The Road to Qatar.

[CanadaFan123]

10 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

I don't think math supports what you say above as US population is ~10x that of Canada.

Edit: also your car accident "fact" is highly specious.  Would like to know where that is from.

Edit #2: 3,700 people die globally each day from car accidents.

Upon further reflection, I stand corrected on both of the above. 

The general point stands - I don't think anyone in general is at more risk in the USA or Canada at this time. The numbers are negligible. 

[Bison44]

13 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

I don't think math supports what you say above as US population is ~10x that of Canada.

Edit: also your car accident "fact" is highly specious.  Would like to know where that is from.

Edit #2: 3,700 people die globally each day from car accidents.

So your saying Canadafan123 does prove Obinna is statistically correct, since all the facts he referenced were all incorrect.  This new math people are using these days is just fascinating.  And I am curious, did that take more than 1 minute to disprove every stat he quoted??  

Edited July 23, 2021 by Bison44

[Miche]

[narduch]

6 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Crazy that a country with 10x the population would have 10x the cases... 

That article has also been debunked if you look into Alabama statistics it's improbable.

Don't be a dummy. Case incidence is population adjusted.

Canada is at 7 cases per week per 100k population. USA is 92. That is a population adjusted metric.

Please give it up. Take the L

[JohnnyFranchise]

4 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Upon further reflection, I stand corrected on both of the above. 

The general point stands - I don't think anyone in general is at more risk in the USA or Canada at this time. The numbers are negligible. 

wait, what?

the US has ~10x the population but you posted that they had 28x the number of deaths.

i guess the numbers are negligible because who needs facts, right?

[CanadaFan123]

Just now, JohnnyFranchise said:

wait, what?

the US has ~10x the population but you posted that they had 28x the number of deaths.

i guess the numbers are negligible because who needs facts, right?

The numbers are negligible because they are so low. We're talking about ~300 deaths between two countries with a population of over 350 million. In terms of this forum and what we're talking about - a soccer game - it's negligible, yes.

[narduch]

2 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

wait, what?

the US has ~10x the population but you posted that they had 28x the number of deaths.

i guess the numbers are negligible because who needs facts, right?

The numbers don't matter because they prove him wrong

[JohnnyFranchise]

12 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

The numbers are negligible because they are so low. We're talking about ~300 deaths between two countries with a population of over 350 million. In terms of this forum and what we're talking about - a soccer game - it's negligible, yes.

then why did you bring them up in the first place? because you thought they were going to prove your point, then when you got shown that they actually proved you incredibly wrong they become negligible. 

you're a beauty, bud.

Edited July 23, 2021 by JohnnyFranchise

[CanadaFan123]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

then why did you bring them up in the first place? because you thought they were going to prove your point, then when you got shown that they actually proved you incredibly wrong they become negligible. 

you're a beuaty, bud.

Read again. My original post wasn't proving a point about numbers - the point was that they're negligible - as I stated and you can reread. I said that the numbers in the USA were higher but they were negligible. 

52 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

If you take the latest 7 day average we are at 9 deaths per day, while the USA is at 252 deaths per day. This would say that the USA is experiencing deaths at a higher rate, although the difference is negligible.

So I'm not sure what you're arguing. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by CanadaFan123

[Oranje]

[JohnnyFranchise]

4 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Read again. My original post wasn't proving a point about numbers - the point was that they're negligible - as I stated and you can reread. I said that the numbers in the USA were higher but they were negligible. 

hahaha, outstanding.

THIS was your original post:

56 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

A quick Google of COVID deaths shows our latest data point being July 17 wherein there were 3 deaths in Canada. On that same day there were 83 deaths in the US. Proportionate to population that would actually make them safer. Of course this is just one day. 

 

[CanadaFan123]

4 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

hahaha, outstanding.

THIS was your original post:

 

Right, I was wrong about that but even then I said "Of course this is just one day" as the qualifier. I then went on to talk about the US death rate being higher on a 7 day average in that same original post. You're bizarrely cherry picking one paragraph to try to win some sort of argument. 

So we're agreed that the US death rate is higher regardless of the fact that I made a mistake on the latest statistic. What is your point here?

Edited July 23, 2021 by CanadaFan123

[JohnnyFranchise]

6 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Right, I was wrong about that but even then I said "Of course this is just one day" as the qualifier. I then went on to talk about the US death rate being higher on a 7 day average in that same original post. You're bizarrely cherry picking one paragraph to try to win some sort of argument. 

So we're agreed that the US death rate is higher regardless of the fact that I made a mistake on the latest statistic. What is your point here?

no point, just enjoying watching you backtrack and contradict yourself.

[CanadaFan123]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

no point, just enjoying watching you backtrack and contradict yourself.

My original post is unedited and I haven't contradicted myself - but nice try. 

[El Hombre]

20 minutes ago, Oranje said:

I would love to see this every fourth or fifth post.  Seriously. 

[JohnnyFranchise]

Just now, CanadaFan123 said:

My original post is unedited and I haven't contradicted myself - but nice try. 

"i'm gonna use facts and figures to prove my point"

*the figures actually prove you wrong*

"those figures don't matter"

seems like a contradiction to me, but i guess that can be interpreted differently.

we're starting to go in circles now and i'm getting bored. let's let this thread get back on topic.

i'm outta here, have a good weekend.

