www.mercurynews.com
As you say, it really is about intellectual honesty.I don't easily abide monologues-
I want to talk about intellectual honesty. I posted this in another thread
Rush Limbaugh Floats Theory That Coronavirus Deaths Are Being Inflated to Push an Agenda
Conservative talk-radio host and recent Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree Rush Limbaugh on Thursday floated the theory that deaths from coronavirus have been inflated so that governments could further “the policies they have put in place.”Citing the latest record-breaking unemployment claims...www.yahoo.com
I'm using that article as an example because I use the term intellectual honesty a lot- Rush, is a great example as well as our own beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic- I've said for years Rush is very intelligent, but he is hyper-partisan. I've told our very own, beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic, the same thing- I give them their just due for their intelligence, (and I'll add now, their tenacity as there is a lot to be said for that trait) but I can't abide their hyper-partisan intellect. Both are intelligent enough to know better and the evidence is overwhelming that there is very little difference in the Party elite outside their rhetoric, which is used as a tool to keep citizens divided. Any half wit can see there is no difference. Hitting a brick wall at 100 or at 90 still is hitting a brick wall. The only (maybe) difference is the rate of descent to the same destination- and that rate of descent is accelerating almost daily.
In the article it says what it says- I'm not going to give away the punch line- you have to read it and make your own determination.
These people, hardcore Left and hardcore Right, all follow the same approach. Particularly in the media, and particularly those who appear to think they're in the media:
That is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form: Purposely mixing fact and fiction to push an ideological "point". And they do it so often that it appears to come naturally to them.
- Begin with a simplistic, shallow, one-sided, highly partisan premise
- Highlight, focus on, and expand all information, data and news that supports your premise
- Avoid, ignore, diminish, dismiss and/or distort all information that is contrary to your premise
- Jump to dishonest conclusions, make assumptions, and belch out simplistic extrapolations based on the above purposely twisted reality
- When challenged, defend yourself by saying "everything I said was true" - which purposely overlooks all the information and facts you have avoided, distorted and ignored.
It can be Limbaugh, it can be Maddow, it can be any of their peers or any of their fans. These people are a malignancy on this country, and they're winning.
I have plenty of room to talk, because unlike you, I hold BOTH ends fully accountable, regularly, as I clearly did in the post YOU JUST QUOTED.As you say, it really is about intellectual honesty.I don't easily abide monologues-
I want to talk about intellectual honesty. I posted this in another thread
Rush Limbaugh Floats Theory That Coronavirus Deaths Are Being Inflated to Push an Agenda
Conservative talk-radio host and recent Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree Rush Limbaugh on Thursday floated the theory that deaths from coronavirus have been inflated so that governments could further “the policies they have put in place.”Citing the latest record-breaking unemployment claims...
I'm using that article as an example because I use the term intellectual honesty a lot- Rush, is a great example as well as our own beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic- I've said for years Rush is very intelligent, but he is hyper-partisan. I've told our very own, beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic, the same thing- I give them their just due for their intelligence, (and I'll add now, their tenacity as there is a lot to be said for that trait) but I can't abide their hyper-partisan intellect. Both are intelligent enough to know better and the evidence is overwhelming that there is very little difference in the Party elite outside their rhetoric, which is used as a tool to keep citizens divided. Any half wit can see there is no difference. Hitting a brick wall at 100 or at 90 still is hitting a brick wall. The only (maybe) difference is the rate of descent to the same destination- and that rate of descent is accelerating almost daily.
In the article it says what it says- I'm not going to give away the punch line- you have to read it and make your own determination.
These people, hardcore Left and hardcore Right, all follow the same approach. Particularly in the media, and particularly those who appear to think they're in the media:
That is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form: Purposely mixing fact and fiction to push an ideological "point". And they do it so often that it appears to come naturally to them.
- Begin with a simplistic, shallow, one-sided, highly partisan premise
- Highlight, focus on, and expand all information, data and news that supports your premise
- Avoid, ignore, diminish, dismiss and/or distort all information that is contrary to your premise
- Jump to dishonest conclusions, make assumptions, and belch out simplistic extrapolations based on the above purposely twisted reality
- When challenged, defend yourself by saying "everything I said was true" - which purposely overlooks all the information and facts you have avoided, distorted and ignored.
It can be Limbaugh, it can be Maddow, it can be any of their peers or any of their fans. These people are a malignancy on this country, and they're winning.
You are hardcore left. What room do you have to talk?
