Ferguson's Model of Pandemic Really Bad

[mikewhitney]

Mike, I think this is a video you'd like. Plandemic, interview with Judy Mikovits. The scientist pariah literally being frantically censored on all mainstream social media sites.

https://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=1MM1CJNU

I tried to make it display the video, but I suck at coding.

Right. Fauci conspired with another guy and grabbed Mikovits' paper before it was published. The paper, as best as I recall, pointed to the way to treat AIDS. She was put in jail without any charges. She was forced into bankruptcy because she was providing information to heal people. Fauci is not a defender of public health and safety. He works with Gates in order to devise a way to push for worldwide vaccination of people, as a profit grab by pharmaceuticals. We know that 70% of ads on TV are by Big Pharma. The problem around here (and among most Americans) is the lack of interest to even listen to this testimony. They think that we would hear it on the news if it were important. At least, if someone watches the videos and then rejects the information, that person has at least looked behind the curtain to see if there really is something behind it.

I think that the COVID-19 situation is just going to get worse -- that people will be content with what they learn from the mainstream media. There are just no ears to hear concerning the warnings going out. The resolution will have to be by the hand of God.

Note that the video is only displayed for a few supported video websites. So, it is the website feature that is missing here -- not your technical abilities.

[seanD]

Right. Fauci conspired with another guy and grabbed Mikovits' paper before it was published. The paper, as best as I recall, pointed to the way to treat AIDS. She was put in jail without any charges. She was forced into bankruptcy because she was providing information to heal people. Fauci is not a defender of public health and safety. He works with Gates in order to devise a way to push for worldwide vaccination of people, as a profit grab by pharmaceuticals. We know that 70% of ads on TV are by Big Pharma. The problem around here (and among most Americans) is the lack of interest to even listen to this testimony. They think that we would hear it on the news if it were important. At least, if someone watches the videos and then rejects the information, that person has at least looked behind the curtain to see if there really is something behind it.

I think that the COVID-19 situation is just going to get worse -- that people will be content with what they learn from the mainstream media. There are just no ears to hear concerning the warnings going out. The resolution will have to be by the hand of God.

Note that the video is only displayed for a few supported video websites. So, it is the website feature that is missing here -- not your technical abilities.

It's just so hilarious watching not only every major social media site scrub her video off their site, but every major MSM news site writing articles about how nuts she is, how she has no credibility, she's dangerous, don't pay any attention to her... blah, blah, blah. It's so apparent how obvious of a smear campaign it is and how coordinated it is. You'd think they'd realize that that only makes it go viral.

[mikewhitney]

It's just so hilarious watching not only every major social media site scrub her video off their site, but every major MSM news site writing articles about how nuts she is, how she has no credibility, she's dangerous, don't pay any attention to her... blah, blah, blah. It's so apparent how obvious of a smear campaign it is and how coordinated it is. You'd think they'd realize that that only makes it go viral.

Is it just coincidental how people who speak contrary to Fauci or Gates or Big Pharma are always described in such bad light? Gates, however, is forgiven for experimenting with vaccines on children in India and Africa. Was it purely accidental that 10s of thousands of vaccines had sterilization (anti-fertility) chemicals in them? The pharmaceutical companies were forgiven for recalling contaminated vaccines in America but then sending those vaccines to be used in other countries. (Sorry, I'm hazy on the specifics here.) It is only the people like Mikovits, who find treatments for AIDS, who are the bad people. Only doctors who promote healthy immune systems are ostracized.

I just wish that people here would examine some of this stuff. We see how the media constantly speaks against our duly elected President. Why do we distrust those reports but trust everything else the media reports. (We already have a long discussion thread talking about the media lies. No one of the leftists explained why that is acceptable or how the media can be trusted.)

[Roy]

Mike, I think this is a video you'd like. Plandemic, interview with Judy Mikovits. The scientist pariah literally being frantically censored on all mainstream social media sites.

https://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=1MM1CJNU

I tried to make it display the video, but I suck at coding.

That's good, because that video is being removed because it claims, among other things, that

(i) coronavirus is five years old and originated as a contaminated batch of influenza shots,
(ii) wearing masks is more hazardous than catching the virus.

Not only utterly bonkers, but dangerous.

Mikovits is a dishonest crackpot who is profiting from idiots who are endangering themselves and others.

[Mountain Man]

A reviewer of Ferguson's software found that the software is untrustworthy for making any determinations for scientific publication or public policy. The github site allows people to share software source code with other people. The software was released so that other researchers could verify Ferguson's model and test alternative scenarios. Apparently it took six weeks after the request of the software before Ferguson shared it. I believe that Microsoft was reviewing and improving the software until it was found to be too messy to work with.

Source: https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/165

The tests in this project, being limited to broad, "smoke test"-style assertions, do not support an assurance that the equations are being executed faithfully in discrete units of logic, nor that they are integrated into the application in such a way that the accepted practices of epidemiology are being modeled in accordance with the standards of that profession.

Billions of lives have been disrupted worldwide on the basis that the study produced by the logic contained in this codebase is accurate, and since there are no tests to show that, the findings of this study (and any others based on this codebase) are not a sound basis for public policy at this time.

I want to be clear that this Issue is not meant to denigrate the authors of this code - we've all written code that isn't our best work and code that is untested. But when a codebase is used to craft scholarly publications that are in turn used to influence public policy, the authors of those publications (and ultimately policy) need to ensure that the science is verifiable in a public sense. The lack of tests makes that an impossibility. So closure of this Issue, by retraction of studies based on it, is meant as a critique of the publication and policy authors, not the contributors to this repo.

