Glider Fire Sale

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 10:16:56 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 08 May 2020 06:51:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Here is what the architect of the global shutdown has been up to,
doesn't sound like he believes in his own medicine:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...st-advice-led-
lockdown-QUITS-breaking-restrictions-meet-married-lover.html

If you believe anything you see in the Daily Fail, then you'll definitely
want to buy this bridge I happen to own across the East River in NYC.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org
Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below. No idea of the hierarchy of British newspapers, story also covered by CNN, BBC, and a bunch of other normal outlets. Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...igns-breaking/

On Fri, 08 May 2020 10:54:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below.

That was a general observation, not specifically about that story. The
Sun, Daily Fail and the Torygraph are not news sources I trust.

If its on BBC Radio Four or in New Scientist its probably true.

Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new
religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ve-government-
scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Thats a common problem with some elements of UK government and senior
civil servants: they are so far up their own arses they don't think the
rules they impose can possibly apply to themselves.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that this necessarily makes their
science invalid if they're scientists. Thats unlikely because peer review
is a fairly good way of keeping scientists honest. Mistakes and fraud
WILL be remembered. Remember Andrew Wakefield of MMR infamy? He's
thoroughly discredited these days and ignored by everybody outside the
lunatic fringe.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I think in this specific case, however, Neil Ferguson has a bit of a reputation for getting it not only wrong but way wrong. For example:

He was behind research resulting in the destruction of 11 million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that 150,000 people could die.

Predicted in 2002 that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow disease in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from mad cow.

Predicted in 2005 that up to 150 million people would be killed from bird flu. Reality was that only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

Ferguson’s advice in 2009 said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Reality was that swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Pretty hard to take such a guy seriously but that's exactly what happened when he said there would be 2.2 million dead in USA and 500,000 dead in UK. Oops, missed it by "that" much...

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 2:24:00 PM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 08 May 2020 10:54:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below.

That was a general observation, not specifically about that story. The
Sun, Daily Fail and the Torygraph are not news sources I trust.

If its on BBC Radio Four or in New Scientist its probably true.

Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new
religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ve-government-
scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Thats a common problem with some elements of UK government and senior
civil servants: they are so far up their own arses they don't think the
rules they impose can possibly apply to themselves.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that this necessarily makes their
science invalid if they're scientists. Thats unlikely because peer review
is a fairly good way of keeping scientists honest. Mistakes and fraud
WILL be remembered. Remember Andrew Wakefield of MMR infamy? He's
thoroughly discredited these days and ignored by everybody outside the
lunatic fringe.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On Fri, 08 May 2020 17:03:58 -0700, resigler wrote:

I think in this specific case, however, Neil Ferguson has a bit of a
reputation for getting it not only wrong but way wrong. For example:

Fair comment. I don't remember hearing his name before he popped up this
time.

He was behind research resulting in the destruction of 11 million sheep
and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also
predicted that 150,000 people could die.

I'm uncertain whether he was right or not about the foot & mouth cull. It
certainly spread very rapidly (and stopped all gliding apart from local
flying). Certainly it would have been unwise to eat anything that came
off infected farms, so from that POV, animals that couldn't be eaten had
to be killed and disposed of alongside the large number that the F&M
killed: it was very contagious anfd stock were never allowed off infected
farms.

But I don't recall much concern that it was likely to spread to people.
Yes, there was a clamp-down on rural travel, but that was more to stop
F&M spreading to other farms then from worries that people might catch it.

There was what seemed like an inordinate number of farm animals being
swapped and generally trucked round between farms in the run-up to that
F&M epidemic. Do you know if he said anything about that?

Predicted in 2002 that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow
disease in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from mad cow.

Now that was a rum do, and almost entirely due to the practise of feeding
bits of slaughtered animals to other herbivorous animals. Again, I don't
recall anything being attributed to him - just that the perps seem to
have all got off rather lightly.

Predicted in 2005 that up to 150 million people would be killed from
bird flu. Reality was that only 282 people died worldwide from the
disease between 2003 and 2009.

