There's no doubt he's disingenuous. Never will admit an error unless its so blatantly obvious that he can't weasel out of it. So vested in his COVID narrative that he ignores anything going against it no matter how well thought out the argument is. Most folks would consider changing their viewpoint as evidence presents itself. Not him. Makes claims and accusations against people of which he frequently refuses to back up with evidence when challenged. Slanders and tries to attack someone's credibility while simultaneously ignoring their argument, which is the mark of a poor debater. Is excellent on research, but ill-equipped on how to best use it apart from blasting/spamming shotgun approach of trying to overwhelm a forum with the belief that quantity overshadows quality and if he shows that enough people believe the doctrine, the doctrine cannot possibly be wrong. (see the above post spam session where no one will read the blast of links he fills the post with - and as a reminder, this is the second exact same post with exact same links today - on the exact same thread) He is not samurai.
you lying sack of shit... in my quote above... I clearly identified.... the issue was sometimes doomers did not explain whether they were referencing IFRs or CFRS back then. You can see in my quote... " at the time the Covid doomers were putting forth death rates of 4 to 6 percent. (and sometimes those death rates were not clearly identified as CFRs.)" --- by the way... you just confirmed my point... those IFRs turned about to out to be far better than the doomer's scary numbers. "Angry statisticians dispute Santa Clara County research that found high infection rates" https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04...irus-study-the-authors-owe-us-all-an-apology/
GWB does this too... ... So desperate was the Guardian to discredit it that it began digging dirt on one of the Declaration’s authors, Harvard Professor Dr Martin Kulldorff. "Kulldorff is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist with 24,270 citations: hardly an irrelevant lightweight. Yet as far as the Guardian was concerned, Kulldorff’s accumulated professional expertise was invalidated by the fact that he had once appeared on an internet radio show the Richie Allen Show which had ‘previously hosted multiple antisemites and Holocaust deniers as well as other conspiracy theorists.’ The fact that this smear-by-association method is now routine among scribblers of the hard left does not mean that we should stop being appalled and disgusted by how dirty, underhand and antithetical to free speech and open debate it is. I myself recently appear on the Richie Allen Show. Richie is in fact an old school leftie — ‘a Socialist numbering Salvador Allende and Hugo Chavez among his heroes’ — who interviews a broad range of people on his show, ranging from neo-Nazis to gay rights activists to Islamist-supporting left-wing radicals like George Galloway. It’s called ‘journalism’. The idea that Kulldorff is in any way compromised by his appearance on the show exists only in the embittered imaginations of anti-free speech campaign groups like Hope Not Hate." ... https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/10/13/big-tech-censors-the-great-barrington-declaration/
An article in the Washington Examiner confirms that many of the medical signatures are fraudulent while showing how easy it is to a fake signature to the Great Barrington Declaration. The amusing part is they try to blame it all on "pro-lockdown" advocates. But we didn't really need an article to show us how easy it is to add a fraudulent medical signature is to the petition - our very own Tsing Tao already demonstrated this to us by signing up as Jack the Ripper. 'Pro-lockdown' advocates 'submit hoax signatures' to an anti-lockdown declaration signed by thousands of medical experts https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ration-signed-by-thousands-of-medical-experts A petition signed by thousands of medical professionals calling for an end to coronavirus lockdowns has received several fraudulent signatures. “So the Great Barrington Declaration - an open letter/petition signed by thousands of medics and scientists who oppose the lockdown - has been hijacked by pro lockdown fanatics who are signing it with fake names in a frantic attempt to discredit it. Desperate stuff!” journalist Isabel Oakeshott tweeted Friday morning. Economic and political historian and senior research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, Phil Magness, tweeted that Nafeez Ahmed, a British journalist, was one of the people responsible for a fake submission and that it was being deleted “‘Journalist’ @NafeezAhmed has a thread this morning openly boasting about how he attempted to submit fraudulent signatures,” Magness tweeted Friday. “Needless to say, his submission and others like it are being actively deleted.” “My fake profile for the Great Barrington Declaration allowed me, myself and I to confirm the fake information I submitted, allowing me to receive a simple email verification to get my 'Medical & Public Health' scientist signatory status confirmed,” Ahmed said as part of a lengthy Twitter thread, adding that the declaration was using “fraud to support science.” Magness said that others online are “intentionally submitting hoax signatures” to the declaration, with names like “Mickey Mouse,” speaking to the “juvenile opposition” of those who disagree with the thousands of health experts who have signed the letter opposing lockdowns and urging governments across the country and push for “herd immunity.” Ahmed told the Washington Examiner that he does not "have an ax to grind" with the scientists behind the declaration and has been critical of "draconian" lockdowns in the past but was "surprised" at what he perceived as an "opaque" verification process to sign the declaration. "I was surprised to find that it was so easy for anyone to self-verify as a 'scientist' signatory, without any actual verification process to confirm this is the case," Ahmed said. "If that's the case, it's simply impossible for the publishers of the declaration to know that it is supported by so-and-so 'thousands' of scientists — because it has set up an inherently opaque process that is beyond verification and is, of course, therefore, entirely unscientific." Ahmed continued: "The declaration certainly reflects the opinion of the 38 distinguished scientists who signed it, and the scientific merits of their claims surely should be debated. But it seems to be simple propaganda to claim that their opinion is supported by over 5,000 medical and public health scientists. And that is strong grounds to question why such a deceptive and unscientific process is being used to convince people that the declaration has wide scientific support. If it does, use a transparent and reliable vetting process." In response, Magness told the Washington Examiner that "rather than engaging with the scientific debate over the most serious public health crisis in our lifetime, lockdown supporters such as Nafeez Ahmed have resorted to submitting fraudulent signatures to the Great Barrington Declaration in an attempt to distract attention away from its message." "Such actions amount to academic misconduct, serving no other purpose than to manufacture a controversy out of Ahmed's own admittedly deceitful and juvenile twitter antics," Magness continued. "Despite the brazenness with which Ahmed admits and even boasts of his fraud, his efforts are for naught as the fictitious signatures he and his supporters generated were almost immediately removed and blocked. Sadly, his behavior only distracts from the pandemic at hand, showing that he's willing to play politics when millions of human lives and livelihoods are at stake." Magness also pointed out that other "pro-lockdown" academics joined in on the "spam campaign." Magness’s colleague at the AIER pointed out another apparent attempt to discredit the study by tweeting an article suggesting the Guardian newspaper is engaging in an attempt to link supporters of the declaration to racism. “Like clockwork, the smears are next,” AIER editorial director Jeffrey Tucker tweeted. Tucker added that "perhaps 250 total" signatures have been fraudulent and that the "verification process is slow and difficult but the admins are doing their best." "The site was built not with a year of apparatus and planning but rather in one day," Tucker told the Washington Examiner. "The support has been amazing. We estimate a 0.1% false positive rate, but we have also implemented controls mostly to protect against efforts like Ahmed's." It was reported this weekthat the declaration, co-authored by Harvard professor of medicine Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Oxford professor Dr. Sunetra Gupta, and Stanford Medical School professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, had reached over 50,000 signatures.
Instead of discussing the contents... Idiots and morons will distract and douche... So I will highlight some of the main points... "Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity."
boomers find the internet to be a blackbox so don't realize how easy it is to write a script, recruit 4chan trolls, or hire out a click farm in India to game online polls/petitions/etc... bless their poor souls & their stubborn ignorance
Especially when they allow a signature to appear without any validation whatsoever. Then they are left with the mess of trying to clean up thousands of fake signatures and not even knowing which ones are real or fake.