LaxPower Back-Up Stick

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:02 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:58 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:55 am The point is the trend and trajectory. You don't get that, really?

Of course I get it. But to quote 1.1 Millions dead is inappropriate at this point in the crisis.

No, you are dead f*cking wrong: it is not inappropriate -- especially while Dear Leader is telling Americans to gather in Churches in a couple of weeks. Frankly, it may be that the rest of us have a moral duty to counteract Trump's venal stupidity.

Remember:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180970372/

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:29 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:02 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:58 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:55 am The point is the trend and trajectory. You don't get that, really?

Of course I get it. But to quote 1.1 Millions dead is inappropriate at this point in the crisis.

No, you are dead f*cking wrong: it is not inappropriate -- especially while Dear Leader is telling Americans to gather in Churches in a couple of weeks. Frankly, it may be that the rest of us have a moral duty to counteract Trump's venal stupidity.

Remember:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180970372/

This is my POV but while I think the information is valuable I do not think it was presented in a manner that helps. Just like our leaders who need to be careful how they say things, so do writers. What is the take home of the article, the need and efficacy of social distancing. What will most people take away from the article? 1.1 million of my fellow citizens are going to die. Sure the word could was in there but how many people are going to remember that? Most people are going to read the article, see the 1.1 million number and shut off for the rest of the article.

I'm not saying don't put the number out there but you put the solution first and the why second. I'm not the brightest bulb but when I read something the first point is what I remember the most. If what you want to do is scare people then this does a great job. IF you want to convey the importance of social distancing, for me personally, it falls flat.

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:29 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:02 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:58 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:55 am The point is the trend and trajectory. You don't get that, really?

Of course I get it. But to quote 1.1 Millions dead is inappropriate at this point in the crisis.

No, you are dead f*cking wrong: it is not inappropriate -- especially while Dear Leader is telling Americans to gather in Churches in a couple of weeks. Frankly, it may be that the rest of us have a moral duty to counteract Trump's venal stupidity.

Remember:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180970372/

This is my POV but while I think the information is valuable I do not think it was presented in a manner that helps. Just like our leaders who need to be careful how they say things, so do writers. What is the take home of the article, the need and efficacy of social distancing. What will most people take away from the article? 1.1 million of my fellow citizens are going to die. Sure the word could was in there but how many people are going to remember that? Most people are going to read the article, see the 1.1 million number and shut off for the rest of the article.

I'm not saying don't put the number out there but you put the solution first and the why second. I'm not the brightest bulb but when I read something the first point is what I remember the most. If what you want to do is scare people then this does a great job. IF you want to convey the importance of social distancing, for me personally, it falls flat.

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:32 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:29 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:02 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:58 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 7:55 am The point is the trend and trajectory. You don't get that, really?

Of course I get it. But to quote 1.1 Millions dead is inappropriate at this point in the crisis.

No, you are dead f*cking wrong: it is not inappropriate -- especially while Dear Leader is telling Americans to gather in Churches in a couple of weeks. Frankly, it may be that the rest of us have a moral duty to counteract Trump's venal stupidity.

Remember:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180970372/

This is my POV but while I think the information is valuable I do not think it was presented in a manner that helps. Just like our leaders who need to be careful how they say things, so do writers. What is the take home of the article, the need and efficacy of social distancing. What will most people take away from the article? 1.1 million of my fellow citizens are going to die. Sure the word could was in there but how many people are going to remember that? Most people are going to read the article, see the 1.1 million number and shut off for the rest of the article.

I'm not saying don't put the number out there but you put the solution first and the why second. I'm not the brightest bulb but when I read something the first point is what I remember the most. If what you want to do is scare people then this does a great job. IF you want to convey the importance of social distancing, for me personally, it falls flat.

You make an excellent point. This cuts both ways in terms of the various POVs from individual media sources. The news should not necessarily be happy or apocalyptic but rather relate the current information as a current reality.

Now is not the time to chase views or clicks

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:13 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:45 pm How many deaths per hour compared to legal abortions?

Which you’re totes cool with?

Because it’s her body, her choice?

You should be banned from this forum.

DB

Kismet: I gather you are a liberal, or at the very least a Democrat? Do you believe that the vast majority (meaning, well over 80%) of mainstream media (just remove Fox entirely) are Democrats, or liberal-leaning?

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

Trinity wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:00 am The March 8 Trump party is months after they were briefed about the danger and some senators had time to rebalance their portfolio. These people in charge are as dumb as Spring Breakers.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am 22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:04 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

What is 3900/22,000,000?

Now take 22,000,000 x .013

Which number is larger?

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:10 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

What if you continue to do the math? Look at the number of cases after three more months with a doubling time of say 10 days? Keep the death rate current. What do you think those numbers would be?

Personally, I do not think H1N1 was handled greatly. But isn't it possible we learned a little bit about how to deal with this>

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:14 am

Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:10 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

What if you continue to do the math? Look at the number of cases after three more months with a doubling time of say 10 days? Keep the death rate current. What do you think those numbers would be?

Personally, I do not think H1N1 was handled greatly. But isn't it possible we learned a little bit about how to deal with this>

Have to believe the science from 2010 informed everything thats going on now.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:10 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:04 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am This'll get a ho hum but here goes

CDC Coronavirus Chart March 24——First 3 months

US CASES US DEATHS
44,183 544


H1 NI April 2009-October 2019——First 6 months

US CASES US DEATHS
22 million 3900

Coronavirus looks more lethal because its compared to those Tested.

22 million infected 3900 dead and no bleating, wailing "oh no its the end of the world. Millions could die" Economy continued on.

What is 3900/22,000,000?

Now take 22,000,000 x .013

Which number is larger?

How many times do I have to tell you libs we understand the lethality of this virus. But No one in 2009 had it to compare to. H1 N1 was a new deadly virus.

No noise about it.

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 am

Kismet: I gather you are a liberal, or at the very least a Democrat? Do you believe that the vast majority (meaning, well over 80%) of mainstream media (just remove Fox entirely) are Democrats, or liberal-leaning?

Like on most everything else you yammer about here, you'd gather WRONG.