Ferguson’s advice in 2009 said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was
that the swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Reality was that swine flu
killed 457 people in the U.K.

Pretty hard to take such a guy seriously but that's exactly what
happened when he said there would be 2.2 million dead in USA and 500,000
dead in UK. Oops, missed it by "that" much...

The real question seems to be not how could he be so wrong, but why did
he ever rise to the prominence he achieved recently. Maybe nothing more
worthy than Buggins Turn: if you stay in the civil service long enough
and suck up to enough of your superiors you'll rise, like scum, to the
surface.

I've had contracts in various departments, so have seen their top people
in action: they aren't all that impressive when seen from the bottom.
Gilbert & Sullivan had it spot on when they wrote "Pinafore" and included
the couplet:

So stick tight to your desks and never go to sea,
And you're sure to be the ruler of the Queen's Nayvee

Looks like some things never change.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

What the predictions said was "if we do nothing, something bad will happen, but only if we do nothing.

Something is then done.

Something bad doesn't happen, at least not quite so bad.

It doesn't mean the predictions were wrong, just that the worst case scenarios were prevented:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqzicvDVcKg


On Saturday, 9 May 2020 01:04:01 UTC+1, wrote:
I think in this specific case, however, Neil Ferguson has a bit of a reputation for getting it not only wrong but way wrong. For example:

He was behind research resulting in the destruction of 11 million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that 150,000 people could die.

Predicted in 2002 that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow disease in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from mad cow.

Predicted in 2005 that up to 150 million people would be killed from bird flu. Reality was that only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

Ferguson’s advice in 2009 said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Reality was that swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Pretty hard to take such a guy seriously but that's exactly what happened when he said there would be 2.2 million dead in USA and 500,000 dead in UK.. Oops, missed it by "that" much...

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 2:24:00 PM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 08 May 2020 10:54:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below.

That was a general observation, not specifically about that story. The
Sun, Daily Fail and the Torygraph are not news sources I trust.

If its on BBC Radio Four or in New Scientist its probably true.

Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new
religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ve-government-
scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Thats a common problem with some elements of UK government and senior
civil servants: they are so far up their own arses they don't think the
rules they impose can possibly apply to themselves.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that this necessarily makes their
science invalid if they're scientists. Thats unlikely because peer review
is a fairly good way of keeping scientists honest. Mistakes and fraud
WILL be remembered. Remember Andrew Wakefield of MMR infamy? He's
thoroughly discredited these days and ignored by everybody outside the
lunatic fringe.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I guess we'll need to philosophically disagree on this point. Using your logic anyone at any time can grossly over/under predict a given scenario in order to drive their desired behavior. Apply that sensationalized prediction logic to climate change, environmental pollution, deforestation, acid rain, inflation, education, natural resource depletion (specifically fossil fuels), landfills - all of which have been or are being done - and you'll find the basis for "proving" anything that will give the predictor more power, more budget, more news cycles, etc.

Nope, I'll take a well thought out, historically consistent, and mathematically sound prediction every time.

Robert


On Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 7:56:10 AM UTC-5, b4soaring wrote:
What the predictions said was "if we do nothing, something bad will happen, but only if we do nothing.

Something is then done.

Something bad doesn't happen, at least not quite so bad.

It doesn't mean the predictions were wrong, just that the worst case scenarios were prevented:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqzicvDVcKg


On Saturday, 9 May 2020 01:04:01 UTC+1, wrote:
I think in this specific case, however, Neil Ferguson has a bit of a reputation for getting it not only wrong but way wrong. For example:

He was behind research resulting in the destruction of 11 million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that 150,000 people could die.

Predicted in 2002 that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow disease in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from mad cow.

Predicted in 2005 that up to 150 million people would be killed from bird flu. Reality was that only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

Ferguson’s advice in 2009 said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Reality was that swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Pretty hard to take such a guy seriously but that's exactly what happened when he said there would be 2.2 million dead in USA and 500,000 dead in UK. Oops, missed it by "that" much...

