cmorg

Perhaps this one will help explain the situation better. In the context of the current situation (crisis?), you can see that 42% (shown in the purple) is the same as the 42% (shown in reddish), which means that 84% is what we are looking at. In terms of the breakdown, that only leaves 16% . . . 16%!!! Is that enough? Only time will tell.

Me neither/too.

All I know is that I am pretty sure I had ebola the other day, but I feel better now.

The text in the chart is simply the color key: the exception being black = average. What's important is the change between set one and set three of the relation of orange and yellow - more importantly: what this means to all of us in the end. If the rise in one group (and necessary drop in another) continues in this way, there will be significant changes upon extrapolation.

This chart explains what we are currently facing at it pertains to daily (and even monthly) timelines and the expected growth rate. Notice the changes in the ranges of each group and how each one relates to the other. It really makes you think.

I agree with you about agreeing with pubby.

It is unlikely that such a question will ever be asked of any presidential candidates. It is less likely that, if asked, any candidate would answer the question with any specific points; rather, their response would consist of double-talk and rhetoric. Even less likely is a candidate actually having a realistic plan to balance the budget and pay the debt. But it is a great question.

It is. And so is this . . . From the WHO International website:

Here's some funny ebola news . . .

The wife showed me a pic from Facebook of a man who supposedly died from ebola - then came back from the dead. They are calling him (and others like him) ebola zombies. But I will wait to hear this from a real news source first. If you are suggesting republicans would be zombies, then that will be the end of mankind. Think about it: Republicans turn into zombies; if the old zombie movies are correct, the newly formed zombies will be on the hunt for brains; since all republicans are zombies, all that will be left are liberals and democrats - the zombies will starve and

I'm still waiting for you to tell the truth - any truth. In fact, forget the truth, I'll settle for a hint of sanity.

You are right. According to WHO . . . But the symptoms issue is a bit troubling . . . Those are the early symptoms. Do they seem all that bad, or more like a cold or flu? Based on those symptoms, would you assume you had ebola? Or would you wait until the advanced symptoms to worry . . . I would suggest we all be careful - not Chinese-wearing-dust-masks-careful, just normal careful. The above quotes are from the WHO website.

I agree with your friend. You are a big idiot. jk

I don't really see where I was being an ass just by posting direct examples that truly contradict your statements. I can tell you one thing: The last poster actually gives me a new respect for you. At least you hang in there and attempt to stick to your guns.

No, it is not your place to interpret it - nor is there a need, for it is pretty clear. And you're right, most Muslims don't take that (or the many other) verses to heart, just as Christians and Jews don't take any similar type of verse from the Old Testament to heart in that way. The problem is that there are many Muslims who do take it as a mandate of what their actions should be. But, rather than arguing against a plain fact, maybe you will come to a clearer understanding . . . insha'Allah.

You can't get even the basics right! That chicken is not fried.

No. And I will not be surprised when they announce more cases have been diagnosed.

Well I am so glad that every precaution is being taken, and people travelling from that region undergo intense screeing - like the president said a few weeks ago. That did a lot of good.

One interpretation? Ok, what is your interpretation of this verse from the Koran (Quran 8:12):

And if you ask different people to assign a color to a sunset, you might get red, orange, pink, and shades of purple. Yet they are all correct. You are reaching to find a contradiction.

This is the type of rant I would expect from a child. No reason involved, no rationale involved, not even any perspective involved. If your goal was to hit a new low, you have succeeded. Everything you said (though I sure it was exaggerated for the purpose of mockery) is simply absurd. I bet most of us have given up on you ever actually reasonably engaging in any type of meaningful dialog about this . . or anything. You can't - or won't - stay on subject; you almost always look for some example from our past to excuse what is happening today; or you use way too many words

Maybe the call was in reference to your Persian mail-order bride.

Excellent point!

I really get tired of this kind of stuff. The Constitution says that congress cannot make any law that establishes an official religion. That's it. Even the argument that allowing religious symbols or activities is an endorsement of religion doesn't stand up, because an endorsement does not constitute a law. And what's with agnostics? To me, they are too arrogant to admit that God exists, but too scared to say he doesn't.

So . . . he thought a show called "My Mother the Car" was not stupid, but a show about people being stranded on a tropical island was? I'd call that a bad career choice.