But that's not what the graphs are showing. The graphs are showing continuous infections over February, March and April. Those are not unknown future times. Tho

But that's not what the graphs are showing. The graphs are showing continuous infections over February, March and April. Those are not unknown future times. Those are past times with existent data. There's no reason not to represent those data as clearly as possible. Which a logarithmic scale does not. Again graphs should serve one purpose. The purpose of those graphs is clearly, by the axis labels, supposed to display continuous deaths over a set period of time. The linearly scaled graph displays this clearly, the logarithmic one does not. If the x-axis displayed into some future time, yes I'd agree a logarithmic scale may be more appropriate. But that would be displaying a graph of predictions at that point, which is something totally different than the two example graphs are showing.