WHERE ARE THE BODIES?

[harmankardon1]

Army of None is suffering a terminal case of confirmation bias. Ever since he chose to act as if he was a canary in a coal mine, he is now cornered into proving, no matter what, that he was right. Even if he wasn’t. 

yep it's painful to endure..

[Kwon]

[Flexacon]

Army of None is suffering a terminal case of confirmation bias. Ever since he chose to act as if he was a canary in a coal mine, he is now cornered into proving, no matter what, that he was right. Even if he wasn’t. 

Yes. He had equally as many posts about things he was wrong about. One ridiculous claim of his was that the science backed that the virus only had Chinese/Asian victims.

[harmankardon1]

Yes. He had equally as many posts about things he was wrong about. One ridiculous claim of his was that the science backed that the virus only had Chinese/Asian victims.

Not only wrong but heavily retarded posts, paranoid weirdo shit.

[Thin Lizzy]

At this point we’re all hip to the scam. Take previously very sick people give them the test which probably will show up positive for anyone with a seriously compromised immune system and then when they die label it corona:

In New York, 77% of the 914 patients who died had a medical condition such as diabetes, lung disease, heart disease or asthma, according to the city’s health department. Only 1.5% were otherwise healthy, w

Dangerous shit to be spewing if not retarded.

Owned again Abe:



Why have so many coronavirus patients died in Italy?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/


According to Prof Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health, the country’s mortality rate is far higher due to demographics - the nation has the second oldest population worldwide - and the manner in which hospitals record deaths.


“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus


“On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity - many had two or three,” he says.

[illuminati]

Thanks Kwon
More much more of her Needed.

[mphgrove]

From what I’ve seen, Chinese, for the most part, keep to themselves. It’s amazing that the few thousand that got out of Wuhan in December managed to infect every corner of the entire world.🤔

Meanwhile in Japan:

Ruling party asks for 60 tril. yen stimulus to aid virus-hit economy

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/03/02cbbdf44658-breaking-news-japan-to-ban-entry-from-us-china-s-korea-most-of-europe.html

Interesting about Chinese keeping to themselves. Contrast that with New Yorkers. My observation from having lived in NYC in the past is that, despite a huge percentage of New Yorkers being single and living alone, they tend to be frenetically social, going out and getting together much more often than others in US. In addition to the population density, this reverse social distancing factor could be a factor in the exponential spread there.

[harmankardon1]

Thanks Kwon
More much more of her Needed.

Yeah she's smoking!

Flat stomach with that ass.... Great stuff

[obsidian]

What's going on with the clouds in the background?!

[AbrahamG]

Owned again Abe:



Why have so many coronavirus patients died in Italy?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/


According to Prof Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health, the country’s mortality rate is far higher due to demographics - the nation has the second oldest population worldwide - and the manner in which hospitals record deaths.


“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus


“On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity - many had two or three,” he says.

You win.  Everyone back to work.  No more social distancing.  Open all gyms, businesses, etc etc. 

[illuminati]

What's going on with the clouds in the background?!

Clouds ?  What Clouds ?

🤣

[el numero uno]

Army of None is suffering a terminal case of confirmation bias. Ever since he chose to act as if he was a canary in a coal mine, he is now cornered into proving, no matter what, that he was right. Even if he wasn’t. 

Aren't most Getbiggers guilty of that?

Remember the article about the death toll predictions being revised? Every Getbigger which had claimed Covid-19 was just another flu concluded that the model was wrong, even thou the article clearly stated that was not the case. That, my friend, is also confirmation bias.

You want a more extreme example? The morons who believe some random youtubers claims about the virus being created with X purpose by X government.

[obsidian]

Clouds ?  What Clouds ?

🤣

She has great tits and a very fuckable BDNPO Ass! Kwon as usual delivers! Best poster on Getbig!

[mazrim]

Remember the article about the death toll predictions being revised? Every Getbigger which had claimed Covid-19 was just another flu concluded that the model was wrong, even thou the article clearly stated that was not the case. That, my friend, is also confirmation bias.

That model was wrong. On page 14 it states "to avoid a rebound in transmission, these policies will need to need to be maintained until large stocks of vaccine are available to immunize the population- which would be 18 months or more." The whole point of his model was based off of long shutdowns.
He revised his model when we did not meet anywhere near that time and his best case scenario was based on months and months of lockdowns.

He revised it after 2 days of shutdown in UK so no data was even in yet, so his new data could not have been based on that either.

You can't go by the article you have to go by what he originally stated and showed. He tried to save face and that's it.

There are also graphs in the link showing that there are no scenarios in which critical care beds are not overwhelmed. There was one way that maybe they would not be and that was with 5 months of complete shutdown yet his newest model showed that that was no longer the case.

Here is his original: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf?fbclid=IwAR15h5oAjwjwryZZIwwI2cKgmUfhl15DTnycPjYNajyFFFMqL0-PwfwtY6k

He messed up badly on that model and many people bought into it. Also, of the 20,000 that he now says will die in UK, 2/3rds would have died anyway according to him.

