Time and Space

[Tom Kunich]

Looking for a new movie on Amazon, or elsewhere. The "new" movies were about extraterrestrials or that Jesus is a myth. Does that give you any hint what or who is attempting to take over our world?

On the subject of Jesus, how could he possibly be a myth? From his walking on water to his crucifiction everything was documented and recorded by the very people who witnessed it. Even the records of ancient Rome record his crucifiction and his rising again from the dead was witnessed by others besides the apostles. People do not make up stories that are in the bible and it has been found in records in multiple languages.

As for extraterrestrials: There is NO WAY to go faster than the speed of light. That is perfectly clear from many angles. The Universe is bigger than the time it was created would allow it to be furthermore, it is not only still expanding but accelerating which physics cannot explain. Were there really a Big Bang and not a "Let there be light", it would either be slowing in it's expansion or contracting in preparation for the next Big Bang. So, the speed of light is fixed.

What does this have to do with extraterrestrials? This means that it would take a finite but extremely long time measured in multiple centuries to cross even small gaps (relative) between stars. This would mean that extraterrestrials would be betting not just their own lives but those of many generations on the off-chance that they might find other intelligent life to what end?

This argument is as stupid as the argument that fossil fuel would run out, that they came from plants. Well arguably coal did but Methane is formed by gases and is as natural as iron. Saturn's Moon Titan has entire oceans of Methane. We know that both from spectroscopy and direct observation of Titan from Voyager 1 and 2.

Not to mention, how could you sustain a spacecraft and its inhabitants for centuries? There is nothing you could carry that would power and retain life aboard for that period of time. So the Spacies are reduced to claiming that you simply drive into another universe without these limitations.

To destroy a people you must first take from them there system of belief. Obama knew that well and he set about doing that and was immediately successful with the power hungry Democrats. The classic Democrats held their beliefs and have made the largest change in Party loyalties in history. Looks like the Stupid 4+1 are SOL.

[Frank Krygowski]

ISTR Tom promising to post only on bicycle related subjects. Perhaps
he's forgotten?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 12:41:19 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>ISTR Tom promising to post only on bicycle related subjects. Perhaps
>he's forgotten?

Some relevant quotes by Tom:

05/15/2022
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/FDSwyPDM9kU/m/rrohLx7XAAAJ>
"So I apologize ahead of time because then it is brought to my
attention the bullshit that these people are chanting, I will tell
them exactly what I think of them. But I will try to keep the subject
on bicycles.tech."

07/07/2022
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7ejkbwjjSYs/m/slej2kB7AgAJ>
"And appropriately I have jammed Slocum and Liebermann back into the
kill file with the rest of them and shall now hopefully only comment
on cycling related things. You and the actual cyclists here have had
too much of your patience tried by me responding to the idiots who
cycle not."

08/06/2022
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/0nnsWT4u5E0/m/RiHxM-LZBQAJ>
"Tell you what; from now on when these idiots change the subject let's
simply drop it right there?"

Speaking of changing the subject, I survived cataract surgery on my
right eye on Weds (Jan 17). Everything went well. My eyesight is now
much better than before. Colors are true and bright. No more yellow
looking white light bulbs. It will take a week or two for the right
eye to settle down and become the same as the left eye. I can
probably drive without glasses, but everything closer than about 1
meter is out of focus. So, I went back to my stash of reading glasses
and found that +1.75 and +2.00 diopters works well. No need for
astigmatism correction, so I can survive on cheap dollar store
glasses. One small problem. I can now clearly see the dust, dirt,
spider webs and finger prints on everything in the house. I also look
old and wrinkled in the mirror. Oh well.

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Zen Cycle]

!st, congratulations on successful cataract surgery.
@nd, You forgot this one:

On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:09:54 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/986D_mm3Twk/m/NTbOFqXWAQAJ
>
> This Group would be a far better place without the Stupid five..
> The cite would return to information MOSTLY but not entirely about
bicycles as it was when Jobst moderated it.

--
Add xx to reply

[Tom Kunich]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dGrdMBQkCU

One excess death in Great Britain every 25 minutes. That third booster you got will be the death of you. Too bad. Who will there be to morn your passing?

[Zen Cycle]

On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:19:52 PM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 8:27:49 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dGrdMBQkCU
>
> One excess death in Great Britain every 25 minutes. That third
booster you got will be the death of you. Too bad. Who will there be to
morn your passing?

OK, so you start this discussion with the ridiculous claim that the only
new releases on Amazon are about extraterrestrials or the jesus myth*,
and after getting called out for promising to make only bicycle related
posts, you change the subject to the conspiracy theory about excess
deaths. BTW - I don't live in the UK, and I decided against a 3rd
booster (unlike you, I don't take a knee in fealty to a charlatan messiah).

shit the fuck up tommy

*New releases in Prime Video for purchase this week:
#1 Oppenheimer
#2 Aquaman and The Lost Kingdom (Bonus X-Ray Edition)
#3 Barbie
#4 Trolls Band Together - Bonus X-Ray Edition
#5 The Boys in The Boat
#6 The Marvels
#7 Napoleon
#8 Wish
#9 Thanksgiving
#10 Death Becomes Them

New Streaming this week:

#1 Fast and Furious Hobbs and Shaw
#2 Mission: Impossible M:1
#3 The Flash
#4 Coriolanus
#5 Skiptrace
#6 Stargate:Ark of Truth
#7 Red2
#8 Burn After Reading
#9 Takers
#10 The Swordsman

Not one movie about extra terrestrials or jesus (OK, Stargate has
extraterrestrials in it)

[Tom Kunich]

If you want me to shut up PLEASE make me. I would really like to see your cowardly twerpy ass in front of me so that all of your teeth could be laying on the ground in front of you. You are all talk and nothing more. You are nothing and will remain so.

[Zen Cycle]

So now you go from false claims about movie offerings on Amazon, to
false claims about deaths from the COVID vaccine, to threats of
violence. That's pretty much the story of your life in a nutshell.

I don't have to make you shut up tommy, Google is doing us that favor.

"Effective February 22, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
Usenet content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and new
content from Usenet peers will not appear."

[Tom Kunich]

I don't remember saying anything about Jesus here. Certainly you won't know anything about the afterlife until it is upon you. Myth you say? You'll wish.

The third Pfizer or Moderna shot multiplies IgG4 antibodies in the blood. One of the side effects is that it causes blood clots in the blood stream. This isn't for the occasional person but for all who received the third shot or those who had Covid-19 and two shots after that. This clumping or clotting if you will, can be mitigated with Ivermectin but you claim that it is "horse medicine:" and has no practical value in humans so I expect you won't take it will you? This clotting also causes rapid exhaustion since it reduces oxygen uptake. Covid-19 itself causes it as well but you clear SARS-Cov-2 from your body rapidly. The vaccines travel all over your body and in your liver and elsewhere can be converted to DNA which then becomes part of the human genome and your body then permanently generates SARS-Cov-2 spike proteins permanently.

Happy multiple booster shots since as I predicted before - you then have something that appears to be AIDS-like and attacks any number of bodily functions as your immune system fails. Don't worry though, no one will miss you.

[Zen Cycle]

You're as bad as floriduh dumbass with understanding how this internet
thingie works. This is the second sentence you wrote in this discussion:

"The "new" movies were about extraterrestrials or that Jesus is a myth."

> Certainly you won't know anything about the afterlife until it is upon you. Myth you say? You'll wish.

Are you under some delusion you'll actual get to meet Jesus in the
afterlife? You'll wish.

>
> The third Pfizer or Moderna shot multiplies IgG4 antibodies in the blood. One of the side effects is that it causes blood clots in the blood stream. This isn't for the occasional person but for all who received the third shot or those who had Covid-19 and two shots after that.

Funny, we don't see people who have received their 3rd booster dropping
dead. My father - age 84 - got his 3rd booster last year. He's still
getting around rather ably - walks without any support, still drives,
does his own grocery shopping, Your fear mongering is scaring no one.

> This clumping or clotting if you will, can be mitigated with
Ivermectin but you claim that it is "horse medicine:" and has no
practical value in humans so I expect you won't take it will you?

nope, not unless recommended by a doctor. Especially not on the
recommendation by some fucking idiot in a cycling forum.

