By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
On a recent TWTD poll 80% were in favour of the national lockdown, based mostly I suspect on the evidence presented by Johnson, Vallance & Whitty on Saturday Night, however some of the data used has already been proven to be incorrect and numerous Scientists, experts, and MPs are now calling them out on it and are claiming a National Lockdown is not required at this stage.
Professor Carl Heneghan of Oxford University has pointed out that :
- The projections were based on 3 week old data. - They have already proven to be incorrect. 1000 deaths forecast on 1st November, the actual number was around 200 ( official reporting now states 162 ). - 4000 deaths per day is a doomsday prediction was never a realistic number - Cases are Dropping or flatlining in the most affected areas, Manchester cases down 20% in the previous week. - The 3 Tier system therefore showing signs of working but has not been given the full enough time. - Non-covid excess deaths in the home are increasing, this will get worse in another lockdown.
Professor Tim Spector from Kings College London is another who has disputed the figures. Based on the Zoe study which surveys a million people in the UK weekly they have shown that that cases are far from rising exponentially and in fact are falling in the Northern hotspot areas. They also have the 'R' number dropping to around 1.
Professor David Livermore of UEA has said that the Government is using "clearly ropey statistics" that just "don't make sense"
Tory MP Peter Bone has said "There are lies, damn lies, and covid statistics' going on to add that the Government is using selective data to prove it's case and not getting a balanced range to get to the right decision.
Another Tory MP Sir Desmond Swayne is "devastated" about a second lockdown: "It's a disaster... people will be unemployed... their lives ruined and they'll die in greater numbers... it's mass hysteria".
Cases dropped overall last week for Suffolk and we know that other areas such as Cornwall have low numbers. Why do we need a National Lockdown when the tier system seems to be showing signs of success and other areas have falling numbers anyway?
Boris has claimed there is 'no alternative' to the National lockdown, this is simply not true and Boris is doing what he has proven over a long period of time that he does best - telling lies. History will show him to be one of the worst PMs this country has ever known.
The long term effects of this year are going to catastrophic in my view, and it will not be because of a new virus, it will be because of the direct actions the Government has taken, causing huge long term damage to their own Country and people.
Everybody is so fixated on Covid cases and deaths that I am concerned we are not seeing the bigger picture. I urge everybody to start looking at all of the evidence ( Julia Hartley Brewer on Talk Radio is worth a look ) and to then start questioning what is really going on and why?
[Post edited 6 Jan 2021 10:59]
0
National lockdown - the case against on 20:28 - Nov 5 with 608 views
National lockdown - the case against on 20:18 - Nov 5 by Harry_Palmer
Hi Ryorry, If you read the thread back you will see that he has come after me numerous times and I have barely responded for the most part. He has shown me little respect from the beginning quite frankly and has clearly not even read the OP properly or watched the video as it clearly demonstrated how there were flaws in the data the Government used and several experts had backed this up. If you look at the BBC link that Stokie has posted this further proves that there is validity to my argument.
I really find it strange that you paint the picture that I was somehow winding him up and therefore his abusive posts are justified. This is a perfectly valid topic for discussion and if Badger can't discuss it without resorting to abuse then perhaps he needs to avoid it and move on to other threads that aren't likely to upset him so much. Other posters such as Stokie will disagree with me all day long but still remain respectful, it's not that much to ask is it?
You say that you are prepared to cut him slack, well so am I. I don't imagine too many other posters would have accepted that level of personal abuse and attack on their character with the restraint I did. I understand the strain he is under though and offer compassion to that situation. You talk of his thinking and reading as if to presume I don't do any when with respect you don't know anything about me.
Regarding your last paragraph, I don't honestly believe it will be an emergency short term measure, they have already extended the furlough scheme to March so that in itself suggests this is going to go on for longer than a month. It is not simply the economy in and of itself that concerns me it is the wide reaching impacts on the whole of society. If you have a population where millions become unemployed, depressed and impoverished you will get many many more dead people. We haven't even touched on the future deaths already caused by missed diagnosis and treatments from the first lockdown.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 20:23]
You’ve argued rationally and without abuse. No one should have to put up with being spoken to the way he spoke to you. It’s appalling behaviour and has no place on this forum or anywhere else for that matter.
The Paz Man
1
National lockdown - the case against on 20:37 - Nov 5 with 587 views
National lockdown - the case against on 20:28 - Nov 5 by 26_Paz
You’ve argued rationally and without abuse. No one should have to put up with being spoken to the way he spoke to you. It’s appalling behaviour and has no place on this forum or anywhere else for that matter.
Much like racism and homophobia - right?
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
National lockdown - the case against on 20:28 - Nov 5 by 26_Paz
You’ve argued rationally and without abuse. No one should have to put up with being spoken to the way he spoke to you. It’s appalling behaviour and has no place on this forum or anywhere else for that matter.
Thankyou Paz. Certain posters seem to be untouchable on here, pretty sure you or I would have been banned now for the same behaviour, but there we go, we move on.
