FACT vs OPINION

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

... Also as far as words to describe the virus goes, contagious, Chinese, cough, over-rated, those words all far better describe the virus compared to “deadly” ...

As of November 30, China has recorded 86,530 cases of Covid-19, whereas the Wold has recorded 1,467,515 deaths.
This would suggest, to me, that the word 'deadly' is (nearly 17 times) more descriptive, than is 'Chinese'.
➥ https://www.worldometers.info/corona...country/china/
➥ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

This is an example of "litigating" facts instead of an honest engagement with what's there. You're seeking to find a way out of dealing what is a straightforward and complete simple question. The question's wording does not itself provide any reason to assume different units of weight. Its only trick is to trigger the usual perception that "feathers are light" and "gold is heavy", such that the listener ignores that equal weight is a given.

The original question wasn't straight forward. It is intentionally misleading taking advantage of the fact that most people won't fully reason it out the difference between weight and density. As the most common comparison between feathers and gold is related to density and there is a clear and large difference in density when compared in typically available forms. The question has no useful purpose other than to trick the responder into responding based on density.

So what your argument boils down to, is you can start with a misleading question but heaven forbid someone catch on and turn it around on you.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

A fact ... is a fact (ie true), regardless of who believes it. Belief is just noting someone's acceptance of a particular "fact" or idea. They are not interchangeable. Though belief is all that's required for the idea to be "truth" to the believer.

If facts are immutable and cannot be changed, we have no facts.

Newtonian Physics was believed to be FACT. Many still believe it to be FACT. Heck, it's still taught in school and engineers still use it...yet Einstein proved it wrong.

While belief and fact are not the same thing, your definition of FACT is wrong.

You seem to be missing that this discussion has moved away from the lay definitions of words into a more precise discussion.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by jackdale

“Argument from authority” is valid when dealing with a real authority.

The problem with this is when "real authority" is defined by which side of an issue you stand on.

The only way "argument from authority" holds up is if everyone agrees on a definition of who is an authority. Otherwise, it falls back into false logic.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The problem with this is when "real authority" is defined by which side of an issue you stand on.

The only way "argument from authority" holds up is if everyone agrees on a definition of who is an authority. Otherwise, it falls back into false logic.

Real authority (I would say credible experts) rely on verifiable facts. Doesn't matter which side of an issue you stand, if your facts don't stand up to critical scrutiny, then they are not facts, and you are not a credible expert.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

Oh, where to begin. About 35% of American thought it was a "hoax", and most of those still do. The hard core of denial. As for our soon to be ex-president, he didn't, and he did, lol.

......

I spent close to $100,000 becoming qualified as an advanced practice nurse. In public health we consider the science, relevant studies, the economics, social and cultural aspects – and more – all of which comprise the public and our community at large. Public health does NOT simply imply the physical – to the contrary it considers the community as a whole.

As a nurse I’ve gotta say it: those who hold forth here with their hundreds, nay thousands of listen-to-me posts need to listen more and spew less. All of our lives are at stake.

An excellent example of using Facts (lay definition) to twist the truth.

I'm sure all the Capn could provide a source for all those percentages but when you dig in a little deeper and start interpreting, you can come up with a much different picture.

Take the 35% hoax claim...I've yet to meet someone who claims the virus isn't real and that for some it's deadly. Assuming there is a survey to support this number, you have to look at how the question was posed and what if any qualifiers people added to see what it really means because it simply doesn't mesh with what I've seen out in the real world.

Without researching the survey, I'm betting the survey was purposely designed to get such an outrageous response. There's a huge difference between believing the entire thing is made up and the virus doesn't exist vs the authorities have been selectively presenting data to make it appear worse than it is. Both could be considered hoaxes but the first makes people sound crazy. The second sounds pretty reasonable...so they make up a survey that forces people to choose between:
- The virus is real and we are all going to die
- The virus doesn't exist and it's all a hoax.

With that choice, most reasonable people have no good option and some will out of frustration pick the hoax option...giving the outlandish results for the survey, which likely was the desired outcome.

