NurembergVillan Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 17 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: One of the best rap videos ever was filmed on that bridge. I used to go to gigs upstairs in The Kings Hotel, saw Dr Feelgood there. Great times. This one? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 15 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: This one? This one, about 1’30” in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 Hopefully I’ve worded this post correctly, it’s not about any individual or any comment on this board, it’s a genuine general ponderance. When you see and hear of people that won’t have the vaccine because they are concerned Bill Gates has put microscopic micro chips in it, those people, are they people with a record of mental health issues? They can’t just be people that have chosen to believe a conspiracy theory, can they? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Hopefully I’ve worded this post correctly, it’s not about any individual or any comment on this board, it’s a genuine general ponderance. When you see and hear of people that won’t have the vaccine because they are concerned Bill Gates has put microscopic micro chips in it, those people, are they people with a record of mental health issues? They can’t just be people that have chosen to believe a conspiracy theory, can they? A lot of Muslim people apparently won’t take the vaccine because they believe the fake news that it contains pork. Now obviously they will be told it doesn’t, but they can’t risk it. The risk seemingly outweighs the actual deadly virus. Edited January 27, 2021 by Genie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 13 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Hopefully I’ve worded this post correctly, it’s not about any individual or any comment on this board, it’s a genuine general ponderance. When you see and hear of people that won’t have the vaccine because they are concerned Bill Gates has put microscopic micro chips in it, those people, are they people with a record of mental health issues? They can’t just be people that have chosen to believe a conspiracy theory, can they? My assumption and I have tried to voice this when a twitter pile on is happening. It must be mental health issues, and people should be more understanding. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Genie said: I didn’t ask you specifically, it was mentioned multiple times on the previous page but it doesn’t align to anything hence why I was confused. Sir Patrick Vallence’s comment suggests that the new variant kills 30-40% more people than the older variant. I’d say that was significant not sure why VT crew are playing it down to the point of adjusting the numbers (10 became 11, 13-14 was called 13). Yes he did but expressing it that way is (IMO) a scare tactic because it sounds horrendous. It's not really anywhere near that bad, it is a change in the potential death rate of around 0.3% and when you think of it in those terms its more obvious that there isn't actually any real data to back the claim up, Valance himself said this but the headlines were grabbed by the 30-40% more deaths. A variance of 3 people in 1000 could easily be explained by the sample sizes not being of the same age distribution or any other host of factors. If the numbers had changed from 10 to 11 would anyone bat (soz) and eyelid? but the death rate would have gone up 10% in their terms In real terms a variance in the death rate of 0.3% could be down to all sorts of factors, we don't know and quite obviously neither do the scientists (they as good as said so) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 It’s reassuring to come on Villa Talk to learn that the scientists in the government and public health England are probably wrong in their reports that the new variant of the virus carries an increased risk of death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted January 27, 2021 Administrator Share Posted January 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, Genie said: It’s reassuring to come on Villa Talk to learn that the scientists in the government and public health England are probably wrong in their reports that the new variant of the virus carries an increased risk of death I'm not sure that we've had a scientist in government since Thatcher. She also knew how to tell a story with stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 6 minutes ago, Genie said: It’s reassuring to come on Villa Talk to learn that the scientists in the government and public health England are probably wrong in their reports that the new variant of the virus carries an increased risk of death Please, point us in the direction of where someone actually said that? No one has said they were wrong or probably wrong. What was said was the change between the two isn't in itself statistically significant. Those scientists you talk about actually said as much themseleves. No-one here is disagreeing with the scientists you mention. Here's what valance said (for the seond time of posting today). Quote Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's chief scientific adviser, described the data so far as "not yet strong". He said: "I want to stress that there's a lot of uncertainty around these numbers and we need more work to get a precise handle on it, but it obviously is a concern that this has an increase in mortality as well as an increase in transmissibility." BBC All that has happened in this thread is that people have posted a different way of saying the exact same thing as the governments figures, one that sounds far less horrendous If you don't understand this, I can help you no further 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 16 minutes ago, bickster said: Please, point us in the direction of where someone actually said that? It has been described in here as insignificant, marginally worse, probably within the rounding, etc. 18 minutes ago, bickster said: What was said was the change between the two isn't in itself statistically significant. If 3 or 4 more people die per 1000 infections then that’s about 5,000 extra deaths since Christmas. 1,000 additional deaths every week. I’d call that significant. 19 minutes ago, bickster said: No-one here is disagreeing with the scientists you mention. Only the ones changing the numbers from what was said to play it down 24 minutes ago, bickster said: All that has happened in this thread is that people have posted a different way of saying the exact same thing as the governments figures, one that sounds far less horrendous On this basis you could say don’t bother with masks and social distancing, you’re still unlikely to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 21 minutes ago, Genie said: It has been described in here as insignificant, marginally worse, probably within the rounding, etc. Because it is exactly that and saying that does not disagree with anthying that was actually said. Please look up and learn that Statistically Significant is not an opinion it is a mathmatical term meaning that the change in the data is not likely to happen because of chance. This change is not statistically significant because it could have happened through chance 22 minutes ago, Genie said: I’d call that significant. this is an opinion, you're entitled to it but it has nothing to do with statistical analysis 24 minutes ago, Genie said: Only the ones changing the numbers from what was said to play it down Again point us in the direction of where anyone said 0.2% in order "to play it down" this is your interpretation of peoples motives, I happen to think I saw no-one doing that 29 minutes ago, Genie said: On this basis you could say don’t bother with masks and social distancing, you’re still unlikely to die. This is idiotic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, bickster said: Because it is exactly that and saying that does not disagree with anthying that was actually said. Please look up and learn that Statistically Significant is not an opinion it is a mathmatical term meaning that the change in the data is not likely to happen because of chance. This change is not statistically significant because it could have happened through chance I have an engineering degree so I understand what statistically significant means. I’d already assumed that with the enormous amount of data the chief scientific advisor has access to, and the decision he made to announce to the world he’d already considered elements of chance and ruled them out. He said it because it is a real world concern and driving up the horrific numbers of deaths we’re seeing now. But if VT thinks he’s probably made a bit of an error and jumped the gun then that’s fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, Genie said: I have an engineering degree so I understand what statistically significant means. I’d already assumed that with the enormous amount of data the chief scientific advisor has access to, and the decision he made to announce to the world he’d already considered elements of chance and ruled them out. He clearly hadn't from what he actually said. I've posted it twice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Seat68 Posted January 27, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted January 27, 2021 I have to say today has been the day on VT where we flaunt our credentials so I want to state now I have a CSE in Rural Science. 3 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, bickster said: He clearly hadn't from what he actually said. I've posted it twice What I take from what he has said is that the new variant is killing a lot more people than the old one and people in the UK and around the world need to be aware. Exactly how many as a percentage or ratio is TBC and needs more data to say with certainty, but in the region of his preliminary release. I don’t think he’s saying “it could be a lot worse, but I’m not sure, it might not be worse at all”. Edited January 27, 2021 by Genie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 18 minutes ago, Seat68 said: I have to say today has been the day on VT where we flaunt our credentials so I want to state now I have a CSE in Rural Science. Cycling proficiency badge. Had the disc on the bike AND the triangular pin badge. King of the road. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozzavfc Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 3 hours ago, Genie said: A lot of Muslim people apparently won’t take the vaccine because they believe the fake news that it contains pork. Now obviously they will be told it doesn’t, but they can’t risk it. The risk seemingly outweighs the actual deadly virus. It's horrible to think that someone specifically created a rumour just to try and kill as many Muslims as possible by pretending it's not safe for them 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted January 27, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted January 27, 2021 34 minutes ago, Seat68 said: I have to say today has been the day on VT where we flaunt our credentials so I want to state now I have a CSE in Rural Science. I got to colour in a feather on my arrow card for tying my own shoelaces. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted January 27, 2021 Moderator Share Posted January 27, 2021 32 minutes ago, sidcow said: I got to colour in a feather on my arrow card for tying my own shoelaces. Come off it, you are a velcro wearer and no doubt... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts