- This topic is empty.
May 10, 2020 at 10:53 #53144Node
Neil Ferguson’s history of wildly inaccurate predictions is on the public record.
His report on which lockdown is based was never published or peer reviewed. If you dispute this, show me where it was published or peer reviewed. I cannot prove a negative.
Up until the end of 2018, Ferguson’s employers, Imperial College, had received $185 million from the Gates Foundation
Yet on the strength of this untested report from an unreliable source with a clear conflict of interest, the WHO changed the course of history.May 10, 2020 at 12:14 #53145Clark
Node, I’m going to cease interacting with you unless you stop advocating for an agenda, start reading what I’ve already written and start discussing, because it is simply a waste of my time. There are many points above, and from weeks back, that you simply ignore. Discussion requires that we achieve consensus as we proceed, or we fail to build a basis for further discussion. I am on the verge of discounting you as insufficiently rational to hold any meaningful discussion with.May 10, 2020 at 13:02 #53147Clark
You need more than conspiracy theory to engage in rational argument. You’re a disgrace; you’re proving Mark Lewis right:
– “I’m quite happy to take their homes off them. If these people would have rational debate, I would do that [instead], but they are nutters who have conspiratorial theories and I will never change their outlook.”May 10, 2020 at 13:04 #53148Clark
Node, you’re undermining freedom of speech and the freedom of the Internet by abusing them. You disgust me.May 10, 2020 at 13:13 #53149Clark
You’re discrediting Craig’s site and thereby discrediting support for the Palestinians, the peace movement and the campaign for human rights. All through your inflated ego, your sense of superiority and your searing sense of self-righteousness. Get a grip, or get lost.May 10, 2020 at 13:23 #53150Clark
For every action there’s a reaction, and one reaction to pigheaded conspiracy theory is that Israel needs nuclear weapons. If rational debate is refused, what option is left but strength of arms?
You disgust me Node.May 10, 2020 at 13:25 #53151Node
Your behaviour towards me is obsessive. It is causing problems for both of us. If you stop interacting with me I will respect that. Quite simply, you stop responding to my posts or referring to me, and I’ll reciprocate.May 10, 2020 at 13:47 #53153SA
“What about you SA? Do you dispute any of my 3 premises or my conclusion that the WHO has changed history on the strength of an untested report from an unreliable source with a clear conflict of interest?”
First I would like you having levelled the charge that a world leading organisation in infectious disease modelling and control is an unreliable source. Could you please provide me with such evidence? I do not think that such a unit with so many world class researchers and publications and funding, in one of the foremost universities in the UK can be dismissed so lightly by you without producing adequate references from reliable sources with knowledge in the area.
Then you say that Ferguson’s group research on Covid-19 is not published. What is this? or is The Lancet not a peer reviewed Journal?
I do not think that the WHO has declared a pandemic purely on the say so of Ferguson’s group. He may be one of the advisers but there are many sources that have led to this declaration.
I notice from your questions that you start off by questioning all recognised ‘authorities’ by either rubbishing them, with no evidence but just because some layman on a website has said they were incompetent and without providing any evidence. As Clark says there is no point in discussing anything if we do not have an agreement on basic facts such as the expertise of known and universally recognised experts. I am not saying that that is sufficient, because that has to be continuously bolstered by their continuing track record. To give an example, although Ioannidis has had an excellent track record, he has recently done things that are against his own advice, rather a poor piece of research, but with a little bit of scientific training anyone can see the weaknesses of his output in this case. Whatever else he says has only been a matter of opinion. The Imperial group, and others are in the heart of this research and have produced many reports, some publications, and guidelines including to our government. To try to undermine them the way you do is a bit too dismissive for me to try and indulge in refutations.May 10, 2020 at 13:51 #53154Clark
I refuse. You have the mind of a Nazi, and I’m calling you out. All decent people must be forever vigilant against the totalitarianism you espouse. Engage rationally, or accept that your views must be suppressed for the greater good. You do have a choice, just as criminality is a choice that risks incarceration. With freedom of expression comes responsibility. Exercise responsibility or lose your freedom, your own and others’.May 10, 2020 at 14:06 #53156Clark
SA, it is agreed that a good test of theory is its ability to make predictions.
I predict that Node will continue as before, ignoring your link to a peer-reviewed article published in the scientific literature, and simply never raising that question again as if he had never raised it in the first place. Node will continue to harp on about other things, effectively changing the subject and forever setting the agenda.