[Kwon]

What's going on with the clouds in the background?!

Covid-clouds!

[Marvin Martian]

Slowly, one by one. Some funeral homes in certain parts are up 3x in business, but the real trouble is all the work that goes into picking up and then staging the funerals. Everyone is scared to help load or even be close the bodies. And they are trying to have semi-normal services for the dead, but the decontamination procedures afterward are adding hours to it.

Good friend of mine owns a couple of funeral homes, a crematorium and graveyard / mausoleum. His family had owned one of the funeral homes for generations and he expanded. I need to ask him if business has improved.  

[el numero uno]

That model was wrong. On page 14 it states "to avoid a rebound in transmission, these policies will need to need to be maintained until large stocks of vaccine are available to immunize the population- which would be 18 months or more." The whole point of his model was based off of long shutdowns.
He revised his model when we did not meet anywhere near that time and his best case scenario was based on months and months of lockdowns.

He revised it after 2 days of shutdown in UK so no data was even in yet, so his new data could not have been based on that either.

You can't go by the article you have to go by what he originally stated and showed. He tried to save face and that's it.

There are also graphs in the link showing that there are no scenarios in which critical care beds are not overwhelmed. There was one way that maybe they would not be and that was with 5 months of complete shutdown yet his newest model showed that that was no longer the case.

Here is his original: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf?fbclid=IwAR15h5oAjwjwryZZIwwI2cKgmUfhl15DTnycPjYNajyFFFMqL0-PwfwtY6k

He messed up badly on that model and many people bought into it. Also, of the 20,000 that he now says will die in UK, 2/3rds would have died anyway according to him.

Even if what you say it's true, there's no way one could conclude this from the article, so my point about confirmation bias still stands.

Now, regarding your claims, I can't comment on them since I haven't read the paper and the revision. But I'm pretty sure there will be many getbigger who will agree with you without even clicking on that link, further proving my point about confirmation bias.

[Thin Lizzy]

Aren't most Getbiggers guilty of that?

Remember the article about the death toll predictions being revised? Every Getbigger which had claimed Covid-19 was just another flu concluded that the model was wrong, even thou the article clearly stated that was not the case. That, my friend, is also confirmation bias.

You want a more extreme example? The morons who believe some random youtubers claims about the virus being created with X purpose by X government.

I didn’t say the virus was man made. I said this:

This is how the scam works. If you get a positive test reading, the cause of death is corona and nothing else counts.

There was a story about a 20-year-old who died of corona. Turned out he also had leukemia.

According to Prof Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health, the country’s mortality rate is far higher due to demographics - the nation has the second oldest population worldwide - and the manner in which hospitals record deaths. 


“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus


“On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity - many had two or three,” he says. 

[Thin Lizzy]

That said, I will admit to being wrong about one thing. I figured that after the stimulus was passed, that shit would start winding down and the economy would be restarted. What I didn’t take into account was the possibility that they were going to do another one immediately afterwards.


Pelosi sees infrastructure package similar to Trump $2T plan

https://apnews.com/2581d5c0e45d0ce4361c997d4a9b9d00

[mazrim]

Even if what you say it's true, there's no way one could conclude this from the article, so my point about confirmation bias still stands.

Now, regarding your claims, I can't comment on them since I haven't read the paper and the revision. But I'm pretty sure there will be many getbigger who will agree with you without even clicking on that link, further proving my point about confirmation bias.

Gotcha. So your point was just based on how some are interpreting particular articles. My misunderstanding.

[Flexacon]

That model was wrong. On page 14 it states "to avoid a rebound in transmission, these policies will need to need to be maintained until large stocks of vaccine are available to immunize the population- which would be 18 months or more." The whole point of his model was based off of long shutdowns.
He revised his model when we did not meet anywhere near that time and his best case scenario was based on months and months of lockdowns.

He revised it after 2 days of shutdown in UK so no data was even in yet, so his new data could not have been based on that either.

You can't go by the article you have to go by what he originally stated and showed. He tried to save face and that's it.

There are also graphs in the link showing that there are no scenarios in which critical care beds are not overwhelmed. There was one way that maybe they would not be and that was with 5 months of complete shutdown yet his newest model showed that that was no longer the case.

Here is his original: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf?fbclid=IwAR15h5oAjwjwryZZIwwI2cKgmUfhl15DTnycPjYNajyFFFMqL0-PwfwtY6k

He messed up badly on that model and many people bought into it. Also, of the 20,000 that he now says will die in UK, 2/3rds would have died anyway according to him.

I think part of the point of that original paper was to get the UK government to move away from herd immunity. He basically told them change your strategy as I'm gonna publish this.

Also his early numbers used the rate of infection from the Chinese data, but that was changed after data from Italy became available. Can't really blame the model for that. The same model gave the second set of numbers.

[Rambone]

What's going on with the clouds in the background?!

Clouds aren’t cirrocumulus. Would not hit!

[Kwon]

1

[IroNat]

Glad you're back, Kwon.

[Hulkotron]

The virus appears to be unfairly targeting bodybuilders.