Statistics 101 Proves Their Lies on Ebola

We're being told there is a 0% chance of getting Ebola without direct contact with an infected carrier (who is symptomatic, no less) and a 100% chance it will be contained.

I vaguely remember from college statistics class something about the "confidence interval" in a statistical model, that being the measure of the reliability of a model. I was hazy most of those days (re: High), but I seem to remember there being a rule against ever using 100% or 0% in any modeling exercise. Can't remember if it had to do with the Uncertainty Principle or Unknown Population Parameters, I just know no real scientist would ever use either 100% or 0% and expect to be taken seriously.

Bottom line, the more certitude in their language and assurances, the more you can be sure its nothing but a nice, warm tit of lies meant to suckle you soundly back to sleep.

/end rant/