Discussion:
Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
(too old to reply)
Winfield Hill
2020-04-18 19:06:14 UTC
Permalink
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
b***@columbus.rr.com
2020-04-18 19:14:22 UTC
Permalink
I love it when people espouse a good conspiracy theory. I really love it when you cannot tell which side is pushing the crazy theories
John Larkin
2020-04-18 19:46:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
b***@columbus.rr.com
2020-04-18 20:06:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement
jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....He who pays the piper calls the tunes
John Larkin
2020-04-18 20:34:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement
jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....He who pays the piper calls the tunes
They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Phil Allison
2020-04-18 20:56:02 UTC
Permalink
John Larkin wrote:

-------------------
Post by John Larkin
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....
He who pays the piper calls the tunes
They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.
** Does anyone sensible really think that modelling future outcomes based on numerous guesses and hunches is doing science ?

It sure ain't the well founded "scientific method".

Seems the public have been conned into calling it science - because "scientists" are the ones doing it. Hmmmm....

"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have virtue.

IMO - all they really show is how gullible you are - or maybe something worse.


..... Phil
John Larkin
2020-04-18 21:04:03 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:56:02 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
Post by Phil Allison
-------------------
Post by John Larkin
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....
He who pays the piper calls the tunes
They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.
** Does anyone sensible really think that modelling future outcomes based on numerous guesses and hunches is doing science ?
It works OK for well-behaved, reasonably linear systems, which aren't
the most interesting or important systems.
Post by Phil Allison
It sure ain't the well founded "scientific method".
Seems the public have been conned into calling it science - because "scientists" are the ones doing it. Hmmmm....
TOP scientists!
Post by Phil Allison
"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have virtue.
IMO - all they really show is how gullible you are - or maybe something worse.
..... Phil
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 03:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:56:02 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
Post by Phil Allison
Post by John Larkin
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....
He who pays the piper calls the tunes
They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.
** Does anyone sensible really think that modelling future outcomes based on numerous guesses and hunches is doing science ?
It works OK for well-behaved, reasonably linear systems, which aren't
the most interesting or important systems.
John Larkin uses Spice to model electronic circuits. He hasn't noticed that transistors have an exponential - non-linear - relationship between base-emitter voltage and collector current.
Post by John Larkin
Post by Phil Allison
It sure ain't the well founded "scientific method".
Of course not. But it is useful within the scientific method, when used by people who know what they doing. John Larkin doesn't know much about what they are doing (or what he's doing when he runs Spice)
Post by John Larkin
Post by Phil Allison
Seems the public have been conned into calling it science - because "scientists" are the ones doing it. Hmmmm....
TOP scientists!
The problem here is that John Larkin has a very strange idea of what constitutes science.
Post by John Larkin
Post by Phil Allison
"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have virtue.
John Larkin gets all his idea about anthropogenic global warming from denialist propaganda sites, and lacks the wit to realise that they are lying to him for their own commercial advantage.
Post by John Larkin
Post by Phil Allison
IMO - all they really show is how gullible you are - or maybe something worse.
John Larkin is terminally gullible.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Del Rosso
2020-04-18 21:03:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are
catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have
virtue.
"I believe in science" is a useful phrase because it marks the people
who wouldn't know science if it fell on them.

So does "the science is settled" to a lesser degree.
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 03:16:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Phil Allison
"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are
catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have
virtue.
"I believe in science" is a useful phrase because it marks the people
who wouldn't know science if it fell on them.
So does "the science is settled" to a lesser degree.
Sadly, lots of people think this. The science about anthropogenic global warming really is settled - or as settled as a well-established scientific hypothesis can ever be. The earth is getting warmer, and it is getting warmer because the human habit of burning fossil carbon for fuel means that there is quite a bit more CO2 in the atmosphere than there was a few hundred years ago (or has been for the past 20 million years).

The fact that today's CO2 is short of carbon-14 does mean that the extra CO2 is our CO2 - fossil carbon doesn't contain any carbon-14.

John Larkin and Tom Del Rosso don't seem to know enough about science to understand this. The denialist propaganda machine does exploit their ignorance.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 02:34:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement
jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Scientists are no different than musicians....He who pays the piper calls the tunes
They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.
Computer simulations are supposed to be all over the place. They are intended to demonstrate how different sets of assumption play out. Any computer model has to be a simplification of reality, and the interesting question is which set of simplifications are productive.

Scientists are quite as driven by emotion and ego as musicians - it's a theatrical profession - but what they produce is much more tightly constrained than musical compositions.

John Larkin is deeply ignorant about science, but at it's core it is a social mechanism designed to set up a coherent and cohesive view of the world. We've been working on the mechanism for the last couple of hundred years.

The Royal Society in London was the first one set up to formalise this process.

"The very first ‘learned society’ meeting on 28 November 1660 followed a lecture at Gresham College by Christopher Wren."

So far it seems to be working out pretty well.
--
Bill Sloman, sydney
whit3rd
2020-04-18 20:13:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
b***@columbus.rr.com
2020-04-18 20:33:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
Science is a funny thing. When it flies airplanes and fires guns and heals people....the funny thing is....pretty much every one believes in science. The problem is when "scientists" make grand pronouncements , that funny enough , have huge political ramifications, with no proven anything....It is pretty much should be treated as bunk. And that data you talk about....It is usually twisted and distorted to drive an agenda.
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 02:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
Science is a funny thing. When it flies airplanes and fires guns and heals people....the funny thing is....pretty much every one believes in science. The problem is when "scientists" make grand pronouncements , that funny enough , have huge political ramifications, with no proven anything....It is pretty much should be treated as bunk. And that data you talk about....It is usually twisted and distorted to drive an agenda.
It difficult to twist or distort data. Somebody else can go out and measure the same thing, and the two sets of data had better agree - within the limits of observational accuracy.

Rght-wingers do seem to be susceptible to stuff that claims to be science, but is actually propaganda. The book "The Bell Curve" comes to mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve

It was dismantled by some real scientists

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality_by_Design

who - amongst other things - looked carefully at the data that Hernstein and Murray had relied on, and found that it didn't support the story that "The Bell Curve" had built on it.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Larkin
2020-04-18 20:38:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.

The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun. The good ones
will name names.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
whit3rd
2020-04-18 21:54:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.
Nonsense, as usual. You've also said there's too much news coverage.
We have a pandemic on a globe with 7.8 billion inhabitants
and you pronounce a finding of 'too many opinions'?
Post by John Larkin
The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun.
Oh, you have some supporting data and a good model that predicts that?
Me, I'm predicting a practical vaccine for 'a year or so from now'. That's
my idea of fun.
John Larkin
2020-04-18 22:45:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.
Nonsense, as usual. You've also said there's too much news coverage.
We have a pandemic on a globe with 7.8 billion inhabitants
and you pronounce a finding of 'too many opinions'?
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range. Some people say
it will be with us for 18 months, only stopping when have a vaccine in
mass production. Some people want to go back to work in two weeks.
Some want to go back now.

Some people suggest a second, bigger case surge in the fall. One big
name simulated a bouncing-ball curve of infections, multiple declining
peaks.

We are just now starting to get some antibody data.
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun.
Oh, you have some supporting data and a good model that predicts that?
You don't think anyone will write books about this? You don't think
they might be fun? Barry's book about the 1918 epidemic is great
reading.
Post by whit3rd
Me, I'm predicting a practical vaccine for 'a year or so from now'. That's
my idea of fun.
New cases seem to have peaked, and faded way down, in the places where
it started earliest. Look at the JHU new-case curves. Lots of european
countries are below 1/10 of peak now. It may well be gone before a
vaccine is available or useful, like most colds.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
whit3rd
2020-04-19 00:04:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
Post by John Larkin
Some people say
it will be with us for 18 months, only stopping when have a vaccine...
"it" being... half a hundred things. Active sickness? Travel restrictions? Gathering
discouragement? Viable virus residues? Hospital staff wearing hazmat gear?
Some of those, yes; some of them, no. #shrug
Post by John Larkin
One big
name simulated a bouncing-ball curve of infections, multiple declining
peaks.
Yeah, that can happen. So, a simulation can show that happening. #shrug
Post by John Larkin
You don't think anyone will write books about this? You don't think
they might be fun? Barry's book about the 1918 epidemic is great
reading.
So is Betty MacDonald's _The Plague and I_, about TB. Not fun,
exactly.
We ought not anticipate such writing, though, rather we should let authors
surprise us.
John Larkin
2020-04-19 00:20:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-19 17:06:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.

But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.

Grins,
James
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-19 17:16:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.

There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.

Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Cursitor Doom
2020-04-19 17:56:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
We have economists so 50 or so of them (an impressive number anyway) with
no scruples can be bribed to all agree that such-and-such a proposed
course of action would result in financial catastrophe. By these means,
the briber hopes to be able to scare everyone into abandoning the
proposed course of action. Surprisingly, this tactic often doesn't have
the desired effect; the proposed course of action is proceeded with
nevertheless and all the dire predictions come to nothing. Whenever you
hear "x number of economists all agree course of action y would be
catastrophic for the economy" you can safely assume their opinion has
been bought and paid for by someone else with a vested interest.
And *that* is what economists are for, John.
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-19 18:10:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-19 18:20:10 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:10:48 -0400, Phil Hobbs
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Nuance is strongly correlated to paralysis.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-20 17:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)

Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan

BONUS:
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith

How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.

Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.

There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.

Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."

Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”

Cheers,
James
John Larkin
2020-04-20 18:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)
Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith
How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.
Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.
There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.
Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."
Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”
Cheers,
James
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-20 18:49:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)
Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith
How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.
Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.
There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.
Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."
Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”
Cheers,
James
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
Well, the state has taken over the means of production. :(

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
whit3rd
2020-04-20 19:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.

The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
John Larkin
2020-04-20 21:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.
Looks like Laffer is back. He had the novel theory that there is an
optimum tax rate to maximize government revenue (not that maximizing
government revenue is a good thing.) I canceled my subscription to
Scientific American after their absurd editorial mocking Laffer. Their
argument would have negated the universal gas law, too.

The enormous US gov debt will never be paid off through taxation.
Inflation works better.

The PPP loans are designed to be forgiven.
Post by whit3rd
The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
A lot of marginal jobs and businesses won't survive the shutdown. Many
small biz have folded already. Some people will never work again. Some
of that is painful but good in the long term, shuffle things.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Ricky C
2020-04-20 23:13:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.
Looks like Laffer is back. He had the novel theory that there is an
optimum tax rate to maximize government revenue (not that maximizing
government revenue is a good thing.) I canceled my subscription to
Scientific American after their absurd editorial mocking Laffer. Their
argument would have negated the universal gas law, too.
The enormous US gov debt will never be paid off through taxation.
Inflation works better.
You can't pay off US debt with inflation. Higher inflation inexorably results in higher interest rates than the inflation factor.

The current US debt is not so bad. It's only $80,666.67 per person. I've owed a lot more than that, roughly triple and I paid it off in 30 years. The problem is we keep spending more than we make... the deficit.

Fix the deficit and the debt will take care of itself.

Oh yeah, inflation can't help with the deficit either.
Post by John Larkin
The PPP loans are designed to be forgiven.
Yes, if the employers keep paying their employees. That's the point, better PPP loans than unemployment.
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
A lot of marginal jobs and businesses won't survive the shutdown. Many
small biz have folded already. Some people will never work again. Some
of that is painful but good in the long term, shuffle things.
You don't have to be marginal. How many businesses can close their doors, send everyone home and two or three months later start back up as if nothing had happened? Restarting the economy won't be an easy transition. Sure, as soon as we let people go back to work, many will, but not everyone. Not all companies are ready to start up until their customers are buying. This will be a chain that will ramp up a bit at a time.

But unlike Larkin, I'm willing to say what I think will happen. Instead of staying in lock down until we have the infection under enough control such that we can prevent another massive spread of the disease, we will start up too soon and the infection will rapidly spread again. This time governments will be gun shy of imposing stay at home orders and the whole mess falls apart with the disease spreading much more widely than a few urban centers.

In most of the country, once you close the schools and keep non-essential workers at home, the new infection rate drops a lot. But relax these constraints and the infection rate goes up a lot.

I just think we need to get this disease under control before open things up again.

It's not entirely different from smothering a fire with a pot lid, but then because you don't see flames you take the lid off before the overheated pot has cooled and WHAM!
--
Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-20 21:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.
The problem is, of course, that the government spends too much.

"Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets."
--Ronald Reagan
Post by whit3rd
The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?

Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed. Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.

Cheers,
James Arthur
John Larkin
2020-04-20 22:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.
The problem is, of course, that the government spends too much.
"Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets."
--Ronald Reagan
Post by whit3rd
The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed. Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Imagine how many cancer screenings aren't being done.

