Two weeks after ending lockdown, Texas sees surge in cases

[Flash]

Cool. What was the case count before May 11th, when Abbott reopened the state on April 27th?

You leave those numbers out of your post, why? Because there were far fewer cases prior to the end of the lockdown.

Texas "opened" on April 27th.

So start your count from then.

Unless, you're going to be a dishonest piece of shit.

Wondering why you chose to start with May 11th and not April 27th. May 11th is a weird date to choose, isn't it? What significance does that date hold?

Oh right, because if you did, you'd see a clear increase in the number of cases that correlates to the reopening of the state.

But you're not honest enough to do that because you don't want to give me something to drag you over on a thread.

So, you think an increase to 1395 on April 29 or 1438 on May 1 is due to the state reopening on April 27? That is a really fast acting virus. Only somebody trying to argue partisan political points would make such an assumption.

May 11 was picked because it shows a period of 10 days to show the rate before and after the surge.

I have no desire to show there has been an increase, decline, or no change since the re-opening. I have not "re-opened" and basically stay at home like you.

My only point was that the Texas "surge" was basically a one day event that returned to its previous average (and, as testing increased). Only those whose partisanship replaces facts are eager to show increases or decreases due to re-opening.

As I said before, neither you or I have eaten at a restaurant for 2 months since the shutdown began.

 

[LV426]

So, you think an increase to 1395 on April 29 or 1438 on May 1 is due to the state reopening on April 27? That is a really fast acting virus. Only somebody trying to argue partisan political points would make such an assumption.

Those are just the confirmed infections, not hospitalizations, Flash. And yes, I would expect a surge like that immediately after opening. Morons go out, contract the virus, get a test the next day, and look at that, they're positive.

You're a dishonest piece of crap because you are working under the assumption that people only get tested if they are showing symptoms, but that is not the case.

You're such a sophist.

All of this effort just to avoid admitting I'm right.

 

[LV426]

May 11 was picked because it shows a period of 10 days to show the rate before and after the surge.

But why 10 days? That's a random number. We had been saying surges would appear 2-4 weeks. 10 days isn't two weeks, is it? it's not even a week and a half.

 

[Flash]

Here's the running chart of daily new infections since you left that information out of your post because of how dishonest a person you are.

The arrow signifies the date Texas began with the re-opening. And look at that, a surge two weeks after, and higher case count levels on average vs. before reopening:

View attachment 15374

Eventually, Flash is going to come around and admit that reopening led to a surge. But he'll come to that realization about two weeks from now, instead of trusting in people smarter and more intuitive than him.

But that's typical for Flash. He's always behind the curve.

The attachment does not work. I noticed you switched sources away from the worldometer you used earlier--nice touch.

 

[LV426]

My only point was that the Texas "surge" was basically a one day event that returned to its previous average (and, as testing increased). Only those whose partisanship replaces facts are eager to show increases or decreases due to re-opening.

But it wasn't a one day event and the data clearly shows higher daily rates of infection post-lockdown than prior to it.

Eventually, you are going to admit that there's a surge, and when that day comes, I am going to drag your ass for it and never let it go.

 

[Earl]

The far left loons want the country shut down until Nov.

It will NOT happen.

 

[LV426]

The attachment does not work. I noticed you switched sources away from the worldometer you used earlier--nice touch.

No, I didn't, Flash. It's all from the worldometer. Nice try with your bullshit sophistry. And yes, the attachment works. Stop lying. You can click on it yourself here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/

Scroll to the bottom, and you'll see this chart. I added the arrow for your convenience because I know how hard it is for a senile old piece of shit like you to honestly look at anything:

 

[LV426]

The attachment does not work. I noticed you switched sources away from the worldometer you used earlier--nice touch.

The attachment works fine and it comes from the same site that I've been using this whole time. So you fucked up here because you thought you had a gotcha! but it turns out I hqve the gotcha:



And here's the link...just scroll to the bottom and you'll see the exact same chart. April 27th, which was the low point of new cases, was the day Texas "reopened": https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/

The worst part of all this is that your ego is so massive that you can't bear to admit that I'm right. Doing so would upend every single convention and belief you have that you have fought with me about, because it's like the sweater song...if I pull at one single thread of your persona or character, the whole thing unravels. Your BoThSiDeRiSm, your sophistry, your phoniness...it all gets laid bare.

 

[Flash]

But why 10 days? That's a random number. We had been saying surges would appear 2-4 weeks. 10 days isn't two weeks, is it? it's not even a week and a half.

Ten days is about the same number of days before and after the surge. Here you say the surge would appear in 2-4 weeks but earlier you claimed it would occur immediately after the April 27 re-opening: "I would expect a surge like that immediately after opening. Morons go out, contract the virus, get a test the next day, and look at that, they're positive."

Which is it? 2-4 weeks or immediately?

Texas is just one case. Why do you exclude states which have reopened that have seen declines in new cases? Doesn't fit your preconceived biases? Sophist? Lazy?

 

[Flash]

The attachment works fine and it comes from the same site that I've been using this whole time. So you fucked up here because you thought you had a gotcha! but it turns out I hqve the gotcha:

View attachment 15377

And here's the link...just scroll to the bottom and you'll see the exact same chart. April 27th, which was the low point of new cases, was the day Texas "reopened": https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/

The worst part of all this is that your ego is so massive that you can't bear to admit that I'm right. Doing so would upend every single convention and belief you have that you have fought with me about, because it's like the sweater song...if I pull at one single thread of your persona or character, the whole thing unravels. Your BoThSiDeRiSm, your sophistry, your phoniness...it all gets laid bare.

Your OP was about the "surge" in Texas implying it was a big increase due to re-opening.

My numbers do not go back to April 27 (re-opening) because that was never a discussion we had; therefore, you are not "right" because I never argued re-opening would not result in increased cases. I don't necessarily disagree with that prediction although I don't have an opinion either way.

Now, you are changing the discussion to case increases since April 27 rather than the fact that cases returned to their May average after the surge on May 15.

April 27-May 14 (day before the surge) the average new cases per day was 1099. May 16-20 (the days after the surge) the average number of new cases was 979. So, the surge did not indicate an increased daily average of cases at this time.

Try to stick to the same argument unless you let me know you are changing to a new point.

I can tell you are becoming frustrated due to your increased number of personal attacks.

 

[Flash]

The attachment works fine and it comes from the same site that I've been using this whole time. So you fucked up here because you thought you had a gotcha! but it turns out I hqve the gotcha:

No, it is not the same site you have been using the whole time because you posted this link just a few posts earlier (using some outdated data).

[LV426]. "So it definitely looks like it's surging in Texas:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/unite...-america/texas"

 

[LV426]

No, it is not the same site you have been using the whole time because you posted this link just a few posts earlier (using some outdated data).

[LV426]. "So it definitely looks like it's surging in Texas:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/unite...-america/texas"

Jesus Flash, be a big fucking baby about it. Whine and cry that I'm being unfair even thought all the data now shows that its surging in states that rushed to reopen.

Like here, in Georgia:

Coronavirus cases in Georgia surpass 40,000, more than 1,200 confirmed in the past 24 hours
https://www.wjcl.com/article/corona...NXV3XG4G8FSWV9r5MQzaODlVi60FDqB_i7qhUDCOsdj_E

The words you're looking for are: "I'm sorry for being a sophist pig, LV426, you were right to predict a surge in cases, and I was wrong to fudge data to make it appear the opposite. I'm sorry and I'll do better next time."

 

[LV426]

Your OP was about the "surge" in Texas implying it was a big increase due to re-opening.

Which is completely the case. The number of daily new cases since reopening is higher than it was prior to it.

Any honest person can look at this and make that determination.

Any HONEST person.

 

[LV426]

My numbers do not go back to April 27 (re-opening) because that was never a discussion we had

But your numbers do go back that far, you just chose to not include them because including them would show a demonstrably higher new case count post-reopening vs. pre-reopening.

Now, you are changing the discussion to case increases since April 27 rather than the fact that cases returned to their May average after the surge on May 15

OMFG you are such a piece of shit.

Is the May average HIGHER OR LOWER than the April average?

 

[LV426]

April 27-May 14 (day before the surge) the average new cases per day was 1099. May 16-20 (the days after the surge) the average number of new cases was 979. So, the surge did not indicate an increased daily average of cases at this time.

Cool.

So what was the April 1-April 26 average?

You do this frequently with everything you post here, Flash. You intentionally leave data out in order to skew results all because you don't want to have to admit that I'm right. It's a pattern with you. And its indicative of how you live your life, no doubt.

 

[LV426]

Ten days is about the same number of days before and after the surge. Here you say the surge would appear in 2-4 weeks but earlier you claimed it would occur immediately after the April 27 re-opening: "I would expect a surge like that immediately after opening. Morons go out, contract the virus, get a test the next day, and look at that, they're positive."

Which is it? 2-4 weeks or immediately?

Texas is just one case. Why do you exclude states which have reopened that have seen declines in new cases? Doesn't fit your preconceived biases? Sophist? Lazy?

It's both!

here's the chart, FOR THE FIFTH TIME, Flash:



Can you read a chart, or are you disabled? Literally TWO DAYS after opening on 4/27, Texas recorded its highest case count of the pandemic at the time, narrowly edging out the previous high on April 9th.

IT'S IN THE CHART.

So not only was there a surge immediately after opening, those surge levels persisted.

Next week, expect that case count to be in the upper 1000's.

 

[Flash]

But it wasn't a one day event and the data clearly shows higher daily rates of infection post-lockdown than prior to it.

Eventually, you are going to admit that there's a surge, and when that day comes, I am going to drag your ass for it and never let it go.

The surge was a one-day event. Since the re-opening there has been a higher average number of daily cases, but only about 50% as high as the surge on May 15. So, that surge was not indicative of the daily average since the re-opening since it was twice as high as normal.

 

[LV426]

The surge was a one-day event.

IT CLEARLY WASN'T JUST A ONE DAY EVENT:




How many days after April 27th did it take for the new case count to surpass the pre-opening high?

How many days after April 27th did the new case count surpass the pre-reopening high?

Was the daily case count average post-reopening higher than pre-reopening? And, by how much?

 

[Stretch]

Actually, the curve is rising, and has been for the last week. Two other states (GA and FL) had been seeing declines since early April, but have now leveled off. The more people that start going out in public, the more likely we are to see a spike. Of course if the Trump Cult would start wearing masks instead of being selfish, whiny idiots, that would help mitigate things.

***LOGIC ALERT!***
More testing now? More cases detected now.

 

[Flash]

Which is completely the case. The number of daily new cases since reopening is higher than it was prior to it. Any honest person can look at this and make that determination.

Yes, agreed. But the argument was not about whether the average number of cases are higher, but that the 2000 cases surge on May 15 was indicative of the number of cases since the re-opening.

Flash: "Your OP was about the "surge" in Texas implying it was a big increase due to re-opening."

LV426: "Which is completely the case."

Not completely the case. If the daily number of new cases was anywhere near 2000 then it would indeed be a "surge." But the number of news cases averages only about 300. An increase, of course, but hardly a surge.

Again, you are picking an argument I never made.