Another scientist who doesn’t believe in a word he says

Scientist demonstrates Pandemic lockdowns are “only for the little people”.

The Leona Helmsley moment for science has arrived. From the bigger they are, the harder they fall department comes this epic fall from grace by a deified idiot thinking with his non-science head.

From the UK Telegraph:

Exclusive: Government scientist Neil Ferguson resigns after breaking lockdown rules to meet his married lover

The scientist whose advice prompted Boris Johnson to lock down Britain resigned from his Government advisory position on Tuesday night as The Telegraph can reveal he broke social distancing rules to meet his married lover.

Professor Neil Ferguson allowed the woman to visit him at home during the lockdown while lecturing the public on the need for strict social distancing in order to reduce the spread of coronavirus. The woman lives with her husband and their children in another house.

More here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/05/exclusive-government-scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/

Mind you, this is the guy with the COVID-19 virus computer model that single-handedly destroyed the global economy, by initially predicting huge amounts of deaths. The fear produced a world-wide lockdown and economic devastation.

Oh, and his mistress, Antonia Staats, is a Soros-funded activist at the climate-wackadoodle organization in the UK known as Avaaz.

Josh of course, had something to say in a cartoon:

Buy Josh a pint when the pubs reopen? Go here.

286 thoughts on “Another scientist who doesn’t believe in a word he says

  1. He wears glasses, therefore he must be a scientist. Actually, he is an authority on interpolations from crystalline to dynamically triangulated random surfaces.

    • I thought he had somewhat of a 007 appearance, despite the glasses (it’s a cover)

      • He has the masculine angular jaw, he’s a womanizer => next James Bond.

        At least, according to my abstract model.

    • I was thinking that he was a scientist because he had a relatively hot, blonde mistress. Don’t all scientists get at least somewhat hot blonde mistresses?

      • Apparently the “shit for brains” people are trying to breed! Now that’s scary!

      • You’ve been indoctrinated by Disney films like “Honey I Shrunk The Kids” IMHO. 😉
        Though they do make a good Hollywood wannabe couple – is there any video?

        • Fred Burfle, Mark and Sparkle Farkle, Fannie Farkle suddenly spring to mind. I wonder why?

        • Two engineering students were talking one day…
          Student1, “Hey, where did you get the new bike?”
          Student2 says, “Sally rode up to me on her bike the other day”
          Student1, “Wow, Sally’s really beautiful.”
          Student2, “Yeah, she is. Anyway, she rode up on her bike, threw it to the ground, took off all her clothes and threw them on the ground. She was standing naked in front of me and said, ‘Take whatever you want!””
          Student1, “Good choice, the clothes wouldn’t have fit.”

        • I don’t think you’re doing anything wrong. Remember that you’ve got to talk to each other after the main business is finished.
          An engineer told me before he died …

      • He isn’t really a scientist, he just plays one on TeeVee !

        I didn’t see him wearing a white labcoat, so he can’t really be a scientist anyway.

    • People are dying! Is there an authority on interpolations from crystalline to dynamically triangulated random surfaces in the house!!!??

          • No no, you have to say “Is there an authority on interpolations from crystalline to dynamically triangulated random surfaces in the house” three times really fast. And typing is not saying. Just sayin’…

    • He’s also the “scientist” who told us:

      “…that up to 200 million people could be killed from bird flu…”

      “…a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the disease [swine flu] would lead to 65,000 UK deaths…”

      “…modelling on foot and mouth disease that suggested that animals in neighbouring farms should be culled, even if there was no evidence of infection…”

      “…predicted that between 50 and 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef.”

      Link

      The guy has been off by a wide mark in every situation.

      Why on earth is anybody listening to him?

      • Good question! In reality more British farmers committed suicide from the effects of the BSE scare on their livelihoods than the total number of people who died from the disease itself.

    • He wears glasses and has a beard. That qualifies him as an expert on any matter the media needs a comment for.

  2. You forgot the most important part…he tested positive for the virus AND saw her within the 14 day quarantine period!!

  3. I was puzzled why nearly all countries followed broadly similar approaches. I had assumed they all had their own expert virologists, and were sharing data etc.

    Are we now saying everyone has been simply doing what this one guy said?

    Seems unlikely….

    • Actually highly likely. He is quoted ad nauseam in the USA for example.

      Plus the guy has been wrong on several other occasions; bird ‘flu, mad cow ….. No accountability. He wouldn’t survive very long in the private sector.

      • Ignorance of experts,
        Panic of running herds,
        Truth falling down in spurts,
        Four and twenty blackbirds.
        =================

        • This is the wonderful headline from the tabloid Daily Mail

          “How ‘Professor Lockdown’ fell for German lover who was married to a Battle of Britain pilot’s grandson: Neil Ferguson had secret trysts with left-wing campaigner who’s in an ‘open marriage’ with fellow academic”

          I think everything is in there

          Tonyb

          • The Daily Mirror headline was something like

            Dr. Lockdown takes trousers down

      • The British are fond of Draconian, over-the-top responses to medical problems. A single case of foot-and-mouth disease and all the herds are slaughtered.

        • Yea that’s right, and now the fiend is suffering from foot-in-mouth disease himself 😂

      • Aiden they’re talking about him here in Australia too. He’s been around and making massive errors for decades! His ‘modeling’ on predicted deaths has been way off in the past too. He predictions for Mad Cow deaths were so far out I don’t know how he didn’t lose his post then. But then ‘consensus’ scientists don’t lose their jobs for being wrong they receive awards. I’d say he resigned because of the scandal associated with the disclosed affair.

      • Of course he wouldn’t- none of them would! They’d actually have to take responsibility, do actual work, etc. Also, they wouldn’t be able to dodge blame with the usual, ‘mistakes made, inquiry held, lessons learnt’ rubbish. Not one of these authority figures have any experience of life in the real world.

    • That is why Sweden has another approach.

      Swedish politicians relied solely on their state virologist’s recommendations.

      The Swedish parliament has considered the final decision should be spawned by the politicians, not the state virologist in the future (If I have understood it correctly).

      • While we are on the topic of Sweden, let us compare some numbers.

        We shall do Sweden vs UK and Australia vs NZ. Data used shall be from worldmeters.info so you can play along and home and/or find my screaming errors.

        Why those places? Well UK and GretaLand are both northern hemisphere countries of (very) roughly the same climate and with vastly different approaches. Australia is where I live, and NZ is not only (roughly) in the same part of the world, but again put in place a much harsher lockdown relative to Australia.

        So rather than do the usual X/ 1M Pop stats, let us compare Tests to Cases (rounded for brevity)
        Sweden 6:1
        UK 7:1
        Oz 102:1
        NZ 113:1

        Now let us do cases to deaths
        Sweden 8:1
        UK 7:1
        Oz 71:1
        NZ 71:1

        and finally tests and deaths
        Sweden 50:1
        UK 48:1
        Oz 7256:1
        NZ 8001:1

        So… first thing to consider is that the requirements for testing are probably very different. I suggest that given the 6:1 type ratios in the Northern parts of the world the policy was to test people who reported in sick, while South of the magic line around the middle of the planet there was a lot more ‘suspected’ testing – possibly because the Government needed to be seen to be doing something.

        I know a workmate here in Oz was required to go in for testing because his partner was trying to get a new script for her asthma puffer.

        – Why are you short of breath?
        – Cause I have asthma
        – Are you SURE?? Where have you been lately?
        – Ummm… regional Victoria last week…
        – You crossed a STATE BORDER!!! TO THE TEST LABS WITH YOU!!!

        So 14 days hard isolation for him and his lady only to confirm at the end that yes, she did suffer from asthma.

        So I suggest that the 100:1 type ratios in Australia and NZ are more to do with massive amounts of people sitting around with test kits and nothing to do. Quick! Test everyone! In comparison I suggest in UK and Sweden they may have been testing only people with Wuhan like symptoms. Open to correction.

        But, UK and Sweden are very similar and Aust and NZ are very similar.

        Then we get cases/deaths and tests/death. Again UK/Sweden are very similar, as are Aust/NZ.

        I would suggest that climate and Vit D may explain why the Wuhan seems to be deadlier by some magnitude, but topic for different discussion.

        The observation I would like to make is that Aust/NZ and UK/Sweden are both so similar in these ratios that we can start making some apples to apples comparison. The testing methods appear to be the same and the survival rate for those unfortunate to being a ‘case’ are also about the same. Once you get sick you have about the same chance of surviving in the UK as you do in Sweden.

        So then we start comparing Deaths per Million.
        UK 443
        Sweden 291

        Australia and NZ both 4

        So despite everything else appearing to be the same, people in the UK are dying at a significantly greater rate, and people in the Trans Tasman are dying at the same. (minor grammatical flaw in that sentence I think, but you get my point).

        So, conclusions? UK lockdown did not positively affect the deaths and may actually have made it worse.

        NZ’s Level 4 lockdown, coupled with the fact NZ is in real terms already massively isolated, did not out perform the more casual Australian responses.

        So, In My Opinion; Closing borders? yeah, pretty sensible. Locking people in their homes? Pointless and possibly damaging.

        • …and the divorce rate in lockdown countries was probably higher than the death rate, but my anecdotal experience probably won’t apply to everybody!

        • That’s all well and good, but it relies on countries reporting things in the same way. They don’t.

    • But, his estimate of 500,000 UK deaths is probably about right, it was likely just an estimated death rate (1%) times the size of the population (around 60 million). There have “only” been around 30,000 UK deaths so far, probably because only around 1% of the population has had the virus, so far.

      Lockdowns come with estimates for compliance, which I believe was only something like 75%, maybe the good prof just decided to put himself in the 25% non-compliant group.

      • “But, his estimate of 500,000 UK deaths is probably about right, it was likely just an estimated death rate (1%) times the size of the population (around 60 million). There have “only” been around 30,000 UK deaths so far, probably because only around 1% of the population has had the virus, so far.”

