The left effing loves science – unless anyone draws conclusions from it…
…that the left doesn’t like. Then the research must be hidden from The People, lest they demonstrate Wrongthink about COVID or anything else.
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
Alex Berenson has criticized the JH study, but I don’t think he said it should be censored.
The big Dutch mask study was held from publication for weeks and then it was somewhat hedged.
I brought the Dutch study to the attention of the University of Nebraska Medicine Clinic and they stuck with their view that masks are effective. The Ministry of Truth has spoken!
Larger question: How did Orwell get so much right in “1984?” Uncanny.
One of the most ludicrous of all the delusions of “progressives” is that they are the party of science, while conservatives are supposedly hostile to the scientific enterprise. One has only to consider the hostility of the left to any discussion of the biological reality of sex and of the statistical differences between men and women, or to the facts underlying various genetic differences in IQ (as consistently measured in psychometric research over many decades) to realize that, for the left, scientific studies have value only insofar as they are useful in advancing an ideological and political agenda.
The left loves “SCIENCE!(tm)”, which is defined as: “any scientific research, no matter how shoddy, which reinforces the leftist narrative.”
In regards to Covid-19, that narrative is fairly simple and obvious: It is an extremely dangerous, deadly disease, regardless of age group or co-morbities. It is so dangerous, any and all repressive restrictions implemented are entirely justified and anyone who dares question any of the above is literally a murderer (as well as being an irrational, anti-science troglodyte)…EXCEPT….when it comes to Black Lives Matter, and all protests on behalf of “black and brown bodies”.
The left hates “science” as generally understood in the West since Bacon, and still defined by anyone who is not a leftist; roughly as:
“A systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.”
Berenson has disputed it but some others I’ve seen have not been so dismissive and more importantly Johns Hopkins did not delete because it was wrong they deleted it because it was being used as the wrong kind of evidence by the wrong kind of people.
It seems pretty obvious at this point that a lot of deaths from other causes are being classified as COVID.
It seems that a lot of the early deaths were ‘dry kindling’ kind of people that had not died in last years relatively mild flu season and now we are seeing a ‘pull ahead’ affect where we are seeing people die that were on borrowed time anyway.
The thing is this will all be evident in time but by then the totalitarians won’t care and will have moved on to the next thing like climate change lockdowns.
There have been previous claims that the death total has not been increased by the virus, but most of those relied on some statistical variations which were suggestive but not totally convincing. This JH study, as described in the linked article is different in that it apparently showed that comparing 2018 to 2020, that the DECREASES in other causes is almost exactly compensated by the INCREASE is so-called Covid deaths. One would expect that deaths due to other causes to be relatively stable each year. If those all go down in 2020, then that points to Covid being over counted as a primary cause. Quite damning. It would have been nice to actually read the original before it got pulled.
It seems like what we are really doing is shifting around a bunch of deaths whether by cause of death or date of death.
The other thing that is going to come around eventually is deaths from cancer or heart attack will go up because of lack of screenings and people being afraid to go to the hospital for a number of reasons like fear of COVID to fear of being cut off from family. But, hey, those deaths aren’t as important only COVID deaths matter nothing else.
I actually did find it…the Red Sate article links to the JHU Newsletter through Waybackmachine. The JHU Newsletter article is a report on Birand’s research with some interview quotes and relevant graphs and tables. The conclusion from the article is
“If [the COVID-19 death toll] was not misleading at all, what we should have observed is an increased number of heart attacks and increased COVID-19 numbers. But a decreased number of heart attacks and all the other death causes doesn’t give us a choice but to point to some misclassification,” Briand replied.
This is all so reminiscent of all the climate censorship that occurs. Can’t have anyone publishing any data that the Medieval Warming Period actually occurred!
I have a feeling that Briand’s position is now in jeopardy and also the person who wrote the article for the JHU Newsletter. I feel for her.
