1
ThreeGuysGameStudio 1 point ago +1 / -0

Guys..c'mon...didnt think I'd need to spell it out for you.

How Do you tell the difference between a virus that evolved in nature passing between bats and animals and humans VS a virus that was purposely evolved in a lab by passing between bats and animals and humans?

You Can't.

And yet they don't even suggest that such a thing might be possible? Like, really?

1
ThreeGuysGameStudio 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah, no, lol. Because you're here I'll assume you're a legit Pede and just don't understand the argument, so I'll explain, because it's actually not that obvious:

The # of confirmed (tested) cases is the MINIMUM # of current cases. What are the chances that the # of confirmed (tested) cases are the ACTUAL #? Close enough to 0% to be 0%.

So what's the maximum # of cases? Well, while confirmed cases rise in correlation to more testing, so long as the testing availability lags sufficiently behind the ACTUAL # of cases, we will undoubtedly see an increase in cases directly correlated to the increase in testing.

Once testing ramps up & overtakes actual # of cases, we will see the curve of confirmed cases "flatten"

The scenario in which the testing ramps up in perfect unison with the exponential spread of the virus is the least likely scenario, virtually 0% probability, and there is no way to know where we are, or where we were, in terms of actual spread.

3
ThreeGuysGameStudio 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah, the fact that negative test rate is remaining stable (while only testing those with symptoms) confirms that testing is still catching up to spread.

But, again, no way to tell how far behind it is, AKA the worst may already be behind us and we'd have no way to know other than mass hospitalization and death, which isn't happening. Furthermore, we're more than two weeks from the beginning of social distancing now, which means (IF we weren't already at baseline spread throughout the country before the shutdown started), the peak cases should have occurred at that 10 to 14 day mark from distancing. But, since testing is still catching up, it's going to look like the peak is a couple weeks from now because people are fucking idiots and nobody seems to be able to report this properly.

5
ThreeGuysGameStudio 5 points ago +5 / -0

Tell me about it...wish some with some freaking followers would pick these points up, I'm dying.

2
ThreeGuysGameStudio 2 points ago +2 / -0

This whole convo started because Fat Drake was ridiculing anti-vaxxers for 'not believing in science'.

Perhap some day he will discover that, ironically, he is the one who refuses to believe the numbers contained within the scientific study he linked to me.

1
ThreeGuysGameStudio 1 point ago +2 / -1

Read as: they don't believe an accidental lab based scenario is plausible.

Every reason they give for why that is (at the end of #3) are almost certainly things bad actors would do on purpose when trying to "randomly" evolve a decent pandemic in a lab.

0
ThreeGuysGameStudio 0 points ago +1 / -1

Here is my angle from 2 weeks ago: https://thedonald.win/p/4KBCiJM/trumpinion-covid19-has-been-circ/

To your question: smart bad guys would release this thing at multiple locations a long time before the official "release" so they could be sure it had already spread everywhere, guaranteeing testing would indicate spread, even though it had already spread.

The whole "release in one place and hope it doesn't die out and spreads fast enough" plot works for movies, but not real life.

China would then run a fake "oh look it just started in Wuhan" because they have full control of their people and system to do such a thing.

And they eat bats so...yeah plausible

2
ThreeGuysGameStudio 2 points ago +2 / -0

TLDR; This shit's almost certainly fake + some very smart insights nobody talks about

3
ThreeGuysGameStudio 3 points ago +3 / -0

Any time you keep elderly people quarantined in that environment for weeks, you're going to see deaths. Cruise ships have 1 or 2 deaths a week anyway.

BTW, just hear Trump discourage Testing? He knows where the danger is...

3
ThreeGuysGameStudio 3 points ago +3 / -0

If Enimem, Tom Hanks, and several NBA players have the virus by random exposure, what is a reasonable number of Americans we can assume also have the virus? The chances such high profile persons contracted the virus when there's a total of 1,400 confirmed cases are basically 0%. Obviously, nobody is saying that's the real number, but what I'm saying is there would statistically need to be a ton more cases than are confirmed before we start seeing high profile names like this pop up. Thus, we can reasonably conclude there are many, many undocumented cases currently. We can also therefore conclude that 1) it's been around for quite a while and 2) it's mostly not a big deal as our medical industry is and has been fine.

If hospitals start to get stressed as we start testing and more cases are confirmed (even though they were almost certainly already there in the first place), we can determine with certainty that it's all about the panic.

If we don't test cases at all and just watch the medical industry in our country, that's perhaps the best test for whether it's actually a big deal or not.

Again, I'd like to point you to Africa. Africa is the real outlier here.

https://www.france24.com/en/20200312-is-africa-with-its-low-rates-so-far-ready-to-face-the-coronavirus-pandemic

4
ThreeGuysGameStudio 4 points ago +4 / -0

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/03/who-is-getting-sick-and-how-sick-a-breakdown-of-coronavirus-risk-by-demographic-factors/

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/children-faq.html

"Limited reports of children with COVID-19 in China have described cold-like symptoms, such as fever, runny nose, and cough. Gastrointestinal symptoms (vomiting and diarrhea) have been reported in at least one child with COVID-19. These limited reports suggest that children with confirmed COVID-19 have generally presented with mild symptoms, and though severe complications (acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock) have been reported, they appear to be uncommon. See more information on CDC..."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/high-risk-complications.html

"Early information out of China, where COVID-19 first started, shows that some people are at higher risk of getting very sick from this illness. This includes:

Older adults People who have serious chronic medical conditions like: Heart disease Diabetes Lung disease"

3
ThreeGuysGameStudio 3 points ago +3 / -0

Updated with new info / streamlined to highlight key points

1
ThreeGuysGameStudio 1 point ago +1 / -0

If anything, aren't recent mutations a sign it's been around and incubating for a while? How many influenza mutations are there per year?

COVID-19 has 29891 nucleotides, whereas influenza only has ~13500, and smaller genomes mutate faster than larger ones...if we're only a few months into COVID-19 incubation, mutations seem rather unlikely at this stage, no?

Then again, no clue wtf I am talking about.

3
ThreeGuysGameStudio 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ok, generically this is true, I just didn't want to go into the specific evidences of their pedophilia. There are many internet accusations that are irrelevant. In my opinion, the accusations against those two individuals are relevant.

In terms of Enimem, look into his relationship with Rachel (Ray) Chandler.

In terms of Hanks, he has quite a few victim accusers.

2
ThreeGuysGameStudio 2 points ago +2 / -0

A few things you should understand:

  1. Video coming out of China can as easily be manipulated or deceptive as real. Point being, Chinese people screaming as government police take them from their homes is probably something that happens every single day in China for lots of reasons. And, as I said, when medical systems get overwhelmed, people die, and mass pandemic panic is a sure way to overload those systems.

  2. Italy shutting down due to their medical system being overwhelmed all falls well within the realm of my explanation as well as a 'real pandemic' explanation. This fact has multiple viable interpretations, and is therefore less relevant than others.

Basically, you're focusing on the wrong facts because they have valid explanations that fall within my suggestion as well as the official one. You need to find facts that can't be explained in any other way than 'real pandemic'.

2
ThreeGuysGameStudio 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not at all, merely relevant data points when considering whether or why 2 high-profile individuals might go along with a fake scare.

2
ThreeGuysGameStudio 2 points ago +2 / -0

Maybe I'll run for assassination...err, I mean, President after Trump's second term with the above as my only policy.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›