Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer

[Derek27]

At this point anyone that understands statistics should be able to see that...

How qualified are you in statistics?

The elite like Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum are the same as us, they don't like stupid people polluting the planet and fighting wars. They like animals and the idea of saving the planet by doing something big for the greater good and longer term. Old Bill certainly wants to go out with a bang.

I'm not sure exactly how they will do it but my guess is that they want the majority of the world vaccinated and sterilised to reduce the population, the growth of the population or to maximise the % of useful working life of people by reducing lifespans. The final result will be a more sustainable society with a better quality of life in the future, or a life where everything is controlled, tracked and traced and robots stop you for speeding (if they do that just bring a spanner and unscrew their nuts and bolts so they fall apart and can't fine you).

I tried my best to save you, feel free to PM me some trading secrets as a thanks

We all know people who can't be trusted. But when you feel you can't trust 99% of the population, you get isolated, live in a world of your own and your situation just gets worse and worse, to the point where you're beliefs become more surreal than most people's dreams!

[Derek27]

So that's what the issue is. You're struggling to make money trading, need somebody to blame and a group of anonymous traders doesn't satisfy, so you have to blame Bill Gates.

At this point anyone that understands statistics should be able to see that this virus isn't killing any more people than previous ones anywhere in the world, although I'm pretty sure delayed/cancelled treatments for bigger killers explain the excess deaths at home.

Anyone that knows psychology surely can see that this is one big psychological operation with some unknown agenda that isn't what we are being told.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Argumentum_ad_populum

When he says anyone that understands statistics, anyone that knows psychology, he means to the same low-level extent that he does.

I've often turned to astronomy to counter common belief fallacy by asking questions like, how long do most people think it takes for the earth to spin 360 degrees? Or how long precisely is a day?

[greenmark]

At this point anyone that understands statistics should be able to see that this virus isn't killing any more people than previous ones anywhere in the world, although I'm pretty sure delayed/cancelled treatments for bigger killers explain the excess deaths at home.

Anyone that knows psychology surely can see that this is one big psychological operation with some unknown agenda that isn't what we are being told.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Argumentum_ad_populum

When he says anyone that understands statistics, anyone that knows psychology, he means to the same low-level extent that he does.

I've often turned to astronomy to counter common belief fallacy by asking questions like, how long do most people think it takes for the earth to spin 360 degrees? Or how long precisely is a day?

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

[alexmr2]

I hope you and others like you remain exchange users for as long as possible. People with an absolute belief in something they've imagined yet admit they don't understand are why easy edges exist.

I agree with what you are saying in that edges exist because humans haven't evolved psychologically for centuries. My posts may have came across like it, but my opinion isn't really black or white decisive with an ego to 100% believe it, it's just a rough guess or theory which I personally believe is more plausible than what we are being told which doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at how few people are dying from viruses. The approach also opens up to paradoxes like by trying to fight it we are just making our immunity to viruses even worse in the long term.

I believe your bots find value because people give it away constantly with fear and greed, especially in situations when emotions are most likely to be high. Also most people don't care about price, they only care about being wrong or right so I think that is the issue here, not the people who like to critically think against the grain. If you look at the majority of the crowd and their response to the pandemic you will see the same emotions. Firstly the Government is using age-old marketing techniques such as scarcity (FOMO) and fear of death to push their agendas.

The average person goes along with measures whether it be wearing masks, socially distancing or taking vaccines without really understanding why, but because the crowd is doing it. Some may be scared and overestimate their chance of dying because they have been fed so much propaganda showing the 1% of the 1% of the 1% 94 year old struggling to breath in a hospital ward on the BBC, and then it has distorted their perspective of reality. They may think they are doing good because the Government's psychological attack which uses techniques such as social disapproval (you are a danger to others if you don't take it). They may have greed because they only want the vaccine so they can take part in non-essential activities (travel abroad or pubs). I'm not knocking them for it, I just like to try and understand and analyse what is going on even if I'm wrong on some things

[alexmr2]

When he says anyone that understands statistics, anyone that knows psychology, he means to the same low-level extent that he does.

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

You don't need to be a genius or have a good understanding of statistics to see how easy it is to manipulate those figures, and even then they are still within normal parameters of death rates in all countries regardless of their levels of restrictions. You also don't need to be a psychologist to see the psychological techniques which are being applied to the public

[greenmark]

When he says anyone that understands statistics, anyone that knows psychology, he means to the same low-level extent that he does.

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

You don't need to be a genius or have a good understanding of statistics to see how easy it is to manipulate those figures, and even then they are still within normal parameters of death rates in all countries regardless of their levels of restrictions. You also don't need to be a psychologist to see the psychological techniques which are being applied to the public

Back that up with data Alex. My data comes from the ONS.

