Cable Forum - Coronavirus

Dealing with Covidiots on my towns Facebook page.

They are saying this isn't in law as it is only guidance, and so they are going ahead as planned, even though we are in tier 4

People have had enough of this farce, many will do xmas as they had planned following the original guidance.

downquark1

21-12-2020 11:57

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36063121)

And that is precisely the sort of equivocation that allowed the MMR scare to take root. Failure to evaluate plausibility, or failure to give appropriate weight to a claim which is contested within a relevant peer group, leads to competing ‘theories’ getting equal airtime in popular media and creates the misleading impression that batschitt crazy speculation should be given equal prominence to thoroughly considered hypothesis.

Occam’s razor is a very useful interpretive principle in situations like this. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. A massive, coordinated virus scare designed to reset the world financial system in favour of control by shadowy elites is not simple. It would be terrifyingly difficult to plan, much less pull off. You’re not demonstrating imagination and flexibility of thought by entertaining it alongside good old fashioned government cock up. Quite the opposite.

In February when I said people should get supplies and consider self isolating I was denounced as a nutcase then. You can go back and read the thread.

jfman

21-12-2020 12:02

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36063118)

Dealing with Covidiots on my towns Facebook page.

They are saying this isn't in law as it is only guidance, and so they are going ahead as planned, even though we are in tier 4

I'd stay off for your own sanity, Hom3r.

I hope you have a Merry Christmas when it comes.

Chris

21-12-2020 12:07

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36063130)

In February when I said people should get supplies and consider self isolating I was denounced as a nutcase then. You can go back and read the thread.

I’m trying really hard, but I’m failing to understand why this means I should take seriously your claims about a shady international attempt to put one over the common folk.

downquark1

21-12-2020 12:16

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36063135)

I’m trying really hard, but I’m failing to understand why this means I should take seriously your claims about a shady international attempt to put one over the common folk.

Ok if we discount that. Am I suppose to be happy Borris went around promising he would not cancel Christmas and then change the rules last minute. That is either farce or malice.

Chris

21-12-2020 12:23

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36063138)

Ok if we discount that. Am I suppose to be happy Borris went around promising he would not cancel Christmas and then change the rules last minute. That is either farce or malice.

You’re proposing a false dilemma. There are other equally plausible explanations in this case, among them the possibility that the government reacted to compelling new evidence as soon as it could reasonably do so. In favour of this possible explanation is the fact that the leaders of the Scottish and Welsh governments agreed the Christmas relaxation with the UK gov acting for England, and withdrew it at the same time. Neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Mark Drakeford owe Boris any favours and both of them would lose no time in exploiting either farce or malice for their own advantage. But they didn’t. Everyone agreed everything at the same time.

downquark1

21-12-2020 12:57

Re: Coronavirus

Fine. I predict the 70% more contagious will be dropped or proven wrong. It is ludicrous to think they have such a precise measurement so early. It was most likely justification for Borris' uturn.

nomadking

21-12-2020 13:02

Re: Coronavirus

There has been talk before, of different strains with different infection rates and mortality rates. So nothing that unusual.
Either way, whether because of the newer variant or bad behaviour, if the indications are the R number is higher, then harsher restrictions are required.

Chris

21-12-2020 13:03

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36063148)

Fine. I predict the 70% more contagious will be dropped or proven wrong. It is ludicrous to think they have such a precise measurement so early. It was most likely justification for Borris' uturn.

They don’t have such a precise measurement and the technical papers that have been issued are laced with caveats to that effect. Much of that has actually found its way into mainstream news reports. There is a level of uncertainty that was reflected in the press conference by stating the new strain “might be” 70% more transmissible but that was always going to get lost in the noise.

To be honest I think the sudden spike in new infections is likely to have more to do with people rapidly getting complacent after the vaccination programme began and deciding to sack off the rules and go to a Christmas party or two. I’m not doubting the new strain exists but I find it too much of a coincidence that the infection spike corresponds so closely to the vaccine approval. Human behaviour is always the weak link in any system.

As to whether the potential transmissibility of the new strain is being exploited to crack down on rule breaking, well, quite possibly it is.

RichardCoulter

21-12-2020 13:04

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36063081)

Source?

Interview on yesterday's Andrew Marr show.

jonbxx

21-12-2020 13:06

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36063118)

Dealing with Covidiots on my towns Facebook page.

They are saying this isn't in law as it is only guidance, and so they are going ahead as planned, even though we are in tier 4

Local Facebook feeds are a minefield of fruitloopery to be honest. I'm sure we will all recognise some classic greatest hits such as;

My journey out was essential but all these other people were doing 'non essential' things
A multitude of anitvax things such as 'this vaccine hasn't been tested enough' (how much is 'enough'), I don't want my DNA changed, New World Order, etc.
This is all the fault of young people/old people/immigrants
Brexit will make all this better or worse
The whole thing is a hoax anyway

RichardCoulter

21-12-2020 13:07

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36063084)

They have to ask the question, and look at what the answer is. Doesn't mean that there is yet any actual evidence that it is a problem.

Let's hope there isn't. They should have said that the vaccine will probably still be effective,, but that to be 100% they need more time to be able to do more tests.

Perhaps they thought that this would would cause panic etc, but we are adults and need to be told the facts straight away, even if It's possible/actual bad news.

downquark1

21-12-2020 13:09

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36063150)

It is perfectly plausible there is a new strain. What is unusual is to know the R number so early. As I said before viruses do not come with R values written on them.

Most likely this is some estimation that actually came with a wide error bar that Boris has chosen not to share with us.

nomadking

21-12-2020 13:25

Re: Coronavirus

The newer variant hasn't just popped up in the last week. It's had time to be able to compare transmission rates.

Maggy

21-12-2020 13:30

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36063156)

:tu:

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:21.

Page 126 of 569