Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: warspite1

...

By the way vis a vis your first comment, do you like my pretty pie chart? Maybe could do with a dash of colour?

I think I can safely conclude from this that I have a cat light/bike heavy type scenario going on chez warspite.

think it would be more conclusive if you had it shaded a bit (and in pink?)

well the cat/bike ratio has just altered as one of our older toms has come back from his night out so things are back to 4/4

edit: shortly after that it altered to 3/4, at the moment it is 2/4 but will be 2/2 fairly soon.

Its almost as if by comparing 2 factual but unrelated numbers I am either (a) talking mince or (b) have proved there is a correlation between the number of cats and the number of bikes in the house at any time.

FWIW, I'll opt for the mince explanation.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: loki100

except the two numbers combined are as meaningful as if I posted the cat:bike ratio in my house......


You've identified a death rate well in excess of anyone else.....

warspite1

Mate, for the sake of your own sanity, give it up. Nothing you say will stop these pretty graphs and the 'death rate' - totally ridiculous, alarmist nonsense in isolation though it is - from being presented.

That the same numbers (without the totally redundant "Total Cases" which form no part of his calculation) are posted in places such as worldometers appears lost on some. Their numbers are suitably caveated to clearly state that they are based on "cases which had an outcome" and which have the serious/critical numbers as a % of the active cases next to it, and which provide further useful links - one of which clearly states "A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present". But then, they have obviously tried to present numbers in a more meaningful form but this distinction appears to be totally lost on the "I hate to be the bearer of bad news but we've been calculating this all wrong" brigade.

He is happy to create graphs of totally meaningless numbers, without explanation or caveat, for no useful purpose whatsoever, so why not just let him and save yourself the aggravation?

By the way vis a vis your first comment, do you like my pretty pie chart? Maybe could do with a dash of colour?

I think I can safely conclude from this that I have a cat light/bike heavy type scenario going on chez warspite.

Mate, for the sake of your own sanity, give it up. [:D][:D][:D][:D]

BBC

Coronavirus: Warning over daily death figures
By Rachel Schraer
Health reporter
7 April 2020

Experts are warning against over-interpreting daily figures of people dying with Covid-19, since they often reflect reporting delays.

Spikes or dips may in part reflect bottlenecks in the reporting system, rather than real changes in the trend.

On Monday, 439 coronavirus deaths were recorded in the UK - down from 621 on Sunday and 708 on Saturday.

Many hospitals will not report deaths that happened over the weekend until the middle of the following week.

Over the weekend, NHS England released new figures broken down by the actual date of death.

And these reveal that between 11 March and 1 April there were about 300 more deaths than previously thought during that period.

Prof Jim Naismith, at the University of Oxford, said because of "understandable" delays in reporting by NHS trusts, the daily figures included deaths that may have happened up to two weeks ago.

Separate figures, published last week, also suggest the number of people dying with coronavirus is higher than the daily totals indicate.

The Office for National Statistics examined registrations and found deaths in the community not included in the daily hospital deaths figures.

Nevertheless, there are some early promising signs the virus's spread is slowing, as new confirmed cases fell from 4,450 to 3,802 between Friday and Monday.

The rate of increase in new cases has halved in the past week.

And this should feed through into a slowing in critical-care admissions and eventually deaths.

But reporting delays mean once we reach the peak, we may not know about it for several days.

And this makes it a challenge to see the real trend at the moment.

Prof Naismith said daily data releases were good for transparency.

"The only downside of government releasing data in this way is that it has become a scorecard for the media and a worried public," he said.

Follow Rachel on Twitter

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52167016

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/ ... heres-why/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... -covid-19/

So you see, no one knows. Worldometer's front page has about the same numbers as Bob. Maybe you should write them and tell them how stupid they are. [:D]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/ ... heres-why/

I wonder if Lemay will read that.

Nope, it would ruin his fear mongering!

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Lobster

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/ ... heres-why/

I wonder if Lemay will read that.

Nope, it would ruin his fear mongering!

I don't understand why you people don't simply push the green button. Personally I don't do that. Maybe the person I censor has something to say that I need to hear. But then I'm not into censorship because I'm not a dicktator.

Here, write these people and tell them they are fear mongering because of their front page. The math is correct but ignore that and tell them how wrong they are. [8|] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Here, write these people and tell them they are fear mongering because of their front page. The math is correct but ignore that and tell them how wrong they are. [8|] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

warspite1

As said above and about a berzillion times previously, its not the numbers on their own. Yes, the numbers on their own are pointless, useless, simplistic, mis-guided and scaremongering, but if he wants to post them then fine - post away to his little hearts content. But it would be sensible to add a simple caveat or two. It's not difficult, he doesn't need to make any judgements, assumptions or guestimates himself, just simply put some freakin' context around the 'pretty' graphs:

That the same numbers (without the totally redundant "Total Cases" which form no part of his calculation) are posted in places such as worldometers appears lost on some. Their numbers are suitably caveated to clearly state that they are based on "cases which had an outcome" and which have the serious/critical numbers as a % of the active cases next to it, and which provide further useful links - one of which clearly states "A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present". But then, they have obviously tried to present numbers in a more meaningful form but this distinction appears to be totally lost on the "I hate to be the bearer of bad news but we've been calculating this all wrong" brigade.

