The United States was forced to shut down its economy—resulting in 30 million unemployed, because of fears of what COVID-19 would do. The extreme measures states took to “slow the spread” has done untold damage to our economy, way of life, and health. Only now, after months of misery, is the “data” that pushed for these lockdowns finally exposed as complete garbage.
Way back in March (doesn’t that seem like a long time ago?), we were told that COVID-19 was a deadly plague. After months of the media claiming it wasn’t a big deal, suddenly reports came out that this disease could cost millions of American lives. In fact, one heavily-circulated model predicted 2.2 million Americans would die—unless drastic actions were taken.
You might not know that the “model” was created by the Imperial College of London. It wasn’t based on actual data from countries that had previous battled and studied the disease. In fact, it wasn’t even peer reviewed or published, when it hit the airwaves. Yet this shoddy piece of computer modeling motivated entire governments to flush their countries down the toilet. Eventually, the model had to be revised again and again. We quickly learned that the people behind it were massively wrong.
On top of that, the man who led the team had to resign because he broke his own lockdown demands to go hook up with a married woman. He was so worried about the disease, that he had no problem committing adultery.
Now, the consensus is official in on this bogus model.
One computer data modeling expert said the Imperial model coding, done by professor Neil Ferguson, is a “buggy mess that looks more like a bowl of angel hair pasta than a finely tuned piece of programming” …
“We would fire anyone for developing code like this and any business that relied on it to produce software for sale would likely go bust”
Scientists from the University of Edinburgh say that the findings in Ferguson’s model were impossible to reproduce using the same data. The team got different results when they used different machines, and even different results from the same machines. [Source: Daily Wire]
Funny how when this model was actually peer reviewed, other scientists discovered it was utter crap. They couldn’t reproduce the same data. In fact, they said they got different results every time. The code itself was declared a mess and “totally unreliable.”
Yet this model was used by Britain and our own White House task force in deciding to shut down our countries.
Back in March, people were panicking. Everyone was watching Italy and fearing their country would be next. This model came out, predicting wild outcomes that any rational person should have questioned. This model wasn’t made by doctors studying infection trends around the world, but a group of computer programs who apparently knew nothing about disease.
But because our government was afraid of what might happen, they pushed un-Constitutional lockdowns that will take us years to recover from.
The real questions we should be asking now are: who is going to pay for this—and why aren’t we reopening? Most states are gradually reopening at a pathetic pace. Why is that necessary, when the “data” that forced us inside was utterly wrong (and every state is showing dropping numbers)? Why are we still pretending that the sky is falling, when the worst predictions were garbage?
And who is going to face repercussions for this disastrous serious of decisions? We can’t just let this go once we get our movie theaters back. We must hold our leaders accountable for violating our rights. Neil Ferguson and his Imperial College team can’t worm out of their responsibility for this debacle.
Our mayors, judges, and governors who shut down perfectly fine economies must face the consequences as well. They let fear and peer pressure lead them to do the unthinkable. Leaders who single-handedly destroyed our communities (and continue to do so) must not be allowed to lead anymore.
Remember that, the next time you go to the polls.