One of my kids is taking meds for a suspected problem that isn't fully
identified because her doctor can't see her, so is guessing.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Ricky C
2020-04-20 23:37:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
The most immediate expenditures, on unemployment and relief during
the lockdown, are almost exactly credit, extended to (everyone)
but eventually to be paid back, in taxation. It's inevitable,
those Trump tax cuts you liked had to be a brief anomaly.
The problem is, of course, that the government spends too much.
"Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets."
--Ronald Reagan
Post by whit3rd
The value of this, though, is that a lot of people with marginal jobs and
savings will get the credit they need without a mess of middlemen getting
forms filled out. To keep a lockdown in place, and save lives, you have
to forestall desperation among folk obeying social-distance rules.
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed. Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Imagine how many cancer screenings aren't being done.
One of my kids is taking meds for a suspected problem that isn't fully
identified because her doctor can't see her, so is guessing.
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to examine a patient over the phone?

Why aren't medical services provided? I think that comes under the heading of "essential" services.

I suspect you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Obviously the doctor is satisfied with the diagnosis and prescription or wouldn't have done it. Yeah, this is one type of construction you are very good at, dramatic construction.
--
Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 09:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.

If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in
any state to operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath
I'm not even sure I could make myself heard when phoning
for an ambulance.
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-21 11:58:23 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.
It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 13:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.
It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.
That's a little bit more than an examination!

Aficionados could probably do a Spinal Tap over Skype :)
D***@decadence.org
2020-04-21 20:47:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st
century. We can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why
would a doctor not be able to examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.
It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.
That's a little bit more than an examination!
Aficionados could probably do a Spinal Tap over Skype :)
None more black! ("How much more black could it be?")
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-21 14:45:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.
It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.
It's tough to do any sort of exam over Skype.

ICU nurses can tell an awful lot about someone just by their
'color'. And after spending lots of time in the ICU myself,
I was able to do it too. You can tell almost on inspection
who's in big trouble, and who's doing well. That doesn't work
on video -- it's not even close.

Dad spent some time in the jungle photographing dermatological
afflictions. Same story.

Cheers,
James Arthur
Ricky C
2020-04-21 14:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.
You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.
Post by Tom Gardner
My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.
I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your phone.
Post by Tom Gardner
If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in
any state to operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath
I'm not even sure I could make myself heard when phoning
for an ambulance.
Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you need them?

I'm sorry, if that's true we need to cut California off and push it into the Pacific. Let it drift over to China and they can have it. At least you will get medical care. Try a doctor in Wuhan.
--
Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 14:35:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We
can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be
able to examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at the relevant
time.
You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in
the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small
percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the
population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.
Think it through...

Someone who doesn't have a smartphone won't be able to
operate it sufficiently well for it to be useful. The
owner would have to be right next to the user.

Over here we are required to stay more than 2m from
people not in our household.

See the incompatibility?
Post by Ricky C
My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.
I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your phone.
She is 98, and we are keeping outside contact to a minimum.

See the incompatibility mentioned above.

In addition, you are assuming I live anywhere near her.
Post by Ricky C
If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in any state to
operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath I'm not even sure I could make
myself heard when phoning for an ambulance.
Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you > need them?
Have you considered that I would have to phone for an
ambulance to get there? Then re-read my point.
Ricky C
2020-04-21 22:20:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We
can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be
able to examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at the relevant
time.
You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in
the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small
percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the
population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.
Think it through...
Someone who doesn't have a smartphone won't be able to
operate it sufficiently well for it to be useful. The
owner would have to be right next to the user.
Over here we are required to stay more than 2m from
people not in our household.
See the incompatibility?
You are being absurdly pedantic. If you need to break the 6 foot rule, break it. That doesn't cause infection. It provides a path for it. It's not such a strict rule you can never change it.

What do people do who need more intimate care such as washing, feeding, etc. Do have to adopt someone into your family?
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.
I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your phone.
She is 98, and we are keeping outside contact to a minimum.
See the incompatibility mentioned above.
In addition, you are assuming I live anywhere near her.
Yep. I don't know what your real issues are. You haven't explained them. I think the idea of her not being able to visit is doctor seem to be overblown. I don't believe the state has shut down medical care.
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in any state to
operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath I'm not even sure I could make
myself heard when phoning for an ambulance.
Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you > need them?
Have you considered that I would have to phone for an
ambulance to get there? Then re-read my point.
WTF are you going on about??? Do you think the ambulance crew is going to maintain a 6 foot separation as they load her into the vehicle?

You just want to create problems it seems.

The guidelines are guidelines, not laws.
--
Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 22:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Ricky C
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We
can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be
able to examine a patient over the phone?
Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at the relevant
time.
You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in
the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small
percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the
population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.
Think it through...
Someone who doesn't have a smartphone won't be able to
operate it sufficiently well for it to be useful. The
owner would have to be right next to the user.
Over here we are required to stay more than 2m from
people not in our household.
See the incompatibility?
You are being absurdly pedantic. If you need to break the 6 foot rule, break it. That doesn't cause infection. It provides a path for it. It's not such a strict rule you can never change it.
What do people do who need more intimate care such as washing, feeding, etc. Do have to adopt someone into your family?
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.
I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your phone.
She is 98, and we are keeping outside contact to a minimum.
See the incompatibility mentioned above.
In addition, you are assuming I live anywhere near her.
Yep. I don't know what your real issues are. You haven't explained them. I think the idea of her not being able to visit is doctor seem to be overblown. I don't believe the state has shut down medical care.
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in any state to
operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath I'm not even sure I could make
myself heard when phoning for an ambulance.
Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you > need them?
Have you considered that I would have to phone for an
ambulance to get there? Then re-read my point.
WTF are you going on about??? Do you think the ambulance crew is going to maintain a 6 foot separation as they load her into the vehicle?
You just want to create problems it seems.
The guidelines are guidelines, not laws.
You need to work on your reading and your comprehension.

That would be a starting point for combining words into
coherent sentences that bear some resemblance to the point
being made.
Ricky C
2020-04-20 23:31:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live, but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
You need to move to a state where they aren't insane about medical treatment.

Try Florida. The WWE is considered an "essential service", so surely they will not prevent any medical exam or treatment, no? In fact if that is the bar, what would be shut down??? Maybe strip joints.
--
Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-21 01:34:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic

And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.

ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.

The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.

The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.

Lots of hospitals are now empty, even laying employees off. Check the
news. That's incompatible with "available and providing normal care."
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
You need to move to a state where they aren't insane about medical treatment.
I don't think the neighbor is in any condition to plan a move just now.
She's busy struggling to breathe. But she'll be glad you had an easy
answer for her, that's always comforting.

Cheers,
James Arthur
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-21 02:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic
And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.
ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.
The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.
The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.
A lot of people are going to get very shaggy and very grey soon. The
public uproar over that is going to be a political force.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Bill Sloman
2020-04-21 05:02:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic
And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.
ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.
The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.
The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.
A lot of people are going to get very shaggy and very grey soon. The
public uproar over that is going to be a political force.
Australia's lock-down doesn't now include barbers and hair-dressers, though there were rules at the start which came in for quite a lot of criticism and got dumped. They still have to be careful.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Ricky C
2020-04-21 05:08:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic
And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.
ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.
The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.
The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.
A lot of people are going to get very shaggy and very grey soon. The
public uproar over that is going to be a political force.
Yep, I can see it. The shaggy grey brigade is out recruiting voters as soon as this is over and they get a haircut so they can go out in public.
--
Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Bill Sloman
2020-04-21 05:03:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it) you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

It isn't perfect, but it seems to work a whole lot better than whatever the US seems to be doing at the moment.

Covid-19 victims are infectious before they have visible symptoms, and some poeple may beat the virus without ever showing symptoms. We haven't got a good grip on how many that might be, but contact tracing has made it clear that it's less than half the people who get infected, probably quite a lot less.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic
One incoming infected person can infect a lot of people quite quickly in that kind of environment. You can detect the infection before the infectees shown symtoms, so this isn't evidence for a high level of symptom-less infections, and James Arthur should know enough about the subject to be aware of this, so this is probably one more example of his enthusiasm for ignoring facts that don't fit his message.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.
Ir they are let out too early.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.
What stuff means to James Arthur is what he'd like it to mean.

"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632 deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

The US failure to flatten the curve has cost them 42,517 deaths so far, and they are clocking up nearly 30,000 new cases every day, which probably means 1000 new deaths.

Since everybody ends up dying of something, avoiding dying of Covid-19 is merely rescheduling the inevitable, but Covid-19 does kill people who might have been expected to live quite a bit longer.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
It's vital to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed, but doing it properly, as in China, South Korea and - as it seems so far - Australia can effectively eliminate the virus from the population.

It's still going to pop up again, due to travellers from places that haven't done it right (such as Italy, Spain and the US), but local lock-down and rigorous contact tracing can reduce the new infections to very low numbers.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.
Of course it is. Lock-down isn't absolute.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.
Lots of hospitals are now empty, even laying employees off. Check the
news. That's incompatible with "available and providing normal care."
The US doesn't have universal health. If the hospital isn't serving enough customers to make a profit, it will close it's doors. It doesn't have to, but compensating it for serving the interests of society as whole would be socialism, and James Arthur would prefer to die (and is perfectly happy to see other people die) in the pursuit of ideological purity.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
You need to move to a state where they aren't insane about medical treatment.
I don't think the neighbor is in any condition to plan a move just now.
She's busy struggling to breathe. But she'll be glad you had an easy
answer for her, that's always comforting.
James Arthur is a font of easy answers - almost all of them wrong.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 09:26:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we
weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact
tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose
literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with
the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people carrying
it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in contact
with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it) you get told
to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to
isolate themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used
(yet). I wonder if it is actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632 deaths,
and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple
peaks, months apart.

None of that should be taken to infer I think the US
(or UK) response is sensible.
Post by Bill Sloman
Since everybody ends up dying of something, avoiding dying of Covid-19 is
merely rescheduling the inevitable, but Covid-19 does kill people who might
have been expected to live quite a bit longer.
Spiegelhalter, whose job is to understand and publicise
relative risks has an interesting take on that.

He notes the covid mortality rates exactly mirror those
from other causes. In effect covid at any age compresses
the annual risk of dying into a much shorter timescale.
Post by Bill Sloman
The US doesn't have universal health. If the hospital isn't serving enough
customers to make a profit, it will close it's doors. It doesn't have to, but
compensating it for serving the interests of society as whole would be
socialism, and James Arthur would prefer to die (and is perfectly happy to
see other people die) in the pursuit of ideological purity.
Kerala is interesting. It is highly literate, has a significant
private healthcare sector, but a trusted more-or-less communist
government.

Its covid response and results are impressive.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/21/kerala-indian-state-flattened-coronavirus-curve

Background: I know Kerala as a tourist, and wouldn't mind
living there - if they would have me :)
Ricky C
2020-04-21 14:14:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we
weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact
tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose
literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with
the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people carrying
it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in contact
with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it) you get told
to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to
isolate themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used
(yet). I wonder if it is actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632 deaths,
and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple
peaks, months apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent. Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside. They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return without being hunted down immediately.
--
Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 14:40:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-21 14:57:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.

And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.

Cheers,
James Arthur
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 16:12:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
And the big unanswered (currently unanswerable) questions are
- what stages of relaxation are valid (by some defined criteria)
- what are the preconditions for relaxation
- what are the preconditions for re-imposition of restrictions

I'm distressed that our fragrant PM, Boris Johnson, has opined
from his convalescent bed that he won't relax restrictions while
there could be another wave.

Either his cognitive powers have declined and he can no longer
comprehend the IC report, or he is being knowingly disingenuous.
Given his track record, probably both.
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-22 00:10:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
And the big unanswered (currently unanswerable) questions are
- what stages of relaxation are valid (by some defined criteria)
- what are the preconditions for relaxation
- what are the preconditions for re-imposition of restrictions
This is an uncommonly intelligent, responsible, timely discussion of
those issues, conducted with the doctor behind the antibody prevalence
studies in Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties.

Highlights:
- contact-tracing is infeasible at these prevalence levels
- details Santa Clara study method
- estimates COVID-19 case fatality rate ~= 0.1 to 0.2%, same as flu
- influenza mortality stats are lowered by the availability of vaccines;
w/o vaccines, flu CFR would be higher.
- recommends widespread serological studies
- hospital utilization level should guide re-opening efforts
- shutdown devastating to impoverished nations
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/an-update-from-dr-b.php

Cheers,
James Arthur
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 02:57:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
And the big unanswered (currently unanswerable) questions are
- what stages of relaxation are valid (by some defined criteria)
- what are the preconditions for relaxation
- what are the preconditions for re-imposition of restrictions
This is an uncommonly intelligent, responsible, timely discussion of
those issues, conducted with the doctor behind the antibody prevalence
studies in Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties.
- contact-tracing is infeasible at these prevalence levels
- details Santa Clara study method
- estimates COVID-19 case fatality rate ~= 0.1 to 0.2%, same as flu
- influenza mortality stats are lowered by the availability of vaccines;
w/o vaccines, flu CFR would be higher.
- recommends widespread serological studies
- hospital utilization level should guide re-opening efforts
- shutdown devastating to impoverished nations
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/an-update-from-dr-b.php
It does make the point that the testers got the result that they wanted and expected.

