Quote (Black XistenZ @ Sep 10 2020 07:40am)
And then they decrey everyone who isnt willing to uncritically follow the recommendations and ideas of anyone deemed an "expert" or "scientist" (no matter their actual expertise on the subject, and with no consideration of the actual substance and quality of their recommendations)...
to be fair it wasnt peer reviewed, it was just a snappy number stupid media ran with:
Quote
The paper, which has not been peer-reviewed, failed to account for simultaneous happenings—like schools in South Dakota reopening, among other things—that could have contributed to coronavirus spread in some of the studied areas.
The paper was headed in the right direction, tracking inflows to Sturgis nationwide to compare county by county changes in infection rates. if also mentions but fails to control for other relevant factors such as bar/restaurant openings and schools opening. then they skip 10 steps to come with a deeply flawed conclusion.
its like if you draw up a great blueprint for a shed but then while building dont confirm any measurements and end up with a slanted mess of a structure u then claim is perfect.