dumbasabagofrocks : ok Cuepee, even if i am not sure about your magic hookus pokus counting thing,...so what if I know how many jelly beans or corona virus cases I have, if the number is the same regardless. Try to explain how that helps seniors smart guy!


Cuepee: Well dumbasabagofrocks, counting corona virus cases is both beneficial at the time of counting (Present) and for the future.

In the present it tells us who today is identified as infected. They can quarantine and then reduce contact with others immediately.

In the future this would lead to less spread and cases. Less spread and case reduces the chances a senior will inadvertently catch it and die. That is a good thing for them.

Also if we had a National Program for Count, Track and Trace, and people could see the data they could see communities, cities and areas they might travel to and avoid or chose them based on if they are a hot spot currently or not.

Again a good thing for seniors, especially.

dumbasabagofrocks : eh you lost me at that magic counting thing. Sounds like a science thing and we don't like science in these parts.

Ok ok...i sneaked that one in...just in case u were referring to factual numbers.
I was under the impression u meant ''counted infections'' because no one 5 years and up could mean factual numbers.

So lets start over: the more u test, the higher the count...copy?

Just catching up as best I can in this mess of a thread, but I do like that this guy is legit dumb as opposed to the fake act that Joey person was doing, if his gimmick schtick is still kicking around.

My question to this never guy, and if it was asked before - I apologize

Will the number of tests change how many people actually have the infection, and part two - will testing change how many more people will get the infection, ie - will more tests today reduce the cases in the future or not?

I like that this guy legit represents a decent portion of the population that is considerably stupid, in that knowing that these people exist and how they "think" is important when trying to create public health policies that will work and be understood. The reality is - these dummies are part of humanity and systems have to account for that.

All the best.

By asking this, u do not only insult me, u insult yourself.
But dont worry, youre not alone!

Forgive me, as it does take me a couple tries at times to ask questions in a way that genuine dummies actually understand, so I am not quite sure what part of it confused you, and I will try again.

1) Test numbers go up. Will number of people who have Covid go up? Yes or no?

2) Test numbers go up. Will that increase or decrease number of people that have Covid weeks from now?


If these are too hard for you to answer, I can maybe try again, and use smaller words, but not quite sure I can ask a yes or no question to someone who does not understand how to answer that. I will assume if you evade the questions a second time out of fear of answering them then that is on purpose for some weird reason that is not worth exploring much. Thanks!

All the best.

AGAIN,

Trump was hosting a round table discussion with Seniors.

What they are concerned about is chance of getting sick and hospitalized and death.

That does not change by counting. It was a stupid thing for Trump to say.

Can you understand that?

There is a reasonable chance he does not actually understand it. That is the thing - sometimes a dummy is just purely a dummy, so they will be happy to be part of a team that makes them feel good. Trump is going to have an indoor rally with 20,000+ people screaming and not wearing masks in a state where cases are spiking. This guy would be there if he could. That is a lot of dummies, and it is a part of humanity - like it or not.

Guess my question to you is how much time will you spend attempting to educate this specific dummy? Does not seem like you are enjoying it much so far, so after a few attempts where he either is clueless or choosing to be clueless - let him go - not like anything he says matters, and he probably would be the first to admit that. If you are enjoying the interaction with him, which will not really get anywhere - as you cannot really slam dunk a pure dummy - then no problem, have fun - I certainly understand that as a form of entertainment.

Its not a rally. Its a protest against Hunter Biden and the Democrats defunding Police Departments

We all know Protests OK Rallies bad

I appreciate that you are trying to be clever. The effort is duly noted. Now, one can debate whether a protest involving systemic injustice, held outside, with most people wearing masks, is the same thing as a 20,000+ person political rally event crammed together indoors, with masks essentially scoffed at as a sign of weakness (punch that virus!) is the exact same thing as you imply, but that might eat into all that effort you went into being clever, so we would not want to do that for now, since I always like when people like you try to be clever, so keep at it!

All the best.

He said the same i did, the more tests...the higher the number of ''COUNTED'' infections.
Only he said it Trump style, because of all the fake stats/graphs by the fake media.

[img]https://i.ibb.co/cNjVg0C/nevergofull******.gif[/img]

[img]https://i.ibb.co/PtkvkXY/full******.gif[/img]

1) U do understand that the number of people who have Covid can only go up right?

2) Same principle applies here...

Seriously...is that the best u can up with?

is this day 1 of trump's incredible comeback? this policing executive order (disclaimer: i think trump is completely deplorable. just asking about the election)

terrible polls for trump today

not sure if it's been talked about here. relates to college football and this whole environment .... but i see these uprests at iowa and oklahoma state football. but isn't 70%+of white males in those states similar to the HC and university culture in both cases (oklahoma especially)....... i'm thinking grundy at OSU is not attypical at all for that area.

I will try again, as it is clear you are having a hard time understanding the concept.

Let us pretend that 1,000 people in a city of a million have Covid, but you are not sure who has it yet.

Option 1:

You test 0 people

Option 2:

You test literally every person magically at the exact same time with instant results


Will the actual number of people who have Covid be different in those scenarios? Yes or no. You literally need to just answer with a single word, and I gave you both options .



Now, part 2, and I know I already likely lost you, but may as well try

Let us assume that you actually understand that 1,000 people will have covid in both situations above as a static in the moment statistic.

Now, you have two choices

Choice 1: You test nobody, and have no idea who has Covid

Choice 2: You tested the entire population and know exactly which 1,000 people have Covid


Will the number of cases increase more quickly in the future with either of those choices? Yes or no, and if yes, which option causes a greater increase in cases in the future compared to the other option. Note, let's assume total case counts go up as time passes (because, duh) - this is asking which will have a faster rate of increase.


I totally understand if you still do not understand this, as unlike the others I recognize when dummies are at their limit, and I only try a little bit to get them to go past their innate limitations, so your attempts at answering these are appreciated, even though I expect you will not be able to do it, and unlike most of the other people talking to/at you - I kind of enjoy these interactions, even when I know they will go nowhere. Thanks!

All the best.

Since, You deleted the top part of my post which actually answers your question here it again.

AGAIN,

Trump was hosting a round table discussion with Seniors.

What they are concerned about is chance of getting sick and hospitalized and death.

That does not change by counting. It was a stupid thing for Trump to say.

Can you understand that?

You do not seem to be enjoying your interaction with him.

Why do you keep sticking the word “counted” in there. Trump didn’t say ANYTHING implying counted cases.

Ok, ill play along.

Q1:No (duh)
Q2:No (testing itself not doing ****)

Now its my turn:
Do you agree that the rising infection count is useless (as shown on 2p2 by one of their elite authors) without mentioning the testing volume?
I mean u strike me as a ''somewhat'' above average bright guy so u should be able to answer this level1 question!?

Congrats, you got this right, and that was with only a 50% chance!

The problem here is instead of randomly guessing you tried to apply some thought and that was your undoing.

I will explain this, though I know you will completely not understand how this works.

Choice 1: You literally have no idea who has Covid, because you did no testing. As a result, those people will not be properly identified and quarantined, so they will spread the virus to others, generally without knowing they are doing that.

Choice 2: You literally know every single human that has it. Now, this is not realistic in the real world, but works for the point being made. In this choice, where you literally know each human that has it at that moment, you can simply separate these 1,000 people for the 2-3 weeks needed, and after that the virus has had nowhere to go, so they would not spread it to others.


Now, these are extreme cases to try to make the point simpler, but I get that even doing that likely confused you. The answer is that by testing and identifying those that have this virus (which is contagious - and you can google that word if you do not understand it) you have a better chance of isolating them to prevent them from spreading it to others.

Thus, the number of cases will increase quite a bit faster in choice 1 than choice 2, so your belief that testing who has it is meaningless is wrong, but at least you tried to put thought into your answer, so good job on that effort!



In the above I tried to explain to you that the rate of the increase matters. Thus, your answer that testing is useless, and will not change the growth rate of future infections is wrong. You are just choosing to ignore (either by choice or more likely you just are not smart enough to get it ) that while the total number of cases will always increase (because, duh), how fast they increase (ie: the rate) does make a difference based on the choice made above.


Your question was poorly asked, and I broke down why and explained the answer, but I would not wager that you will understand it or change your mind, because I get how people like you are as humans.

All the best.

Neverbeclever's reply to that...

New cases per day, tests per day, positive test rate, hospitalizations, active cases, deaths. All useful!

I think basically everyone following the data here understands the basic limitations around testing, and going around in circles about it isn't very interesting.

I'd suggest we move on.

This topic does seem to make some people testy.

I just cannot believe how veteran online poker players cant read graphs and statistics.