More evidence that China is lying BIG TIME about the extent

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

The above-linear increase in deaths year-over-year among an aging
population could be just the result that it was a Communist team effort
for the better part of 40 years to get that. go team?

Historical data is of not much use in a chaotic event like COVID-19, which is a true game changer.

Twaddle.It's just one more infectious disease.

Just look at the 1918 Flu, which killed more people than WWI itself (but was promulgated by the war). On top of that, the Chicomm data is completely unreliable, at least for the current crisis. Chaotic events just don't lend themselves to analysis by differential equations which, by their very nature, assume a linear system.

You've got to have a non-linear system to have chaos.

Differential equations work fine for non-linear systems. They do assume piecewise linearity - which is what "finite, continuous and differentiable" is all about, but there's a huge universe of non-linear problems for which they do work.

Spice handles the exponential response of a transistor to changes in base-emitter voltage perfectly satisfactorily.

I've been aware that Flyguy is intellectually challenged for some time now, but this bit of evidence is more conclusive than usual.

LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming, and a monarchy is a modern form of government!! And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

The above-linear increase in deaths year-over-year among an aging
population could be just the result that it was a Communist team effort
for the better part of 40 years to get that. go team?

Historical data is of not much use in a chaotic event like COVID-19, which is a true game changer.

Twaddle.It's just one more infectious disease.

Just look at the 1918 Flu, which killed more people than WWI itself (but was promulgated by the war). On top of that, the Chicomm data is completely unreliable, at least for the current crisis. Chaotic events just don't lend themselves to analysis by differential equations which, by their very nature, assume a linear system.

You've got to have a non-linear system to have chaos.

Differential equations work fine for non-linear systems. They do assume piecewise linearity - which is what "finite, continuous and differentiable" is all about, but there's a huge universe of non-linear problems for which they do work.

Spice handles the exponential response of a transistor to changes in base-emitter voltage perfectly satisfactorily.

I've been aware that Flyguy is intellectually challenged for some time now, but this bit of evidence is more conclusive than usual.

LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming, and a monarchy is a modern form of government!! And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

The above-linear increase in deaths year-over-year among an aging
population could be just the result that it was a Communist team effort
for the better part of 40 years to get that. go team?

Historical data is of not much use in a chaotic event like COVID-19, which is a true game changer.

Twaddle.It's just one more infectious disease.

Just look at the 1918 Flu, which killed more people than WWI itself (but was promulgated by the war). On top of that, the Chicomm data is completely unreliable, at least for the current crisis. Chaotic events just don't lend themselves to analysis by differential equations which, by their very nature, assume a linear system.

You've got to have a non-linear system to have chaos.

Differential equations work fine for non-linear systems. They do assume piecewise linearity - which is what "finite, continuous and differentiable" is all about, but there's a huge universe of non-linear problems for which they do work.

Spice handles the exponential response of a transistor to changes in base-emitter voltage perfectly satisfactorily.

I've been aware that Flyguy is intellectually challenged for some time now, but this bit of evidence is more conclusive than usual.

LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming, and a monarchy is a modern form of government!! And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality. I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me. Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare; telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 6:01:47 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:

On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 8:50:05 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 5:48:50 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 7:42:12 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 3:04:12 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:

The higher the infection rate (infections per million population, NOT per day or week), the more stringent the measures people must take to avoid infection. The latest data shows this is working: the national increase yesterday was just 7% in confirmed cases (after 23% the day before), and NY say a minuscule 0.3% increase. Nonetheless, a friend of mine in NYC and his wife got infected and they have no idea how (they practiced all the recommended procedures).

3/30 to 3/31 saw a 14% increase in count of infected in the US and the previous day saw a 14% increase as well. These numbers will give you exactly the same result as your "rate" per capita unless the number of deaths greatly increases day to day. This is according to worldometers. Where did you get your data?

https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en

The numbers I pulled off of that page are for total cases, not current infections. The numbers are

Apr 1 215066 13%
Mar 31 189953 16%
Mar 30 164275 15%
Mar 29 142474

Apr 1 number seems to not be totally updated yet. Still, not the numbers you get. Don't know where you got the 7% increase.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

There seems to be a lag between when cases are reported and when they appear on this website. Maryland, for example, had no change yesterday, but had the largest increase of all states today (40%). Yesterday, NY's slight 0.3% increase was replaced by a 21% increase today. Another website I know of uses a 7 day sliding window average to filter out these perturbations:
https://aatishb.com/covidtrends/