Can’t remember if someone else linked to this but it’s highly informative; “How accurate are the covid tests?”
https://sebastianrushworth.com/2020/11/06/how-accurate-are-the-covid-tests/
As for the suppression of knowledge; “When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know, the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives.” R.A. Heinlein
That quote obviously applies to the Left’s propaganda organs; the MSM, Academia and Social Media Networks.
physicsguy,
No honest person can dispute that we are keeping tracks of COVID deaths unlike anything ever. In most places in the US if you have a COVID positive when you die you are counted as a COVID death even if you were in hospice for a final stage cancer and tested positive the day before.
It all goes back to the money. Hospitals have all kinds of financial incentive to have COVID positives and the best kind (from the hospitals perspective) is the asymptomatic ‘with COVID’ cases.
Perverse incentives.
I keep asking myself “why did they delete the article?”
“Hospitals have all kinds of financial incentive to have COVID positives….”
As, apparently, do certain parties looking to justify radical changes to voting laws—specifically, laws pertaining to voting by mail—due to all these COVID “positives” (and “COVID-caused” fatalities), and then legislate accordingly….
That is, all kinds of incentives, not merely financial….
(Jus’ sayin’….)
But if you bring up the perverse incentives (which are completely obvious) you’re insulting the healthcare workers who are risking their lives every day!
I posted it on FB whose observers added a flag that context was missing.
Geoffrey Britain,
Thank you for that link. A very interesting article. And a very interesting web site.
Because I had a common out patient procedure done in August, the hospital had me tested for COVID beforehand. Neither SWMBO nor I have exhibited any of the symptoms related to the virus. Not back then. Not up until now.
Oh … the test came back stating no evidence of COVID was found.
Griffen correctly states, “The thing is this will all be evident in time but by then the totalitarians won’t care and will have moved on to the next thing like climate change lockdowns.”
Here, see this Narrative?
OK, pick a conclusion, any conclusion:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/a_former_andrew_cuomo_aide_writes_that_hes_an_awful_human_being.html
H/T Powerline blog.
Lots of people do that in general or in specific topics. For example, Newton’s theory of gravity is not only incomplete but has been contradicted by consensus science in numerous incidents. But this topic is not debated because 1. people don’t know the math necessary to argue about the 3 body problem and 2. it causes cognitive dissonance because they grew up with gravity, like a cult dogma.
Neo herself has deleted or threatened to delete, any such topic because she feels it is too closely related to that consPIRACY called Flat Earth Theory.
It’s a kind of demand for self censorship and double think thought police that is both intolerable as well as non sensical. It inevitably leads to stockholme syndrome or the inability to deal with difficult information such as the elections steal of 2020 and before.
It causes a schism between advocates of the dogma (gravity in this case, classic physics) and those that have the evidence on their side. The evidence is not argued against, it is simply DELETED, because some thought police authority like Zucker borg/droid, finds it cognitive too dissonant.
So Yammer is on about the N3B again. It is true that Newton gravity is incomplete, but that’s why there is General Relativity. However, Newton is more than adequate unless one is dealing with precise timing from GPS satellites or near super massive objects. It’s not a case of wrong/right, but more a continuum of Newton: almost correct, and useful in almost all circumstances, to GR better, and more applicable to more esoteric phenomena. ie think of Newton as the “everyday, very useful approximation” to GR. Just as one only uses Galilean relativity in low speed situations (less than 10% of speed of light) rather than using the much more cumbersome Special Relativity. Why bother when a 1/1000 of a percent precision is not needed?
But back to N3B, hopefully for the last time:
N3B is a subset of the general problem for any central force, defined as dependent on the radial distance and directed as a vector along the radial direction. It is coincident with the same situation as the electrostatic case as both are 1/r^2 forces in the radial direction. The equation of motion for the N3B situation is best resolved in spherical coordinates, which is the case for all central force problems. Using the standard cartesian coordinate system is an exercise in masochism. The equation of motion (EqM) will have accelerations in 3 coordinates (r, theta, phi) for each of the 3 bodies, plus the interaction terms (forces) between the 3 objects. If using the standard F=m(d^2x/dt^2) in spherical corrdinates, then the EqM will be a second order partial differential equation. One can use the Lagrangian formulation which yields first order partial differential equations, but there will be 3 simultaneous such equations….pick your poison.