Sorry to hear you are struggling mate. It is pretty tough on everybody right now but I think we just have to be hopeful that things will get better soon. A few more ITFC wins would certainly help! Take care mate.
1
National lockdown - the case against on 20:52 - Nov 5 with 542 views
National lockdown - the case against on 20:18 - Nov 5 by Harry_Palmer
Hi Ryorry, If you read the thread back you will see that he has come after me numerous times and I have barely responded for the most part. He has shown me little respect from the beginning quite frankly and has clearly not even read the OP properly or watched the video as it clearly demonstrated how there were flaws in the data the Government used and several experts had backed this up. If you look at the BBC link that Stokie has posted this further proves that there is validity to my argument.
I really find it strange that you paint the picture that I was somehow winding him up and therefore his abusive posts are justified. This is a perfectly valid topic for discussion and if Badger can't discuss it without resorting to abuse then perhaps he needs to avoid it and move on to other threads that aren't likely to upset him so much. Other posters such as Stokie will disagree with me all day long but still remain respectful, it's not that much to ask is it?
You say that you are prepared to cut him slack, well so am I. I don't imagine too many other posters would have accepted that level of personal abuse and attack on their character with the restraint I did. I understand the strain he is under though and offer compassion to that situation. You talk of his thinking and reading as if to presume I don't do any when with respect you don't know anything about me.
Regarding your last paragraph, I don't honestly believe it will be an emergency short term measure, they have already extended the furlough scheme to March so that in itself suggests this is going to go on for longer than a month. It is not simply the economy in and of itself that concerns me it is the wide reaching impacts on the whole of society. If you have a population where millions become unemployed, depressed and impoverished you will get many many more dead people. We haven't even touched on the future deaths already caused by missed diagnosis and treatments from the first lockdown.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 20:23]
I did not say you were setting out to wind him up, and apologies if that's how it came across.
I said that your posting in a way which obviously continually contradicted his own stance was like constantly waving a red rag in front of a bull. There's a difference between that and "paint(ing) the picture that I was somehow winding him up and therefore his abusive posts are justified."
I didn't say "his abusive posts are justified" either. I said I was willing to cut him some slack in the circumstances, and didn't vote either way on those posts of his.
Edit: As for your last para, you seem to have ignored what I'd already said in that post of mine you replied to, and my previous ones on the thread, so I'm going to leave it there.
National lockdown - the case against on 20:48 - Nov 5 by Harry_Palmer
Thankyou Paz. Certain posters seem to be untouchable on here, pretty sure you or I would have been banned now for the same behaviour, but there we go, we move on.
Sorry to hear you are struggling mate. It is pretty tough on everybody right now but I think we just have to be hopeful that things will get better soon. A few more ITFC wins would certainly help! Take care mate.
Completely agree. Cheers mate, you too!
The Paz Man
0
National lockdown - the case against on 20:54 - Nov 5 with 539 views
National lockdown - the case against on 20:37 - Nov 5 by SpruceMoose
Much like racism and homophobia - right?
Right?
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
National lockdown - the case against on 20:52 - Nov 5 by Ryorry
I did not say you were setting out to wind him up, and apologies if that's how it came across.
I said that your posting in a way which obviously continually contradicted his own stance was like constantly waving a red rag in front of a bull. There's a difference between that and "paint(ing) the picture that I was somehow winding him up and therefore his abusive posts are justified."
I didn't say "his abusive posts are justified" either. I said I was willing to cut him some slack in the circumstances, and didn't vote either way on those posts of his.
Edit: As for your last para, you seem to have ignored what I'd already said in that post of mine you replied to, and my previous ones on the thread, so I'm going to leave it there.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 20:56]
Truth is the argument isn't getting anyone anywhere here. Harry has already made his mind up, has a few social scientists that say things that confirm it and won't listen to the wealth of evidence that contradicts his view.
There comes a point where multiple posters are wasting our breath pointing out the errors he refuses to see and he is wasting his breath repeating the same things without addressing the overwhelming evidence presented to him.
It is yet another example of some people putting their own view above the scientific evidence. Thankfully, even this inept government has conceded to the overwhelming weight of evidence and done something (albeit probably too little and definitely far later than should have happened). Maybe both sides should concede they are not going to get anywhere by continuing the argument here.
National lockdown - the case against on 20:52 - Nov 5 by Ryorry
I did not say you were setting out to wind him up, and apologies if that's how it came across.
I said that your posting in a way which obviously continually contradicted his own stance was like constantly waving a red rag in front of a bull. There's a difference between that and "paint(ing) the picture that I was somehow winding him up and therefore his abusive posts are justified."
I didn't say "his abusive posts are justified" either. I said I was willing to cut him some slack in the circumstances, and didn't vote either way on those posts of his.
Edit: As for your last para, you seem to have ignored what I'd already said in that post of mine you replied to, and my previous ones on the thread, so I'm going to leave it there.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 20:56]
Fair enough, thanks for clarifying, and trust me I see things posted daily that are like red rag to a bull to me in terms of contradicting my own beliefs. I tend to ignore them most of the time.