        There is the problem of 500,000 estimate, it make you think only 1% of population has been infected.
        It also makes you think UK can’t get out of lockdown, because more than 1% will be infected.
        If it was said that about 1% of population age 60 years or older or say at most 20% total pop had about 1% of dying, then it would be closer to the truth.
        20% of 66 million is 13.2 million people at risk. 13.2 times 1% is 132,000 people who could die without the lockdown. But there is going to effective lockdown when 50,000 people die, because people will respond due to fear. So, you going to have lockdown whether you want it or not, but by government ordering a lockdown well before the 50,000 death, you are having the government maintaining public security, rather than causing public panic and public demanding the government “do a lockdown” and/or people just stay home {and any orders to leave their homes will be disregarded]. So there is certainty you will get a lockdown, the only question is what kind lockdown is it going to be. So there no question that there will be “social distancing” of some type and way the 500,000 UK deaths could be vaguely correct, is you including causalities from some kind civil war, or perhaps that virus is still problem years from now, or other wild assumptions.
        But if said most deaths will occur in the 60+ age group and that number could as high as 132,000 people {though if extremely badly governed could be even higher} then one might be able to govern the crisis better.
        But probably a more important thing to focus on instead of deaths, is the number who get seriously ill but don’t die {but it’s possible/likely they could have long health consequence from being seriously ill]
        And that is why UK should have had lockdown a lot sooner than they did and why do a lockdown.
        Let’s first look at 60 or older or 20% of population of 13.2 million people. 132,000 die and more than 500,000 survive but could got seriously ill. The rest of population might total an addition 1 million or possible much more. And having that occur within a month time period, rather than a year period at least a very daunting problem or an impossible situation. But since public doesn’t need a government to react, it’s unlikely it could get this bad.
        But it would been a more accurate model.
        Anyhow more than 90% of deaths were from 60+ age group or 30,000 death about 27,000 of 132,000,
        and without any of 132,000 at present catching virus {they already have} the 27,000 may climb to 40,000. Or no current lockdown action is going to prevent it- improvement in treatment could prevent it. And since hospital are less crowded, that fact alone might save some.
        But that give you some clue about decisions about the present lockdown.
        One thing, is you could begin to send the kids to school. It seems they were always at very low risk, and kids seem to not be spreader of virus {unlike other flus] but social distancing with the kids is good idea- I would not test their immunity to potential harm {mainly getting seriously ill] so would put them in crowded school buses or crowded classes, and have them wear masks- and wash their hands. And classes outside are much better than inside. Encouraging more outdoor sports could be a good idea- though wearing masks would be problem, so not team sports. Or sports that kids don’t need to wear masks. Or change the rules of team sports.

        • 1. Lockdowns are a disease prevention measure.
          2. There are other diseases and other corresponding prevention.
          3. We must not only assess the success of lockdown vs disease (covid) but the success of lockdown vs other preventions.
          4. Use common Cost EFfective Analysis CEA to determine if government spent money wisely.

          • The British are fond of Draconian, over-the-top responses to medical problems. A single case of foot-and-mouth disease and all the herds are slaughtered.

          • “1. Lockdowns are a disease prevention measure.”

            Lockdown is also forced vacation.
            You can’t stop any disease, but you could end the vacation.

            I would say this chinese virus, appears to spread slowly, but it actually spread really fast.
            Vacation is over, get back to work.

            Now, question why does India have 1 death per million and UK has 443 deaths per million?

            I give couple answers, India average yearly temperature is 24 C and it has Malaria.
            {and India doesn’t trust China}
            Another question, why does Venezuela have 0.4 deaths per million and Brazil has
            40 deaths per million.
            Both are warm and Venezuela trusts China.
            [And Venezuela hospitals don’t have power and running water and has 10 million percent inflation].

        • I heard a question ask on Melbourne radio yesterday.
          In USA
          68,000 deaths
          30 million job losses.
          If 10% of the 30 million or 3 million people are suffering badly, how do we compare the 3 million suffering to the 68,000 death?

        • Part of the ploy of oafish boors like Ferguson is to continue to shift the goalposts, and quoting multiple different numbers, as you’ve described above. Any normal person reading these in some ordinary “dead tree” press, or hearing some newscaster read that out on TeeVee, will have their brain numbed and be entirely discombobulated by the complexity. They won’t remember any of that, and there’s no need to even try, because by the next day the numbers will be all changed around again. Comparing the figures are entire meaningless, because the methods of calculation, collation and summation vary wildly from country to country anyway.

      • Oxford University estimated that the UK infection rate was 25% in mid March. It is probably 30-40% by now.

    • Sometimes coincidences happen, but most of the time there is more to them. Both UK and USA government “experts” initially gave advice to their bosses that the virus was no big deal. Then they didn’t recommend mass testing. Then in the US at least they botched the tests they did administer and some were contaminated. Then they that said that in order to save us all they needed the economy to shutdown and for the healthy to quarantine. Then they use junk science to prevent generic and proven Hydroxychloroquine from being used as an effective treatment and are now pushing rushed approval for an expensive patented drug that shows little promise. Now it’s rushed approval for a vaccine while advocating for more lockdowns and social distancing.

      This isn’t a pandemic, it’s a plandemic. Fauci and his counterparts allowed the virus to spread as much within their nations before reacting, and then when they reacted it was akin to cutting off your foot because you have a bunion. If it wasn’t for Trump forcing the CDC to allow private labs to create and administer tests, we would hardly have any tests done and the case fatality rate would be much higher than the already skewed numbers.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMcDH80xiVw

      Well worth the watch.

    • They are all in this up to their scrawney vested interest necks…..

      Robert Redfield “Associated People” …
      Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci, Deborah Birx, Tedros Adhanom, Neil Ferguson.
      https://tameside.directory/people/robert-r-redfield/

      They’re all “at it” in one way or another, and constantly conferring, and cooking up new prevarications no doubt?

    • He was a good Samaritan, poor woman run away from her abusive husband, she needed to be comforted; word is, she liked it, not a lot, so went back home. 🙂

    • Boris Johnson.
      Always sh****g others wives, multiple children out of wedlock (including the recent one).
      Paid no attention to “The lockdown to save the NHS”, consequently caught the virus and ended-up in NHS critical care.
      Went to the Cheltenham event, with many hundreds of others, and loads got sick as a result.

      But let’s go-on about someone else…..

      Still, he hasn’t made any comments about grabbing womens p***ies (yet)

      • Still, he hasn’t made any comments about grabbing womens p***ies (yet)

        But isn’t that just what one would EXPECT from a dirty filthy rotten nasty American Republican pig like Trump, or from one of those “Conservative Party” types in the UK?

        But how do we explain such a thing coming from one of the beautiful people like Ferguson? I mean, if we’re going to compare apples to oranges when we’re talking hypocrisy anyway. After all, progressives are surely the best of the best of humanity, don’t you agree?

        • sy,
          “But how do we explain such a thing coming from one of the beautiful people like Ferguson?”

          I don’t know about him being beautiful.

          But he’s en EXPERT! We believe in them, no we pray to them. This story must be fake. An expert like that can’t do wrong.

          /sarc

        • syc:
          IIRC Trump was a registered Democrat when he made the “grabbing…” comment,
          so does that absolve him at all? /sarc

        • Paraphrasing: sycomputing : May 6, 2020 at 10:24 am

          just what one would EXPECT from a dirty filthy rotten nasty American Republican pig like Trump,

          Now there are two (2) types of people who make comments similar to the above ….. but neither will testify to actually what prompted them to voice such a derogatory characterizing of another person.

          If the person making the remark is a man that is criticizing another man, then jealousy is his reason because he is NOT attractive to beautiful women (beautiful women don’t find anything about him attractive).

          If the person making the remark is a female that is criticizing a man, then hatred and anger is her reason because she knows for a fact that her dreams of a sexual relationship with the man in question is an impossibility. ….. “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. 😊

          • Now there are two (2) types of people who make comments similar to the above . . .

            Now you just lookie here ‘ole son – if’n you’n is a sayin’ what I’m a thinkin’ you’n is a thinkin’ you’re a sayin’, then you’n ain’t neither a thinkin’ nor a sayin’ it right correctly.

            TO WIT:

            There’s a 3rd type of people makin’ a comment similar to the above, and that’d be one who’s a makin’ an ironic comment that ever’body [sic] else’n is a knowin’ ain’t all the way the true notion of the man’s thinkin’ who’s a makin’ the comment he’s a makin’ cept’n for you!

            But that’s alright, I fergive you.

            So you just remember what I told you now several years ago Samuel C. Cogar, how you remind me of my Grandpappy, and how I miss ‘im greatly, and if’n you continue along this line of talkin’, to remind me of him more, I’m a gonna drive over there boat in tow, drag you out by the back a yer collar, and you and me’s a gonna go out and do some fishin’ with a bottle of Wild Turkey 101, hear?

            We’ll have ourselves a “To Wit” (or maybe better said: a “T’WIT) ‘ole time ole son!!

          • Samuel they removed the ‘Reply’ option from sycomputing’s comment below.

            I would have liked to have advised him/her to put the Disney character Foghorn Leghorn back in his cage. The OTT comment fell flat, reduced to kindergarten tactics. These people are incapable of intelligent conversation.

          • Hi Megs:

            Samuel they removed the ‘Reply’ option from sycomputing’s comment below.

            Well, technically speaking, they (in the ethereal sense of “They”) didn’t remove “the ‘Reply’ option,” rather, that’s just how WordPress generally works. Note you can do some tricky funky stuff with the “wp_list_comments” function in the “comments.php” file, but you first need to know some php and anyway that’s neither here nor there for our discussion (did you see what I did there? I made myself look really farging smart by name dropping the php programming language and certain functions within it, about which I haven’t a clue)

            What we can’t have in these forums is an infinite number of div offsets to the right each time someone replies to a reply of the first reply ad infinitum to ad nauseum, else things would become difficult to read and that simply won’t do. Peeps wouldn’t like it. So it’s restricted to . . . two replies to the first reply I think . . . don’t quote me on that.