[alexmr2]

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

Well firstly looking at 60 years of data is no good because the population and health was much lower 60 years ago. You will notice that the flu disappeared completely around the time covid came in, so a lot of those covid deaths are just what would have been labelled as the flu any normal year.

Perhaps most important of all, covid deaths are all based on an inaccurate PCR test There's an incentive to label any death within 28 days as covid. We never used to label flu deaths within 28 days as it wasn't really cared about back then but now covid can be used for almost any cause. Most of these deaths are old age or people with multiple comorbidities.

If you want a better picture then look at the total deaths but remember there are some excess taking place in peoples homes (not carehomes or hospitals) because people are being denied/delayed treatment to bigger killers. Also I keep pointing out that deaths are within normal parameters in all countries because some didn't have lockdown and the results are no different. There's a graph and lots of scientific papers out there which show weak efficacy between levels of restrictions or no lockdown at all in different countries

[greenmark]

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

Well firstly looking at 60 years of data is no good because the population and health was much lower 60 years ago. You will notice that the flu disappeared completely around the time covid came in, so a lot of those covid deaths are just what would have been labelled as the flu any normal year.

Perhaps most important of all, covid deaths are all based on an inaccurate PCR test There's an incentive to label any death within 28 days as covid. We never used to label flu deaths within 28 days as it wasn't really cared about back then but now covid can be used for almost any cause. Most of these deaths are old age or people with multiple comorbidities.

If you want a better picture then look at the total deaths but remember there are some excess taking place in peoples homes (not carehomes or hospitals) because people are being denied/delayed treatment to bigger killers. Also I keep pointing out that deaths are within normal parameters in all countries because some didn't have lockdown and the results are no different. There's a graph and lots of scientific papers out there which show weak efficacy between levels of restrictions or no lockdown at all in different countries

Ok Alex. That is all drivel, but I don't want this thread to be closed down because it becomes toxic again. We're not out of the woods yet with this virus. So this forum is a useful source of opinion and I'll bite my lip.

[Derek27]

When he says anyone that understands statistics, anyone that knows psychology, he means to the same low-level extent that he does.

Statistically, over the last 60 years, between Jan and August the average deaths from flu and pneumonia is 27000. Jan to August 2020 it was 14000, and 48000 covid deaths. And that's with covid only running from late february and 3 months of lockdown. Yeah, covid isn't dangerous at all. Jeez!!!!

You don't need to be a genius or have a good understanding of statistics to see how easy it is to manipulate those figures, and even then they are still within normal parameters of death rates in all countries regardless of their levels of restrictions. You also don't need to be a psychologist to see the psychological techniques which are being applied to the public

You don't need a good understanding of statistics to realise it's possible to manipulate figures, but you do need a good understanding of statistics to identify manipulation and flaws. More importantly, you need an open and impartial mind. You need to let the evidence lead you to a conclusion. As I've said before, you work the wrong way round, you decide what you want to believe and look for evidence to support what you believe, ignoring anything you don't want to hear.

Any idiot can make daft claims about Bill Gates and government agendas. Where's your evidence, where's the secretly recorded footage of these collaborations to reduce the population?

[alexmr2]

More importantly, you need an open and impartial mind. You need to let the evidence lead you to a conclusion. As I've said before, you work the wrong way round, you decide what you want to believe and look for evidence to support what you believe, ignoring anything you don't want to hear.

You seem to have a confirmation bias that I have a confirmation bias.

I believed it for around 3 months and for another 3 months I was unsure. After 6 months there was more and more evidence that something wasn't right so my opinion was made then. I do keep an open mind for the survival rate ever falling below 99% or the excesss deaths breaking out of the normal parameters but I can't see it happening given so much time has passed and nothing has changed

[Derek27]

More importantly, you need an open and impartial mind. You need to let the evidence lead you to a conclusion. As I've said before, you work the wrong way round, you decide what you want to believe and look for evidence to support what you believe, ignoring anything you don't want to hear.

You seem to have a confirmation bias that I have a confirmation bias.

I believed it for around 3 months and for another 3 months I was unsure. After 6 months there was more and more evidence that something wasn't right so my opinion was made then. I do keep an open mind for the survival rate ever falling below 99% or the excesss deaths breaking out of the normal parameters but I can't see it happening given so much time has passed and nothing has changed

When a hundred people tell you that you're wrong, you struggle to believe or understand that it's a hundred individual opinions, not one opinion that everybody else is following. You've already demonstrated that by assuming I believe everything I hear on mainstream media rather than having the same opinion. Where's the evidence of the Bill Gates chip or your latest conspiracy theory that governments want to reduce and sterilise the population, which you yourself admitted you haven't a clue how they intend to do it, which in turn is an admission that you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

You obviously got your BG theory from the tinfoil hat people, did you invent the population reduction one yourself?

