Jump to content

WHO traitors


Cardboard
 Share

Recommended Posts

Oh sorry! Our resident Medical Attorney General... Care to explain this change from WHO? These are facts are they not? No politics there.

 

My subscription to Conspiracy Theories Monthly is expired. Since you feel this is of vital importance to our INVESTING community. Can you explain why any investor should care about this?

 

Or are you just cluttering our investment board for sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh sorry! Our resident Medical Attorney General... Care to explain this change from WHO? These are facts are they not? No politics there.

 

My subscription to Conspiracy Theories Monthly is expired. Since you feel this is of vital importance to our INVESTING community. Can you explain why any investor should care about this?

 

Or are you just cluttering our investment board for sport?

 

Trolling for fun and year end tax loss harvesting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humble contribution for the analysis (decision-making) part.

 

When ordering a test (true for disease but it works the same for investment tests that we apply all the time), there is always the problem of false negatives (sensitivity) and false positives (specificity). The value of the test can be improved by context (clinical presentation or company fundamentals) or by integrating the environment (spread and prevalence in the community or industry/general economic conditions).

 

For the PCR test aspect, 1 of every 220 Americans were ‘diagnosed’ in the last week. In this group, there are a few false positives. The fascinating aspect is that the underlying number of positive-test cases represent only a tiny fraction of true-positive cases walking (and spreading) around the virus because data is showing that the US is reaching functional herd immunity. One can argue about the range of true-positive people to number of positive-test people (it’s somewhere between 4 to 20) but the number of true-positives is much higher than the number of positive-tests, demonstrating that the false positive problem is an issue to consider but not a material one for total community spread, hospitalizations and excess deaths. Yesterday, across the US, the percent positive was 22.0% (!).

 

COVIDCasesDec182020.PNG

 

The argument that false positives equate to the virus doesn’t exist does not match what is happening in the real world. Two examples, one from California and one from an area I respect a lot, a fellow Canadian province, Alberta:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/weather/california-hospitals-crushed-as-virus-patients-flood-icus/ar-BB1c3mr9?ocid=msedgntp

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/alberta-to-send-adults-to-edmonton-s-stollery-children-s-icu-as-covid-19-hospitalizations-surge/ar-BB1c3F6F?ocid=msedgntp

 

On the OffGuardian source, the site is rated low for reliability on facts and ranks high on pseudo-science and very high on conspiracy. They have, for instance, reported that no one had died from Covid and that Covid does not exist. Specifically the PCR aspect has been evaluated:

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/07/blog-posting/covid-19-tests-are-not-scientifically-meaningless/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humble contribution for the analysis (decision-making) part.

 

When ordering a test (true for disease but it works the same for investment tests that we apply all the time), there is always the problem of false negatives (sensitivity) and false positives (specificity). The value of the test can be improved by context (clinical presentation or company fundamentals) or by integrating the environment (spread and prevalence in the community or industry/general economic conditions).

 

For the PCR test aspect, 1 of every 220 Americans were ‘diagnosed’ in the last week. In this group, there are a few false positives. The fascinating aspect is that the underlying number of positive-test cases represent only a tiny fraction of true-positive cases walking (and spreading) around the virus because data is showing that the US is reaching functional herd immunity. One can argue about the range of true-positive people to number of positive-test people (it’s somewhere between 4 to 20) but the number of true-positives is much higher than the number of positive-tests, demonstrating that the false positive problem is an issue to consider but not a material one for total community spread, hospitalizations and excess deaths. Yesterday, across the US, the percent positive was 22.0% (!).

 

COVIDCasesDec182020.PNG

 

The argument that false positives equate to the virus doesn’t exist does not match what is happening in the real world. Two examples, one from California and one from an area I respect a lot, a fellow Canadian province, Alberta:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/weather/california-hospitals-crushed-as-virus-patients-flood-icus/ar-BB1c3mr9?ocid=msedgntp

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/alberta-to-send-adults-to-edmonton-s-stollery-children-s-icu-as-covid-19-hospitalizations-surge/ar-BB1c3F6F?ocid=msedgntp

 

On the OffGuardian source, the site is rated low for reliability on facts and ranks high on pseudo-science and very high on conspiracy. They have, for instance, reported that no one had died from Covid and that Covid does not exist. Specifically the PCR aspect has been evaluated:

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/07/blog-posting/covid-19-tests-are-not-scientifically-meaningless/

 

The conclusion is that a new forum category should be created for whackadoos.

My bad, we already have that category, but the paper tiger denies its existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WHO people are frauds. As are most of the government agencies and people who at this point have basically realized they can use this thing to manipulate folks and become more powerful. I dont know why folks waste their time with the "advice" or "recommendations" of these people/organizations who have done little but chase their tails and be behind the 8 ball for this entire thing. The only thing that hasn't changed since March is my approach. Wear a mask indoors at public places. Keep distance from other people. The former is obvious bc of the virus, the latter I just generally do anyway even before all this because I dont see a need to be on top of other folks. Otherwise, life is pretty normal. Dont see what all the fuss is about. To each their own though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conclusion is that a new forum category should be created for whackadoos.

My bad, we already have that category, but the paper tiger denies its existence.

Humble contribution for the analysis (decision-making) and constructive discussion part.

 

i gather that you’re into modulation pools these days. Unfortunately, nature did not provide me talent for the production of various ‘musical’ modulations but I enjoy music (sensitive reception) and the physics of sound, the meaning of language and the biology of communication are fascinating topics. One way to see modulation (just like when one decides to post here) is to see the outcome of your interaction with the source(s) and its impact on destination(s). The beauty of ‘it’ is that some of ‘it’ stays with you even if the physical and tangible presence of the residual cannot be detected.

 

The reason for the trouble here is for general public awareness and also because of personal redemption potential (I may be too much of an idealist here). The point is that Cardboard has the potential to be a great contributor. He may not have internalized this but we had landed on the same distressed investment (it was a small position for me) target around 2015-6. And while we eventually disagreed on the way to extract value, potential value to extract, there was. The value of participation on investment boards was discovered during the value surfacing process of that specific investment. I am basically a dumbbell but have difficulty understanding how someone could be so thoughtful and analytical in relation to some topics while completely failing at others.

 

And how do you deal with that if you’re the moderator?

Signed: somebody who knows less and less as life goes on

-----

 

On a lighter note, in the comments section submitted by the opening poster, there’s this picture submitted by asylum (!) and a picture is worth a thousand words. :)

 

YES.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every test, regardless of its nature, will have false positives and false negatives. Nothing is 100% foolproof. nothing is a surprise here, or should be. The question is to quantify the false positives and negatives and interpret any measured results a d include the fakest positives and negatives as part of the error.

 

It is funny and sad but those that scream fraud here don’t seem to understand how the scientific method usually works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conclusion is that a new forum category should be created for whackadoos.

My bad, we already have that category, but the paper tiger denies its existence.

Humble contribution for the analysis (decision-making) and constructive discussion part.

 

i gather that you’re into modulation pools these days. Unfortunately, nature did not provide me talent for the production of various ‘musical’ modulations but I enjoy music (sensitive reception) and the physics of sound, the meaning of language and the biology of communication are fascinating topics. One way to see modulation (just like when one decides to post here) is to see the outcome of your interaction with the source(s) and its impact on destination(s). The beauty of ‘it’ is that some of ‘it’ stays with you even if the physical and tangible presence of the residual cannot be detected.

 

The reason for the trouble here is for general public awareness and also because of personal redemption potential (I may be too much of an idealist here). The point is that Cardboard has the potential to be a great contributor. He may not have internalized this but we had landed on the same distressed investment (it was a small position for me) target around 2015-6. And while we eventually disagreed on the way to extract value, potential value to extract, there was. The value of participation on investment boards was discovered during the value surfacing process of that specific investment. I am basically a dumbbell but have difficulty understanding how someone could be so thoughtful and analytical in relation to some topics while completely failing at others.

 

And how do you deal with that if you’re the moderator?

Signed: somebody who knows less and less as life goes on

-----

 

On a lighter note, in the comments section submitted by the opening poster, there’s this picture submitted by asylum (!) and a picture is worth a thousand words. :)

 

YES.jpg

 

I often stare at the screen in amazement at the duality of some posters.

 

If given the choice between ignorance and bliss, I'll usually choose the truth. It just seems more convenient.

 

Alas, one persons troll is another's Shrek.

 

---

 

Reddit has a straightforward set of rules for moderation that seem pretty sensible:

 

www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy

 

Penalties for breaking the rules run from the simple temporary mute to a lifetime ban.

 

I've fallen afoul of certain moderators before I learned the rules.

Maybe the new CoBF will apply some semblance of their system?

In which case, I'll need to tighten up  :'(

 

---

 

Tonic to dominant and back to the resolution, with a few secondaries to point the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Trolling" is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community.

 

Don't bother to confuse Cardboard with facts, he ignores them anyway. And I would imagine Sanjeev has better things to do with his time than to constantly monitor someone who's main goal seems to be to troll the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ This topic has little to do with politics, but a lot to do with people that got suckered in by WHO and defended WHO.

 

So Cardboard points out the hoax - deal with it boys - and learn not to be suckers next time. Have a thick skin for once when your heroes like WHO  are exposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the recent exchange between Cardboard & KCLarkin in this topic, I've reported this topic to Sanjeev, with the request the topic to be moved to the Politics forum.

 

[What an ink.]

 

Honestly, Sanjeev : What are you in reality doing with CoBF here?

 

Yeah, John  - give Sanjeev a break - he does a great job trying to keep the peace. Don't let this shit between the Americans and Canadians get under your skin! Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can call me a troll, inflammatory or what not but, if you believe that the way these tests are being interpreted or mis-interpreted have no bearing on investments and the economy then you are fools.

 

As I mentioned previously, Covid will become a distant memory around mid-2021. Older folks and emergency personnel will get vaccinated and this will move from page 1 to page 10 in MSM. People will stop listening to them and they will have to find other "exciting/scary" things to talk about.

 

And yeah their hero will be in charge and will be credited for saving us.... If you don't believe that this negativity moving away won't impact cyclicals then yes, you are fools!

 

Cardboard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can call me a troll, inflammatory or what not but, if you believe that the way these tests are being interpreted or mis-interpreted have no bearing on investments and the economy then you are fools.

 

As I mentioned previously, Covid will become a distant memory around mid-2021. Older folks and emergency personnel will get vaccinated and this will move from page 1 to page 10 in MSM. People will stop listening to them and they will have to find other "exciting/scary" things to talk about.

 

And yeah their hero will be in charge and will be credited for saving us.... If you don't believe that this negativity moving away won't impact cyclicals then yes, you are fools!

 

Cardboard

 

I prefer paper tiger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Trolling" is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community.

 

Don't bother to confuse Cardboard with facts, he ignores them anyway. And I would imagine Sanjeev has better things to do with his time than to constantly monitor someone who's main goal seems to be to troll the board.

 

Well if we are shooting straight here, I can not remember the last time Ive seen a real, substantive, or effort filled post relating to investments, from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Trolling" is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community.

 

Don't bother to confuse Cardboard with facts, he ignores them anyway. And I would imagine Sanjeev has better things to do with his time than to constantly monitor someone who's main goal seems to be to troll the board.

 

Well if we are shooting straight here, I can not remember the last time Ive seen a real, substantive, or effort filled post relating to investments, from you.

 

You are quite right.

I come here to learn about investing from people like yourself that know more about investing than do I. That, however doesn't preclude me from expressing my opinion on other matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...