            Nevertheless, I’m happy to let you know that that regardless of the ‘Reply’ option not being there under my reply, I’m now replying that I understood your reply just as though the ‘Reply’ option were actually there when you replied! So all is well.

            I would have liked to have advised him/her to . . .

            I want you to know that I’m always most appreciative of and for good advice, so thank you, you’ve succeeded in your quest! I’m sorry that my reply wasn’t up to snuff fer . . . err, “for” you. I think you’re a dear heart for coming to Sam’s aid like you did – that’s most terrific and I applaud you for it.

            But Sam and I, well, we have a “history” of sorts. He won’t remember because he’s getting up there in years (which is why he reminds me of my grandpappy):

            https://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2018/02/21/the-coming-global-forest-regrowth/#comment-2750577

            But just for a little context on the “Fogern Legern” motif and why I find it and Sam endearing, I invite you to review the following. Enjoy!

            https://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2014/08/06/wuwt-filling-in-knowledge-holes-since-2006/#comment-1708822

            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/06/france-may-be-ahead-of-the-curve-when-it-comes-to-global-warming-policy-backlash/#comment-2551956

            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/22/hole-in-the-ozone-layer-shrinks-to-smallest-size-on-record/#comment-2830065

            Now, there’s no need to apologize Megs . . . really . . . I wouldn’t, nay couldn’t expect you to understand my relationship with Sam given MY inability to engage in intelligent conversation!

          • I do have to say Sy that am truly impressed with your linguistic acrobatics! Point taken that some things are presented in a particular context. But for those not privy to that context the comment loses relevance. Thanks for extrapolating.

          • “Samuel they removed the ‘Reply’ option from sycomputing’s comment below.”

            They didn’t remove it. The reply indent only goes so far.

          • Megs:

            I do have to say Sy that am truly impressed with your linguistic acrobatics!

            Well you’re the only one, and just being kind to say so I’m sure, but one is more than none, so many thanks!

            And we’re agreed on your further points that: 1) context is everything and 2) my comments embody nothing relevant.

          • Megs – May 6, 2020 at 6:02 pm

            Samuel ………………………sycomputing’s comment below.

            I would have liked to have advised him/her ……..

            Megs, advising sycomputing of most anything is nothing less than “an act of futility” on the part of the advisor.

            sycomputing really don’t like me at all, simply because I “jump his/her case” most every time he/she posts untruths, misinformation and/or junk science commentary. He/she really doesn’t like me “jerking his/her chain”.

            But what really irks sycomputing the most is that he knows that I am older, more intelligent, more experienced and better educated in the actual factual sciences of the natural world than he/she can ever hope to be ……. without a change in his/her personality.

          • Samuel, we can only be who we are and endeavor to be authentic. People going in on the attack do themselves no favour. Hopefully with wisdom and passing time comes measured responses.

            There is much humor, wit and intellect to be found on this site (mostly). I have learned much.

          • I have learned much.

            Megs, that was great for my old eyes to be reading.

            I earned my teaching Degree in/of the Biological & Physical Sciences many years ago (1963) and I utterly detest the “junk science” that the public schools have been teaching for the past 30 years.

            So, iffen you read where I am correcting someone on their science beliefs …… you can “bet your biffy” that my commentary is based in/on scientific facts and evidence ……. and/or … on common sense thinking, logical reasoning and intelligent deductions.

            Here you go, Megs, learn more about …. “why you are what you are” ….. by reading this commentary that is titled …. A View of How the Human Mind Works, which I posted on April 15, 2019 at 4:27 am at this url link: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/04/14/moonbat-being-moonbat/#comment-2680500

          • Samuel I read and enjoyed the link ‘A view of How the Human Mind Works’. I’d like to touch on some particular areas of interest. But first I’d like to raise the issue of how the written word is perceived. You have a unique way of putting vernacular into your writing, I enjoy it, it makes me smile. I really think that Sy enjoys it too, but Sy has a strong mischievous streak and enjoys playing with the minds of intellectual people, or people perceived as fools. It may be that Sy is simply an intellectual troll. I may be way off base here of course but I haven’t seen enough of Sy’s comments to get any feel for where he/she is coming from.

            Getting back to how the written word is perceived in relation to the post that you sent me. You set a challenge to others on the post and I noted that one particular participant seemed happy to be involved and when he/she posted their results you responded with aforementioned vernacular. What I don’t think you realised is that they mistakenly read the vernacular as being condescending. That was what lead to the somewhat offensive defense.

            In regard to your long comment, I enjoyed your analogy of the human brain to a computer. It made so much sense but at the same time it made me smile. My youngest son labeled me a ‘techtard’ some years ago and I have to say it’s true. I confuse computers! That’s my story anyway. I have never been on any social media platform and this is the first and only site that I have made comments on and only in recent months. One of the Bob’s on this site taught me how to cut and paste so that I could better contribute to conversations by adding links. Thank you Bob.

            Getting back to the ‘long comment’. I enjoyed your explanation of the dream process and how in a dreamstate the image you perceive is as though you were awake. I don’t know if it’s a common thing and on the whole I love to dream, but if I don’t like the way a dream is going I can choose to end it. The dream that is.

            Language is another thing I found interesting and the way we are conditioned to think and speak in the ‘Mother tongue’ we grew up with. Even when we learn another language, in deep thought we revert to our 1st language. I have observed that if I’ve endeavored to catch the attention of someone who has a different 1st language to me and they don’t immediately respond that it’s likely they were deep in the thought of their own language.

            Religion is ingrained in those who grew up with it, it is an integral part of their lives and some cannot understand how a person could not believe. It becomes a part of who you are and like language it is simply something that you know.

            This is what brings me back to the CAGW issues. I saw a recent interview with Michael Moore and even though he has come to understand that renewables will not only fail to save our planet, but they are causing significant ecological damage. Given that he has only had conversations with ‘consensus scientists’ he is yet to learn that though we could do things a little differently, the planet is not in the imminent danger that he has been led to believe. He does not know that CO2 is ‘not’ a demon created by capitalists who have no regard to the destructive path they have sent the planet on. He still talks about the urgent need to ‘do’ something before it’s too late.

            I sincerely hope that as he has opened his mind to the possibility that renewables were a scam, that he takes the time to speak to ‘real’ scientists, not those who work within the buddies system looking to appease politicians and journalists. Maybe someone can open his mind further toward reality.

          • Psst Megs!

            sycomputing really don’t like me at all . . .

            Don’t listen to him! I think Sam’s the greatest! It’s not so much about Foghorn Leghorn, but rather, Yosemite Sam, if you recall that classic character.

            But don’t tell him I said so. I don’t want him to get the wrong idea.

      • BoJo was meant to be a pm of and for good times, but sadly for him and the country those are somewhere far beyond the horizon.

        • It looks that the UK’s most respected and BoJo’s paper the Daily Telegraph is moving away from its unwavering government support with more and more strongly critical articles.
          “We are following the science” doesn’t wash any longer.
          https://www.telegraph.co.uk

          • Vuk in reality they are ‘following the models’ so of course it shouldn’t wash anymore! Given that the models around this current and many previous pandemics have been so wrong surely they have to question the climate models too.

          • All the traditional “dead tree” press are kaka-ing their pants these days, because they never did get the hang of this here internet thang, where the REAL News is to be seen in the Public Comments and links to censored & deleted stories at archive.org, bitstream, reddit, personal blogs (like WUWT) and similar. You know places where real experts are actually authoring real stories with actual verifiable facts with references! Vested interest hacks taking payola from billionaire “philanthropists” like Gates, Soros, et al just aren’t believed by most readers these days. Just see the public comments under any stories published at the “Daily Tripe” or “Grauniad” and you’ll see they are mostly panning.

      • Still confused as to what a joke is eh? No surprise, leftards lost their sense of humor a long time ago. It would be interesting to hear all the things you’ve said in private, I’m sure it would all be very classy.

  4. It’s amazing the hypocrisy from some of these people, and this one in particular, having his married mistress visiting him secretly, while her own children and husband stayed home while her secret lover made recommendations to Parliament to shelter in place and shut down the economy. This is a monumental breach of trust by the authorities that make these policies up for the rest of us. What an a-hole. Why do people listen to these types of people, especially after something like that. Hopefully this idiot no longer has any influence over public policy in the UK. Now he is also probably responsible for breaking up a family and causing a divorce due too his own selfishness.

    Or the idiot mayor of Chicago who had her hair done, ignoring her own directive, because she said she is the public face of the state and has to look good. Or Canadian PM Trudeau who did so as well, breaking a temporary order not to cross provincial borders into Quebec, so as he could travel from Ontario to Quebec to be with his family at his lake front summer residence. But other folk who were caught doing so, faced hefty fines and/or jail time. It becomes hard not become jaded by this lack of trust from public leaders and policy makers. No wonder people are getting real mad.

  5. The report I saw said that he also had been diagnosed with Covid 19 when he saw her. Not only a hypocrite but also a huge a$$hole who should be charged.

    • Is everyone aware that ferguson has been funded by the Gates foundation to write on climate topics?

      His last one was about how yellow fever would be affected by climate change and the gates foundations was one of the largest sponsors

      Tonyb

  6. Friendship with “benefits”, polygamy without responsibility, intelligence without borders

    • Advice without responsibility, authority without accountability, actions without consequences.
      The guy is living a deluded life.

    • Vuk,

      You seem to believe that higher infection rate in Sweden’s no-lockdown was unexpected?
      This was EXACTLY to be expected…. by definition… what they were hoping to accomplish.

      Without a vaccine, and given a widely dispersed respiratory transmission virus, and an infection with most healthy people having a long asymptomatic period, AND that many of those infections are ultimately low- to no-symptoms, containment was never to be expected.

      We’re all going to get SARS-CoV-2 immunity … one way or another.

      • High infection low death rate is desirable. It is not infection but the death rate that should be of concern, since Swedish life expectancy of males 82 (USA 76) and females 85 (USA 81) years; Sweden has a lot of old people to get rid off !

        • Sweden has a very low test rate. Infection rate number are meaningless until you have tested a statistically significant number of the population.