ORIGINAL: Lobster

I don't understand why you people don't simply push the green button.

warspite1

Yes you do, you've just explained it. I have never green buttoned anyone either for similar reasons to you. Personally I suspect very few people do - but some people (not all) just love to self importantly announce that they've green buttoned x.

ORIGINAL: Lobster



Mate, for the sake of your own sanity, give it up. [:D][:D][:D][:D]

warspite1

I hope you are not criticising my graph. I've put hours into extrapolating the key data points [:D]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

...
I hope you are not criticising my graph. I've put hours into extrapolating the key data points [:D]

could you do a time series? that might help?

My data points are 4 bikes, 1 cat. Are your conclusions still valid?

ORIGINAL: Zorch

My data points are 4 bikes, 1 cat. Are your conclusions still valid?

Maybe it's just me, but when did cats start riding bikes?
Do they keep spare bikes in case visitors come over?

Why did Warspite1's graph not include your cat? [&:]

Proving that his numbers must be flawed. I'm going to green button him! [:-]

Will Curtis get it? I'm going to green button him. [8|]

Cats and dogs living together, with bikes ... ahhhhhhhhh! I'm going to green button them too![:(]

RR

Today's worldwide figures:



Those who say that Total Deaths and Total Recovered are "completely unrelated" are blind, deaf, and dumb. Together they make up the Total Resolved, and as such are obviously related.

The number I'm calculating is the only valid death rate we can derive that is based entirely on facts.

Everyone else is proffering opinions, beliefs, gut feelings, intuitions, etc. I'll pass.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
...that is based entirely on facts.

Not true.

Many folks are given cause of death as coronavirus without having been given a test to see if they have the disease. Doctors have been given that latitude because test kits are in short supply, especially in particularly hard hit countries such as Italy.

None of the numbers you are using are "facts." They are simply "reported."

So the best you can say is "based on reported."

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

ORIGINAL: Zorch

My data points are 4 bikes, 1 cat. Are your conclusions still valid?

Maybe it's just me, but when did cats start riding bikes?
Do they keep spare bikes in case visitors come over?

Why did Warspite1's graph not include your cat? [&:]

Proving that his numbers must be flawed. I'm going to green button him! [:-]

Will Curtis get it? I'm going to green button him. [8|]

Cats and dogs living together, with bikes ... ahhhhhhhhh! I'm going to green button them too![:(]

RR

warspite1

Fetch me my angry trousers - I'm madder than I've ever been [:@]

Are you seriously questioning my numbers Mr RR?? Seriously? But I've dealt in facts. The total number of cats to bikes for the whole of the UK... except at the time of writing I only knew the numbers for my house... BUT never mind, them's the facts so that must be right mustn't it! I mean, no need to caveat my numbers or actually give any information [:D]

But that's it, I've had enough. I'm going to Green Button the entire world - including my little green button MWahahahahahahahaha

ORIGINAL: Lava

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
...that is based entirely on facts.

Not true.

Many folks are given cause of death as coronavirus without having been given a test to see if they have the disease. Doctors have been given that latitude because test kits are in short supply, especially in particularly hard hit countries such as Italy.

None of the numbers you are using are "facts." They are simply "reported."

So the best you can say is "based on reported."

Which is what I've always said.

From my post #971:

"It is a FACT: Of all the known resolved corona virus cases worldwide, over 20% have died."

Now, if you want to base anything on Unknown cases, or Unresolved cases, you are engaging in opinion, etc.

This little post to prepare for deconfinement.
1) An IQ test for everyone.
Only those who get at least 100 will be able to go out, the others will remain confined because their intelligence is a danger for everyone.
2) A National Resilience Council (CNR) which will represent the interests of ...... survivors.
3) A new Bretton Woods to deleverage humanity. All debts will be canceled, a new universal currency created:
The coinvid.
Hope.

Oh, snake-oil vendors again! Don´t know how anyone even supports this, no matter what relation there be.

There's a old German 17th. Century Story/Fable about Death;
At the time of the plague, Death went to town.
An old man on the outskirts asked him where he was going.
Death said: I'll get a hundred people.
On the way back the old man asked him why he got a thousand people.
Death replied: I only got a hundred people. The others died of fear.