It’s a simple curve comparison of deaths per week on a per capita basis.
The authors say;
Note that the data sets begin at different points in the year (as marked on the left). Also note that the figures shown here are for new deaths each week, not for cumulative deaths.
There is no ‘death rate’ comparison at all.
Crashes, Not Like...
It’s about the spike.
Ari Schulman, Brendan Foht, Samuel Matlack
How deadly is Covid-19 compared to seasonal flu, past pandemics, or car crashes?
To offer context, we have produced two charts showing coronavirus deaths along with deaths from other common causes in the past to which the disease has recently been compared. One chart shows deaths for the United States, the other for New York, the state hardest hit.
Note that the data sets begin at different points in the year (as marked on the left). Also note that the figures shown here are for new deaths each week, not for cumulative deaths.
United States
The chart shows deaths per capita to allow for comparison of data from different years. Deaths are shown from:
New York State
- Covid-19, starting from February 17. (Covid Tracking Project)
- The 2017-18 flu season: This was the deadliest recent flu season. The chart shows one line for deaths attributed directly to flu, and another for deaths attributed to either flu or pneumonia. The smaller line is an undercount of flu-caused deaths, the larger is an overcount, with the real number lying somewhere in between. (More on this below.) The data begin on October 1, 2017, which the CDC considered the first week of that flu season. (CDC)
- Heart disease and cancer: The first and second leading causes of death in the United States. The chart shows total 2017 deaths averaged per week. (CDC)
- Car crashes: Weekly deaths beginning from January 1, 2018. (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)
- 1957-58 Asian flu pandemic: Weekly influenza and pneumonia deaths beginning from August 24, 1957. These data come from a contemporary CDC program that surveilled 108 American cities with a total population of about 50 million people. We have used that figure, rather than the total U.S. population at the time, to calculate deaths per million. (CDC)
Enlarge
Because the number of weekly Covid-19 deaths in New York is now larger than the typical number of weekly deaths from all causes, we are omitting most of the individual causes from the chart. And because the state’s population has been highly stable over the time periods considered — decreasing by just 0.7 percent since 2017, according to the latest Census Bureau estimates — we have chosen to show both absolute deaths and deaths per capita. The causes shown are:
Note the markedly larger scale of deaths per million on the New York chart as compared to the United States — indicating how much harder Covid-19 has hit that state than the country as a whole.
- Covid-19 deaths, starting from March 2. (Covid Tracking Project)
- The 2017-18 flu season, with week 1 beginning on October 1, 2017. (CDC)
- All deaths from all causes for the same period as the 2017-18 flu season. (CDC)
I'm libertarian- I don't abide, or buy into the left/right pardigm demagoguing.
My Bad... I should have checked the Covid line in your lame ass chart first.. I got distracted by all the OTHER faults.. The numbers for that red line are PURE SHIT... Showing 200 deaths per million about 2 week March... That's 64,000 DEATHS PER WEEK... Did not happen that way... Number of CASES per day did not break 300 or 400 UNTIL your graph starts...
Cases, Data, and Surveillance
Cases, data, and surveillance to track and analyze COVID-19.www.cdc.gov
I think what you got is bad statistical sushi... I'm done and out...
I have plenty of room to talk, because unlike you, I hold BOTH ends fully accountable, regularly, as I clearly did in the post YOU JUST QUOTED.As you say, it really is about intellectual honesty.I don't easily abide monologues-
I want to talk about intellectual honesty. I posted this in another thread
Rush Limbaugh Floats Theory That Coronavirus Deaths Are Being Inflated to Push an Agenda
Conservative talk-radio host and recent Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree Rush Limbaugh on Thursday floated the theory that deaths from coronavirus have been inflated so that governments could further “the policies they have put in place.”Citing the latest record-breaking unemployment claims...
I'm using that article as an example because I use the term intellectual honesty a lot- Rush, is a great example as well as our own beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic- I've said for years Rush is very intelligent, but he is hyper-partisan. I've told our very own, beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic, the same thing- I give them their just due for their intelligence, (and I'll add now, their tenacity as there is a lot to be said for that trait) but I can't abide their hyper-partisan intellect. Both are intelligent enough to know better and the evidence is overwhelming that there is very little difference in the Party elite outside their rhetoric, which is used as a tool to keep citizens divided. Any half wit can see there is no difference. Hitting a brick wall at 100 or at 90 still is hitting a brick wall. The only (maybe) difference is the rate of descent to the same destination- and that rate of descent is accelerating almost daily.