Node has no interest in impartial, objective investigation. Node has very limited curiosity about the natural world. Node’s overriding objective is to win, by any means necessary, just as a government instructs its military.May 10, 2020 at 14:16 #53157Clark
Blood of the Past
All the many corpses begin to speak
What ignorance is cannot be argued over anymore
It is too late for pleading white picket dreams
Print you off, the shemps, the world is shrinking
Rooted in a trivial concern, in interconnectedness
In the need to make face and keep up
And drown out the many voices within
Imagine a culture that has, at its root
A more soulful connection to land and to loved ones
But I can hear the lie before you speak
There is nothing but progress to eat
And we are so fat and so hungry
And the black wrists are cuffed in the pig van
While the white shirt and tie in the tube car, distractional picture
Pictures of beer and guilt about urges
Sexual distrust and abandoned to nothingness
Give me something I can nail myself to
Give me a sharply-dressed talking head
Who has something about them I trust and despise
And what of it, anyway? These windows don’t open
They were designed to stay closed
Shower, smoothie, coffee, commute
Check the internet, never stop, never stop
There is a scar on the soul of the world and it needs you to look
The blood of the past is here, it remains
The blood of the murders, the bodies like sacks leaking brain
All stacked, chest aback on the planes, it remains
To acknowledge without guilt, to accept without condition
And to listen when other people tell you how you have behaved
Truth is, it’s for us to feel and be moved
But I hear the clatter of bone against steel, it is coming
It will not be stilled, it is there
In the air, scorched white
The reflection of sunlight on glass bouncing back into sunlight
And glass bouncing back, industrialized
Denial, business as usual
So roll your eyes, shake your head, turn away and call me names
I’m okay with that, too proud
Unable to listen, we keep speaking
Moted by blood, unable to notice ourselves
Unable to stop and unwilling to learnMay 10, 2020 at 14:22 #53158Clark
I have heard you,
When will you say to us, Node?
Yes Clark, yes SA,
I have heard you.May 10, 2020 at 15:26 #53164Node
To forestall further argument, I see I should have added “up to” to some of Ferguson’s predicted death totals. However all that is necessary for my point is that you agree that Ferguson’s predictions have proven unreliable in the past. Can we agree on that?May 10, 2020 at 16:02 #53165Tony M
Testing is no better and no more accurate than flipping a coin. We’ve been had, some far more than others.May 10, 2020 at 17:13 #53167Clark
And you’d know Tony M, ‘cos you’re an expert.May 10, 2020 at 17:42 #53168Clark
Great sources Node. The Guardian twice; the right-wing, friend-of-the-landowners Spectator (I thought you were above being brainwashed by the “MSM” Node?); some obscure private Washington “non-profit” think-tank-cum-consultancy that seems to have written its own Wikipedia page as an advert; one apparently genuine research institute; and a YooToob by… Wait for it…
UK Column again!!!
…and it was only uploaded since the covid-19 pandemic; axe to grind perhaps?
The chairman of PRB is Amanda Glassman of the Center For Global Development and writes for the Guardian. The PRB’s home page is all about how serious covid-19 is. Their CEO appears to be venture capitalist Jeff Jordan, investing in Belly, Circle, Tilt.com, Fab.com, Instacart, Lookout, Twice, Walker & Co., 500px, Accolade, Pinterest, Fanatics, Julep, and zulily.
– “The Population Reference Bureau receives support from a number of foundations, non-governmental organizations, and government agencies. Examples of such funding include the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the United States Census Bureau, and the World Health Organization“
Node, these are the very people and organisations you claim to be creating a fake pandemic!!! This is why conspiracy theory is so useless; you can “prove” anything with it.
Wanna talk to me about evidence yet, what sort I find convincing and why?May 10, 2020 at 18:09 #53170Clark
So, our expert Node writes:
– “Actually only 178 BSE deaths worldwide”
He means humans killed by variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) not BSE which affects cattle; the 178 were in the UK not worldwide, he omits another 49 in the rest of the world despite them appearing in his own link. Such sloppy work is hard to take seriously.
But something immediately occurs to me; those 227 were indeed killed by vCJD, which is caused by meat contaminated by BSE. So is it really the case that those animals were destroyed unnecessarily?
To find out, I looked at Node’s first link, and guess what, Node has misrepresented the facts. Node’s version; “[Ferguson] Predicted 50K BSE deaths” (actually vCJD). Reality:
– “The Imperial College team predicted that the future number of deaths from Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) due to exposure to BSE in beef was likely to lie between 50 and 50,000″
50 < 227 < 50,000 – so the team that included Ferguson got it right.
I don’t think I’ll bother looking any deeper. Would you trust Node to make medical decisions for your family? Would you even buy a used car from him? What a sloppy twit, leaping to his preferred conclusion and not even bothering to read his own sources. Jeez.