Stephen J Gould's book "The Mismeasure of Man" does go into the way that experimenter bias can influence published results.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-22 06:41:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
And the big unanswered (currently unanswerable) questions are
- what stages of relaxation are valid (by some defined criteria)
- what are the preconditions for relaxation
- what are the preconditions for re-imposition of restrictions
This is an uncommonly intelligent, responsible, timely discussion of
those issues, conducted with the doctor behind the antibody prevalence
studies in Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties.
- contact-tracing is infeasible at these prevalence levels
- details Santa Clara study method
- estimates COVID-19 case fatality rate ~= 0.1 to 0.2%, same as flu
- influenza mortality stats are lowered by the availability of vaccines;
w/o vaccines, flu CFR would be higher.
- recommends widespread serological studies
- hospital utilization level should guide re-opening efforts
- shutdown devastating to impoverished nations
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/an-update-from-dr-b.php
I'd look at that but, since I'm rather deaf, videos require
a lot more effort on my part than reading. In addition, it
is 42 minutes long, and I'm sure that I could read the
information therein faster.

Having said that, the highlights you mention seem unremarkable,
although some of the details will inevitably turn out to
be imperfect.

The "hospital utilization level should guide re-opening efforts"
point is essentially the same as the Imperial College report,
provided that re-imposition occurs when the case rate rises
again.

The IC report estimates that we would then be shutdown for 2/3
the time until a vaccine is developed.
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-21 16:27:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
I'm at work!
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-22 00:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
I'm at work!
Cool! Me too!

Cheers,
James
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-22 02:07:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.

I wonder why we don't.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
I'm at work!
Cool! Me too!
Cheers,
James
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 02:57:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.
I wonder why we don't.
It's called the immune system. Trying reading something about it, sometime.

You will be amazed, if you have the attention span to keep reading without regular doses of flattery. Since you will get reminded of all of the idiotic things you have posted on the subject, you would find the experience anything but flattering.

The reason why we keep on getting new infections - maybe one ever few years - is that the viruses involved mutate very frequently, and the one's that can still infect you have changed enough that your immune system doesn't recognise them any more, and has to find a new antibody to label them as foreign, dangerous and in need of termination. This takes a couple of days.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Doe
2020-04-22 04:45:03 UTC
Permalink
Regular Australian troll...
--
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2c0c:: with SMTP id d12mr24719354qta.284.1587524228886; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:57:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:e602:: with SMTP id z2mr10463946qkf.42.1587524228677; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:57:08 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:57:08 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=110.175.201.50; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 110.175.201.50
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 02:57:08 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:591597
hoo.com
oo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait unti
l the
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the
things
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... te
sting,
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. T
hen we
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most peo
ple
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been
in
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't k
now it)
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder
if it is
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4
,632
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more
.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks,
months
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowe
d to roam
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and kill
ed???
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to
adequately
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to som
e extent.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from t
he outside.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed
to return
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down someth
ing
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It
's
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's
not
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.
I wonder why we don't.
It's called the immune system. Trying reading something about it, sometime.
You will be amazed, if you have the attention span to keep reading without regular doses of flattery. Since you will get reminded of all of the idiotic things you have posted on the subject, you would find the experience anything but flattering.
The reason why we keep on getting new infections - maybe one ever few years - is that the viruses involved mutate very frequently, and the one's that can still infect you have changed enough that your immune system doesn't recognise them any more, and has to find a new antibody to label them as foreign, dangerous and in need of termination. This takes a couple of days.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-22 05:45:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.
FLU SEASONALITY
"While seasonal influenza (flu) viruses are detected year-round in the United States, flu viruses are most common during the fall and winter."
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
I wonder why we don't.
a) Sub-optimal propagation conditions, seasonal, reduce exposures
b) We develop immunity?

Cheers,
James
Tom Gardner
2020-04-22 06:42:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.
FLU SEASONALITY
"While seasonal influenza (flu) viruses are detected year-round in the United States, flu viruses are most common during the fall and winter."
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
I wonder why we don't.
a) Sub-optimal propagation conditions, seasonal, reduce exposures
b) We develop immunity?
Quite!

It isn't rocket science!
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-22 10:28:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
I don't think that's correct. Prevalence falls dramatically
out-of-season, but AIUI they persist in the population (people
still get flu mid-summer, just not as often) and resurge when
conditions favor (promote / facilitate) effective propagation.
If every cold and flu virus lingered forever, we'd all be dead. We'd
get 50 infections at a time all year.
FLU SEASONALITY
"While seasonal influenza (flu) viruses are detected year-round in the United States, flu viruses are most common during the fall and winter."
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
I wonder why we don't.
a) Sub-optimal propagation conditions, seasonal, reduce exposures
b) We develop immunity?
Cheers,
James
Sure we develop immunity, or at least some immunity. Just enough to
allow a background level of essentially continuous (seasonally
modulated) viral attack. Why are we so friendly to viruses?
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Tom Gardner
2020-04-22 06:35:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
That's "gone" in the way that plague is gone from the US (it
is actually endemic in the SW). Given the right conditions,
both will reappear.

The difference between covid and is that the plague is more
easily treatable (antibiotics, fatality rate 11%), it is less
transmissable in modern societies, and the conditions are
unlikely to reoccur.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
I'm at work!
I walked into the road without looking!

(which is unlikely to be a problem with the 1960s-level of
traffic around here)
Ricky C
2020-04-22 07:07:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
That's "gone" in the way that plague is gone from the US (it
is actually endemic in the SW). Given the right conditions,
both will reappear.
That's a lack of knowledge on the part of both of you. The plague lives in rodents and their fleas. You can get rid of it in people, but it will reappear because you haven't gotten rid of the germ in the rodent population.

Once you rid the US of SARS=CoV-2 it is gone (unless you have infected pet pandolins). You just have to keep it out from other infected countries. It's looking like we may be the last country in the world to get rid of this disease. We can't even keep it from continuing to spread in the human population without worrying about pandolins.
--
Rick C.

-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-22 11:13:25 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 07:35:01 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.
But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.
That's "gone" in the way that plague is gone from the US (it
is actually endemic in the SW). Given the right conditions,
both will reappear.
C19 will burn out, and its descendents will hit us in the future. Some
day we may understand this ongoing dance between viruses and people.
Post by Tom Gardner
The difference between covid and is that the plague is more
easily treatable (antibiotics, fatality rate 11%), it is less
transmissable in modern societies, and the conditions are
unlikely to reoccur.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.
I'm at work!
I walked into the road without looking!
(which is unlikely to be a problem with the 1960s-level of
traffic around here)
The freeways here are blasting along at 65 MPH. I can get to work in 7
minutes. I can jay walk across Potrero Avenue because there are hardly
any cars.

But I can see the traffic building up every day, even as the lockdown
ratchets up. I'll have to resume driving back streets to work soon.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-21 16:24:56 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.

There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-21 16:30:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.
There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.
Or if you want exponential rather than Gaussian tails, a hyperbolic
secant. (Q-switched laser pulses are often modelled as sech curves.)

Interestingly, both the Gaussian and sech pulses are their own Fourier
transform, which makes them convenient to handle on paper.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 17:07:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.
There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.
Nobody cares what the exact shape will be!

Unless there is /reason/ (i.e not emotion, not hope) to
believe otherwise, then history is a reasonable starting
point.

History indicates several peaks over years rather than months.
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-21 17:47:33 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:07:25 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.
There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.
Nobody cares what the exact shape will be!
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."

The curve doesn't matter?
Post by Tom Gardner
Unless there is /reason/ (i.e not emotion, not hope) to
believe otherwise, then history is a reasonable starting
point.
Not the stuff I've seen.

Loading Image...

Some are worse!
Post by Tom Gardner
History indicates several peaks over years rather than months.
If you are predicting that we will have another cold and flu season
next winter, I agree.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
whit3rd
2020-04-22 00:03:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
Ah, at last you have a clue! The lives being threatened by the
disease matter, and a nonzero value means threat. The upward
trend matters because (in a new disease with no immunities)
the expected trend is exponential, and if the first derivative
(the slope) is positive, so are all the other derivatives.

There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds etc.),
and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch that limit,
meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in addition
to the viral ailment.

So, 'flatten the curve' makes sense in avoiding that breakdown.
Such a breakdown made ebola a very costly disease some years ago.

Yes, of course, the curve does not incorporate enough information to
deal with the disease, either on an individual basis, or throughout an urban area,
or on a national level, nor does it provide services like testing, life support,
financial assistance... it's a small tool with a few small uses. If you
want to scratch an itchy back... nope, it's not the curve that matters.
John Doe
2020-04-22 00:55:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
Ah, at last you have a clue! The lives being threatened by the
disease matter, and a nonzero value means threat.
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.

Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.

The state of Wyoming has a grand total of TWO coronavirus deaths.

People in flyover states... "It's a bird, it's a plane. No, it's a
bunch of coronavirus".

As time goes on, personal protective equipment becomes available,
exponentially. Some very intelligent people all over the country are
working on solutions and ramping up production of needed products.
keith wright
2020-04-22 02:09:23 UTC
Permalink
On Tuesday, 21 April 2020 17:55:14 UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
...
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Covid-19 is making a good attempt at overtaking the flu in a short time unless we do something about it:

This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.

https://ibb.co/R99KRVZ

from: https://medium.com/swlh/misinformation-goes-viral-1aad951e4492

...
Ricky C
2020-04-22 02:28:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by keith wright
...
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
https://ibb.co/R99KRVZ
from: https://medium.com/swlh/misinformation-goes-viral-1aad951e4492
...
I don't get it. So COVID-19 lumps all it's victims into a short span rather than spreading them over the year. Sounds convenient to me.

The flu makes you wait all year long. Try COVID-19, the convenient killer. Now faster acting, halving your time in the ICU.



Do you guys think Larkin is serious about the questions he asks? He certainly appears to be an obnoxious troll. Maybe he really doesn't understand people enough (along with science) to appreciate that he questions sound like he is baiting people. He did say he is autistic. Is he really that unaware of how other people feel?

No wonder he likes Trump.
--
Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-22 06:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by keith wright
...
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
https://ibb.co/R99KRVZ
from: https://medium.com/swlh/misinformation-goes-viral-1aad951e4492
...
I don't get it. So COVID-19 lumps all it's victims into a short span rather than spreading them over the year. Sounds convenient to me.
The flu makes you wait all year long. Try COVID-19, the convenient killer. Now faster acting, halving your time in the ICU.
Do you guys think Larkin is serious about the questions he asks? He certainly appears to be an obnoxious troll. Maybe he really doesn't understand people enough (along with science) to appreciate that he questions sound like he is baiting people. He did say he is autistic. Is he really that unaware of how other people feel?
No wonder he likes Trump.
John asks perfectly reasonable questions that, for some reason,
a few people aren't able to understand or process. Whooooosh.

I find him delightful, articulate, thoughtful, easy to understand,
and usually right.

Asking questions can be an attempt to get people to think things
out, rather than just telling them something. If someone considers
a question and formulates answers in his own mind, then perhaps
he'll see the thing whole, and understand it entirely.

But the communications can fail if the two minds attempting lack
sufficient commonalities.

Try explaining nuclear physics to a cow. The cow will listen patiently,
courteously, patronizing you. When you're done, she'll belch. And when
you leave she'll gossip with the other cows, pitying you, the loon,
rambling, and incoherent.

Cheers,
James Arthur
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 08:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by keith wright
...
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
https://ibb.co/R99KRVZ
from: https://medium.com/swlh/misinformation-goes-viral-1aad951e4492
...
I don't get it. So COVID-19 lumps all it's victims into a short span rather than spreading them over the year. Sounds convenient to me.
The flu makes you wait all year long. Try COVID-19, the convenient killer. Now faster acting, halving your time in the ICU.
Do you guys think Larkin is serious about the questions he asks? He certainly appears to be an obnoxious troll. Maybe he really doesn't understand people enough (along with science) to appreciate that he questions sound like he is baiting people. He did say he is autistic. Is he really that unaware of how other people feel?
No wonder he likes Trump.
John asks perfectly reasonable questions that, for some reason,
a few people aren't able to understand or process. Whooooosh.
James Arthur's idea of a perfectly reasonable question is something he is able to hang a bit more right-wing propaganda onto. That makes John Larkin a useful idiot.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
I find him delightful, articulate, thoughtful, easy to understand,
and usually right.
Which means far-right. John Larkin doesn't understand enough about politics to have any kind of actual political stance, but he's a gullible twit (outside of electronics) and happy to fall for the sort right-twaddle that James Arthur peddles. This level of gullibility may be rare enough to make him attractive to James Arthur, who may have trouble finding people silly enough to agree with (or at least be tolerant of) his bizarre right-wing lunacies.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Asking questions can be an attempt to get people to think things
out, rather than just telling them something. If someone considers
a question and formulates answers in his own mind, then perhaps
he'll see the thing whole, and understand it entirely.
Not something that John Larkin seems capable of managing.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
But the communications can fail if the two minds attempting lack
sufficient commonalities.
Far-right-wing lunatics run into this quite often, but are surprisingly resistant to the idea that they are the people who are out of touch with reality.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Try explaining nuclear physics to a cow. The cow will listen patiently,
courteously, patronizing you. When you're done, she'll belch. And when
you leave she'll gossip with the other cows, pitying you, the loon,
rambling, and incoherent.
John Larkin on climate change comes to mind. He'll explain what he has learned from climate change denial propaganda web-sites, and feels hurt when people are unreceptive to his neatly organised - if utterly fallacious - ideas.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
2020-04-22 11:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by keith wright
...
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
https://ibb.co/R99KRVZ
from: https://medium.com/swlh/misinformation-goes-viral-1aad951e4492
...
I don't get it. So COVID-19 lumps all it's victims into a short span rather than spreading them over the year. Sounds convenient to me.
The flu makes you wait all year long. Try COVID-19, the convenient killer. Now faster acting, halving your time in the ICU.
Do you guys think Larkin is serious about the questions he asks? He certainly appears to be an obnoxious troll. Maybe he really doesn't understand people enough (along with science) to appreciate that he questions sound like he is baiting people. He did say he is autistic. Is he really that unaware of how other people feel?
No wonder he likes Trump.
John asks perfectly reasonable questions that, for some reason,
a few people aren't able to understand or process. Whooooosh.
I ask a lot of perfectly unreasonable questions too. That's the way to
discover things.

Most people, especially here, are hostile to ideas. They shoot down
concepts instead of playing with them.

Concept: viruses are a component of horizontal evolution. They hurt
individuals but help species, so we tolerate some.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
I find him delightful, articulate, thoughtful, easy to understand,
and usually right.
Asking questions can be an attempt to get people to think things
out, rather than just telling them something. If someone considers
a question and formulates answers in his own mind, then perhaps
he'll see the thing whole, and understand it entirely.
But the communications can fail if the two minds attempting lack
sufficient commonalities.
It's hard to brainstorm, super hard in a public forum.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
John Doe
2020-04-22 04:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by keith wright
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Covid-19 is making a good attempt at overtaking the flu in a short
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
The rest of the country isn't anything like New York. Even
California has a small fraction of that.

Here is a frequently updated map of the states (page down about
three times), with confirmed cases and deaths...

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/16/816707182/map-tracking-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus-in-the-u-s

Notice Wyoming has a grand total of TWO deaths. North and South
Dakota have a total of *21* deaths. Many of the flyover states have
no more than 100 deaths.
Ricky C
2020-04-22 05:12:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
Post by keith wright
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Covid-19 is making a good attempt at overtaking the flu in a short
This is a plot of the weekly deaths in New York compared to those from the flu.
The rest of the country isn't anything like New York. Even
California has a small fraction of that.
Here is a frequently updated map of the states (page down about
three times), with confirmed cases and deaths...
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/16/816707182/map-tracking-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus-in-the-u-s
Notice Wyoming has a grand total of TWO deaths. North and South
Dakota have a total of *21* deaths. Many of the flyover states have
no more than 100 deaths.
The flyover states also have MUCH lower populations. They essentially are not so important in this endeavor, but we should not let the new infection rate climb even there.
--
Rick C.

-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 02:48:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
Ah, at last you have a clue! The lives being threatened by the
disease matter, and a nonzero value means threat.
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Over a much longer period.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
The healthcare systems in Italy, Spain and New York have looked pretty broken.
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
The state of Wyoming has a grand total of TWO coronavirus deaths.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
People in flyover states... "It's a bird, it's a plane. No, it's a
bunch of coronavirus".
As time goes on, personal protective equipment becomes available,
exponentially. Some very intelligent people all over the country are
working on solutions and ramping up production of needed products.
Unfortunately none of them seem to be in charge of enforcing lock-down or organising contact tracing.

The US performance at containing the epidemic has been dire - down there with Spain and Italy. New York State has had three times as many confirmed Covid-19 infections per million people as Spain and Italy.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

There are now five states - and the District of Columbia - which have had more, and Trump is encouraging people to ease up on lock-downs. Make America greatly infected?

John Doe does seem to be a Flyguy-level imbecile. But then he always did.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Doe
2020-04-22 04:26:47 UTC
Permalink
Regular Australian troll...
--
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4e4d:: with SMTP id eb13mr21315916qvb.169.1587523712894; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aed:3e22:: with SMTP id l31mr18413786qtf.290.1587523712689; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder5.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=110.175.201.50; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 110.175.201.50
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 02:48:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 53
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:591594
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
Ah, at last you have a clue! The lives being threatened by the
disease matter, and a nonzero value means threat.
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Over a much longer period.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
The healthcare systems in Italy, Spain and New York have looked pretty broken.
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
The state of Wyoming has a grand total of TWO coronavirus deaths.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
People in flyover states... "It's a bird, it's a plane. No, it's a
bunch of coronavirus".
As time goes on, personal protective equipment becomes available,
exponentially. Some very intelligent people all over the country are
working on solutions and ramping up production of needed products.
Unfortunately none of them seem to be in charge of enforcing lock-down or organising contact tracing.
The US performance at containing the epidemic has been dire - down there with Spain and Italy. New York State has had three times as many confirmed Covid-19 infections per million people as Spain and Italy.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
There are now five states - and the District of Columbia - which have had more, and Trump is encouraging people to ease up on lock-downs. Make America greatly infected?
John Doe does seem to be a Flyguy-level imbecile. But then he always did.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 04:39:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4e4d:: with SMTP id eb13mr21315916qvb.169.1587523712894; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aed:3e22:: with SMTP id l31mr18413786qtf.290.1587523712689; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder5.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=110.175.201.50; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 110.175.201.50
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 02:48:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 53
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:591594
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
Ah, at last you have a clue! The lives being threatened by the
disease matter, and a nonzero value means threat.
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Over a much longer period.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
The healthcare systems in Italy, Spain and New York have looked pretty broken.
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
The state of Wyoming has a grand total of TWO coronavirus deaths.
So the epidemic hasn't got there yet.
Post by John Doe
People in flyover states... "It's a bird, it's a plane. No, it's a
bunch of coronavirus".
As time goes on, personal protective equipment becomes available,
exponentially. Some very intelligent people all over the country are
working on solutions and ramping up production of needed products.
Unfortunately none of them seem to be in charge of enforcing lock-down or organising contact tracing.
The US performance at containing the epidemic has been dire - down there with Spain and Italy. New York State has had three times as many confirmed Covid-19 infections per million people as Spain and Italy.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
There are now five states - and the District of Columbia - which have had more, and Trump is encouraging people to ease up on lock-downs. Make America greatly infected?
John Doe does seem to be a Flyguy-level imbecile. But then he always did.
Regular Australian troll...
John Doe is a top-posting troll. I can fix the top-posting, but curing him of being a troll is beyond my powers. Covid-19 may be able to manage it.

Calling other people trolls is troll-like behaviour, but John Doe is a special case - its' more like calling a spade a bloody shovel.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
whit3rd
2020-04-22 03:21:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
Yes, this is a planet orbiting in a vacuum.
Was that supposed to be meaningful?
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
Is that because they've stopped a lot of routine healthcare like hospitals here?

My dentist appointment, made over a month ago, has been rescheduled to late May.
Ricky C
2020-04-22 04:12:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
He's saying if we exit the lock down we can play catchup!
--
Rick C.

-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
John Doe
2020-04-22 04:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
He's saying if we exit the lock down we can play catchup!
I'm saying you are a blathering idiot.

If you want to provide the timescale, go for it...
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 07:43:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
Post by Ricky C
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
He's saying if we exit the lock down we can play catchup!
I'm saying you are a blathering idiot.
John Doe says a lot things like that. He really is an idiot, so it doesn't signify.
Post by John Doe
If you want to provide the timescale, go for it...
He hasn't understood what was actually being said, which is typical.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Doe
2020-04-22 04:44:37 UTC
Permalink
A lazy troll...
--
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a8cb:: with SMTP id r194mr24401246qke.172.1587525720062; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:3665:: with SMTP id n34mr24505086qtb.227.1587525719873; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:21:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:21:59 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.221.140.126; posting-account=vKQm_QoAAADOaDCYsqOFDAW8NJ8sFHoE
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.221.140.126
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 03:22:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:591607
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
Yes, this is a planet orbiting in a vacuum.
Was that supposed to be meaningful?
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
Is that because they've stopped a lot of routine healthcare like hospitals here?
My dentist appointment, made over a month ago, has been rescheduled to late May.
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 07:48:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a8cb:: with SMTP id r194mr24401246qke.172.1587525720062; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:3665:: with SMTP id n34mr24505086qtb.227.1587525719873; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:21:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:21:59 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.221.140.126; posting-account=vKQm_QoAAADOaDCYsqOFDAW8NJ8sFHoE
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.221.140.126
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 03:22:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:591607
Post by John Doe
Over twice as many people die from the flu than so far have died
from the coronavirus.
Meaningless without matching timescales.
Post by John Doe
Post by whit3rd
There's a capability of healthcare that has limits (number of beds
etc.), and the count of active cases , on a timescale, could touch
that limit, meaning our healthcare system would be broken, in
addition to the viral ailment.
Only in a vacuum.
Yes, this is a planet orbiting in a vacuum.
Was that supposed to be meaningful?
Post by John Doe
Florida has more available/unused hospital beds now than it had
before the coronavirus.
Is that because they've stopped a lot of routine healthcare like hospitals here?
My dentist appointment, made over a month ago, has been rescheduled to late May.
A lazy troll...
John Doe really is a top-posting troll, and silly enough to think that it's worth his while to call anybody else a troll. Whit3rd is less like a troll than most of the people who post here, which makes John Doe more obviously idiotic than usual, not that that signifies much.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-22 06:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:07:25 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.
There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.
Nobody cares what the exact shape will be!
But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."
The curve doesn't matter?
It almost certainly did, and it doesn't matter that much.

The key point is the R value: >1 and the numbers
increase, <1 and they fall.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by Tom Gardner
Unless there is /reason/ (i.e not emotion, not hope) to
believe otherwise, then history is a reasonable starting
point.
Not the stuff I've seen.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/367/6485/1414.2/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1
Some are worse!
I'm not sure what your point is.
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by Tom Gardner
History indicates several peaks over years rather than months.
If you are predicting that we will have another cold and flu season
next winter, I agree.
Given this virus' characteristics and the lack of a vaccine,
it will be far more frequent than yearly :(
Ricky C
2020-04-21 22:21:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.
Just so.
In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
You can believe what you want... and do.

Can you show me a statement by the WHO that says the disease wasn't eliminated in Wuhan?
--
Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Tom Gardner
2020-04-21 22:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Can you show me a statement by the WHO that says the disease wasn't eliminated in Wuhan?
If I did, the your statements on comp.arch.embedded lead me to believe you
couldn't be bothered to read it.
Martin Brown
2020-04-22 08:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
The cat is already so far out of the bag that the only way we will ever
eliminate it now is if an effective vaccine can be made against it.

That has worked for smallpox and almost for polio.

Even *with* a vaccine we may still struggle to obtain full coverage
thanks to the the anti-vaxxer movement and the conspiracy theory nutters
who are torching mobile phone masts. I expect other fringe groups too.
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Ricky C
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures  to assure the disease is not allowed to
return
without being hunted down immediately.
Their lockdown was much more draconian than the UK or USA. I'm not sure
any western population would tolerate the measures they used in China.
Post by Tom Gardner
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.
That there is now a resurgence in Japan where for a very long time it
seemed to be well under control does not bode well for removing the
lockdown safely without having an uncontrolled resurgence of Covid.

It is basically just too good at evading containment measures when such
a high proportion of the population can be unwitting carriers.

Singapore is also going haywire with Covid infections in the underclass
of overcrowded migrant labourers they employ to do their dirty work.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/singapores-cramped-migrant-worker-dorms-hide-covid-19-surge-risk
Post by Tom Gardner
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
To be fair the Imperial paper did anticipate that possibility and
assumed bang bang imposition of relaxing and then lockdowns to prevent
the disease swamping the health system. The odd thing was that they also
dropped all measures at the end and had a sharper higher spike result.
(perhaps due to timing at the start of winter - November is the start of
flu season and the code has its roots in flu epidemic modelling)
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Bill Sloman
2020-04-22 08:50:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Brown
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to
roam the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???
The cat is already so far out of the bag that the only way we will ever
eliminate it now is if an effective vaccine can be made against it.
That has worked for smallpox and almost for polio.
Even *with* a vaccine we may still struggle to obtain full coverage
thanks to the the anti-vaxxer movement and the conspiracy theory nutters
who are torching mobile phone masts. I expect other fringe groups too.
Post by Ricky C
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some
extent. Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside. They take adequate measures  to assure the disease is not allowed to return without being hunted down immediately.
Post by Martin Brown
Their lock-down was much more draconian than the UK or USA. I'm not sure
any western population would tolerate the measures they used in China.
Australia seems to have managed it. It has been argued that the lock-down mainly serves to make contact tracing easier, and the contact tracing - with isolation of people who might have been infected by contact with a confirmed case - is the more effective part of the Chinese and South Korean success. Since South Korea never actually locked down, this is plausible. Australia does seem to be doing a lot of contact tracing on the relatively few cases we have got.

<snip>
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-22 09:02:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Brown
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Bill Sloman
"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.
Yet.
The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks,
months apart.
Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to
roam the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and
killed???
The cat is already so far out of the bag that the only way we will ever
eliminate it now is if an effective vaccine can be made against it.
I strongly suspect that is the case, but it is too much of
a jump for some members of this forum (even ignoring the
popup trolls like Flyguy).

Hence there may be (some limited) value in making less
unequivocal statements.
Post by Martin Brown
That has worked for smallpox and almost for polio.
Even *with* a vaccine we may still struggle to obtain full coverage thanks to
the the anti-vaxxer movement and the conspiracy theory nutters who are
torching mobile phone masts. I expect other fringe groups too.
Yes :(

Although we can hope than the casual and less rabid
anti-vaxxers will have pause for thought. It would
be amusing to see their reaction to mandatory vaccination.
Post by Martin Brown
Post by Ricky C
China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to
adequately low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to
some extent. Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than
from the outside. They take adequate measures to assure the disease is
not allowed to return without being hunted down immediately.
Their lockdown was much more draconian than the UK or USA. I'm not sure any
western population would tolerate the measures they used in China.
Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted down and
killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others, don't believe
that.
That there is now a resurgence in Japan where for a very long time it seemed
to be well under control does not bode well for removing the lockdown safely
without having an uncontrolled resurgence of Covid.
It is basically just too good at evading containment measures when such a
high proportion of the population can be unwitting carriers.
Singapore is also going haywire with Covid infections in the underclass of
overcrowded migrant labourers they employ to do their dirty work.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/singapores-cramped-migrant-worker-dorms-hide-covid-19-surge-risk
It was obvious (to me at least) just as things were
hotting up in Wuhan, that a key indicator would be
what happened as restrictions were relaxed.

Even then I had hopes and fears.
Post by Martin Brown
Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.
To be fair the Imperial paper did anticipate that possibility and assumed
bang bang imposition of relaxing and then lockdowns to prevent the disease
swamping the health system. The odd thing was that they also dropped all
measures at the end and had a sharper higher spike result. (perhaps due to
timing at the start of winter - November is the start of flu season and the
code has its roots in flu epidemic modelling)
That is one of the sources for my belief.

It is always helpful to avoid multiple independent
statements based on a common imperfect source from
being taken more seriously than staements from multiple
independent sources. But you knew that.
Ricky C
2020-04-21 05:04:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?
They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.
That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.
That's why all the testing. You do believe the testing works, right? If not, how do you know so many people are infected???
Post by d***@yahoo.com
E.g., this homeless shelter in Boston, where 36% tested positive,
but were symptom-free.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homeless-shelter-finds-36-percent-of-visitors-test-positive-nearly-all-asymptomatic
And all the people coming out of hiding, will then get it.
Not if you quarantine the people who test positive. Yeah, if you let typhoid Mary walk all over town you will have a problem.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
ISTM flattening the curve doesn't reduce deaths, it simply re-schedules
them.
Well there are multiple reasons why you are wrong and they have all been explained before even if you don't get it.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
The sensible, rational, epidemiologists I've heard, say the same --
it's to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, like Italy,
not to reduce the total number of people who get sick. It doesn't.
Tell that to China and the other countries that have the disease under control.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Meanwhile, expect the lockdown itself to kill many, many people.
Thanks to WuFlu my mom, as one example, hasn't been able to see a
doctor for two months -- they're all closed.
I don't know where you live,
We're talking about California.
So your mom can't get medical care in California? Wait, there are people all over the country protesting in the streets that they can't have their hair cut and your aren't protesting about your Mom not getting medical care???

Something is fishy.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
but I see no indication that important medical services are being curtailed here in VA. I checked a few providers and while a new telehealth service is available (examinations via phone and computer), they continue all important services.
It's not possible to be hunkered down, and providing medical services.
It's one or the other.
Is the entire world black and white to you? Where are you getting your food? Is food distribution shut down? How about the power to your home? Is the electricity industry shut down?

So if doctors are still working it's not a shut down?
Post by d***@yahoo.com
The dental offices down the street are closed. The blood bank isn't
getting donations -- they're pleading.
Lots of hospitals are now empty, even laying employees off. Check the
news. That's incompatible with "available and providing normal care."
We aren't talking about hospitals. We are talking about your Mom and how you don't care. Why aren't you protesting in the streets??? You should hold a sign that says, "Why can't my Mom get kinda important medical care?"
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Ricky C
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Her neighbor's chemo
has been put off during these two months, but the neighbor's case has
progressed so shockingly that they've decided to proceed urgently.
Prognosis is dire. Mom's not in danger. Lots of others aren't as
lucky.
You need to move to a state where they aren't insane about medical treatment.
I don't think the neighbor is in any condition to plan a move just now.
She's busy struggling to breathe. But she'll be glad you had an easy
answer for her, that's always comforting.
I just want to understand. You seem to be saying she is dying there. So my suggestion for her to go somewhere to get medical care is a bad idea? Ok, please tell her that too. "Stay here and die, it's the right thing to do".
--
Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-20 21:16:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)
Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith
How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.
Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.
There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.
Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."
Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
I expect we're in for some nasty inflation as a best-case. But years
ago I was in Italy as their irrationally exuberant spending came home
to roost, when a handful of well-circulated candy for change replaced
worthless coinage at the Autostrada toll booths. Everything was
crumbling, prices rising every day, yet our hosts still partied, flung
pasta acrobatically Italian-style at dinner, skied, drove like maniacs.
I concluded that Rome may have fallen, but then there was Italy.
I.e., we can still have fun, can't we?

Cheers,
James
Ricky C
2020-04-20 22:54:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)
Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith
How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.
Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.
There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.
Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."
Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”
Cheers,
James
Go ahead and joke. What the Fed and the Treasury have been doing is
serious. They have been playing the markets and riding the tiger's
back and the tiger is getting hungry.
Yes, and idle hands are the devil's workshop.
--
Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-20 18:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Phil Hobbs
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
My Dad used to say that he wanted to hire a one-armed economist. People
who didn't know the wheeze would ask why: "I'm sick of being told, 'on
the one hand this, on the other hand that.'"
I was wading through a list of Ronald Reagan's quips last night, and
that one was in there :)
Another: "An economist is someone who sees something that works in
practice, and wonders if it would work in theory." -- Ronald Reagan
“We have 2 classes of forecasters: Those who don't know . . . and
those who don't know they don't know. “ - John Kenneth Galbraith
How has French revolution affected world economic growth? Too early to
say.
That was Chou En-Lai's, I think. (IIRC Chou was asked whether the
French Revolution was a good thing.)
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Did you hear of the economist who dove into his swimming pool and broke
his neck? He forgot to seasonally adjust.
There were two economists who were shipwrecked on a desert island. They
had no money but over the next three years, they made millions of
dollars selling their hats to each other.
Two economists were sitting at a nudist colony. The one said, "Have
you read Marx?" The other says, "It's these wicker chairs."
That doesn't sound like Reagan's style, at least not in public.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Three econometricians went out hunting and came across a large deer.
The first econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the left. The
second econometrician fired but missed by a meter to the right. The
third econometrician didn’t fire but shouted in triumph, “We got it!
We got it!”
Cheers,
James
Fun.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Bill Sloman
2020-04-20 03:35:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
Nobody is gong to bother. You couldn't understand the answer, and wouldn't bother to try.

The only science you think you understand are the hard experimental sciences, and you get them wrong from time to time too.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Flyguy
2020-04-20 03:56:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Sloman
Post by j***@highlandsniptechnology.com
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
From folk with credible models, and for the same region and time period?
One of them is possibly credible. We just don't know which one.
I once had a model of a Ferrari. It wasn't anything like an actual
Ferrari.
But then it didn't come out of a computer -- if it had come out of
a computer it wouldda been just like an actual Ferrari. Because
computers.
Grins,
James
There's a joke that if you want 10 opinions on economics, ask 5
economists.
There's a wonderful article in this morning's NY Times by an
economist. He argues both sides of an issue and comes to no
conclusions. His trained professional skill is ambiguity.
Someone remind me, why do we have economists?
Nobody is gong to bother. You couldn't understand the answer, and wouldn't bother to try.
The only science you think you understand are the hard experimental sciences, and you get them wrong from time to time too.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
The ChiComm disinformation machine is in full force:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/04/04/china-fake-news-coronavirus-164652
Ricky C
2020-04-19 00:10:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
New cases seem to have peaked, and faded way down, in the places where
it started earliest. Look at the JHU new-case curves. Lots of european
countries are below 1/10 of peak now. It may well be gone before a
vaccine is available or useful, like most colds.
Not very likely. While the EU may be doing better most of the world is not. John literal not only doesn't understand math, he doesn't even understand numbers.

The world figures show over 1.5 million current cases growing by 53,000 each day. So every day we have more and more transmission. I don't understand why Larkin can't understand that we are still on the up ramp side of things across the world.

Even in the US we have 600,000 active infections, growing by around 30,000 each day. This isn't dropping currently.
Even the rate of new infections isn't dropping.

What Larkin seems totally incapable of understanding is that the infection rate is not dropping off anywhere because that is the natural path of the infection. It is dropping off in some places as a result of the measures they are taking to prevent the spread of the disease.

Even when Larkin focuses on "lots of european
countries", he is cherry picking a few that suit his ideas. The UK is not dropping at all. Germany is still around half the peak values. Italy is half. Spain is no less than half, likely more (rather spiky data). The Swiss have managed to get their new infection rate down to around a quarter. The French are headed in the right direction, but they are nowhere near a tenth unless he is looking at a single day with a very high reported number which is obviously a reporting glitch. That doesn't qualify as "lots" of countries.

So while Larkin usually cherry picks data, in this case he is just plain lying through his teeth.
--
Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Bill Sloman
2020-04-21 09:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.
Nonsense, as usual. You've also said there's too much news coverage.
We have a pandemic on a globe with 7.8 billion inhabitants
and you pronounce a finding of 'too many opinions'?
There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.
Most of them extremely dubious. John Larkin doesn't do critical judgement so he can't reject the rubbish.
Post by John Larkin
Some people say it will be with us for 18 months, only stopping when have a vaccine in mass production. Some people want to go back to work in two weeks.
Some want to go back now.
It depends how far out of touch with reality they are. John Larkin is not discriminating between the various levels of idiocy on display - the way above his pay grade.
Post by John Larkin
Some people suggest a second, bigger case surge in the fall. One big
name simulated a bouncing-ball curve of infections, multiple declining
peaks.
Nobody whose name that John Larkin can recall.
Post by John Larkin
We are just now starting to get some antibody data.
And it is looking remarkably dubious.
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun.
Oh, you have some supporting data and a good model that predicts that?
You don't think anyone will write books about this? You don't think
they might be fun? Barry's book about the 1918 epidemic is great
reading.
Post by whit3rd
Me, I'm predicting a practical vaccine for 'a year or so from now'. That's
my idea of fun.
New cases seem to have peaked, and faded way down, in the places where
it started earliest. Look at the JHU new-case curves. Lots of European
countries are below 1/10 of peak now.
Name one. Spain is a 18.5% of its peak, but it has taken almost a month to get there, and the decline is very lumpy. Italy is still a 34% of it's peak and it has taken just as long to get there.
Post by John Larkin
It may well be gone before a vaccine is available or useful, like most colds.
Only in John Larkin's private cloud-cuckoo land.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 02:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.
Sadly, the deficit in observation and reliable data describes John Larkin's situation, rather the science that he thinks he is commenting on.
Post by John Larkin
The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun. The good ones
will name names.
I doubt if John Larkin will feature as an example of ill-informed comment - there are too many other around, and Donald Trump's pratfalls will probably get pride of place.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-19 08:01:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
There's plenty of observation, but the data is still
far from perfect since the measurement tools and
procedures are so poor.[1]

That doesn't mean we should throw our hands in the
air and shout "it is God's will" or "the Rapture
is coming".
Post by John Larkin
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.
Simulations are like business plans: neither survive
contact with reality.

Their point is that they give a hand-waving feel for
which tweakable parameters are more and less important.