> This clotting also causes rapid exhaustion since it reduces oxygen uptake. Covid-19 itself causes it as well but you clear SARS-Cov-2 from your body rapidly. The vaccines travel all over your body and in your liver and elsewhere can be converted to DNA which then becomes part of the human genome and your body then permanently generates SARS-Cov-2 spike proteins permanently.
>

Your medical expertise is even less credible than your electronics
expertise.

> Happy multiple booster shots since as I predicted before - you then have something that appears to be AIDS-like and attacks any number of bodily functions as your immune system fails. Don't worry though, no one will miss you.

Luckily I won't have to worry about it for several decades, dumbass

[Roger Merriman]

I’m up to 5 with the boosters possible more? I get the Flu as well every
autumn as it’s free for folks who do my jobs plus for what ever reason
since the Brain Injuries even the common cold can floor me for a good week
or more, let alone COVID19 which I’ve had again due to my work and is
brutal.

> > This clumping or clotting if you will, can be mitigated with
> Ivermectin but you claim that it is "horse medicine:" and has no
> practical value in humans so I expect you won't take it will you?
>
> nope, not unless recommended by a doctor. Especially not on the
> recommendation by some fucking idiot in a cycling forum.
>
>> This clotting also causes rapid exhaustion since it reduces oxygen
>> uptake. Covid-19 itself causes it as well but you clear SARS-Cov-2 from
>> your body rapidly. The vaccines travel all over your body and in your
>> liver and elsewhere can be converted to DNA which then becomes part of
>> the human genome and your body then permanently generates SARS-Cov-2
>> spike proteins permanently.
>>
>
> Your medical expertise is even less credible than your electronics
> expertise.
>
>
>> Happy multiple booster shots since as I predicted before - you then have
>> something that appears to be AIDS-like and attacks any number of bodily
>> functions as your immune system fails. Don't worry though, no one will miss you.
>
> Luckily I won't have to worry about it for several decades, dumbass
>

Roger Merriman

[Frank Krygowski]

On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 10:45:59 AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> The third Pfizer or Moderna shot multiplies IgG4 antibodies in the blood. One of the side effects is that it causes blood clots in the blood stream. This isn't for the occasional person but for all who received the third shot or those who had Covid-19 and two shots after that. This clumping or clotting if you will, can be mitigated with Ivermectin but you claim that it is "horse medicine:" and has no practical value in humans so I expect you won't take it will you? This clotting also causes rapid exhaustion since it reduces oxygen uptake. Covid-19 itself causes it as well but you clear SARS-Cov-2 from your body rapidly. The vaccines travel all over your body and in your liver and elsewhere can be converted to DNA which then becomes part of the human genome and your body then permanently generates SARS-Cov-2 spike proteins permanently.
>
> Happy multiple booster shots since as I predicted before - you then have something that appears to be AIDS-like and attacks any number of bodily functions as your immune system fails. Don't worry though, no one will miss you.

Ah, another Kunich prediction! I expect it be as accurate as all other Kunich predictions: Newsom would be recalled. Trump would trounce Biden in 2020. My EV would have only 15% range in cold weather... and so many more.

I've had every available COVID vaccine and booster. So have all my extended family members. We're all still here. How soon can I expect to die, Tom?

Meanwhile, it seems people who might believe you are dropping off more quickly.
https://spectrumnews1.com/oh/cleveland/politics/2023/07/31/yale-study-finds-increased-deaths-in-republican-majority-counties-after-covid-vaccine-released

- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Ryder]

On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:48:54 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

<LOL> From that study...

"There is evidence that Republican-leaning counties have had higher
COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."

Seriously??? Republican-leaning counties vs Democratic-leaning
counties????

[zen cycle]

Yes, dumbass, because too many of you magatards buy into stupid bullshit
from the likes of tommy. Or should that 'too many' be 'not enough'?

[Catrike Ryder]

<LOL> Totally bogus "study." Too much missing information. It counted
deaths, not necessarily deaths due to covid, it didn't factor in the
fact people died because of hurricanes in some counties, it didn't
even factor in the age of the deceased (some counties have older
populations).


IOW, there was no evidence presented that more Republicans died of
covid than Democrats. But of course, you nitwit Democrats will believe
anything that you're told that supports your mindset and agenda.

[zen cycle]

Sure, I'm going to take the word of a willfully ignorant dumbass who
reads "the Air Force brought it into the Department of Defense inventory
as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was designated the standard basic weapon
for the Air Force on 2 January 1962" from a declassified DOD report and
still insists the military never bought any AR-15s as to what he
believes is wrong with a study, simply because it doesn't support his
mindset and agenda.

> IOW, there was no evidence presented that more Republicans died of
> covid than Democrats.

Yes, there is, you're just too willfully ignorant to accept it because
it doesn't support your mindset and agenda.

> But of course, you nitwit Democrats will believe
> anything that you're told that supports your mindset and agenda.

haha...thanks funny coming from a magatard and NRA tool believing
anything fed to him from right wing media:

"gender studies is a popular major in the US" let me guess - you got
that from OANN?, or was is just some bullshit uttered by a right wing
politician from the dumbshine state that you swallowed hook, line, and
sinker simply because it supports your mindset and agenda?

floriduh dumbass, willfully and proudly remaining ignorant to keep the
dumbshine state bar low.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 08:02:52 -0500, zen cycle

I guess Junior is unable to dispute that the "study" was bogus
because of too much missing information. It counted

deaths, not necessarily deaths due to covid, it didn't factor in the

fact people died because of hurricanes, floods, bad weather, and other
reasons. It didn't even factor in the age of the deceased (some
counties have older populations). IOW, there was no evidence

presented that more Republicans died of covid than Democrats.

He was, however able to accept the leftist organization's undocumented
rhetoric, though.

No surprise there.

[Tom Kunich]

Roger, I'm afraid that you don't understand what the "vaccines" for covid-19 do. Covid-19 spike proteins cause the red blood cells to clump together and This causes oxygen uptake to be very low. This is why people with severe heart problems usually from old age, were dying. Not only was the heart not receiving sufficient oxygen but these people generally had blocked arteries that were being stopped up all together with these clumped blood cells.

The way in which the vaccine works is that it causes you body to manufacture spike proteins which supposedly would cause your body's immune system to generate antibodies against the spike protein. It accomplished this but very poorly and inefficiently and by the 3rd or 4th vaccination, your body stopped generating IgG1, 2 and 3, and began generating IgG4 antibodies with it also does for other poisons like bee stings. At the same time, the mRNA had traveled so thoroughly through your body and into critical organs such as your Liver and Pancreas where it was converted to DNA. Now rather than a temporary condition in which platelets clumped together it became a permanent condition.

Now despite the freakish lies told about it by the idiots here, these clumps of platelets were almost immediately separated and O2 uptake of your hematological system restored to nearly normal with Ivermectin. You know - that "horse dewormer" those idiots were saying. The FDA actually forbid doctors from prescribing Ivermectin on pain of losing their medical license. All of this because Trump suggested that it might be effective. It was but what has become of the Democrat Party couldn't care less about the millions of lives lost to a virus developed by the American taxpayer via Fauci who by then was running the CDC.

If you're in good condition you may very well not be able to tell that you have lost your ability to process oxygen properly. But as you age and your blood vessels become constricted you life span is going to be sharply limited. The last several years the average age at death has gone down for the first time since 1918.

So bragging that you got a lot of boosters is not a very good thing.

[Tom Kunich]

I realize that your fondest dream is that this next election will be a fraudulent as the last but this time we are aware of what lengths you will go to and will be ready. So what are you going to do when Trump rolls back into the White House? Are you going to go to Washington and protest? When the cops are given back their legal powers they will shoot you down in the street like the rabid dog that you are.

[John B.]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 13:29:04 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

An d stupid Tommy says, the last election was fraudulent. But
unfortunately the courts don't seem to agree.

So Tommy show us some actual proof, as I read that there have been
some like 60 cases brought to the courts and not a single case was
found to be an actual crime,
--
Cheers,

John B.

