It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Debunking the Imperial College Covid model that led to the lockdowns in US and UK

page: 2
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2020 @ 10:50 AM
link   
We are easily going to pass 100,000 deaths with the lock down. It certainly is quite plausible we would have had 500,000+ without the lock down. It is also likely we will end up with 500,000+ before this over, even with the lock down. New cases in the USA are at their highest level yet. Given this i think the 2 million dead without lock downs was certifiably achievable. So basically there is zero evidence that this model was inaccurate for the USA.



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Grambler

All those words and absolutely no mention of how the two organizations that initially produced the incredibly flawed projection models (IHME and ICL) received incredibly large sums of money from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation?


Oh trust me i know.

But i am making the easiest case probavable that it was wrong.

If i mention gates, the material i posted will be ignored and everyone will just discuss whether or not gates is corrupt



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Yep, your feelings over all of the facts in the thread.



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Yep, your feelings over all of the facts in the thread.


Excellent analyses. Those of us who were skeptical from the beginning have been proven correct.

Unfortunately, this is mass hysteria on an unprecedented level. Politicians and media have made it almost impossible to actually come up with workable solutions. Covid is real but it is hardly the pandemic it was made out to be.



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Grambler

All those words and absolutely no mention of how the two organizations that initially produced the incredibly flawed projection models (IHME and ICL) received incredibly large sums of money from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation?


Oh trust me i know.

But i am making the easiest case probavable that it was wrong.

If i mention gates, the material i posted will be ignored and everyone will just discuss whether or not gates is corrupt


Fair enough mate - better not bring up the $1.8 billion that John Hopkins University received from Bloomberg either.

And don't mention the Rockefellers.

Cheers.



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
We are easily going to pass 100,000 deaths with the lock down. It certainly is quite plausible we would have had 500,000+ without the lock down. It is also likely we will end up with 500,000+ before this over, even with the lock down. New cases in the USA are at their highest level yet. Given this i think the 2 million dead without lock downs was certifiably achievable. So basically there is zero evidence that this model was inaccurate for the USA.


That is all well and good; and it may even be correct. But I think it misses the bigger point of the OP. Your statements are assumptions, and even if they turn out to come true they are still assumptions in the here and now.

Is it acceptable to seriously curtail the rights and livelihoods of hundreds of millions to save the lives of hundreds thousand based on assumption?

Is it even acceptable to seriously curtail the rights and livelihoods of hundreds of millions to save the lives of hundreds thousand based on absolute certainty?


And even those questions do not address the full breath of the situation; because it assumes the issue is binary when it most certainly is not.

There are a myriad of degrees and approaches to this situation between total fascist governess and Laissez faire governess; each having its own set of death counts both from the virus and from mitigation of the virus.

We did not have this conversation before the lockdowns; fine, it was a dangerous situation that needed immediate action.

I think the problem is that we are still unwilling to have this conversation even now as a society even though we do currently have the luxury to do so.

What is worse is that a large group of citizens, leaders and media would rather create a 2 dimensional villain out of those people who want to have this conversation rather than listen to what they might have to say.
edit on 7-5-2020 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Many people still believe the lockdowns were necessary

Lockdown was the agreed upon model. Unfortunately, the planners didn't prepare for a modern biological weapon. They did ... kind'a ... but, even that plan wasn't executed.

Anyway you cut it, the infection rate was incredible. Nothing ever before like this in my lifetime. The fallout from this event 'could' be worse than the event itself. Stoopid stuff is still being allowed (if not encouraged) to happen.



posted on May, 7 2020 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Ferguson has form.

His outlandish 'estimates' using very flawed 'modelling' tools have been proved wrong before, 20 years of error causing the destruction of peoples' livelihoods and lives.

OP, I know you have said this Thread is about Ferguson's hypocrisy and you do not want it to focus on and become deflected/derailed into big pharma/Gates/WHO/GAVI tit for tat model but to be fair, Ferguson and his employers at Imperial College are very much in bed with that gaggle.

By 2018, Gates Foundation provided $185m to Imperial! And just to illustrate how corporate pharma is using those academic institutes and their front-men for financial gain, global vaccination revenues currently stand at £59.2b, partly because of the trust placed on the expertise of those academics, even failed ones like the hypocrite Ferguson.

Part 1 of this investigative report, 'Who controls the UK Govt response to C19?', gives more detail about failure Ferguson, front man for the slime.


www.ukcolumn.org...



posted on May, 10 2020 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
We are easily going to pass 100,000 deaths with the lock down. It certainly is quite plausible we would have had 500,000+ without the lock down. It is also likely we will end up with 500,000+ before this over,

It is also possible we would have had the same number, or even less.


even with the lock down. New cases in the USA are at their highest level yet. Given this i think the 2 million dead without lock downs was certifiably achievable.

Achievable... interesting word.

The way they are mis-classifying anyone dying with COVID as having died from COVID, you're probably right, they could 'achieve' whatever number they wanted.




top topics



 
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join