People don't know how to call BS on thing.
What happens is you get a collision of frames.
I see it in my work all the time
What happens is you get a collision of frames.
I see it in my work all the time
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Covid Skepticism
- Thread starter Ranga
- Start date
Forbes article on YouTube style "research"
Blurb:
When most of us “research” an issue, what we are actually doing is:
- formulating an initial opinion the first time we hear about something
- - evaluating everything we encounter after that through that lens of our gut instinct
- - finding reasons to think positively about the portions of the narrative that support or justify our initial opinion
- - and finding reasons to discount or otherwise dismiss the portions that detract from it.
Of course, that’s not what we think we’re doing. We think of ourselves as the heroes of our stories: cutting through misinformation and digging up the real truth on the matter. We think that, just by applying our brainpower and our critical reasoning skills, we can discern whose expert opinions are trustworthy and responsible. We think that we can see through who’s a charlatan and a fraud, and we can tell what’s safe and effective from what’s dangerous and ineffective.
Except, for almost all of us, we can’t.
PS
I can't believe I am reading Forbes....guess my youthfulness phase is passing and I am slipping into the oldfulness phase. Oh well, it could be worse.
Yeah motivated reasoning
Confirmation bias
And the framing effects effect on the framer.
There is no spoon. Objectivity is impossible living in a reality that we ourselves construct. But pursue it we must.
Why? Because.
Last edited:
My parents raised me to doubt myself.
The higher the accountability to wider one's frame must be.
One the coolest bumper stickers I ever saw was "Don't believe everything you think".
I think a cool bumper sticker would be:
"Trust you gut"
or
"Think with your heart, not your head"
"Trust you gut"
or
"Think with your heart, not your head"
I guess you don't know any of the folks at HI Sessions and what they do.
sorry if this sounds bad, but I'd prefer to trust a group of locals actually living in what's happening here talking among themselves as trusted friends, than a bunch of "big body" mainland haoles on TV media or over the internet/print who don't live here or have the same values as people born and raised where I live.
The only things I've witnessed almost everywhere else with a few exceptions have only cemented the reasoning as to why locals here named people doing and saying such things with the derogatory word we came up with. I'm sure every time locals hear or see something stupid in the media reflecting such behavior they are thinking if not silently saying the same word in their head to describe it.
best bumper sticker here is...
"Hey, this ain't the mainland"
sorry if this sounds bad, but I'd prefer to trust a group of locals actually living in what's happening here talking among themselves as trusted friends, than a bunch of "big body" mainland haoles on TV media or over the internet/print who don't live here or have the same values as people born and raised where I live.
The only things I've witnessed almost everywhere else with a few exceptions have only cemented the reasoning as to why locals here named people doing and saying such things with the derogatory word we came up with. I'm sure every time locals hear or see something stupid in the media reflecting such behavior they are thinking if not silently saying the same word in their head to describe it.
best bumper sticker here is...
"Hey, this ain't the mainland"
heh, the Southern version of that is "I don't care how you did it up North"
"your cognitive system and nervous system are both fallible but they are all all you got."
We should have picked our own cotton.
You become what you hate
It takes one to know one
Do as I say not as I do
I don't believe you, or them.
Shut up or I'll give you something to really cry about.
You become what you hate
It takes one to know one
Do as I say not as I do
I don't believe you, or them.
Shut up or I'll give you something to really cry about.
I still have nightmares about A.S. Convergence (strong law of large numbers), Kinchin's WLLN (weak law of large numbers, or convergence in probability), as well as convergence in distribution. Other things that kept me up at night during that period were Mann-Wald (the continuous mapping theorem), the Delta-Method (multivariate and univariate), and Chebyshev's Inequality. I can't begin to count how many times I used Chebyshev to show convergence in probability during the winter of my first year of grad school. The theory I studied that winter contained possibly the hardest concepts I was ever exposed to academically. The professor I had was brutal. A very nice guy, but he worked us to death. He strongly believed that the material was essential for a good statistician.
What Franklin Veaux is talking about is incredibly important. I'm not going to go into much of it, but limiting the effect Covid 19 to the deaths makes about as much sense as judging the educational level of an area by dividing people into 'have PHD' or 'no PHD' categories. Anyone doing so is an absolute idiot, you would be putting someone with an MS in statistics and an MS in physics in the same category as a high school dropout. While the percentage of folks who have a PHD is quite important for such an analysis, it is woefully inadequate as a complete measure of how well educated an area is, it omits FAR too much information. I have not done any serious analysis of Covid19, but 'survive' or 'die' are not remotely adequate for analyzing the scope of this disease.
