Qanon Conspiracy theories

[beachnut]

tucker is not a credible source, PragerU is not too

.A desperate and futile attempt at pretending the CDC publishes incomplete data looks like this:

Pretending the CDC chart is not about weekly pneumonia and influenza mortality surveillance looks like this:

That is funny, you can't answer the question, so you make up BS. Is all the data in for the latest weeks. Has the pandemic messed up reporting on time due to sending everyone not needed at hospitals and labs home? You don't know, you don't care as you search for BS websites to support your paranoid far out conspiracy theories, and use fox news nuts who are not credible.


Try to read, learn, and understand... (more for me, because you don't care if you push BS carelessly...)

Note: The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting healthcare seeking behavior. The number of persons and their reasons for seeking care in the outpatient and ED settings is changing. These changes impact data from ILINet in ways that are difficult to differentiate from changes in illness levels, therefore ILINet data should be interpreted with caution.

I was hoping you would read what I post and learn to stop making up stuff, and do credible research instead.

fox and tucker are not credible sources for anything due to their record of supporting lies, false information, spreading BS, etc, etc, etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf -

Great find on the thedonald.win

And then you go far right, extreme far right with more BS, PragerU is not a credible source, and they make their videos to match the biases of their paranoid audience who eat up the propaganda and pass on the BS as fact and evidence.

you are winning the least credible source contest for spreading woo


Do you need help understanding what this means? "therefore ILINet data should be interpreted with caution."

therefore ILINet data should be interpreted with caution.

do you need help?

I was trying to see if you could find some information, instead, upset fox and tucker are not credible.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Bubba, what's 'pneunomia'?

I'll just leave this right here


if you can access FB

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156788434616836&set=a.10150090597136836&type=3&theater

.
Not pretending to be juvenile looks like this:

It's a fair question, because it seems you have no idea. Having had TB and pneumonia and collapsed lungs and spent time in ICU, I know for a fact you are clueless about anything.

Read my question more carefully, gentlemen.

 

[abaddon]

Read my question more carefully, gentlemen.

I ignored the typo. A typo is kind of trivial when addressing a swamp of abject ignorance.

 

[beachnut]

i thought a little needling would create some real research, it failed

That FaceBook item is a (cdc.gov) graph labeled:

"pneumonia and influenza mortality surveillance from national center for health statistics mortality mortality surveillance system weekly archive 2019-2020"

It has a cdc.gov link but it is blurred

Graph shows that pneumonia and influenza mortality dropped almost 2000 in the 8 weeks of virus ramping up. Some skeptic said that is curious.

It is odd that it started going down the first 8 weeks, when we didnt have a quarantine or social distancing.



Same image found here

...and here


https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...hUKEwjxnu_sytDoAhWPAzQIHb1OBxMQMygMegUIARD4AQ

Stop using fox and tucker - try AP News, it has orders of magnitude more credibility -

"NCHS Mortality Surveillance System data are presented by the week the death occurred at the national, state, and HHS Region levels. Data on the percentage of deaths due to P&I on a national level are released two weeks after the week of death to allow for collection of enough data to produce a stable percentage. States and HHS regions with less than 20% of the expected total deaths (average number of total deaths reported by week during 2008-2012) will be marked as insufficient data. Collection of complete data is not expected at the time of initial report, and a reliable percentage of deaths due to P&I is not anticipated at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services region or state level within this two week period. The data for earlier weeks are continually revised and the proportion of deaths due to P&I may increase or decrease as new and updated death certificate data are received by NCHS."

Research, digging for data, information and knowledge, something fox and tucker can't do, and you believe blindly, and love to make up lies about stuff? Why? Because you can

Why try to get even, when you could check the facts behind a simple graph which is updated in the future ... bet the hospitals are finding reporting hard to do when people are dying and the hospital is maxed out... what do you think?

Go ahead, spread lies, and make up paranoid CTs. It is easier than research.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

I'll just leave this right here


if you can access FB

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156788434616836&set=a.10150090597136836&type=3&theater

Bubba, what's 'pneunomia'?

Read my question more carefully, gentlemen.

I ignored the typo. A typo is kind of trivial when addressing a swamp of abject ignorance.

It isn't a typo.
Well, let me qualify that: it isn't my typo.
Look at the graph Bubba linked to again.

 

[beachnut]

That FaceBook item is a (cdc.gov) graph labeled:

"pneumonia and influenza mortality surveillance from national center for health statistics mortality mortality surveillance system weekly archive 2019-2020"

It has a cdc.gov link but it is blurred

Graph shows that pneumonia and influenza mortality dropped almost 2000 in the 8 weeks of virus ramping up. Some skeptic said that is curious.

