RE: By admitting that it is entirely reasonable to doubt the “official figures,” you have essentially admitted defeat
My interest is not in winning or losing an argument but to get at the truth. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and my knowledge would be the better for it.
So, let me repeat my question since you haven’t come close to even answering it... assuming the official figures exaggerate the number of deaths due directly to Covid, what in your estimation is the more accurate number?
You don’t have to give me an exact figure, just an estimate and better still, your reason for believing in this estimate.
I'm afraid that I have my doubts about that, SeekAndFind! Your posts here give rather the impression that you are spoiling for a fight.
So, let me repeat my question since you haven’t come close to even answering it...
That's true: I have made absolutely no attempt to provide you with the estimate you have requested. That's because I'm not an epidemiologist (NOTE: You don't have to be a chicken to judge an egg, and you don't have to be a nautical engineer to say that the sinking of the Titanic was a disaster attributable largely to human stupidity and hubris), and don't want to simply pull a number out of my *ss. You should instead do some research yourself (why would you be particularly interested in my personal estimate, anyway?).
[...] assuming the official figures exaggerate the number of deaths due directly to Covid, what in your estimation is the more accurate number?
Please do some research yourself! The "ballpark" estimates of some random FReeper should not concern you. (Though the reasons for his skepticism regarding "official figures" - which he has backed up with valid arguments or at least legitimate questions - are certainly worthy of serious consideration.)
Please consult an Epidemiologist in whom you have trust.
Regards,