My compilations are now:
3/27 93,000 24%
3/28 115,334 24%
3/29 125,189 9%
3/30 143,929 15%
3/31 176,560 23%
4/1 188,803 7%
4/2 226,025 20%

If I average just two days I get:
3/28 24%
3/29 16%
3/30 12%
3/31 19%
4/1 15%
4/2 13%

There is a definite trend downwards. The desire to get the most immediate data possible leads to this type of noise in the results.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 4:18:07 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

The above-linear increase in deaths year-over-year among an aging
population could be just the result that it was a Communist team effort
for the better part of 40 years to get that. go team?

Historical data is of not much use in a chaotic event like COVID-19, which is a true game changer.

Twaddle.It's just one more infectious disease.

Just look at the 1918 Flu, which killed more people than WWI itself (but was promulgated by the war). On top of that, the Chicomm data is completely unreliable, at least for the current crisis. Chaotic events just don't lend themselves to analysis by differential equations which, by their very nature, assume a linear system.

You've got to have a non-linear system to have chaos.

Differential equations work fine for non-linear systems. They do assume piecewise linearity - which is what "finite, continuous and differentiable" is all about, but there's a huge universe of non-linear problems for which they do work.

Spice handles the exponential response of a transistor to changes in base-emitter voltage perfectly satisfactorily.

I've been aware that Flyguy is intellectually challenged for some time now, but this bit of evidence is more conclusive than usual.

LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming, and a monarchy is a modern form of government!! And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects..

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality.

I just told you what the real basis is. The theoretical part is taking an average over a bunch of individual infected and infecting people.

You can't follow that because you are an idiot. The fact that you don't want to helps, but you are stupd enough to think that you can get away it it.

> I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me.

You don't. You take data which you don't understand and draw conclusions that the data doesn't support.

> Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare;

From anybody dumb enough to let you lecture them on anything.

> telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

Sure. Even the most mindless gets analogies with sports results. The fact that they are perfectly useless doesn't get noticed.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:31:23 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 4:18:07 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

The above-linear increase in deaths year-over-year among an aging
population could be just the result that it was a Communist team effort
for the better part of 40 years to get that. go team?

Historical data is of not much use in a chaotic event like COVID-19, which is a true game changer.

Twaddle.It's just one more infectious disease.

Just look at the 1918 Flu, which killed more people than WWI itself (but was promulgated by the war). On top of that, the Chicomm data is completely unreliable, at least for the current crisis. Chaotic events just don't lend themselves to analysis by differential equations which, by their very nature, assume a linear system.

You've got to have a non-linear system to have chaos.

Differential equations work fine for non-linear systems. They do assume piecewise linearity - which is what "finite, continuous and differentiable" is all about, but there's a huge universe of non-linear problems for which they do work.

Spice handles the exponential response of a transistor to changes in base-emitter voltage perfectly satisfactorily.

I've been aware that Flyguy is intellectually challenged for some time now, but this bit of evidence is more conclusive than usual.

LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming, and a monarchy is a modern form of government!! And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality.

I just told you what the real basis is. The theoretical part is taking an average over a bunch of individual infected and infecting people.

No, you're the idiot - I already told you that was included in the infection rate I came up with.

You can't follow that because you are an idiot. The fact that you don't want to helps, but you are stupd enough to think that you can get away it it..

LOL! If you are going to accuse me (or anybody else) of being "stupd" you better well SPELL IT RIGHT!

I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me.

You don't. You take data which you don't understand and draw conclusions that the data doesn't support.

Only in your demented mind. You can't even compute your vaunted R0.
ff

Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare;

From anybody dumb enough to let you lecture them on anything.

Non-response noted.

telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

Sure. Even the most mindless gets analogies with sports results. The fact that they are perfectly useless doesn't get noticed.

What sports analogies, sport? No, they go right to the heart of the matter. WA is being successful and the data prove it.

And try not responding until you've actually computed R0.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2020-04-01, Flyguy <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:
> LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming,

With no convincing evidence to the contrary not any clear motive to
lie, that seems sensible.

> and a monarchy is a modern form of government!!

How are you measuring modern?

> And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what is clearly a chaotic environment.

It's just a type of mean. getting an estimate for R0 and a confidence
interval for that estimate is highschool level statistics.

--
Jasen.

 

[bitrex]

On 4/1/2020 6:22 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 01/04/20 22:43, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:40:09 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:32:49 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:44:18 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 5:24:30 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:17:00 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 7:52:50 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 11:21:59 AM UTC-7, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 10:15:50 AM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
The Chicomm lovers of the world (i.e. Sloman) will have to
come to grip with the fact that China is totally lying about...


Nonsense.   The central authority in China has apparently been
open and honest (though
a population of 1.4 billion means some individuals might not be).

"Totally lying" is so broad, it cannot be true.   It cannot
even be false.   It's meaningless.

What does the 'Sloman' reference add?    Are you just trying to
push some parsonality
buttons?   Again?    Tiresome little provocateur!

LOL! "Open and honest?" Are you FUCKING JOKING??? They have been
ANYTHING BUT! Chicomms instinct is to lie first, apologize
later. More evidence of their lies:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/coronavirus-wuhan-doctor-ai-fen-speaks-out-against-authorities


They kept on saying that there was no evidence of human-to-human
transfer for THREE WEEKS after they knew otherwise! This, BY IT
SELF, makes China responsible for the world-wide epidemic.

The Guardian article makes it clear that the unwillingess to face
the reality of the problem was an initial - local - reaction in
December and early January.

At that point the central government got interested and got their
act in order.

China certainly allowed a lot of infected people to fly to
foreign countries, but that was before they had a clear idea of
what was going on.

Flyguy is deeply into China bashing, but only superficially
interested in what he is bashing them about. He'll post
half-baked story serves his purpose

No, China is BASHING THE WORLD! They LIED about COVID for WEEKS!!
What is half-baked is your reply.

You don't like it, but it isn't remotely as half-baked as your
enthusiasm for concentrating on a short period of low level
administrative idiocy in December and early January while ignoring
the rather more constructive attitude that emerged when China got a
proper grasp of what was going on.

It really is mindless China bashing, but you lack the wit to
appreciate quite how blatantly one-sided your propaganda is.

You are getting yourself kill-filed - in the sense that nobody is
going to bother reading what you have to say because it hasn't got
any useful connection with reality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

LOL! Your VERY RESPONSE indicates that I am not being "kill filed,"
if that is even possible on Google Groups.

I don't take you seriously, but you are a sitting duck for the kind
of dismissive comment that I enjoy making. They also serve to remind
other people to think about what they are posting, so it does serve a
useful social purpose, even if you are too dim to learn anything from
them.

If telling the truth about the Chicomm is "China bashing" then so be
it, just as you are a China lover because of OZ's dependence on
China (just like the NBA). But it is hardly "mindless" - I back
everything up with facts, unlike you.

You lack the capacity to distinguish between verifiable facts and
your own demented opinions.
Who knows from what level the orders in China are coming from?
Certainly not you or I, and the Chicomm would be the LAST to say.

Sometimes it is pretty obvious to anybody with a functional brain.
You will have to take that on trust.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

It's time to put your feeble mind into gear:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-01/china-concealed-extent-of-virus-outbreak-u-s-intelligence-says


Just like they claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?

It was amusing how Trump cut Mike Pence off mid-ramble yesterday as the
latter was talking about health care even Trump seems exasperated with
his sycophants from time to time.

 

[bitrex]

On 4/1/2020 6:22 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 01/04/20 22:43, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:40:09 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:32:49 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:44:18 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 5:24:30 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:17:00 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 7:52:50 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 11:21:59 AM UTC-7, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 10:15:50 AM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
The Chicomm lovers of the world (i.e. Sloman) will have to
come to grip with the fact that China is totally lying about...


Nonsense.   The central authority in China has apparently been
open and honest (though
a population of 1.4 billion means some individuals might not be).

"Totally lying" is so broad, it cannot be true.   It cannot
even be false.   It's meaningless.

What does the 'Sloman' reference add?    Are you just trying to
push some parsonality
buttons?   Again?    Tiresome little provocateur!

LOL! "Open and honest?" Are you FUCKING JOKING??? They have been
ANYTHING BUT! Chicomms instinct is to lie first, apologize
later. More evidence of their lies:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/coronavirus-wuhan-doctor-ai-fen-speaks-out-against-authorities


They kept on saying that there was no evidence of human-to-human
transfer for THREE WEEKS after they knew otherwise! This, BY IT
SELF, makes China responsible for the world-wide epidemic.

The Guardian article makes it clear that the unwillingess to face
the reality of the problem was an initial - local - reaction in
December and early January.

At that point the central government got interested and got their
act in order.

China certainly allowed a lot of infected people to fly to
foreign countries, but that was before they had a clear idea of
what was going on.

Flyguy is deeply into China bashing, but only superficially
interested in what he is bashing them about. He'll post
half-baked story serves his purpose

No, China is BASHING THE WORLD! They LIED about COVID for WEEKS!!
What is half-baked is your reply.

You don't like it, but it isn't remotely as half-baked as your
enthusiasm for concentrating on a short period of low level
administrative idiocy in December and early January while ignoring
the rather more constructive attitude that emerged when China got a
proper grasp of what was going on.

It really is mindless China bashing, but you lack the wit to
appreciate quite how blatantly one-sided your propaganda is.

You are getting yourself kill-filed - in the sense that nobody is
going to bother reading what you have to say because it hasn't got
any useful connection with reality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

LOL! Your VERY RESPONSE indicates that I am not being "kill filed,"
if that is even possible on Google Groups.

I don't take you seriously, but you are a sitting duck for the kind
of dismissive comment that I enjoy making. They also serve to remind
other people to think about what they are posting, so it does serve a
useful social purpose, even if you are too dim to learn anything from
them.

If telling the truth about the Chicomm is "China bashing" then so be
it, just as you are a China lover because of OZ's dependence on
China (just like the NBA). But it is hardly "mindless" - I back
everything up with facts, unlike you.

You lack the capacity to distinguish between verifiable facts and
your own demented opinions.
Who knows from what level the orders in China are coming from?
Certainly not you or I, and the Chicomm would be the LAST to say.

Sometimes it is pretty obvious to anybody with a functional brain.
You will have to take that on trust.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

It's time to put your feeble mind into gear:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-01/china-concealed-extent-of-virus-outbreak-u-s-intelligence-says


Just like they claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?

Guys like Ben Sasse (and probably Nancy Pelosi, to be fair) always jump
the gun and think they have "smoking guns" when they don't have shit.

They start beating their "cheating" wives the minute they see a single
random dude's message on her cell phone.

You want to catch a cheater for real be sitting in a chair in the
bedroom when she and her paramour hit the light switch on the way in.
"Hi kids!"

anything less just makes you look bad, bro. Adlai Stevenson they ain't.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:49:00 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:31:23 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 4:18:07 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality.

I just told you what the real basis is. The theoretical part is taking an average over a bunch of individual infected and infecting people.

No, you're the idiot - I already told you that was included in the infection rate I came up with.

But didn't pay any attention to the fact that when the infection first started is an equally important contributor to the number of people infected right now - probably more important before lockodowns and social distancing start reducing the R0.

You still don't seem to get that, which is one of the many failures of comprehension which make you perhaps the most blatantly idiotic poster here at the moment.

You can't follow that because you are an idiot. The fact that you don't want to helps, but you are stupid enough to think that you can get away it it.

LOL! If you are going to accuse me (or anybody else) of being "stupid" you better well SPELL IT RIGHT!

Typos are always with us.

I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me.

You don't. You take data which you don't understand and draw conclusions that the data doesn't support.

Only in your demented mind. You can't even compute your vaunted R0.

I have done it here from time to time. The ratio of last week's new case number to the number five or six days later can be used to do it. It's not a particularly reliable estimate when new infections from new communities keep on getting added into the published totals.

Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare;

From anybody dumb enough to let you lecture them on anything.

Non-response noted.

Lack of appreciation of the insult involved noted. I'll have to be more explicitly contemptuous for you to notice.

telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

Sure. Even the most mindless gets analogies with sports results. The fact that they are perfectly useless doesn't get noticed.

What sports analogies, sport? No, they go right to the heart of the matter. WA is being successful and the data prove it.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/washington-coronavirus-cases.html#map

None of the data you have posted. The new case per day rate peaked at about 600 per day a couple of days ago, but it's a bit early to claim success.

> And try not responding until you've actually computed R0.

I have computed R0 and shown my working. It wasn't a particularly reliable estimate, as I pointed out at the time.

For the US as whole there were 29,874 new cases on the 2nd April and 19,452 on the 28th March, which would be an R0 of 1.5. Less than the the 2.5 to 3 seen if you aren't doing anything to slow the spread, but more than the 0.99 you have to get if you want the epidemic to go away, and lots more than the 0.5 or lower you see if it is going away fast.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote in
news:r66do1$asg$2@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org:

On 2020-04-01, FlyTurd <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:
LOL! You believe the Chicomms have been honest and forthcoming,

With no convincing evidence to the contrary not any clear motive
to lie, that seems sensible.

and a monarchy is a modern form of government!!

How are you measuring modern?

And you think you can come up with an R0 infection rate in what
is clearly a chaotic environment.

It's just a type of mean. getting an estimate for R0 and a
confidence interval for that estimate is highschool level
statistics.

+1 FlyTurd's brains flew a long time ago.

 

On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 2:08:34 PM UTC-4, speff wrote:

On Monday, 30 March 2020 13:15:50 UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
The Chicomm lovers of the world (i.e. Sloman) will have to come to grip with the fact that China is totally lying about what is happening in the country. I reported earlier that there has been an unprecedented number of cell phone disconnects in China (21 million). Now, funeral homes in Wuhan have markedly increased their orders of urns:

https://www.newsweek.com/wuhan-covid-19-death-toll-may-tens-thousands-data-cremations-shipments-urns-suggest-1494914

And this is just Wuhan - millions left the city after the lockdown was announced. No doubt that many of these have spread the disease to other parts of the country. China is likely looking a millions of deaths to COVID before this is over.

China has done a fantastic job containing this to Hubei. No city outside Hubei got more than about 500 cases due to aggressive contact tracing of
something like a million people, using a staff of something like 5,000 people
working full time.

They are being very, very cautious in permitting businesses to re-open, so
I don't think we're going to see any major fumbles. Truly belt and suspenders. Masks are required, hand sanitizers are required. Various
other requirements for the businesses.

You can't get onto the subway without a clean bill of health. You can't
get into your own apartment without the security guard checking your ID
and temperature. If someone does turn up sick, they quarantine the whole
section that used the stairwell. Travel requires a "green" health check.
They also use travel history (to buy a train ticket you have to scan
your ID on the vending machine). They were able to identify every rider on a 4 hour bus journey using the CCTV security camera and show that the virus can infect over a much longer distance than previously thought.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay

South Korea and Taiwan have also been able to keep it out of their major
cities by using less invasive methods. All good examples of competent public health protection and they had to act fast and make decisions on the fly.

More detailed China info here: https://ncov.dxy.cn/ncovh5/view/pneumonia
(use Chrome to translate, the English version doesn't have the domestic detail)

--sp




--

U.S. couldn't coordinate that kind of response in a million years. Wonder if that has to do with civil service in Asia being among the elite, whereas in U.S. it is ....errrr.... non-elite.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, April 4, 2020 at 12:46:28 AM UTC+11, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:

On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 2:08:34 PM UTC-4, speff wrote:
On Monday, 30 March 2020 13:15:50 UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

China has done a fantastic job containing this to Hubei. No city outside Hubei got more than about 500 cases due to aggressive contact tracing of something like a million people, using a staff of something like 5,000 people
working full time.

They are being very, very cautious in permitting businesses to re-open, so
I don't think we're going to see any major fumbles. Truly belt and suspenders. Masks are required, hand sanitizers are required. Various
other requirements for the businesses.

You can't get onto the subway without a clean bill of health. You can't
get into your own apartment without the security guard checking your ID
and temperature. If someone does turn up sick, they quarantine the whole
section that used the stairwell. Travel requires a "green" health check..
They also use travel history (to buy a train ticket you have to scan
your ID on the vending machine). They were able to identify every rider on a 4 hour bus journey using the CCTV security camera and show that the virus can infect over a much longer distance than previously thought.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay

South Korea and Taiwan have also been able to keep it out of their major
cities by using less invasive methods. All good examples of competent public health protection and they had to act fast and make decisions on the fly.

More detailed China info here: https://ncov.dxy.cn/ncovh5/view/pneumonia
(use Chrome to translate, the English version doesn't have the domestic detail)

U.S. couldn't coordinate that kind of response in a million years. Wonder if that has to do with civil service in Asia being among the elite, whereas in U.S. it is ....errrr.... non-elite.

It probably could, and the surveillance technology to make it work is probably in place and working, but US politicians would prefer to see a couple of million Americans die of Covid-19 than admit they were invading the privacy of everybody who votes for them (and against them) just as relentlessly as the Chinese do.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:49:00 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:31:23 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 4:18:07 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality.

