This thread was deleted by a volunteer moderator. I certainly don't want a thread this big deleted so I've restored. THat being said, this thread has served it's purpose. I've closed it to new posts.
We have a new 2024 vaccine thread here. New people don't need to try to wade through 20,000 posts to figure out what is going on.
Actually, understanding ONLY what is needed to support a factual statement - and nothing more, so as to not be led astray by someone trying to distort the argument - is INCREDIBLY indicative of a STEM brain.
Next.
You strip away all other data and context that weakens your case, cherry picking stats in a desperate attempt to support your weird dogmatic antivax obsession. Everyone sees through this, especially when you stridently argue that correcting for confounding variables is bad.
"No, I don't want to make my data more accurate!!1 I'm too smart for that!!!"
Actually, understanding ONLY what is needed to support a factual statement - and nothing more, so as to not be led astray by someone trying to distort the argument - is INCREDIBLY indicative of a STEM brain.
Next.
Not accounting for the % of vaccinated/unvaccinated is in itself distorting the argument.
If you’re trying to change the argument to something you want it to be, maybe.
I simply report numbers from a large hospital system that prove a) “if you get the vaccine you won’t get the virus” / [later] “won’t be hospitalized” / [later] ”won’t die” was NOT true, and b) that the hospitals are NOT overwhelmed with unvaccinated people. The data fully supports both of these statements.
It’s been like this for 6 months now, with the trend leaning slightly toward more vaccinated and boosted being hospitalized vs unvaxxed at any given time. The vaccination rate in the state is like 60-65%. It’s inconsequential to the factual statements above.
It’s been like this for 6 months now, with the trend leaning slightly toward more vaccinated and boosted being hospitalized vs unvaxxed at any given time. The vaccination rate in the state is like 60-65%. It’s inconsequential to the factual statements above.
Base Rate Fallacy
Heartless wrote:
It’s been like this for 6 months now, with the trend leaning slightly toward more vaccinated and boosted being hospitalized vs unvaxxed at any given time. The vaccination rate in the state is like 60-65%. It’s inconsequential to the factual statements above.
Simpson's paradox
I've written about both of these many times. I've posted links of examples from the UK and Israel data. At this point we just have to assume that such math is over your head.
Actually, understanding ONLY what is needed to support a factual statement - and nothing more, so as to not be led astray by someone trying to distort the argument - is INCREDIBLY indicative of a STEM brain.
Next.
You strip away all other data and context that weakens your case, cherry picking stats in a desperate attempt to support your weird dogmatic antivax obsession. Everyone sees through this, especially when you stridently argue that correcting for confounding variables is bad.
"No, I don't want to make my data more accurate!!1 I'm too smart for that!!!"
Convincing!
Not MY case. Maybe the case YOU wqnt to be arguing against.
(See my response to the other guy.)
Its not that hard to admit that those two “official” statements were not true. Just do it- release your anxiety, you’ll feel better.
You strip away all other data and context that weakens your case, cherry picking stats in a desperate attempt to support your weird dogmatic antivax obsession. Everyone sees through this, especially when you stridently argue that correcting for confounding variables is bad.
"No, I don't want to make my data more accurate!!1 I'm too smart for that!!!"
Convincing!
Not MY case. Maybe the case YOU wqnt to be arguing against.
(See my response to the other guy.)
Its not that hard to admit that those two “official” statements were not true. Just do it- release your anxiety, you’ll feel better.
Yes, we are aware that your argument is literally just "people who are vaccinated sometimes die of COVID." We are being charitable and trying to argue against something less asinine than that. But, hey, if that's all you want to claim -- be my guest!
Saying "oh yeah, the vaccine isn't 100% effective!" and then smugly crossing your arms... is not the own you may think it is. Maybe that works on fellow MBAs.
Heartless, do you have a link to the Michigan data you love to cite, actually? Would love to collab on a little 'data science' with you, brother.
LOL- I post the data nearly every week. You go find it and record it.
Case in point. Can't even provide a link to the dataset. You're either 1) making it up or 2) terrified that those of us capable of division may prove you wrong
The fact that our boy here won't even post a link to the data is not really giving me confidence in their analysis abilities.
It’s RAW DATA, jergoff! There’s no analysis needed. It’s literal counts of people. Counts that YOU refuse to accept. Stop trying to change the argument.
”You get the vaccine, you won’t get the virus / end up in hospitalized / die” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
”Hospitals are overwhelmed by the unvaccinated” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
LOL- I post the data nearly every week. You go find it and record it.
Case in point. Can't even provide a link to the dataset. You're either 1) making it up or 2) terrified that those of us capable of division may prove you wrong
You’re intentionally being obtuse. Or you’re stupid. One or the other.
Review my statements. Neither of them need any other data.
The fact that our boy here won't even post a link to the data is not really giving me confidence in their analysis abilities.
It’s RAW DATA, jergoff! There’s no analysis needed. It’s literal counts of people. Counts that YOU refuse to accept. Stop trying to change the argument.