Two of particular relevance to the UK are the effect
of schools being open and of preventing incoming
travellers from China. Both were deemed relatively
unimportant, and allowed to continue.

If I survive I'll be interested to see which are
true/false.


[1] A good article written by people whose job is to
understand and communicate risks and *relative* risks.
Spiegelhalter in particular is known for trying to get
people to think about whether parachuting is more/less
dangerous than smoking/drinking at different ages :)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/coronavirus-statistics-what-can-we-trust-and-what-should-we-ignore
Winfield Hill
2020-04-18 20:50:32 UTC
Permalink
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
--
Thanks,
- Win
b***@columbus.rr.com
2020-04-18 21:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."
Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
--
Thanks,
- Win
It really matters not if it escaped from a lab or if it was some crazy bat virus from a slaughter market in Wuhan. What matters is why the immediate coverup. Why stopping those other scientists (you know the ones in China that were trying to get the word out about this thing and the Communists did what communists do....they lied, and punished their scientists. So the real question is what do we do with a communist country that want the benefits of interacting with the world, but refuses to play by the rules. What do all these scientists have to say about that. Also , are these scientists bothered that the Commies shut down Chinese scientists......Funny, I never read any stories about the comradary of scientists regarding these things.
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 02:56:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."
Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
It really matters not if it escaped from a lab or if it was some crazy bat virus from a slaughter market in Wuhan. What matters is why the immediate coverup.
That seems to have been driven by the local politicans in Wuhan, who didn't like the idea that there might be an epidemic getting under way in their city.

The doctors who were worried about the new disease they were seeing didn't have enough data to spell out what was going on.

It didn't take all that many more cases to get people outside Wuhan interested, and their reaction was much more realistic, and the cover-up stopped pretty much as soon as they got enough data to make it clar what was going on.
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Why stopping those other scientists (you know the ones in China that were trying to get the word out about this thing and the Communists did what communists do....they lied, and punished their scientists.
The people who were told to shut up were the hospital doctors who were treating patients who were presenting with an unfamiliar disease. As soon as there was any scientific investigation of their suspicions, the cover-up stopped.
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
So the real question is what do we do with a communist country that want the benefits of interacting with the world, but refuses to play by the rules.
As soon as they knew that that were dealing with a new disease, they did play by the rules.
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
What do all these scientists have to say about that.
At least one of the clinicians who got told to shut up died of the disease, so we can't ask him.
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
Also , are these scientists bothered that the Commies shut down Chinese scientists......Funny, I never read any stories about the comradery of scientists regarding these things.
You are confusing the medical doctors treating patients with the scientists tasked with finding out why the doctors suspected that they were dealing with a new disease.

The local authorities did tell the doctors to shut up about their suspicions, but when the higher authorities got interested, the results of the scientific investigations did get published pretty promptly.

Try to learn a bit more about what actually did happen.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Gardner
2020-04-19 08:10:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@columbus.rr.com
It really matters not if it escaped from a lab or if it was some crazy bat
virus from a slaughter market in Wuhan. What matters is why the immediate
coverup. Why stopping those other scientists (you know the ones in China
that were trying to get the word out about this thing and the Communists did
what communists do....they lied, and punished their scientists. So the real
question is what do we do with a communist country that want the benefits of
interacting with the world, but refuses to play by the rules. What do all
these scientists have to say about that. Also , are these scientists
bothered that the Commies shut down Chinese scientists......Funny, I never
read any stories about the comradary of scientists regarding these things.
Ignoring scientists, actively ignoring scientific advice,
and not taking necessary steps to prevent spread is deplorable.

At least /China/ has stopped being deplorable in that way.

When will the current US administration stop being deplorable?
John Robertson
2020-04-18 21:23:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."
Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
The fact that this and SARS both appeared in November (2002 and 2019) is
interesting.

Any meteor showers that peak at that time of the year? Mostly the Leonid
occur at that time. Perhaps someone has some time to poke around
archives a bit to see if any other disease outbreaks happened after
meteor showers.

So I did a brief search and found this scientist who proposes more or
less exactly that:

https://profchandra.org/

Didn't recall seeing any mention of him before. I also see that Fred
Hoyle and Prof Chandra had written a book on the subject...

Perhaps other scientists will look into this without preconceptions and
either refute it or endorse the theory as needing more attention.

John
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-18 21:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
But that's a profoundly unscientific statement on its face -- who
cares whether it's a "virus backbone" previously used in Western
research? How would that prevent anyone who wanted to, at any time,
from acquiring a sample and studying it? And how does this individual
purport to know the particulars of every virus and viral experiment
in all the world's labs?

It's a preposterous statement. Further, who cares? That he's not
aware of anyone using it before, does not mean Wuhan virologists
could not have collected it, collected then modified it, or even
synthesized it.

I'm not arguing for any theory. But these are thoroughly unscientific
rebuttals.

Cheers,
James Arthur
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-18 22:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."
Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
Funny how having several colleagues get disappeared for saying otherwise
will do that.

Cheers

Phil
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-21 18:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
whit3rd wrote...
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."
https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1
That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."
Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."
That's moving the goal posts. They were collecting a lot of bat
coronaviruses and working on them in _Level_2_, not L4. It probably
wasn't an engineered virus, but that's entirely beside the point.

And if you live in Shanghai, you're under the ChiCom thumb, so you say
what you have to say. Maybe a well-known foreigner is a bit safer
himself, but all they'd have to do to make Hundman play ball is to
disappear one of his Chinese friends and let Hundman know what he had to
do to get him released.

It's not like they never do that sort of thing, you know.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Cursitor Doom
2020-04-21 19:23:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Hobbs
And if you live in Shanghai, you're under the ChiCom thumb, so you say
what you have to say. Maybe a well-known foreigner is a bit safer
himself, but all they'd have to do to make Hundman play ball is to
disappear one of his Chinese friends and let Hundman know what he had to
do to get him released.
It's worth keeping in mind that this one-word global government Hillary &
her ilk want to see brought in will be implemented along the lines of the
Chinese model. So if you value your freedom, it would be wise to
emphatically reject the project and all the nation-hating nutjobs like
Bill Sloman and Gardner who are loudly cheering it on.
Phil Hobbs
2020-04-18 22:32:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by whit3rd
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
What do you mean "we", paleface? ;)
Post by whit3rd
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.
When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.
The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.
Dream on. You should see some of the dreck I get sent to peer-review.
Thirty years of watching the average quality go straight into the tank
would probably cure even you of that Pollyanna view of science you keep
trotting out.

It's a great pity, but 21st Century science has fallen a long way from
the 20th Century.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 02:10:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.
Particularly when you haven't got a clue what constitutes "science".
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Tom Del Rosso
2020-04-18 21:07:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But it was a
lab if a food market is a lab.

Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that some
things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.
John Larkin
2020-04-18 22:48:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 17:07:13 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But it was a
lab if a food market is a lab.
Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that some
things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.
The Japanese discovered a lot of sanitary stuff before bacteria were
imagined.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
John Doe
2020-04-19 00:45:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by Tom Del Rosso
I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But
it was a lab if a food market is a lab.
Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that
some things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.
The Japanese discovered a lot of sanitary stuff before bacteria
were imagined.
Could be, but the Japanese aren't the Chinese.

Yes, I know "they all look alike".

The Japanese realized how useful branding is. Something the Chinese
haven't figured out even though they have had more than enough time.
John Larkin
2020-04-20 18:40:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 00:45:20 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
Post by John Doe
Post by John Larkin
Post by Tom Del Rosso
I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But
it was a lab if a food market is a lab.
Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that
some things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.
The Japanese discovered a lot of sanitary stuff before bacteria
were imagined.
Could be, but the Japanese aren't the Chinese.
Yes, I know "they all look alike".
Actually, "they" don't.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
John Doe
2020-04-19 00:40:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But it
was a lab if a food market is a lab.
Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that
some things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.
lol
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-18 21:12:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.

ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.

Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.

There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.

The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.


Cheers,
James Arthur
George Herold
2020-04-18 22:25:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Cheers,
James Arthur
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)

George H.
John Larkin
2020-04-18 22:57:31 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:25:58 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Cheers,
James Arthur
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
George H.
No, the slants are extreme lately. You can read the first paragraph of
a news report and predict which camp it came from.

There must be a new Recommended Insults appendix to the NY Times Style
Book.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Bill Sloman
2020-04-21 10:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:25:58 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Cheers,
James Arthur
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
No, the slants are extreme lately. You can read the first paragraph of
a news report and predict which camp it came from.
Or John Larkin thinks he can. which isn't quite the same thing.
Post by John Larkin
There must be a new Recommended Insults appendix to the NY Times Style
Book.
Trump does place unusual demands on news reporters. His spectacular performance on Fact Checker is unprecedented, and getting the right superlatives must take an effort.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydnay
John Doe
2020-04-19 00:51:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any
scientific arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their
speculations being tossed around non-scientifically by
non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China
were a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections
for traces of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's
excluded. And we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find
the first cases. However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have
been studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected
SARS-CoV2, then lost control. Or synthesized something, or
collected, then modified something wild, etc. Or that none of
that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most
news almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the
source. It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my
tolerance is much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
Racist!
Given the Internet, getting news from the source is much easier
nowadays. Like directly from courts and legislatures. I was watching
C-SPAN long before the Internet, but now it's super easy. Access to
court proceedings not very difficult.
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-19 16:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
George H.
That's a good question about news sources. I had to think a bit to
re-trace my process.

In my youth I was exposed to some honest-to-goodness communist
propagandizing from directly across the Iron Curtain, which has affected
the way I process information later in life. I've seen Orwellian police
states personally and heard their official voices deny obvious truths.
And all of that has bred a keen sense for when I'm getting incomplete
information, straw-men, narratives, and rhetorical devices instead of
facts. I can usually spot con-men instantly, too. Same thing.

I think my staying-informed process consists essentially of collecting
seeds from wherever, suggesting possibly interesting happenings to
investigate. From there, I'll possibly read a few treatments of the
issue first to see what's being argued, then go directly to the source
so that I can evaluate the arguments being made.

When I go to the source and watch the actual person saying the actual
thing, or read the law itself, or proposed legislation, I often find
the popular reporting omits critical details, or flat-out
mischaracterizes or even misstates what was actually said.

So when reading an article in the popular press, I just read through
the slant gleaning objective facts. For example, this AP article says

" The punishment of eight doctors for “rumor-mongering,” broadcast
on national television on Jan. 2, sent a chill through the city’s
hospitals.

“Doctors in Wuhan were afraid,” said Dali Yang, a professor of Chinese
politics at the University of Chicago. “It was truly intimidation of
an entire profession.” "
https://apnews.com/68a9e1b91de4ffc166acd6012d82c2f9

Okay, on Jan. 2, China was aware of and suppressing news of their
epidemic. That's useful. But later, after making a balanced
presentation about why Chinese leaders might have wanted to avoid
public panic, the article takes a swipe at President Trump for the
same thing with no such mitigation. Orange Man is Bad, you see.
That's slant.

In pursuit of their Orange Man Bad thesis the AP article makes
ignorant statements about the U.S. response, such as "However, even
the public announcement on Jan. 20 left the U.S. nearly two months
to prepare for the pandemic."

The AP is clearly trying to argue that the U.S. failed to act, and paint
that on The Donald. But I already know the U.S. didn't have its first
known case until Jan. 21st -- by that measure we had exactly one day
to prepare for the pandemic. It's a lame argument. And I also know
that on Jan. 20th, Dr. Fauci had announced the National Institutes
of Health was already working on a vaccine for the coronavirus. That
doesn't sound like inaction or inattention to me. That sounds like our
officials were on high alert, working aggressively to counter the
threat. But the AP doesn't mention those things I already know,
important things devastating to their argument. So, I immediately know
the AP is cherry-picking, poorly-informed, or they're pitching me.

So, I try to dig out the facts wherever I can, read through the slant,
and reach a reasonable understanding of reality.

And never forget -- the most insidious power of the media is the power
to ignore. Whenever you're getting only the costs of a thing but not
the benefits, or only the benefits but not the cost, you're not being
informed, you're being played.

Cheers,
James Arthur
Bill Sloman
2020-04-20 03:34:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
George H.
That's a good question about news sources. I had to think a bit to
re-trace my process.
In my youth I was exposed to some honest-to-goodness communist
propagandizing from directly across the Iron Curtain, which has affected
the way I process information later in life. I've seen Orwellian police
states personally and heard their official voices deny obvious truths.
And all of that has bred a keen sense for when I'm getting incomplete
information, straw-men, narratives, and rhetorical devices instead of
facts. I can usually spot con-men instantly, too. Same thing.
And the expertise you developed is put to use in the material you post here, which is full of incomplete information, straw man examples and rhetorical devices.