In the article it says what it says- I'm not going to give away the punch line- you have to read it and make your own determination.
These people, hardcore Left and hardcore Right, all follow the same approach. Particularly in the media, and particularly those who appear to think they're in the media:
That is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form: Purposely mixing fact and fiction to push an ideological "point". And they do it so often that it appears to come naturally to them.
- Begin with a simplistic, shallow, one-sided, highly partisan premise
- Highlight, focus on, and expand all information, data and news that supports your premise
- Avoid, ignore, diminish, dismiss and/or distort all information that is contrary to your premise
- Jump to dishonest conclusions, make assumptions, and belch out simplistic extrapolations based on the above purposely twisted reality
- When challenged, defend yourself by saying "everything I said was true" - which purposely overlooks all the information and facts you have avoided, distorted and ignored.
It can be Limbaugh, it can be Maddow, it can be any of their peers or any of their fans. These people are a malignancy on this country, and they're winning.
You are hardcore left. What room do you have to talk?
And you obviously don't know my politics. I'm not an obedient Trump sycophant, so I must be a radical pinko socialist Hitler commie, to you.
I wonder if you realize the only time we communicate is when you jump in to complain about me, without me mentioning (or thinking about) you.
So in your mind, I agree with Hillary on every issue, and voting for her had nothing to do with my opinion of her opponent. Great. Wrong.I have plenty of room to talk, because unlike you, I hold BOTH ends fully accountable, regularly, as I clearly did in the post YOU JUST QUOTED.As you say, it really is about intellectual honesty.I don't easily abide monologues-
I want to talk about intellectual honesty. I posted this in another thread
Rush Limbaugh Floats Theory That Coronavirus Deaths Are Being Inflated to Push an Agenda
Conservative talk-radio host and recent Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree Rush Limbaugh on Thursday floated the theory that deaths from coronavirus have been inflated so that governments could further “the policies they have put in place.”Citing the latest record-breaking unemployment claims...
I'm using that article as an example because I use the term intellectual honesty a lot- Rush, is a great example as well as our own beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic- I've said for years Rush is very intelligent, but he is hyper-partisan. I've told our very own, beloved, I'm sure, PoliticalChic, the same thing- I give them their just due for their intelligence, (and I'll add now, their tenacity as there is a lot to be said for that trait) but I can't abide their hyper-partisan intellect. Both are intelligent enough to know better and the evidence is overwhelming that there is very little difference in the Party elite outside their rhetoric, which is used as a tool to keep citizens divided. Any half wit can see there is no difference. Hitting a brick wall at 100 or at 90 still is hitting a brick wall. The only (maybe) difference is the rate of descent to the same destination- and that rate of descent is accelerating almost daily.
In the article it says what it says- I'm not going to give away the punch line- you have to read it and make your own determination.
These people, hardcore Left and hardcore Right, all follow the same approach. Particularly in the media, and particularly those who appear to think they're in the media:
That is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form: Purposely mixing fact and fiction to push an ideological "point". And they do it so often that it appears to come naturally to them.
- Begin with a simplistic, shallow, one-sided, highly partisan premise
- Highlight, focus on, and expand all information, data and news that supports your premise
- Avoid, ignore, diminish, dismiss and/or distort all information that is contrary to your premise
- Jump to dishonest conclusions, make assumptions, and belch out simplistic extrapolations based on the above purposely twisted reality
- When challenged, defend yourself by saying "everything I said was true" - which purposely overlooks all the information and facts you have avoided, distorted and ignored.
It can be Limbaugh, it can be Maddow, it can be any of their peers or any of their fans. These people are a malignancy on this country, and they're winning.
You are hardcore left. What room do you have to talk?
And you obviously don't know my politics. I'm not an obedient Trump sycophant, so I must be a radical pinko socialist Hitler commie, to you.
I wonder if you realize the only time we communicate is when you jump in to complain about me, without me mentioning (or thinking about) you.
The only time I communicate with anyone here is when I comment on their posts. Thats the normal way of doing things here.
And I do know your politics. You are an admitted Hillary voter. And I know Hillary's politics very well. Its no surprise you hate Trump though for some reason you act like it should be. He beat your candidate and you still haven't gotten over it. Its what drives you. That holier than thou fake neutrality isnt fooling anyone. Your every opinion is that of the wealthy ruling elites. Not much bravery required for that is there?
