who observe short distances between donor case & recipient and think "must 'droplet' transmission" because measles does that.
-
-
Show this thread
-
I really hope all this interest in transmission of one resp viruses translates into research & even better, clearer explanations for all others.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Isn’t that a bit like the assumption by certain people in Jan/Feb 2020 that it couldn’t be transmitted in the presymptomatic incubation period? Why would they assume this was the one virus without that happening? A bit like not believing the paint is wet without touching it.
-
love it (!) and if ok with you - will be using this: “A bit like not believing the paint is wet without touching it” sometimes I wonder how we ever made it to the moon...like wasn’t that in 1969 ??? – at Lake Las Vegas
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
#RIVM (Dutch CDC) ".. we know that other people are predominantly infected via the larger droplets. These droplets don't travel far (usually less than 1,5 meter)." Daily number of cases in The Netherlands on 16 April: 8,966 and rising. Source:https://www.rivm.nl/coronavirus-covid-19/verspreiding … - End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's the most basic of logical errors. The statement, "If A, then B" does not imply that "If B, then A" is true. Similarly, "If droplets, then short-range transmission" is true, but that does not mean "If short-range transmission, then droplets" is true.
-
Yep--fallacy of affirming the consequent.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yup, it’s a logical fallacy:https://twitter.com/rye_b/status/1334943625587941379 …
-
These days you could write a logic textbook using only Covid-related real-world examples to illustrate all the formal and informal fallacies.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.