Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "Bob Woodward on Milley's call to China: His whole point is that miscommunication is the seed of war" video.

Actually by December 2019, US studies on blood samples show that 1.5% of the US population already have C19 antibodies. Thats 4 million people! Backtracking the numbers back to patient zero in the US, its estimated that the virus was already present in the US Aug 2019.
2
@geoffreyk9164 Google string: "US blood covid antibodies studies december 2019" Nothing is misleading. You will find the actual US study on that matter. First link.
1
@tudeslildude There was also the "mysterious vaping illness" that was spreading during that time (that apparently ONLY the US had). It had the EXACT same symptoms as C19. And multiple retirement centres in the US was also affected with the EXACT same symptoms as C19 as well.
1
@geoffreyk9164 You have failed to state what exactly was misleading. The US research shows that of all the 9 US states studied in December 2019, 1.5% of the people had C19 antibodies. That means they already contracted the virus and recovered. If 100% of all studied states had antibodies, its safe to say that is also the same across all states, that is, 1.5% of the US population. That is, over 4 million people. Using science to backtrack transmissibility of a virus, patient zero dates back to July/Aug 2019. Or did you think 4 million infections can happen over a couple months?
1
@geoffreyk9164 "You seem to be taking the findings of this report and back calculating to July or August, but that is not what these studies have concluded" I never said thats what the REPORT concluded. I SPECIFICALLY said "its ESTIMATED that the virus was already present in the US Aug 2019" I never said that IN THE REPORT, thats what is concluded. Your comment is now flagged as misleading. I'll ask you again, did you think that 4 million people can be infected in just a couple of months?
1
@geoffreyk9164 "Firstly, there is only one authorized fact checker assigned per video and in this instance it is me" Your post has again, also been flagged as false. Ill say your words right back at you: "there is no verified fact to support your claim". "Any “flags” contributed by @Yerris are illegitimate and should be ignored" You have no authority to determine that, Mr self-appointed "authorized fact checker". You need to get a life. Stop pretending to be some sort of "authorized fact checker" when youre not. Why dont you fact check CNN themselves? CNN present false and misleading information all the time. "Secondly, yes, that is correct, as I clearly stated you have taken a report that appears to otherwise be legitimate and back calculated to a patient zero some time in July or August 2019" Wrong! I SPECIFICALLY said that was an ESTIMATION in my initial comment. YOU are the one that claimed that I said thats what the REPORT CONCLUDED. I NEVER said thats what the report concluded.
1
@geoffreyk9164 "Firstly, there is only one authorized fact checker assigned per video and in this instance it is me" Because you said so, therefore it must be true? There are literally hundreds of millions of videos on Youtube and you dare say that there are so-called "authorized fact checkers" for each of these videos? Back at you: "This post is flagged as false". "Any “flags” contributed by @Yerris are illegitimate and should be ignored" You have no have authority to determine that. Who do you think you are? "I work for the Annenberg Public Policy Center, which is contracted by Google to conduct fact check exercises on this platform" You work on a Friday night? What a joke. You made your last comment around 2am Pennsylvania time, where Annenberg Public Policy Center is located. You can fool others but you cant fool me. "Thirdly, I clearly stated that the report did not conclude the July/August estimate for Covid-19 Patient Zero in the US and that it was you who were back calculating this figure." You stated "You were flagged because you are misstating the findings of this report". Like I said, I did NOT misstate anything. I never claimed the estimated were FROM that report. It was YOU that misread that. How can someone that claims to be an "authorized fact checker" not able to read or comprehend English properly? "What I clearly did say is that no vetted and verified source has drawn this same conclusion as you. As a result, there is no verified evidence to support your claim, hence your original comment was flagged." Oh yeh? Might as well flag CNN for their comments/information too. Why dont you do that? In fact you yourself have made things that arent vetted nor can be verified. Mr "authorized fact checker". Lets verify that first. Cant do that can you?
1
@geoffreyk9164 "This post is flagged as false" You can stop your robotic nonsense now. What in my last comment is "false"? Moreover, since you claim you are "authorised", then youre a "professional" in your line of work, meaning you had a duty to be "correct". In Youtubes platform, you cant flag anyone for something thats "false". Only "Unwanted commercial content or spam, Pornography or sexually explicit material, Child abuse, Hate speech or graphic violence, or Harassment or bullying". NOWHERE you can report for an alleged "false" post. The fact that youve stated that you can "flag" my comment as "false" is false in itself. You lied. Ill say it again, you can fool others but you cant fool me. "There is only one authorized fact checker assigned per video and in this instance it is me" More copy paste robotic nonsense. There is no vetted nor verified source that can verify your claims. Hence, your claim is false. How do you like that? "Any “flags” contributed by @Yerris are illegitimate and should be ignored" Again, you have NO authority to determine that. You and your imaginary authority. You need to get a life. "There is only one authorized fact checker and only one authorized fact check organization, the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC)" Lies. The Annenberg Public Policy Center in itself is not a "fact check ORGANIZATION" in itself. They do however, have a project dedicated to fact checking. But even so, the task is to "monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by MAJOR U.S. POLITICAL PLAYERS in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases", not comments of common people on the internet. Like I said, you can fool others but you cant fool me. Moreover, there are MANY authorised fact checking organsations out there. And APPC is NOT one of them. "Regarding your insistence that I am not understanding you, you are mistaken. As I clearly said, I understand that the report did not draw the conclusion of the July/August estimate. This is your estimate. My point is that there are no verified facts to support this claim. Simply stated, you have misunderstood the report" More Lies. You did not "simply state" that I "misunderstood the report". You said I "misstated" the findings of the report, when I NEVER stated those estimates were from THAT report. And neither did I "misunderstood" the report. Can one not incorporate findings elsewhere to make a statement? It is YOU that misread. You need to work on your English before pretending to correct others. Also, its not "MY" estimate, that is SCIENCES estimate. I merely stated an estimate based off calculations on backtracking transmissiblity of the virus by its R0. R0 is already known, its a matter of mathematics in determining the numbers, and mathematics is NOT "false" nor "misleading". Me stating legitimate estimates outside of the report is also NOT "false" nor "misleading". Bringing in science is into a scientific topic is NOT "misleading". Your comment itself is misleading.
1