WHEN'S IT ALL GONNA OPEN??

[Sir Nibble]

It seems that the problem is not a non scientific person sitting in on SAGE, (note sitting in not sitting on) but that it's Dominic Cummins, which brings me again to identifying the criminal then looking for the crime. Ironically, in this debate, Cummins is the victim of persecution.

[mark99]

2 hours ago, Sir Nibble said:

Much of the debate is down to agenda. There is a good deal of it driven by party political bias and some people have thrown out objectivity and starting with the identity of the criminal are looking for the crime.

I could name 3 or 4 whom sole ambition is to hang their bogeyman whatever topic in here.

[Sir Nibble]

Just now, mark99 said:

I could name 3 or 4 whom sole ambition is to hang their bogeyman whatever topic in here.

Indeed, and if one discards objectivity, credibility goes out with it.

[Phil.]

25 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

The question is Cummings qualifications, not mine, and he has no relevant qualifications to be on the panel. Other members of Government seem to agree with this even quoting the dire source of the Daily Wail (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257417/Top-Tories-join-calls-ban-Dominic-Cummings-coronavirus-scientific-briefings.html  ) (just to show impartiality).

 

The trouble with Cummings is that he always sees himself as the most intelligent person in the room and that will be the case on SAGE despite his lack of knowledge. Anyone want to try to contradict him? unlikely since he is a foul mouthed person as well.

Did you actually read the article you quoted, it lists the members of SAGE. Having seen some of these in action at briefings, I suspect that Cummings would himself have felt the least knowledgable, and I can’t imagine even him trying to tell some of those attending, what their jobs are. Certainly the Chief Scientific Advisor, the CMO and the deputy CMO, have all displayed the wherewithal over the past few weeks, to tell Cummings to put a sock in it, if he wandered into their remit. Not everyone is as weak and feeble as you wish to portray.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

10 minutes ago, Phil. said:

Did you actually read the article you quoted, it lists the members of SAGE. Having seen some of these in action at briefings, I suspect that Cummings would himself have felt the least knowledgable, and I can’t imagine even him trying to tell some of those attending, what their jobs are. Certainly the Chief Scientific Advisor, the CMO and the deputy CMO, have all displayed the wherewithal over the past few weeks, to tell Cummings to put a sock in it, if he wandered into their remit. Not everyone is as weak and feeble as you wish to portray.

It lists the members of SAGE currently known, doesn't say that it is all of them. You clearly underestimate the esteem in which Cummings holds himself.

18 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

It seems that the problem is not a non scientific person sitting in on SAGE, (note sitting in not sitting on) but that it's Dominic Cummins, which brings me again to identifying the criminal then looking for the crime. Ironically, in this debate, Cummins is the victim of persecution.

Oh, I do hope so , that is his method of dealing with anyone not subservient to his agendas.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Wanderer Vagabond

[Phil.]

1 minute ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

It list the members of SAGE currently known, doesn't say that it is all of them. You clearly underestimate the esteem in which Cummings holds himself.

But I don’t underestimate the three professionals that I listed, and that you seem to think an upstart like Cummings could influence.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Just now, Phil. said:

But I don’t underestimate the three professionals that I listed, and that you seem to think an upstart like Cummings could influence.

He influences Government, an expert panel is a mere bagatelle to him.

[Sir Nibble]

So no one disputes the right of the cabinet to have a representative present, just their right to choose that representative?

[Phil.]

4 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

He influences Government, an expert panel is a mere bagatelle to him.

He influences a bunch of jokers who are politicians, who have never been at the top of any profession, unlike the three men I mentioned.

 

edited to add....there are probably others on the committee who would also stand up for their position, I just haven’t seen them in action

Edited May 2, 2020 by Phil.

[George and Dragon]

16 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

So no one disputes the right of the cabinet to have a representative present, just their right to choose that representative?

IMHO there should be no-one but scientists on SAGE. But that's just my opinion.

 

[ditchcrawler]

Before the travel ban "law" or what ever you would like to call it, we had pictures on the TV of packed underground trains, I think at that time they had reduced the service to try to dissuade people from traveling but they just packed onto fewer trains. Anyway, back to the point, I wonder how many of them succumbed to the virus

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Before the travel ban "law" or what ever you would like to call it, we had pictures on the TV of packed underground trains, I think at that time they had reduced the service to try to dissuade people from traveling but they just packed onto fewer trains. Anyway, back to the point, I wonder how many of them succumbed to the virus

 

That 4 weeks (mid February to mid March) was a 'strange time' to say the least.

I think the man on the Clapham Omnibus could have come up with better suggestions than those that were 'advised' (not mandatory) by those that were in the position to advise.

[George and Dragon]

5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Before the travel ban "law" or what ever you would like to call it, we had pictures on the TV of packed underground trains, I think at that time they had reduced the service to try to dissuade people from traveling but they just packed onto fewer trains. Anyway, back to the point, I wonder how many of them succumbed to the virus

Those pictures; I expect the TV news editors were careful to ensure they showed us only typical carriage occupation, not extremes like they normally would. And that being the case, the rate of infection seems to be much lower than we might have feared.

[WotEver]

2 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

Those pictures; I expect the TV news editors were careful to ensure they showed us only typical carriage occupation, not extremes like they normally would. And that being the case, the rate of infection seems to be much lower than we might have feared.

24,000 is low? 

[ditchcrawler]

3 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

Those pictures; I expect the TV news editors were careful to ensure they showed us only typical carriage occupation, not extremes like they normally would. And that being the case, the rate of infection seems to be much lower than we might have feared.

In which case it was yet another case of the media lying to us because they said it sould the paced trains when people were asked to only do essential travel and work from home. But can youbelive anything the media say, any of them

2 minutes ago, WotEver said:

24,000 is low? 

All on the one train?

 

[churchward]

15 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

I know of people who have not been prepared to say what they would like to, for fear of their position. Putting Cummings in there makes this a possibility... if he wasnt there, it wouldnt be. Simples really.

 

Oh well if you put it that way!

 

I do not like cummings either or indeed the concept of powerful  advisors full stop no matter who they are or what party leader they work for but there is still no point in making things up and covering it with such jibber-jabber as above.

Edited May 2, 2020 by churchward

[George and Dragon]

3 minutes ago, WotEver said:

24,000 is low? 

 I was talking about infections  But, no 27000 deaths is a considerable number. However, what we do know about Covid -19 is that it's only fatal in about 1% of cases (some say <1% but for the sake of easy numbers...) unlike something like Ebola which was fatal in about 50% of cases. We also know that it's not as infectious as measles. 

 

5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

In which case it was yet another case of the media lying to us because they said it sould the paced trains when people were asked to only do essential travel and work from home. But can youbelive anything the media say, any of them

The media are, of course, interested in selling the story so they show us the examples that look the worst. They did manage to make some of us realise that for social distancing on the tube to work there should have been the normal level of services running, by then it was too late.

[Momac]

4 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

  However, what we do know about Covid -19 is that it's only fatal in about 1% of cases 

How do we know that ?

Do we now what percentage of the UK population will become a case ?

 

 

 

 

[Tonka]

I hope it's not the same people that were at the sage meeting when they discussed Todbrook reservoir dam breaking up last September

[ditchcrawler]

13 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

 

 

The media are, of course, interested in selling the story so they show us the examples that look the worst. They did manage to make some of us realise that for social distancing on the tube to work there should have been the normal level of services running, by then it was too late.

And my question was, I wonder how many of them got infected.. I would have expected one infected person to have been able to infect more than three, maybe no one was infected?

 

[churchward]

10 minutes ago, MartynG said:

How do we know that ?

Do we now what percentage of the UK population will become a case ?

 

 

 

 

No no one does yet.  It will not be known until this is over or near to.  However, it is true to say that the experts in the UK are saying that if the virus was let to spread naturally among the population i.e. no lockdown it could kill about 500,000 people in the UK and that is close to a 1% death rate against the total population.

 

Currently the global death rate taking total known cases (3.4 million) and total known deaths (240K) the the death rate is about 7% just now. The actual death rate will be lower as there are people who have had it most likely that have gone undetected.

Edited May 2, 2020 by churchward

[WotEver]

41 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

However, what we do know about Covid -19 is that it's only fatal in about 1% of cases

I don’t believe we do know that at all. There’s much that we don’t know. 

41 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

I was talking about infections

So was I. That’s why I didn’t say 27,000.

 

24,447 known cases just in London. 
 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by WotEver
Clarity.

[Athy]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

I think the man on the Clapham Omnibus could have come up with better suggestions 

The best suggestion would have been for him not to get on the Clapham omnibus in the first place.

[Machpoint005]

2 hours ago, Phil. said:

I suspect that Cummings would himself have felt the least knowledgable, and I can’t imagine even him trying to tell some of those attending, what their jobs are.

If you are right (and you may be) then what is the point of his attendance in the first place?

2 hours ago, Sir Nibble said:

Indeed, and if one discards objectivity, credibility goes out with it.

 

That is certainly the case with the chap who (occasionally) does prime minister impressions.

 

 

[Sir Nibble]

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

If you are right (and you may be) then what is the point of his attendance in the first place?

 

That is certainly the case with the chap who (occasionally) does prime minister impressions.

 

 

Don't confuse objectivity with factual accuracy ? Objectively the man lies like a hairy egg!