[zen cycle]

I guess the floriduh dumbass is unable to realize he has no credibility
with regard to assessing the credibility of any study since he so
proudly displays his willful ignorance on a regular basis and so
frequently presents an ignorant opinion completely contradicted by the facts

>
> He was, however able to accept the leftist organization's undocumented
> rhetoric, though.

It wasn't rhetoric, and it was thoroughly documented, you willfully
ignorant dumbass.

>
> No surprise there.

I guess floriduh dumbass is too willfully ignorant to realize I haven't
made any assessment of the study one way or the other. No surprise there.

[zen cycle]

<snipped ignorant tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories>

>
> So bragging that you got a lot of boosters is not a very good thing.

Not to worry Roger, tommy's credibility on this is as good as his
credibility with electronics, or bicycles, or anything else.

[Tom Kunich]

Roger, you really ought to listen to someone so stupid that he cannot understand a couple of lines of code for blinking a light.

[zen cycle]

No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become true.
And, of course, you never addressed my question why you decided to use
an external 24 bit A/D converter when the integrated 10 bit version met
the requirement with more than an order of magnitude.

No need, it's simply because you were never really an engineer, but
merely a technician who somehow managed to be in a few situations where
you could claim success when you were actually irrelevant.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:22:23 -0500, zen cycle

<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 1/27/2024 8:51 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 08:02:52 -0500, zen cycle
>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I guess Junior is unable to dispute that the "study" was bogus
>> because of too much missing information. It counted
>> deaths, not necessarily deaths due to covid, it didn't factor in the
>> fact people died because of hurricanes, floods, bad weather, and other
>> reasons. It didn't even factor in the age of the deceased (some
>> counties have older populations). IOW, there was no evidence
>> presented that more Republicans died of covid than Democrats.
>
>I guess the floriduh dumbass is unable to realize he has no credibility
>with regard to assessing the credibility of any study since he so
>proudly displays his willful ignorance on a regular basis and so
>frequently presents an ignorant opinion completely contradicted by the facts
>
>>
>> He was, however able to accept the leftist organization's undocumented
>> rhetoric, though.
>
>It wasn't rhetoric, and it was thoroughly documented, you willfully
>ignorant dumbass.

<LOL> aand yet below, you claim you never "made any assessment of the

study one way or the other."

>> No surprise there.
>
>I guess floriduh dumbass is too willfully ignorant to realize I haven't
>made any assessment of the study one way or the other. No surprise there.
>

Of course you haven't. You just accepted that it "wasn't rhetoric, and
it was thoroughly documented."

[zen cycle]

On 1/27/2024 8:51 AM, floriduh dumbass once again flaunted his willful
ignorance:
>

I finally took the time to read the study referenced in the article
Frank linked, and as usual, the floriduh dumbass reads literature and
makes conclusions that are contradicted by the facts.

The report, its data, methods, and conclusions are here:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617

> I guess Junior is unable to dispute that the "study" was bogus
> because of too much missing information. It counted
> deaths, not necessarily deaths due to covid, it didn't factor in the
> fact people died because of hurricanes, floods, bad weather, and other
> reasons.

Of course, this isn't true. The study calculated excess death rate,
which would include things like hurricanes, floods, bad weather, and
other reasons.

You remember excess deaths, dontcha dumbass? That's the metric you and
the other two stooges keeping harping on as some sort of ludicrous
attempt at justifying the claim that the vaccines are killing more
people than they are curing. If you three keep chanting the algorithm
proves your point, you don't get to claim it's not relevant here*.
You're entitle to your own opinion, you aren't entitled to your own
facts.

It didn't even factor in the age of the deceased (some
> counties have older populations).

And of course, this is completely untrue as well, and proves beyond the
shadow of a doubt that the willfully ignorant floriduh dumbass didn't
read the study before flaunting his willful ignorance. From the study:

"A cross-sectional comparison of excess mortality between registered
Republican and Democratic voters between March 2020 and December 2021
adjusted for age and state of voter registration was conducted. "

Let's parse that out for the dumbass, just because we know he didn't
comprehend the importance of that passage due to his 4th grade reading
comprehension:

"adjusted for age"

Not only that, but Supplement 1 in the study (linked in the JAMA
article) contains 4 tables broken down by age, and the study used a
Poisson statistical regression model which very explicitly used age:

log (𝜆{𝑡𝑝𝑎𝑐}) = 𝛼{𝑝𝑎𝑐} + 𝛾{𝑎𝑠(𝑐)}𝜔{𝑡}
𝑌{𝑡𝑝𝑎𝑐} ∼ 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑛(𝜆{𝑡𝑝𝑎𝑐})

Where 𝛼 = age-bin

> IOW, there was no evidence
> presented that more Republicans died of covid than Democrats.

And of course, this is untrue as well. The study itself is evidence, and
also refers to other studies which suggest a correlation of excess
deaths to party affiliation:

"Prior studies have found that Republican-leaning counties have had

higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."

As with any study published in JAMA, It has an extensive list of
references used to create the study including the other studies linking
party affiliation to covid death rates.

> He was, however able to accept the leftist organization's undocumented
> rhetoric, though.

lol..Lots to unpack there, Let's start with undocumented - I guess in
floriduh dumbass world a research paper published in arguably the worlds
foremost medical journal with a list of 25 references is "undocumented".

Then of course there's "leftist":
I suppose it comes as no surprise that someone from the dumbshine state
would consider the American Medical Association to be a "leftist
organization", as if the medical industry were more interested in
pushing a political agenda than the Hippocratic oath. Yes, that would be
the position NRA stooges and magatards like the floriduh dumbass,
kunich, and the shitstain would take, regardless of well-documented
evidence to the contrary

>
> No surprise there.

Yes, dumbass, there is no surprise that you reach conclusions and make
statements as fact completely devoid of any intellectual rigor.

To be continued in a separate discussion, because ignorant dumbass
demonstrations like this from the floriduh dumbass are too precious not
to share widely.

*Yes, dumbass, I know you haven't made any comment in this forum
regarding excess death conspiracy "theories", but given your penchant
for accepting any undocumented rhetoric that suits your mindset and
agenda, it's not that far of a leap.

[AMuzi]

That's not correct. There have been a smattering of convictions

https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/

https://wjno.iheart.com/featured/brian-mudd/content/2022-06-22-qa-successfully-prosecuted-voter-fraud-from-2020-election-cycle/


but the larger cases were all disposed by rulings on
standing, on latches, by appeal demurrals or other technical
procedures; no testimony or evidence were entered into those
court records.

--
Andrew Muzi
a...@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Catrike Ryder]

Indeed, "adjusted for age" doesn't mean that the the "study" factored
in the ages of the people in the county, nor any other information
regarding the counties that were used.

>Not only that, but Supplement 1 in the study (linked in the JAMA
>article) contains 4 tables broken down by age, and the study used a
>Poisson statistical regression model which very explicitly used age:
>

>log (?{????}) = ?{???} + ?{??(?)}?{?}
>?{????} ? ???????(?{????})
>
>Where ? = age-bin

[AMuzi]

Adverse mRNA effects are unclear in their frequency or
significance:
https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/why-do-vaccinated-people-represent-most-covid-19-deaths-right-now/

And if there's no there there, why obfuscate?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.html

p.s. Does anyone doubt that the major medical organizations
and their regulators and funding bodies have a clear leftist
inclination?

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/campbells-scoop/80583

Which is why my brother and well over 80% of MDs do _not_
belong to AMA. AMA has a perfect right to their own
ideology, but they are hardly 'dispassionate observers' to
politics. Since you mention Hippocratic oath, note that the
one we learned long ago is gone; currently no mention of
euthanasia or abortion. Which again is their right but
hardly apolitical.

[zen cycle]

And of course, there is still no evidence of widespread fraud,
especially not from the political left. From your link:

"The political affiliations are known for 165 defendants: 38.2% of those
convicted were Democrats, 42.4% were Republicans, while the remainder
were Independent, nonpartisan, or unaffiliated."

wow.....165 convictions, out of nearly 160 million votes cast. That's
about .01%....STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!! 1 100TH OF 1 PERCENT OF VOTES CAST
FOUND TO BE FRAUDULENT!!!!!!

[AMuzi]

Yes as I noted above. The bulk of cases were
diverted/stymied/deflected with no evidence allowed into the
record.

