Official live update of spread of COVID19

[FlatAssembler]

And more evidence it's garbage 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/20...b34c4475c2

https://trendeepro.com/claims-baselessly...te-deaths/

https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/vacci...ing-so-bad

https://news.grabien.com/story-mehdi-has...doesn-t-ha

https://ijr.com/reporter-pushes-back-false-theories/

Fs conspiracy quack sites got nothing and I repeat bad science is not a replacement for no science.

Irrelevant Gish-Gallop. I am not talking about what Tucker Carlson said, which he got indirectly from an anonymous blogger. I am talking about the study cited by AMG News, built on two studies, one recent and one from a few years ago. In all seriousness, though, it seems to me you have no actual arguments, and I think I will stop posting here, as all you have is Gish-Gallop.

[The Architect Of Fate]

My case is built on an actual study, one cited by AMG News.

Yup your garbage nutter site

[The Architect Of Fate]

Irrelevant Gish-Gallop. I am not talking about what Tucker Carlson said, which he got indirectly from an anonymous blogger. I am talking about the study cited by AMG News, built on two studies, one recent and one from a few years ago. In all seriousness, though, it seems to me you have no actual arguments, and I think I will stop posting here, as all you have is Gish-Gallop.

No, you have no argument and this addresses your nonsense your just too clueless to see how. You are seriously dense. And feel free to take your nonsense elsewhere no one will miss you.

[FlatAssembler]

My case is built on an actual study, one cited by AMG News.

Yup your garbage nutter site

It's not my site in any sense. I have not heard of it until yesterday. But the things it says about vaccines seem legit.

[The Architect Of Fate]

It's not my site in any sense. I have not heard of it until yesterday. But the things it says about vaccines seem legit.

I'm clearly referring to it as the source you cited not that you own the site. God, you're dense!  And nothing your looney toon nutter site says is true it's all fringe stupidity of the highest caliber. 

[arewethereyet]

Yup your garbage nutter site

It's not my site in any sense. I have not heard of it until yesterday. But the things it says about vaccines seem legit.

If you have further stuff on COVID put it in the COVID conspiracy thread.  Or I can move it, warn you, and we will see who wins this fight.

Enough of your nonsense is enough. 

If you don't understand this, I can put it in the form of an admin note.  Your choice.

Here's the link to the thread...use it.

Covid 19 conspiracies dump (atheistforums.org)

[brewer]

Logical???

OK, fine, they are empirical arguments, so maybe they are not logical arguments if we want to be extremely precise.

bold mine

https://nrich.maths.org/6664

excerpt: By empirical arguments I mean those that purport to show the truth of a generalisation by validating the generalisation in a proper subset of all possible cases. These arguments are clearly invalid, because they cannot exclude the possibility of the existence of a counterexample to the generalisation.

Not to be confused with emperical evidence, which the site does not provide. All it is doing is putting forth are unfounded assertions, possible connections. There is no direct cause and effect evidence cited.

[FlatAssembler]

OK, fine, they are empirical arguments, so maybe they are not logical arguments if we want to be extremely precise.

bold mine

https://nrich.maths.org/6664

excerpt: By empirical arguments I mean those that purport to show the truth of a generalisation by validating the generalisation in a proper subset of all possible cases. These arguments are clearly invalid, because they cannot exclude the possibility of the existence of a counterexample to the generalisation.

Not to be confused with emperical evidence, which the site does not provide. All it is doing is putting forth are unfounded assertions, possible connections. There is no direct cause and effect evidence cited.

That's right, cause and effect is out of scope of that study. All it was trying to show is that the number of athletes who have died suddenly has indeed increased, that it's not just anecdotal evidence.

[brewer]

bold mine

https://nrich.maths.org/6664

excerpt: By empirical arguments I mean those that purport to show the truth of a generalisation by validating the generalisation in a proper subset of all possible cases. These arguments are clearly invalid, because they cannot exclude the possibility of the existence of a counterexample to the generalisation.

Not to be confused with emperical evidence, which the site does not provide. All it is doing is putting forth are unfounded assertions, possible connections. There is no direct cause and effect evidence cited.

That's right, cause and effect is out of scope of that study. All it was trying to show is that the number of athletes who have died suddenly has indeed increased, that it's not just anecdotal evidence.

It was not a study, it was an observation coupled with a unfounded theory/assertion. 

Here is a study (abstract): https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/...108.804617

And another (abstract): https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10....110.004622

[arewethereyet]

Back to Official info on COVID in this thread. Conspiracies and misinformation belong in the COVID Conspiracy Dump.

Let's get back on track.