National lockdown - the case against on 21:04 - Nov 5 by 26_Paz
I’m not going to bite, sorry but my mental health is more important than giving you the pleasure of winding me up
I wish you well with your mental wellbeing but your views on race and sexual orientation really have nothing to do with it.
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
National lockdown - the case against on 21:13 - Nov 5 by SpruceMoose
I wish you well with your mental wellbeing but your views on race and sexual orientation really have nothing to do with it.
I don’t have any views on those subjects. You constantly accusing me of things does affect my mental health. I genuinely didn’t come here for a row tonight so just won’t be engaging with you any more this evening.
The Paz Man
-2
National lockdown - the case against on 21:17 - Nov 5 with 456 views
National lockdown - the case against on 21:00 - Nov 5 by Nthsuffolkblue
Truth is the argument isn't getting anyone anywhere here. Harry has already made his mind up, has a few social scientists that say things that confirm it and won't listen to the wealth of evidence that contradicts his view.
There comes a point where multiple posters are wasting our breath pointing out the errors he refuses to see and he is wasting his breath repeating the same things without addressing the overwhelming evidence presented to him.
It is yet another example of some people putting their own view above the scientific evidence. Thankfully, even this inept government has conceded to the overwhelming weight of evidence and done something (albeit probably too little and definitely far later than should have happened). Maybe both sides should concede they are not going to get anywhere by continuing the argument here.
My god, what an absolute load of tosh.
First off you have barely even been involved in the debate, where are the errors you have pointed out? Stokie made some valid observations but hardly enough to debunk my entire argument.
Have you actually read the BBC piece which backs up much of what I was saying ?
Where is the overwhelming evidence that Lockdowns have a net benefit overall then please? The Government haven't carried out the studies or the impact assessment so I very much doubt you have but please feel free to enlighten me.
Edit. actually I am done for one night, you are right this is going nowhere and getting rather tedious, respond/ don't respond but I will bid you goodnight.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 21:23]
0
National lockdown - the case against on 21:18 - Nov 5 with 453 views
National lockdown - the case against on 21:16 - Nov 5 by 26_Paz
I don’t have any views on those subjects. You constantly accusing me of things does affect my mental health. I genuinely didn’t come here for a row tonight so just won’t be engaging with you any more this evening.
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
National lockdown - the case against on 18:15 - Nov 5 by 26_Paz
I had 5 a side last night, last game for a while. It’s a big centre with about 12 pitches. Was chatting to the manager, he said they have about 300 people in a night. They’ve been doing all the track and trace and have had a grand total of 1 case since they reopened. I then went for a beer after with a mate and he and his mrs have both been made redundant. He’s ok financially for a while and is doing ok mentally but his mrs is really struggling. Doesn’t even get out of bed some days. I guess what I can’t get my head around is the level of damage compared to the amount of corona I see in my life. Maybe I’m lucky but I just don’t know anybody who’s even had it let alone been really ill from it. Anyway, that’s how I’m feeling. I’m not going to be getting into any debates about the pros and cons, I don’t have the energy, that’s just where I’m at right now
Paz me ol' mucker. Totally get that you can't get your head around it. In about 6 weeks, i'll be officially in the vulnerable age group. The one thing that keeps me sane(ish) from the current situation is being able to work in the great outdoors, which in turn at least means i have some contact with customers, albeit from a safe distance. I'm much more fortunate than many in that respect, so i'm counting my blessings somewhat. No idea on your personal situation, but i guess we're just going to have to make the best of a sh1t situation. Take j2,s advice, get some good boxsets and reading material in and bunker down.
We have no village green, or a shop.
It's very, very quiet.
I can walk to the pub.
1
National lockdown - the case against on 22:22 - Nov 5 with 400 views
National lockdown - the case against on 21:17 - Nov 5 by Harry_Palmer
My god, what an absolute load of tosh.
First off you have barely even been involved in the debate, where are the errors you have pointed out? Stokie made some valid observations but hardly enough to debunk my entire argument.
Have you actually read the BBC piece which backs up much of what I was saying ?
Where is the overwhelming evidence that Lockdowns have a net benefit overall then please? The Government haven't carried out the studies or the impact assessment so I very much doubt you have but please feel free to enlighten me.
Edit. actually I am done for one night, you are right this is going nowhere and getting rather tedious, respond/ don't respond but I will bid you goodnight.
[Post edited 5 Nov 2020 21:23]
Yes, I have read it. Yes, the Government has been criticised for the way it presented that data. Yes, I have now trawled through most of this thread.
No, you have not addressed any of the data put to you about exponential growth in death rates and hospital admissions. There is plenty of data showing that a second lockdown was necessary a month ago and is even more necessary now. The article describes the criticism from UK Statistics Authority for the use of just one of the pieces of data they used.
As I say, there is no point me pointing these out to you because you are too closed-minded.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