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 2:24:00 PM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 08 May 2020 10:54:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below.

That was a general observation, not specifically about that story. The
Sun, Daily Fail and the Torygraph are not news sources I trust.

If its on BBC Radio Four or in New Scientist its probably true.

Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new
religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ve-government-
scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Thats a common problem with some elements of UK government and senior
civil servants: they are so far up their own arses they don't think the
rules they impose can possibly apply to themselves.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that this necessarily makes their
science invalid if they're scientists. Thats unlikely because peer review
is a fairly good way of keeping scientists honest. Mistakes and fraud
WILL be remembered. Remember Andrew Wakefield of MMR infamy? He's
thoroughly discredited these days and ignored by everybody outside the
lunatic fringe.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Leave them to cower in their homes swaddled in the comfort of their humiliation masks

On Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 10:46:09 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Leave them to cower in their homes swaddled in the comfort of their humiliation masks

WTF? If I was new to this group I would be looking to find the group that actually discussed Recreational Aviation Soaring! Wearing a mask to keep others from breathing your germs and the germs of other is not humiliation, it is being respectful to mankind. Oh my God you should be ashamed of yourself as I am for you with such an ignoramus statement.

On Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 6:37:51 AM UTC-7, wrote:
I guess we'll need to philosophically disagree on this point. Using your logic anyone at any time can grossly over/under predict a given scenario in order to drive their desired behavior. Apply that sensationalized prediction logic to climate change, environmental pollution, deforestation, acid rain, inflation, education, natural resource depletion (specifically fossil fuels), landfills - all of which have been or are being done - and you'll find the basis for "proving" anything that will give the predictor more power, more budget, more news cycles, etc.

Nope, I'll take a well thought out, historically consistent, and mathematically sound prediction every time.

Robert

I once rode in a car going 120 MPH on the freeway, without seat belts, and I didn't die or even be in an accident "proving" that driving that fast is safe and we don't need speed limit laws.
Liberate the freeways!

On Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 8:56:10 AM UTC-4, b4soaring wrote:
What the predictions said was "if we do nothing, something bad will happen, but only if we do nothing.

Something is then done.

Something bad doesn't happen, at least not quite so bad.

It doesn't mean the predictions were wrong, just that the worst case scenarios were prevented:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqzicvDVcKg


On Saturday, 9 May 2020 01:04:01 UTC+1, wrote:
I think in this specific case, however, Neil Ferguson has a bit of a reputation for getting it not only wrong but way wrong. For example:

He was behind research resulting in the destruction of 11 million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that 150,000 people could die.

Predicted in 2002 that up to 50,000 people would die from mad cow disease in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from mad cow.

Predicted in 2005 that up to 150 million people would be killed from bird flu. Reality was that only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

Ferguson’s advice in 2009 said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Reality was that swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Pretty hard to take such a guy seriously but that's exactly what happened when he said there would be 2.2 million dead in USA and 500,000 dead in UK. Oops, missed it by "that" much...

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 2:24:00 PM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 08 May 2020 10:54:56 -0700, greggballou wrote:

Nice try. Same story in the telegraph link below.

That was a general observation, not specifically about that story. The
Sun, Daily Fail and the Torygraph are not news sources I trust.

If its on BBC Radio Four or in New Scientist its probably true.

Mr Lockdown doesn't believe in your new
religion even though he created it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...ve-government-
scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Thats a common problem with some elements of UK government and senior
civil servants: they are so far up their own arses they don't think the
rules they impose can possibly apply to themselves.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that this necessarily makes their
science invalid if they're scientists. Thats unlikely because peer review
is a fairly good way of keeping scientists honest. Mistakes and fraud
WILL be remembered. Remember Andrew Wakefield of MMR infamy? He's
thoroughly discredited these days and ignored by everybody outside the
lunatic fringe.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Good video. Especially highlighting the impact of the predictions on behaviour and the subsequent lowering of bad outcome. It's too bad that some posters seem to spend a lot of time looking for consipiracy behind, under, near and inside every stone when anything impacts or their very self-centered world view.