Dished up a big plate of word salad there, that pretty much doesn’t say anything. That is impressive.
I'm not interested in winning arguments on the internet, so if you don't think I've said anything worthwhile, that's cool. I hope others find them meaningful since that's why I'm posting.
So you are saying The NY Times and/or COVID tracker number is more definitive and a better data set than state and CDC direct info.
I'm saying what I said there, that the Florida DOH dataset is a subset of the data on the New York Times page. Which to the best of my understanding from looking at both datasets and the available documentation is correct.
But if it makes you feel better to use non government sources and media companies go for it. Doesn’t change the facts.
No, nothing we argue about will change the facts. What the facts are is that the New York Times pulls the data directly from the reports to a variety of government agencies, while the page you linked to is more limited in its intent. Again, the
first thing you should do if you're actually interested in understanding a dataset is to understand the methods that produced it and how different datasets have taken different approaches. That's what I've tried to do, and it has given me new insights I wouldn't have otherwise had.
There is zero data that 100 or more people have ever died so far in 24 hours in Florida due to Covid. Zero nada, none, and you have shown me and data showing that , even using Nytimes data etc.
I'll let this speak for itself.
It might happen
Reported versus the actual number that died that day. Not reported like whatever definition you came up with.
The definition of "reported" isn't something I came up with. My description of the methodology that produced this dataset is in the documentation for the data.
Not quite going to get it I see. But alas. Moving on.
There's nothing to get here aside from the fact that some datasets are subsets of others, subject to reporting inaccuracies and time delays, etc. And that's the same point you're making as well - you just
prefer the Florida government link you shared to the combined Federal, state, local dataset the New York Times compiles and publishes. Neither is better or worse than the other, they're just different and can probably answer different questions if you take the time to dig deeper into them.
This should be an obvious point to make, but it seems like it needs to be said. If you feel like you these threads are more about defending your views than learning about things and discussing, then it probably is time to take a break from posting. This whole discussion came back to the simple point that according to reliable datasets, the number of deaths has been over 100 per day. This is just a fact about the number of deaths given the reporting and collection methodology. There's not much more to say about it.
, maybe they explained it better.
not snark just having fun. I mean all these are opinions.