Anti Conspiracy Theories #2 when a YouTube video just won’t do!

[MaineCoonMama]

Isn't this what the government and the press have been doing for over a year? Deliberate scaremongering re peoples risk of death

Not within a specific timeframe, no. I know two people who have passed from Covid, so I know only too well what the risks are.

I might add the majority of scientists are a lot more believable than one guy who may have done something good once but has clearly lost his way.

Laughing because I've lost a friend and a family member? Classy @Podular. Please put me on ignore, thanks.

 

[Moth]

Isn't this what the government and the press have been doing for over a year? Deliberate scaremongering re peoples risk of death

Yes I remember Piers Morgan attacking Patrick Valance and Chris Whitty for scaremongering after they said that deaths could reach 200 a day by the end of October.

Totally wrong of course .... it was 320

 

[Doctor_Wibble]

A bit stuck here... a short moon-hoax piece posted on The Other Thread and I want to say I love the featured clapperboard but can't tell if that would be a compliment or an insult and just how bad a whoosh moment I may have had in relation to the intent behind the production being proof or spoof.
Plus it was posted a few days ago and the thread has moved on and I'm not wanting to inadvertently troll by dredging, as it were.

I had thought I had a handle on CTs and how they are presented but this question I think proves I'm still very much 'somewhat grasshoppper'

 

[MaineCoonMama]

A bit stuck here... a short moon-hoax piece posted on The Other Thread and I want to say I love the featured clapperboard but can't tell if that would be a compliment or an insult and just how bad a whoosh moment I may have had in relation to the intent behind the production being proof or spoof.
Plus it was posted a few days ago and the thread has moved on and I'm not wanting to inadvertently troll by dredging, as it were.

I had thought I had a handle on CTs and how they are presented but this question I think proves I'm still very much 'somewhat grasshoppper'

Honestly, that would have been posted in all seriousness. Just like the Zuckerberg and child post. I'm really interested it CTs but I don't bother to post on there, it's not worth getting into a bitchfest.

 

[Moth]

Honestly, that would have been posted in all seriousness. Just like the Zuckerberg and child post. I'm really interested it CTs but I don't bother to post on there, it's not worth getting into a bitchfest.

It tells you all you need to know that someone chose to post the Zuckerberg picture without finding out if it was even real first. If it hadn't been quickly debunked what sort of conclusions would have been arrived at?

 

[sdmilne]

It tells you all you need to know that someone chose to post the Zuckerberg picture without finding out if it was even real first. If it hadn't been quickly debunked what sort of conclusions would have been arrived at?

How anybody could actually have looked at that Zuckerberg thing and thought for a moment it was real is quite scary.

 

[MaineCoonMama]

It tells you all you need to know that someone chose to post the Zuckerberg picture without finding out if it was even real first. If it hadn't been quickly debunked what sort of conclusions would have been arrived at?

He was already cursed for being Satan incarnate, lmao. That's most of the problem with the whole CT movement. As I said before, I'm really interested in reading about them. There might be one or two that are correct or have some basis in fact but if there's an obvious fake story/photo offered up as truth? That just shows how little 'research' is actually done.

 

[Moth]

How anybody could actually have looked at that Zuckerberg thing and thought for a moment it was real is quite scary.

I've just looked at "fake moon landing" video. Sometimes even I don't have the words.

 

[Doctor_Wibble]

Honestly, that would have been posted in all seriousness. Just like the Zuckerberg and child post. I'm really interested it CTs but I don't bother to post on there, it's not worth getting into a bitchfest.

Fair enough, I got the e and the pi and of course the date once I had realised it was US format, though I'm a little uncertain at the camera number which has a remarkable similarity to the Lego product code for a star wars spaceship (75248).

 

[Purrrrrrr]

It tells you all you need to know that someone chose to post the Zuckerberg picture without finding out if it was even real first. If it hadn't been quickly debunked what sort of conclusions would have been arrived at?

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you (and others) , no matter how many times you are asked to debate the post and not the poster choose not to do that. But then I seem to see you on other forums talking about this forum and its admin. isn't there a rule about keeping it on tattle? I'm not 100% sure if that is what don't take it off tattle means, but hey I doubt you care anyway.

I posted that just as I was about to leave to pick up the kids. I ASKED if anyone knew in what context was it posted. I didn't take it as I see it. I said I didn't have time to look into it.

I asked a question I got a reply. No drama until you and the others bring it here.

 

[MaineCoonMama]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you (and others) , no matter how many times you are asked to debate the post and not the poster choose not to do that. But then I seem to see you on other forums talking about this forum and its admin. isn't there a rule about keeping it on tattle? I'm not 100% sure if that is what don't take it off tattle means, but hey I doubt you care anyway.

I posted that just as I was about to leave to pick up the kids. I ASKED if anyone knew in what context was it posted. I didn't take it as I see it. I said I didn't have time to look into it.

I asked a question I got a reply. No drama until you and the others bring it here.

With all due respect, no names were mentioned. It was a general post, which we are entitled to discuss. There's no drama here.

 

[Moth]

Why are our some of our friends getting so worked up because the CDC in America are measuring the number of hospitalisations and deaths in people that have been vaccinated?

According to the linked article, by not including the number of vaccinated people who subsequently contract Covid but do not become seriously ill, the CDC is 'manipulating the data' to prop up the effectiveness of the vaccine. However, as I understand it, the best scenario for the vaccine is that it will make me less likely to contract and spread the virus and if I do get it, reduce the chance of me being hospitalised or even dying. So it seems to me that measuring the number of vaccinated people that are hospitalised or die would be a good measure of its effectiveness.

 

[caroleffinbaskin]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you (and others) , no matter how many times you are asked to debate the post and not the poster choose not to do that. But then I seem to see you on other forums talking about this forum and its admin. isn't there a rule about keeping it on tattle? I'm not 100% sure if that is what don't take it off tattle means, but hey I doubt you care anyway.

I posted that just as I was about to leave to pick up the kids. I ASKED if anyone knew in what context was it posted. I didn't take it as I see it. I said I didn't have time to look into it.

I asked a question I got a reply. No drama until you and the others bring it here.

But why would you even think it was real??

 

[Purrrrrrr]

But why would you even think it was real??

Haha I didn't think it was real in that way. I thought it was a joke but a sick type of joke and I wondered in what context he was saying it

 

[Moth]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you (and others) , no matter how many times you are asked to debate the post and not the poster choose not to do that. But then I seem to see you on other forums talking about this forum and its admin. isn't there a rule about keeping it on tattle? I'm not 100% sure if that is what don't take it off tattle means, but hey I doubt you care anyway.

I posted that just as I was about to leave to pick up the kids. I ASKED if anyone knew in what context was it posted. I didn't take it as I see it. I said I didn't have time to look into it.

I asked a question I got a reply. No drama until you and the others bring it here.

You are joking aren't you? It's been made perfectly clear on the CT thread that people don't want a debate, they are not interested in even reading the opinions of people who don't agree with them and proudly boast about blocking anybody that spoils their fun. That's why I very rarely post on that thread.

On the other hand, CT-ers have twice appeared on this thread demanding that we concentrate on addressing the CTs but when I've responded by asking them which CTs they had in mind, they refused to engage. The vast majority of my posts are purely 'debating' or rather debunking the theories and I never mention posters by name.

In this particular case, I think the fact that you didn't have time to verify the picture of Mark Zuckerberg but decided to post it anyway and that it elicited a comment that he is a psychopath before it was explained the it is a fake is quite revealing of the CT mindset.

 

[Purrrrrrr]

I reported my own post. I should not post here and I promised I wouldn't.

 

[Moth]

A chap called Nick Milner wrote to a number of local councils asking for the number of funerals (burials and cremations) carried out in each of the calendar years from 2015 to 2020. I don't know his motivation for doing so but it's become popular to quote some of the responses apparently as evidence that Covid-19 hasn't caused 'excess deaths', it's all exaggerated and probably that it's all a hoax etc. etc.

For example:


I've no reason to suppose that these figures are wrong and I can't directly check them because there doesn't seem to be a central record of burials carried out. However there is one for cremations collated by The Cremation Society.