I just told you what the real basis is. The theoretical part is taking an average over a bunch of individual infected and infecting people.

No, you're the idiot - I already told you that was included in the infection rate I came up with.

But didn't pay any attention to the fact that when the infection first started is an equally important contributor to the number of people infected right now - probably more important before lockodowns and social distancing start reducing the R0.

You still don't seem to get that, which is one of the many failures of comprehension which make you perhaps the most blatantly idiotic poster here at the moment.

You can't follow that because you are an idiot. The fact that you don't want to helps, but you are stupid enough to think that you can get away it it.

LOL! If you are going to accuse me (or anybody else) of being "stupid" you better well SPELL IT RIGHT!

Typos are always with us.

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T make typos!

I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me.

You don't. You take data which you don't understand and draw conclusions that the data doesn't support.

Only in your demented mind. You can't even compute your vaunted R0.

I have done it here from time to time. The ratio of last week's new case number to the number five or six days later can be used to do it. It's not a particularly reliable estimate when new infections from new communities keep on getting added into the published totals.

Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare;

From anybody dumb enough to let you lecture them on anything.

Non-response noted.

Lack of appreciation of the insult involved noted. I'll have to be more explicitly contemptuous for you to notice.

Which seems to be your ONLY skill.

telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

Sure. Even the most mindless gets analogies with sports results. The fact that they are perfectly useless doesn't get noticed.

What sports analogies, sport? No, they go right to the heart of the matter. WA is being successful and the data prove it.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/washington-coronavirus-cases.html#map

None of the data you have posted. The new case per day rate peaked at about 600 per day a couple of days ago, but it's a bit early to claim success.

Your statement simply doesn't make sense (surprise!). Here is my latest data:

Rank State Population Cases Infection Rate Infection Rank Rel to NY
1 New York 19,440,469 102,683 5,282 1 1.0
2 New Jersey 8,936,574 25,590 2,864 2 1.8
6 Louisiana 4,645,184 9,159 1,972 3 2.7
7 Massachusetts 6,976,597 8,966 1,285 4 4.1
4 Michigan 10,045,029 10,791 1,074 5 4.9
13 Connecticut 3,563,077 3,824 1,073 6 4.9
34 District of Columbia 720,687 757 1,050 7 5.0
10 Washington 7,797,095 6,597 846 8 6.2

If you will note, this data is VERY CLOSE to the NYT data. So, you are just CONFIRMING that I am on the right track!

And try not responding until you've actually computed R0.

I have computed R0 and shown my working. It wasn't a particularly reliable estimate, as I pointed out at the time.

For the US as whole there were 29,874 new cases on the 2nd April and 19,452 on the 28th March, which would be an R0 of 1.5. Less than the the 2.5 to 3 seen if you aren't doing anything to slow the spread, but more than the 0.99 you have to get if you want the epidemic to go away, and lots more than the 0.5 or lower you see if it is going away fast.

You are too full of yourself to see the problem with trying to compute R0 in real-time. R0 is an exponent of differences; if the underlying data from which the differences are computed has a lot of noise present the exponent will be pretty much meaningless. Integrated and filtered data (which is what I am doing), on the other hand, reduces this noise effect.

 

[dcaster@krl.org]

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
:

Typos are always with us.

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T make typos!

Wrong! I make many typos. When I was a teenager, I took a bunch of tests and found that I was very good using tweezers and very bad using my fingers.. _I am a lousy typist and could never touch type using a _Sholes keyboard.. So I switched to using a Dvorak keyboard. Using a Dvorak keyboard I can touch type but make many typos.

As far as intelligence , I scored 72 on the Navy GCT.

Dan

 

[dcaster@krl.org]

entrance exam (essentially an SAT).On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 9:08:46 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
"dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in
news:d0669310-cbc2-439c-84c9-531e78c23fe6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman
wrote:
:


entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

Typos are always with us.> entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T
make typos!
entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

Wrong! I make many typos. When I was a teenager, I took a bunch
of tests and found that I was very > entrance exam (essentially an SAT).good using tweezers and very
bad using my fingers. _I am a lousy typist and could never touch
type using a _Sholes keyboard. So > entrance exam (essentially an SAT).I switched to using a Dvorak
keyboard. Using a Dvorak keyboard I can touch type but make many
typos.