<snip>
Post by d***@yahoo.com
In pursuit of their Orange Man Bad thesis the AP article makes
ignorant statements about the U.S. response, such as "However, even
the public announcement on Jan. 20 left the U.S. nearly two months
to prepare for the pandemic."
The AP is clearly trying to argue that the U.S. failed to act, and paint
that on The Donald. But I already know the U.S. didn't have its first
known case until Jan. 21st -- by that measure we had exactly one day
to prepare for the pandemic.
But that case didn't start the US epidemic - the US was already quite well enough aware of what was going on to shunt the patient into effective isolation.

The first one that got away and started US epidemic did so some weeks later.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
It's a lame argument.
Not as lame as the one James Arthi]ur is peddling here.

<snip>
Post by d***@yahoo.com
So, I try to dig out the facts wherever I can, read through the slant,
and reach a reasonable understanding of reality.
And then post a comment with a slant that makes Trump and his repulbican clown car look good - or at least less fatuously incompetent.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
And never forget -- the most insidious power of the media is the power
to ignore. Whenever you're getting only the costs of a thing but not
the benefits, or only the benefits but not the cost, you're not being
informed, you're being played.
James Arthur is extremely fond of ignoring inconvenient facts, and the most obvious fact here is that the US - which has about a quarter of China's population - has now had 764,265 people infected with Covid-19 - a number that is rising by about 30,000 a day - while China managed to limit the number infected to 82,747 and had twelve new cases today (probably all returning travellers).

That makes the US response decidedly inadequate. Other people have managed to do better - with less time to prepare - so the word incompetent isn't out of place.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
George Herold
2020-04-21 23:07:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by George Herold
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)
George H.
That's a good question about news sources. I had to think a bit to
re-trace my process.
In my youth I was exposed to some honest-to-goodness communist
propagandizing from directly across the Iron Curtain, which has affected
the way I process information later in life. I've seen Orwellian police
states personally and heard their official voices deny obvious truths.
And all of that has bred a keen sense for when I'm getting incomplete
information, straw-men, narratives, and rhetorical devices instead of
facts. I can usually spot con-men instantly, too. Same thing.
I think my staying-informed process consists essentially of collecting
seeds from wherever, suggesting possibly interesting happenings to
investigate. From there, I'll possibly read a few treatments of the
issue first to see what's being argued, then go directly to the source
so that I can evaluate the arguments being made.
When I go to the source and watch the actual person saying the actual
thing, or read the law itself, or proposed legislation, I often find
the popular reporting omits critical details, or flat-out
mischaracterizes or even misstates what was actually said.
So when reading an article in the popular press, I just read through
the slant gleaning objective facts. For example, this AP article says
Right, I agree with all that. But these days, I seem to glean more
anger than fact. (Reading the news pisses me off before I'm informed.)
Post by d***@yahoo.com
" The punishment of eight doctors for “rumor-mongering,” broadcast
on national television on Jan. 2, sent a chill through the city’s
hospitals.
“Doctors in Wuhan were afraid,” said Dali Yang, a professor of Chinese
politics at the University of Chicago. “It was truly intimidation of
an entire profession.” "
https://apnews.com/68a9e1b91de4ffc166acd6012d82c2f9
Okay, on Jan. 2, China was aware of and suppressing news of their
epidemic. That's useful. But later, after making a balanced
presentation about why Chinese leaders might have wanted to avoid
public panic, the article takes a swipe at President Trump for the
same thing with no such mitigation. Orange Man is Bad, you see.
That's slant.
In pursuit of their Orange Man Bad thesis the AP article makes
ignorant statements about the U.S. response, such as "However, even
the public announcement on Jan. 20 left the U.S. nearly two months
to prepare for the pandemic."
The AP is clearly trying to argue that the U.S. failed to act, and paint
that on The Donald. But I already know the U.S. didn't have its first
known case until Jan. 21st -- by that measure we had exactly one day
to prepare for the pandemic. It's a lame argument. And I also know
that on Jan. 20th, Dr. Fauci had announced the National Institutes
of Health was already working on a vaccine for the coronavirus. That
doesn't sound like inaction or inattention to me. That sounds like our
officials were on high alert, working aggressively to counter the
threat. But the AP doesn't mention those things I already know,
important things devastating to their argument. So, I immediately know
the AP is cherry-picking, poorly-informed, or they're pitching me.
So, I try to dig out the facts wherever I can, read through the slant,
and reach a reasonable understanding of reality.
And never forget -- the most insidious power of the media is the power
to ignore. Whenever you're getting only the costs of a thing but not
the benefits, or only the benefits but not the cost, you're not being
informed, you're being played.
Yeah, or are we even asking the right questions.
As my fav podcast host Eric Weinstein asks, who decided on this
'frame' for the conversation?

You know what bothers me the most (at least at this particular moment)
we are selling our kids future for our current benefit.
As Phil H said on some other thread, the national debt is a fiction...
(well he said something like that anyway. :^)

Do you have any kids James? nieces or nephews

George H.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Cheers,
James Arthur
John Larkin
2020-04-18 22:54:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
Maybe they just transported some bat virus from a cave for research
purposes, and it infected a lab tech and got loose.

There was a guy on NPR this morning, a bat collector who does crawl
into caves and traps bats and takes varuous iccky samples to look at
their viruses. Bats host huge ranges of viruses that apparently do
them little or no harm. Like another virus I could name.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Shanghai resident Assistant Professor? Of course he is an objective
expert.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Cheers,
James Arthur
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
d***@yahoo.com
2020-04-19 15:54:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
Maybe they just transported some bat virus from a cave for research
purposes, and it infected a lab tech and got loose.
That's what I meant by "collected...then lost control." One of the
workers could've gotten ill just crawling around in caves.

Anyway, early on in this panic attack I read that several of the lab
workers fell ill with China's Gift, which might pertain to the
question at hand, or maybe not.
Post by John Larkin
There was a guy on NPR this morning, a bat collector who does crawl
into caves and traps bats and takes varuous iccky samples to look at
their viruses. Bats host huge ranges of viruses that apparently do
them little or no harm. Like another virus I could name.
Post by d***@yahoo.com
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Shanghai resident Assistant Professor? Of course he is an objective
expert.
Yes. And not being dead, in prison, or disappeared definitely adds
both expertise and credibility.

Cheers,
James
Bill Sloman
2020-04-21 10:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.
ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.
Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.
Maybe they just transported some bat virus from a cave for research
purposes, and it infected a lab tech and got loose.
If your local food market sells bats as food, there are going to lots more bats moving through it than any research lab.
Post by John Larkin
There was a guy on NPR this morning, a bat collector who does crawl
into caves and traps bats and takes varuous iccky samples to look at
their viruses. Bats host huge ranges of viruses that apparently do
them little or no harm. Like another virus I could name.
Covid-19 doesn't seem to have John Larkin any harm yet - he's had addled ideas on lot of subjects for years now.
Post by John Larkin
Post by d***@yahoo.com
There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.
The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.
Shanghai resident Assistant Professor? Of course he is an objective
expert.
He's not at liberty to be entirely expert, but he's still going to know a lot more than John Larkin or Flyguy, much as they may want to pose as our resident experts.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
b***@gmail.com
2020-04-18 22:58:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

Anyway, latest genetic analysis on extant virus samples from China exclude the whole city of Wuhan as the origin. They're zooming in on Guangdong as the origin, and possibly as early as September.

https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-outbreak-september-not-wuhan-1498566
speff
2020-04-18 23:27:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Absence of proof is not proof of absence.
Anyway, latest genetic analysis on extant virus samples from China exclude the whole city of Wuhan as the origin. They're zooming in on Guangdong as the origin, and possibly as early as September.
https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-outbreak-september-not-wuhan-1498566
If it has natural origins with an intermediate animal, GD makes a lot more sense than Wuhan because they're far more into weird stuff there.

“The Cantonese will eat everything on four legs except the table.”

Wuhan is more boring- their famous dish is just spicy noodles.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
John Doe
2020-04-19 00:38:07 UTC
Permalink
Not getting enough attention...
--
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!drn
From: Winfield Hill <winfieldhill yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfounded, Scientists Say
Date: 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700
Organization: Rowland Institute
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <r7fj3602eaj drn.newsguy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcfc06bd2c6bfd79507cbd98de39c9c3a7609940083c15d2f.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: Direct Read News 5.60
X-Received-Bytes: 751
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1302565358
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:590662
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
--
Thanks,
- Win
Tom Del Rosso
2020-04-19 01:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy. A
lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
Phil Allison
2020-04-19 02:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Tom Del Rosso wrote:

--------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy.
** What idiocy.

The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.

Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.

So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
Post by Tom Del Rosso
A lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
** My god you are dumb.

The conspiracy bit relates to ALL those aware being complicit and silent.



.... Phil
Tom Del Rosso
2020-04-19 02:22:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
--------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they
don't agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a
conspiracy.
** What idiocy.
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number
of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly
indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme
improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying
saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
Post by Tom Del Rosso
A lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
** My god you are dumb.
The conspiracy bit relates to ALL those aware being complicit and silent.
That's not a conspiracy either. That's a dictatorial government telling
people what to do.

My god you are in need of therapy.
John Doe
2020-04-19 02:36:30 UTC
Permalink
<blather>
Post by Tom Del Rosso
My god you are in need of therapy.
lol
Ricky C
2020-04-19 03:23:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Doe
<blather>
Post by Tom Del Rosso
My god you are in need of therapy.
lol
You can laugh, but you are right there sitting next to him on the group W bench.
--
Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 03:29:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by John Doe
<blather>
Post by Tom Del Rosso
My god you are in need of therapy.
lol
You can laugh, but you are right there sitting next to him on the group W bench.
That's unkind and inaccurate. John Doe is a complete idiot. Phil Allison does have some useful information to impart, even if he is prone to fly off the handle if even minimally provoked.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Phil Allison
2020-04-19 02:49:46 UTC
Permalink
Tom Del Rosso Cannot Read wrote:

-------------------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Phil Allison
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they
don't agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a
conspiracy.
** What idiocy.
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number
of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly
indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme
improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying
saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
Post by Tom Del Rosso
A lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
** My god you are dumb.
The conspiracy bit relates to ALL those aware being complicit and silent.
That's not a conspiracy either. That's a dictatorial government telling
people what to do.
** All you wrote was "lab accident" .

No mention of a govt forced cover up.

Go fuck yourself.



..... Phil
bitrex
2020-04-19 03:00:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
--------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy.
** What idiocy.
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
Post by Tom Del Rosso
A lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
** My god you are dumb.
The conspiracy bit relates to ALL those aware being complicit and silent.
.... Phil
Who needs "conspiracies" when politicians can openly tell Americans "I
could shoot one of you and get away with it" and they actually seem
extremely happy someone is finally being honest with them.
Ricky C
2020-04-19 03:21:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
--------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy.
** What idiocy.
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate. There have been many events that were kept secret by the government for many years before they finally were revealed and acknowledged. One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The experiment went on for 40 years from 1932 to 1972. It involved who knows how many people in the government knowingly participating. It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment ended.

This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general public.
--
Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
bitrex
2020-04-19 03:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
--------------------
Post by Tom Del Rosso
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy.
** What idiocy.
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate. There have been many events that were kept secret by the government for many years before they finally were revealed and acknowledged. One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The experiment went on for 40 years from 1932 to 1972. It involved who knows how many people in the government knowingly participating. It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment ended.
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general public.
Likely few involved thought they were doing anything "wrong" and it's
unlikely most of the American public would've cared much either prior to
1972 anyway there wouldn't be anyone to tell. Yeah they're doing some
medical experiments on poor black men, whatever.

Doesn't seem like they did much extremely proactive to keep those
experiments much of a "secret" for the majority of the 40 years nobody
gave a shit for the most part.

To have an actual conspiracy I'd argue some significant part of the
conspirators have to believe they're actually doing something bad or
against the law they weren't breaking any laws of the time as far as I know.
bitrex
2020-04-19 03:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by bitrex
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct  -  from flying
saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate.  There have been many events that were kept
secret by the government for many years before they finally were
revealed and acknowledged.  One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of
Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.”  The experiment went on for 40
years from 1932 to 1972.  It involved who knows how many people in the
government knowingly participating.  It was only when an employee of
the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment
ended.
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
Likely few involved thought they were doing anything "wrong" and it's
unlikely most of the American public would've cared much either prior to
1972 anyway there wouldn't be anyone to tell. Yeah they're doing some
medical experiments on poor black men, whatever.
Doesn't seem like they did much extremely proactive to keep those
experiments much of a "secret" for the majority of the 40 years nobody
gave a shit for the most part.
Take that "story" to any major American newspaper in 1955 and the editor
would laugh at you "What do you think you have here, they're doing some
medical tests on broke niggers for the benefit of everyone's public
health and you want me to run a headline about it? what the fuck kind of
story is this"
Ricky C
2020-04-19 03:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by bitrex
To have an actual conspiracy I'd argue some significant part of the
conspirators have to believe they're actually doing something bad or
against the law they weren't breaking any laws of the time as far as I know.
Not the first time you'd think wrong.

