-1
tmuktkpuqzyc -1 points ago +1 / -2

LOL. Wow, conspiracies.win, baby. A place for serious discussions.

Come back when you hit puberty and I'll explain statistics to you. In the meantime, just keep on deflecting, I know it feels safer than facing up to reality.

0
tmuktkpuqzyc 0 points ago +1 / -1

You did nothing of the sort

What are you referring to? Are you accusing me of not pulling the raw data on total deaths (all causes) and tallying the numbers for the first 47 weeks of each year?

0
tmuktkpuqzyc 0 points ago +1 / -1

what your napkin math has to do with the website presented is totally unclear.

Sorry, I didn't address this in my first response. I thought I did make this clear in my original post though:

Based on this data, total deaths are up by over 300,000 this year vs each of the last 3 years, which were each within 50,000 of one another. Whenever I mention these stats on conspiracies.win I get downvoted, but nobody ever has a response, so I think I'm on to something! What do you think could've caused this?

-1
tmuktkpuqzyc -1 points ago +1 / -2

Because when it fits the narrative, people here are more than happy to upvote CDC statistics. Look at this shitpost that got 50 upvotes: https://conspiracies.win/p/11R4ufrAqE/with-covid-having-such-a-devasta/c/

Maybe I should've put my back of napkin statistics in a power point and took a picture of my computer monitor with my phone, then posted it without any actual links to the data at hand. That would be more conspiracies.win style.

The great thing about the napkin data I shared: you don't have to trust me! You can run the numbers yourself! Because I shared the source and my process!

And yeah, totally reasonable to not trust CDC data, but that doesn't explain the downvotes given that there are several other posts on this site based on CDC data that people here find more palatable.

-2
tmuktkpuqzyc -2 points ago +3 / -5

conspiracies.win, where uncomfortable statistics are silently downvoted and sexy photos of the first lady are upvoted to the top.

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +3 / -2

That is interesting https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/

If you adjust for the missing 20 days in December the yearly projected total for Sweden 2020 is 94678, so 6k more than last year, but only a couple thousand more than 2018.

-1
tmuktkpuqzyc -1 points ago +1 / -2

Well, there was a total lockdown in my city in March and many of those freedoms have since been restored. During WWII there was enforced rationing and internment camps, which were reverted when the war was over. During the Vietnam war the draft was instituted, and then reverted. After 9/11 we weren't allowed to carry lighters and pocket knives on planes, but now we are again.

There are many examples of government restrictions on our freedoms which have been temporary. I'm just not very concerned about the masks, call me crazy, just my opinion.

0
tmuktkpuqzyc 0 points ago +1 / -1

I really am interested in your thoughts, as you seem to bother to look at numbers which is nice :)

But yeah, points 1 and 3 are just wrong because the CDC data I used (and thus my numbers above) are TOTAL DEATHS for all causes.

I'm not sure #2 is actually an issue, but I'm happy to re-run the numbers in 2 weeks. I seriously doubt (given the numbers being reported the last couple weeks) that it will narrow the gap at all. If anything I expect it to widen further.

-4
tmuktkpuqzyc -4 points ago +1 / -5

... what in the world is your point? This is still straight up TDW bullshit and more importantly DEFINITELY NOT A CONSPIRACY.

-5
tmuktkpuqzyc -5 points ago +1 / -6

Because I come here for CONSPIRACIES not whatever bullshit pops into your head. If you have a conspiracy to share that involves Hillary, PLEASE DO. Otherwise, post it on TDW or keep it to yourself.

2
tmuktkpuqzyc 2 points ago +3 / -1

Nah man, the numbers from that page are TOTAL DEATHS of all causes.

-4
tmuktkpuqzyc -4 points ago +1 / -5

I haven't once mentioned or defended Hillary.

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +2 / -1

You should explore the data yourself and draw your own conclusions. The numbers presented in that article don't seem abnormal when you look at the broader data set. For example, the change in heart disease deaths week-to-week for those same dates but in the previous year (2019)...

4-13 -923

4-20 +318

4-27 -736

There are weeks in 2019 when the numbers jump up or down by 1200 or more. Which is probably why the author of that article chose to cherry pick 3 weeks in the table of cause of death fluctuations.

-3
tmuktkpuqzyc -3 points ago +3 / -6

And for christians!

-5
tmuktkpuqzyc -5 points ago +3 / -8

Shocking, eh? Ever wonder why they never show a side-by-side graphic with christians? Yeah, me neither.

-6
tmuktkpuqzyc -6 points ago +2 / -8

Ok, now do one for christians.

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fascinating, never heard of this. Thanks for posting!

5
tmuktkpuqzyc 5 points ago +5 / -0

Have you been drinking enough water?

-3
tmuktkpuqzyc -3 points ago +2 / -5

Nah, but I do think this is the low-effort circle-jerk material that is the hallmark of TDW. And again, what's the conspiracy?

-2
tmuktkpuqzyc -2 points ago +2 / -4

LOL. Yes I see that now, I should've checked post history at the start.

-3
tmuktkpuqzyc -3 points ago +1 / -4

Ok that's cool, but this is a hypothetical discussion where OP stated that they would rather everyone over 60 die than their children have to wear masks. That's what was stated, that's all that was stated, that's all I'm responding to here.

Do you agree with OP that it would be better for all people over 60 to die than for some children to have to wear masks in public?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›