The total deaths falls into this type of argument also. If you believe that the numbers are being inflated, automatically, they lump you in with those who believe there have only been a 1000 or so deaths and therefore, you must be insane and can be ignored. This is a technique to shut down any dissenting opinions.

PS: Nice Argument from Authority attempt tacked on at the end.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Real authority (I would say credible experts) rely on verifiable facts. Doesn't matter which side of an issue you stand, if your facts don't stand up to critical scrutiny, then they are not facts, and you are not a credible expert.

Those with credible facts, will present the facts and not rely on their professional title.

Basically anyone going on about their title, usually is trying to make up for a lack of facts.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The problem with this is when "real authority" is defined by which side of an issue you stand on.

The only way "argument from authority" holds up is if everyone agrees on a definition of who is an authority. Otherwise, it falls back into false logic.

Historically it was professional organizations who society deemed as being the arbiters of both expert status and what the expert opinion was/is on the matter. Idea being that no one outside the field could have a clue to make such a determination.

But alas, if you're a nobody in your field, no funding, no respect, relatively dull, etc, the easiest way to gain prominence is to pander to pseudoscience/crazy folks outside the profession who are looking for an "expert" with credentials who agrees with them. Look at the current administration's cast of expert characters. It's like the scene from Spaceballs..."You idiot! You've captured their stunt doubles!"

Quite caustic in all of this is the legal system where it's ordinary to drag the oddball scientists up on the stand....where strained/specious reasoning is used to attempt to get money. That strained/specious reasoning routinely makes it into the news where pseudoscience/crackpot scientists-for-hire undermine science...and for what? Bucks for lawyers and crackpot scientists.

The greatest tragedy in all of this is that....indeed it is the rare "nobody" in their science field whose idea is so crazy that no one listens to them. Great ideas, inventions, observations too, too frequently comes from such people. But the professional organizations by nature give them short thrift, and the lawyers don't seek them out for the good of humanity.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Those with credible facts, will present the facts and not rely on their professional title.

Basically anyone going on about their title, usually is trying to make up for a lack of facts.

I said nothing about presenting professional titles. But it is a useful shorthand at times. The fact is (), we all take much of what we think we know on authority. The test for us is to rely on credible authority.

You tell me you are an immunologist with a doctorate from Cornell, this comes with high credibility when discussion the current pandemic. It is easily verifiable.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

... Newtonian Physics was believed to be FACT. Many still believe it to be FACT. Heck, it's still taught in school and engineers still use it...yet Einstein proved it wrong ...

Eienstein didn’t nullify Newton, or proove him wrong - he “stood on his shoulders”, and extended the limits of Newton’s theories.

In some cases, even when an old theory is supplanted, we continue to use it. Such an example can be seen in Newton's law of gravity. When Newton proposed his theory of universal gravity, in the 1600s, he described gravity as a force of attraction between all masses. This allowed for the correct prediction of the motion of the planets, the discovery of Neptune, the basic relation between a star's mass and its temperature, and on and on. Newtonian gravity was, and is, a robust scientific theory.

Then, in the early 1900s, Einstein proposed a different model, known as general relativity. The basic premise of this theory is, that gravity is due to the curvature of space and time by masses. Even though Einstein's gravity model is radically different from Newton's, the mathematics of the theory shows that Newton's equations are approximate solutions to Einstein's equations. Everything Newton's gravity predicts, Einstein's does as well. But Einstein also allows us to correctly model black holes, the big bang, the precession of Mercury's orbit, time dilation, and more, all of which have been experimentally validated.

But Einstein's theory is much more difficult to work with, than Newton's, so often we just use Newton's equations, to calculate things. For example, the motion of satellites, or exoplanets. If we don't need the precision of Einstein's theory, we simply use Newton to get an answer that is "good enough".

Einstein's theory didn't supplant Newton's, until we had experimental evidence that agreed with Einstein, and didn't agree with Newton.

But even if/when someone succeeds in creating a theory better than Einstein's (and someone almost certainly will), Einstein's theory will still be as valid as it ever was. Einstein won't have been proven wrong, we'll simply understand the limits of his theory, just as Einstein explained the limits of Newton's.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

An excellent example of using Facts (lay definition) to twist the truth.

I'm sure all the Capn could provide a source for all those percentages but when you dig in a little deeper and start interpreting, you can come up with a much different picture.

Take the 35% hoax claim...I've yet to meet someone.....

Well, that settles everything.

Without researching the survey, I'm betting the survey(s) was/were purposely designed to get such an outrageous response.

Bet as one likes, I've yet to meet someone who can prove that the survey was purposely designed to obtain an outrageous response.

Please provide evidence for the assertion that the survey that you haven't read was designed to garner an outrageous response (where evidence is not another assertion, but actual primary-source data).

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by jackdale

This is one of the ways in which I vet my experts.

https://guides.library.duq.edu/infor...aluation/CRAAP

“Peer reviewed” ba ha ha ha!

Oh yes, because academia is a shining star of all that’s right in the world lol

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

.... I mean you got like under a 1% chance of death from it, one might opine you are more likely to get killed driving to get tested for the virus, than if you actually had the virus....

The "facts" would seem to prove this opinion wrong. There are ~40k automobile accident fatalities annually in the US (IIHS source). There have been ~265k deaths this year (to date) attributed to Covid. Even if you think that number is inflated by 10 you still can't get to "driving to get tested is more likely to result in your death than Covid."

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

Oh, where to begin. About 35% of American thought it was a "hoax", and most of those still do. The hard core of denial. As for our soon to be ex-president, he didn't, and he did, lol.

Now. Speaking as a 30 year advanced practice nurse, public health. The mortality rate as a percent makes a terrible argument for a exponentially growing and dangerous pandemic that is not even close to over and will be the number one cause of death in the United States.

Worse yet - restricting the concern to mortality alone is a tragic, but perhaps intentional? We must consider the entirety of the ongoing world tragedy of Covid.

Analysis that follows is mine:

Long Term Consequences of Covid

No one is immune from lasting consequences. According to emerging studies:

18-34: 20%

35-49: 32%

50+: 47%

Overall: 35% The point: the focus on death rates – while still important – should not be your sole concern. Long term, possibly lifelong consequences are VERY important and affect FAR more people, of ALL ages. It has been well said that many of those who did not die may wish that they had. These include:

1. Crippling fatigue

2. Breathlessness

3. Persistent cough

4. Joint pain

5. Muscle aches

6. Tachycardia with exercise

7. Changes in hearing and/or eyesight

8. Headaches

9. Damage to key organs: heart, lungs, kidneys, gastrointestinal system

10. Depression and anxiety

11. Foggy thinking

12. De-realization (feeling you are “not really here”)

13. Tissue invasion (lingering small pockets of infection), eg in nerves (numbness/tingling)

14. Vertigo

15. Increased saliva, runny nose

16. Continuing diarrhea

17. Some evidence of new Type I diabetes, changes in blood sugar

18. Long term damage to the immune system

19. Suspected involvement in new auto-immune diseases

20. Blood vessel damage (due to hypercoagulation)

21. Strokes, psychosis and dementia.

None of these are related to the severity of the Covid infection. Any of these can and do occur with even mild(er) infection. Those who survive the ICU show continuing problems for up to a year (data still coming in), so far. An Italian study showed 87% of infected people had continuing issues even two months later. About 40% stated they were experiencing decreased quality of life, and issues affecting their ADL’s (activities of daily living).

A just released University of Maryland medical school study estimates that 30 to 50% of ALL infected people will suffer a degree of new and lasting/chronic mental illness, including PTSD. Students who survive are reporting lasting difficulties – academic, occupational and physical.

Friends, here’s the point. Covid is NOT the flu, and is immeasurably worse, more infective , with far more serious and long lasting damage. The focus on what some (mistakenly) consider “low” death rates is not the point. To the contrary, not dying may well be the only good thing, as “surviving” may mean a permanent change – negative – in your quality of life. How bad? We don’t know, but the indications are not good. Unlike the flu, up to half of all survivors will NOT “recover” in the classic sense, but will suffer a lasting reduction in their quality of life and losses in their ability to perform what we call Activities of Daily Living. It’s no joke.

A PHOSP-COVID large scale study (10,000 people) is now underway. Regardless, you MUST protect yourself now. It’s like smoking – we all knew cigarettes were dangerous long before it was “proved”. As an advanced practice nurse I’ve seen quite enough in the hundreds of current reports and smaller studies that I can advise – without equivocation – that at best, Covid may leave you wishing you had died, as your life changes forever.

For example, a good friend (also a nurse) foolishly exposed himself, contracted Covid – did NOT die – but now, months later – has permanent lung damage and can now barely walk to his mailbox and back without stopping halfway – and this months later. He was not admitted, no ICU, a so-called milder case. He was an active sailor and performed all his own maintenance on his cruising sailboat and home.

No more. His once active life has been permanently changed. Worse yet, his damaged lungs et al mean – in his own professional words – that “my next lung infection, even of the flu, will probably kill me.”

Still feeling political?

Addendum:

It’s time to put another shibboleth to bed. Our frequent flyers here seem to have a hangup about what they call “shutdowns”?! This is as if that descriptor alone means something. Countries are then compared by these amateurs, predictions made, crude theories proposed – all with the usual condescending tone of assumed authority.

Let’s get real. The real truth is that “lockdowns” are defined and rated by analyzing about 40 categories, each of which has about 4 different ratings (from absent, to mild, to moderate, to severe). Thus the “lockdowns” they so glibly promote are actually defined by over 160 different factors. The 40 different categories are then weighted as some have more of an effect than others.

In sum, the “lockdown” for a country or region carries a score of from 0 to 100. The descriptor alone means next to nothing. Is a “lockdown” rated “5” the same as a “lockdown” rated “95”? Of course not, but yet these self-appointed experts think so. But there’s more!

No country scores zero; nor does any country score 100. Further, the scores are constantly changing from day to day, week to week, month to month. Thus for our FF posters, a typical claim, like “Sweden has done ‘well” (whatever that means) without a real ‘lockdown’ (whatever that is)” – such a claim is ignorant, misleading, political and foolish. Such claims, and the arguments that follow, are more than a waste of time.

To the contrary, such claims – often politically driven – are part of the other virus: misinformation. With the estimated 30% of the population who sequentially considered Covid “a hoax”, then “will disappear”, is somehow “overstated” and that we need to end “lockdowns” – all of these unqualified and largely political claims only serve to insure that Covid will get much, much worse.

The lack of leadership, coordination, national and international planning – to my mind – is a self-induced human tragedy without equal in modern history. I say this: sailors, stick to sailing. Leave public health to the professionals. The idea that we public health professionals do not consider the economics (we do) is not only uninformed, it seems a blatant, political lie.



******************

I spent close to $100,000 becoming qualified as an advanced practice nurse. In public health we consider the science, relevant studies, the economics, social and cultural aspects – and more – all of which comprise the public and our community at large. Public health does NOT simply imply the physical – to the contrary it considers the community as a whole.

As a nurse I’ve gotta say it: those who hold forth here with their hundreds, nay thousands of listen-to-me posts need to listen more and spew less. All of our lives are at stake.

Yeah you just lose credibility with the 35% think virus is a hoax nonsense

Again, it’s stupid obvious that the virus is real, but the REACTION to the virus is BS border lining on mass hysteria

I know people who spent $100,001 on their education who disagree with you, so you have been overruled lol

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

The "facts" would seem to prove this opinion wrong. There are ~40k automobile accident fatalities annually in the US (IIHS source). There have been ~265k deaths this year (to date) attributed to Covid. Even if you think that number is inflated by 10 you still can't get to "driving to get tested is more likely to result in your death than Covid."

Death WITH covid ≠ death FROM covid

Think it’s like 6% of the covid seats were straight up FROM covid, which proves my driving to the test is more dangerous point


Here’s it from a politician who’s also a doctor, and is into fringe extremist stuff like the bill of rights lol

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=ElN5nlGUAi8