Jump to content

insaintee

Saints
  • Content Count

    6,057
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

insaintee last won the day on July 15 2013

insaintee had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About insaintee

  • Rank
    Nae Necked Numptie and MOD
  • Birthday 05/01/1962

B&W Army Custom Fields

  • Top Man
    Kyle Magennis

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Behind you
  • Interests
    The betterment of mankind

Recent Profile Visitors

12,081 profile views
  1. It's a top end estimate. of a range of predictions. The working assumptions are based on more than one paper. I'm really not sure what your trying to prove? That we had an intervention and avoided worse case scenarios is surely a good thing.
  2. You would first vaccinate the likely vectors of spread. people that have the most contacts with other people
  3. I get every thing right. You mean this paper I assume. If you read it you will see there is a range of predictions and also we did not have an uncontrolled outbreak. In view of the deaths we've had, an assumption of 250,000 and middle estimate is not an unreasonable guess for what would have happened https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
  4. The experts predicted up to 250,000 deaths if we did nothing with the lower end of that range being between 100,000 and up . The flaw in your argument is that we did something. We still had @50,000 deaths. In a year we normally get @500,000 deaths. And the possibility of a further wave of deaths can't be ruled out.
  5. That's not an Afro, that is a haystack
  6. Think Baird could have done fine for us. However I think it is significant that he has not played for us since a certain league cup game. In which case better for all if he moves on. Goody did single him out as a player he wanted to work with at the start of the season.
  7. Yes please thought Parkin was decent
  8. Forunately it is not you that needs convinced, it public health officials and experts. Not wish to dis your *ahem* scientific credentuals
  9. https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-08-oxford-covid-19-study-face-masks-and-coverings-work-act-now https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/set-c/set-c-facemasks.pdf?la=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24
  10. I'll just leave this here 😎
  11. In that case there are no facts. In fact there are no facts in science hence you get climate change deniers and the like
  12. Still hurting from being made to look an ass. My suggestion is stop acting like an ass.
  13. It implys causatiion. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/life-sciences/ecology-and-conservation/cause-and-correlation-biology-users-guide-path-analysis-structural-equations-and-causal-inference-r-2nd-edition?format=PB Either 1. It's a statistical artifact (which should not be the case if statisical tests are applied) 2 There is a spurious relationship. A third factor is controling both factors (should not be the case if a proper controls are included in design e,g. in a multi-variate regression model. 3. There is a indirect relationship. Which means that a third variable sits between to the two others in the system and that variance in the control variable influences the intermediate variable which in turn influences the output varible. (in effect this is just the same as a direct relationship) 4, A direct relationship. Good too see you recognising the limits of the scientific method
  14. I also refer you to the paper supplied earlier.
×
×
  • Create New...