The Coronavirus, not the beer

There is nothing more inevitable than people doing mental gymnastics than justifying the incorrect expert predictions.

They've been doing it for years with climate change.

The models included SD assumptions in their base case and have proven to be quite wrong.

No model is going to be perfect, but to not be within the same ballpark is unacceptable.

I'm grateful they were wrong. Hopefully IHME has a few more downward revisions in them.
 
sturg33 said:
I dunno dude... while Berenson is posting data consistently, he DID get that one thing wrong that one time.

So sadly, everything he posts is dismissed and instead we must continue lockdowns for another 6 months.
Click to expand...

Sad take by you. It's not just that he was wrong, it was that he lied and then doubled down on like a super important point. The "good faith" explanation is that he doesn't have the slightest idea how to read the data. The "bad faith" explanation is he's a troll. Either one is a good reason to take his "analysis" with a huge grain of salt.

For example, in this linked tweet, he is just straight up lying again about what the governor is talking about. He's clearly talking about projections falling in the blue portion of the graph from 9,800 to 1,800. Thus why it says "Initial Peak Projection: 9,800." You know, right there on the graph. The yellow graph is a counterfactual for demonstration purposes under a "nobody every takes any action theory." That was never the actual projection since Ohio starting moving on this in early March.

He then lies about the Ohio mitigation. He says: "Ohio didn’t *actually* issue a lockdown order until Monday, March 23. Yes, lockdowns are such magic that they can PREVENT (theoretical) peaks that occurred before they were issued..." But that was not the date Ohio started taking mitigation action; that was just the final step. Ohio was one of the first states to move very quickly. They cancelled major events in early March and shutdown all restaurants and bars by Mar 15.

This guys premise that this graph is a lie and Ohio is trying to deceive the world is legit 9/11 truther level nonsense.

My advice was for you to read him at least as critically as you believe "leftists" should read mainstream media sources. It's doesn't seem like that really took. But please, continue to whine about how your "skeptics" are being silenced.
 
Metaphysicist said:
No. Just pure illiteracy. They start with a baseline of no distancing - that's the 2.2m number. They then include other model projections with lower numbers based on measures taken.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculously bad modeling then because there is a 0% chance that would happen.

It's completely irrelevant to do that exercise. And we wonder why they were so wrong.
 
Metaphysicist said:
Sad take by you. It's not just that he was wrong, it was that he lied and then doubled down on like a super important point. The "good faith" explanation is that he doesn't have the slightest idea how to read the data. The "bad faith" explanation is he's a troll. Either one is a good reason to take his "analysis" with a huge grain of salt.

For example, in this linked tweet, he is just straight up lying again about what the governor is talking about. He's clearly talking about projections falling in the blue portion of the graph from 9,800 to 1,800. Thus why it says "Initial Peak Projection: 9,800." You know, right there on the graph. The yellow graph is a counterfactual for demonstration purposes under a "nobody every takes any action theory." That was never the actual projection since Ohio starting moving on this in early March.

He then lies about the Ohio mitigation. He says: "Ohio didn’t *actually* issue a lockdown order until Monday, March 23. Yes, lockdowns are such magic that they can PREVENT (theoretical) peaks that occurred before they were issued..." But that was not the date Ohio started taking mitigation action; that was just the final step. Ohio was one of the first states to move very quickly. They cancelled major events in early March and shutdown all restaurants and bars by Mar 15.

This guys premise that this graph is a lie and Ohio is trying to deceive the world is legit 9/11 truther level nonsense.

My advice was for you to read him at least as critically as you believe "leftists" should read mainstream media sources. It's doesn't seem like that really took. But please, continue to whine about how your "skeptics" are being silenced.
Click to expand...

The funny thing about you telling me to read the one alternative voice to the hundreds of people I follow peddling the same information much less is how we get to a mess where everyone blindly accepts that if we dont imprison ourselves 2 million people will die.

Saying a shutdown was announced on March 23 is not a lie. In fact, it's the opposite of a lie. I understand your point that the official semantics is a technicality, but it's not a lie.

You'll have to excuse me for paying attention to someone who is posting (real) data, and asking questions that arent the consensus of every firefighting journalist on my timeline. Why an opposing viewpoint of the real world data we are seeing is so offensive to you is a puzzler to me.
 
thethe said:
That's ridiculously bad modeling then because there is a 0% chance that would happen.

It's completely irrelevant to do that exercise. And we wonder why they were so wrong.
Click to expand...

That scenario is their point of departure. They make it clear that this is NOT likely to happen.
 
I don't think anyone on the IC team had an inkling that people would claim this was their projection. They would be startled by that. That scenario was just an expository tool. A way to explain their thought process.
 
nsacpi said:
I don't think anyone on the IC team had an inkling that people would claim this was their projection. They would be startled by that. That scenario was just an expository tool. A way to explain their thought process.
Click to expand...

We will do our best to make them look reasonable

[Tw]1248355751019634688[/tw]
 
thethe said:
Any comments on that German study?
Click to expand...

I am happy for any evidence that the virus has already worked through a good portion of the population. I think we can all agree that the sooner we get good testing out there on how many people have already had it, the quicker we can figure out how to get back to normal.

His source is bizarre, so it is hard for me to really make much of it; he has a screenshot instead of a link and after googling it, it is from some emarketing website. Best I can tell it is referencing this Germany study, which I can't read. I saw that Germany is gonna do a large scale version of this study, which, you know, great. But assuming these numbers are real:

1) A fatality rate of .4 still seems pretty high using this method. The flu has a case fatality rate of <.1. If you include all the people who never actually get diagnosed with it, that number would presumably drop as well. This doesn't really seem that inconsistent with the "10x worse than the flu" thing Fauci was saying.

2) The death numbers in NYC seem pretty likely to eclipse this. But I would be happy to be wrong.

3) Overall promising, will be glad to have the larger scale data.
 
thethe said:
That's ridiculously bad modeling then because there is a 0% chance that would happen.

It's completely irrelevant to do that exercise. And we wonder why they were so wrong.
Click to expand...

It's ridiculously bad modeling to establish to establish a baseline. Got it. That makes a lot of sense.
 
Great, I appreciate your feedback mostly because I like your writing.

Based on these preliminary findings would you also agree that in a city like NY the virus would spread more?
 
[tw]1248386761174036481[/tw]

Great news that, most likely, people are sick and worried about bills

So they aren’t going to the hospital and instead just dying
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top