It is odd that it started going down the first 8 weeks, when we didnt have a quarantine or social distancing.



Same image found here

...and here


https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...hUKEwjxnu_sytDoAhWPAzQIHb1OBxMQMygMegUIARD4AQ

Who made the chart, how, and will they update it, or what?

Who made the chart? Do you have the excel template to insert new data, there is new data...

NCHSData13.csv can you put in the updated data to see the difference? No, yes, maybe - got excel?

As found by someone, there is an error in spelling on the chart, from the chart maker... who was it? Funny stuff - attention to detail ... what's 'pneunomia'?
... see above - good luck

Updated numbers for the first 12 weeks of 2020, put that in the graph - things change, and knowing why is knowledge based on facts and evidence, making up BS based on speculation, bias and paranoia, is fox, tucker and the silly comments posted on the "what's 'pneunomia'? chart"

3993
3984
3890
3719
3577
3561
3497
3358
3390
3404
3203
2930

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S2

 

[abaddon]

It isn't a typo.
Well, let me qualify that: it isn't my typo.
Look at the graph Bubba linked to again.

I looked at it. I wish I hadn't. That wasn't my point.

I can forgive a typo. I have little sympathy with intentional ignorance such as we see in this thread.

We have no disagreement. I am simply less willing to follow links provided by our protagonist in this thread. I know in advance that it will inevitably lead to some BS website.

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12, and rule 11.

 

[Elagabalus]

I looked at it. I wish I hadn't. That wasn't my point.

I can forgive a typo. I have little sympathy with intentional ignorance such as we see in this thread.

We have no disagreement. I am simply less willing to follow links provided by our protagonist in this thread. I know in advance that it will inevitably lead to some BS website.

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12, and rule 11.

It only shows cases of pneumonia it says nothing about Covid-19. It's typical, Bubba.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

It only shows cases of pneumonia it says nothing about Covid-19. It's typical, Bubba.

No, it doesn't. This is my point, which no-one else seems to have spotted.
The graph Bubba posted shows cases of 'pneunomia'.
Now, I find it strange, actually beyond credibility, that the CDC would misspell 'pneumonia' on such a graph, and then post it on their website without ever correcting it.
Further to this, I tried to find that graph on the CDC website, using the address at the top of the image. Now I will freely admit that my eyes are not what they were, and so (with the small print used), I may have misread it, but I got a 'page not found' message when I searched the site for that address.
In addition, the other address- which does actually work- appears to show figures for flu deaths that are completely at odds with the red line on the graph.
These three things are leading me to suspect that this graph may not actually be from the CDC at all. I am, as always, happy to admit if I'm wrong.
This is, of course, easily fixed:
Bubba: can you link to the page on the CDC website where that graph appears?

 

[Spektator]

In a strange coincidence, I know the man who is the chief editor and proofreader of the CDC's publications. I am going to ask him for his comment on this. If he responds and gives me permission, I will let you know what he says about the pneunomia graph.

 

[bruto]

I also tried to find the graph on the CDC site, and could not. I would suggest that if it does exist there, the person posting it is the one who should find it. I don't use Facebook, so I can't go there and get a better copy of the graph or question the person posting it, etc. I would, however, note that I have heard occasional mutterings suggesting that postings on Facebook are not always entirely disinterested, and even some suggestions that they are not always canonically accurate.

 

[Spektator]

I didn't expect him to respond so quickly, but my CDC contact says the graph is a phony. With regard to the implication that deaths resulting from covid-19 are deliberately overstated, he goes on to say

[FONT=&quot]The national center for health statistics correlates, but dies not generate, cause of death data. Cause of death is assigned by the attending physician. Unless the cause of death is obvious, the attending physician uses his or her best professional judgement. While some physicians might be lazy or overworked and inappropriately assign covid 19 as a cause, it is extremely unlikely that this is more than a minor factor. Saying otherwise assumes a massive conspiracy on the part of physicians. People who believe in massive conspiracies have obviously never tried to get three or more people to agree to do anything.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Also, Spain, Italy, and Iran would have to be in on the conspiracy. Iran has mass graves so large you can see them in satellite imagery.[/FONT]
[/FONT]

 

[eerok]

People who believe in massive conspiracies have obviously never tried to get three or more people to agree to do anything.

Quoted for sheer quotability.

