Type to search

Tags: ,

The Heresy of Common Sense

Share

In the Middle Ages, mankind started to look beyond religious reasons to explain the world around them. The transition from Alchemy to Chemistry was a painful one as many enlightened thinkers and brilliant minds were persecuted for daring to suggest theories that contradicted the religious status quo.

Famously Galileo was placed under arrest for publishing the theory that the earth rotates around the sun, as the Church at the time believed that the earth sat at the centre of the Universe. Such suggestions to the contrary were deemed heretical resulting in serious personal consequences for the heretic in question. There are many examples, not just in Western Culture, of scientific evidence being rejected as it threatened the establishment. Like me, you probably believed that those days were long gone, that now we all embrace critical thinking and diverse scientific opinion. That all significant decisions would be made based on scrutinised, challenged and ultimately proven beyond reasonable doubt science.

How wrong we would be.

When both Brexit and Trump won in 2016, something changed significantly regarding democracy and the accepted way of doing things. An angry establishment could not bare the fact that their worldview was not shared by the majority of the population. As soon as the ‘resist’ and ‘FBPE’ movements appeared, the media has fuelled a campaign for the ‘losing sides’ to exact revenge.

Surveys after Brexit revealed that between a quarter and a third of ‘Remain Voters’ wished to see Britain fail abysmally once we left the EU. They wished hardship on their own country and citizens simply because they didn’t get their own way. People who cannot fathom losing a vote prefer a scorched earth policy rather than accepting democracy – it is a spiteful nihilistic and nasty mindset that has grown  over the last four years. The Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion movements have ‘legitimised’ bitter and angry people to behave appallingly, safe if the knowledge that they have the mainstream media working as their PR arm.

And now it is COVID.

We appear to have a Prime Minister who is struggling to lead because he wants to remain popular with as many people as possible. He foolishly believes that the media and the left will start to like him if he plays their game. The cost of this misconception is becoming catastrophic. Mental health, cancer and other conditions are going undetected, not to mention suicides – all this is seemingly acceptable collateral damage. For what? To avoid criticism from point scoring politicians and a partisan media? Good luck with that.

The financial cost is incalculable both now and in the long term, with businesses closing on a daily basis. All of this costs lives, even if indirectly and in the long term; it just doesn’t appear as a scrolling number on a BBC News ticker so perhaps it is easier to ignore?

Leadership requires ignoring the noise of the countless opinions thrown at you, and not paying attention to activists with nefarious agendas. Rather it is acting on the best information available that has been checked and cross checked, is demonstrably correct and will deliver the best outcome possible.

Boris must see how political the virus is; after Trump closed the borders early with the EU he was called all the usual slurs at the time. Nancy Pelosi told people to gather and party in Chinatown as a way of responding to the President’s measures! Yet now he is accused of not acting fast enough by those same dishonest people who expect us to forget their words and actions at the time. COVID has become a political pawn from a bullying frustrated and angry left in the same way that Climate Change has; a desire to change the world to their warped utopia without the inconvenience of democracy. They’re happy to hand an advantage to a cruel regressive regime in China, such is their lack of patriotism and obvious loathing of all things Western.

The COVID pandemic has followed the same curve of all similar viruses despite the many approaches to dealing with it around the world. Sadly the vulnerable are lost early, then the impact diminishes over time. The doom laden predictions of Neil Ferguson and Imperial College have again proven wildly inaccurate. Yet as the virus has a tiny flat growth in line with all season viruses such as flu, Boris seems to be listening to the clamour from bad faith actors to shut down the country once again. Hancock is talking about ‘tougher measures’ to control us.

A quick overview of Prof Neil Ferguson’s track record:

He was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths.

In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE.

In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Last March, Ferguson admitted that his Imperial College model of the COVID-19 disease was based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. Ferguson declined to release his original code so other scientists could check his results. He only released a heavily revised set of code after a long delay.

It is worth providing some statistics for context of the death rates, as there is a general misconception (unchallenged by the Media) that COVID deaths and excess deaths are disproportionately high.

Currently around 42,000 people have sadly died with COVID, which is 0.06% of the population. Of those deaths, just over 300 are of people under 60 without known pre existing conditions. Each year, approximately 620,000 people die in the UK, which is circa 1,700 a day. A bad flu winter will see this number rise, and mild flu season will see it fall. That impact is greater than COVID.

The media is now reporting COVID deaths as ‘someone who tested positive in the last 28 days and has subsequently died’. So if you had no symptoms, didn’t go to hospital, yet had a heart attack but had a positive test recently, your death would be registered as a COVID death. Don’t believe me – look at the small print the next time the BBC publish the figures on the news.

Worse still, there is a ‘false positive’ rate of just under 1% for the testing. As we know cases are being presented as ‘on the rise’ but we are now testing far more than earlier in the year; over 200,000 a day. In April, testing on this scale would have shown a much higher number than we were reporting, so the correct way to report numbers would be ‘positive tests as a percentage of total tests’. Yet each week the numbers are juggled to make the situation appear worse than it actually is. It keeps much of the public frightened, and as such, compliant.

To explain the danger of ‘false positives’ in a high testing number, think of it like this. If 1,000 people are tested, then with a ‘false positive’ rate of 1%, ten people will incorrectly be shown as having the disease. Now place that in the context of hundreds of thousands of tests and you can see why we are seeing an increase of cases, despite relatively few people dying and being admitted to hospital. From 200,000 tests, 2,000 people will be incorrectly shown as having COVID which is a large percentage of the new cases being reported. From recent interviews with cabinet members, it is clear that they don’t have any understanding of this relatively straightforward statistical phenomenon.

Bolton – the current hot spot in the UK reported as the worst place in the country – currently has two, yes two people in hospital with COVID. Coronavirus is now only the 24th biggest killer in Britain, accounting for just 1.4% of August deaths. Only half a percent of hospital beds have COVID patients in them (yet routine health care continues to be impacted despite the extra billions pumped into the NHS).

The local lockdowns are based on the ‘R’ number which uses yet another model for calculations. For example, opening the pubs increases the R number, as does opening the schools. It is prediction not actual data, and in reality is when pubs opened in June, we did not see the huge second wave predicted by some.

The Heresy of Common Sense

(click to enlarge picture)

I encourage people to look deeper into the statistics, but the purpose of this article is to pose the following questions:-

Boris is neither a medic nor a statistician, so he will be relying on advice. Is he simply incompetent, in that he has failed to realise the agenda from a media and left wing group of academics that wish to see his Government fail & fall, and who wish to punish the country that we inhabit? He was bullied out of the ‘herd immunity’ strategy at the start and can now clearly see the outcome in Sweden, so will be aware that we could be much further along. He will know that the much lauded (in the media) New Zealand approach has ruined their travel industry and they have no population immunity, so are susceptible as soon as they open their doors again.

Or does he understand that scientific voices raising the alarm bell, presenting solid evidence against current strategies, are being silenced? That he is happy to continue on this path in order to suppress the population and use powers to control and restrict us from freedoms we took for granted just a year ago?

Is there a bigger reason that justifies demoralising and ruining your own country in order to enforce greater state control of the population?

There isn’t an answer to any of these questions that should not be highly alarming to us, and provides yet more evidence that drastic change is needed from the political status quo.

Article supplied for publication by the For Britain Party.

Tags::

You Might also Like