The other important element the author touches on is the misinterpretation of mortality rate. A disease with a low mortality rate but a high transmission rate can kill FAR more people than a disease with a high mortality rate but a low transmission rate. As an exercise, think of the theory behind what an actuarial present value is. It is essentially the expected present value of the payout, times the probability that the payout occurs. If the probability of the payout is high, the APV (actuarial present value) can be very high, even expected present value of the claim is low. In the U.S. we have a death total of more than 160k, which is almost certainly a solid under-count. I would also guess that the number infected is far higher than what is reported. While that might mean that the mortality rate might not be all THAT high, it is really rather pointless to make that argument. A low mortality rate with a high transmission rate can still lead to a staggering number of deaths, which this pandemic has. When I hear people citing the mortality rate as evidence that this disease is not all that bad it truly blows my mind. I don't see how anyone can be that stupid. Context behind a metric is extremely important, if you lack the understanding of what it really means you won't apply it accurately and your inference is likely to be spurious.
Part of the reason this stuff is important to me is that when people don't have a thorough understanding of methodology they make inaccurate inferences, which leads to general distrust of statistics. As an example, consider a hypothetical zip code. There are 99 single family homes there that are worth 1m. There is one estate that is worth 20m. Let's say the estate sells during a year, and that it is the ONLY home to sell. Someone might see that the median price for a home sold is 20m and infer that this is a good measure of the home values in the area. This sounds absurd, but the issue in this case is NOT the calculation, it is the inference. The median home price would indeed be 20m for that quarter, but that would not mean that it is representative of homes in the area. The error is in the inference that typical home values are estimated by median sale price. Typically that is an accurate inference, but in this case one would be way off. The statistic is NOT a lie, the lie is in the inference which comes from poor data analysis. While this hypothetical might seem a bit far fetched, it is important to have a thorough understanding of an analysis before making an inference. The people using the mortality rate without considering the transmission rate are doing a very poor job. Mortality rates are quite important, I use a Cox Proportional Hazards model from time to time for failure rate. Mortality rate is a big deal in statistics, Cox got knighted for his contributions, but it is important to understand what mortality rate does, and does not reveal.
Some studies are now confirming an association between heart damage and getting Covid. This is AFTER appropriate confounding factors have been accounted for, so please don't tell me that the people who have heart damage due to Covid19 had it beforehand, as a pre-existing heart issue would be the very definition of a confounder in a study like this. I hope that as more data comes out we don't keep seeing this association, but I doubt that will be the case.
Obviously I wish more people studied statistics seriously in college, that goes without saying. But I REALLY wish more people finished undergrad with at least a modicum of an understanding of confounding. This is particularly true in the medicine.
I'm not going to read the rest of the thread, but if the idiots in Bakersfield have been discussed anyone defending them is beyond stupid. They were censored by youtube for VERY good reasons. If anyone here is claiming they were censored due to some conspiracy they are destroying their credibility. Their methodology was about as reasonable as measuring the percentage of cars in Dover Shores that are Teslas, then extrapolating state wide and assuming that percentage is accurate across the whole state. One of the things I always do in a data analysis is figure out which populations I can generalize about based on the sample. I guess they don't teach that wherever these idiots went to med school. I grew up in the mid-Hudson Valley in a relatively blue collar town. I can count on one hand how many times I saw a Ferrari. I now live in Newport Beach, where I see them almost everyday. To generalize about Ferrari frequency in Poughkeepsie NY based on Ferrari frequency in Newport Beach would be an incredible level of stupidity. Greenwich CT or Purchase NY would work better for that.
I REALLY hope this swell ends up delivering. This has not been a good month for surf in Orange County. The fact that that bothers me even a tiny bit indicates that I am pretty far out in the tail on the luckiness curve.
Nancy Pelosi revealed what a joke these lockdowns have been all along by going to the hairdresser without a mask. She's special.
"Lockdowns For Thee But Not For Me!!!" is Nancy's new slogan.
.
.
.
"Lockdowns For Thee But Not For Me!!!" is Nancy's new slogan.
.
.
.
What if this whole thing is really just a test to see how the governments of the world respond to pandemic? What if it's just a practice run?