"Substantial, draconian measures limiting population mobility should be taken immediately"

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: loam

Haven’t watched the video but my opinion on this is if is is world-ending, then it’s already too late.

C’est la via

Its been my thoughts that since seeing what happened after 2016 and how people have acted ever since, that no matter what, if we continue down this path, humanity is too damn stupid to survive anyway.

a reply to: SailorJerry

We are a pretty stupid species, aren’t we.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: SailorJerry

There are 59 departures from Wuhan right now.

wuhan departures

Are they just running these flights to burn fuel?

yeah, with destinations to other parts of China, and there are a few that are chartered flights to and from other countries to evacuate people of those countries, which have been announced.

Google travel bans.

Im not going to argue in circles with you when you clearly havent done your research

a reply to: loam

I did. He suggests the limiting of population mobility in mainland China exclusively probably as the main method to prevent creating seed cities of the virus. Not the entire shut down of all travel.

It's not going to work. The fact that it is appearing internationally already means it's past containment.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SailorJerry

We are a pretty stupid species, aren’t we.

I feel like we didnt use to be, back when common sense and truth werent replaced with feelings.

Now we deserve everything Natural selection throws at us

That Military Blockade looking pretty nice right about now, eh?

I haven't gone away with that perspective, I mean, what message the world would get, to see American naval power containing the second most powerful nation on earth, as a means to prevent the further spreading of the virus.

That is stepping up and taking control of a potential global threat.

This is assuming if China fails in its attempt at quarantine, the US will have to take matters into its own hands in the name of National Security.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: loam

Chill my dude. Even this guy said is a weak chance of pandemic.

ETA: I have given you most of your stars. No need to get bent outta shape.

Not bent out of shape. That's an assumption on your part. Frankly, I care little if you remain unconvinced by this information.

With regard to your characterization that he said 'weak chance', that is not true. In fact, what he did say is that while "not certain", there is NOT a weak or insubstantial risk of global epidemic. @12:10

Quite the opposite of what you said.

originally posted by: SailorJerry

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: SailorJerry

There are 59 departures from Wuhan right now.

wuhan departures

Are they just running these flights to burn fuel?

yeah, with destinations to other parts of China, and there are a few that are chartered flights to and from other countries to evacuate people of those countries, which have been announced.

Google travel bans.

Im not going to argue in circles with you when you clearly havent done your research

In your previous response you said I need tk do my research. I have provided my research in every response. All you have provided is conjecture. You also have terrible taste in rum.

Here is a flight that lands every other day at jfk.

wuhan to jfk

a reply to: loam

No one even knows what "not a not weak chance" means. Its certainly below a moderate chance or that is what he would have said.

a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

You didn't understand what he said then. Their data assessment indicates it's too late for the mainland. He's speaking about travel *from* the mainland.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: loam

No one even knows what "not a not weak chance" means. Its certainly below a moderate chance or that is what he would have said.

Again, he said NOT weak and NOT insubstantial probability. The opposite of weak and insubstantial is strong and substantial.

Once again @12:10.

a reply to: loam

Let me help you with Engrish. No one says "not weak" when they mean anything above weak. They would say strong and substantial if they mean the opposite.

a reply to: SailorJerry

Flight to ORD from wuhan today. wuhan to ohare

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: loam

Let me help you with Engrish. No one says "not weak" when they mean anything above weak. They would say strong and substantial if they mean the opposite.

You're lecturing me on my English? LOL.

originally posted by: drewlander

originally posted by: SailorJerry

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: SailorJerry

There are 59 departures from Wuhan right now.

wuhan departures

Are they just running these flights to burn fuel?

yeah, with destinations to other parts of China, and there are a few that are chartered flights to and from other countries to evacuate people of those countries, which have been announced.

Google travel bans.

Im not going to argue in circles with you when you clearly havent done your research

In your previous response you said I need tk do my research. I have provided my research in every response. All you have provided is conjecture. You also have terrible taste in rum.

Here is a flight that lands every other day at jfk.

wuhan to jfk

You seem to have a really hard time parsing data, go over all that again , look up the flights, look up what they are doing.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: SailorJerry

Flight to ORD from wuhan today. wuhan to ohare

LoL click on your own link

again you seem to have issues parsing data

originally posted by: drewlander

originally posted by: SailorJerry

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: SailorJerry

There are 59 departures from Wuhan right now.

wuhan departures

Are they just running these flights to burn fuel?

yeah, with destinations to other parts of China, and there are a few that are chartered flights to and from other countries to evacuate people of those countries, which have been announced.

Google travel bans.

Im not going to argue in circles with you when you clearly havent done your research

In your previous response you said I need tk do my research. I have provided my research in every response. All you have provided is conjecture. You also have terrible taste in rum.

Here is a flight that lands every other day at jfk.

wuhan to jfk

Yeah, 3 min is not "research"

Some of us have spent a week looking into this or more since it broke

Again, I dont care what you BELIEVE, were operating off of facts.

I swear this is like trying to explain clouds, to someone that denies clouds exist.

a reply to: SailorJerry

Wrong link. That was me.

a reply to: drewlander

China has banned its citizens from booking overseas tours and purchasing overseas hotels and flight packages amid the Wuhan coronavirus that has killed 42. The Chinese government on Saturday announced a ban on overseas tours and the purchase of flights and hotels abroad, according to a report from The New York Times.

L:iterally 2 second search

That doesnt mean flights returning people to their native countries doesnt exist

Good Christ

a reply to: SailorJerry

You have not provided a source for even 1 fact.