The reason wasn't that his crackpottery left the British economy in ruins – no one seems to care about this detail – but because he was fudging a married woman during the lockdown. Ms Antonia Staats, 38, was visiting him. She lives with her husband and kids elsewhere in the U.K., in a GBP 1.9 million villa, and she is green (an activist at Avaaz, an ecoterrorist group). I would bet that she has been the actual driver behind Ferguson's hysterical pseudoscientific predictions (including the climate ones) in recent years and he is just an irrelevant puppet. She probably told him "I will fudge you but you need to spread the hysteria". And he did. Why would a rich, attractive, married woman date such an ugly loser? Her green fanaticism seems like the only possible answer. Alternatively, Staats is a puppet as well and the primordial driver is her sponsor George Soros.
Sue Denim has analyzed the leaked software used in Ferguson's "model" of the epidemics. She's been a coder for 30 years, at Google etc. The model is "SimCity without the graphics", a silly computer game that remembers some attributes of individual people. It uses a random generator and the outcomes often look very different during different runs. There are lots of bugs that are admitted to be bugs. It's rubbish and everyone who has used this model should retract his or her papers, she recommends.
Quite generally, I am amazed by the sheer stupidity of the people who would be willing to trust the predictions of such "models". The model is clearly just a computer game. It has characters that resemble the real world and they interact in ways that also resemble the real world. But it is clearly not the real world. To get trustworthy predictions, you need to properly adjust everything that matters. All the dumb people who believe in similar "models" think that it's enough to have lots of things that resemble the real life and then it is "science" and "trustworthy". Sorry, it's not and you are a complete imbecile if you believe in this thesis.
Needless to say, this blind trust in any outcome that comes from a computer is very similar to Stephen Wolfram-like "theories of everything". In the latest iteration (he sent me the files days before he "published" them but he sent similar "personal" messages to many others, I later learned), he has some software that draws some graphs (vertices with lines in between). He likes the pictures and finds them real-world-like which is why he declares the underlying software to be the "physical theory of everything".
Again, I am totally shocked by the stupidity of Stephen himself and all the people who need to ask whether it makes sense as physics. It is exactly on par with Leo Vuyk's strawberries. You may draw pictures or photographs of strawberries, cellular automatons, or graphs and they remotely resemble something in the real world. But things "remotely resembling the real world" are at most arts, not sciences. There is absolutely no relationship to physics whatsoever. There is no real derivation of Maxwell's, Einstein's, Dirac's, Higgs'... equations, three generations of particles, projection to the subspace of eigenstates after a measurement (rules of quantum mechanics), nothing. It's just some stupid fudging arts.
Arts may still be valuable but it must be judged as arts. Perhaps scientifically inspired arts. But if I compared Leo's strawberries or Stephen's graphs and cellular automatons with competition, sorry, the Mandelbrot set would still win by a great margin. Leo and Stephen are lame and uninspired as scientifically inspired artists in comparison. Mandelbrot and Julia could have sold their pictures as a "theory of everything in physics" and by now, they would surely find millions of morons who would parrot this ludicrous thesis. But they knew better. More precisely, mankind wasn't as incredibly idiotic as it is today – yet.
If someone wants to do propose something like a theory of everything in 2020, he must have a damn serious string theory paper or something that is basically indistinguishable from it. Everyone who still misunderstands this simple assertion is just a scientifically illiterate moron. Please stop asking me about crackpotteries, morons. Almost every day, I am being sent tons of garbage claiming to be a revolution in physics. How low your IQ has to be if you're still unable to predict that my answer will be No? The senders seem to think that they're brilliant because they can copy-and-paste the URL to a crackpot article. Sorry, you are absolute idiots if you can't independently prove and conclude that those things are hopeless as physics.
Concerning the blind trust in pseudoscience, here is some news from the last night:
Cuomo says it’s ‘shocking’ most new coronavirus hospitalizations are people who had been staying homeThe New York governor, a highly visible Coronazi covidiot, was forced to share some statistics about the new cases of Covid-19 in his state.
66% of new admissions were at home and 18% were in a nursing home. In total, that's 84% that were "in some home". This state-wide number 84 becomes more extreme in The New York City: 90 percent of the new NYC admissions weren't traveling by cars, public transportation, and they weren't even walking around. Also, unemployed people happen to beat the employed ones in the number of infections (perhaps the face masks are worn in the office and it helps? Masks always help and they're being thrown away at home).
