Posted on 09/09/2020 12:16:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A REALLY BIG load of crap.
Another report said that at least 456,000 people were at Sturgis-—and 67 Covid cases were reported.
Mathematically, that is 67+ less then 2/100ths of cases per 456,000 attendees.
And how many cases arose from the BLM riots?
Oh, and can you please give me the death rate, because that’s really all that matters.
And the 50,000 Al Sharpton DC rally didn’t produce one case of Covid-19? Haven’t heard a word about the spread of Covid-19 due to the 100 days of protesting in Portland. Must be this virus is Democrat friendly.
Now do the study for the last 100 nights in Portland.
No studies done on BLM protests.
Don’t believe a word of it.
Maybe they are confusing covid with the STD count..
Bull Sh*t.
Of the 400,000 visitors 500,000 got the China Virus and infected another 2.3 Million people, cats, and dogs. It will cost Trillions of dollars to fix the problem.
We are all going to die because of this motorcycle rally of Trump supporters.
Funny how the Antifa riots never spread the China Virus. Good pure Christian folks out having a nice Sunday riot.
Are there even 250k people in South Dakota?
Oh, their quintuple counting the population...
Such a load of randomized hor$e$hit!
That’s right. It is crap. The media want to whip up hysteria.
You took the words right out of my mouth. Total Liberal feces.
Watch this doctor absolutely DEMOLISH wearing a mask and how harmful it really is! This link was posted by a retired anesthesiologist.
https://twitter.com/trustheq84/status/1303095615304298497
https://twitter.com/MikayesFiona/status/1303747304231505922?s=20
and 90% of the cases were false positives.
and probably 9% of the remaining 10% were politically-partisan positive tests.
and no-one died.
But months of demonstrations accompanied by looting and rioting gets a pass because it’s more important.
It’s well known that all members of IZA Institute of Labor Economics suffer from the incurable and deleterious effects of unknown syphilitic brain infections.
Bs
“It is ALL assumptions and modeling, taking numbers from projected small percent increases nationally to project totals back in the assumed placed where the bikers came from.”
My reply is as follows:
I skimmed through the paper. . . And you hit the nail on the head. Made up data and projected made up data on what the number of purported Covid19 cases reported were going to be in each of the assumed home areas and Sturgis. . . And what they assumed it would be if it was a worst case condition IF attendees were as contagious as they assumed. SHEESH!Synthetic control this, synthetic assumption that... and an EXACT result of 266,796 cases at their conclusion???
As I said above, such an exact number in a statistical analysis always signals completely lying asshats intended to get the attention of people totally ignorant of what a statistical result should be able to do, and look like. ABSURD!!!
They claim their results are based on data ONE MONTH post Sturgis. Sturgis concluded August 16. That would mean they’d need to sample data on September 15th to use BEFORE starting their raw data analysis. Yet they were submitting their paper for publication, meaning it had already been written, on September 2nd. I know from papers I wrote back in the dark ages, collecting, compiling, and analyzing such data is at least a several week project. I grant you that computers and the internet cuts SOME time off that, but writing, formatting, and editing (even with the typos and misused words I noted in this paper in just a quick, cursory scan through) a 63 page statistical paper still takes some reasonable amount of time for discussion, construction, formatting, editing, before assembly and writing, correlation of data and researching background literature, etc. and then the final collaboration among the four authors who are at four different locations. Let’s give that a week.
That takes them back seven days from the 2nd to just ten days post Sturgis for any data to be collected, still inside the two week gestation period of Covid19. I think we can safely assume that for the first few days post Sturgis, there is no valid data to collect. I.E. this is likely proof that their data is all bogus, and the paper written with conclusion a foregone target before they started. Which, of course, we knew already.
Expert trolling for grant dollars.
Yes, it’s supposed to be for 30 days after Sturgis Motorcycle Rally. But notice that Sturgis ended August 16. They submitted this for publication on September 2nd. Allow a week for data collection, organization, analysis etc., then another week for writing the 63 page paper. . . That takes one back to 14 days from the 2nd. The 30 days would not be up until September 15th. Oops. Yet the start of collecting data had to be no later than August 19th, three days after the end of Sturgis. DOUBLE OOPS!!!
Looks like they made up any supposed data that’s in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.