Further notes :

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/dhs-agency-warned-about-integrity-mail-voting-2020-election-while

[Tom Kunich]

Since the device did not have an external A-D, one has to wonder what you're talking about. There was a source on one end and the internal A-D on the other. I did not show any schematics so where did you get that idea save from you imagination.

[Tom Kunich]

Krygowski and Flunky don't believe that there is going to be a reckoning.

[AMuzi]

> Krygowski and Flunky don't believe that there is going to be a reckoning.

I happen to agree with them on that point.

Our Administrative State System admits no dissension and the
track record skews sharply against truth, accountability or
rectification.

[Catrike Ryder]

>> log (?{????}) = ?{???} + ?{??(?)}?{?}
>> ?{????} ? ???????(?{????})
>>

>> Where ? = age-bin

The suggestion that more Republicans than Democrats died of Covid
based on comparing the number of *excess* deaths in some undocumented
"Republican leaning counties" vs. some undocumented "Democrat leaning
counties" is beyond absurd.

"To calculate the number of excess deaths, we estimated the number of
deaths we would expect in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. First,
we estimated expected weekly deaths at the county-by-party-by-age
level by fitting a Poisson regression model to observed weekly death
counts at the county-by-party-by-age-level for January 1, 2018,
through December 31, 2019.20,21 We then predicted expected deaths over
our full sample. Excess deaths were defined as the difference between
observed and expected deaths for January 1, 2018, to December 31,
2021. As a check on the model, we used predictions from the model in
the weeks before the onset of COVID-19 (January 1, 2018, to March 31,
2020) to estimate excess deaths during this period."
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617

The fact that they didn't tell which counties they used says a lot. If
they had, we could take a look at what might have been going on in
those counties.

[John B.]

Yup, I was guilty of not including something like "60 cases brought by
Trump adherents..."
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Every time I read one of the thrilling studies that prove something or
another I'm reminded of a friend who made a successful business of
conducting studies to determine whether a projected business would be
a financial success. He once commented, "tell me what you want to
prove and I'll design a survey to prove it.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 05:19:49 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

+1

Exactly

[John B.]

On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 07:04:11 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 5:44:51?AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:19:52?PM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:

No Tommy... you told us that you weren't going to post here any more

--------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 13:40:58 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

some snipped...

>
>I think that now that I figured Eternal-September out and
could post through them, the only one with anything worth saying is
Andrew and I'm not going to spend my time on Usenet for one man. So
long and thanks for all the fish.

------------------------------------------------
And everybody gave a great sigh of relief as they waved goodbye.

And here you are back, like the proverbial turd in the punch bowl.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Because I read the code, dumbass. This is how we know you were never really an engineer - you can't even understand the comments in the code from where ever you copy/pasted it.

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/mKhS2lPQY_A/m/twbRAH9LAgAJ

"/*SuperSnoop Dectector Board
Operation of the Detector:
1. Via a Detector wand the board detects current
flow through the water. The current flow is via an AC source from the
Generator Board. This current flow is detected via the voltage drop
through the medium's resistance. It is measure with the 24 bit ADC
(U4) LTC 2440 and passed to the MPU via the Serial Data mechanism on
the C Port of the MPU."

The LTC 2440 is a discreet 24 bit Delta Sigma ADC from Analog Devices.
https://www.analog.com/en/products/ltc2440.html

And this is also how we know you'll never be able to explain how to use PWM to test a cable. You aren't an engineer, you never were.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 11:34:31 AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:47:43 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

> The suggestion that more Republicans than Democrats died of Covid
> based on comparing the number of *excess* deaths in some undocumented
> "Republican leaning counties" vs. some undocumented "Democrat leaning
> counties" is beyond absurd.

More evidence your mother used to do your homework for you. IT wasn't undocumented, dumbass. The JAMA paper listed the study it got the info from in the references.

"Prior studies (7,8) have found that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."

8. Sehgal NJ, Yue D, Pope E, Wang RH, Roby DH. The association between COVID-19 mortality and the county-level partisan divide in the United States: study examines the association between COVID-19 mortality and county-level political party affiliation.  Health Aff (Millwood). 2022;41(6):853-863. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00085

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 10:35:42 AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass _still_ flaunts his willful ignorance: :

> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 10:14:23 -0500, zen cycle
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On 1/27/2024 8:51 AM, floriduh dumbass once again flaunted his willful
> >ignorance:
> >
> >

> > It didn't even factor in the age of the deceased (some
> >> counties have older populations).
> >
> >And of course, this is completely untrue as well, and proves beyond the
> >shadow of a doubt that the willfully ignorant floriduh dumbass didn't
> >read the study before flaunting his willful ignorance. From the study:
> >
> >"A cross-sectional comparison of excess mortality between registered
> >Republican and Democratic voters between March 2020 and December 2021
> >adjusted for age and state of voter registration was conducted. "
> >
> >Let's parse that out for the dumbass, just because we know he didn't
> >comprehend the importance of that passage due to his 4th grade reading
> >comprehension:
> >
> >"adjusted for age"
> Indeed, "adjusted for age" doesn't mean that the the "study" factored
> in the ages of the people in the county, nor any other information
> regarding the counties that were used.

yes, dumbass, it did, as I noted with:

> >Not only that, but Supplement 1 in the study (linked in the JAMA
> >article) contains 4 tables broken down by age,

to reiterate because you're still too blinded by your willful ignorance:

"Supplement 1 in the study (linked in the JAMA article) contains 4 tables broken down by age,"

Need to read that again?

"4 tables broken down by age"

Gawd you're as dense as kunich...

[Frank Krygowski]

On 1/28/2024 5:19 PM, John B. wrote:
>
> Every time I read one of the thrilling studies that prove something or
> another I'm reminded of a friend who made a successful business of
> conducting studies to determine whether a projected business would be
> a financial success. He once commented, "tell me what you want to
> prove and I'll design a survey to prove it.

Yes, John, you've mentioned that time after time after time.

I'll point out that you're actually arguing against yourself. You've
also mentioned many times that the COVID vaccination rates and death
rates for Thailand look far better than those for the U.S.

What's your real point? That we should ignore the data you, yourself,
provide? That nothing can be known? That we must forever wallow in
ignorance?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

If the Florida poster had proof that Republicans did as well as
Democrats against COVID, surely he'd be able to find studies
demonstrating that. He pretends to be literate; he should be able to
find corroboration of his views - if such corroboration exists.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

The Republicans who brought charges of voter fraud were so incompetent
that they could not even meet the requirements of the courts. When they
did manage that, they lost. But we're still supposed to believe that
Trump would have won the election, despite that?

I'm not impressed. It's a right wing fairy tale.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 00:00:26 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/28/2024 10:39 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 11:34:31?AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:47:43 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The suggestion that more Republicans than Democrats died of Covid
>>> based on comparing the number of *excess* deaths in some undocumented
>>> "Republican leaning counties" vs. some undocumented "Democrat leaning
>>> counties" is beyond absurd.
>>
>> More evidence your mother used to do your homework for you. IT wasn't undocumented, dumbass. The JAMA paper listed the study it got the info from in the references.
>>
>> "Prior studies (7,8) have found that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."
>>

>> 8. Sehgal NJ?, Yue D?, Pope E?, Wang RH?, Roby DH?. The association between COVID-19 mortality and the county-level partisan divide in the United States: study examines the association between COVID-19 mortality and county-level political party affiliation. ? Health Aff (Millwood). 2022;41(6):853-863. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00085

>
>If the Florida poster had proof that Republicans did as well as
>Democrats against COVID, surely he'd be able to find studies
>demonstrating that.

Krygowski's narcissistic frame of mind contributes to his totally
missing the fact that I never claimed such a thing. What I do claim is
that there isn't any credible evidence that political affiliation was
a factor.

>He pretends to be literate; he should be able to
>find corroboration of his views - if such corroboration exists.

See above:

[Catrike Ryder]

On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 23:56:36 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/28/2024 5:19 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> Every time I read one of the thrilling studies that prove something or
>> another I'm reminded of a friend who made a successful business of
>> conducting studies to determine whether a projected business would be
>> a financial success. He once commented, "tell me what you want to
>> prove and I'll design a survey to prove it.
>
>Yes, John, you've mentioned that time after time after time.
>
>I'll point out that you're actually arguing against yourself. You've
>also mentioned many times that the COVID vaccination rates and death
>rates for Thailand look far better than those for the U.S.