”You get the vaccine, you won’t get the virus / end up in hospitalized / die” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
”Hospitals are overwhelmed by the unvaccinated” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
As I said, we are aware that your argument is just 'the vaccine is not 100% effective' dressed up in some C-tier MBA jargon. This is a boring and meaningless argument. I'm trying to give you some credit and argue some nuance here but you seem to stubbornly insist that we only give you credit for the most inane part of your tirades. Very well!
Still waiting on a link to the data though, if it exists.
Not MY case. Maybe the case YOU wqnt to be arguing against.
(See my response to the other guy.)
Its not that hard to admit that those two “official” statements were not true. Just do it- release your anxiety, you’ll feel better.
Yes, we are aware that your argument is literally just "people who are vaccinated sometimes die of COVID." We are being charitable and trying to argue against something less asinine than that. But, hey, if that's all you want to claim -- be my guest!
Saying "oh yeah, the vaccine isn't 100% effective!" and then smugly crossing your arms... is not the own you may think it is. Maybe that works on fellow MBAs.
The MBA was by far the easiest of those degrees, you know that, right?
Case in point. Can't even provide a link to the dataset. You're either 1) making it up or 2) terrified that those of us capable of division may prove you wrong
You’re intentionally being obtuse. Or you’re stupid. One or the other.
Review my statements. Neither of them need any other data.
It's increasingly obvious that you are simply making up the data if you cannot point to a source for it. Why you aren't cooking the books a little more in your favor... I don't know. General incompetence probably.
It’s RAW DATA, jergoff! There’s no analysis needed. It’s literal counts of people. Counts that YOU refuse to accept. Stop trying to change the argument.
”You get the vaccine, you won’t get the virus / end up in hospitalized / die” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
”Hospitals are overwhelmed by the unvaccinated” was not a true statement. No other data is needed.
As I said, we are aware that your argument is just 'the vaccine is not 100% effective' dressed up in some C-tier MBA jargon. This is a boring and meaningless argument. I'm trying to give you some credit and argue some nuance here but you seem to stubbornly insist that we only give you credit for the most inane part of your tirades. Very well!
Still waiting on a link to the data though, if it exists.
This entire argument is based on the fact that you are unable to admit basic FACTS because your brains have been turned to mush over the past 2 years.
I post data that proves that two of the “official Covid narrative” mantras are false, and you refuse to accept it. Stop trying to change the argument into something of which you feel you have the upper hand.
Yes, we are aware that your argument is literally just "people who are vaccinated sometimes die of COVID." We are being charitable and trying to argue against something less asinine than that. But, hey, if that's all you want to claim -- be my guest!
Saying "oh yeah, the vaccine isn't 100% effective!" and then smugly crossing your arms... is not the own you may think it is. Maybe that works on fellow MBAs.
The MBA was by far the easiest of those degrees, you know that, right?
I hope that was accompanied by an arm cross and a smug smile
As I said, we are aware that your argument is just 'the vaccine is not 100% effective' dressed up in some C-tier MBA jargon. This is a boring and meaningless argument. I'm trying to give you some credit and argue some nuance here but you seem to stubbornly insist that we only give you credit for the most inane part of your tirades. Very well!
Still waiting on a link to the data though, if it exists.
This entire argument is based on the fact that you are unable to admit basic FACTS because your brains have been turned to mush over the past 2 years.
I post data that proves that two of the “official Covid narrative” mantras are false, and you refuse to accept it. Stop trying to change the argument into something of which you feel you have the upper hand.
"The vaccine is not 100% effective" is your argument. You are a generational visionary. Blasting apart years of propaganda. What would we do without you.
Well, provided that you aren't just making up this data. Which you obviously are.
A surge involving the rapidly-transmitting Delta variant in heavily vaccinated countries has led to much hand-wringing that the vaccines are not effective against Delta, or vaccine effectivenss wanes after 4-6 months. This ha...
This entire argument is based on the fact that you are unable to admit basic FACTS because your brains have been turned to mush over the past 2 years.
I post data that proves that two of the “official Covid narrative” mantras are false, and you refuse to accept it. Stop trying to change the argument into something of which you feel you have the upper hand.
"The vaccine is not 100% effective" is your argument. You are a generational visionary. Blasting apart years of propaganda. What would we do without you.
Well, provided that you aren't just making up this data. Which you obviously are.
I’m absolutely not making it up. And I’ll continue to post it, as I have for weeks now. I strongly encourage you all to search your local hospital system data on their website.
Not once was I trying to convey anything more than raw data that disproves the two most basic claims from the Covidian tribe. Yet, look how long it’s taken for you to admit they were false.
If you weren’t such an insufferable DB, I’d be (probably many people on here) more willing to work with you. But given that you couldn’t understand the basic FACTS that can he derived from JUST the regular counts of hospitalized Covid patients, I have little confidence that you’d be honest in your contributions.
