Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[digitaldog]

This isn't about wanting to believe, but about shedding a light from another angle on the subject.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” -Neil deGrasse Tyson

[TechTalk]

they say "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.” just a few days after exactly such a case (vote switching by a software "glitch" was discovered in one of the key states).

Erroneous claims that were debunked some time ago.

https://www.statesman.com/news/20201111/fact-check-did-glitch-in-wisconsin-switch-votes-from-trump-to-biden

https://gizmodo.com/no-theres-isnt-a-glitch-in-michigan-election-softwar-1845607896

[faberryman]

I'll just leave this here:

Who is Azealia Banks and why should we be listening to what she has to say?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Who is Azealia Banks and why should we be listening to what she has to say?

A black rap singer. As to why, well, we've been bombarded by the Hollywood elite stance against Trump, so for good measure.

[digitaldog]

Who is Azealia Banks and why should we be listening to what she has to say?

According to the "Google Machine" (Yes, I had to look): Azealia Amanda Banks is an American rapper, singer, songwriter, and actress.
Like Slobodan, a part time, untrained expert on vaccines and Epidemiology; a really deep thinker who's opinions should be shared here.
Now back on Planet Earth.... For some of us...

[faberryman]

A black rap singer. As to why, well, we've been bombarded by the Hollywood elite stance against Trump, so for good measure.

Why would I care what a black rap singer has to say about COVID or Trump or much of anything else? I'd probably listen to what she had to say about rap music if I were interested in rap music, but I'm not.

I haven't be bombarded by the Hollywood elite stance against Trump. I have no occasion to hear what they have to say. Why would you be listening to Hollywood elite? What is it that you do that subjects you to bombardment by the Hollywood elite? You might want to change that.

[faberryman]

This isn't about wanting to believe, but about shedding a light from another angle on the subject. With all your faithful belief in science, it is strange that you'd take any current claim (e.g., CDC's on the excess death) as a gospel. It may be proven true (CDC's claim) or it may not ultimately. By the same token, her claim might or may not be true ultimately. I just find it that such the existence of a challenging claim enriched our understanding of the matter, even if rejected in the end. Scepticism comes quite handy when facing new claims and uncharted territories.

Just because someone says something doesn't mean they are shedding light from another angle on the subject.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Erroneous claims that were debunked some time ago....

Nothing has been "debunked." On the contrary, confirmed:

local authorities caught and reported the problem early on in the vote tabulating process, so the error was never reflected in the state’s official results. It also wasn’t the result of a “glitch” in the software’s programming either, but rather an embarrassing human error that I’m sure we’ve all been guilty of before: putting off a software update for too long.

My claim wasn't that the switched votes were included in the final tally. If the "problem" was caught and reported, that means there was a problem in the first place. Whether it is a software glitch or human error is equally irrelevant, because if the software wasn't updated, it still should have functioned in such a way not to switch votes. Besides, where is the analysis of how many voting machines did or didn't have their software updated by the same deep state officials who proclaimed it "the most secure in history?"

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Why would I care what a black rap singer has to say, any more than my next door neighbor?...

Why do you then care what I and other members of the forum have to say? She certainly has more followers than you and I. Ever heard of influencers?

[pegelli]

That seems to be her major "crime"... trivializing... by not using raw numbers, but relative percentages.

Again, the retraction did not go into why is that wrong. Instead, it uses the appeal-to-emotion logical fallacy, by "trivializing" the empathy the left peddles, in absence of logical arguments.

I think the main crime was making claims that can be debunked easily by looking at the raw data publically available.

The main conclusion from the Yanni Gu/Genevieve Briand paper is
"All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary"

If you look at the raw data on this website: US Excess Death statistics (the graph a little about halfway on the page) you'll see that in the three weeks Gu and Briand tabulate causes and conclude that "the increase in COVID death is fully compensated by a lower number of other causes" the excess death above normal are 36-41%, 33-38% and 29-34% (the lower number above the "threshold for excess death" and the higher number above the "average expected death") above what could be expected for those weeks. I'm fully willing to look at data from multiple sides, but to me it seems the conclusion of the Yanni Gu/Genevieve Briand study misrepresents the actual and verifyable data that are publically available.

[faberryman]

Why do you then care what I and other members of the forum have to say?

Some I do, some I don't. It's mostly to keep my mind engaged, like working crossword puzzles, only interactive.

She certainly has more followers than you and I. Ever heard of influencers?

Who cares how many followers she has? You have heard of lemmings haven't you.

I guess it goes back to my youth. Where I wanted to do something, I would tell my father that everyone else was doing it. He always asked me if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, would I jump off a bridge too. That's how I learned about lemmings.

I have heard of influencers. I don't really participate much on social media so I guess I am not influenced by them, but maybe I am and don't know it. I don't buy much stuff. Mostly at the grocery store or the pharmacy, and that's pretty much same old stuff I have been getting for years. I did buy some new socks last month, but I just went to Amazon and looked at the pictures of the socks and ordered the ones that looked good in the pictures.  They turned out okay. I would buy them again if I needed socks. I also needed a new pair of walking boots, so I got a pair just like the one I was replacing. I wouldn't know where to go on Facebook or Twitter to find sock or walking boot influencers.

The main influencers to avoid are the photography equipment influencers. You could go broke if you listened to them. I generally avoid photography stuff on YouTube for example. Most of those guys just like the sound of their voices and just keep going on and on. Life is too short to spend time listening to that stuff. By and large it won't make you are better photographer, although there are some specialty technique videos that are helpful.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

in case you missed it, propaganda is on the way out together with the orange buffoon in the WH.

Btw, are you (they) telling me that tiny red line represents 9/11?

[TechTalk]

Nothing has been "debunked." On the contrary, confirmed:

My claim wasn't that the switched votes were included in the final tally. If the "problem" was caught and reported, that means there was a problem in the first place. Whether it is a software glitch or human error is equally irrelevant, because if the software wasn't updated, it still should have functioned in such a way not to switch votes. Besides, where is the analysis of how many voting machines did or didn't have their software updated by the same deep state officials who proclaimed it "the most secure in history?"

No software "switched votes" on "voting machines". Any issue was NOT related to "voting machines" that "did or didn't have their software updated" as you erroneously speculate.

Wisconsin

"In other words, the “glitch” was in a media system, not a voting system. The wrong numbers were briefly loaded into an array of media websites, but the numbers were never counted or reported incorrectly by Rock County."

Michigan

"Here’s how the process usually works: Voters submit their ballots to voting machines that scan and retain them. Once the machines are finished processing these ballots, each one prints out its final tally of votes for each candidate in each race. Officials then aggregate these printed totals using election management system software. However, since Antrim County dragged its feet on a software update, its version miscalculated when combining these totals, even though each individual voting machine tabulated the ballots correctly.

“As with other unofficial results reporting errors, this was an honest mistake and did not affect any actual vote totals,” Benson said. “Election clerks work extremely hard and do their work with integrity. They are human beings, and sometimes make mistakes. However, there are many checks and balances that ensure mistakes can be caught and corrected.”

County officials disclosed this discrepancy in a Facebook post on Thursday. They explained that they were reviewing the printed tallies from each precinct and counting vote totals by hand—not individual ballots, a claim that Benson called “completely false”—after noticing the election software’s erroneous reporting. The incorrect unofficial results, which had already been posted to its website, were removed at 4 a.m. that day.

Benson added that even if officials hadn’t noticed the issue when they did, it would have been caught during the county canvass. That’s when the Boards of County Canvassers, which are made up of two Democrats and two Republicans, go around and verify the printed tallies from each machine to ensure the countywide totals are correct.

And the error which was caught by election officials was NOT "switched votes" it was an error in tabulation that produced incorrect unofficial totals—NOT "switched votes".

* Bonus points for referring to "deep state officials"—which has a scary ring to it—otherwise known as county clerks.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... * Bonus points for referring to "deep state officials"—which has a scary ring to it—otherwise known as county clerks.

I referred as such to the authors of the "most secure election in history" claim, not county clerks.

As for the rest, you keep "debunking" something I didn't claim (that it ended up in the final tally). Or hairsplitting if that was a voting machine or "election management system software." Same difference.

I can even buy that it was an honest mistake. It doesn't change the fact that it happened and that the media initially got a switched-vote tally.

[faberryman]

I referred as such to the authors of the "most secure election in history" claim, not county clerks.

Since Krebs was head of cyber security, when he said the 2020 election was the most secure in history, I figured that he was talking about from a cyber security standpoint. I don't think any of the problems that have be reported have anything to do with cyber security, so I don't know why you are taking issue with his statement.

The only cyber security issue that I can think of is Sidney Powell's claim that the military seized and is guarding a server in Germany which has votes on it showing that Trump won the election in a landslide. Sounds a little far-fetched to me, but she will get her chance to prove it.

[TechTalk]

how many voting machines did or didn't have their software updated by the same deep state officials who proclaimed it "the most secure in history?"

* Bonus points for referring to "deep state officials"—which has a scary ring to it—otherwise known as county clerks.

I referred as such to the authors of the "most secure election in history" claim, not county clerks.

You actually seem to refer to BOTH county clerks AND the authors of the "most secure election in history" claim in the same sentence. County officials are responsible for updating the software on both voting machines and election system tabulators. If you're only referring to the latter group, then the answer is none, for the reason stated in the preceding sentence.

As for the rest, you keep "debunking" something I didn't claim (that it ended up in the final tally). Or hairsplitting if that was a voting machine or "election management system software." Same difference.

Errors in voting machines would be a major issue and there were none. Errors in unofficial vote tabulation systems, not so much, as the canvassing that follows obtains the results from the actual individual voting machines themselves to calculate the official results of votes cast.

Third, they say "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.” just a few days after exactly such a case (vote switching by a software "glitch" was discovered in one of the key states).

I can even buy that it was an honest mistake. It doesn't change the fact that it happened and that the media initially got a switched-vote tally.

The error which was caught by election officials was NOT "switched votes" it was an error in tabulation that produced incorrect unofficial totals—NOT "switched votes". Incorrect unofficial totals does NOT equal the "switched votes" which you are claiming. If you have evidence that machines were switching votes, let's see it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

https://www.foxnews.com/world/more-people-died-of-suicide-in-japan-in-one-month-than-the-entire-coronavirus-pandemic

(Bold mine)

The National Police Agency said suicides surged to 2,153 in October alone, with more than 17,000 people taking their own lives this year to date, CBS reported.

By comparison, fewer than 2,000 people in the country have died from COVID-19 in 2020.

Experts say the pandemic has exacerbated mental health issues due to prolonged lockdowns, isolation from family members, unemployment and other financial concerns, and a lack of school structure.

[digitaldog]

By comparison, fewer than 2,000 people in the country have died from COVID-19 in 2020.

Shows how well wearing masks and taking a virus seriously can reduce death from it!
And how many deaths in this country (USA) from the SAME virus? We're at 265K sir. Shows how poorly wearing masks and taking a virus seriously can produce death from it!
Suicides are by choice. Those 265 thousand dead from Covid-19 didn't make the choice. I don't expect you to accept the differences and the huge differences in the number of dead.

[faberryman]

https://www.foxnews.com/world/more-people-died-of-suicide-in-japan-in-one-month-than-the-entire-coronavirus-pandemic

I don't know where this paragraph in the article came from:

"Experts say the pandemic has exacerbated mental health issues due to prolonged lockdowns, isolation from family members, unemployment and other financial concerns, and a lack of school structure."

It sounds sort of generic. I thought Japan did not have any lockdowns and its schools reopened in the spring.

Maybe I haven't been following Japan's response to COVID carefully enough.

How does this article on the suicide rate in Japan have anything to do with what we are talking about?

[elliot_n]

https://www.foxnews.com/world/more-people-died-of-suicide-in-japan-in-one-month-than-the-entire-coronavirus-pandemic

(Bold mine)

Japan has had less suicides this year than in any of the previous 10 years.