I don't think they needed a "study" to make that determination.

>What's your real point? That we should ignore the data you, yourself,
>provide? That nothing can be known? That we must forever wallow in
>ignorance?

Believeing something is not the same as knowing it. Some people
believe pretty much anything they've been told by propagandists that
line up with what they want (need) to believe.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 19:39:51 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 11:34:31?AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:47:43 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> The suggestion that more Republicans than Democrats died of Covid
>> based on comparing the number of *excess* deaths in some undocumented
>> "Republican leaning counties" vs. some undocumented "Democrat leaning
>> counties" is beyond absurd.
>
>More evidence your mother used to do your homework for you. IT wasn't undocumented, dumbass.

<LOL> Really? What counties did they study, Dummy?

>The JAMA paper listed the study it got the info from in the references.

Indeed. Did you even look at the study?

>"Prior studies (7,8) have found that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."
>

>8. Sehgal NJ?, Yue D?, Pope E?, Wang RH?, Roby DH?. The association between COVID-19 mortality and the county-level partisan divide in the United States: study examines the association between COVID-19 mortality and county-level political party affiliation. ? Health Aff (Millwood). 2022;41(6):853-863. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00085

Detirmining how many people of each party affiliation *would* have
died had there not been a "pandemic" is the biggest problem. Not
being able to detirmine the actual cause of the deaths is another. How
many were killed by something other than Covid? Assumptions about who
did or didn't get vaccinated is another problem.

The "study" was nonsense. It had no purpose other than to propagandize
the issue.

[John B.]

Well, you do have t0 give Frank "1" for trying although the Covid
rate, at least in Thailand, isn't a survey, it is an actual count of
the subject.

But I suppose that when you are grasping at straws any port in the
storm is welcome.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 17:11:48 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

There's a big difference between an actual count, and "conclusions"
based on a study. Studies, like the one in question here, need
sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
promote the sponsors' agenda.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 4:33:26 AM UTC-5, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 19:39:51 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 11:34:31?AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> >> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:47:43 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> The suggestion that more Republicans than Democrats died of Covid
> >> based on comparing the number of *excess* deaths in some undocumented
> >> "Republican leaning counties" vs. some undocumented "Democrat leaning
> >> counties" is beyond absurd.
> >
> >More evidence your mother used to do your homework for you. IT wasn't undocumented, dumbass.
> <LOL> Really? What counties did they study, Dummy?

To reiterate: The JAMA paper listed the study it got the info from in the references.

And because all you're really doing is once again flaunting your willful ignorance, this is a link the the study the JAMA paper referenced:
https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10438362
Page 3
"We first included 3,107 of the 3,143 US counties and county equivalents, excluding counties in Alaska, as Alaskan elections are reported at the district level."

In addition, exhibit 1 is titled:
"Characteristics of 3,109 US counties, by 2020 presidential election partisan vote share"

> >The JAMA paper listed the study it got the info from in the references.
> Indeed. Did you even look at the study?

I quoted from it, dumbass, what do you think?

> >"Prior studies (7,8) have found that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."
> >
> >8. Sehgal NJ?, Yue D?, Pope E?, Wang RH?, Roby DH?. The association between COVID-19 mortality and the county-level partisan divide in the United States: study examines the association between COVID-19 mortality and county-level political party affiliation. ? Health Aff (Millwood). 2022;41(6):853-863. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00085
>
> Detirmining how many people of each party affiliation *would* have
> died had there not been a "pandemic" is the biggest problem. Not
> being able to detirmine the actual cause of the deaths is another. How
> many were killed by something other than Covid?

It's referenced in the report, dumbass.

> Assumptions about who
> did or didn't get vaccinated is another problem.

Not much of one, it's called statistical analysis, for which they've listed their datasets, methods and rationale. All we have from you is demonstrably false claims about the data in the report and you own ignorant opinion. If you have something tangible, present it. Otherwise you're bloviating bullshit and criticizing the the methodology of a study because you don't like what it has to say.

>
> The "study" was nonsense. It had no purpose other than to propagandize
> the issue.

It's only nonsense to people who continue to believe the election was stolen.

[zen cycle]

yeah, like 'the military never bought any AR-15's', or legislation which
specifically exempts religious objections from the provisions of the law
some how discriminates against religion, or a study which references a
report on county-level deaths from covid is using undocumented claims
about county-level deaths.....Something like that?

[zen cycle]

Too bad the conclusions were based on actual counts.

> Studies, like the one in question here, need
> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
> promote the sponsors' agenda.

"Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
Research Fund funded this study."

[zen cycle]

You have yet to demonstrate any lack of credibility with the report.
Everything you claim that is wrong with it is disprove by the data and
references in the report itself.

>
>> He pretends to be literate; he should be able to
>> find corroboration of his views - if such corroboration exists.
>
> See above:

Your opinion is of no value here. If you have data contradicting the
findings, present it. Otherwise, you're just presenting your opinion as
fact.

[Catrike Ryder]

No, Dummy, it was based on an assumption of what the death count
would've been had there not been a pandemic.

Have you still not looked at the study?

>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>
>"Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>Research Fund funded this study."
>

<eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"

[Catrike Ryder]

Apparently Junior did not read what I wrote above. Here it is again..

Krygowski's narcissistic frame of mind contributes to his totally
missing the fact that I never claimed such a thing. What I do claim is
that there isn't any credible evidence that political affiliation was
a factor.

Will he read and understand it this time?

>Your opinion is of no value here. If you have data contradicting the
>findings, present it. Otherwise, you're just presenting your opinion as
>fact.

<SIGH> Some people are such illiterate dogmatists that they simply
cannot comprehend the concept of not accepting someone's conclusions,
and claiming that they're wrong.

I have no idea if a person's political preferences cause him/her to be
more vulnerable to Covid. My opinion is that the jackasses who did the
study and the AMA, don't know, either.

[Rolf Mantel]

Right, this is the same content expressed in different words.
What's the difference between "not accepting a conclusion without giving
a reason why" and "presenting an opinion as fact"?

[Zen Cycle]

No, dumbass, it used actual counts from the other referenced studies -
you know those documents you claim are undocumented?

>
> Have you still not looked at the study?

I quoted from it dumbass, what do you think?

>
>>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>>
>> "Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>> University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>> Research Fund funded this study."
>>
>
> <eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
> Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"

You're making the claim, prove it. Otherwise it's just your willfully
ignorant dumbass opinion,....again.

[Zen Cycle]

Apparently the floriduh dumbass didn't read what I wrote above. Here is
it again:

You have yet to demonstrate any lack of credibility with the report.
Everything you claim that is wrong with it is disprove by the data and
references in the report itself.

Let me parse that out for you since it's clear this is beyond your

understanding. You wrote:

"What I do claim is that there isn't any credible evidence that
political affiliation was a factor."

I wrote:
"You have yet to demonstrate any lack of credibility with the report. "

Get it yet, dumbass, or do you need more help?

>> Your opinion is of no value here. If you have data contradicting the
>> findings, present it. Otherwise, you're just presenting your opinion as
>> fact.
>
> <SIGH> Some people are such illiterate dogmatists

lol...First you claim there was no listing of what counties were
reviewed, when it's referenced in the report, then you make a claim as
fact based on your opinion when you didn't read the study....illiterate
dogmatist indeed.....

> that they simply
> cannot comprehend the concept of not accepting someone's conclusions,
> and claiming that they're wrong.

Oh, I can indeed. However, it's incumbent upon the person claiming the
study is wrong to to be able to rationally back up their claim.
Everything you claim that is wrong with it is disproved by the data and

references in the report itself.

>

> I have no idea if a person's political preferences cause him/her to be
> more vulnerable to Covid.

lol...you really think that's what the study says? Hint: it doesn't.

> My opinion is that the jackasses who did the
> study and the AMA, don't know, either.

If you actually read the study and understood what the conclusions are,
you'd realize the authors know far more about this than you (or anyone
in this forum).

[Zen Cycle]

On 1/27/2024 4:29 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

> On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 3:57:30 AM UTC-8, zen cycle wrote:
>> On 1/27/2024 5:07 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:48:54 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 10:45:59?AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The third Pfizer or Moderna shot multiplies IgG4 antibodies in the blood. One of the side effects is that it causes blood clots in the blood stream. This isn't for the occasional person but for all who received the third shot or those who had Covid-19 and two shots after that. This clumping or clotting if you will, can be mitigated with Ivermectin but you claim that it is "horse medicine:" and has no practical value in humans so I expect you won't take it will you? This clotting also causes rapid exhaustion since it reduces oxygen uptake. Covid-19 itself causes it as well but you clear SARS-Cov-2 from your body rapidly. The vaccines travel all over your body and in your liver and elsewhere can be converted to DNA which then becomes part of the human genome and your body then permanently generates SARS-Cov-2 spike proteins permanently.
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy multiple booster shots since as I predicted before - you then have something that appears to be AIDS-like and attacks any number of bodily functions as your immune system fails. Don't worry though, no one will miss you.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, another Kunich prediction! I expect it be as accurate as all other Kunich predictions: Newsom would be recalled. Trump would trounce Biden in 2020. My EV would have only 15% range in cold weather... and so many more.
>>>>
>>>> I've had every available COVID vaccine and booster. So have all my extended family members. We're all still here. How soon can I expect to die, Tom?
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, it seems people who might believe you are dropping off more quickly.
>>>> https://spectrumnews1.com/oh/cleveland/politics/2023/07/31/yale-study-finds-increased-deaths-in-republican-majority-counties-after-covid-vaccine-released
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>>
>>> <LOL> From that study...
>>>

>>> "There is evidence that Republican-leaning counties have had higher

>>> COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning counties."
>>>

>>> Seriously??? Republican-leaning counties vs Democratic-leaning
>>> counties????
>>>
>> Yes, dumbass, because too many of you magatards buy into stupid bullshit
>> from the likes of tommy. Or should that 'too many' be 'not enough'?
> I realize that your fondest dream is that this next election will be a fraudulent as the last but this time we are aware of what lengths you will go to and will be ready. So what are you going to do when Trump rolls back into the White House? Are you going to go to Washington and protest? When the cops are given back their legal powers they will shoot you down in the street like the rabid dog that you are.

lol...so you advocate police executing citizens who are exercising their
1st amendment rights - simply because you don't agree with what they
have to say...How typically tommy.....

[Catrike Ryder]

It's not the same content at all. Although, I have no responsibility
to explain my opinions, in this case, not accepting a conclusion, but
I did, in fact, explain that the study was based on assumptions, not
facts.

But in regards to the "difference." Example:

I do not accept much of what the Bible says as adequate documentation
of all that Christianity professes, however, I'm not an atheist. I am
a skeptic.

[AMuzi]

The question will remain in the area of belief as there were
no findings of fact either way.
--
Andrew Muzi
a...@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:30:58 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

You say you read it but you missed this:

To calculate the number of excess deaths, we estimated the number of
deaths we would expect in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. First,
we estimated expected weekly deaths at the county-by-party-by-age
level by fitting a Poisson regression model to observed weekly death
counts at the county-by-party-by-age-level for January 1, 2018,
through December 31, 2019.20,21 We then predicted expected deaths over
our full sample. Excess deaths were defined as the difference between
observed and expected deaths for January 1, 2018, to December 31,
2021. As a check on the model, we used predictions from the model in
the weeks before the onset of COVID-19 (January 1, 2018, to March 31,
2020) to estimate excess deaths during this period.

We calculated excess death rates (the primary outcome) as the ratio of
observed deaths (the numerator) to expected deaths (the denominator).
To obtain estimates of excess death rates at aggregated levels, we
used a weighted average of estimated excess death rates in each of the
underlying cells (eg, county-by-party-by-age), weighted by their
expected death counts. We estimated Poisson 95% prediction intervals
(PIs), simulating from the coefficient distribution and outcome
distribution, with SEs clustered by county.22 We additionally adjusted
estimated differences in excess death rates between Republican and
Democratic voters—the primary estimate of interest—for differences in
excess death rates by age group and state during the COVID-19
pandemic. Intuitively, this approach compared excess death rates
between Democratic and Republican voters of the same age residing in
the same states during the same week of the pandemic and then weighted
those differences in excess death rates to either the weekly level,
when plotting weekly differences in excess death rates, or to 3
broader time periods: (1) April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (the
part of the study period overlapping the COVID-19 pandemic); (2) April
1, 2020, to March 31, 2021 (the period during the pandemic before open
vaccine eligibility for all adults); and (3) April 1, 2021, to
December 31, 2021 (the period during the pandemic after open vaccine
eligibility for all adults).


Do you not understand what the word "estimated" means

>> Have you still not looked at the study?
>
>I quoted from it dumbass, what do you think?
>
>>
>>>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>>>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>>>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>>>
>>> "Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>>> University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>>> Research Fund funded this study."
>>>
>>
>> <eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
>> Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"
>
>You're making the claim, prove it. Otherwise it's just your willfully
>ignorant dumbass opinion,....again.

That's not a claim, it's a question. The answer is in it's name,
Dummy.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:46:49 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

So what counties were referenced.

>> that they simply
>> cannot comprehend the concept of not accepting someone's conclusions,
>> and claiming that they're wrong.
>
>Oh, I can indeed. However, it's incumbent upon the person claiming the
>study is wrong to to be able to rationally back up their claim.
>Everything you claim that is wrong with it is disproved by the data and
>references in the report itself.
>
>>
>> I have no idea if a person's political preferences cause him/her to be
>> more vulnerable to Covid.
>
>lol...you really think that's what the study says? Hint: it doesn't.
>
>> My opinion is that the jackasses who did the
>> study and the AMA, don't know, either.
>
>If you actually read the study and understood what the conclusions are,
>you'd realize the authors know far more about this than you (or anyone
>in this forum).

Our study has several limitations. First, there are plausible
alternative explanations for the difference in excess death rates by
political party affiliation beyond the explanatory role of vaccines
discussed herein. Second, our mortality data, although detailed and
recent, only included approximately 83.5% of deaths in the US and did
not include cause of death. Although overall excess death patterns in
our data are similar to those in other reliable sources, such as the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health
Statistics data, it is possible that the deaths that our study data
did not include may disproportionately occur among individuals
registered with a particular political party, potentially biasing our
results. In addition, the completeness of our mortality data may vary
across states or time, potentially biasing our estimates of excess
death rates. Third, all excess death models rely on fundamentally
untestable assumptions to construct the baseline number of deaths we
would expect in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fourth, because
we did not have information on individual vaccination status, analyses
of the association between vaccination rates and excess deaths relied
on county-level vaccination rates.

[Zen Cycle]

Yes, it doesn't mean "assumed"

>
>>> Have you still not looked at the study?
>>
>> I quoted from it dumbass, what do you think?
>>
>>>
>>>>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>>>>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>>>>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>>>>
>>>> "Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>>>> University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>>>> Research Fund funded this study."
>>>>
>>>
>>> <eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
>>> Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"
>>
>> You're making the claim, prove it. Otherwise it's just your willfully
>> ignorant dumbass opinion,....again.
>
> That's not a claim, it's a question. The answer is in it's name,
> Dummy.

It's clear you do believe they have an agenda. Prove it.

[Zen Cycle]

Here it is...again:

this is a link the the study the JAMA paper referenced:
https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10438362
Page 3
"We first included 3,107 of the 3,143 US counties and county
equivalents, excluding counties in Alaska, as Alaskan elections are
reported at the district level."

In addition, exhibit 1 is titled:
"Characteristics of 3,109 US counties, by 2020 presidential election
partisan vote share"


>

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:29:11 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>

<LOL> Seeing his arguments circling the bowl, Junior wants to play the
meanin_of_words game, however, an estimation is not a fact.

>>>> Have you still not looked at the study?
>>>
>>> I quoted from it dumbass, what do you think?
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>>>>>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>>>>>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>>>>> University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>>>>> Research Fund funded this study."
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
>>>> Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"
>>>
>>> You're making the claim, prove it. Otherwise it's just your willfully
>>> ignorant dumbass opinion,....again.
>>
>> That's not a claim, it's a question. The answer is in it's name,
>> Dummy.
>
>It's clear you do believe they have an agenda. Prove it.

<LOL> do you not know what "Economic Policy" is about?

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:33:58 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>

Why not just admit that you're unable to name the counties?

[Zen Cycle]

On 1/29/2024 9:57 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:33:58 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> So what counties were referenced.
>>
>> Here it is...again:
>>
>> this is a link the the study the JAMA paper referenced:
>> https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10438362
>> Page 3
>> "We first included 3,107 of the 3,143 US counties and county
>> equivalents, excluding counties in Alaska, as Alaskan elections are
>> reported at the district level."
>>
>> In addition, exhibit 1 is titled:
>> "Characteristics of 3,109 US counties, by 2020 presidential election
>> partisan vote share"
>
> Why not just admit that you're unable to name the counties?

Floriduh dumbass flailing in willful ignorance once again:

There are 3143 counties in the US. The study included 3107 of them.

IOW - making it so simple even a willfully ignorant floriduh dumbass can
follow - All counties in the US except for alaska.

Any more stupid questions?

[Zen Cycle]

lol...funny seeing the floriduh dumbass accusing others of playing word
games - and no, my argument is not circling anything except your pea
brain - making you dizzy into playing stupid semantic games.

>
>>>>> Have you still not looked at the study?
>>>>
>>>> I quoted from it dumbass, what do you think?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Studies, like the one in question here, need
>>>>>>> sponsors to supply resources, time and money, and thus, are done to
>>>>>>> promote the sponsors' agenda.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Funding/Support: The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at Yale
>>>>>> University and the Yale School of Public Health COVID-19 Rapid Response
>>>>>> Research Fund funded this study."
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <eyeroll> Do you believe that The Tobin Center for Economic Policy at
>>>>> Yale didn't have an agenda, Dummy?"
>>>>
>>>> You're making the claim, prove it. Otherwise it's just your willfully
>>>> ignorant dumbass opinion,....again.
>>>
>>> That's not a claim, it's a question. The answer is in it's name,
>>> Dummy.
>>
>> It's clear you do believe they have an agenda. Prove it.
>
> <LOL> do you not know what "Economic Policy" is about?

You're the one making the claim that the Tobin Center for Economic
Policy has an agenda - prove it.

[Rolf Mantel]

Am 29.01.2024 um 15:57 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:33:58 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/29/2024 9:24 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:46:49 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:

>>>> lol...First you claim there was no listing of what counties were
>>>> reviewed, when it's referenced in the report, then you make a claim as
>>>> fact based on your opinion when you didn't read the study....illiterate
>>>> dogmatist indeed.....
>>>
>>> So what counties were referenced.
>>
>> Here it is...again:
>>
>> this is a link the the study the JAMA paper referenced:
>> https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10438362
>> Page 3
>> "We first included 3,107 of the 3,143 US counties and county
>> equivalents, excluding counties in Alaska, as Alaskan elections are
>> reported at the district level."
>>
>> In addition, exhibit 1 is titled:
>> "Characteristics of 3,109 US counties, by 2020 presidential election
>> partisan vote share"
>
> Why not just admit that you're unable to name the counties?

Are you claiming that this paper is deficient by not listing the names
of there 3,109 counties in an appendix rather than only describing how
the list of these counties was compiled?

Are you claiming that a list of the names of these 3,109 counties would
help you understand the issue?

Are you claiming that you yourself are too stupid to
1) get a list of all county names by state
2) throw away the counties in Alaska
3) combine these state lists into the national list you wish to see?

Or are you just playing "I don't like it so I'm finding some spurious
dung to throw at it"?

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:24:49 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>

More LOL... The study only studied unamed counties in Ohio and
Florida.

[Catrike Ryder]

The study in question only studied unamed counties in Ohio and
Florida, and yes, know which counties were studies=d would allow me to
note other things that might have affectedd deaths in those counties

[Tom Kunich]

Yale and Harvard lost all credibility when they began assuming that the virus was an accidental mutation from the wild when the makeup of the virus plainly shows the sites that were manipulated. Flunky flunks out again.

[Tom Kunich]

You aren't even aware of what is being said - domestic terrorists like you deserve response for response.

[Rolf Mantel]

> Florida, and yes, know which counties were studied would allow me to

> note other things that might have affectedd deaths in those counties

Please provide evidence for your claim that only a few unnamed counties
in Florida and Ohio were evaluated rather than all counties in USA
excluding Alaska.

The study linked above claims on page 3 that it includes 3,109 counties
but aggregated several "New York City" counties into 1 to be able to
compare this New York City data with the information from New York
Times. If "the study in question" is not "the study linked above",
please clarify what you are speaking about.

Rolf

[Tom Kunich]

Like northern Italy, Florida has more retired and consequently, sick people to say that there was more excess deaths there without taking extraordinary means to correct for that makes the "study" which took little if any heed to that simply a political bashing.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 17:07:11 +0100, Rolf Mantel

Results
Our study included 538 159 deaths for individuals aged 25 years and
older in Florida and Ohio between January 2018 and December 2021
linked to their 2017 voter data (eTable 1 in Supplement 1).

Our study found evidence of higher excess mortality for Republican
voters compared with Democratic voters in Florida and Ohio after, but
not before, COVID-19 vaccines were available to all adults in the US.

[Zen Cycle]

Hi Rolf,
The JAMA article did restrict the study to floriduh and ohio, but it
wasn't "a few unnamed counties", it was the entirety of both states
assessed to the county level. The report is quite clear that it wasn't
"just a few counties".

But you hit the nail on the head with "I don't like it so I'm finding
some spurious dung to throw at it". This has been catrykes M.O. since he
first started posting here - much like kunich and andre, he decries any
science that tells him what he doesn't want to hear as 'junk'.

[Zen Cycle]

It wasn't "unnamed counties", dumbass, it was the entire state assessed
at the county level.

eMethods. Supplemental Description of Methods
A. Description of study data and linkages
This study made use of data from five different sources. Below, we
describe each of these data sources in more detail and then discuss how
these data were assembled into our analytic file.

Florida voter file:
The publicly available Florida voter file for February 2017 was accessed
via the Harvard Dataverse. For additional details on the file and a link
to request access to the data proceed to the following:
https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/UBIG3F.
The file contains full name, date of birth, county of registration,
gender, and party affiliation.

Ohio voter file:
The publicly available Ohio voter file for 2017 was accessed via the
Ohio Secretary of State website at:
https://www6.ohiosos.gov/ords/f?p=VOTERFTP:HOME. We accessed the link
and downloaded the data on March 4, 2017. The file contains full name,
date of birth, county of
registration, and party affiliation.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:28:01 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>

Results
Our study included 538 159 deaths for individuals aged 25 years and
older in Florida and Ohio between January 2018 and December 2021
linked to their 2017 voter data (eTable 1 in Supplement 1).

Do you really believe that was all the deaths in the entirety of
Florida and Ohio for four years?

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:33:33 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>

[Zen Cycle]

Do you have any data to the contrary?

[Frank Krygowski]

On 1/28/2024 11:56 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/28/2024 5:19 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> Every time I read one of the thrilling studies that prove something or
>> another I'm reminded of a friend who made a successful business of
>> conducting studies to determine whether a projected business would be
>> a financial success. He once commented, "tell me what you want to
>> prove and I'll design a survey to prove it.
>
> Yes, John, you've mentioned that time after time after time.
>
> I'll point out that you're actually arguing against yourself. You've
> also mentioned many times that the COVID vaccination rates and death
> rates for Thailand look far better than those for the U.S.
>

> What's your real point? That we should ignore the data you, yourself,
> provide? That nothing can be known? That we must forever wallow in
> ignorance?

So I've read the ramblings from the Florida tricycle rider. He's
desperate to defend his usual position, which is that any research
findings that violate his prejudices must be fake.

(Which, come to think of it, sounds a lot like "Any election my
candidate lost must be stolen.")

So a question for him, for John, for Tom: Suppose you were a medical
researcher who really, honestly wanted to find out if political
leanings for _either_ party were correlated with bad COVID outcomes. How
would you go about determining that?

Don't slither away from the question. Give us a procedure that could
give us good results in the real world.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

ISTM the Trumpian lawyers simply gave up. They knew that if they
actually had good evidence of significant election problems, they could
have corrected their mistakes and continued in the courts.

My guess is (on the principle of "follow the money") whoever was paying
those lawyers realized there was no "there" there. They would lose more
money by further pursuits. So they shut off the money flow to the lawyers.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:37:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/28/2024 11:56 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/28/2024 5:19 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Every time I read one of the thrilling studies that prove something or
>>> another I'm reminded of a friend who made a successful business of
>>> conducting studies to determine whether a projected business would be
>>> a financial success. He once commented, "tell me what you want to
>>> prove and I'll design a survey to prove it.
>>
>> Yes, John, you've mentioned that time after time after time.
>>
>> I'll point out that you're actually arguing against yourself. You've
>> also mentioned many times that the COVID vaccination rates and death
>> rates for Thailand look far better than those for the U.S.
>>
>> What's your real point? That we should ignore the data you, yourself,
>> provide? That nothing can be known? That we must forever wallow in
>> ignorance?
>
>So I've read the ramblings from the Florida tricycle rider. He's
>desperate to defend his usual position, which is that any research
>findings that violate his prejudices must be fake.

Krygowski likes to argue against his own words that he falsely
contributes to people he's afraid to deal with directly.

>(Which, come to think of it, sounds a lot like "Any election my
>candidate lost must be stolen.")

More of the above... Is his narcissism the reason he demands
information from other people?

>So a question for him, for John, for Tom: Suppose you were a medical
>researcher who really, honestly wanted to find out if political
>leanings for _either_ party were correlated with bad COVID outcomes. How
>would you go about determining that?

First of all, I can't imagine why I'd want to do that.

>Don't slither away from the question. Give us a procedure that could
>give us good results in the real world.

Even if I did have an answer, it'd be none of Krygowski's business.

[Zen Cycle]

On 1/29/2024 1:15 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:37:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>

>> So I've read the ramblings from the Florida tricycle rider. He's
>> desperate to defend his usual position, which is that any research
>> findings that violate his prejudices must be fake.
>
> Krygowski likes to argue against his own words that he falsely
> contributes to people he's afraid to deal with directly.

no one's afraid to deal with you, you narcissistic piece of shit.

>
>> (Which, come to think of it, sounds a lot like "Any election my
>> candidate lost must be stolen.")
>
> More of the above... Is his narcissism the reason he demands
> information from other people?
>
>> So a question for him, for John, for Tom: Suppose you were a medical
>> researcher who really, honestly wanted to find out if political
>> leanings for _either_ party were correlated with bad COVID outcomes. How
>> would you go about determining that?
>
> First of all, I can't imagine why I'd want to do that.

Proud willful ignorance duly noted.

>
>> Don't slither away from the question. Give us a procedure that could
>> give us good results in the real world.
>
> Even if I did have an answer, it'd be none of Krygowski's business.

whiner.

[Lou Holtman]

I have no position in this but what would be the motivation for someone to start such a research: try to correlare excess deaths to a political preference?

Lou

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:30:02 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
<lou.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

It could be used for political propaganda.

[Frank Krygowski]

I suspect it developed this way: First, anyone who was the least bit
interested would have noted that right wingers scoffed at everything
related to COVID. That was amply demonstrated in this discussion group.
The details of rationalization shifted over time, but what seemed
consistent was that the further right a person's political beliefs, the
more they were likely to say that COVID was fake, COVID was very mild,
vaccines didn't work, masks didn't work, there was no reason to stay
away from others, etc.

It would thus be very reasonable for a person working in public health
to ask "Did the areas with more right-wingers suffer more serious
infections and deaths?" It would give an indication of whether COVID
defense measures and related behavior actually did make a difference.

What we're seeing is A) research confirming the probability that
behaviors made a difference; and B) rationalizations from the losing
side that any research that shows they were wrong _must_ be false.

Again, just like "Any election my candidate lost must be stolen."

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Lou Holtman]

Nope it is only contributing to the incredable polarization what is going on in the US. It is disgusting not only here.

Lou

[Zen Cycle]

On 1/29/2024 2:30 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:

Unlike others in this forum I don't see a government conspiracy
everywhere I look. As I see it, The political affiliation wasn't the
input to the research, it was the conclusion.

The covid death rates are routinely analyzed for trends down to the
individual level. After the vaccines were released, the data showed
clustering of areas where the death rates were reduced and clusters
where they weren't. The first question asked then by an epidemiologist
is "why"?

The answer is simple. The vaccination rates in areas where the death
rates were reduced was much higher than in the areas that saw little or
no reduction, as were prophylactic activities (masking, hand washing,
avoiding large gatherings...). Again, an epidemiologist asks "why"?

Why are the individuals in those areas with the sustained rates of covid
deaths not participating in the vaccination program?

Again, the answer is simple. There is a real correlation between the
political affiliations of people who engaged in prophylactic activities
and those who defiantly - and in many cases spitefully - refused to
follow the advice of the CDC, the WHO, and every other medical
organization of any significance on the planet.

It really isn't much of a leap from there. Of course, one can't simply
look at the correlation and state causation. Scientific rigor must be
applied. Hence studies like the ones discussed here are conducted, and
summarily scoffed at by the same folk who refused to engage in any
prophylaxis mentioned above because of the selfish "I do not buy on to
the ridiculous notion that I have a responsibility to do something
simply for the benefit of others. It's my decision to make.", as well
as the known disdain from that ilk for science and higher education in
general. So, much that it invariably leads to things like this:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/10/covid-19-outbreak-in-gop-caucus-complicates-barrett-confirmation/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-virus-spreads-across-gop-ranks-some-republicans-say-party-will-pay-price-for-stupid-approach/2020/10/03/12e1c484-0585-11eb-b7ed-141dd88560ea_story.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/31/coronavirus-trump-campaign-rallies-led-to-30000-cases-stanford-researchers-say.html

Of course, the conspiracy theorists in this forum will tell you that
none of this is true, that the pandemic was a hoax, that the vaccines
have killed more people than they've saved, and any research concluding
a correlation between political affiliation and covid death rates are
pure propaganda.

Fine with me, AFAIK, the less of them there are, the better off we'll be
as a nation.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:06:48 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
<lou.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>Nope it is only contributing to the incredable polarization what is going on in the US. It is disgusting not only here.
>
>Lou

+1

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:15:58 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>

>Unlike others in this forum I don't see a government conspiracy
>everywhere I look.

Yes. liitle man, go ahead and believe what the government and the
media want you to believe, and do what they tell you to do.

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:19:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/29/2024 2:30 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:

Any significant differences in number of deaths related to being
vaccinated are not political issues.

>Again, just like "Any election my candidate lost must be stolen."

<eyeroll>

[Lou Holtman]

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 10:24:54 PM UTC+1, Catrike Ryder wrote:

> Any significant differences in number of deaths related to being
> vaccinated are not political issues.

On the other hand even getting flat tires is turned into a political issue.

Lou

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:38:53 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
<lou.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 10:24:54?PM UTC+1, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>
>> Any significant differences in number of deaths related to being
>> vaccinated are not political issues.
>
>On the other hand even getting flat tires is turned into a political issue.
>
>Lou

Arguing politics makes as much sense as trying to herd cats.

[Frank Krygowski]

So performing a scientific or epidemiological study contributes to
American polarization! That in itself would be horrifying in more
enlightened times.

And any implication that one should not do science because some find the
results offensive? That is beyond horrifying. It amounts to putting
ignorance on an altar and worshiping it.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Sorry for the double reply, but:

What is the situation in the Netherlands? Do you have large blocs of the
population who have had markedly different COVID results? Do you have
large numbers who based on party affiliation have rejected medical
recommendations for dealing with the disease?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Ryder]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 18:29:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/29/2024 4:06 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:

>> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 9:20:01?PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 1/29/2024 2:30 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:

>ignorance on an altar anid worshiping it.

Performing a heavly biased paid for "study" for propaganda purposes is
what contributes to American polarization! There is absolutely no
other reason for doing it.