Yamarsakar’s objection seems to be that the EqM cannot be solved in closed form…..that is true. That is also the case for the vast majority of PDQs. However, those equations can still have a solution, it’s just not a closed form function like y=x^2. PDQs are generally solved by a series solution; that is an infinite sum of terms. In the case of N3B, as the force only acts on the radial coordinate, the three coordinates are independent of each other and we can apply the method of separation of variables to get to the solution. The solutions for the angular coordinates are well-known and are routinely solved by junior physics majors. The result for the azimuthal coordinate, phi, is SUM( e^(i*m*phi)), where the sum runs over the index m from 0 to infinity, and to preserve the fact that just rotating by 360 degrees cannot change the physics, m must be an integer. The solution to the theta coordinate (which goes from the vertical to straight down, 180 degrees) is a series known as the Legendre polynomials, Plm’s. They also form an infinite series SUM(Plm). There’s nothing unknown here…like I said, all central forces have these in common in their solutions. In fact, the angular solutions, as they are constants of the motion, bring about the conservation of angular momentum; again a commonality in all central force situations.
So, the big stumbling block in N3B (or also in the electric case for 3 equal charged particles!) is finding that series solution for the radial coordinate, which of course is where the forces are acting. This is really a mathematical problem in solving a very difficult differential equation. As the Wikipedia article shows (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem) the solutions are still being worked on. IF the mathematicians can’t come up with the appropriate series solution, nonetheless we can approximate those solutions by numerical methods. The physics still works.
So how can we actually put a lander on Mars with great precision if we can’t get a good series solution to N3B? We can because the radial equation becomes much simpler to deal with if the masses of the objects are no longer equal, then a series solution to the equation becomes viable (generally they are of the Laguerre polynomials). Sending a lander to Mars involves first a 2 body problem with a very large mass Earth compared to a very small mass spacecraft. Next, is its transit to Mars where we have a large mass Sun, much smaller mass planets and a very tiny mass spacecraft. In that case the radial equation can have a series solution, and to get more accuracy we just need to take more terms in the series to whatever precision we need.
The empirical fact that we CAN accomplish such a long range space mission shows that there’s nothing wrong with the physics, or the way we deal with an very difficult mathematical problem via numerical approximations. Or by simply taking as many terms as is needed for the accuracy in the well-defined infinite series solutions.
In either May or June, I was checking the Johns Hopkins coronavirus page on the statistics on surface transmission (fomite transmission). In black and white there was a statement that the viral load precluded becoming ill with COVID-19 in this manner. Subsequently I wondered when we were going to catch up to the science when it came to gloves, sanitizers etc. When I checked back about 2 weeks later it was gone. I realized then that screenshots were required in tracking the “science” pertaining to the “pandemic”. I began referring to this as “the pandemic response” rather than pandemic as I am of the opinion that the response has been far worse than the disease.
Speaking of the politicization of science;
see Lysenko
see Climate Gate and in general, global warning now called climate change
see “Good Calories, Bad Calories,” by Gary Taubes
see “The Big Fat Surprise,” by Nina Teicholz
see logging and the spotted owl scam
see acid rain, lake acidification and it’s causes
see the hole in the ozone and chloroflourocarbons
The left will ride any horse, scientific or otherwise as long as it furthers their cause. They will shoot that horse when it no longer serves the purpose of the left. They will resurrect that dead horse if it once again becomes useful to them.
The left never, ever gives up; they are like a metastasizing cancer that may be in remission for a bit, but it will always return.
The left believes in the electoral college, fair/honest voting , Supreme Court decisions and science as long as it works in their favor. They hate all of it when it does not.
The left is motivated only by power and its attainment. They will destroy any individual or group (e.g. blacks) as long as it furthers their goal.
And they want those who do not believe in their cause or who oppose them, dead.
Speaking of the “three body’ problem; is that not an example of chaotic behavior?
As far as I’m concerned, the American Democratic party is the most egregious tyrannical Western regime in modern history. I actually consider them worse than China as our dems continue to hide behind the flag and their ‘version’ of law. I am far from the only one. Make no mistake: if they go much further, there will be an uprising that Twitter can’t interfere with. The saddest part to me is that we’ve brought it all upon ourselves with the degradation of anything resembling actual consciousness for the past several decades in spite of a flood of cautionary sentiments from a great many people. The fact of the matter is that many in America won’t speak up because they really are THAT terrified of looking bad or being disliked.
Science is, with cause, a philosophy and practice in the near-domain (i.e. frame of reference). One of four logical domains, often conflated when politically congruent – a sociopolitical construct (e.g. consensus).
2020-11-28 Calling BS
It’s not complicated folks; Social Security does not pay dead people.
Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: a controlled study
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses
Let’s Make It Clear and Simple
Ivermectin
HCQ
The FDA-approved drug ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro
New insights on the antiviral effects of chloroquine against coronavirus: what to expect for COVID-19?
The multiple molecular mechanisms by which chloroquine can achieve such results remain to be further explored. … preliminary data indicate that chloroquine interferes with SARS-CoV-2 attempts to acidify the lysosomes and presumably inhibits cathepsins, which require a low pH for optimal cleavage of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
Zn2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture
Here’s a piece of science they REALLY hate.
Haidt proved in the lab that conservatives and libertarians understand each other and liberals, but liberals understand neither of them. I have seen liberals weave the most amazing just-so stories to explain that.
The paper JH removed was lacking in clarity leading to the possibility of incorrect conclusions. Yes, CV19 exists and has caused excess deaths mostly in our population of seniors. The stacked proportion graph in the paper makes it look like nothing is amiss. But when you look at weekly all cause deaths over a number of years it is easy to see that many more than usual have died compared to an average flu season.
The link is a statistician’s take on that paper.
https://wmbriggs.com/post/33680/
Yawrate,
Thanks for that link. I agree the first graph of stacked bars in Briand’s original is not convincing. However the table down towards the end is a bit more in that it shows actual numbers for individual weeks where the Covid deaths almost exactly balance the decrease in other deaths. I also note that Briggs doesn’t totally dismiss Briand’s conclusion, only tempers the result, I would say. As he says, the data is really a mess and it will be many years before it is all sorted out; or maybe never if the Dems control the future.
Briggs also notes the ridiculous censoring of Briand’s results by JHU and that it caused more harm than good…..the usual result of censorship.
I’m pretty sure we would not have seen a post title containing the slang, “effin'” from neo as recent as two years ago.
I, for one, like the new neo.
Neo unleashed!
physicsguy 8:32am – I’m sure Yammer will have a cogent response lol
physicsguy:
You show that when it gets down to real world (reality) Yammer is, well, yammering.
Whoa, astrophysics…. I left the college physics track after the freshman course – never even learned about spherical coordinates that I can recall. It sounds like it could have been interesting. But I was a chem major, after all; that makes me an ‘applied physicist’. 🙂
Rufus T. Firefly:
Well, I must confess – the “effing” actually was a reference to this sort of thing.
Spherical coordinates is roughly the same as locating a point on a globe with latitude and longitude. The third dimension is distance from the origin, i. e. center of the globe. Homework problem: What is the radial distance between two points on earth given their latitude and longitude? You are allowed to assume a perfect sphere :^)
neo, no need to explain or apologize. Though I had much the same thought as Rufus.
FOAF:
Well, it’s the true explanation, but I was also kind of joking.
neo: The “I effing love science” blog looks interesting. I expected “Neil deGrasse Tyson” drum-banging against the right, but mostly it’s just interesting, mildly sensational stuff.
FOAF, I don’t quite understand your question. “Radial distance” I feel should mean just the radius measured from point A to the center, then from center to point B, so it’s always going to be 2*r given the assumption. Are you trying to trick us? 🙂
huxley:
I think that site was very popular at one point, years ago. I have no idea whether it still is popular.
Philip, maybe “radial” distance was the wrong terminology and I should have used “angular” distance, or just angle. It is the angle between the two radii you describe. In other words the “straight line” distance between any two points on the earth’s surface describes part of a circumference of the earth, what is the angle of that distance? E. g. from any point on the equator to either pole it is 90 degrees or pi/2 in radians. Of course not quite a straight line because it is on a spherical surface.
It is not simple to solve, requiring a lot of trigonometry. E. g. the angle between 45 lat 0 long and 45 lat 90 long is NOT 90 degrees, it is less because the radius of latitudes decreases as you go from equator to the poles. That is simpler to solve because the two points are on the same latitude, it gets harder for points with different latitude and longitude.
Time for the DOJ/FBI to start lovin’ playin’ “20 Questions” (and drawing some conclusions…and then acting on them):
https://twitter.com/DenverFlynn/status/1333129692036157443
H/T Sidney Powell twitter feed
Anotha shocka…
The “science” now seems to have infected the Old Dominion:
https://twitter.com/FishingForInfo/status/1333164469975912448
H/T Lee Smith twitter feed.
More “science”:
A “most interesting” thread from Oct. 30:
https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1322255690128412673
H/T Ron Coleman twitter feed.
Did I say “science”? Hmm, should have said “divination”? (Or maybe even, “astounding analysis”. Make that “pre-analysis”. “Prophecy”?)
This is the third time I am attempting to post Dr. Peter McCullough’s eight minute youTube about his peer reviewed paper and personal experience in using HCQ and Zinc in outpatient treatment of Covid.
It is EXTREMELY effective.
Neo, are you censoring this, or your server???
I will post it separately, to see if this makes it through.
Ahhh–that is interesting!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdsAVTkSDhM
physicsguy,
Speaking of Newton and pandemics, I have a theory and I wonder if others have thought the same, or if it is even held by others.
The way I heard the story is: Newton was studying at Trinity when another round of the plague broke out, so the students were sent home. He was scheduled to take a course in Mathematics that semester (it may have specifically been on series) so brought some books home so that he would be ready when courses resumed. In that plague imposed interim he basically taught himself all Mathematics (or, “The Maths” as he and his fellow Brits would say) that were known at the time.
So my theory is that he may not have gone as far as he did without the independence imposed by the pandemic. In other words, he didn’t know how much Mathematics there was to learn, so he was uninhibited in his learning process. If he had been coddled along by an instructor would he have gone as far? Would he even have been as interested?
This is probably a bad analogy, but maybe it’s a bit like the story behind Charlie Parker’s saxophone virtuosity. The story goes that he wanted to play sax and was literally laughed off a stage by an audience. He was so humiliated he went off on his own and played in an isolated shed for hours a day; often just running through nearly random scales and combinations of notes. When he emerged he had surpassed most of the formally educated players of his day.
And, let’s not forget the Secular Religion of the Left: Global Warming… Poops, that was proved false… so, nimbly in mere minutes, they hopped into (cough gag) CLMATE CHAAAANGE..!!
Did the MSM herd follow thenailung of Climategate a few years ago?? Nope.
Don’t forget…CONSENSSSUUUSSS!!
If I’m a “Sceptic”, then I’m a Denier!!
Horseshit.
So my theory is that he may not have gone as far as he did without the independence imposed by the pandemic. In other words, he didn’t know how much Mathematics there was to learn, so he was uninhibited in his learning process. If he had been coddled along by an instructor would he have gone as far? Would he even have been as interested?
Rufus T. Firefly: I believe Newton’s intellect was so far off the charts, with or without the independence afforded by the Plague, that it’s impossible to say.
However, Newton was not so math-naive as you suggest. By the time he left London on account of the Plague, he had been going to Trinity College, Cambridge for four years, acquired a Bachelor’s degree, studied Galileo and Kepler, and discovered a generalized version of the binomial theorem. (wiki)
That said, maybe the Plague did come along at an opportune time for turbocharging his development. Without it, perhaps he would only have become a formidable, but forgettable, mathematician of his time, and not *Sir Isaac Newton*.
Tyson may be a tool, but he’s had some interesting segments re harold urey and the kuiper fellow, and their contributions, to planetary science, (both were mentors to carl sagan) there was another with kondratych (nee shargel) the Soviet scientist and zek, who inspired houbolt, in planetary trajectories, forty years later,
huxley,
I was not aware he had done all that prior to the plague. Seems like it fully refutes my theory. I agree regarding his unique intellect. He seemed very able to get lost in long periods of introspection as a youth, which was off-putting to the adults around him who were hoping he’d be more useful in the daily tasks at hand of running the family farm.
He seemed a bit anti-social, which we currently associate with autism and asperger’s syndrome. Again, able to spend long periods alone, and “living in his head.” Also, he was paranoid of others and reluctant to communicate with other scientists. However, after his genius was brought to light and he received the public attention his talent deserved he was put in charge of the Treasury and seems to have adapted rather well to the public demands of civil service, including maneuvering to find his niece a suitable beaux. The ease at which he managed that transition makes me question that he had autism.
Very interesting fellow. Certainly one of the most incredible minds on record!
Miguel Cervantes,
I used to get a bit upset because many folks revere Neil Degrasse Tyson as an Astronomy and/or Astrophysics genius; which he is not, but I’ve grown to appreciate his talent. He knows the material well enough and has a good mind, but more uniquely, he is a good communicator. I think he is a great fit as the Director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York where he can have an impact on young people. It’s good for young people to have role models in the sciences and Degrasse Tyson knows how to present a strong, public persona.
I believe his advisor(s) at UT Austin did not promote him through the PhD program because they recognized he was not the type of student who was likely to do significant research, or contribute to science as an innovator. However, Degrasse Tyson does contribute to science by inspiring others, and that’s no easy feat.
Related
More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.
After deaths from the virus reached more than 2,500, with a 150% increase in the past week, health authorities have been combing through data to provide clues to help combat the spread of the disease.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says?
Lee:
When something like that is blocked, it is almost never by me or by the server. It is the spam filter, and I don’t know what algorithm they use to make their decisions.
Pollution From Oil Extraction Makes Otter Penis Bones Weaker
One of the headline articles from
https://www.iflscience.com/
Just to have a test.
When in college, I was in favor of F-speak, and used it freely. But it’s a mistake to allow it become socially acceptable. I claim it is a significant contributor to more rage and demonization of others, when vulgar insults are used to enhance your signaling; on what you’re against, or what you favor.
WTF?
Yeah, I mean it BUT know it’s unlikely to revert. Tho a few million dollar lawsuit victories of those insulted with vulgar words as “hate speech” might rapidly change that calculus.
But then what about penis and vagina – which also make me hesitant to write in public? Well, they’re vulgar, but less polarizing. Didn’t young Elliot insult his brother with “penis breath” in an early scene from E.T. ?
https://www.iflscience.com/
Yes, yes he did.
Some new versions delete this?
Like new versions of Money For Nothing take out the “little faggot with the earings and the make-up”.
I’d like to see both a 3 yr avg total US deaths by week (’17-20), and last year 2019 separately, and a comparison to this year.
Those pulling the JH study should be providing that info.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
doesn’t obviously have it, but I’m not searching thoroughly (too many other blogs to read! or write long comments to.)
Death rate: 867.8 deaths per 100,000 population (as of 2018)
We know how many deaths there were in the U.S. in 2019 (2.8 million) and in the in the years prior to that.
Now try to get a definitive answer as to what are the current numbers of deaths in 2020 and a reasonable projection for the end of the year. Just try… I dare you.
CNN is trying to catch up to the alternative media on Covid in China.
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1333546045008203777
Physicsguy,
In engineering, we have a saying that encapsulates what you were saying above: “Don’t let ‘perfect’ be the enemy of ‘good enough’.”