As far as intelligence , I scored 72 on the Navy GCT.

entrance exam (essentially an SAT). Dan

I don't have that number handy, but my test, which was at a 1978
time point (it matters) placed me at the 89th percentile of all whom
had taken it thus far. Oh and that was not GCT, it was AFEES
entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

If you double the Navy GCT score the result is roughly the IQ. So a Navy GCT score of 72 is roughly an IQ of 144. But could be higher as the highest possible Navy GCT score is 72.

Dan

 

"dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in
news:d0669310-cbc2-439c-84c9-531e78c23fe6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman
wrote:
:




Typos are always with us.

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T
make typos!




Wrong! I make many typos. When I was a teenager, I took a bunch
of tests and found that I was very good using tweezers and very
bad using my fingers. _I am a lousy typist and could never touch
type using a _Sholes keyboard. So I switched to using a Dvorak
keyboard. Using a Dvorak keyboard I can touch type but make many
typos.

As far as intelligence , I scored 72 on the Navy GCT.

Dan

I don't have that number handy, but my test, which was at a 1978
time point (it matters) placed me at the 89th percentile of all whom
had taken it thus far. Oh and that was not GCT, it was AFEES
entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

 

"dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in
news:e288f36a-6e3d-40c5-8609-119e5f63880e@googlegroups.com:

entrance exam (essentially an SAT).On Friday, April 3, 2020 at
9:08:46 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
"dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in
news:d0669310-cbc2-439c-84c9-531e78c23fe6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman
wrote:
:


entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

Typos are always with us.> entrance exam (essentially an
SAT).

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T
make typos!
entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

Wrong! I make many typos. When I was a teenager, I took a
bunch of tests and found that I was very > entrance exam
(essentially an SAT).good using tweezers and very bad using my
fingers. _I am a lousy typist and could never touch type using
a _Sholes keyboard. So > entrance exam (essentially an SAT).I
switched to using a Dvorak keyboard. Using a Dvorak keyboard I
can touch type but make many typos.

As far as intelligence , I scored 72 on the Navy GCT.

entrance exam (essentially an
SAT). Dan

I don't have that number handy, but my test, which was at a
1978
time point (it matters) placed me at the 89th percentile of all
whom had taken it thus far. Oh and that was not GCT, it was
AFEES entrance exam (essentially an SAT).

If you double the Navy GCT score the result is roughly the IQ.
So a Navy GCT score of 72 is roughly an IQ of 144. But could be
higher as the highest possible Navy GCT score is 72.

Dan

Well, what does the genius in you tell you?

A good test for that one is "Did you join MENSA?" and if the answer
is yes... FAIL! Hahahahaa!

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, April 4, 2020 at 5:56:19 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:49:00 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:31:23 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 4:18:07 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:18:19 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 8:40:27 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 6:33:32 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 4:27:21 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 1:15:50 AM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/31/2020 2:21 AM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 7:00:42 PM UTC-7, bitrex wrote:
On 3/30/2020 9:19 PM, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 3:26:05 PM UTC-7, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

snip

Flyguy does see the world from his own unique point of view - one in which he gets things right.

R0 is simply the number of other people that an infected person infects.

If you do thorough contact tracing you can actually count the number of people infected.

The average value of R0 in a particular environment and social situation is stable enough to be worth knowing, even if the situation is chaotic (which means short-term unpredictable rather than random).

R0 is a theoretical concept with no basis in reality.

I just told you what the real basis is. The theoretical part is taking an average over a bunch of individual infected and infecting people.

No, you're the idiot - I already told you that was included in the infection rate I came up with.

But didn't pay any attention to the fact that when the infection first started is an equally important contributor to the number of people infected right now - probably more important before lockodowns and social distancing start reducing the R0.

You still don't seem to get that, which is one of the many failures of comprehension which make you perhaps the most blatantly idiotic poster here at the moment.

You can't follow that because you are an idiot. The fact that you don't want to helps, but you are stupid enough to think that you can get away it it.

LOL! If you are going to accuse me (or anybody else) of being "stupid" you better well SPELL IT RIGHT!

Typos are always with us.

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T make typos!

If you could read, you could read up on "errors of action" and you'd find that everybody makes them. Intelligent people are more likely to proof-read what they write and catch some of them, but regular people catch about 30% of their errors and even trained proof-reader miss 5%.

I deal in day-to-day realities with the data that is available, for which in your supreme superiority belittle me.

You don't. You take data which you don't understand and draw conclusions that the data doesn't support.

Only in your demented mind. You can't even compute your vaunted R0.

