>>11469529Thanks for the link. But dude, NYT, claim after claim and "could" after "could":
> The assumptions in the C.D.C.’s four scenarios, and the new numerical projections, fall in the range of others developed by independent experts.What can I say, is this "science" for you? I predict 10'000 deaths worldwide, trust me, my assumptions fall in the range of others developed by independent experts.
But I liked two things in the article:
1. What I said, problem is flu and covid-19 at the same time.
2. The crazy stuff going on at the moment might be an overreaction due to the fear of a second spanish flue
