Welcome Guest

Oh, you mean when you noted that the 50.1% number

Posted on: December 17, 2020 at 10:03:22 CT

ummmm MU

Posts:

44902

Member For:

13.48 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

was not the number to correct my statement that started with "If that were the number..."

??

Yeah, that was very illuminating to me.

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