So what's your explanation (speculation, whatever) as to why this particular group of scientists and statisticians, obviously representing a broad swath of institutions around the world, and not obviously biased or beholden to anyone, came to the conclusions they did and concluded that the prior studies did not apply to the COVID-19 pandemic?
I need to understand that, I think, before simply rejecting this study out of hand for the sole reason it disagreed with prior studies.
I am not by the way merely assuming they are right, for better or worse I found their exposition fairly persuasive. Now granted this science is above my pay grade, but in my chosen profession I have had to learn a lot of complex subject matters and think for a layperson I am pretty good at it. (Must be a logical fallacy there lol.)
__________________
Four phrases I have coined that sum up today's hobby:
No consequences.
Stuff trumps all.
The flip is the commoodity.
Animal Farm grading.
Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 05-19-2021 at 08:13 PM.
|