Node, you’re just a conspiracy theorist. I can help you fix that if you like.May 10, 2020 at 18:14 #53171Clark
OK Node, forget that débâcle and never recall it again, right? Onwards and upwards to your next glory! As Tony says, some have been had far more than others…May 10, 2020 at 18:44 #53172Clark
Regarding flu vaccines, what I think happened there was this. The flu vaccination is a precaution, so it has to be administered before the outbreak, so obviously it has to be manufactured before it can be distributed and administered, and this was done and cost a lot of money (a political issue).
When the flu actually came around, a lot of people turned out to have immunity to it, especially older people, who are the ones expected to be more vulnerable, so the vaccine proved less necessary than it might have been.
Now I’m no expert, so what I wrote above might be wrong. But at least I know I’m not an expert. I don’t just see a big price tag and scream “conspiracy!”, assuming I know better than all the world’s experts. It takes a special type of intelligence to do that.May 10, 2020 at 18:47 #53173Clark
Now. Tony M. If you looked at the total excess death figures, ie. the huge rise (and subsequent fall) in the UK death rate since March, you’d realise that it wouldn’t matter even if we had no test at all, there’s still overwhelming evidence for a deadly pandemic.May 10, 2020 at 19:12 #53174SA
I shall give you the benefit of the doubt and answer your ‘accusations’ against Neil Ferguson.
“I was referring to Neil Ferguson, not Imperial College. As I said his record is easily available, but since you insist, here are some of his catastrophic predictions.”
First to address is that you have been referring to Neil Ferguson and not Imperial. But this itself is odd. You don’t really think that an institution like IC would employ someone with a dud reputation did you? Of course you did because later on you dismiss IC with this:
“I am stating as fact that they receive huge sponsorship from an organisation which stands to make billions from covid-19 vaccines, therefore Imperial College has a conflict of interest.”
So really we have a corrupt world famous institution being bribed to produce research that would influence its results so as to comply with its grants.
This is the nitty gritty of conspiracy theories. Everybody is corrupt and therefore you can safely ignore all their lifetime work and even IC is corrupt, Bill Gates is corrupt. Against such CTs there is really no rational discussions. Just please, without offence look at this and tell me: are you really aware of how Universities appoint senior staff, and how the process has safeguards and how important reputations are in this respect, not reputations to CTs but to the scientific communities? Are you aware of how grants are awarded mostly competitively? Is everything that Bill Gates does tainted? Is that because he is interested in vaccinating many people in Africa because they cannot afford it and he is a billionaire, or is that he has evil purposes to exterminate Africans and ultimately rule the world?. I am no apologist for Bill Gates or any billionaire but it is a fact of life that billionaires influence policies and some of them do so by buying news media and become POTUS but at least Bill Gates is at the more benign end and as far as I know his foundation is arms length with full checks. But of course you may choose to differ and I understand why. I do not like the system but try not to blame individuals for trying to do good within a corrupt system.
Then your quotes about Ferguson’s history of predicting this and that. Of course these articles come from The Spectator and the Guardian. And of course they are politically motivated. No doubt Neil Ferguson gave advice on Foot and Mouth, on Bird Flu and other virus epidemics. The decisions taken on his advice were mainly pragmatic and political. He has in the case of Covid 19 made projections which were later modified to take account of changing government policy and revised his predictions downward. So that is what is modelling is about, if you change one of the parameters then the outlook may be different. No doubt deaths from bird flue, BSE and F&MD proved to be less than he predicted, but maybe that was a result of the advise the government followed. If were are to know the truth we would like to have a levelled scientific discussion, not trial by Spectator and Guardian.
And then the CTs are now concentrating on Ferguson, and in so doing probably also are aligning themselves with Dominic Cummings and some of the very vociferous right wing elements in this government who also do not like Ferguson and probably were very pleased to see him go, with the help of the Telegraph (although I agree he was foolish).
But Ferguson is not the only scientist in this, there are many more and there are scientific advisers all over the world, some of them sleeping with mistresses and some not, some tainted by association with Bill Gates and some not. They come from many countries, including places like China, Taiwan, India, Russia, France, Italy Spain, the USA and many others. They all say things that are similar. So why this obsession with Ferguson. Is it because it is the real soft belly that will prove the falsity of the situation, or is a typical CTs diversion?
My challenge to you is simple: please find the equivalent of Ferguson in China, Italy and Spain and any other countries you wish and tell me if their advice is tainted by similar previous failures and associations with Bill Gates.
