Coronavirus Pandemic

[Niall_Quinn]

It's almost as if nature knows what it's doing.

[Letters]

Then, based on the 85-94% false positive estimates (see Rabb if you need confirmation from an authoritarian)

You are deliberately (or maybe accidentally) misrepresenting that figure. Lies, damned lies and statistics...
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b6de79b677e909
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-b550133.html

You really are appalling, aren't you?

Whoopsie! You just fell off your high horse. I thought we were debating the issues, not attacking people?

[Niall_Quinn]

You are deliberately (or maybe accidentally) misrepresenting that figure. Lies, damned lies and statistics...
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b6de79b677e909



Whoopsie! You just fell off your high horse. I thought we were debating the issues, not attacking people?

Oh, he did another Google search. The whole discussion is long gone - ignored. And here we are down in the he-said, she-said weeds again, batting away bullshit like his Reuters "expose" that he's suddenly forgotten about (when it was supposed to be a triumph, of course). This could go on for all eternity, couldn't it? Just as long as nothing ever gets debated.

You either answer the question I put to you, to prove you know at least something about this and aren't just chucking out Google results in total ignorance, or we speak no more.

You go back and address the original post. Make some effort to have a proper debate. Or else take your circus elsewhere.

[Letters]

Oh, he did another Google search.

Yes. And what are you doing? Out there doing real research, are you? You're becoming an expert in the field and conducting your own trials?
No, you're looking up stuff online too. You're just finding different stuff and because you have different biases you're believing it.
Stop pretending you're doing anything clever.

The whole discussion is long gone - ignored.

It hasn't been ignored, I literally just replied. You cited some figures, I found something which calls bullshit on them.
The rest of your argument is entirely predicated on the idea that "they" know these tests are false - and that plays right into your conspiratorial hands.
"They" know that these tests don't work but "they" are putting all these restrictions in place anyway. "They" must be up to something.
But if the tests do work then the rest falls apart.

This could go on for all eternity, couldn't it? Just as long as nothing ever gets debated.

Sure, it could. I said that yesterday - we could spend all day finding links. But what's the alternative. How do you think we should be debating this.
As I also said, we are not experts in this field.
But the article I presented explains where this 90% thing came from and why it's a misrepresentation of the statistics.
If you're going to ignore it because it doesn't fit your narrative then that's your prerogative.

You either answer the question I put to you.

Which question? You've posted a few long posts, there is no "original" one, it's an ongoing discussion.

[Niall_Quinn]

You just got murdered on your last fake news bullshit - ignored of course.

And if I murder you on this one - it'll be exactly the same, onto the next bullshit.

I've been speaking about this since March, and reading since then too. You haven't got a thought in your head, don't want to know anything, and your "debate" method is to copy paste a few keywords into Google and find the most appropriate response, even though you don't understand a word of it. My effort is considerable, yours is virtually non-existent, and that's the game. You can do this forever at zero expense, I have to find the time. I post up medical journals, you post up the HuffPo and then double down by calling me the conspiracy theorist. You get called out for doing it once, so you ignore that and do it again.

And why? Because you NEED to win the Internets? Not about debate, never was.

Wasn't on a horse either. You don't need to be lofted up to see how lowly your character is. Just look down.

[Niall_Quinn]

So the normal flu season will be used to hype up the number of filled beds, which are always filled this time of year, and the deaths, which always occur this time of year, will be feasted upon. And the elderly will bear the brunt of it, as has been the case every year. And deep concern will be feigned, for the poor old people who have to choose between food and heat every year, or who now have to dig deeper to bung the BBC in return for the fake news bullshit. The same BBC will blast those figures out and all will be back to lockdown #1 before we know it.

To save us.

[Letters]

OK, let me have a go at explaining it. You might not understand it, but hopefully others will.

Let's say a test for a hypothetical virus gives a false positive every one in a thousand cases.
Let's assume for simplicity it never gets a false negative.

But it's rare to have the virus. Let's say only 1 in a thousand people have it.
You test a million people. 1000 people are positive and test positive.
999,000 are negative but 999 of them will test positive, because one in a thousand do.
So now you have 1999 positive tests when in reality only 1000 people have the virus.

OH NOES! THE TEST IS ONLY 50% ACCURATE!!1!

But let's say it's mostly people who are symptomatic - people who are likely to have it - who are getting tested.
You test 10000 people, 9000 of whom have the virus.
So 9000 people are positive and test positive, 1 poor sod out of the remaining 1000 also tests positive
9001 positive tests, only one false positive.

HURRAH! THE TEST IS ACCURATE!!1!!

Same test, different conclusion. It all depends how many people you test, how many people have it.
So yes, if you test people who come off planes - people who aren't symptomatic (otherwise they wouldn't have been able to fly) and who may well have had a previous negative test. In that scenario so few people actually have the virus that false positives are going to massively skew the results. That is what Raab is talking about and it's a figure you have excitedly leapt upon without understanding what I have explained above in your desperate desire to see conspiracy and cover up everywhere you look.

[Niall_Quinn]

Which just goes to prove, you didn't read the Saudi document. Lightweight.

[Niall_Quinn]

Btw, I mentioned Raab because you are incapable of accepting information from anyone who doesn't claim authority over you. I didn't present Raab as an expert, I presented him as somebody you'd pay attention to.

And here you are.

[Niall_Quinn]

And, of course, if the test actually did detect the live virus - who cares where it's taken? You just destroyed your own argument by cutting to the heart of it, inadvertently of course.

Did I say "your own argument"? I meant the one you copy pasted from hastily Googled searches.