The figure is not bogus, how one interprets the figure is the point of contention.
It’s bogus because of the deeply flawed math that resulted in a bogus 6% figure.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The figure is not bogus, how one interprets the figure is the point of contention.
It’s bogus because of the deeply flawed math that resulted in a bogus 6% figure.
Again, you’re referencing a claim based upon the 6% figure, not the figure itself. Unless the CDC used “deeply flawed math” to come to the figure, it isn’t bogus. It’s straight from the CDC. The figure itself is not bogus, only how people interpret the figure can arguably be considered bogus. I again refer you to the CDC statement copy and pasted above.
I never said that only 6% of deaths were caused by Covid, only that this is more likely than the alternative mainstream narrative that 100% of listed deaths were.
I’ve already been through the faulty reasoning of the ‘fact-checkers’ and also realize the claims they are ‘fact-checking’ in many cases are also based upon faulty interpretation of the CDC data. I never made the claim you reference which the ‘fact-checkers’ deemed bogus, and plenty of mainstream outlet headlines read similar to mine: “94% of ‘covid’ Deaths had underlying conditions”. I did, however, expose how the ‘fact-checker’ logic was as equally flawed as the ‘bogus’ claims they were supposedly ‘fact-checking’...