      • Or not. The gained immunity from infection may well be short-term. And since the virus seems to be rapidly mutating, the immunity gained from one infection may well not be relevant to any others. And it won’t help the elderly, since their immune systems seem to have “amnesia” with respect to new infections..

    • I think the Swedish method is doing very well considering their almost total lack of a lockdown. How is it that they are still doing better than a number of UK/EU members and only slightly worse than the US? “Reported cases” seems to vary based on location and testing. Deaths may be a better metric, but that has other factors involved as well.

      Germany is an outlier for whatever reason.

      • Germany is not an outlier, neighbouring Denmark and Austria are doing just as well, and Portugal is there too. What I do not understand is why the east Europe is doing so well. Greece, Czechia, Slovenia, Finland and three Baltic states all have good medical and technical means of tracking deaths and are still having death rate less than 5/100k, I don’t know if it it is the measures they took or different version of the virus is there. In my native Monte Negro (pop. 600k) they test everyone who gets either of the three major symptoms (high temps, difficult breading or muscular pain), there are just few hundred positive and only 6 dead, i.e. 1/100k, which is line with other countries in the region.
        I know that in MN anyone found breaking actual curfew was arrested and fined and a large number sent to isolation in old disused army barracks for a week ‘holiday’.

        • Infection & death rates are not just a function of how well respective countries governments handle the situation they face, it is also dependent upon how many infected people (and the easily overlooked goods and cargo too – rarely, if ever mentioned) entered each country and how many other people they came in contact with.

          Its unlikely that these figures will ever be discovered for anyone. Comparisons by media, governments, NGO’s etc probably wont/can’t factor this in, for their own respective reasons, justifiable or not.

          I just hope after the media/talking head sh!tstorm blows over, some real science is done in understanding how everything panned out and how best to nip it off early next time around so governments don’t lock down society again, with all the damage that it is currently doing.

      • “Germany is an outlier for whatever reason.”

        What I’ve read is that it doesn’t count deaths as due to Covid-19 unless the victim was tested for it and/or unless Covid-19 could be proved to be the main cause, not just a contributing cause.

      • ” the Swedish method is doing very well considering their almost total lack of a lockdown”
        Sweden has restrictions. It forbids gatherings of more than 50 people. That rules out sporting events, theater. It restricts bars to table service only, etc.

        • Did they make idiotic restrictions like no fishing, no car washes, etc, like Washington State’s Democrat governor did?

      • Michael Jankowski
        “The Swedish method is doing very well ”
        So 274 deaths per million compared with Australia and New Zealand both with 4 deaths per million and similar population median ages is “doing well”
        Really?

      • Germany is an outlier because it is headed by a person with an actual brain. Sweden’s approach (you can die now or later, what’s the difference?) is great except for one thing. By delaying the dying part, you increase the time for discovery of a treatment. Being dead makes taking advantage of said treatment a little problematic.

    • Still, it looks like they are just where they wanted to be AND they didn’t fook their economy getting there.

    • So where is ‘near exponential’ growth in cases and subsequently hospitalizations and deaths in Sweden predicted by models if no strict lockdowns are implemented?

        • Understood – that was a rhetorical question anyway. Looks like prof. Ferguson set up his private lockdown rules. There was once upon a time a war for a woman – Trojan – so maybe he assumed this woman is worth another war.

    • Sadly, Sweden failed to correctly isolate its nursing homes and healthcare facilities.
      Tbis has nothing to do with the adopted strategy with respect to lockdown.

      Sweden cases/deaths ratio is in the same ballpark as other countries which faced the same problem with their ederly.

      The Swedish healthcare system never got overhelmed.

      I just have a question for the lockdown advocates :
      – and now what are you going to do ? Wait (at least 3 years) while continuing to live in your caves while waiting for a miracle vaccine (which never happened with respect to a coronavirus) ?

      Any chess player knows that lockdown is nothing but a dead end.

  7. Move on? So, basically, a cover-up. He advised people to stay off the streets, in order to have privacy without bedroom walls, and reduce the social distance between him and his friend with “benefits”. I wonder if this is why Planned Parenthood et al were certified to provide an essential service. Keep women barefoot, available, and taxable.

  8. Yet another siren, Antonia Trampanotto, pops yet another hypocrisy-clouded, authoritarian bubble.
    Plus ça change, etc.

  9. UK lockdownsceptics.org
    Latest News
    By Toby Young / 6 May 2020 / 35 Comments
    https://lockdownsceptics.org/2020/05/06/latest-news-22/
    […]
    For those who find this sort of thing unenlightening and want a more meaty takedown of Professor Ferguson, a reader who’s an experienced coder – as in, worked as a senior engineer at Google for eight years – has written a review of the code underpinning the Imperial College model for this site that you can read here.
    https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/
    Quite technical, but even a non-specialist like me can get the gist: ICL’s computer model is a great illustration of the coders’ golden rule – “garbage in, garbage out”.
    […]

    MG

    • I’ve read this. It seems that the IC model is complete junk from a programming point of view. As a retired academic, I know that academics make lousy programmers but the IC model is extraordinary.

      I really hope that there is an investigation into the damage that Ferguson’s shoddy “science” has done. His scientific failure is a lot more important that his private life.

      (PS: I did my PhD at Imperial before it engulfed medical schools. Ferguson is at St Mary’s Hospital and it sticks in my craw when it is referred to the “Imperial” model)

    • That is frightening – global decisions were made based on junk code.
      It would be fitting to remove Imperial College’s accreditation – Pour encourager les autres – a suitable signal to all universities and academics that you take responsibility for the effect of your pronouncements. Had that been done for the similar badly forecast foot and mouth epidemic, the global economy might be in a far better state now.

      However, it also shows the extreme gullibility of not only politicians but the media and other academics.
      It must be true it came from a computer model from Imperial College.
      The same model’s output was used uncritically by supposed experts at presidential briefings.

      This level of trusting faith must stop. Nullius in verba.

    • Brutal.

      Conclusions. All papers based on this code should be retracted immediately. Imperial’s modelling efforts should be reset with a new team that isn’t under Professor Ferguson, and which has a commitment to replicable results with published code from day one.

      On a personal level I’d actually go further and suggest that all academic epidemiology be defunded. This sort of work is best done by the insurance sector. Insurers employ modellers and data scientists, but also employ managers whose job is to decide whether a model is accurate enough for real world usage and professional software engineers to ensure model software is properly tested, understandable and so on. Academic efforts don’t have these people and the results speak for themselves.

      I’ve noticed over a 40-year career in programming that pretty much the first thing one programmer says when taking over responsibility for someone else’s code is that it’s junk and needs to be restructured. Two years later that programmer moves on and it’s rinse & repeat with the next one. The result is a given code base tends to get worse over time as more people have a hand in it. The best code tends to be written either by a single (good) programmer or a small team that work especially well together.

      • I don’t write model code, but I do write logic codes in microprocessors (for electrical substations).
        I have noticed it is possible to write beautiful looking logic that produces garbage on the output.
        It is also very difficult to deconstruct a string of logic as there is more than one way to skin a cat
        I general scrap problematic logic and start from scratch, sounds like modelers should do the same
        “Can’t polish a turd” as the saying goes

      • +1 Alan. I work at a Fortune 500 company.? In our department, every other departments‘ code is crap. Do you want proof? Just ask our manger 😉

    • A global influenza pandemic is imminent and will kill up to 150 million people, the UN official in charge of coordinating the worldwide response to an outbreak has warned.
      David Nabarro, one of the most senior public health experts at the World Health Organisation, said outbreaks of bird flu, which have killed at least 65 people in Asia, could mutate into a form transmittable between people.
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/30/birdflu.jamessturcke

      The world may have to live with Covid for years to come: Imperial College London scientist warns vaccine may NEVER be created and outbreaks and lockdowns could become the norm
      3 May 2020
      Dr David Nabarro, a special envoy to the World Health Organisation (WHO) on Covid-19, said no ‘absolute assumption’ can be made ‘that a vaccine will appear at all’.
      The global health professor argued that ‘high hopes’ are ‘dashed’ because scientists are ‘dealing with biological systems, we’re not dealing with mechanical systems’.
      He added that restrictions to movement ‘may apply to parts of a country, or it may even apply to a whole country’ in the face of another outbreak
      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282589/Imperial-College-London-scientist-warns-lockdowns-norm.html

      Nabarro. Another alarmist to be aware of

  10. So she lived in a £1.9 million mansion in an “open marriage”. Gotta love those Champagne Socialists!

    Still, I’ve prefer to focus on the mayhem caused by Ferguson’s bug-infested epidemiological models rather than his booty calls. Thirteen year-old poorly documented “C” code generates worthless, exaggerated output? I’m shocked (not).

    • I resent that, I have 20 year old poorly documented C code that’s very useful. Only problem is that it’s harder and harder to maintain. Fortunately every time I modify it I add a couple comments, so maybe someday it will be well documented C code

      • Ha! You got me there! Old but solid C code is not something to scoff at, even though it may be thin on comments. Back in the day I had a prof who, upon viewing a sample of my code for an assignment, said “Comments should make a program easier to read, not more difficult!”

        For some technical reading, here’s a code review of Ferguson’s model:

        https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/

        It’s not pretty.

        • The code review is devastating. The program as employed might make one suspect that the intent was to yield as wide a range of output as possible, one suitable for cherry picking to obtain the largest number of deaths.

          Even so, someone who has not read the code defends it!.

        • The excuse for the model’s non-deterministic behavior is that the model is stochastic. OK then.

          Although the text above referred to “random variations”, the stochastic model does not just use any arbitrary set of values. The asset model is based on detailed studies of how markets behave, looking at averages, variations, correlations, and more.

          The models and underlying parameters are chosen so that they fit historical economic data, and are expected to produce meaningful future projections.

          If the model is truly stochastic, it should be backed up with reams and reams of data.

          Describing a buggy apparently useless model as stochastic is simply brilliant. Don’t they say that a well developed sense of humor is the sign of a great intellect? My hat is off to whoever thought to call that model stochastic.

