funny isn't it?purpleprairiecat wrote: ↑June 29th, 2020, 9:42 pmYou appear to have used three sources for your information. You should list them all so that readers can check this out unless you are trying to hide the sources. The first graph that you used is from a Google search that is impossible for readers to verify. Honestly, I don't trust that graph. For one thing, the data are over a week old. The numbers also are not matching with data that I found from the Georgia Department of Public Health (https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report) and from the CDC COVID Data Tracker website (https://www.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases)
the data/graphs were taken from the Georgia Department of Public Health just a few short hours ago. the graphs are from HERE: https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report
Georgie department of Health. Look at that. same site you accessed. I just put the two graphs side by side via extra effort on my part so as to help avoid confusion. that clearly worked.
perhaps you can tell me how this data is DIFFERENT than what CDC has? I'd be curious. meanwhile, take a bit of a read: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/arch ... as/611935/
the death rates for the WORLD are from here: https://www.statista.com/chart/21170/co ... worldwide/
the death rates for STATES are from here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/110 ... -by-state/
so, no, not 'three different sources'. but two for sure (technically, statistica is a compilation from multiple sources ).
Data are based on reports by states and counties at the time of publication. Local governments may revise reported numbers as they get new information.
first because the presentation of the data makes it easy enough to understand AND covers off on the confirmed versus 'yet to be confirmed' concerns voiced. (Georgia department of health: show me another state that makes the data as easy to understand)
dig into the data for statistica. tell me how it's wrong. if you look up above, there's 'some' question into the validity of the way CDC is/has reported data.
but you knew that, right?
I just LOVE how the 'brush back/go to' pitch is to call into question the data source, but you never ever seem to present facts to support your aspersions.
if you're gonna tell me I'm wrong, better figure to tell me HOW I'm wrong. just don't be lazy about it.