[MtlMario]

I just want to point out that the US pop. is about 325 mil. compared to ours which is about 38 mil. So the actual difference is about 8.5 times the difference. I had to clarify that after hearing so many times the 10 X difference. That's all.

[CanadaFan123]

16 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

"i'm gonna use facts and figures to prove my point"

*the figures actually prove you wrong*

"those figures don't matter"

seems like a contradiction to me, but i guess that can be interpreted differently.

we're starting to go in circles now and i'm getting bored. let's let this thread get back on topic.

i'm outta here, have a good weekend.

Literally never said any of those things and I said the numbers were negligible from the start. I guess anything can seem like a contradiction if you are making up quotes. Have a great weekend. 

[Obinna]

6 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Right, I was wrong about that but even then I said "Of course this is just one day" as the qualifier. I then went on to talk about the US death rate being higher on a 7 day average in that same original post. You're bizarrely cherry picking one paragraph to try to win some sort of argument. 

So we're agreed that the US death rate is higher regardless of the fact that I made a mistake on the latest statistic. What is your point here?

The point is to make you look wrong by focusing on everything but the crux of the argument.

That's the thing about propagandized individuals, they don't realize how ridiculous they appear. It's quite stunning, but also very sad. Their cognitive dissonance forces them to twist and mischaracterize the argument and then tell you that it doesn't make sense.

Of course it doesn't, that's not what the argument was about. 

Anyone wrongly telling you what your argument is does not have the capacity to argue on that subject. That's when you know it's time to move on.

Don't worry though, rational lurkers will have no trouble understanding what you are saying. 

[narduch]

2 minutes ago, Obinna said:

The point is to make you look wrong by focusing on everything but the crux of the argument.

That's the thing about propagandized individuals, they don't realize how ridiculous they appear. It's quite stunning, but also very sad. Their cognitive dissonance forces them to twist and mischaracterize the argument and then tell you that it doesn't make sense.

Of course it doesn't, that's not what the argument was about. 

Anyone wrongly telling you what your argument is does not have the capacity to argue on that subject. That's when you know it's time to move on.

Don't worry though, rational lurkers will have no trouble understanding what you are saying. 

I hope you look in a mirror when you post garbage like this. Basically describing yourself 

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

I hope you look in a mirror when you post garbage like this. Basically describing yourself 

I always evaluate my position after the fact and consider where or how I may have been wrong. Everyone should do this.

It's not always easy when we are being prideful or married to a particular position.

I defended the merits of the "take a weak squad to GC" argument the other day. Larin and Ayo joining Davies on the injury list kind of forced me to question if we did the right thing. I considered that side of the argument and gave it it's due.

It's healthy to re-evaluate your position on things. If you refuse to see the other side of an argument, or you are just incapable of understanding it, that's a red flag (for myself and for everyone).

Edit:

For this particular argument it's tricky because emotion and statistics intertwine when we talk about "safety". Is the united states statistically "less safe" than canada? Arguably yes (I don't know what constitutes a  "significant" statistical difference). Is there a practical significant difference? Arguably no.

The argument was about a practical difference. Is that difference significant? I say no and I base that primarily on the actions of the players and staff. The only change in attitude, actions or rhetoric I observed from the first leg WCQ to the second leg was a sense of relief they were returning to a safer jurisdiction (Chicago). You can clearly see the players on social media exploring Chicago, which you wouldn't do if you felt the city was unsafe. There is a litany of other reasons why I consider there to be no difference in safety, but those are the best ones given the context. 

Most of the time people talk past each other it's because the terms of whatever is being arguing about haven't been properly fleshed out. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Obinna

[narduch]

8 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I always evaluate my position after the fact and consider where or how I may have been wrong. Everyone should do this.

It's not always easy when we are being prideful or married to a particular position.

I defended the merits of the "take a weak squad to GC" argument the other day. Larin and Ayo joining Davies on the injury list kind of forced me to question if we did the right thing. I considered that side of the argument and gave it it's due.

It's healthy to re-evaluate your position on things. If you refuse to see the other side of an argument, or you are just incapable of understanding it, that's a red flag (for myself and for everyone).

No offense but the anti vaccine  and anti mask brigade are fucking morons.

[Bison44]

This isnt an opinion thing, he quoted 2 numbers trying to make his point and he had to admit both were wrong.   Now he still has his opinion and it hasnt changed, but he was man enough to admit he didnt use good numbers to prove his opinion. Which I can respect.

You pull a bunch of physcho bable about people being progagandized and cognitive dissonance out, insinuating rational posters will get it. Basically saying people who want the facts a person uses to be correct are not being rational??  I'll get it too if he comes back with some kind of fact that isnt wrong.  

[narduch]

4 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

This isnt an opinion thing, he quoted 2 numbers trying to make his point and he had to admit both were wrong.   Now he still has his opinion and it hasnt changed, but he was man enough to admit he didnt use good numbers to prove his opinion. Which I can respect.

You pull a bunch of physcho bable about people being progagandized and cognitive dissonance out, insinuating rational posters will get it. Basically saying people who want the facts a person uses to be correct are not being rational??  I'll get it too if he comes back with some kind of fact that isnt wrong.  

I do enjoy the anti lockdown people bringing out terms like cognitive dissonance with zero sense of irony or internal reflection 

[toontownman]

Just leaving this here.