BigRedBuster

@N is for nowledge who is IMHE?

No, literally who put the graph together and published it? Who tweeted it?

What is the source of this graph?

So....you know more than just about every infectious disease expert in the world just be looking at a graph.

Can you provide a link to all the assumptions in each of the projections? And, are you talking about the IMHE or IHME?

Literally everyone is questioning this. I'm not sure what you think you are arguing against.

Ummmm....that's because more limitations have been put in place? It's not a difficult concept here.

This conversation was going on in a thread in the football forum. It got moved here. I did learn that the Onion is a good source for information.

You use the information you have and adjust as you go. So...according to you, we shouldn't have had any social limitations put on us at all. BTW...1,600+ dead today and we have 4 more hours to go. By far the deadliest day yet. So...since you're the infectious disease expert, how high are these going to go? We already had one supposedly expert tell us that we only have 15 cases in the country and it's going to go to zero soon. That was oh....about 12,400+ deaths ago....over 3-4 weeks.

I'll be voting for Biden, but I do agree with this.

Good Riddance.

You literally quoted The Onion as a source.

That also typically is said about someone who is saying something, that everyone understands, but doesn't agree with. That doesn't mean they "don't wan to hear it" or that you are right. Change "Trump" to "Hillary" and you have what a heck of a lot of people were saying 4 years ago. How about this? I agree with you that everyone should vote for Biden so we don't have Trump. That still doesn't eliminate the need for Biden to be out convincing every single person of that just to make sure he wins in a landslide and not just by squeaking by...or god forbid, loses. I will be voting for him. But, he still needs to be helping convince everyone else. But, someone saying they need to hear more....isn't being lazy or passive.

1:00pm central and we already have 1,370+ deaths. We have 6 more hours to go. It's going to be a bad day.

Yep, it was. That doesn't change anything as to the validity of the projection. Nothing was known as to how extensive the social distancing would be and how well the American public would adhere to it. Still, nothing you have posted proves what you are trying to state.

Two things are true. a) If Bernie supporters don't vote for Biden, chances are Trump wins another 4 years. b) This does not eliminate the need for Biden to prove why they should support him. I can turn your argument around on you for 2016. A heck of a lot of people blindly voted for Trump because they refused to want Hillary as President. They didn't look closely at the type of person Trump was...all they knew is that they didn't want Hillary, so anyone is better than that. Heck, I still have people say....well, at least we don't have Hillary. Well.....here we are. Your view that someone demanding Biden convince them to vote for him is some how lazy or passive is one of the oddest things I've ever seen you say on here.

So...let me get this straight. In your first post, you state that you agree with the idea to open everything up and get things going because it's no where close to as bad as the experts are portraying it. In your next post, you explain why (if there isn't a vaccine or major treatment breakthrough, we shouldn't have a season. What is different in your second post than what anyone (me) has been saying? You portray anyone (me) as "sheepals" whatever that is and stupid, ignorant... I've simply been saying that we listen to the experts, and the sooner we do that, this gets under control so down the road, we can open up. What is "catering to their own fears" about that? Am I to assume that you believe all social limitations should be lifted immediately and what ever happens happens because it's no where close to as bad as the experts say?

This is a new virus nobody had ever seen before. The original projections are based on what people know about viruses that seem to act the same as what the experts are seeing. Interestingly, those original projections, aren't off that far assuming nothing had changed. The fact that things HAVE changed that has affected the outcome, doesn't make the original projections garbage.

OK...are you taking the original question to ask "SHOULD we have a season next year?" That seems to be what you are indicating. The original question was for the chances of us having one. Those are two very different questions. "SHOULD" we have a season will be determined as time goes on over the next 4-5 months. I haven't seen anyone dispute that or indicate we should make that determination right now. This is all a very bad situation financially for a lot of people. Nobody is disputing that. We need to be opened back up as soon as possible. That "as soon as possible" will be determined by how serious people take this problem NOW so the virus gets controlled and we can move on with our lives. If people don't take it seriously, it will drag on longer.

The difference between you and me is that you seem to have the feeling that a projection that isn't almost dead nuts on the first time, must be garbage. I tend to understand that projections are adjusted over time with what is happening on the ground. When the original projections are made, nobody knew what measures would take place and how Americans would react to them or adhere to them. It's like projecting now that the Huskers are going to win 8 games next year, then in fall camp, top two QBs, starting RB and two starting WRs go down with injury. So, it's adjusted to project 5 wins next year. That doesn't mean the original projection was garbage.

Nobody is making decisions for 4-5 months from now yet. The point of the thread was to guess if we will or not have a football season. That will be decided as we get closer to that time. I don't see anyone disputing that.

What's the point of posting that and how does that prove your point? I laughed because the original models were without social distancing which indicated 1.5-2 million deaths. You then basically point that out in your post and use it to try to argue against what I said. FYI....there are some who now believe the death toll in Wuhan is 40,000+ If you extrapolate that out to the US population, that comes out to roughly 1.18 million. That 40,000+ in Wuhan still was affectively lowered by social distancing that was eventually put in place. Nothing you have posted indicates that the models are garbage like you seem to think.

Well, rhubarb is what I have in the back yard. Well....I have dandelions too, but I tasted dandelion wine once and wasn't impressed. So, rhubarb is the ingredient of choice. I might try wild plums in the future.