So at the four crematoria in Birmingham (Lodge Hill, Perry Bar, Sutton Coldfield and Yardley) they recorded 6,323 cremations in 2020 and 5,255 in 2019; an increase of 1,068 or 20%

Across the whole of the UK and Northern Ireland there were 542,774 cremations in 2020 and 472,308 in 2019 an increase of 70,466 or 15%.

Bearing in mind that this does not include burials or any of 2021 and it rather seems to paint a different picture of the impact of Covid-19.

 

[sdmilne]

I reported my own post. I should not post here and I promised I wouldn't.

You don't need to do that surely. Post where you like. Speak your mind. It's healthy.

 

[Cupcakemum]

A chap called Nick Milner wrote to a number of local councils asking for the number of funerals (burials and cremations) carried out in each of the calendar years from 2015 to 2020. I don't know his motivation for doing so but it's become popular to quote some of the responses apparently as evidence that Covid-19 hasn't caused 'excess deaths', it's all exaggerated and probably that it's all a hoax etc. etc.

For example:


I've no reason to suppose that these figures are wrong and I can't directly check them because there doesn't seem to be a central record of burials carried out. However there is one for cremations collated by The Cremation Society.

So at the four crematoria in Birmingham (Lodge Hill, Perry Bar, Sutton Coldfield and Yardley) they recorded 6,323 cremations in 2020 and 5,255 in 2019; an increase of 1,068 or 20%

Across the whole of the UK and Northern Ireland there were 542,774 cremations in 2020 and 472,308 in 2019 an increase of 70,466 or 15%.

Bearing in mind that this does not include burials or any of 2021 and it rather seems to paint a different picture of the impact of Covid-19.

I think the point is that over 5yrs the burials and cremations have been much higher.
This seems to be a current trend over multiple councils and also worldwide data, despite the growth rate

The scientists that were banned from MSM did try to point out that trends do differ year to year, and after years where the deaths have been lower that they will increase after that... because nature has to unfortunately take its course.
This clearly makes sense, because as sad as it is people have to die at some point. So in years where less people have died, the years after will be worse. This does appear to be the case in most councils data...

However, as you say, these figures seem to paint a very different picture after over year in a pandemic when you compare them to past years where the death rates have been much much higher.
The FOI that people have requested also include private and council run cremations and burials

 

[Moth]

I think the point is that over 5yrs the burials and cremations have been much higher.
This seems to be a current trend over multiple councils and also worldwide data, despite the growth rate

The scientists that were banned from MSM did try to point out that trends do differ year to year, and after years where the deaths have been lower that they will increase after that... because nature has to unfortunately take its course.
This clearly makes sense, because as sad as it is people have to die at some point. So in years where less people have died, the years after will be worse. This does appear to be the case in most councils data...

However, as you say, these figures seem to paint a very different picture after over year in a pandemic when you compare them to past years where the death rates have been much much higher.
The FOI that people have requested also include private and council run cremations and burials

I don’t know Nick Milner’s motivation for sending FOI request about burial and cremations to some councils but if the issue is the number of deaths in 2020 compared to previous years, I am confused about why he chose this method rather than using the much more easily obtained figures published by the ONS i.e.:

2015: 529,655
2016: 525,048
2017: 533,253
2018: 541,589
2019: 530,841
2020: 608,002

The screenshot that you included for Middlesborough was a council that Mr Milner contacted but I don’t think showing figures for individual councils proves much, if anything. For example, he also contacted Harrogate which had a 17% increase in funerals in 2020 compared with the average for the previous 5 years.

I cannot tell the source of your screenshot of the data for the 14 councils but I note that 6 of them reported a larger number of funerals in 2020 than in any of the preceding 5 years and that overall funerals in 2020 showed an increase of 3,102 or 9% over the average for the previous 5 years. There are of course approximately 400 councils in the UK so the screenshot represents only a tiny proportion of the total.

The ‘Cremation Society of Great Britain’ produces statistics funerals held at every crematorium in Britain. Cremation is by a significant margin more popular than burial so accounts for the considerable majority of funerals. Their figures show:

2015: 462,916
2016: 459,693
2017: 468,702
2018: 481,308
2019: 472,308
2020: 542,774 - 73,789 or about 16% above the average for the previous 5 years

So I don’t think it has been established that “over 5 years burials and cremations have been much higher”.