I have done it here from time to time. The ratio of last week's new case number to the number five or six days later can be used to do it. It's not a particularly reliable estimate when new infections from new communities keep on getting added into the published totals.

Telling somebody what the R0 is will get you a blank stare;

From anybody dumb enough to let you lecture them on anything.

Non-response noted.

Lack of appreciation of the insult involved noted. I'll have to be more explicitly contemptuous for you to notice.

Which seems to be your ONLY skill.

To you. You are too stupid to notice skills that you don't have.

telling them that there state has dropped from 2nd to 10th in COVID cases and 3rd to 8th in the infection rate, as has happened for Washington state, will getting an appreciative nod. Your arrogance blinds your ability to comprehend.

Sure. Even the most mindless gets analogies with sports results. The fact that they are perfectly useless doesn't get noticed.

What sports analogies, sport? No, they go right to the heart of the matter. WA is being successful and the data prove it.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/washington-coronavirus-cases.html#map

None of the data you have posted. The new case per day rate peaked at about 600 per day a couple of days ago, but it's a bit early to claim success.

Your statement simply doesn't make sense (surprise!).

Not to you. No surprise there either.

Here is my latest data:

Rank State Population Cases Infection Rate Infection Rank Rel to NY
1 New York 19,440,469 102,683 5,282 1 1.0
2 New Jersey 8,936,574 25,590 2,864 2 1.8
6 Louisiana 4,645,184 9,159 1,972 3 2.7
7 Massachusetts 6,976,597 8,966 1,285 4 4.1
4 Michigan 10,045,029 10,791 1,074 5 4.9
13 Connecticut 3,563,077 3,824 1,073 6 4.9
34 District of Columbia 720,687 757 1,050 7 5.0
10 Washington 7,797,095 6,597 846 8 6.2

If you will note, this data is VERY CLOSE to the NYT data. So, you are just CONFIRMING that I am on the right track!

Except that you haven't specified what you mean by infection rate.

The most recent new cases per day data for New York state seem to be around 8000 per day

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronavirus-cases.html

If you don't say what your numbers are they don't mean anything at all.

And try not responding until you've actually computed R0.

I have computed R0 and shown my working. It wasn't a particularly reliable estimate, as I pointed out at the time.

For the US as whole there were 29,874 new cases on the 2nd April and 19,452 on the 28th March, which would be an R0 of 1.5. Less than the the 2.5 to 3 seen if you aren't doing anything to slow the spread, but more than the 0.99 you have to get if you want the epidemic to go away, and lots more than the 0.5 or lower you see if it is going away fast.

You are too full of yourself to see the problem with trying to compute R0 in real-time.

I'm well aware of the problems, which is why I say that approach doesn't give a particularly reliable number. You could probably do better with a weighed sum of the new case numbers for the day five, six, seven, eight, nine and ten days before the latest new case number, reflecting the distribution of the time it takes from infection to the date at which symptoms appear. The weights would have to normalised to add up to one.

It's doable, but you need the data on the distribution of the time from infection to visible symptoms/getting tested which has to be inferred from contact tracing.

> R0 is an exponent of differences; if the underlying data from which the differences are computed has a lot of noise present the exponent will be pretty much meaningless.

In this case it was a ratio of two numbers - no kind of exponent, which is the number of times you multiply one number by itself.

There's certainly no differencing (subtraction of one number from another) involved.

> Integrated and filtered data (which is what I am doing), on the other hand, reduces this noise effect.

Unfortunately garbage in always produces garbage out, not matter what you do with it in the middle (which you haven't specified). Since you don't seem to have a clue about what you are actually doing, your telling us what you think you are doing probably won't help.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, April 4, 2020 at 7:01:31 AM UTC+11, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:08:59 PM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
:




Typos are always with us.

People of superior intelligence, which you CLAIM to be, DON'T make typos!

Wrong! I make many typos. When I was a teenager, I took a bunch of tests and found that I was very good using tweezers and very bad using my fingers. _I am a lousy typist and could never touch type using a _Sholes keyboard. So I switched to using a Dvorak keyboard. Using a Dvorak keyboard I can touch type but make many typos.

As far as intelligence , I scored 72 on the Navy GCT.

How does that relate to regular IQ tests? Apparently Mensa can map their IQ tests (which are normalised to make the population average 100, like pretty much every other IQ test) to the US Army and Navy classification tests but googling doesn't throw up anything useful.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney