Ridgerunner

And the VA study was very questionable.

No, but it can do damage to the ship and injure or kill sailors on the ship. Also, a gun boat filled with explosives could ram a ship. That's why if gun boats get too close to ships they are fair targets.

Gun boats are. And boats can carry explosives. Remember what happened to the USS Cole?

On the matter of the validity of the study, Dr. Raoult's opinion carries much more weight than mine. This is in his area of expertise.

This report must be Richard Burr's way of getting the Democrats off his back for his questionable stock sales.

If the boats are a threat to the safety of our ships they have a right to defend themselves. No required permission from Congress for that.

I think you need to read what Dr. Didier Raoult said about that study.

I'm talking about now, not the past. And in the past almost all my comments about Trump were in response to attacks on him. I didn't originate the conversations. In the future on this thread I intend to be quiet about Trump. I hope everyone else will too.

What good is a model for setting medical and economic policies if it's numbers are no where close to being accurate? I live in the real world, not the hypothetical world of some computer geeks. When a model predicts 240,000 deaths in the U.S. with mitigation, and the actual number is only somewhere between 50-60 thousand; how can you call that a reliable model?

Previously the model was predicting as many as 240,000 deaths with the mitigation measures that Dr. Fauci was talking about. With no mitigation the British model had predicted 2.2 million deaths in the U.S.

No. That's what you call it.

I wasn't talking about Europe. I was talking about the U.S. Both Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx cited those models numerous times when setting government policy to combat the coronavirus.

What I am saying is that major medical and economic decisions were made in the U.S. based upon computer models that were grossly inaccurate. With more accurate models maybe we could have taken more appropriate actions that would not have caused so much panic and not done so much damage to our economy.

I thought we weren't suppose to talk politics here.

Who? You?

Who is making fun? I'm just stating facts. The fact is the models were way wrong. So why should we believe future models of those people?

The same statisticians who said with the lock down 240,000 people in the U.S. would die from the first wave of the coronavirius, and without the lock down 2.2 million would die ? Their projections were ridiculous.

In the future it will be interesting to see whether mitigation efforts have stopped the coronavirus pandemic or just prolonged it.

And you are such a nice person, right?

You are the one full of hatred, not me. How much longer until you again cannot contain it and it bursts free in one of your tirades?

And there is a vaccine for the flu.

I have no problems from using hydroxychloroquine in Vietnam in 1969/1970. And it was not my choice to take the drug. It was required by the U.S. Army to prevent being infected with malaria. Trump made me take the drug in 1969/1970? You are an idiot.

Do those numbers not seem strange to anyone?

You accused me of drug abuse.

So what is your answer?