Seems like someone disagreed with your opinion. A lot of someones once the news broke.
--
Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
bitrex
2020-04-19 04:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by bitrex
To have an actual conspiracy I'd argue some significant part of the
conspirators have to believe they're actually doing something bad or
against the law they weren't breaking any laws of the time as far as I know.
Not the first time you'd think wrong.
Seems like someone disagreed with your opinion. A lot of someones once the news broke.
There was a class-action ethics lawsuit that was settled. Who went to
jail? on what charges? what criminal laws were broken?

"It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public
to the press that the experiment ended. "

Not exactly, the study was known about by medical professionals and
academics before 1972 and professionals in the field had accused the
organizers of unethical practice a number of times before and attempted
to draw attention to the matter. Nobody cared:

<https://tenor.com/view/nobody-cares-nobody-cares-spongebob-imagination-gif-8176136>

Not much of a "conspiracy." More like an "open secret"
bitrex
2020-04-19 04:27:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by bitrex
Post by Ricky C
Post by bitrex
To have an actual conspiracy I'd argue some significant part of the
conspirators have to believe they're actually doing something bad or
against the law they weren't breaking any laws of the time as far as I know.
Not the first time you'd think wrong.
Seems like someone disagreed with your opinion.  A lot of someones
once the news broke.
There was a class-action ethics lawsuit that was settled. Who went to
jail? on what charges? what criminal laws were broken?
"It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public
to the press that the experiment ended. "
Not exactly, the study was known about by medical professionals and
academics before 1972 and professionals in the field had accused the
organizers of unethical practice a number of times before and attempted
<https://tenor.com/view/nobody-cares-nobody-cares-spongebob-imagination-gif-8176136>
Not much of a "conspiracy." More like an "open secret"
Moreover the authors had published data under their own names in
journals about the study's results that's how other medical
professionals read about it and sent them letters of protest. They used
their real names and they prolly found their addresses in the fucking
phone book! what kind of "secret" is this!
Tom Del Rosso
2020-04-19 20:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by bitrex
To have an actual conspiracy I'd argue some significant part of the
conspirators have to believe they're actually doing something bad or
against the law they weren't breaking any laws of the time as far as I know.
My point was that to conspire they have to make a choice. Obeying
authority because you are afraid or believe you have no choice isn't
conspiracy. Conspiracies are needed only by people who are not in
power. Whatever the Chinese government did they didn't conspire. It
doesn't matter then if they think they're breaking the law.
Phil Allison
2020-04-19 04:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Ricky C wrote:

---------------
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate. There have been many events that were kept secret
by the government for many years before they finally were revealed
and acknowledged.
** Governments rely on privacy/secrecy provisions that all public servants must sign before taking up employment. Sometimes there are anonymous leaks to journalists.

But this it not a conspiracy, which is an agreement between persons carrying out an nefarious act.

One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The experiment went on for 40 years from 1932 to 1972. It involved who knows how many people in the government knowingly participating. It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment ended.

** So not a conspiracy - the employee had to risk their future career to do that.
Post by Ricky C
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
** Such situations are common, in business and government organisations. It is why "whistle blower" laws were created in many places.




.... Phil
Ricky C
2020-04-19 04:59:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
---------------
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate. There have been many events that were kept secret
by the government for many years before they finally were revealed
and acknowledged.
** Governments rely on privacy/secrecy provisions that all public servants must sign before taking up employment. Sometimes there are anonymous leaks to journalists.
That's total BS. I was a federal employee and I never had to sign anything about secrets. You make up stuff and then try to pass it on as fact. Why?
Post by Phil Allison
But this it not a conspiracy, which is an agreement between persons carrying out an nefarious act.
Post by Ricky C
One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The experiment went on for 40 years from 1932 to 1972. It involved who knows how many people in the government knowingly participating. It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment ended.
** So not a conspiracy - the employee had to risk their future career to do that.
Nope. You are just wrong... again. Sometimes you are a bit like the guy they call alwayswrong.
Post by Phil Allison
Post by Ricky C
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
** Such situations are common, in business and government organisations. It is why "whistle blower" laws were created in many places.
Yes, exactly. So now you are agreeing that this was a conspiracy. That's why you need whistle blowers, to rat out the conspirators. It's not about revealing secrets. The only secrets the government can enforce are sensitive documents they classify as such. That is a whole different matter where you can and will go to jail for releasing.

Whatever. I'm not going to debate this with you. I don't recall any time you have ever backed down from being wrong in any discussion with anyone. So what's the point of endlessly explaining anything to you?

Enjoy..
--
Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
bitrex
2020-04-19 05:13:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
---------------
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
The term refers to hypotheses of events that require and large number of persons be involved and yet silent on the fact - seemingly indefinitely.
Any believer is required to suspend disbelief about the extreme improbability of that actually being the case.
So far, no such hypotheses have ever proved correct - from flying saucers, flat earth and space aliens running the world and worse.
That's not accurate. There have been many events that were kept secret
by the government for many years before they finally were revealed
and acknowledged.
** Governments rely on privacy/secrecy provisions that all public servants must sign before taking up employment. Sometimes there are anonymous leaks to journalists.
That's total BS. I was a federal employee and I never had to sign anything about secrets. You make up stuff and then try to pass it on as fact. Why?
Post by Phil Allison
But this it not a conspiracy, which is an agreement between persons carrying out an nefarious act.
Post by Ricky C
One good example is the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The experiment went on for 40 years from 1932 to 1972. It involved who knows how many people in the government knowingly participating. It was only when an employee of the Public Health Service went public to the press that the experiment ended.
** So not a conspiracy - the employee had to risk their future career to do that.
Nope. You are just wrong... again. Sometimes you are a bit like the guy they call alwayswrong.
Post by Phil Allison
Post by Ricky C
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
** Such situations are common, in business and government organisations. It is why "whistle blower" laws were created in many places.
Yes, exactly. So now you are agreeing that this was a conspiracy. That's why you need whistle blowers, to rat out the conspirators. It's not about revealing secrets. The only secrets the government can enforce are sensitive documents they classify as such. That is a whole different matter where you can and will go to jail for releasing.
Whatever. I'm not going to debate this with you. I don't recall any time you have ever backed down from being wrong in any discussion with anyone. So what's the point of endlessly explaining anything to you?
Enjoy..
I don't think it was a conspiracy either because again, AFAIK nobody did
anything illegal. It was not illegal for medical professionals running a
study to lie to negro males in 1932.

It caused a public outcry and they stopped for the same reason like,
using recycled oil in the deep fryer at fast food restaurants. it wasn't
illegal and they didn't hang a lampshade on it but people eventually
found out and decided collectively it was gross.

you have to do something illegal to have a conspiracy! That's why they
call it a conspiracy! that's why they fucking call it non-stick:
<https://youtu.be/U1f4ZfHkICo?t=5>
Phil Allison
2020-04-19 07:00:47 UTC
Permalink
Ricky C wrote:

---------------
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
** Governments rely on privacy/secrecy provisions that all public servants must sign before taking up employment. Sometimes there are anonymous leaks to journalists.
That's total BS.
** No it's not.

Govt employees are all sworn not to discuss their work, any persons/businesses they deal with or guide rules they are directed to follow.

The prohibition includes family and friends.

The usual penalty is dismissal with no chance of re-employment.
Post by Ricky C
I was a federal employee ...
** Yawnnn...
Post by Ricky C
and I never had to sign anything about secrets.
** Likely cos a fool like you was never gonna know any.
Post by Ricky C
You make up stuff and then try to pass it on as fact.
** Your arrogant pig ignorance is your only point.
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
** So not a conspiracy - the employee had to risk their future career to do that.
Nope.
** Fuck me, this wanking fuckwit is soooo stupid.
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
Post by Ricky C
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
** Such situations are common, in business and government organisations. It is why "whistle blower" laws were created in many places.
Yes, exactly.
** But such are never evil conspiracies - just bad policies.
Post by Ricky C
Whatever. I'm not going to debate this with you.
** You are totally incapable of debating me or anyone with a modicum of genuine intelligence.

Cos you simply don't have any.


.... Phil
Ricky C
2020-04-19 07:18:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Allison
---------------
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
** Governments rely on privacy/secrecy provisions that all public servants must sign before taking up employment. Sometimes there are anonymous leaks to journalists.
That's total BS.
** No it's not.
Govt employees are all sworn not to discuss their work, any persons/businesses they deal with or guide rules they are directed to follow.
The prohibition includes family and friends.
The usual penalty is dismissal with no chance of re-employment.
Post by Ricky C
I was a federal employee ...
** Yawnnn...
Post by Ricky C
and I never had to sign anything about secrets.
** Likely cos a fool like you was never gonna know any.
Post by Ricky C
You make up stuff and then try to pass it on as fact.
** Your arrogant pig ignorance is your only point.
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
** So not a conspiracy - the employee had to risk their future career to do that.
Nope.
** Fuck me, this wanking fuckwit is soooo stupid.
Post by Ricky C
Post by Phil Allison
Post by Ricky C
This is just one notable example of many people needing to keep quiet
to maintain a secret that would not be well received by the general
public.
** Such situations are common, in business and government organisations. It is why "whistle blower" laws were created in many places.
Yes, exactly.
** But such are never evil conspiracies - just bad policies.
Post by Ricky C
Whatever. I'm not going to debate this with you.
** You are totally incapable of debating me or anyone with a modicum of genuine intelligence.
Cos you simply don't have any.
.... Phil
I am blown away by your debating technique. You are truly the master debater.

But it is pretty amazing that you are so full of it. How do you know this about government work? Have you worked for the federal government?
--
Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Phil Allison
2020-04-19 09:32:37 UTC
Permalink
Ricky C wrote:

=================
Post by Ricky C
I am blown away by your debating technique.
You are truly the master debater.
** While you my narcissistic friend ...

are just another pathetic, public masturbater.




.... Phil
Ricky C
2020-04-19 03:11:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy. A
lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
When they say "conspiracy theory" they are referring to the fact that the idea is believed in without much evidence... or in most cases, any substantial evidence.

I posted a day or two ago that there was information that indicated this infection coming from a Wuhan lab was thin, but not unbelievable or however I put it at the time. While the supporting information is scant, there is also very little evidence of the virus originating spontaneously from natural causes and showing up in the wet market.

Our friend Bill seems to be very dismissive of this idea. I agree that the evidence is very thin so at this point it is only a possibility. But the theory that it came from natural means via the Wuhan wet market is equally thin and also only a possibility. As usual Bill can't discuss a topic reasonably, something he has in common with a number of people here. So I won't debate it with him just as I try not to respond to DLU (Deluded Unix User).

I am interested in any evidence anyone has about either theory of the origin of this virus.
--
Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Bill Sloman
2020-04-19 03:24:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky C
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy. A
lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
When they say "conspiracy theory" they are referring to the fact that the idea is believed in without much evidence... or in most cases, any substantial evidence.
I posted a day or two ago that there was information that indicated this infection coming from a Wuhan lab was thin, but not unbelievable or however I put it at the time. While the supporting information is scant, there is also very little evidence of the virus originating spontaneously from natural causes and showing up in the wet market.
Our friend Bill seems to be very dismissive of this idea. I agree that the evidence is very thin so at this point it is only a possibility. But the theory that it came from natural means via the Wuhan wet market is equally thin and also only a possibility. As usual Bill can't discuss a topic reasonably, something he has in common with a number of people here.
Rick C.'s idea of a reasonable discussion is one in which other people agree with his - frequently sily - ideas. He can't get it into his head that he might be wrong.
Post by Ricky C
So I won't debate it with him just as I try not to respond to DLU (Deluded Unix User).
Of course not. He ends up looking like an idiot when he tries.
Post by Ricky C
I am interested in any evidence anyone has about either theory of the origin of this virus.
The theory that Covid-19 evolved naturally, in the same way as SARS and MERS and (much earlier) measles, is pretty persuasive. Why invoke an virus lab when you don't have to? William of Occam spelled out the principle some time ago
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
bitrex
2020-04-19 03:12:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Del Rosso
Post by Winfield Hill
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say
People always use the term "conspiracy theory" for any theory they don't
agree with, whether or not it has anything to do with a conspiracy. A
lab accident, if it happened, is not a conspiracy.
Your wife or girlfriend may very well be having gang bangs with five
dudes every weekend when you're not home but unless you can come up with
hard evidence of these events it's you that tends to end up looking like
the villain, not her, if one goes around talking about one's suspicions
to anyone who will listen.

The irony being the man in question is indeed sometimes correct, but 95%
of the time the man in question has also been jumping at shadows and
making all sorts of accusations based on circumstantial evidence for a
long time before the truth comes out, and when it finally does the only
thing people seem to remember is him being the "bad guy", and don't seem
to care too much about her behavior, anyway.
Piotr Wyderski
2020-04-19 08:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Winfield Hill wrote:


https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/4/21207927/5g-towers-burning-uk-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-link

Best regards, Piotr
Loading...