forums.silverfrost.com Forum Index forums.silverfrost.com
Welcome to the Silverfrost forums
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Can REAL*4 array store more than 4GB?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    forums.silverfrost.com Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John, Good you reminded to backup sources and bat files too

By the way i listen and like also another John Campbell, he is from UK, on the Youtube who comments things about this fashionable illness the name of which better not to pronounce on the network. Be carefully listening this though there in Australia, you may get 10 years in the clink from your name twin Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnCampbell



Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 2351
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please delete this if not appropriate, but;

Any reference to Australia having severe restrictions about this fashionable illness are unbelievably distorted ! eg TC on Fox was ludicrous.
Compare the fatality rates in Australia to Florida and you should conclude that a more accurate discussion could be helpful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John,

I will be careful with wording but you will understand.

Thing change fast, John. Florida has the same population as AU but has currently twice less people's "Blue Screen Of D" per day than even your totally closed AU after implementing treatment using monoclonals instead of fashionable procedure into the arm. With this it is also in the leaders today even in the US and will lead even more as another John Campbell showed recently results of naturally obtained resistance because Florida does not close or lock itself.

And TC is really interesting and funny young guy. Due to him i for first time looked at Fox despite do not watch any massmedia for 25 years. Still massmedia is massmedia, too much of obvious propaganda. What he said was too funny?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2021 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To All : by the way one senator from Florida claims these unbelievable things about England. Is this true ?
Listen these couple minutes on Youtube starting from 11:45

https://youtu.be/fha3yxLIV1c?t=705
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnCampbell



Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 2351
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan,

"one senator from Florida" is not a good start.

If 67% of poputaloun are vacinated what % of deaths would suggest vaccines are not effective ? I don't think this senator gets that.

I did get the following headline from News corp / sky news, which is not a reliable source ?

COVID death risk 32 times higher for the unvaccinated, figures suggest

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-death-risk-32-times-higher-for-the-unvaccinated-figures-suggest-12457074

I do wonder what is happening to democracy in USA.
Why are vaccines a political choice ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What figure there shows with the peak at 55? What these units mean? Why in May unvacced were lower than 1 shot vacced? And why currently there is almost zero difference between them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnCampbell



Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 2351
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan,
What is your point ?
A senator is mis-quoting some medical statistics ?
The statistics appear wrong ?
medical science is wrong ?
Do you have a point to make about how medical statistics are being reported ?
Lets limit ourselves to talking rubbish about Fortran !!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Wed Nov 03, 2021 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nothing could be wrong.

I just discussed the curves in the link you gave. Because it is obvious that you and the link i gave compare different things. Your number was obtained by integration of blue and green curves, when the main contribution was in Jan-Mar, while the guy tells about the part starting in May.

By the way this part of forum is about "basically anything that takes your fancy!" What discussed is actually extremely important for fortraneers because of average age of users.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More surprises
https://youtu.be/8G_8TT7xuNU?t=524
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 5:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I usually make typos, errors, mistakes when i do first versions of anything and it takes me a week to gather all puzzle pieces. I got even more shocking data but may be i made a mistake. Can anyone double check last table in this report from which follows totally unbelievable. This is official data about Scotland last month. Looks like new data partially corroborates what Rick Scott mentioned for different period of time or i miss something ? Why i ask? Because Dr.John Campbell from UK (not our JC) which i still follow on the net does not mention something like this and on emails does not respond and because nobody on this planet bothers to check the numbers

https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/10091/21-11-10-covid19-publication_report.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mecej4



Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 1580

PostPosted: Thu Nov 18, 2021 3:55 am    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

DanRRight wrote:
... senator from Florida claims these unbelievable things about England. Is this true ? Listen these couple minutes on Youtube starting from 11:45 ...

That is Sen. Ron Johnson, from Wisconsin; Sen. Rick Scott appeared at the beginning of the video.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnCampbell



Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 2351
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Thu Nov 18, 2021 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan,

It is not good enough to merely question the data and then suggest perhaps the solution is wrong.
Show an alternative explaination and prove this new hypothesis is a better model.
My understanding is that vaccines protect us from serious illness, not from any illness.

Where is science going in the modern media ?
Leave it to the likes of Tucker Carlson to suggest possible alternatives with no proof, and in so doing try to undermine the best scientific approach available.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are right, mecej1, this was Johnson.

John, i do not claim anything. Just ask all to check the numbers if i am right, because i always make mistakes. This compiler teached me 100 times per day that i make unbelievable number of mistakes Smile

This is their numbers:

From Table 20 (for John, this was for C-related bad luck cases, not just any not related at all, read fine print) we can get

Unv. : 19+15+8+14 = 56
Vac. : 106+120+115+108 = 449

Total 56+449=505

56 /505 = 11%
449/505 = 89%

or Unv/Vac = 1:8

But because (from Table eighteen) the total number of Unv people was 1,684,323 i.e. smaller than Vac which was 3,864,774, the bad luck chances are

Unv. 56/1,684,323=0.00003325 or 3.325 people per 100,000 unvac people during 4 these weeks versus
Vac. 449/3,864,774=0.00011618 or 11.618 per 100,000 vac people during same 4 weeks

So the relative bad luck chances for Vac are 11.618/3.325 or 3.49 times worse than for Unv.
Correct?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnCampbell



Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 2351
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan,

I tried to find independent reporting of the numbers you have quoted.
I found : https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03003-6

Some of the issues that confuse include:
unvaccinated people are more restricted in their movements, which may affect their chances of catching covid.
First vaccinated have a lesser protection that increases weeks after being vaccinated, until 2 weeks after second dose.

However, the interesting statement from this article is "But vaccines are still offering remarkable protection against hospitalization and death"

I don't think the statistic you are highlighting is most representative of vaccine effectiveness.
I am more concerned about where booster doses will take us in the future.

I am old enough to remember the early polio vaccines. Fortunately we did not have social media misinformation back then and we all queued up for our polio shots, rather than the real consequences of not being vaccinated.

Social media does not report the unfortunate stories of those who have been silenced, but the claims of influrencers and idiots who are still alive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanRRight



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2477
Location: South Pole, Antarctica

PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John, This is Scotland, not Australia, unv.people move as freely everywhere as all others, often not wearing anything additional by the way. With lesser protection for 2-3 weeks after procedure i'd agree, but is this the major reason of really earth shattering difference by 3.5 times?

Let's return to our numbers, i usually ignore publications with just the claims. First, are my numbers correct?


For those who like punching the numbers here is another puzzling piece, now straight from the epicenter of all related information. It also has similar claims like in the one John just cited, but can anyone explain me based on m.rates in the Table 2 there, how after procedure people start to live ... twice-to-three time longer than general population when currently general unv. population m.rates in this table are almost similar to ones in 2019, when nothing was worrying like today ?! Again i asked all top medical experts i can find on the net, including its authors, and no one responded.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7043e2.htm?s_cid=mm7043e2_w

This article was also retranslated on Youtube by the one of major educators on the subject. He seems also did not pay attention to the numbers. UPDATE: This reviewer responded "the point of the study is not how they are different but the fact that there is no increase in mor tality in the vac. group" which at the best for him tells that he even does not understand what he is saying. Because if the method underestimates the m.rates by whopping factor of 2-3 how it can reveal the effect of orders smaller magnitude ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    forums.silverfrost.com Forum Index -> General All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group