Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:52 am  

coco the fullback wrote:

You do know that's not 18,627 unique individual visitors, right?

P.S. who toes Boris' line? He (but probably Cummings) has got almost everything wrong in response to this pandemic. That's why we're still in such deep doodoo after all this intervention.

Oh dear coco, what do you take me for, "unique visitors" indeed.
The straws you grasp trying to discredit me are unbelievable.

However, it's better than unique, it proves people are coming back and are enthralled by the discussion perhaps.

So Cummings has got almost everything" wrong" has he?
Pretty much what I have been saying then

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:54 am  

Billy Butcher wrote:

Over 18,000 views suggests that ‘THEY’ are on to you Miro.

Run. Go into hiding. While you still can.

Yes Billy boy, that's probably correct in your New World Order.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:10 pm  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote:

No you didn't say 600,000 was a large percentage of the USA that's not what I asked, read my post again I asked what the population of the USA was and what proportion 600,000 is of that to put that in perspective along side you beating the drum about 99.7% being unaffected by the virus from a health point of view.

My ridiculous argument, there you go straight on the defensive as usual and attack with information that can be rubbished, that's why its pointless debating with someone like you.

Now can you answer my question please you like one way traffic don't you but a bit of scrutiny in your analysis and everyone else is

If you want to start going down to slagging people off for putting a question good luck because you will be arguing with yourself. So thanks for the crazy emoji was that aimed at me or you?

Then what were you inferring here, why bring up 600,000 as a percentage?

You said
Can you tell me before I tell you the population of the USA and what percentage 600,000 people is.

I took it as you indicating that 600,000 was a small number of Americans and therefore inferring I was indicating that it was a large number of Americans.

So what were you inferring?

I asked
First of all I never claimed 600,000 was a large percentage of the USA population so why bring that up?

How is that slagging you off?

The crazy emoji ? Well you, if you buy a used car from Texas Pete after reading 600 complaints about him...logical?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:17 pm  

coco the fullback wrote:

I'm beginning to worry about your grasp of basic arithmetic.
The whole population of the USA has probably not visited Texas Pete's.
I would perhaps look at how many people had visited and if it was 600 complaints out of 700 customers then I'd probably steer clear.

P.S. I'll respond to your earlier post when I get chance to do some research.

Never mind "probably," I would stay clear if it was 600 people in the whole world, never mind Texas or the US. I would stay clear no matter what.

"The whole population of the USA has probably not visited Texas Pete's."

Yes, and my guess is that the vast majority of Americans have never heard, or know anything about Bill Gates either making the 600,000 an even more impressive figure.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:43 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote: I read this last night and thought that I'd accidentally logged on to RL Fans: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/53191523 Dont know if i'm adding fuel to Miro's fire or have just found one of his sources: And the unfounded smears continue to roll in.. I have never mentioned 5G in relation to c-19, at least not as a cause or delivering similar symptoms. In fact I don't believe I have discussed the ins and outs of 5G at all . Nor do I believe I have ever said digital I/D will be in the vaccine Why the smear? For those who cannot access the link. It basically attempts to de-bunk the above allegation inferred by the poster wrencat. However, it is BBC policy to refuse to discuss vaccines with anyone who question or opposes Bills vaccine. See article by the BBCs Emma Barrett for proof. Therefore why anyone would go to the BBC for information on vaccines is anyone's guess. MY other guess is that the same policy applies to 5G as well as a multitude of other subjects.. Censorship by omission.

wrencat1873 wrote: I read this last night and thought that I'd accidentally logged on to RL Fans: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/53191523 Dont know if i'm adding fuel to Miro's fire or have just found one of his sources: And the unfounded smears continue to roll in.. I have never mentioned 5G in relation to c-19, at least not as a cause or delivering similar symptoms. In fact I don't believe I have discussed the ins and outs of 5G at all . Nor do I believe I have ever said digital I/D will be in the vaccine Why the smear? For those who cannot access the link. It basically attempts to de-bunk the above allegation inferred by the poster wrencat. However, it is BBC policy to refuse to discuss vaccines with anyone who question or opposes Bills vaccine. See article by the BBCs Emma Barrett for proof. Therefore why anyone would go to the BBC for information on vaccines is anyone's guess. MY other guess is that the same policy applies to 5G as well as a multitude of other subjects.. Censorship by omission.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 1:24 pm  

Miro wrote:

And the unfounded smears continue to roll in..
I have never mentioned 5G in relation to c-19, at least not as a cause or delivering similar symptoms.
In fact I don't believe I have discussed the ins and outs of 5G at all .

Nor do I believe I have ever said digital I/D will be in the vaccine Why the smear?

For those who cannot access the link. It basically attempts to de-bunk the above allegation inferred by the poster wrencat. However, it is BBC policy to refuse to discuss vaccines with anyone who question or opposes Bills vaccine.
See article by the BBCs Emma Barrett for proof.
Therefore why anyone would go to the BBC for information on vaccines is anyone's guess. MY other guess is that the same policy applies to 5G as well as a multitude of other subjects..
Censorship by omission.

So, you try to discredit EVERY government on the planet (in your (many) previous posts), you discredit the BBC's information and refuse to acknowledge the "bilk" of their article, which was designed to "out" people who, like yourself, have looked for just about every angle to convince "us" that Covid is anything from "non existent" to some kind of "world reset" mechanism.
Sorry but, you do appear to be fighting a lone (well 2 person) battle on here and despite your 600,000 petition regarding Bill Gates, you have nothing but conjecture for the vast, vast majority of your argument.
A "few" signatories on the "declaration" that you posted, pales into insignificance against the huge numbers of medics that believe the world to be following "roughly" the right path to deal with the pandemic and I repeat that, YOU have thrown up so many different reasons for "everyone else" being wrong that your posts look evermore desperate.
And now you have the BBC as "censored".
You keep talking about "Bills vaccine" and yet every country that is half capable, is looking for their own "cure", I dont see any of them relying on Bill.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:26 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

So, you try to discredit EVERY government on the planet (in your (many) previous posts), you discredit the BBC's information and refuse to acknowledge the "bilk" of their article, which was designed to "out" people who, like yourself, have looked for just about every angle to convince "us" that Covid is anything from "non existent" to some kind of "world reset" mechanism.
Sorry but, you do appear to be fighting a lone (well 2 person) battle on here and despite your 600,000 petition regarding Bill Gates, you have nothing but conjecture for the vast, vast majority of your argument.
A "few" signatories on the "declaration" that you posted, pales into insignificance against the huge numbers of medics that believe the world to be following "roughly" the right path to deal with the pandemic and I repeat that, YOU have thrown up so many different reasons for "everyone else" being wrong that your posts look evermore desperate.
And now you have the BBC as "censored".
You keep talking about "Bills vaccine" and yet every country that is half capable, is looking for their own "cure", I dont see any of them relying on Bill.

I ask you again, how does the BBC article “out” me.

you say:
you discredit the BBC's information.
And now you have the BBC as "censored"

As did there own reporter the BBC Reporter Emma Barrett. Who are you to argue with her? At least I give credit where credits due.
Check out vintage reporter Eamonn Holmes, GMT, SKY News etc. too for his take on what journalists have NOT been allowed to take the government to task on. Very, very interesting.

There are also a huge number of medics on our side, those not financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. i.e. Independent scientists and medics.

600,000 is a”few”? Get real.
I believe I'm being very fair to Bill. I could list the many allegations but fair do's, lets see if the investigations come to anything.
However, these billionaires never have to stand trial do they? I give you Tony “weapons of mass destruction” Blair just for starters.

Bill Gates is funding the vaccine programme except maybe in Russia.
Yes, many labs are supposedly working on it, each have their own expertise, but Bill Gates is funding the majority of it and what he says go's i.e he who pays the piper calls the tune. Pity he has zero scientific or medical background.
Tell you what, when it comes out, lets see who is behind it. My money is on Bill Gates. Who do you think will be behind it? Would you like to place a bet?
That is a vaccine for the 99.9% who have survived very well without it. 100% in my circle.

As for only two people on here. You know it's more than that, more fakery from you to add to your 5G smear and fake allegations.

As for “only 2” smear. Look through history, many folk stood alone against what they believed was wrong and history proved them right. Trust me, I , or we, are in excellent company.

Not that we are alone, a million plus demonstrators in Germany for instance also, Would you like some of those examples from history?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:45 pm  

Miro wrote:

I ask you again, how does the BBC article “out” me.

you say:
you discredit the BBC's information.
And now you have the BBC as "censored"

As did there own reporter the BBC Reporter Emma Barrett. Who are you to argue with her? At least I give credit where credits due.
Check out vintage reporter Eamonn Holmes, GMT, SKY News etc. too for his take on what journalists have NOT been allowed to take the government to task on. Very, very interesting.

There are also a huge number of medics on our side, those not financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. i.e. Independent scientists and medics.

600,000 is a”few”? Get real.
I believe I'm being very fair to Bill. I could list the many allegations but fair do's, lets see if the investigations come to anything.
However, these billionaires never have to stand trial do they? I give you Tony “weapons of mass destruction” Blair just for starters.

Bill Gates is funding the vaccine programme except maybe in Russia.
Yes, many labs are supposedly working on it, each have their own expertise, but Bill Gates is funding the majority of it and what he says go's i.e he who pays the piper calls the tune. Pity he has zero scientific or medical background.
Tell you what, when it comes out, lets see who is behind it. My money is on Bill Gates. Who do you think will be behind it? Would you like to place a bet?
That is a vaccine for the 99.9% who have survived very well without it. 100% in my circle.

As for only two people on here. You know it's more than that, more fakery from you to add to your 5G smear and fake allegations.

As for “only 2” smear. Look through history, many folk stood alone against what they believed was wrong and history proved them right. Trust me, I , or we, are in excellent company.

Not that we are alone, a million plus demonstrators in Germany for instance also, Would you like some of those examples from history?

Miro, I fully accept that people are getting hacked of with restrictions being placed on their way of life and it's probably fair to say that EVERYONE would prefer to have things back the way they were at the start of the year, myself included.
However, this isn't to say that they totally disagree with how things have "moved". I would suggest that its borne out of frustration and I would also expect that as time goes by, there will be some civil unrest, just as there has been in Italy.

However, dont confuse peoples frustration with them agreeing to some of your many theories.

I'm not sure that anyone knows how this thing will play out but, my best guess and it's only a guess, is that, either a vaccine will be found, even if it's something that will buy time or, that we reach a point where enough people protest and eventually, governments around the world will "gamble" and undo the many restrictions and see what the fall out is.

Perhaps we hit a point where fewer and fewer people die from the virus and therefore it becomes like a severe dose of flu, still killing big numbers but maybe at a level that governments are happy to "accept".

As I say, I dont know and I'm not sure anyone else does at this point in time.

"The World" is gambling on finding an effective vaccine and quick but, despite your many theories, I'm still not seeing a global re-set. It will be more like a recovery plan for many, many nations that are on their economic backsides.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:45 pm  

coco the fullback wrote: You seem to be generally agreeing with the WHO's stance that lockdowns should only be used as a method of getting the spread back under control and buy some time to put other measures in place. The number one priority was to 'flatten the curve' to avoid systemic breakdown, but this also has the effect (if done properly) of delaying the worst impact and eventually (assuming an effective vaccine) save lives. The problem is it's a false dichotomy. You can't compare 'lockdown' with 'no lockdown' as if it's action or no action. There are many ways to reduce the spread which do not require a full lockdown, depending on the progress of the virus. For starters, how is a 'lockdown' defined? Comparing curves of those with 'lockdown' and those without is somewhat unscientific. What exactly are you comparing? Are you taking into consideration other measures short of a full 'lockdown'? What about the timing? Did you compare all countries you considered to have a lockdown with all those that didn't? or just cherry-pick a few? The study I quoted earlier into the Wuhan lockdown went to great pains mathematically to separate the effects of different actions and found a significant impact of lockdown itself. The virus increases exponentially, but the curve is in reality it's a logistic function, it cannot go on forever as there are not an infinite number of people, but without herd immunity via a vaccine the curve has fake peaks by increasing or decreasing measures to reduce the R number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_ ... a_pandemic Other actions/restrictions will have an effect on the spread, but much slower. Where i live there was no lockdown, but they severely restricted movement in and out of districts. As the virus had not spread to here, it was very effective and there is still no community spread of the virus. In other areas, particularly big cities, there was a lockdown. This zonal approach is much more effective. Saying all the curves go up and then down regardless of lockdown is like saying all mountains go up and down so they are all the same. Everest is not the same as Ben Nevis. I really don't have the data for all countries for dates/timing of lockdown and numbers of deaths. A thorough analysis of a significant selection of countries is needed, but it is notoriously difficult to make international comparisons as conditions and levels of testing and methods of recording deaths varies widely. Interesting that the UK binned 5,500 deaths (change of method) in the middle of August and 30,000 cases (double counting) at he start of April but never corrected the massive underestimate of cases before that (lack of testing). According to statisticians (more or less podcast) the most accurate reflection of deaths caused by covid would be a limit of 60 days, not 28. An analogy for the virus is a loan with compound interest (also exponential). The amount of interest you pay (deaths) depends on 3 factors: Interest rate (R number), amount borrowed (prevalence) and time. The only one you can control is the interest rate (R number). For loans, you could transfer to different lender with lower interest, but there may be costs involved (economic impact). So, the action you take depends on the current situation. Is the interest rate still low enough? Is the amount borrowed small? Can you easily afford the interest payments? (death rate not significantly higher than normal) You have to do the calculations. Maybe it's worth paying to transfer the loan if you can see that in a couple of months you won't be able to pay the interest. On the Nordic countries, it seems valid to compare them to each other rather than to the UK This is a highly contagious virus which spreads by people with the virus (symptomatic or not) coming into close contact with people who are susceptible to it. In the UK we are very mobile and in most places live very close to others. This is perfect for the spread. It is clear that due to lack of testing that the government had no idea how bad the spread had got until it was pretty much too late to control without a long lockdown. Those countries who reacted quickly and harshly have come out of this the best. So, comparing total deaths in Sweden with the other Nordic countries combined, using daily data from the BBC/JHU (I only started collecting data 28th March when I was WFH Sweden (Total Norway/Finland/Denmark) 28th March 105 (94) 28th April 2355 (839) 28th May 4266 (1117) 28th June 5280 (1181) It's clear that numbers in Sweden were relatively out of control. Would they have saved lives if they'd reacted faster? edit to add: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54654646 No I do not agree with any form of lockdowns mandated by any government institutions perpetuated by the media on their behalf. I think all individuals are free to live how they see fit. During any health crisis governments are best placed to serve people by providing fact sheets, recommendations and guidance only similar to how the Japanese government dealt with this virus. It should be entirely up to the person whether they should be "allowed" to open their "non essential" business. If you're vulnerable take extra pre cautions, if you're petrified bask yourself in the new normal and stay home at all times. Cue the "selfish" argument or you're going to overwhelm the NHS! My reply is simple if you are concerned about the health service being over run then join a march/petition to ban all people from requesting asylum while you're at it, you could even demand a ban on smoking (78,000 related deaths per year), ban fast food, ban alcohol, ban all contact sports. Why should we prioritise treating the lives of those groups of people who are putting strain on the NHS but not those who might get C19 who've chosen to get on with their lives. Where does the madness end? Recorded deaths - are you saying we should record the C19 deaths differently by increasing the number of days from 28 to 60 days from the last positive test? Do you work for the BBC? The majority of those 5,500 were binned for a good reason as people were going back into hospital at a later date for other medical reasons and were being recorded as C19. If you are referring to Sweden's performance in terms of the total number of deaths it's well documented they performed poorly due to the same mistakes as the UK; not protecting care homes, clearing out hospitals of elderly patients and refusing elderly patients treatment. This is backed up by the age of deaths - 5,271 out of 5,918 were over the age of 70. Compare Sweden to a country like Switzerland - similar population, more recorded cases but half the number of deaths as they were successful in protecting their elderly. You want me to trust a study with contributions made by the Chinese, The People's Republic of China? A country which has supposedly recorded just 85,826 out of a population of 1,439,323,776! Even the governments biggest fanboy, the BBC admit it's difficult to tell whether regional lockdowns are working https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54239538 Considering this article was reporting cases up until the end of September I'm guessing those graphs look even worse in defence of the regional lockdowns with daily reported cases now well in excess of 20,000. Oh BBC why won't you update the article for good measure? I can't tell between the countries that lockdown strongly and those that put in a few restrictive measures. I don't need to prove anything as I'm not the person ordering everyone about. At the end of the day it's the UK Governments position to back up it's claims as they are the ones shouting fire in a crowded theatre. Every measure they come up with seems to fail as they follow it with another restrictive measure. I then hear people saying the only reason why the rules don't work is because people aren't following the rules. Well you know what they say in rugby; you can't sack the players but you can sack the coach. Just wish we could sack coaches Whitty, Al and Cummings.

coco the fullback wrote: You seem to be generally agreeing with the WHO's stance that lockdowns should only be used as a method of getting the spread back under control and buy some time to put other measures in place. The number one priority was to 'flatten the curve' to avoid systemic breakdown, but this also has the effect (if done properly) of delaying the worst impact and eventually (assuming an effective vaccine) save lives. The problem is it's a false dichotomy. You can't compare 'lockdown' with 'no lockdown' as if it's action or no action. There are many ways to reduce the spread which do not require a full lockdown, depending on the progress of the virus. For starters, how is a 'lockdown' defined? Comparing curves of those with 'lockdown' and those without is somewhat unscientific. What exactly are you comparing? Are you taking into consideration other measures short of a full 'lockdown'? What about the timing? Did you compare all countries you considered to have a lockdown with all those that didn't? or just cherry-pick a few? The study I quoted earlier into the Wuhan lockdown went to great pains mathematically to separate the effects of different actions and found a significant impact of lockdown itself. The virus increases exponentially, but the curve is in reality it's a logistic function, it cannot go on forever as there are not an infinite number of people, but without herd immunity via a vaccine the curve has fake peaks by increasing or decreasing measures to reduce the R number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_ ... a_pandemic Other actions/restrictions will have an effect on the spread, but much slower. Where i live there was no lockdown, but they severely restricted movement in and out of districts. As the virus had not spread to here, it was very effective and there is still no community spread of the virus. In other areas, particularly big cities, there was a lockdown. This zonal approach is much more effective. Saying all the curves go up and then down regardless of lockdown is like saying all mountains go up and down so they are all the same. Everest is not the same as Ben Nevis. I really don't have the data for all countries for dates/timing of lockdown and numbers of deaths. A thorough analysis of a significant selection of countries is needed, but it is notoriously difficult to make international comparisons as conditions and levels of testing and methods of recording deaths varies widely. Interesting that the UK binned 5,500 deaths (change of method) in the middle of August and 30,000 cases (double counting) at he start of April but never corrected the massive underestimate of cases before that (lack of testing). According to statisticians (more or less podcast) the most accurate reflection of deaths caused by covid would be a limit of 60 days, not 28. An analogy for the virus is a loan with compound interest (also exponential). The amount of interest you pay (deaths) depends on 3 factors: Interest rate (R number), amount borrowed (prevalence) and time. The only one you can control is the interest rate (R number). For loans, you could transfer to different lender with lower interest, but there may be costs involved (economic impact). So, the action you take depends on the current situation. Is the interest rate still low enough? Is the amount borrowed small? Can you easily afford the interest payments? (death rate not significantly higher than normal) You have to do the calculations. Maybe it's worth paying to transfer the loan if you can see that in a couple of months you won't be able to pay the interest. On the Nordic countries, it seems valid to compare them to each other rather than to the UK This is a highly contagious virus which spreads by people with the virus (symptomatic or not) coming into close contact with people who are susceptible to it. In the UK we are very mobile and in most places live very close to others. This is perfect for the spread. It is clear that due to lack of testing that the government had no idea how bad the spread had got until it was pretty much too late to control without a long lockdown. Those countries who reacted quickly and harshly have come out of this the best. So, comparing total deaths in Sweden with the other Nordic countries combined, using daily data from the BBC/JHU (I only started collecting data 28th March when I was WFH Sweden (Total Norway/Finland/Denmark) 28th March 105 (94) 28th April 2355 (839) 28th May 4266 (1117) 28th June 5280 (1181) It's clear that numbers in Sweden were relatively out of control. Would they have saved lives if they'd reacted faster? edit to add: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54654646 No I do not agree with any form of lockdowns mandated by any government institutions perpetuated by the media on their behalf. I think all individuals are free to live how they see fit. During any health crisis governments are best placed to serve people by providing fact sheets, recommendations and guidance only similar to how the Japanese government dealt with this virus. It should be entirely up to the person whether they should be "allowed" to open their "non essential" business. If you're vulnerable take extra pre cautions, if you're petrified bask yourself in the new normal and stay home at all times. Cue the "selfish" argument or you're going to overwhelm the NHS! My reply is simple if you are concerned about the health service being over run then join a march/petition to ban all people from requesting asylum while you're at it, you could even demand a ban on smoking (78,000 related deaths per year), ban fast food, ban alcohol, ban all contact sports. Why should we prioritise treating the lives of those groups of people who are putting strain on the NHS but not those who might get C19 who've chosen to get on with their lives. Where does the madness end? Recorded deaths - are you saying we should record the C19 deaths differently by increasing the number of days from 28 to 60 days from the last positive test? Do you work for the BBC? The majority of those 5,500 were binned for a good reason as people were going back into hospital at a later date for other medical reasons and were being recorded as C19. If you are referring to Sweden's performance in terms of the total number of deaths it's well documented they performed poorly due to the same mistakes as the UK; not protecting care homes, clearing out hospitals of elderly patients and refusing elderly patients treatment. This is backed up by the age of deaths - 5,271 out of 5,918 were over the age of 70. Compare Sweden to a country like Switzerland - similar population, more recorded cases but half the number of deaths as they were successful in protecting their elderly. You want me to trust a study with contributions made by the Chinese, The People's Republic of China? A country which has supposedly recorded just 85,826 out of a population of 1,439,323,776! Even the governments biggest fanboy, the BBC admit it's difficult to tell whether regional lockdowns are working https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54239538 Considering this article was reporting cases up until the end of September I'm guessing those graphs look even worse in defence of the regional lockdowns with daily reported cases now well in excess of 20,000. Oh BBC why won't you update the article for good measure? I can't tell between the countries that lockdown strongly and those that put in a few restrictive measures. I don't need to prove anything as I'm not the person ordering everyone about. At the end of the day it's the UK Governments position to back up it's claims as they are the ones shouting fire in a crowded theatre. Every measure they come up with seems to fail as they follow it with another restrictive measure. I then hear people saying the only reason why the rules don't work is because people aren't following the rules. Well you know what they say in rugby; you can't sack the players but you can sack the coach. Just wish we could sack coaches Whitty, Al and Cummings.

[PopTart]

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:24 pm  

I agree with the part where you think people will call you selfish