Welcome Guest

So you can challenge my conclusion drawn from

Posted on: December 17, 2020 at 09:56:00 CT

ummmm MU

Posts:

44902

Member For:

13.48 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

my conditional statement (though the distinction you're trying to draw between is and would be is a really weak one), but your initial beef in this thread was that I drew a conclusion at all.

Go back and read it.

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

MESSAGE THREAD

did something right to save 100,000 lives - tigerinhogtown STL - 12/17 09:09:18

Current ~ 315K dead. There's two weeks until the end of the - SparkyStalcup MU - 12/17 09:31:57

Liar - Panthera MU - 12/17 12:11:14

lol....have you ever asked yourself why the Total Death #s - Mizzou Lou KC - 12/17 09:42:34

oh lord, you're going to trigger paleojas (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:43:59

uh oh...I'm unfamiliar with his work (nm) - Mizzou Lou KC - 12/17 10:10:48

the forcast was over 400,000 - tigerinhogtown STL - 12/17 09:40:09

It is not undercounted (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:34:41

"majority of people are taking precautions" - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:12:13

50.1% is a majority, but it's not enough. - *M* KC - 12/17 09:27:29

If that were the number, then it's further proof that govt - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:31:26

As you know, it's not the number. It's the number I used - *M* KC - 12/17 09:34:11

"If that were" - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:35:12

"Then it's further proof" that "mandates don't work" - *M* KC - 12/17 09:38:17

lol good lord this is an ignorant post (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:41:34

I'm sure that to you it seems that way Sal. Too many - *M* KC - 12/17 09:42:26

It's an if/then hypothetical, counselor. (nm) - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:39:40

So "if that were the number", then "it would be proof" - *M* KC - 12/17 09:41:55

If...then. - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:44:09

Right. But you said If it were, then "it's", i.e., "it IS" - *M* KC - 12/17 09:45:55

From a K-12 website: - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:47:44

That would be useful if it represented what you said - *M* KC - 12/17 09:50:44

That doesn't make any difference. They are both - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:51:23

true, but one is an accurate conclusion, and the other is a - *M* KC - 12/17 09:52:26

You originally took issue with me drawing a conclusion at - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:53:52

You are not making any sense (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:47:23

Honestly, Sal, I don't expect you to understand it. - *M* KC - 12/17 09:48:14

It was clearly a hypothetical statement (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:43:15

I know that. But the conclusion was definite. - *M* KC - 12/17 09:44:21

lol wtf (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:45:35

Yeah, that's the "then" part about an if/then statement. - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:44:49

Do you know the diffference between "then it is" and - *M* KC - 12/17 09:47:18

Both would work for the conclusion that I was drawing - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:48:33

One is accurate, the other is misleading. So for those - *M* KC - 12/17 09:51:35

Regardless, they are both definite conclusions drawn from - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:53:03

One is arguably true on its face, and one is demonstrably - *M* KC - 12/17 09:54:59

So you can challenge my conclusion drawn from - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:56:00

No, my initial beef in this thread was that - *M* KC - 12/17 09:59:29

Oh, you mean when you noted that the 50.1% number - ummmm MU - 12/17 10:03:22

lol (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 10:08:37

take a breather (nm) - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:48:08

That number would likely need to be closer to 75-80% to - SparkyStalcup MU - 12/17 09:33:26

I don't know what the number is but ultimately you're - ummmm MU - 12/17 09:36:43

Some people can't stand free thinking individuals - Sal MU

- 12/17 09:42:42

You touched on the real issue for so many these days - Bulldog Bob Brown STL - 12/17 09:41:08