Quote:
Originally Posted by Elrazor
Yeah, keep arguing about semantics like whether 1.1 to 1.4 is "around one" or "well above 1" to avoid justifying your made-up numbers.
In any case, your previous argument was clearly talking about past behaviour - in other words, when the R was "around 1".
WTF are you talking about?
This is really basic stuff and here we are months into this thing and whooosh lolrazor.
.9 and 1.1 are both "around 1" but are poles apart in terms of what is happening with corona, cant believe you need this explaining to you.
.9 exponential decline, 1.1 exponential growth.
Any number above 1 = exponential growth, therefore above 1 is ****ing key and absolutely nothing to do with semantics and every .1 above 1 leads to significant differences in exponential growth over time.
Second point is again just a gargantuan ive been living in a cave reading PE books woooosh.
Of course Im not talking about past behaviour when R "was around 1".
Im talking about the obvious blasted all over the media how the hell can you miss it exponential growth we have had over the last few weeks when the R was super duper mega obvious even to PE teachers significantly above 1 and how that has led to the planned re introduction of crowds being canned.
The whole point of all mitigation strategies is to keep R at 1 at a minimum and less than 1 if possible.
Just handwaving the R number as around 1 is an absolutely meaningless statement when each increment is so impactful, and that is nothing to do with semantics and everything to do with the spread of infection.
Last edited by O.A.F.K.1.1; 09-23-2020 at 08:05 AM.