You see I have explained clearly my reasons and you still want to badger. — Ambrosia
Corona is the name for the common cold goook it up.
Because pasteurs theory doesn't make sense in the real world. Nor is it proven by kochs postulates.
If I feel a risk I would wear a seat belt or such like. But that's my choice. — Ambrosia
I never died of measles or colds or anything else! — Ambrosia
Accelerated immunization activities have had a major impact on reducing measles deaths. During 2000– 2018, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 23.2 million deaths. Global measles deaths have decreased by 73% from an estimated 536 000 in 2000* to 142,000 in 2018.
The question is whether the unlikely turns out to be right as often as you predicted it would, neither more nor less. — Srap Tasmaner
The fact people have died in boxing means I shouldn't box — Ambrosia
or take a vaccine beforehand???
Dying from a cold is zero,unless your already very ill. — Ambrosia
I notice your avoiding the gay cure example I gave,very disingenuous.
Fact is you believe in vaccines a priori from appeal to authority
All these precautions and intrusions are based on fear and deliberate lies. — Ambrosia
Except maybe add the word professional..."1% change of a professional spotting it". In theory, a professional should have a higher chance of spotting a flaw than a laymen, such that a laymen would have even less than a 1% chance of spotting the flaw.The flaw is so hard to spot that there's only a 1% chance of spotting it — Isaac
Except maybe add the word professional..."1% change of a professional spotting it". In theory, a professional should have a higher chance of spotting a flaw than a laymen, such that a laymen would have even less than a 1% chance of spotting the flaw. — Yohan
Two heads are better than one.
That's a truism. When in doubt, get a second opinion. Yep, could be helpful.
Does it mean a group of people is more likely to be right than one single individual? No, that is not a truism, that is bias. — Yohan
Most people used to believe in flat earth (I assume including most geologists). — Yohan
I will trust my intelligence thanks. — Ambrosia
We just specified that the problem is so hard to spot that there's only a 1% chance it will be spotted so we'd expect only 1 in every 100 engineers to spot it - 99% of experts would be wrong. — Isaac
So the variable that matters is how hard the flaw is to spot, not how many experts spot it.
Since that's an unknown variable, there's a 50% chance we're in the first scenario, and a 50% chance we're in the second. So the ratio of experts judging safe:unsafe is irrelevant, it just cancels out. — Isaac
That makes sense. — Yohan
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.