          • Most of Linux.

            Oodles of embedded code that runs devices flawlessly for decades.

            There’s lots of C code that you literally bet your life on without even knowing it.

      • It’s only about 15 years ago that I interviewed for a job maintaining an important program written in Fortran. Good programs never die; you just can’t find anyone who still knows the language or wants to know it.

  11. Huh? Now I understand why Dr. Fauci endorsed random, anonymous, Tinder hookups. Seems this is something the government bureaucrat “Doctors” have ample time to engage in … on your taxpayer dollars

  12. At least we’re not at the stage yet where massive government spending is called for to build the world’s fastest supercomputers and a moon shot push for quantum computing in order to model the virus. They will call it the COVID/Tokamak-19 project. Except the French will want it based in Paris.

  13. Too bad we’ll never know who gave Covid-19 to Boris, but it could’ve been Neil.
    The irony is so heavy, it can break careers!

  14. “Another scientist who doesn’t believe in a word he says”

    As so often, no-one quotes the words that he says, that he is supposed to not believe in. In fact, he simply pointed out the inexorable math that if you decide to let the virus take its course until restrained by herd immunity, that means that at least 60% of the population will need to be infected, and something significant fraction of 1% will die. And for the US, that means millions.

    I see no reason to doubt that Neil Ferguson still believes that. It’s true.

      • I’m with you, Andrew. Can you think of a time EVER before now, if at all, that Dr. Stokes has attempted to distract from the original argument in order to make an irrelevant point???

        I’m just as shocked as you are . . . maybe even more.

        • “to distract from the original argument”
          I quoted, and addressed, the entire headline of the article. Prof Ferguson is noted for his math that has implications for us all, not his marital purity. His math is not undermined by these events, and I’m sure he believes, correctly, that it is true.

          • I quoted, and addressed, the entire headline of the article.

            Well you quoted it anyway. But you didn’t address the content of the article and thus the context of the headline. Instead you baited a red herring and fished out your own argument that no one was making.

            But Andrew saw you. And so did I.

            His math is not undermined by these events, and I’m sure he believes, correctly, that it is true.

            Who said he didn’t? And if no one did, why are you distracting from the obvious context of the article to say so?

            🙂

          • Nick isn’t here for a serious exchange.

            Well given his performance here I sure hope not!

            Truth be known, neither am I, it’s just fun tossing folks about the intellectual room. Good practice too. Or at least it’s good practice when SOME folks make an ATTEMPT at an effort.

            🙂

          • ‘It’s no use. Nick isn’t here for a serious exchange.’

            Agreed – his posts today aren’t even honest – just argumentative tripe.

        • You can’t be more shocked than he is, it would violate Maxwell’s first equation.

    • Nick,
      Your assumed case fatality rate of 1% is far too high. Each week now brings news of more and more evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was widely circulating both (1) months earlier than originally believed in Europe and the US, and (2) that most of the infections in the young and healthy are largely low to no symptoms. The US didn’t really take note until it got into a nursing home facility (frail, and high levels of co-morbidities) in Washington State.

      Similarly with Italy, and that country’s large multi-general families living in one home, of young and the elderly together.
      The data is screamingly clear now: For the young and healthy population group, SARS-CoV-2 really is just a seasonal cold virus. And with lockdowns we are simply slowing this large demographic group’s acquisition of immunity that can help everyone.

      With no effective licensed, mass-produced vaccine for at least a year, all these lockdowns are accomplishing is delaying the build-up of herd immunity in that large segment of population that could then protect the vulnerable.

      • “Your assumed case fatality rate of 1% is far too high.”

        If you assume 0.1%, that is still a huge number of deaths before herd immunity is reached. And the other side of the coin is, you don’t know the extent to which the previously infected are immune. None of this math is affected by inappropriate socialising by Dr Ferguson.

        • No. You do not understand immunity.

          In fact we do know they are “immune” else they’d still be chronically infected (swab-test PCR positive). Formation of immunity is what cleared the acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, from the lungs, airways, and gut.

          What we do NOT know is how long that will last in any 1 person. There is evidence some people only develop IgM antibodies. Others develop IgG antibodies. The former – IgM as a correlate of immunity, then that IgM immunity correlates to a likely waning after 3-6 months and they could become susceptible again,but the symptoms will most certainly be lessand the immune response more rapid, if any, for 2nd and 3rd subsequent infections in following cold-flu seasons.

          Immunologists know this because we know how B-cell memory forms and that without Class-Switch Recombination, long-lived plasma cells that make IgG are not developed from the B cell memory pool. CSR and affinity maturation are T-cell dependent processes that happens in germinal center reactions in our lymph nodes. That’s why our lymph nodes swell when we get an infection.

          With IgG, we know a polycolonal pool of plasma cells were formed from the Germinal Center reactions to Corona Virus structural epitopes, and that there is also then a long-lived T cell memory pool formed (multi-years to decades of immunity) to conserved Corona Virus peptide epitopes that the virus will not be able to mutate without fitness consequences.

          • “What we do NOT know is how long that will last in any 1 person. “
            Yes. As I said
            “you don’t know the extent to which the previously infected are immune “

            Even if they do not become symptomatic, they may still be able to transmit infection, which is what matters for herd immunity.

        • Nick, you should look at the numbers that have not been infected despite commuting on overcrowded mass transit systems like the London underground for the last 4 months. To me what is amazing is not the number of asymptomatic with antibodies – around 4% of the population it is the 95% that after repeated exposures do not get infected.

          If you were to run a model that assumed that only 5% of the population were infectable and of those only 1% would have severe symptoms you would still see the kind of growth we have seen except that toward the end the ‘prey’ 5% group will have either been infected and survived or died. Then the ‘predator’ corona virus just stops – there are insufficient prey individuals. Which is what SARS and MERS did after their initial epidemic runs.

          It may be that China with large scale zinc and selenium deficient diets and also deficient in vitamin D and with genotypes that have more ACE2 receptors will see recurrent waves but even that seems to be reducing.

          The modeling assumption that humans are identical is incorrect. Therefore the algorithms used are also incorrect. Predator/prey algorithms may be better expressions of what is happening.

        • “If you assume 0.1%, that is still a huge number of deaths before herd immunity is reached. ”

          And, given most are at or beyond the average life expectancy, the extra deaths over the normal for the year would be insignificant compared to the economic harm that has been done by trying to ‘save’ those people to die from someone else.

          It seems to me that we’re likely to see far more people die from starvation than would have died from Chinese Flu. Though probably in the countries that rely on exports of food from the West to feed their people, not in the West itself.

          • Progressives have no sense of perspective – how many deaths are worth the deaths they’ve convinced themselves they prevent?

          • MarkG
            Re “the old are going to die argument soon as they have lived beyond life expectancy ”
            Life expectancy is a static concept unless it is adjusted for how much longer can people expect to live from a given age

            A new study reported in The Economist of 2 May claims covid-19 victims in western Europe would have lived for 11 more years on average
            It added that life expectancy for old people are surprisingly high,because many of the unhealthiest have already died
            For example an 80 yo (in Italy) can expect to live to 90

    • I watched him in an interview in which he was quite vague, seemingly wanting to be on every side of every issue, so he couldn’t be wrong. He stated that the “isolate the vulnerable” and let the rest of society operate model, which I started advocating anyplace I could 7 weeks ago and which we seem to be evolving toward ever so slowly, won’t work as it is “idealistic” and … well, it won’t work. You can find the interview on UnHerd, I am not wasting my time finding it for anyone.

      Considering the trajectory of his career of projections I wasn’t too impressed with him, and am even less so now.

    • As so often, no-one quotes the words that he says, that he is supposed to not believe in.

      You mean just like you didn’t where this post’s author is concerned, right? Because I don’t see an argument in the post that the guy denied his own model.

      Do you?

      So by, “the words that he says, that he is supposed to not believe in” did you mean, for example, the following words? (emphasis added):

      “My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing . . .”

      https://tinyurl.com/stmbzsm

      Because it sounds to me like by his own admission he just trashed your theory, at least when we don’t make up red herrings to distract from the author’s point:

      ‘I accept I made an error of judgment and took the wrong course of action,’ he said in a statement announcing his resignation from the U.K.’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. ‘I acted in the belief that I was immune, having tested positive for coronavirus and completely isolated myself for almost two weeks after developing symptoms. I deeply regret any undermining of the clear messages around the continued need for social distancing.’

      https://tinyurl.com/y7fktjbr

      What say you?

      • “did you mean, for example, the following words?”
        So which of those words do you claim refers to something that he doesn’t believe in? Please set it out.

        The fact is that Dr Ferguson laid out some math on the possible courses of an epidemic. We all have a stake in whether his math is right. And it isn’t invalidated in any way by his inappropriate socialisation.

        • “Cumulative all-cause mortality in the UK remains in the range of the five strongest flu waves in the last 25 years. The peak in daily hospital deaths was already reached on April 8 .

          New statistical data show that in mid-April, out of about 12,000 additional deaths, about 9,000 were „related to Covid“ (including „suspected cases“), but about 3,000 were „not related to Covid“. Moreover, of the total of about 7300 deaths in nursing homes, only about 2000 were „related to Covid“. In both the „Covid19 deaths“ and the non-covid19 deaths, it is often unclear what these people actually died of. The Association of British Pathologists has therefore called for a „systematic review of the true causes of death“.

          The temporary „Nightingale“ hospitals in the UK have so far remained largely empty. A similar situation was already seen in China, the US and many other countries.

          At the end of April it became known that the lockdown was apparently not, as officially stated, recommended by a scientific commission alone, but that a high government advisor had „pushed“ the scientists to support the lockdown”

        • Please set it out.

          I’ll copy his own admission here again for you:

          “I deeply regret any undermining of the clear messages around the continued need for social distancing.”

          Now, either: 1) Dr. Ferguson is an hypocrite; or 2) he doesn’t believe in social distancing. If you want to agree to 1) then I’m with you. But then if you do agree to 1) why are you complaining about no one arguing the point you’re trying to say the OP argued?

