC, the FDA, the American Medical Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Society for Virology, etc. Believe a political think tank called the Brownstone Institute. Right.Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Can you refute the author pointing out the flawed assumptions in the model? That's all that matters, not your ad hominems, non sequiturs and weak ass appeals to authority.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 2:58 pm This will not affect SeattleGriz. He will just say, again, the you can't trust mediabiasfactcheck. But I do consult mediabiasfactcheck. And I thought the rest of you may be interested in what it has to say about the source SeattleGriz chose to rebut the modeling study on COVID-19 vaccinations:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownsto ... tute-bias/
It's just ridiculous. Don't believe credible sources like the CDC, the FDA, the American Medical Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Society for Virology, etc. Believe a political think tank called the Brownstone Institute. Right.Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
You seem a little touchy about called out on your biased source, SG.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 3:02 pmCan you refute the author pointing out the flawed assumptions in the model? That's all that matters, not your ad hominems, non sequiturs and weak ass appeals to authority.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 2:58 pm This will not affect SeattleGriz. He will just say, again, the you can't trust mediabiasfactcheck. But I do consult mediabiasfactcheck. And I thought the rest of you may be interested in what it has to say about the source SeattleGriz chose to rebut the modeling study on COVID-19 vaccinations:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownsto ... tute-bias/
It's just ridiculous. Don't believe credible sources like the CDC, the FDA, the American Medical Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Society for Virology, etc. Believe a political think tank called the Brownstone Institute. Right.
Curious, your degree is in Computer Science?
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Sounds like your peevishness should be reserved for mediabiasfactcheck. They called your source out for failing to fact check and for promoting misinformation regarding covid-19. Charges you have yet to rebut.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 3:02 pmCan you refute the author pointing out the flawed assumptions in the model? That's all that matters, not your ad hominems, non sequiturs and weak ass appeals to authority.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 2:58 pm This will not affect SeattleGriz. He will just say, again, the you can't trust mediabiasfactcheck. But I do consult mediabiasfactcheck. And I thought the rest of you may be interested in what it has to say about the source SeattleGriz chose to rebut the modeling study on COVID-19 vaccinations:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownsto ... tute-bias/
It's just ridiculous. Don't believe credible sources like the CDC, the FDA, the American Medical Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Society for Virology, etc. Believe a political think tank called the Brownstone Institute. Right.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Bro. Nothing of the sort was done. Reread. StOnge used the homegrown site to base his judgement of Brownstone. He did not refute any of the statements by the author from Brownstone showing the flaws in the mathematical model.houndawg wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:10 pmSounds like your peevishness should be reserved for mediabiasfactcheck. They called your source out for failing to fact check and for promoting misinformation regarding covid-19. Charges you have yet to rebut.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 3:02 pm
Can you refute the author pointing out the flawed assumptions in the model? That's all that matters, not your ad hominems, non sequiturs and weak ass appeals to authority.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
C'mon. You're smarter than that and should be able to see StOnge has nothing other than an appeal to authority that is not warranted.houndawg wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:03 pmYou seem a little touchy about called out on your biased source, SG.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 3:02 pm
Can you refute the author pointing out the flawed assumptions in the model? That's all that matters, not your ad hominems, non sequiturs and weak ass appeals to authority.
Curious, your degree is in Computer Science?
No, I got a BS in Microbiology with a minor in Chemistry. Worked as an OR Tech in the military and sold clinical laboratory testing and pathology for six years. In addition to two military national cycling championships in which I got invited to the Olympic Training Center, I also taught Nutrition, Business Development and Anatomy and Physiology at the trade school level. Performed the PCR test as a bench tech and worked in an RNA lab in college. Lastly I worked with two time Mr Universe, Lance Dreher, as a personal trainer for five years.
I know a thing or two about health, wellness and the medical industries.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
You did not refute mediabiasfactcheck's calling out Brownstone for failing to fact check and for promoting disinformation about covid, you presented Brownstone as an unbiased source.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:33 pmBro. Nothing of the sort was done. Reread. StOnge used the homegrown site to base his judgement of Brownstone. He did not refute any of the statements by the author from Brownstone showing the flaws in the mathematical model.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23481
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
So disprove his stats with some of your own, show us where he's gone wrongSeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:40 pmC'mon. You're smarter than that and should be able to see StOnge has nothing other than an appeal to authority that is not warranted.
No, I got a BS in Microbiology with a minor in Chemistry. Worked as an OR Tech in the military and sold clinical laboratory testing and pathology for six years. In addition to two military national cycling championships in which I got invited to the Olympic Training Center, I also taught Nutrition, Business Development and Anatomy and Physiology at the trade school level. Performed the PCR test as a bench tech and worked in an RNA lab in college. Lastly I worked with two time Mr Universe, Lance Dreher, as a personal trainer for five years.
I know a thing or two about health, wellness and the medical industries.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Do you know the history of mediabiasfactcheck? Already pointed out to StOnge they have been called unreliable because the guy who runs the site has no formal education in journalism or any other related fact checking field and no published methodology. He's a nut with an axe to grind.houndawg wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:48 pmYou did not refute mediabiasfactcheck's calling out Brownstone for failing to fact check and for promoting disinformation about covid, you presented Brownstone as an unbiased source.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:33 pm
Bro. Nothing of the sort was done. Reread. StOnge used the homegrown site to base his judgement of Brownstone. He did not refute any of the statements by the author from Brownstone showing the flaws in the mathematical model.
Brownstone is the group that came up with the Great Barrington Declaration. They were for targeted protection of those most susceptible, but didn't agree with total lockdowns. The main authors are epidemiologists from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford (if I remember correctly).
The article points out errors in the assumptions made by the model authors. Just because StOnge doesn't like the source, doesn't mean that 2+2 isn't 4. A truth is still a truth. The model made some seriously flawed assumptions.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz