Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Mon Nov 02, 2020 9:59 pm  

coco the fullback wrote: An interesting article here from the economist https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/ ... d19leaders It highlights many cultural differences between Sweden and the UK. It's clear that their initial approach cost a lot of lives, but they learnt their lesson and put together test,track and isolated systems that are actually fit for purpose (unlike the UK). Well done to them for avoiding a second wave (so far) I'd dispute the cultural differences between Sweden and the UK, or other European countries, having any significant impact on their performance. For instance they have various mono cultures present in Sweden, as a percentage of the population they have more people living in Sweden (19%) that were foreign born than the UK (12%). I'd assume this would make messaging with an aim of compliance more difficult to achieve. To be fair, more research would be needed in this area. Please note the percentages given are worked off memory so I may be slightly out. Their testing was reported as being very poor during the peak in April and even by the end of May, especially if you were to compare it to the rest of the developed world. I will keep an eye on their excess deaths over the next couple of months to look for any notable increase/decrease.

coco the fullback wrote: An interesting article here from the economist https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/ ... d19leaders It highlights many cultural differences between Sweden and the UK. It's clear that their initial approach cost a lot of lives, but they learnt their lesson and put together test,track and isolated systems that are actually fit for purpose (unlike the UK). Well done to them for avoiding a second wave (so far) I'd dispute the cultural differences between Sweden and the UK, or other European countries, having any significant impact on their performance. For instance they have various mono cultures present in Sweden, as a percentage of the population they have more people living in Sweden (19%) that were foreign born than the UK (12%). I'd assume this would make messaging with an aim of compliance more difficult to achieve. To be fair, more research would be needed in this area. Please note the percentages given are worked off memory so I may be slightly out. Their testing was reported as being very poor during the peak in April and even by the end of May, especially if you were to compare it to the rest of the developed world. I will keep an eye on their excess deaths over the next couple of months to look for any notable increase/decrease.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:08 pm  

48756c6c20 524c4643 wrote:

Produce evidence of an isolated novel virus, CDC admit this has not being done, paper from CDC admit that they used a computer algorithm to produce a 'virus' and then by consensus declared it as SARS0-COV-2
All the data from around the world proves there's no pandemic, never was and certainly isn't a second wave.

And that's not a wifi password, but you'll never have enough brain power to deduce what it is, are you 'blue pill people', wishing for your freedom to be taken away, you want society to continued to be destroyed and more lives lost because of the criminal actions taken by governments around the world. If you're not then why are you backing what these criminals are doing and not looking at proper science/data, unlike the wildly distorted crud coming out of the supposed leaders?

Oh my days. Completely teapot lid.

The fact there are so many of these people in society is almost as big a concern as the actual virus.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Mon Nov 02, 2020 11:31 pm  

MatthewTrin wrote: From your reuters articles “There are now hundreds of stocks of cultured SARS-CoV-2 in laboratories around the world” Wasn't there a claim amongst "conspiracy theorists" that the cultured stocks did not satisfy all four of Koch's postulates? 1. The organism must be regularly associated with the disease and its characteristic lesions. 2. The organism must be isolated from the diseased host and grown in culture. 3. The disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the organism is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host. 4. The same organism must be reisolated from the experimentally infected host. "It fulfils at least some of Koch’s postulates (the conditions that should be met in order to determine whether an infectious agent causes a particular disease). The totality of available evidence demonstrates that the SARS-CoV-2 virus both exists and is the cause of the disease COVID-19." https://research.reading.ac.uk/research ... -theories/ Can you tell me how a virus can fulfil the original Koch's postulates and why Rivers postulates are used instead? https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_koch's_po ... to_viruses https://davidcrowe.ca/SciHealthEnv/pape ... ulates.pdf https://paramedicsworld.com/virology-no ... studynotes https://jb.asm.org/content/33/1/1

MatthewTrin wrote: From your reuters articles “There are now hundreds of stocks of cultured SARS-CoV-2 in laboratories around the world” Wasn't there a claim amongst "conspiracy theorists" that the cultured stocks did not satisfy all four of Koch's postulates? 1. The organism must be regularly associated with the disease and its characteristic lesions. 2. The organism must be isolated from the diseased host and grown in culture. 3. The disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the organism is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host. 4. The same organism must be reisolated from the experimentally infected host. "It fulfils at least some of Koch’s postulates (the conditions that should be met in order to determine whether an infectious agent causes a particular disease). The totality of available evidence demonstrates that the SARS-CoV-2 virus both exists and is the cause of the disease COVID-19." https://research.reading.ac.uk/research ... -theories/ Can you tell me how a virus can fulfil the original Koch's postulates and why Rivers postulates are used instead? https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_koch's_po ... to_viruses https://davidcrowe.ca/SciHealthEnv/pape ... ulates.pdf https://paramedicsworld.com/virology-no ... studynotes https://jb.asm.org/content/33/1/1

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 12:29 am  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote:

There you go you get asked for facts and turn it around then go off at a tangent now with Blair et al over the Iraq war you couldn't make it up

No my dear RW&B. I have never stated I have "facts" or unequivocal proof and my guess is niether do you. As for WMD I just assumed you were such a part of the "inner circle" you were party to those "facts" as well. I mean, they never lie, do they?
Other than that you do see the irony in your post?

You said this "I do have an open mind but I base it on facts not assumptions."

So come on, facts please.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 12:45 am  

coco the fullback wrote: Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% Do you have any support for this assertion? context? I answered your Texas Pete question before. To know how significant 600 complaints is you need to know how many customers he had. 600 out of 650 = 92% = he really is a cowboy, don't go there 600 out of 6 000 000 = 0.01% = seems like a decent enough guy, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Again, it is you who is making the claim, therefore the burden of proof is yours. I don't believe there have been any alien abductions, but some people do. There is no way anyone can prove the negative, that there has never been an alien abduction, but there is no credible evidence that there has. The burden of proof is with those who are making the claim. RW&B asked me this Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley. Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ? No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure. I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot. Quote>> 1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020

coco the fullback wrote: Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% Do you have any support for this assertion? context? I answered your Texas Pete question before. To know how significant 600 complaints is you need to know how many customers he had. 600 out of 650 = 92% = he really is a cowboy, don't go there 600 out of 6 000 000 = 0.01% = seems like a decent enough guy, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Again, it is you who is making the claim, therefore the burden of proof is yours. I don't believe there have been any alien abductions, but some people do. There is no way anyone can prove the negative, that there has never been an alien abduction, but there is no credible evidence that there has. The burden of proof is with those who are making the claim. RW&B asked me this Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley. Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ? No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure. I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot. Quote>> 1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 1:04 am  

Miro wrote: RW&B asked me this Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley. Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ? No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure. I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot. Quote>> 1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020 That really is how polls work. I suggest you get in touch with YouGov and point out where they're going wrong with their polling techniques. They're new to the field, so I'm sure they'd appreciate your expert advice. While your at it you could work out the margin of error for the poll and whether that could take it from 96% to less than 50%. What's the probability that 96% positives are selected from a pool of less than 50% positives.

Miro wrote: RW&B asked me this Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow! https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates only 96% then 96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838 600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19% From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley. Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ? No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure. I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot. Quote>> 1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020 That really is how polls work. I suggest you get in touch with YouGov and point out where they're going wrong with their polling techniques. They're new to the field, so I'm sure they'd appreciate your expert advice. While your at it you could work out the margin of error for the poll and whether that could take it from 96% to less than 50%. What's the probability that 96% positives are selected from a pool of less than 50% positives.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 1:10 am  

PopTart wrote:

Not that I disagree with your point, but when was your last post about rugby?

Seriously, you have nothing better to than defend this joker? The one who stoops to accusing a fellow poster of “paranoid psychosis.” The one who contributes nothing, And you a moderator? By Eck Pop Tart, this shows how desperate you are to have a pop at yours truly. (no pun intended)

Answer: October 26th 2020. No one respoded to the rugby bit, only the "covid" bit. I mean, what can ya do??? I tried.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 1:27 am  

coco the fullback wrote:

That really is how polls work.
I suggest you get in touch with YouGov and point out where they're going wrong with their polling techniques. They're new to the field, so I'm sure they'd appreciate your expert advice.
While your at it you could work out the margin of error for the poll and whether that could take it from 96% to less than 50%.
What's the probability that 96% positives are selected from a pool of less than 50% positives.

This is the guy who poo pood 600,000 signatures , now he's saying 1,575 from the whole of the USA is meaningfull figure. I don't care what yougov say, it aint.

This is why they get it so wrong, YouGov my arris. Not suprised tthese pollsters got the Brexit forcast wrong or Trump winning the race for the White House, or Corbin.....No, I'll stop here.

Remember, " Lies, damned lies, and statistics " is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 4:27 am  

Miro wrote: This is the guy who poo pood 600,000 signatures , now he's saying 1,575 from the whole of the USA is meaningfull figure. I don't care what yougov say, it aint. This is why they get it so wrong, YouGov my arris. Not suprised tthese pollsters got the Brexit forcast wrong or Trump winning the race for the White House, or Corbin.....No, I'll stop here. Remember, " Lies, damned lies, and statistics " is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. I am beginning to worry about your grasp of basic arithmetic. The 600,000 signatures. I forget what the petition was for now. What proportion of the population could have signed that if they had wished? What was the petition? how was it carried out? This is not a survey or poll. This is the total number of people who signed, it says nothing about the people who chose not to sign. This is the total number who supported the petition. As for Brexit: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... ndum-model On 21st June 2016 YouGov had leave with 51%, down from a peak of 53% on 12th June. However, this was well within the margin of error for the survey, and hence the poll results were inconclusive. Back to your example. You claim that 'most' Americans had never heard of Bill Gates. A survey conducted by YouGov found that 96% had heard of him. It's not clear what you intended to mean by 'most', so we'll take it as 51% (a very generous interpretation of 'most') Population of US = 329,516,498 (latest census figure) So, according to you at least 168,053,414 people have never heard of Bill Gates (one time richest man in the world, regardless of what job he did) survey sample size = 1575 Result 96% of 1575 = 1512 people surveyed said they knew Bill Gates So, the question is, what's the probability of selecting 1575 people at random from a population with 49% who know Bill Gates and finding 1512 people who say they know him. You'll need to use binomial probability. Answer: 1.72 x 10^-335 chance or 0.(335 zeroes)172 = pretty damned close to impossible To put it another way, if you have a huge bag of red and blue balls (and there are more red than blue), what are the chances of pulling out 1575 balls and finding 1512 of them are blue and only 63 red?

Miro wrote: This is the guy who poo pood 600,000 signatures , now he's saying 1,575 from the whole of the USA is meaningfull figure. I don't care what yougov say, it aint. This is why they get it so wrong, YouGov my arris. Not suprised tthese pollsters got the Brexit forcast wrong or Trump winning the race for the White House, or Corbin.....No, I'll stop here. Remember, " Lies, damned lies, and statistics " is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. I am beginning to worry about your grasp of basic arithmetic. The 600,000 signatures. I forget what the petition was for now. What proportion of the population could have signed that if they had wished? What was the petition? how was it carried out? This is not a survey or poll. This is the total number of people who signed, it says nothing about the people who chose not to sign. This is the total number who supported the petition. As for Brexit: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... ndum-model On 21st June 2016 YouGov had leave with 51%, down from a peak of 53% on 12th June. However, this was well within the margin of error for the survey, and hence the poll results were inconclusive. Back to your example. You claim that 'most' Americans had never heard of Bill Gates. A survey conducted by YouGov found that 96% had heard of him. It's not clear what you intended to mean by 'most', so we'll take it as 51% (a very generous interpretation of 'most') Population of US = 329,516,498 (latest census figure) So, according to you at least 168,053,414 people have never heard of Bill Gates (one time richest man in the world, regardless of what job he did) survey sample size = 1575 Result 96% of 1575 = 1512 people surveyed said they knew Bill Gates So, the question is, what's the probability of selecting 1575 people at random from a population with 49% who know Bill Gates and finding 1512 people who say they know him. You'll need to use binomial probability. Answer: 1.72 x 10^-335 chance or 0.(335 zeroes)172 = pretty damned close to impossible To put it another way, if you have a huge bag of red and blue balls (and there are more red than blue), what are the chances of pulling out 1575 balls and finding 1512 of them are blue and only 63 red?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:59 am  

Miro wrote:

No. it's not the need to “put them right” it's defending my posts. Would it be better if I ignore everyone? Then I would be called ignorant, and worse, running away.

It's simple arithmetic. Your 1 post has generated at least 3. Well done you. That's 3 more posts thanks to you to add to the total. Genius.

So sorry for the “wordy” answer and here's me believing I was giving you a little respect in answering your questions. More fool me.

Now then, as someone who seems hell bent on silencing me why on earth are you encouraging me to go onto Twitter, facebook, start an e mail campaign to the press, radio phone ins and “share my views with a wider audience? Would that not be dangerous and against your “covid” beliefs? Hypocrite or what??

The last paragraph ?. Nah, that was just me being modest.

My dear Miro I have no desire for you not to continue your postings just questioning why you fear broadening your audience and are content to be a 'big' contributor in a small pool. I encourage you to take your views to a bigger audience I am sure despite your assertions of modesty you crave attention if not we would not have progressed from page 15, a progression caused by the need for you to have the last 'response.

You make reference to my 'covid beliefs; would you care to tell me what they are? ( pointless inclusion of a second question mark and the ending 'oops' a mild effort at you being condescending , no oops from me I'm sure you are aware of my disdain towards your posts and efforts at attempting to be superior so to take a little from your style, Miro my dear a response from you is not necessary but I am sure you will once again seek to have the last response. Slightly contradictory but you can tell me what my beliefs are it would churlish of me to ask a question of you and then deny you the response, particularly as I am keen to know they are in the world that is Miro (I still see you as Arkwright0
'