Almost all the new infections are the people who mindlessly obey the pseudoscientific stay-at-home orders or recommendations or whatever it is. Now, the governor is "shocked" and "alarmed". Surely many of these mindless sheep are shocked, too. Why is it them who is getting sick and dying? Shouldn't the mindless obedience to the Coronazis and their pseudoscientific propaganda make you 100% immune towards a flu-like disease? (And the most obedient ones wouldn't even dare to pronounce the sentence that Covid-19 is a flu-like disease.)
Well, the answer is No, mindless obedience to crackpots and to the power-thirsty scum doesn't protect you from contracting a virus – or from anything else, for that matter. The lockdown – quarantine isolating mostly healthy people – is no scientifically valid tool to fight against the virus. There is absolutely no rational or empirical reason to think that it should "work". A lockdown is a policy to restrict the movement and activities of the people, not the movement and activities of the viruses. People and viruses are different things and follow unequivalent paths, a point that tons of people (and maybe a majority) completely seem to misunderstand.
Everyone who still believes – now, on May 7th, 2020 – that the lockdown has been a good idea is just absolutely brain-dead. I think it's good news that at least the laws of Nature still work (mankind can totally break down but Nature can't) and are helping to turn some of the brain-dead people to totally dead people. Too bad that they can't speed up this process by two or three orders of magnitude – in that way, we could see some slowdown in the degeneration of mankind.
A virus generally spreads in a human body and it can jump to another nearby body if it can survive the journey in between. The closer the people are to each other, the easier it is for the virus to survive the journey. The journey may be a flight on a droplet in the air; but it may involve surfaces where the virus lives for hours or days, perhaps air-conditioning (aerosols?), and other routes. Under the lockdown, people are generally closer to other people. Whole families contract the disease more easily; they are likely to get greater doses than they would get outside. The jump over a tiny gap is enough to spread the virus in between the families (or in between the nursing homes).
Tons of the stupid people were clearly made to believe the – utterly ludicrous – idea that the more economically crippling a quarantine-like policy is, the more the virus will be suppressed. It doesn't work like that, idiots. It's exactly the reasoning of the ancient sacrifice rituals (scapegoats...) but scientifically literate people recognize that this whole thinking is an antiscientific superstition.
The human species is officially called "homo sapiens sapiens" which means that the members of the species should be intelligent. They should find a way to help themselves instead of sacrificing themselves, to make their lives better, not worse. When they were intelligent, humans have developed lots of "simply clever" solutions that combine advantages of many forms. And a thriving economy is generally the most meaningful "proxy" for the quality of nations' lives. Those who believe that the destruction of economic activities "makes things better" are so stupid that they can't really be considered members of the "homo sapiens sapiens" species. They should be sent into the same facility as the Swedish teenager because they're just like her. They are just some filthy stupid monkeys who visually resemble "homo sapiens sapiens", just like Neil Ferguson's crackpot PC games resemble science in the eyes of the morons.
Healthy people should never be quarantined. It's not a good idea for societies as wholes – whose economies deteriorate very quickly – but it's also a bad idea from the individual viewpoint. By going outside, you are going into places where the concentration of viruses is low because the density of humans per square kilometer is lower than in the living rooms. You are less likely to contract something there and if you contract something, it is probably a smaller dose. By going outside, you grow your immunity by being exposed to small doses of assorted bacteria, viruses, and other pathogens. By going outside, you are being exposed to sunshine which helps to build vitamin D which is one of the useful tools used by the immunity system (B and D vitamins were also argued to help). And there are other advantages of being outside relatively to being inside.
People used to appreciate these advantages before a big part of mankind was turned into mental cripples who are obedient to their Coronazi Führers.
Bonus, related to the virus. Czechia has concluded the testing of some 27,000 "partly random" citizens. You could volunteer which probably makes the measured percentages a bit higher because the people who suspect they are sick are arguably more likely to volunteer. At any rate, 0.4% of the people were currently infected and 0-5 percent had the antibodies according to the chosen Czech test (different antibody tests may end up with very different results).
If you interpret the results at face value (which I find marginally possible although I have expected some 10% of Czechs to be immune in average by now), 0-500,000 have been the "cases" which is 0-60 times the official "confirmed cases" (8,000). Makes sense. And we would need to inflate the interval 0-5 by a factor of 20 to get to 0-100 or so, true herd immunity. That would arguably increase the casualties from 262 (7-hour-old data) to 5,000 or so. Even if it happened, it wouldn't be a big deal. In 2019, 112,920 Czechs died so Covid would still be a negligible fraction of one year's deaths.
10-30 percent of all the cases had no symptoms at all; 70% had mild symptoms.