[alexmr2]

When a hundred people tell you that you're wrong, you struggle to believe or understand that it's a hundred individual opinions, not one opinion that everybody else is following. You've already demonstrated that by assuming I believe everything I hear on mainstream media rather than having the same opinion. Where's the evidence of the Bill Gates chip or your latest conspiracy theory that governments want to reduce and sterilise the population, which you yourself admitted you haven't a clue how they intend to do it, which in turn is an admission that you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

You obviously got your BG theory from the tinfoil hat people, did you invent the population reduction one yourself?

100 people didn't tell me I'm wrong, you need to think in %'s it's more like 70% vs 30% (maybe not on here).

The microchip theories are just a joke, they are weaponised to group rational thinkers in with conspiracy theorists in a debate though.

Sterilising the population would obviously be done by vaccines, the technology is there for anti fertility drugs and it has happened before whether intentionally or not.

When there is such a hard push to inject everyone including children for something with survival rate equal to the flu, it must raise some red flags that there is another agenda than to save lives of 83 year olds. Do you seriously think the government wants people to live longer when there is already an economic crisis attributed to people living 30-40 years after retirement?

[Derek27]

When a hundred people tell you that you're wrong, you struggle to believe or understand that it's a hundred individual opinions, not one opinion that everybody else is following. You've already demonstrated that by assuming I believe everything I hear on mainstream media rather than having the same opinion. Where's the evidence of the Bill Gates chip or your latest conspiracy theory that governments want to reduce and sterilise the population, which you yourself admitted you haven't a clue how they intend to do it, which in turn is an admission that you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

You obviously got your BG theory from the tinfoil hat people, did you invent the population reduction one yourself?

100 people didn't tell me I'm wrong, you need to think in %'s it's more like 70% vs 30% (maybe not on here).

You need to stop taking things so literally. I was making the point that everyone who tells you that your wrong is giving their own opinion, not believing it must be true because it's on the news.

The microchip theories are just a joke, they are weaponised to group rational thinkers in with conspiracy theorists in a debate though.

It's just a joke?? You're a fully subscribed member of the club, and now you're saying it's just a joke? That's what I've been telling you all along!
[/quote]

Sterilising the population would obviously be done by vaccines, the technology is there for anti fertility drugs and it has happened before whether intentionally or not.

It's a complete waste of time putting forward these theories without the evidence/reasoning because nobody's going to take any notice, especially coming from someone who thinks Bill Gates quit Microsoft to learn to trade on Betfair with £2 stakes.

When there is such a hard push to inject everyone including children for something with survival rate equal to the flu, it must raise some red flags that there is another agenda than to save lives of 83 year olds. Do you seriously think the government wants people to live longer when there is already an economic crisis attributed to people living 30-40 years after retirement?

Yes, because most people (even a twit like Boris Johnson, albeit in much-reduced quantities) have an emotion called compassion. People who don't have it would struggle to understand the behaviour of others, and that's probably why you have so much difficulty understanding what's going on in the world.

[alexmr2]

It's a complete waste of time putting forward these theories without the evidence/reasoning because nobody's going to take any notice, especially coming from someone who thinks Bill Gates quit Microsoft to learn to trade on Betfair with £2 stakes.

Do you have evidence to support your theory that Bill Gates didn't quit Microsoft to learn to trade on Betfair with £2 stakes?

[Derek27]

It's a complete waste of time putting forward these theories without the evidence/reasoning because nobody's going to take any notice, especially coming from someone who thinks Bill Gates quit Microsoft to learn to trade on Betfair with £2 stakes.

Do you have evidence to support your theory that Bill Gates didn't quit Microsoft to learn to trade on Betfair with £2 stakes?

I said evidence or reasoning. I have solid reasoning to suggest a multimillionaire working fulltime wouldn't be interested in investing 100s of hours of his spare time learning to trade for the possibility of making a few quid.

As for evidence, you don't understand the concept, burden of proof. In a criminal court, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution. In a civil/county court or tribunal it's with the party making a claim. Basically, the person seeking a decision in his favour, seeking a change or taking away someone's liberty has the burden of proof.

When a pharmaceutical company releases drugs on the market they have to prove it's safe. Likewise, if you come up with a radical and what most right-thinking members of society regard as an insane idea (or any idea for that matter), the onus is on you to prove or provide evidence to support it.