May 10, 2020 at 20:11 #53177Node
- This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by modbot.
This would be comical if it weren’t so tedious. You never reply to me, you reply to a comic book composite “conspiracy theorist” character which exists only in your mind. Never mind wasting my time, you waste even more of your own. Do us both a favour and reply to what I say, not what your “Grassy Knollington” character says.
I never mentioned corruption. I said “a clear conflict of interest.”May 10, 2020 at 20:47 #53178SA
“I said “a clear conflict of interest.”
Clear to you and of course obscure to all those Universities and grant giving bodies and scientists. I am sorry you find my answers tedious but I really don’t know what you are trying to achieve. I think these are serious matters and to think that you have more insight than the majority scientific opinion, because of articles in the Guardian, the Spectator, OffGuardian, UK Column and other such sites beggars belief. You are right I am wasting my time.
May 10, 2020 at 21:00 #53179SA
- This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by modbot.
“I am stating as fact that they receive huge sponsorship from an organisation which stands to make billions from covid-19 vaccines, therefore Imperial College has a conflict of interest.”
Are these ‘facts’?
- “….they receive huge sponsorship…” They are called grants, sponsorships are what is done in commerce and advertising and there are rules that apply to these grants.
- “….From an organisation that stands to make billions from covid-19 vaccines…” Really? Does the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation make vaccines? Do they make billions currently out of making vaccines to be more available to third world countries that can’t afford them? Is this fact supported by any actual evidence? If so I would like to see this evidence.
You really don’t think that by making these statements you have established that they are facts do you?
So unless we can prove that these are facts and not suppositions we cannot make any progress.May 10, 2020 at 21:07 #53180SA
“This would be comical if it weren’t so tedious”
Indeed it is. My answer to you, because I wanted to treat you with respect, was very detailed and asked many questions which you chose to ignore. Why? Is that because you are seeking the truth? I think not.May 10, 2020 at 21:13 #53181Node
SA. Do you agree that Ferguson’s predictions have proven unreliable in the past?May 10, 2020 at 22:16 #53184SA
“SA. Do you agree that Ferguson’s predictions have proven unreliable in the past?“
Ferguson is a scientist not a fortune teller. Your use of the term predictions shows that you do not understand the essence of what modelling means nor that the possible outcome of this modelling may actually change the course of what might otherwise have happened thereby preventing the “predictions” from materialising.
Your question to me is a trick question. How should I know? And would it matter what I think?May 10, 2020 at 22:28 #53185SA
Sorry of course you did not use any of these terms but you used instead a term, conflict of interest. As a result I asked you whether you were aware of how funding and grants for research is done. Most grant giving bodies want to find the answer to a problem and therefore grants an institution or a scientist best suited to find an answer to the question. That this answer may lead to a commercial benefit to the grant giving body does not produce any conflict of interests as long as they follow the rules of science and verification of results.
But your definition is a wide net that captures almost anything given a grant if given by a commercial body.
And I also asked you valid questions about your concept of “facts”. But you ignored that to to go back to being piqued, because all you wanted is to get me to agree with you about your “facts” without questioning their veracity.May 10, 2020 at 22:28 #53186Tony M
On NV-CJD. Contaminated meat products not necessarily the only cause, not even possibly the greatest cause, you’re omitting potentially contaminated blood and other products, such as human cadaver derived, from hospital mortuary post-mortems where the brain was removed, growth hormone, not banned in the UK till ’85 though nv-cjd cases and deaths in amongst other places France had been a runnning scandal since at least 1982. Not synthesised till about ’87. There would have been legal, medically sanctioned and probable small scale illegal use.
On the other -main topic I’d also raise the outbreak of ‘something’ at Greenspring Retirement Community, Fairfax County, Virginia, 55 miles by road, 40 as the crow flies from Ft. Detrick, in June 2019.May 10, 2020 at 23:01 #53188Node
I came across this bloke many years ago. He is knowledgeable, experienced, and I judge him sincere. His cows trust him 🙂
I found his explanation very plausible, but I’ve never found anyone else explore that avenue so it’s inconclusive.
He’s well worth 36 minutes of your time if you haven’t seen him before.May 10, 2020 at 23:08 #53190Clark
– “Sorry; the remote resource you’re attempting to connect to does not exist.”
SA, Node is simply right; it’s the only possible conclusion. Just grovel for using the wrong word, grovel again for using another verboten term, then tug your forelock three times and all will be well. Learn your place and Node will be happy.
Actually, I don’t understand why Craig permits it. There are quite a number of these effectively empty usernames commenting at this site; it is hard to believe that there are real human beings behind them. They are impervious to reason; they should simply be banned.