(Note: In addition to the 👍 emoji, it's probably sensible to "sign" as a comment with your username, as it becomes impossible to see the emoji-ers above a certain threshold).

© Copyright Original Source

The lack of quality of the software makes it sound like there was a technical/image problem connected with the modeling.

Note that complex software should have sufficient tests defined for various portions of the software. Even simple software can have errors or bugs due to many causes -- computation accuracy, unchecked boundary conditions, typos, logic errors, global variables, bad equations, etc. At minimal the software results should be compared against another method of processing the data.

This should be a headline in the news media. I wonder if the UK will continue to rely on his predictions.

When are people going to figure out that computer models are not reality?

[seanD]

That's good, because that video is being removed because it claims, among other things, that

(i) coronavirus is five years old and originated as a contaminated batch of influenza shots,
(ii) wearing masks is more hazardous than catching the virus.

Not only utterly bonkers, but dangerous.

Mikovits is a dishonest crackpot who is profiting from idiots who are endangering themselves and others.

She's not the only "crackpot" scientist out there with similar arguments. I wouldn't know how off base it is because I'm not a scientist or medical doctor. I'm certainly going to take their word over some anonymous schmoe on the internet of whom I know nothing about.

[Thoughtful Monk]

When are people going to figure out that computer models are not reality?

It's our belief that the computer can do more than they really can. I read once that the spread of computers through society has caused people to belief everything can be calculated procisely and problems can then be fixed. I work with data all day and I see how incomplete and inaccurate the data is and how much effort goes in to fixing it. It's no wonder most models are someone's best guess automated. Modeling does have it's place but it's accuracy shouldn't be considered gospel.

"To err is human but to really foul things up, you need a computer."

[Roy]

She's not the only "crackpot" scientist out there with similar arguments. I wouldn't know how off base it is because I'm not a scientist or medical doctor. I'm certainly going to take their word over some anonymous schmoe on the internet of whom I know nothing about.

I suspect you know nothing about Judy Mikovits either.

Why should a YouTuber be a better source than a TWeb poster?

[seanD]

I suspect you know nothing about Judy Mikovits either.

Why should a YouTuber be a better source than a TWeb poster?

Au contraire. I knew nothing about her prior to the controversy of her videos being purged from social media. Since then I've done extensive research on her background because of it. The woman's got some clout and a prestigious scientific history. Are you even a scientist? I know nothing about you. The smear campaign looks obvious to me. They call her anti-vaxxer -- typical smear tactic used against those whom they deem "rogue" scientists -- but she claims she's not. And now I actually plan to buy her best seller "Plague of Corruption." Sounds fascinating.

[mikewhitney]

Au contraire. I knew nothing about her prior to the controversy of her videos being purged from social media. Since then I've done extensive research on her background because of it. The woman's got some clout and a prestigious scientific history. Are you even a scientist? I know nothing about you. The smear campaign looks obvious to me. They call her anti-vaxxer -- typical smear tactic used against those whom they deem "rogue" scientists -- but she claims she's not. And now I actually plan to buy her best seller "Plague of Corruption." Sounds fascinating.

Do you have notes and links from that research?

I was going to ask Roy how far he researched her background and events in her life.

[NorrinRadd]

It's our belief that the computer can do more than they really can. I read once that the spread of computers through society has caused people to belief everything can be calculated procisely and problems can then be fixed. I work with data all day and I see how incomplete and inaccurate the data is and how much effort goes in to fixing it. It's no wonder most models are someone's best guess automated. Modeling does have it's place but it's accuracy shouldn't be considered gospel.

Reminds me of the idealized cases you get in early physics classes. Assume a "friction-free" this and "massless" that. ...

[seanD]

Do you have notes and links from that research?

I was going to ask Roy how far he researched her background and events in her life.

Search her name, just don't use Google. Use a different search engine, and you'll find both articles and her own videos. The funny thing is though, even in the midst of all the blatant smear articles about her you'll find on Google, they still go into some detail about her prestigious scientific past, because they can't just outright deny that.

[Thoughtful Monk]

Reminds me of the idealized cases you get in early physics classes. Assume a "friction-free" this and "massless" that. ...

I still remember one model I built in a computer modeling class in college. All I did was change when one event occurred in the model and wow did the model's answer change. The difference would be similar to 10,000 deaths or 1,000,000 deaths. I found the whole subject interesting. Unfortunately, my career since college hasn't included modeling.

[mikewhitney]

Reminds me of the idealized cases you get in early physics classes. Assume a "friction-free" this and "massless" that. ...

I had a project where I had sensors connected to a toy steam engine. I was collecting data at one point in time for someone doing a project for boyscouts. The data by no means followed the PV=nRT equation. It would be interesting to be able to do testing that better represents the idealized behavior.

I suspect that the boiling water in a semi-closed boiler does not quite demonstrate the idealized environment.

[Roy]

Au contraire. I knew nothing about her prior to the controversy of her videos being purged from social media. Since then I've done extensive research on her background because of it. The woman's got some clout and a prestigious scientific history.

Who says she has a "prestigious scientific history"?

Are you even a scientist? I know nothing about you. The smear campaign looks obvious to me. They call her anti-vaxxer -- typical smear tactic used against those whom they deem "rogue" scientists -- but she claims she's not.

And you believe her. You knew nothing about her before, and now you know less than that.