After shutting down the economy based upon the tendentiously misleading advice of the “experts” and their worthless, but oh-so-scientific, models, POTUS has no alternative but to run with the “single efficacious cause” fallacy.
Which, of course, means that the truth will be covered up.
Many Orthodox have long regarded the obsessive focus of the Romans on the horrors of the Crucifixion as a form of pathology.
Our ancient tradition of iconography characterizes the Crucifixion scene with serenity, because, despite its horrors, it is the doorway to victory over sin, death, and evil.
The troparion of Pascha encapsulates the nature of this Orthodox (and thus authentically historical Christian) perspective:
Christ is risen from the dead
Trampling down death by death
And upon those in the tombs
Bestowing life
[Picture relates]
I truly hope so, Anon. But leveling with the People has not been the American way.
I think there are some anomalous features in the graphical record of the timing of illness onset of these CV-19 cases (published by the CDC) and the implied time of infection, based on the preliminary studies of incubation period.
The matter at issue is: why did cases only start presenting comparatively recently? Indeed, the point of infection - which is the bar graph shifted back by, say, the mean infection period - is still 2-3 weeks after the ban on inbound flights from China went into effect.
Now, if the human seeds of the infection were already in the country by that point, or arrived only via other countries, why aren’t their cases showing up earlier in the record? Surely they weren’t all asymptomatic?
It takes time for an epidemic to spread. It takes longer for a pandemic to spread. Yet the case load seems to build very quickly, if what we’re being told is correct.
I’m no epidemiologist, but I do know something about propagation through networks and this looks peculiar.
I don’t think I’ve reach the stage when I can articulate what I think is strange and why. I might even talk myself out of this hunch!
That’s certainly a possibility.
It’s also a possibility that CV cases were, in the early period, being categorized as something else - chiefly, influenza.
Artifacts from partial / unscrubbed data can suggest conditions that did not exist and lead up blind alleyways.
CDC has a published schedule of reported cases in the US by day. How much can legitimately be inferred from that record gives me pause right now.
I come back to my attempt to reconcile observed effects with causes: can what we see (particularly in NYC) be squared with other aspects of the data, and with what we’ve been told?
Hunch might be nothing. Or it might be something. The data available is far from perfect.