Thanks. People may not believe this, but while I obviously lean a little left politically (vs. the whole population; more than a little left on a board with a high% of older white males who lean heavily right) and my political posts certainly reflect opinions and have some bias, even if citing facts, I'm sure, I have never knowingly made a purely scientific post that was biased. That's not to say that I haven't been wrong a few times (like comparing this to the flu in Jan/early Feb), but that's different from posting something on a science topic that wasn't 100% what I actually believed to be true at the time.I'm all for solid debate, so I welcome you challenging #'s, but don't act like your main intent has not been to troll these threads.
Numbers certainly is on one side of the debate but his posts are for the most part very evenly keeled. That doesn't go for everyone on that side of the debate, but it does for him.
And on the two biggest elements of the pandemic response that we bungled, I was absolutely correct, with well demonstrated data behind my posts, and much earlier than most: the fact that we needed aggressive early testing/tracing/isolating in place by late February if we wanted to be able to "see" the spread of the virus to hopefully contain/mitigate it and the fact that we should've pulled out all the stops in early March (way before CDC, WHO, and Fauci) to do what we could to implement universal masking where distancing was not possible, to greatly reduce transmissions/cases, which is the key to reducing deaths.