Reply With QuoteYou said you were a graph professor and you know it!
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
so you admit you aare being deliberately insulting. Typicla action of a keyboard warrior.!Originally Posted by rudy gestede
there you go changing words again to suit your answer just like Croesy. I did not say I was very good at the old graphs as you indicate here as a quote, that's just a lie.
how can Iunderstand a map that has no information on it to indicate what its a map of? From your comments I assume it isn't a map but a graph in the form of a map, or a map in place of a list of countries and figures, but there is nothing on there to tell me what.
this began because TOBW remarked on the fact that the map had elcitied no comments and i pointed out that there was no terms of reference on it.
Besides you no one has commented even yet and no one has actually said what the z rate refers to even yet, including you. But I've lost interest now, people like you will just say "it's obvious" without actually giving any real information to back up the claim anyway
You said you were a graph professor and you know it!
God you're childish. That is absolutely pathetic!!
On reflection I think you really are a child!
No mate, a tragedy is over 30000 deaths in 7 weeks and rising.
Piers Morgan is annoying but at least he's asking the questions that should be asked and pointing out the bollocks behind the spin.
When we've got a PM who, about the country with the world's second highest death count, says that we've “so far succeeded in the first and most important task we set ourselves as a nation – to avoid the tragedy that engulfed other parts of the world” then I'm glad there's someone like Piers Morgan telling them that they're talking utter utter nonsense
Do you seriously not understand what the graph is showing? I can explain it for you if you like.
Well it would be nice if someone did instead of throwing insults about and pretending to be so clever themselves.
I'm pretty sure in the time spent posting messages on here you could have googled an explanation of what the z score means
He doesn't understand what excess means either he said.
Excess = excess deaths
Z value is how far from the standard deviation a value is.
So what? Also all the self proclaimed people on here who either posted it, reposted it or castigated me for not knowing could have just tried to explain it to me. But no one has and that includes you.
Or you could have just googled it, that's what I always do if I don't understand something.
Self proclaimed people
There you go again. I did not say I don't know what excess means, you're making things up again to suit your answers
What are you talking about here then
The map shows a scale on the right and countries of Europe on the map. There are no terms of reference, no link to what the person who produced it was trying to prove or disprove, no information on whether the numbers have been weighted to show different population sizes, and no explanation of the information that is not shown. How can any useful information be gleened from it when more than half the counties indicated have no statistics to prove or disprove whatever the thing is trying to show?
Basically it is useless unless all the information is there. How do we know that the information is not available from some countries or that the producer chose to ignore them? Some countries as we are told are massaging their figures, some count differently. Is there any explanation of whether and how these anomolies have been taken into account?
like many graphs it seeks to prove the authors point, but in this case we don't even know, because the map is shown her completely devoid of any context, what his point was or even who he/she was?
People look at it and assume it means what they wanted to believe anyway.
Now people will start going at mne again but none of it will change the point of what I am saying.
It is a z score of excess mortality.
https://www.euromomo.eu/how-it-works/what-is-a-z-score
thank you.
He didn't need to do that, I posted a definition in my reply to him.
I bet you it took you about a quarter of an hour to come up with that - it's a lot of words which doesn't actually say much at all that is relevant, are you related to Boris Johnson by any chance?
It took me a few seconds when I first looked at it. Without proper reference and context it is meaningless.
to quote you, it doesn't actually say much that is relevant.
and no I'm not.
Reference your other post, I honestly didn't see any reply from you. If I had I'd have acknowledged it with thanks as I usually do on here.
No downing street Briefing to day then.
Have they been binned permanently or was it just put on stop because of Boris's statement in the House of Commons? I have been looking forward to that each day for the graphs and the questions, particularly lately from ordinary folks whos questions generally are for more to the point that the journalists.
apparently he is answering questions at 7 PM. that should be interesting lol
So much of politics is built around a struggle between prioritising money and people. As someone who sides with the latter option naturally, I can see that there has to be an emphasis on the money side as well, but when it comes to a choice, people should win out on the vast majority of occasions. So much of the policy making with the virus is down to a question of balancing the money v people argument and I can accept that the money side of things cannot be put off indefinitely while full concentration is given to as few people as possible dying.
In America, to no great surprise, the money side is increasingly coming to the fore, while it seems that things may now be heading that way in this country. The early flirtation with Herd Mentality was a sign that money was winning out over people and it seems to me that many of the decisions which looked odd at the time (e.g. abandoning the initial approach to testing, reclassification of the status of COVID and some decisions on PPE) were taking purely on financial grounds or because a lack of funding had meant that the systems were just not in place to respond in the way other countries were doing.
However, for the last seven weeks or so, people, largely, won out over money in the UK until the Prime Minister addressed the nation on Sunday when money started mounting its comeback. So much is being left to individual choice in the UK Government's new approach and there has to be a knowledge that, in many cases, economic necessity will be the driver behind a person's choice to return to work or not, irrespective of how safe or otherwise their work situation is.
The Government has got a terrible job on its hands and neither of the primary choices available to them are attractive or without significant risks. It shouldn't really come as a surprise that a Conservative Government is showing increased signs of choosing money over people when it comes to the crunch - I can certainly sympathise with their dilemma, but would also say that if they do go that way, they will also be able to try to blame others (including the public) if and when things go wrong.
It's being widely touted that Chancellor Sunak will announce later today that the furloughed workers scheme will be extended to September but recipients will receive 60% of their earnings instead of the current 80%.
Coronavirus: Chancellor expected to extend furlough scheme to September, but cut it to 60% of earnings - https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...nings-11986807
Furloughed workers to get 60% of their salary until September - https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/12/furlo...mber-12688960/
On a Positive note looks like the Heath hospital has resumed normal service by looking at the amount of cars parked up and people walking in today....
Posting Permissions