|
|
Post by Gassy on Nov 24, 2020 14:36:16 GMT
So, "some of them covid related" and "Some 2,838 of the deaths involved Covid - 600 more than the preceding week, according to the analysis of death certificates." are very different things. You're aware? You've built a lovely picture about this Neil Ferguson guy and tried desperately to discredit him, without actually understanding the the prediction is from a group at Imperial College London Covid Response Team with 18 others. Sure scientists get some these wrong, just like you got Garner wrong as a good manager. Should we discredit everything you say for the rest of your life? I'm fairly certain you could find incorrect science on every single person, after all - it's all there on Youtube and twitter, isn't it? I remember when the first lockdown came in and you tried to discredit the WHO's prediction of a global pandemic based on their comments in the past about Mugabe. How'd that end up? Looks like you got that spot on. Neil Ferguson, the man from Imperial College that has been funded millions by Bill Gates, who largely funds the WHO. Obviously no potential conflict of interest here. We will skip past the fact the WHO is an organisation led by Tedros Adhanom, formerly of the terrorist Tigray People's Liberation Front. Professor Michael Thrusfield of Edinburgh University described Ferguson's modelling of the British Government’s response to Foot and Mouth Disease in 2001 as “not fit for purpose” (2006) and “seriously flawed” (2012). Similar could be said for his nonsense this time. Professor Neil Ferguson, his conflicts of interest and terrible record: off-guardian.org/2020/05/09/who-controls-the-british-government-response-to-covid-19/Great so you're going to discredit math from 18 people and the Imperial College London Covid Response team with.... your uneducated opinion? (that's not a dig btw, I am uneducated on the matter - pretty sure we all are. Unless you hold a degree/masters in predictive modelling?) No comments on your pandemic prediction in relation to the WHO? What about Garner? Leahy? Something that springs to mind here and will relate to you as you quite like to post pictures:  |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,466 
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Nov 24, 2020 14:44:54 GMT
Told you we’d start going down even more bonkers conspiracy wormholes lads . Strap up...... What bonkers conspiracy wormholes? The only wormhole i can see is the one your head is stuck in. None so blind as those who will not see. Crack on Pirate 🏴☠️ |
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 19,461
|
Post by pirate on Nov 24, 2020 15:19:12 GMT
Neil Ferguson, the man from Imperial College that has been funded millions by Bill Gates, who largely funds the WHO. Obviously no potential conflict of interest here. We will skip past the fact the WHO is an organisation led by Tedros Adhanom, formerly of the terrorist Tigray People's Liberation Front. Professor Michael Thrusfield of Edinburgh University described Ferguson's modelling of the British Government’s response to Foot and Mouth Disease in 2001 as “not fit for purpose” (2006) and “seriously flawed” (2012). Similar could be said for his nonsense this time. Professor Neil Ferguson, his conflicts of interest and terrible record: off-guardian.org/2020/05/09/who-controls-the-british-government-response-to-covid-19/Great so you're going to discredit math from 18 people and the Imperial College London Covid Response team with.... your uneducated opinion? (that's not a dig btw, I am uneducated on the matter - pretty sure we all are. Unless you hold a degree/masters in predictive modelling?) Professor Ferguson has been wrong every time with his modelling predictions. As people with an "educated opinion" have previously said, such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, who claimed the model for Foot and Mouth was “severely flawed”, “not fit for purpose” and the event a “serious error”. The same for Covid this time, with Professor Michael Levitt, a biophysicist from the Department of Structural Biology in the School of Medicine at Stanford University, and a recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 2013, who said: "The fact is that epidemiology and modelling has been a disgrace. They have not looked at the data. They have been wrong at every turn. We’re going to see that, although coronavirus is a different disease, the net impact of death is going to be very similar to severe flu. And it’s going to be that way without lockdown." |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Nov 24, 2020 15:51:35 GMT
Great so you're going to discredit math from 18 people and the Imperial College London Covid Response team with.... your uneducated opinion? (that's not a dig btw, I am uneducated on the matter - pretty sure we all are. Unless you hold a degree/masters in predictive modelling?) Professor Ferguson has been wrong every time with his modelling predictions. As people with an "educated opinion" have previously said, such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, who claimed the model for Foot and Mouth was “severely flawed”, “not fit for purpose” and the event a “serious error”. The same for Covid this time, with Professor Michael Levitt, a biophysicist from the Department of Structural Biology in the School of Medicine at Stanford University, and a recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 2013, who said: "The fact is that epidemiology and modelling has been a disgrace. They have not looked at the data. They have been wrong at every turn. We’re going to see that, although coronavirus is a different disease, the net impact of death is going to be very similar to severe flu. And it’s going to be that way without lockdown." Yes 15 years ago it looks like he was. You'd think he'd improve, along with the 17 colleagues and Imperial College London Covid Response Team. All you have is 1 person you don't like from 15 years ago - argue with facts, maths and evidence Pirate. Can you do that? Where is Michael's data? Where are his predictions, Pirate? It's easy to just say 'the data is wrong' - so prove it. That's how science works. But let's dig deeper into your Michael's predictions shall we? Because actually, we can look at his predictions with data that you idolise. In July Michael Levitt said that "US COVID19 will be done in 4 weeks with a total reported death below 170,000. How will we know it is over? Like for Europe, when all cause excess deaths are at normal level for week. Reported Covid19 deaths may continue after 25 Aug. & reported cases will, but it will be over." Michael on testing "At some point we are going to get tired of testing. It’s a huge waste of money, which could much better go to helping people who have lost their jobs and homeless people. It’s great for the pharmaceutical companies selling test kits but it’s not doing anything good.” Michael on the 2nd wave: "I don’t think coronavirus where will be a winter wave of any substance." Michael on the lockdown: "It was probably wrong of me to say that lockdown was a mistake." On the 25th of February 2020 your boy Michael predicted that the virus had almost run its course, and that the final death toll in China would be 3,250. On March 20th he said that “he will be surprised if the number of deaths in Israel surpasses 10“. On March 28th, when Switzerland had 197 deaths, he predicted the pandemic was almost over and would end with 250. On June 28th he predicted deaths in Brazil would plateau at 98,000. There have been over 137,000 deaths in Brazil with hundreds of people dying every day now In Italy he predicted on March 28th that the pandemic was past its midpoint and deaths would end at 17,000 – 20,000. There have now been 35,707 deaths in Italy. Thank god he was there to tell us they haven't looked at the data. Need I go on? |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,466
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Nov 24, 2020 16:02:04 GMT
Professor Ferguson has been wrong every time with his modelling predictions. As people with an "educated opinion" have previously said, such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, who claimed the model for Foot and Mouth was “severely flawed”, “not fit for purpose” and the event a “serious error”. The same for Covid this time, with Professor Michael Levitt, a biophysicist from the Department of Structural Biology in the School of Medicine at Stanford University, and a recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 2013, who said: "The fact is that epidemiology and modelling has been a disgrace. They have not looked at the data. They have been wrong at every turn. We’re going to see that, although coronavirus is a different disease, the net impact of death is going to be very similar to severe flu. And it’s going to be that way without lockdown." Yes 15 years ago it looks like he was. You'd think he'd improve, along with the 17 colleagues and Imperial College London Covid Response Team. All you have is 1 person you don't like from 15 years ago - argue with facts, maths and evidence Pirate. Can you do that? Where is Michael's data? Where are his predictions, Pirate? It's easy to just say 'the data is wrong' - so prove it. That's how science works. But let's dig deeper into your Michael's predictions shall we? Because actually, we can look at his predictions with data that you idolise. In July Michael Levitt said that "US COVID19 will be done in 4 weeks with a total reported death below 170,000. How will we know it is over? Like for Europe, when all cause excess deaths are at normal level for week. Reported Covid19 deaths may continue after 25 Aug. & reported cases will, but it will be over." Michael on testing "At some point we are going to get tired of testing. It’s a huge waste of money, which could much better go to helping people who have lost their jobs and homeless people. It’s great for the pharmaceutical companies selling test kits but it’s not doing anything good.” Michael on the 2nd wave: "I don’t think coronavirus where will be a winter wave of any substance." Michael on the lockdown: "It was probably wrong of me to say that lockdown was a mistake." On the 25th of February 2020 your boy Michael predicted that the virus had almost run its course, and that the final death toll in China would be 3,250. On March 20th he said that “he will be surprised if the number of deaths in Israel surpasses 10“. On March 28th, when Switzerland had 197 deaths, he predicted the pandemic was almost over and would end with 250. On June 28th he predicted deaths in Brazil would plateau at 98,000. There have been over 137,000 deaths in Brazil with hundreds of people dying every day now In Italy he predicted on March 28th that the pandemic was past its midpoint and deaths would end at 17,000 – 20,000. There have now been 35,707 deaths in Italy. Thank god he was there to tell us they haven't looked at the data. Need I go on? Pirate will just move onto more graphs and more crackpot theories until he batters us all into submission. |
|
|
|
Post by Westy on Nov 24, 2020 18:11:04 GMT
So you're saying that Dr Yeadon is a right wing conspiracy theorist? Basically? AND - you can't throw out a *that's a conspiracy theory* accusation, and then cite Wikipedia. That's just poor form. Attack the content not the host. Trump has Twitter. Do you use Twitter? Does that make every Twitter user a Trump supporter? Cos from what I've seen, that one doesn't add up either. With all of the garbage on the internet, you just aren't going to get far by linking to dodgy image boards, the gutter of the internet (yes, even below football forums) Handy for people to know that the link they may be unwittingly clicking on is from a site that may contain right wing racist views and other hateful things that bristol rovers wouldn't want to be associated with in any way. Yeah the Dr/scientist makes points which absolutely need to be listened to & discussed, surely he has written researched medical articles/books on the subject? Twitter is a moderated platform, and your argument there is odd to say the least. Saville was on the BBC. Trump is on Twitter. Tommy Robinson has Facebook. Pedophiles use the internet. Rapists read newspapers. Shall I go on? (Haven't picked this thread up as been busy so will be back in a few days to have a trawl and get into things properly! 🙏) |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,466
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Nov 24, 2020 23:25:08 GMT
With all of the garbage on the internet, you just aren't going to get far by linking to dodgy image boards, the gutter of the internet (yes, even below football forums) Handy for people to know that the link they may be unwittingly clicking on is from a site that may contain right wing racist views and other hateful things that bristol rovers wouldn't want to be associated with in any way. Yeah the Dr/scientist makes points which absolutely need to be listened to & discussed, surely he has written researched medical articles/books on the subject? Twitter is a moderated platform, and your argument there is odd to say the least. Saville was on the BBC. Trump is on Twitter. Tommy Robinson has Facebook. Pedophiles use the internet. Rapists read newspapers. Shall I go on? (Haven't picked this thread up as been busy so will be back in a few days to have a trawl and get into things properly! 🙏) Yeah , go on . It’s amusing . |
|