 

[Elagabalus]

No, it doesn't. This is my point, which no-one else seems to have spotted.
The graph Bubba posted shows cases of 'pneunomia'.
Now, I find it strange, actually beyond credibility, that the CDC would misspell 'pneumonia' on such a graph, and then post it on their website without ever correcting it.
Further to this, I tried to find that graph on the CDC website, using the address at the top of the image. Now I will freely admit that my eyes are not what they were, and so (with the small print used), I may have misread it, but I got a 'page not found' message when I searched the site for that address.
In addition, the other address- which does actually work- appears to show figures for flu deaths that are completely at odds with the red line on the graph.
These three things are leading me to suspect that this graph may not actually be from the CDC at all. I am, as always, happy to admit if I'm wrong.
This is, of course, easily fixed:
Bubba: can you link to the page on the CDC website where that graph appears?

He has it here.

That FaceBook item is a (cdc.gov) graph labeled:

"pneumonia and influenza mortality surveillance from national center for health statistics mortality mortality surveillance system weekly archive 2019-2020"

It has a cdc.gov link but it is blurred

Graph shows that pneumonia and influenza mortality dropped almost 2000 in the 8 weeks of virus ramping up. Some skeptic said that is curious.

It is odd that it started going down the first 8 weeks, when we didnt have a quarantine or social distancing.



Same image found here

...and here


https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...hUKEwjxnu_sytDoAhWPAzQIHb1OBxMQMygMegUIARD4AQ

It's spelled correctly in small print and incorrectly on the "Header".



ETA: To be clear, this is just for Bubba's google images. They are not links to the CDC site.

 

[Elagabalus]

I also tried to find the graph on the CDC site, and could not. I would suggest that if it does exist there, the person posting it is the one who should find it. I don't use Facebook, so I can't go there and get a better copy of the graph or question the person posting it, etc. I would, however, note that I have heard occasional mutterings suggesting that postings on Facebook are not always entirely disinterested, and even some suggestions that they are not always canonically accurate.

Not to worry. The guy posting it is some ugly Canadian dude with yellow teeth.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

He has it here.



It's spelled correctly in small print and incorrectly on the "Header".



ETA: To be clear, this is just for Bubba's google images. They are not links to the CDC site.

Exactly. The two different spellings lead me to suspect that the original CDC graph has been altered. The fact that the images posted by Bubba are not directly from the CDC website reinforce this belief.
Bubba, how about it? Can you link to the page on the CDC website where this graph can be found?

 

[beachnut]

Exactly. The two different spellings lead me to suspect that the original CDC graph has been altered. The fact that the images posted by Bubba are not directly from the CDC website reinforce this belief.
Bubba, how about it? Can you link to the page on the CDC website where this graph can be found?

It looks like someone went to this website... https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S2

Selected view chart data - which downloaded a file to my computer...

NCHSData13.csv

Then someone did the chart using excel, or chart program.

This someone...

https://twitter.com/rmsgeek/status/1246214783830982656

 

[Bubba]

This guy asks reasonable big questions. Some of which his orbital mechanics and rocket science contacts had never thought of, and said are good questions.


The Unusual Earth Orbit Circling Above Our Ancient Past | Roger G. Gilbertson | TEDxColoradoSprings


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HytJn6uaRk

NOTE FROM TED: We've flagged this talk, which was filmed at a TEDx event, because it appears to fall outside the TEDx content guidelines. Claims made in this talk only represent the speaker’s personal views which are not corroborated by scientific evidence.

...and thats kinda lame because the guy doesnt really make claims. He mostly points out what science has not yet figured out

 

[Elagabalus]

This guy asks reasonable big questions. Some of which his orbital mechanics and rocket science contacts had never thought of, and said are good questions.


The Unusual Earth Orbit Circling Above Our Ancient Past | Roger G. Gilbertson | TEDxColoradoSprings


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HytJn6uaRk



...and thats kinda lame because the guy doesnt really make claims. He mostly points out what science has not yet figured out

Look over there!!!


Giggle. Nice one!

 

[Bubba]

Look over there!!!


Giggle. Nice one!

Not at all.

Its just that the pipeline is about to burst. Gotta keep the medicine flowing.

I'm waiting patiently for the experts to clear up the pesky pneunomia thing.

But there is a snag....If only Beach nut would quit wasting our time avoiding how and why the WHO guy didnt answer about Taiwan, by pretending the WHO guy was an actor working for Tucker Carlson.

That old Beachnut is such a kolohe.