Am I mental?
Because scientists are also afflicted with TDS.
> while the number of deaths projected by the model is higher than reality, the direction is the same: up.
As precise as a coin flip. *slow clap*
More likely, we will see Nobel Peace Prizes awarded for modeling, ala Paul Krugman, who is always wrong and Al Gore who has made millions off global warming.
The leap folks will need to make is that models, like their ugly sisters, polling, are bunk designed to manipulate rather than inform.
I hope so but I think the powers that be have a lot - that is, everything - invested in keeping the hysteria going and maintaining the fiction that it was necessary to shit down and destroy our entire country for something that never happened and was never going to happen in the first place. People are going to be really angry when they realize this, so they don’t want us realizing it.
I’m sorry. I make typos too. But I just think “dwaths” is funny.
Hey lets come out with a model of skewed numbers and see if they believe it
Lefties demand we “follow science”. And the science changes every day.
What? Or are they just stabbing in the dark and not asking and answering questions about WHAT precisely they are getting wrong.
This is not science. It's BS and those who are listening to it are fools.
Someone somewhere must know what they are doing. They can still get wrong answer, but at least they are searching for why their answers are wrong.
Projections instead of data....the way to keep the Panic Porn going
I would encourage everyone to go to the source and read the entire article before jumping on the “see, quarantine didn’t work and I don’t like it” bandwagon. The article actually goes into some detail about the modeling of the spread of disease and the various challenges that modelers face.
Diseases spread according to a specific mathematical function, called a growth curve. However, many variables affect that curve. Things such as how well people comply with the lockdowns and observe social distancing and proper hygiene—e.g., high or low compliance—affect the rate of growth. The model tried to account for various scenarios, from immediately removing all restrictions to slowly removing them and came up with a range of death tolls.
The article did NOT provide any evidence that the lock-downs didn’t work or were unnecessary. On the contrary, it acknowledged that those do, in fact, affect the rate of spread of disease.
Dwath prediction is a very series thing. The models that can do that accurately are hugh!
Why was the U of M Covid Model so “Wrong” About Predicting Deaths through Memorial Day?
...
Because crooked Democrats in corrupt universities were up to no good.
Predicting Dwaths is hard, even harder with a lisps.
I doubt it - I’ve never heard of a Dwath. Is it some kind of dwarf or something?
The only value in the ‘model’ is that it lends support to the lefturds’ plans to hobble and control the American people, destroy personal freedoms, and bend them to the socialist will.
The same is true in all the other ‘models’ trotted out by the Anti-Freedom progressive pukes over the last many weeks.
This was NEVER a ‘pandemic’, and they knew it.
They wanted to cull th ehuman herd by killing people in old folks homes.
80% of those who died were in elder care homes.
Think about that.
There model made NO sense.
We did not need a shut down.
We needed to quarantine the vulnerable, not shut down the whole country and its economy.
Public Health and their academe world have taken and suffered a HUGE hit.
They are leftists bastards of dirty name IMHO.
Janice Dean, weather announcer on Fox News lost BITH her parents to Covid-19 in an elder care home. She could not see them, could not talk to them. Cuomo was sending 4500 Covid-19 patients to these homes while he left the 1000 bed Javitz Center empty.
There will be an accounting.
Similarly, elitists defend the validity of their global warming models, even though those models are shockingly inaccurate. I am disgusted by people who abuse math and science as levers to grab power over others.
(Fortunately, Hillary used the same modeling software to predict her chances of being president...)
It is always going to be a failing of any wishcasting prediction when you pre-enter the desired result and then set the model to represent how it gets there. It doesn't represent reality, it represents the viewpoint of the programmer.
Oh, and with MOST of the world shut down, every greenie’s wet dream, CO2 levels went up. Gosh, yet another new record. Makes you wonder - is it the detector/analyzer following a wishcasting scenario, or is it simply not man made CO2? It's sad when you can't even trust what should be a very simple (and repeatable) measure...
Dwath of a Salesman.