Now hear their howls about suppression of their “freedom of speech”, as if they had anything to say.May 10, 2020 at 23:09 #53191Clark
“This bloke”. Now before I go and look, I wonder if this is who I remember…May 10, 2020 at 23:14 #53192SA
Node proves Clark right.
How? Look at his last post. Sticks to one point I raised and leaves it there having ignored a lot of what I said before.
Clark is right. Node does not want a rational discussion.May 10, 2020 at 23:14 #53193Clark
Yep, that’s him; Mark Purdey. The conspiracy theorists seem to think he was outcast by the establishment, but actually his ideas were discussed in the scientific literature, tested, and one was to have some validity. But the conspiracy theorists insist that Purdey’s ideas are the whole story, which is of course the usual obsessive nonsense.
The above was all from memory. I’ll now go and check…May 10, 2020 at 23:16 #53195SA
And if node wants to maintain any credibility he has to answer the questions I asked him several times and not with another question.May 10, 2020 at 23:18 #53196Clark
Node wrote: “but I’ve never found anyone else explore that avenue so it’s inconclusive”. From memory, I found the scientific follow-up pretty easy to find.
Oh look; Purdey has a Wikipedia page! Well fancy that!May 10, 2020 at 23:35 #53198Clark
The article has a whole list of Purdey’s papers published in the scientific literature. His input had considerable influence upon the course of research, eg. “His theories encouraged researchers to publish in 1999 the statistical correlations between the epidemiology of BSE in cattle, scrapie in sheep and vCJD in humans”, and “As more data and research has occurred, Purdey’s theories still appear relevant although untested. As the incidence of BSE and vCJD returns to previous low levels, data which would be useful in determining susceptibility become sparse.”
It’s ironic that conspiracy theorists depict Purdey as having been sidelined and, as Node claimed, “I’ve never found anyone else explore that avenue”. Purdey’s theories were covered by the BBC, the Telegraph and the Ecologist, and gained support and endorsement from Lord King and the Prince of Wales!
But hey, all just lies of the MSM, eh Node? Or not, in this case. See my “What is Conspiracy Theory” thread; “MSM” – (varies at need).
You’re a grade A twit, Node.May 10, 2020 at 23:54 #53199Tony M
Sorry Node, I don’t do youtube. I’ll leave the matter there, have my own experiences of this going back decades having been exposed myself to risk of nv-cjd from medical treatments long ago. Ron Unz’s site is still a bastion of free speech, might see you there. It’s possible, probable no cases are attributable to meat at all. Clark has given his verdict anyway so it’s case closed, he knows best on every subject under the stars, has sycophants and acolytes to back him up if he digs a hole for himself too deep. Hasn’t directly answered his absurd unfounded sweeping generalisation on nv-cjd, have no care anyhow to witness his wriggling and unpleasantness, he lives for argument and denigrating others, to the point of obsession, you’ll always find him on the wrong side of everything, useful only as a bellwether to see where the sheep are being led, nudging the strays -to the slaughter.May 11, 2020 at 00:05 #53201Clark
Tony M, now I realise I don’t have a proper sort of brain like conspiracy theorists do. I realise that I’m too scared of the implications and could never handle the cognitive dissonance to be capable considering the Truth of which you are so keenly aware, that hundreds of nuclear bombs are buried under prominent buildings all over the US just waiting for the day that Larry Silverstein decides to demolish them. I realise that I could never consider such evil as I simply do not possess your degree of freedom of thought. But before I go and discover the Truth of human corpses laden with growth hormone fed to cattle, and strange things 40 miles from Fort Detrick, there’s a much simpler matter we should clear up.
Tony M, May 10, 16:02, #53165 – “Testing is no better and no more accurate than flipping a coin. We’ve been had, some far more than others.”
Please demonstrate to me that you have a functional brain, and that it’s capable of more than merely sneering down at all around you (apart from other conspiracy theorists of course). Have you seen the huge rise and subsequent fall in this year’s overall death figures, beginning in March? Do you understand why that is significant, and why it renders your “point” above (fallacy actually) entirely irrelevant? Because if you don’t, then you don’t possess sufficient reasoning skills to be taken seriously.May 11, 2020 at 00:23 #53203Clark
I suppose I should find it amusing, and I suppose if you were grown men believing in Father Christmas or something I might.
But conspiracy theorists seem obsessed with issues of mass death, and there’s something very distasteful about your arrogance. It appals me that you’re trusted to vote.
- The topic ‘SARS cov2 and Covid 19’ is closed to new replies.