Prof Neil Ferguson : pointy - headed science (Image: www.blazingcatfur.ca )
And it was Ferguson who predicted 150,000 deaths from Mad Cow Disease (Bovine Spongeform Encephalitis, in fact only around 200 have died of that particular existential threat to humanity since 1991.
Von Csefalvay was as profoundly unimpressed with Ferguson's modelling methods as the rest of us were by the news that the cuntstruck COVID Czar had advised the lockdown so his married lover would not be delayed by traffic when she drove down to visit him for rumpy pumpy. In a Review of The Imperial College research on his website Bits and Bugs, he notes that while initial supportive of Ferguson and his modelling, having seen the coding for the model which he says ‘raises some extremely serious questions,’ he is now of the opinion that the model is not worse than useless, it is even worse than that, having been built to guarantee a false result. The coding quality, he says, is poor:
First of all, the elephant in the room: code quality. It is very difficult to look at the Ferguson code with any understanding of software engineering and conclude that this is good, or even tolerableYet that shoddy research and the outrageously hyperbolic result it produced has been gulped down hook line and sinker by scientifically naive and gullible politicians who tend to fall to their knees in an attitude of worship when someone who claims to be "a scientist" offers them advice. Someone like Boris Johnsin in particular, but also his old Etonian cronies and even Sir Kier Starmer, an alumini of the expensive Reigate Grammar School for pos kids from rich families, who all receibed education based on the Renaissance model which teaches us to question everything and always think for ourselves, should have known better than treat it with such credulousness. Von Csefalvay has obviously retained the scepticism instilled by his education, he writes:
Yet for some reason, the UK government treated Ferguson’s model as almost dogmatic truth. This highlights an important issue: politicians have not been taught enough about data-driven decision-making, especially not where predictive data is involved. There is wide support for a science-driven response to COVID-19, but very little scrutiny of the science behind many of the predictions that informed early public health measures. Hopefully, a Royal Commission with subpoena powers will have the opportunity to review in detail whether Ferguson intentionally hid the model from HM Government the way he hid it from the rest of the world or whether the government’s experts just did not understand how to scrutinise or assess a model – or, the worst case scenario: they saw the model and still let it inform what might have been the greatest single decision HM Government has made since 1939, without looking for alternatives (there are many other modelling approaches, and many developers who have written better code)He concludes that it will result in:
…a massive leap backwards, erosion of trust and a complete disclaimer of accountability by publicly funded scientists.Von Csefalvay is not the only well qualified epidemiologist to give vent to his disgust at Ferguson's ineptitude.
Another review, by Craig Pirrong, Professor of Finance and Energy Markets Director of the Global Energy Management Institute at the Bauer College of Business, University of Houston, concludes:
“Models only become science when tested against data/experiment. By that standard, the Imperial College model failed spectacularly.”Going back decades, Ferguson’s track record had been widely criticised (sic), as reported:
Delingpole: Ferguson’s Dodgy Model Has Engendered a World-Historical Blunder
Despite all this, Boris Johnson and his Cabinet colleagues continue to cite Ferguson’s discredited study as if it were the gold standard of scientific research.
Boris even mentioned it in his speech on Sunday night when, attempting to justify the continuation of the lockdown, he claimed:
It is a fact that by adopting those measures we prevented this country from being engulfed by what could have been a catastrophe in which the reasonable worst-case scenario was half a million fatalities.Interesting use of the word ‘fact’ in that sentence, showing that Boris is illing to accept the word of a "scientist" about what constitutes a fact because "scientists," like medieval popes are infallible; a folly which, were there a credible opposition with a charismatic leader, would see the government struggling even with its massive majority.
As We Predicted The Coronavirus bill Is The Biggest Assault On Freedom Since World War 2
Things have gone so far beyond what a rational response to an outbreak of a highly contagious but for most people relatively minor illness that I am starting to believe the conspiracy theories. Along with my fellow Boggart Bloggers I predicted weeks ago the current outbreak of the so - called coronavirus would see a massive hyping of the threat level leading up to an assault on our freedoms. And that is exactly what we have seen happening over the past week.