wanderlust wrote: Sluffy wrote: wanderlust wrote: Sluffy wrote: wanderlust wrote:Finally after the scientific community rounded on the Government's coronavirus strategy and their lack of honesty about it, the
virus modelling from Imperial College that the Government is using has been published - and it predicts
250,000+ deaths* in the UK - so now it's out there and the scientific community critical of the the Government has got it's wish.
Meanwhile on the business front it's become clear that only days after Sunak's budget, his proposed measures of £12 billion support for businesses is looking completely inadequate - especially when compared to Macron's pledge that "no French business will be allowed to fail - even if it takes hundreds of billions" (which it probably will IMO)
Moreover, the whole Government strategy has been amended as they have realised the key problem with the old one - that there is no exit strategy (as I tried to explain to my troll the other day) - starting with yesterday's announcement from Boris. New, more realistic financial measures to keep businesses afloat expected soon.
I'll stop short of saying our Government lies to us, but it has to be noted that their "experts" have been very selective in the information they have released to date and partisan in their interpretation of the modelling.
* see p16 of the report. Note also that this figure assumes "even if everyone could be treated"
US deaths expected to exceed 1.1 million.
Cranky/ˈkraŋki/
adjective
adjective: cranky; comparative adjective: crankier; superlative adjective: crankiest
informal•British
Eccentric or strange.Why do you always believe there is a conspiracy when the real truth is as simple as this -
"In the last 24 hours, Downing Street's instructions to the public to protect everyone's health changed at breakneck speed
as new scientific data emerged".
Data was already there and has been for weeks as it came from China via Imperial. It emerging was new - although they did update it yesterday before release.
And I was telling you days ago that the Government's strategy was flawed, but to their credit they have changed tack now - even though it took the cat crawling out of the bag for them to do it.
So to paraphrase you, hopefully you will finally accept the view that I originally put forward and retract your insults - or do you think you know better than the Government's own "experts" ?
Wrong.
The MODEL was there, the actual DATA is new.
Don't you know the difference between the two - apparently not?
It's not a hard concept to understand.
Putting the
actual DATA from
the last few days into the MODEL has resulted in moving much more quickly into the next stage in fighting this than was predicted.
Do you get it now?
I certainly don't know better than the Government's experts, or any other proven expert come to that - clearly you do.
You know better than anyone apparently about everything.
Or at least you think you do.
Would not surprise me at all if you were an expert on piles too, considering all the shite that come out of your hole!
No you're wrong. The data has been around since January and it was on that basis that the WHO declared the emergency. Obviously it has been added to.
Are you suggesting a) that the Government created their first strategy using data modelling without data? or b) that the small amount of data collected since Friday completely changed the whole picture when added to the huge amount of data collected over the last couple of months that was already in existence? If the latter you're an idiot because it clearly shows you don't understand data modelling - and you don't read things properly the report says that "this
realisation has happened only in the past few days" i.e. they've only just cottoned on to what it really means.
Come on Sluffy...man up, accept that you are and were wrong, withdraw your incessant stream of insults and apologise for being a twat.
Actually, don't bother with the last one because it's not necessarily your fault.
wanderlust wrote:That was funny. Kuennsberg asked Chris Witless if he regretted not taking this action earlier and he went beetroot red when delivering the party line of "the right thing at the right time". He effing well should be embarrassed as thousands of people will have been infected unnecessarily because of him.
Plenty of squirming, but no admission they got it completely wrong.
It's not difficult, I can only assume you are deliberately missing the point on purpose because you NEVER admit to be wrong.
You create a model and put in various details to PREDICT what you expect will happen in the future.
No one knows exactly how good the model is until you get ACTUAL 'data' and
compare what has really happened against prediction - and refine the model accordingly to become more accurate in its predictions for the future.
It seems the ACTUAL data is higher than that PREDICTED for the point we are on, on the upward curve of the virus in this country and thus why we've simply moved on to the next stage on the model.
Seems the model got the predictions wrong in respect of Italy and consequently us and
it was the refining of the model plus the input of ACTUAL data that led to the Governments new measures.Nothing more, nothing less.
Tbh I find your behaviour on this thread totally repugnant.
As you are fully aware there's regular posters on Nuts who are in the highest risk category or have loved ones in it yet all you are clearly concerned about is about scoring points off both the Conservative government and myself and making out how clever you are (about fecking everything) and how dumb the rest of us are, whilst you clearly can't admit to being the least bit wrong - about anything - not just this.
This isn't about your fragile ego.
It's about real people, love ones, dying.
Home