          Alternatively, you could quote where in the article the OP suggests Dr. Ferguson doesn’t believe his own model?

          I don’t see it.

          • “Dr. Ferguson is an hypocrite”
            Dr Ferguson contrasted the mathematical results of an epidemic with and without social distancing. That is just how it is. It is for politicians etc to work out the policy consequences. The Telegraph accuses him of lecturing the public on policy, but gives no quotes.

            “Alternatively, you could quote where in the article the OP suggests Dr. Ferguson doesn’t believe his own model?”
            I quoted the headline, which says that and more. There really isn’t much more to the article than that.

          • Alright well I think you’ve lost the narrative thread. It’s always fun though!

            Take care!

            🙂

          • Poor Nick,

            You never were one to advocate the phrase..

            “practice what you preach”, were you.

            You really do need to learn when to stop making a fool of yourself !

    • At the risk of shining a light on the most deliberately obtuse mentality on the board, it’s about hypocrisy – and you also have to be able to put two-and-two together.

      • Prof Ferguson’s math and its implications matter to us. Possible hypocrisy, not so much. But please quote the actual words that he said that you consider hypocritical.

        • It’s the ACTIONS, oh thick-one.

          THAT’s the hypocrisy – and it’s amazing that I actually have to say that.

          • Definition of hypocrisy
            1: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not: behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel

          • “It’s the ACTIONS, oh thick-one”
            Hypocrisy would be the contrast between actions and words. So what are the words? Quote them, please.

          • You really are a piece of work, Nick.

            From the article – ‘Mind you, this is the guy with the COVID-19 virus computer model that single-handedly destroyed the global economy, by initially predicting huge amounts of deaths. The fear produced a world-wide lockdown and economic devastation.’

            I don’t NEED to quote his words – in this case, he’s got two actions here that shout out hypocrisy.

            But please continue to try and muddy the water by focusing on inconsequential specificities of the word.

          • “single-handedly destroyed the global economy”
            He didn’t single-handedly destroy the global economy. He pointed out that the virus was going to cause a lot of deaths unless something was done. That remains true. I don’t see a lot of people saying that because the Tele caught out Dr F, it’s all OK now.

            On the other hand, there was the Modeller-in-Chief who said Feb 25th
            “And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.”
            I don’t know whether Dr Ferguson was outranked in terms of marital purity, but I think his maths has lasted better.

          • Stokes doesn’t want to accept that Fergusons BAD numbers of the high end led to a situation where EVEN MORE people will die from the fallout, and have been dying because of the panic

          • So – changing the subject again.

            His actions were HYPOCRISY, Nick – despite what you’ve spent all goddamn day trying rationalize. Which was the point of the article and what you used to hijack this thread.

          • Nick his words … quoted as you the old sophist demands

            “I deeply regret any undermining of the clear messages around the continued need for social distancing to control this devastating epidemic. The government guidance is unequivocal, and is there to protect all of us.”

            Yeah he manned up an admitted he is a hypocrit, now can you do the same and man up and admit you are wrong …. No will never happen because you are nothing but a lying troll.

          • “Nick his words”
            He apologises for breaching the government guidance, as anyone might in the circumstances. But the charges of hypocrisy are based on the Telegraph’s charge that he has been “lecturing the public on the need for strict social distancing”. And no-one has been able to quote any of that lecturing. He points out the math of epidemics. But it is up to governments to formulate and promote guidance.

          • Oh look it’s a Stokes deflection or should we just call it an outright lie.

            Prof Ferguson sits on advisory team helping the UK coordinate its pandemic response AKA they pushed for and got the lock down hence he got his name “Professor Lockdown”. Here is an April article with what he said and did and how he got the title “Profesor Lockdown” long before this whole affair.

            https://www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4?r=AU&IR=T

            So please stop insulting our intelligence with you sophist lies.

        • Why Nick, so you can run away when the answers come, as usual?

          You cancerous prick

          • You cancerous prick

            Wow look at Moron Mark giving Nick Stokes leave to live rent free in his head.

            Who’s the pr*ck now? Nick? You? The both of you? If it’s him then it’s gotta be you too don’t you reckon?

            I mean, was that really necessary?

    • … will die … It’s true.

      Prove it.

      And, the “inexorable math” won’t suffice. That is merely a statistical projection based on assumptions. It is not proven by data.

      (Note: The population of the United States is about 328 million:
      (328 million x .6 x .01) < 2 million)

      ************************************

      While the following proves nothing, it is interesting to note that you who come down on the non-data supported conjecture re: human CO2 and climate also come down on the non-data supported conjecture re: COVID 19.

      Common thread: both the human CO2 stance and the COVID 19 stance you take demand that we severely limit civil liberties.

    • Professor Neil Ferguson allowed the woman to visit him at home during the lockdown while lecturing the public on the need for strict social distancing in order to reduce the spread of coronavirus.

      (bold mine)

      There’s where the hypocrisy lies. Based on his model the lockdown was an imperative.

      But you know the drill around here. His model is just target practice.

      • “Based on his model the lockdown was an imperative”
        Based on the math, a lockdown was imperative.
        He didn’t create the math; he just explained it.

        • So why did he ignore his own model, which he created, which spat out the numbers? That’s the point.

          And his explanation of the numbers was a three alarm fire. He’s lecturing lockdown for everyone (note the bold) and sneaking off for nookies.

          His actions demonstrate that this is serious… for everyone else but him.

          Now, if you want to argue that he showed remorse by resigning, there’s something to be said there. I’d have preferred he also would have added self-flagellation in Trafalgar Square followed by 48 hours in stocks where the public could throw rotten veggies at him. But even that is a dodge because everyone else is on lockdown so there would be no-one to throw veggies.

          • Nick Stokes May 6, 2020 at 1:47 pm

            “He’s lecturing lockdown for everyone”

            I note the bold, and also the total absence of quotes.

            It seems you missed this, in the article, Nick.

            […] allowed the woman to visit him at home during the lockdown while lecturing the public on the need for strict social distancing […]”

            You’re ducking, dodging, weaving, and bobbing away from the point of the article which was the hypocrisy demonstrated by Professor Ferguson’s actions.

            Was Professor Ferguson’s action’s hypocritical or not?

            I said “Yes” with a bit of my inimitable flair. You responded to… something else.

            So removing the playfulness that the English language allows, I ask again, was the Professor’s actions hypocritical or not? Yes or no?

        • “Based on the math, a lockdown was imperative.

          So funny.. Nick has foot in mouth yet again.!!

          Since Ferguson broke the lockdown, then obviously he doesn’t believe his own maths that a lockdown was imperative

          Yet again, you put yourself in checkmate with your idiotic blethering.

  15. Well if he’d been a billionaire (like Obama’s buddy movie producer David Geffen), he could have sheltered in place on his megayacht tooling around the Caribbean Islands.

    For Libtards it’s universally always, “The sacrifices I demand for thee are not for me.”

    • He’s not being attacked for telling the truth. He’s being attacked for being instrumental in devastating the British economy and the ancient freedoms of Englishmen.

      The Chinese Flu Panic will be just another nail in the coffin of belief in ‘experts’ and, in particular, their computer models.

    • Bob Ward !!!
      That lickspittle toady of greenie billionaire Grantham wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit him on the nose. Arn’t ya sick of hearing the whining blasts of hot air emanating from that vested interest shill. When Bob Ward’s lips move you know the words you are hearing come straight from the pen of the coterie; fake “Lord” Deben and his climate scamming pals, such as fake “Lord” Krebs, Jim “Carbon” Shea, Ed “Climate Act” Miliband, and other assorted Fabians such as Tony “Iraq” Blair.
      Bah !

  16. “Do as I say, not as I do” . . . a well-know tenet of almost all politically-involved persons, yet often overlooked by a gullible public.

    It is amazing the number of times we are “surprised” by such behavior.

    • Lack of integrity in elected officials is, indeed, “nothing new under the sun,” Mr. Dressler.

      Why do people still believe in the integrity of the people in authority (i.e., why is it “surprising”)?

      Because:

      1) They long for integrity in their leaders (and especially in their spiritual leaders and people like scientists whom they trust to tell them the truth); they want very much for it to be true.

      2) They are honest and upright in their own lives — they assume this is true of others, too.

      The wonderful thing is that experience, which should make bitter cynics of us all, doesn’t destroy this idealism. We still hope for and, until proven wrong, believe for the best.

      Leaders, many of whom achieve their status using tools only sociopathic or narcissistic personalities are willing to use, are more likely than the general population to lack integrity.
      Nevertheless, while they don’t make the headlines, I think that most leaders ARE people of moral integrity — mistaken or ignorant many times, yes, but most are not cheating or hypocrites.

      Unfortunately, along with an admirable idealism about leaders, the public has an unhealthy appetite for scandal. Disgusting behavior sells newspapers… . So, we don’t read about the vast majority who are people of integrity.

  17. Let’s get something straight that undercuts all the shocked surprise. Freedom from all traditionally commendable restraints makes one feel special, which in turn gives some thrilling meaning to a mundane life. Thus the tensions between scrupulous truth telling vs. some celebrated form of advocacy; as well as observing codes of moral conduct for the benefit of so many others (and by the way in the end yourself), even if in this instance you are the very source of the restraining rationale, vs. making yourself a covert or even better a daringly overt unique exception.

    How primordial is this kind of appeal? Read for yourself the very few crafty enticements enlisted by the serpent in the first account of it in Eden: No real harm will come of ignoring any admittedly understood limitations, which surely were falsely posed to intentionally limit the full ascendancy that is plainly your due.

    • Yes, the emotions are quite basic. I see them in these simple analogy terms. We all know that drinking alcohol is bad for health and that it kills many people. Some drinkers feel a pang of conscience when they pay ever more money for their next drink — but then, should they attend a gathering where the drinks are free, they enjoy the alcohol much more and will commonly drink much more than usual, but with less worry from the conscience. They have, in their minds, shifted some of the blame to others like the donors stupid enough to offer them free grog. Then one day the doc tells them they have early, terminal liver damage that will consume valuable public resources to nurse them to the grave. Double bad.
      You can construct many analogies along these lines. You can use cigarette smoking, for example. If you were ever a heavy drinker like I was, this will resonate. But I caught on, gave it up and have a healthy liver at 79. Geoff S

      • “then, should they attend a gathering where the drinks are free, they enjoy the alcohol much more and will commonly drink much more than usual”

        I’m told that where people know they can get as many drinks as they want, they don’t drink much.

  18. Gee, I wonder what her husband and kids think of all of this.

    They’ll be fine with it, I’m sure.

  19. Sperm doesn’t transmit the virus. There is actually a study that claims that.

    We don’t know which masks, gloves etc. for “protective” reasons they might have used (maybe before COVID-19?) so their encounter could technically have been very safe.

    • Special prophylactic “Bishop’s glove” is available to prevent those sorts of infections 😂

  20. I never knew that “scientists” predicted the future. I thought that was for fortune tellers.

    • The UK police these days are only interested if you have stepped on cracks in the sidewalk/pavement or haven’t committed any offense at all.

  21. Sounds like he has morals right up there with Prime Minister Trudeau. Rules are for others…Hypocrisy well without hypocrites there wouldn’t be many left in the alarmist camp would there?

    • Beyond the apparently unsalvageable nature of this specific codebase, testing model predictions faces a fundamental problem, in that the authors don’t know what the “correct” answer is until long after the fact, and by then the code has changed again anyway, thus changing the set of bugs in it. So it’s unclear what regression tests really mean for models like this – even if they had some that worked.

      Applies to GCMs too.

  22. @ Anthony,
    Stick with research, you’ll get eaten alive by the political class.
    Cus you’ve still got a heart.

  23. New CRISPR Coronavirus Test Could Be a Pandemic ‘Game-Changer’
    Cheap accurate testing would enable the safe reopening of the U.S. economy.
    RONALD BAILEY | 5.6.2020 3:00 PM

    The researchers have created molecular tags that latch onto sections of viral genes and emit a signal when their presence is detected. The new STOPCovid  https://www.stopcovid.science/ test enables the detection of as few as 100 copies of the coronavirus in a sample. “As a result, the STOPCovid test allows for rapid, accurate, and highly sensitive detection of Covid-19 that can be conducted outside clinical laboratory settings,” note the researchers. The test initially used standard nasal swab samples, but preliminary data suggest that it will work using much more easily collected saliva samples.

    The research team is talking with manufacturers to further simplify and produce the test. The New York Times reports https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/health/crispr-coronavirus-covid-test.html that they estimate that the materials for one test would cost about six dollars now and would fall even further when mass-produced. “The ability to test for Covid-19 at home, or even in pharmacies or places of employment, could be a game-changer for getting people safely back to work and into their communities,” said team member Feng Zhang in the press release.
    https://reason.com/2020/05/06/new-crispr-coronavirus-test-could-be-a-pandemic-game-changer/?utm_medium=email

  24. Clearly he didn’t believe the carp he was spouting.

    Computer modelling?
    No, computer didling?

  25. “The woman lives with her husband and their children in another house.”

    That sentence seem a bit extraneous.

  26. I think the real story about covid that we need to talk about that left doesn’t want to us that it shows that mass public transit and mass density housing, shibboleths of the left, are the worst possible condition for fighting a contagious virus like this

  27. Stokes believes in AGW say no more he is just an Australian troll for the AGW crowd. He is paid to post this stuff here and other sites. I wonder what he thinks of Michael Moore now?? . Interesting that Mockton is backing down from the lockdown position he so strongly defended previously and is not publishing any more of his drivel here! We welcome Willis to publish a post on Swedens sucessess. Cheers

    • Eliza,
      You are unkind to MoB, who is doing a lot of work, trying to be helpful. You criticise him for a change of course, when that is routine action for a thinking person on meeting solid evidence that contradicts previous. That is a bit rough of you. An apology would show you as reasonable and intelligent.

  28. She was behind the neonicitinoid ban by the EU.

    As one involved in horticulture and agriculture, I don’t want to see dangerous pesticides used willy-nilly.

    Indeed, in the 1980s, I was firmly of the opinion that some of the garden pesticides used back then should only be sold by the properly-trained, which may have required a licensing system, but the state Labor Minister of the day didn’t agree (there were still old-time cautious Laborites in parliament at that stage).

    I saw this as an alternative to the likely future banning of many chemicals for household use. The trouble with banning chemicals is that it only takes one panicked reaction and a precedent is set, which is followed by many other states and countries. Once activists have achieved one ban, they move on to the next target.

    The end result is that one cannot be totally certain that the latest chemical to be struck off is as dangerous as portrayed, or merely another stepping-stone of the hard left march towards our economic ruin.

  29. he upped the ante –

    3 Apr: Nature: Special report: The simulations driving the world’s response to COVID-19
    How epidemiologists rushed to model the coronavirus pandemic.
    by David Adam
    An earlier version of the Imperial (College London/Neil Ferguson) model, for instance, estimated that SARS-CoV-2 would be about as severe as influenza in necessitating the hospitalization of those infected. That turned out to be incorrect…

    The true performance of simulations in this pandemic might become clear only months or years from now…
    “Forecasts made during an outbreak are rarely investigated during or after the event for their accuracy, and only recently have forecasters begun to make results, code, models and data available for retrospective analysis,” (John Edmunds, who is a modeller at the LSHTM) and his team noted last year in a paper6 that assessed the performance of forecasts made in a 2014–15 Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone…

    Media reports have suggested that an update to the Imperial team’s model in early March was a critical factor in jolting the UK government into changing its policy on the pandemic. The researchers initially estimated that 15% of hospital cases would need to be treated in an intensive-care unit (ICU), but then updated that to 30%, a figure used in the first public release of their work on 16 March…

    Ferguson says the significance of the model update might have been exaggerated…
    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01003-6

  30. 25 Apr: Business Insider: How ‘Professor Lockdown’ helped save tens of thousands of lives worldwide — and carried COVID-19 into Downing Street
    by Bill Bostock
    Professor Neil Ferguson, of Imperial College London, authored a paper that prompted the UK to scrap its coronavirus strategy.
    Ferguson’s team warned Boris Johnson that the quest for “herd immunity” could cost 510,000 lives, prompting an abrupt U-turn.
    His simulations have been influential in other countries as well, cited by authorities in the US, Germany, and France…

    Scientists have piled in to criticize Ferguson’s paper in less uncertain terms.
    “Some of the major assumptions and estimates that are built in the calculations seem to be substantially inflated,” John Ioannidis, a professor of disease prevention from Stanford University, told The Telegraph…
    https://www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4?r=AU&IR=T

  31. 6 May: The Critic UK: The Fatal Hubris of Professor Lockdown
    It wasn’t an attractive 38 year-old that brought down Neil Ferguson
    Artillery Row By Toby Young
    Following the resignation of Professor Neil Ferguson, I’m fascinated by the details about Antonia Staats, the woman he is having an affair with…Guido has dug up a podcast she did on March 31st (***now offline), 24 hours after visiting Professor Ferguson, in which she complains that the lockdown is putting a strain on her marriage. But it’s her politics I’m really interested in. The Telegraph has her down as a “left wing-wing campaigner”, a reference to the fact that she campaigned against leaving the EU and is a long-standing environmental activist who supported Greta Thunberg’s climate strike. Many of the papers have included this picture of her standing outside Number 10 delivering a petition to the Prime Minister about ending fossil fuel subsidies:
    PIC

    Some people have asked what the relevance of Ms Staat’s politics is. The answer, obviously, is that her politics are likely to be Professor Ferguson’s politics – and we know that he co-authored a paper in 2016 warning of the terrible consequences of leaving the EU and we can see from his Twitter feed that he’s not exactly a Tory. For instance, he sent the following tweet to the Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran when she won Oxford West and Abingdon in 2017: “Great news – so happy to wake up to hear you won! Fingers crossed that last night means at least a softer Brexit.” …

    Just yesterday we learnt that the lockdowns have forced countries across the world to shut down TB treatment programmes which, over the next five years, could lead to 6.3 million additional cases of TB and 1.4 million deaths. There are so many stories like this it’s impossible to keep track. We will soon be able to say with something approaching certainty that the cure has been worse than the disease.

    Neil Ferguson isn’t single-handedly responsible for this world-historical blunder, but he does bear some responsibility. His apocalyptic predictions frightened the British Government into imposing a full lockdown, with other governments quickly following suit. And I’m afraid he’s absolutely typical of the breed. He suffers from the same fundamental arrogance that progressive interventionists have exhibited since at least the middle of the 18th Century – wildly over-estimating the good that governments can do, assuming there are no limits to what “science” can achieve and, at the same time, ignoring the empirical evidence that their ambitious public programmes are a complete disaster. At bottom, they believe that nature itself can be bent to man’s will…
    https://thecritic.co.uk/the-fatal-hubris-of-professor-lockdown/

    ***re the podcast which has been removed:

    7 May: Daily Mail: She (Staats) admitted on a podcast recorded with a journalist friend days earlier that the lockdown had placed a ‘strain’ on her relationship with her husband Chris, who is yet to comment on his wife’s affair or their alleged open marriage…
    Antonia Staats also spoke out in support of Ferguson who had told the Government to impose restrictions on the public to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
    Friend and former journalist Jeremy Wagstaff interviewed Staats at her home to discuss how she was coping with losing her au pair caring for her two young children, the shortage of toilet paper and surviving the lockdown…
    Staats, who is from Isny, Germany, makes reference in the podcast about her fears that her husband, an academic, might have already been infected.
    She said: Chris has been not feeling great and thinks he got it. But we can’t know for sure. So what now? Do we assume he’s had it?’
    Staats, makes no direct mention of her lover, but does give a nod to Ferguson’s advice on slowing the spread of the virus.
    ‘I’m not a scientist, so I feel reluctant to be like, ‘I think in three weeks we will be through the worst of it’,’ she said.
    ‘I feel inclined to believe the science and I certainly think its not like ‘oh Easter we’ll go back normal and after the Easter holidays the schools are going to open again.’…
    The podcast was recorded by former technology journalist Jeremy Wagstaff for his Singapore based company. He conducted a series of interviews with people around on how they are coping with the crisis. The interview with Staats has since been removed from his company’s website…
    Staats said she is able to work from home and is being paid her usual salary working for the US based activist group Avaaz.
    She told the interviewer she was fortunate and considered herself in a ‘very privileged and comfortable position. I’m not someone in an abusive relationship who is now trapped in a flat with an abuser,’ she said.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8293057/How-Neil-Fergusons-married-lover-enjoys-perfect-family-life.html

    everyone in UK knows Wagstaff:

    LinkedIn: Jeremy Wagstaff, Consultant/writer/advisor (former journalist, WSJ, BBC, Reuters)
    Commentator/contributor
    BBC
    Mar 2004 – Present
    Thomson Reuters
    6 years 7 months (ending Jul 2018)
    Wall Street Journal
    10 years 6 months (ending Jan 2008)
    Thomson Reuters
    9 years (ending Jul 1997) etc
    https://sg.linkedin.com/in/wagstaff

  32. 2 more pics posted by 350.org:

    2012: Flickr: 350.org
    #EndFossilFuelSubsidies London petition delivery. Jenny Rosenberg (Friends of the Earth EWNI), Antonia Staats (Avaaz), Marco Cadena (Push Europe), Emma Biermann (350.org), Parker Liautaud (young Arctic explorer).
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/350org/7393847884/in/photostream/

    2012: Flickr: 350.org
    #EndFossilFuelSubsidies London petition delivery. Jenny Rosenberg (Friends of the Earth EWNI), Antonia Staats (Avaaz), Marco Cadena (Push Europe), Emma Biermann (350.org), Parker Liautaud (young Arctic explorer).
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/350org/7393804452

  33. SAGE secrecy:

    28 Apr: Daily Mail: ‘Partial’ list of SAGE members WILL be published amid backlash at secrecy and complaints No10 chief Dominic Cummings attended meetings
    •A ‘partial’ list of SAGE members will be issued shortly amid secrecy backlash…
    •Sir Patrick Vallance said names of all those who agree will be released soon
    By James Tapsfield
    Chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance revealed this morning that a list will be issued ‘shortly’.
    However, he insisted only the experts who are ‘happy to have their names published’ will be included…
    Sir Patrick, who chairs Sage, has previously argued that the decision not to disclose its membership was based on advice from the Centre for Protection of National Infrastructure, which warned of lobbying.
    Sir Patrick said representatives from a number of different institutions, including the Food Standards Agency and Public Health England, sit in on Sage meetings.
    He added: ‘And we also have officials from Whitehall who listen in to the meetings, and can ask questions if they wish to…
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8260923/Partial-list-SAGE-membership-published.html

    4 May: Guardian: Government names dozens of scientists who sit on Sage group
    by Rowena Mason
    Downing Street has published the names of the more than 50 scientists who sit on its Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies to discuss coronavirus, after criticism of the secrecy surrounding the group and the Guardian’s revelation that the No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings had attended meetings of the group.
    The list of names was made available on the government’s website (LINK), showing that around half of the experts come from universities and another half are made up of government chief scientific advisers, public health officials or NHS senior staff…

    The scientists include university professors such as Wendy Barclay, Ian Boyd, John Edmunds, Sir Jeremy Farrar, Neil Ferguson, Julia Gog, Peter Horby, Dame Theresa Marteau, Graham Medley, Andrew Morris, Cath Noakes, Michael Parker, Venki Ramakrishnan, Andrew Rambaut, Brooke Rogers, James Rubin, Calum Semple, Sir David Spieglhalter, Russell Viner, Mark Woolhouse and Lucy Yardley.
    Two participants refused to be named. Membership lists of several other advisory groups were also published.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/government-names-dozens-of-scientists-who-sit-on-sage-group

    4 May: Guardian: Public’s trust in science at risk, warns former No 10 adviser
    Ex-chief scientific adviser sets up rival panel of experts over Covid-19 ‘lack of transparency’
    by Hannah Devlin
    Prompted by growing concern about the lack of transparency around the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), ***Prof Sir David King has convened a panel of experts that he says will act as an independent alternative.
    The group, which will broadcast live on YouTube and take evidence from global experts, will hold its first meeting on Monday…

    The group, which includes a range of leading scientists working across public health, computer modelling, behavioural science and intensive care medicine, aims to present the government with “robust, unbiased advice”.
    King argues that the official Sage is compromised by the fact that 16 of the 23 known members of the committee, including the prime minister’s strategist Dominic Cummings, are employed by government.

    The Independent Sage meeting will cover seven areas, including the criteria for lifting lockdown, testing and tracing and quarantine and shielding policies for vulnerable groups. It will formally submit its recommendations to the health and social care select committee, placing pressure on the government to explain the advice behind its lockdown exit strategy, parts of which are expected to be unveiled in the coming week.
    King said that the biggest potential pitfall in weeks ahead would be to relax lockdown measures too soon and that he believes the government’s so-called five tests for whether it is safe to ease restrictions are inadequate.
    “My own feeling is that the extent to which the virus is still in the population means we are not yet close … to coming out of lockdown,” he said. “Undoubtedly the biggest potential pitfall is removing lockdown too early and too quickly.”

    A second peak, he said, could not only increase casualties, but could also lengthen the overall period of time before the country is able to fully exit lockdown. “If you go into a second peak, it just becomes more and more difficult to end the pandemic,” he added.

    King previously held the chief scientific role, now occupied by Sir Patrick Vallance, between 2000 and 2007 and served as the UK’s climate envoy from 2013 to 2017.
    The independent advisory group will include some vocal critics of the government’s Covid-19 policies, such as the global public health expert Prof Anthony Costello, as well as ***former and existing Sage experts.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/03/publics-trust-in-science-at-risk-warns-former-no-10-adviser

    ***will Ferguson be joining David King’s group?

  34. 6 May: BBC: Coronavirus: Lockdown adviser quits, climate change warning and ‘new normal’
    Here are five things you need to know about the coronavirus outbreak this Wednesday morning. We’ll have another update for you at 18:00 BST.

    1. Prominent adviser quits
    Back in March, it was Prof Neil Ferguson’s modelling of the virus’s transmission that persuaded the UK government it should impose the lockdown. Now, though, he’s been forced to quit as an adviser after admitting undermining those very social distancing rules. A reminder of them here…

    2. UK warned over coronavirus climate trap
    Funds earmarked for the post-pandemic recovery should go to firms that will reduce carbon emissions. That’s the message from government advisers today. We know that we’re living through an unrivalled drop in carbon output due to the economic slowdown – as these five charts explain (LINK) – but how could a “Build Back Better” strategy work? (LINKS TO HARRABIN BELOW)
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52552299

    political propaganda:

    6 May: BBC: Climate change: Could the coronavirus crisis spur a green recovery?
    By Roger Harrabin
    I’ve just had a light bulb moment. The feisty little wren chirping loudly in the matted ivy outside my back door is telling us something important about global climate change.
    That’s because, intertwined with the melodious notes of a robin, I can actually hear its song clearly.
    Normally, both birds are muffled by the insistent rumble of traffic, but the din has been all but extinguished in the peace of lockdown…
    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-52488134

  35. 7 May: Politico: What COVID-19 scientists can learn from their climate change colleagues
    The epidemiologists and virologists helping governments are now thrust into the public eye — which also makes them target
    by RICHARD BLACK
    (Richard Black is director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit. He was formerly BBCscience and environment correspondent for 12 years)

    The late climatologist Stephen Schneider titled his memoirs “Science as a Contact Sport” — and for him and his colleagues, either side of the explosive 2009 U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen, life was exactly that.
    Knocks on the door in the dead of night; security threats serious enough to mandate personal bodyguards at science conferences; postings on white supremacist websites pointing out researchers’ Jewish heritage.

    All this abuse for merely flagging up what their science showed to be true: that humankind’s greenhouse gas emissions were changing the face of the Earth in ways likely to be overwhelmingly negative and possibly catastrophic, and that a different way forward, free from untrammelled fossil fuel use, was feasible and desirable…

    One thing that COVID-19 scientists have in common with their climate-change peers is that neither body of experts is monolithic…
    Such is the divergence between scientists that David King, a former chief scientific adviser to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, has set up an alternative group of experts to cast their own judgment on the available evidence and provide a fresh stream of interpretation and advice…

    And hence the defenestration of Imperial College London’s Neil Ferguson by newspapers whose comment pages speak to an abhorrence for lockdown policies. Newspapers happy to call a scientist whose advice probably saved many thousands of lives “the bonking boffin” and “Professor Lockdown.”…
    Climate scientists have been at this a lot longer than their coronavirus peers. So what can the latter usefully glean from the formers’ experience?…

    The detractors of climate science no longer have currency anywhere it matters (outside the White House) because their claims, whether “climate change is all natural” or “reducing emissions is economic suicide,” have been clearly shown to be wrong.
    COVID-19 science, as Ferguson has just found out, may currently be a contact sport. But the experience of climate science suggests it is a sport that good scientists will eventually win.
    https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-what-covid-19-scientists-can-learn-from-their-climate-change-colleagues/

  36. Well, even if he wasn’t thinking so well with the brain that’s inside his skull, at least his two little brains came up with something.

  37. Your headline said “He is deified idiot who is not thinking with his head”

    I suggest he was thinking with another part of his body some distance from his head

    Do Americans use the expression we have in Australia of calling an idiot a “dickhead”? It seems very appropriate for this bloke.

  38. I am certain Ferguson believes everything he says. He just believes it doesn’t apply to him, only us proles and drudges who are incapable of thinking for ourselves.

  39. Anyone still maintains that the COVID farce was NOT a plot to accomplish a specific goal?

Comments are closed.