Archiv: maths? what maths?

09.07.2022 - 18:41 [ ]

82 Prozent der Covid-Intensivpatienten vollständig geimpft

„Im Zeitraum MW 16-19/2022 war für ungeimpfte Personen das Risiko, aufgrund von COVID-19 in einem Krankenhaus behandelt zu werden 6,7-fach (12- bis 17-Jährige), 3,7-fach (18- bis 59-Jährige) bzw. 9,0-fach (ab 60-Jährige) erhöht im Vergleich zu Personen mit einer Auffrischimpfung.“

Fragen Sie mich bitte nicht, wie das zu den oben zitierten Zahlen aus dem Wochenbericht passt.

28.12.2021 - 05:55 [ Tagesschau,de ]

Bundesweit Demonstrationen: Tausende protestieren gegen Corona-Maßnahmen

Erneut haben sich zahlreiche Menschen an Protesten gegen die Corona-Regeln und gegen eine Impfpflicht beteiligt. In mehreren Städten eskalierte die Lage: Demonstrierende griffen Einsatzkräfte an.

10.08.2021 - 13:29 [ American Geophysical Union / Science Daily ]

Ancient shell shows days were half-hour shorter 70 million years ago

(March 9, 2020)

The length of a year has been constant over Earth’s history, because Earth’s orbit around the Sun does not change.

01.04.2021 - 23:27 [ ]

ARD-DeutschlandTrend: Zuspruch für härteren Lockdown steigt

Zwei Drittel für härteren Lockdown (…)

24 Prozent finden die aktuell gelten geltenden Maßnahmen angemessen (-14 zu Mitte März, -23 zu Anfang März), und ebenfalls 24 Prozent sagen, die Corona-Maßnahmen gehen zu weit (-1 zu Mitte März, -6 zu Anfang März).

15.02.2020 - 13:41 [ Taniel / Twitter ]

Marvelous NYT explanation of the myriad Iowa errors (with a beautiful lay-out). But the biggest & most simple error is missing: 2 precincts (in Decatur Co. & Des Moines Co.) still lack any real results, & are likely showing results of another precinct.

15.02.2020 - 13:25 [ New York Times ]

We Checked the Iowa Caucus Math. Here’s Where It Didn’t Add Up.

There has often been some fuzziness in the way the results of the Iowa caucuses were calculated and reported. But this is the first year that Iowa Democrats released raw vote counts. The transparency provided the public with its first opportunity to check the complex math that determines which candidates get the delegates they need to win the Democratic nomination.

And in many cases, the math did not check out. In such a close race — Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., is leading Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont by a tenth of a percentage point — even small mistakes can add up.

13.02.2020 - 20:24 [ ]

Nevada Democrats debut to volunteers new iPad-based ‘tool’ to calculate math on Caucus Day in the wake of Iowa fiasco


Nevada Democrats are planning to use a new caucus tool that will be preloaded onto iPads and distributed to precinct chairs to help facilitate the Caucus Day process, according to multiple volunteers and a video recording of a volunteer training session on Saturday.

09.02.2020 - 10:46 [ ]

The Iowa Caucuses Were a Complete Mess—and We Did the Math to Prove It


Now that data is officially out, it confirms the numbers in the tweet: Sanders had 101 voters and Buttigieg had 66 on final alignment, but both received 4 delegates.

The full picture painted by the data is 101 votes for Sanders, 66 for Buttigieg, and 48 for Biden, plus 25 uncommitted voters, for a total of 240. Delegates were officially distributed 4-4-2 for Sanders-Buttigieg-Biden. But that should have been 5-3-2.

09.02.2020 - 10:44 [ Jaylen, @UnivOfKansas Alum / Twitter ]

Des Moines Precinct 80: Bernie’s group had 101 people Pete’s group had 66 people Bernie & Pete end up tied at 4 delegates following a coin toss. This is democracy??? ? #IACaucus


09.02.2020 - 10:41 [ Eliza Mackintosh ]

Iowa conspiracy theories show US democracy has bigger problems than foreign interference

The US intelligence community anticipates foreign actors will try to use the same tactics again in 2020, and there are already signs of interference from Russia (Moscow denies all claims of meddling).

20.11.2018 - 14:33 [ Nicolas Lewis / ]

A major problem with the Resplandy et al. ocean heat uptake paper

(6.11.2018) I wanted to make sure that I had not overlooked something in my calculations, so later on November 1st I emailed Laure Resplandy querying the ΔAPOClimate trend figure in her paper and asking for her to look into the difference in our trend estimates as a matter of urgency, explaining that in view of the media coverage of the paper I was contemplating web-publishing a comment on it within a matter of days. To date I have had no substantive response from her, despite subsequently sending a further email containing the key analysis sections from a draft of this article.

How might Laure Resplandy [xiv] have miscalculated the ΔAPOClimate trend as 1.16 per meg per year?

20.11.2018 - 14:31 [ ]

Global Warming: Another Doomsday Climate Model Flunks A Math Test

(15.11.2018) Media around the world seized upon the report as yet another indicator of climate-change doom and runaway global warming. No surprise, since most of the media faithfully adhere to the Holy Church of Global Warming.