Jump to content

baa99

Members
  • Posts

    2837
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

Posts posted by baa99

  1. I am sure the close relationship of Laos and China is the reason there is not a single case of CV-19 in the whole of Laos. It is through the diligent efforts of Chinese tourists and business travellers that the virus has not spread throughout the glorious land of the LRP.:spin: 

  2. 15 hours ago, buffalo_bill said:

    Til recently there have been hoards of Chinamen in Thailand, there MUST have been infected individuals between them. The virus is everywhere now to various degrees but why only 180 cases in Siam? Velly ssatrange.

    Did you see the price of the test, >5k baht? It is the lack of testing in Thailand is the reason for the small number of confirmed cases.

     

    Plus there is a big economic incentive not to get tested. Imagine a construction crew and one worker gets ill. Would he get a test knowing he could lose his job? Would the crew boss report a worker is ill knowing it could shut down his construction crew for 2 weeks? Would a hotel report a sick maid or clerk knowing it could shut down the hotel for 2 weeks?

  3. How important climate is to transmission rate is unclear to me. I adjusted known CV cases by the population of the country for a few countries.

    USA           -> 11 per million

    Malaysia   -> 13 

    Singapore -> 40

    Singapore certainly has a warm and humid climate.

  4. Here, we estimate the impact of different screening programs given current knowledge of key COVID-19 life history and epidemiological parameters. Even under best-case assumptions, we estimate that screening will miss more than half of infected people. Breaking down the factors leading to screening successes and failures, we find that most cases missed by screening are fundamentally undetectable, because they have not yet developed symptoms and are unaware they were exposed. 

     

    https://elifesciences.org/articles/55570

  5. You are forgetting thermodynamics and statistical mechanics! It is a far simpler problem to determine the final mean temperature at a particular CO2 concentration.

    Take an ice cube from the freezer and place in a glass (in a 25C room). To predict the shape of the ice cube as it melts is a very difficult problem. However predicting the final temperature is very easy.

  6. 8 hours ago, Coss said:

    Less of a prediction - more of the this is the appropriate thread for the post, having content related and so on...

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

    Not a post about climate change  being real or not.

     

    This link is posted to demonstrate what I've always held to be true in the climate argument. The science is not in.

    Now there is some science that is surprising. It doesn't go one way or the other to solve the, pro or anti argument, but in a short period of time, it shows that change, does indeed happen.

     

     It also shows that predicting the future is not something that science is particularly good at. Science is good at demonstrating , fact.

     

    So the gist of the article at the above link is that - there is more snow arriving at Antartica, than ice leaving, and, wait for it, if that changes, there could be less in the future...

    But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

    I guess you missed this part of the article. I guess science can't predict a solar eclipse.

×
×
  • Create New...