Previously, I had already hinted at certain similarities to the hysterical climate debate, primarily driven by the climate apocalypticists. And the parallels in the early phase were far too numerous to be mere coincidence.
To make it clear why I chose such a title, I need to briefly introduce Michael Mann before we turn our attention to the modeler Neil Ferguson.
Michael Mann rose to dubious fame when he presented his “Hockey Stick” graph regarding global warming, portraying an impending “humanity-destroying” global temperature rise. That was now more than 27 years ago.
His graphs were criticized early on by some as unscientific. Mainly because Dr. Michael Mann refused to disclose the data sources he used to create them. And since Michael Mann is a man of the world, he didn’t want to let the criticism and “accusations” stand. He sued scientists who disagreed with him. After a long legal battle, especially the lawsuit against Steyn and particularly Dr. Tim Ball, Michael Mann’s charlatanry was exposed. In August 2019, his credibility finally collapsed. During the trial, Michael Mann refused to disclose the data requested by the court to determine whether the accusations against him could be definitively dismissed and whether the civil lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball could proceed. His reason for not providing the necessary data was that “he had been very busy.”
Why would a man who spent nearly a full decade pursuing a lawsuit all the way to Canada’s highest court, who felt his honor had been injured, and who invested millions of USD in various lawsuits on the same matter (where did he even get the money for such nonsense?), suddenly be too busy to prove that he wasn’t practicing pseudoscience? That makes no sense in any reasonable world.
In any unbiased scientific discussion, it was clear from that point onward that Michael Mann, by not disclosing his sources for the Hockey Stick graph, was not working scientifically but pursuing a political agenda. His graph played a major role in the UN and thus in the IPCC’s hysterical and unscientific model “science.” To this day, not a single IPCC model has proven capable of making accurate predictions. Yet the media and politicians continue to preach the end of humanity based on these ever-changing reports and models, which even the IPCC itself described as not generally (Archive p. 774 right) predictive.
That the climate hysteria is part of the current virus hysteria and the overall aspect of manipulation on a planetary level, I will address again in a future article about the new messiah “Bill Gates.”
In short: There is no serious science when political decisions are to be made based on computer models following the GIGO principle. And certainly not when one doesn’t even disclose the “garbage data” with which the models were fed. Perhaps revealing this data would endanger international security or unsettle part of the population with the truth.
Do you know the fable of the shepherd boy who always cried Wolf? Here is the fable, as it is short and should remind everyone how manipulation of the masses works when people are not attentive and simply forget. It also describes the character of Neil Ferguson and, more importantly, that we apparently do not learn from our mistakes.
The Boy Who Cried “Wolf” (by Aesop)
Once upon a time there was a shepherd boy who had to tend a flock of sheep on the meadow. One day, feeling bored, he decided to play a trick on the villagers. He shouted: “Help! A wolf! A wolf!”The villagers heard his cries, dropped all their tools and rushed from the village to help the shepherd boy. When they reached him, they asked: “Where is the wolf?”
The shepherd boy laughed loudly: “Ha, ha, ha! I fooled you all! I was only playing a trick on you.”
A few days later, the shepherd boy played the same trick again.
Again he cried: “Help! Help! Wolf! Wolf!”
Again the villagers rushed up the hill to help him, and again they realized the boy had tricked them. They were very angry with him because he had been so cheeky and made them abandon their work for nothing.
Then, some time later, a real wolf actually came into the field. The wolf seized one sheep, then another, and another. The shepherd boy ran to the village and shouted: “Help! Help! A wolf! Help! Someone help!!”
The villagers heard his cries, but they laughed because they thought it was another trick. The boy ran to the next villager and said: “A wolf is attacking the sheep. I admit I lied back then out of boredom, but this time it is true!”
Finally the villagers went to look for the wolf. It was true. They could see the wolf fleeing, and many dead sheep lay on the grass.
Moral: Whoever lies once will not be believed, even when he speaks the truth.
http://www.popcorn-fun.de/Aesop_Fabeln/der%20junge,%20der%20wolf%20rief.htm
In our situation, Neil Ferguson is the shepherd boy and the world population are the villagers.
Neil Ferguson is an epidemiologist and works at the Imperial College London in England. He is essentially our Michael Mann when it comes to COVID-19.
His opaque and unverifiable models misled governments into reacting disproportionately. And he already began revealing his expertise in February, hinting at the danger of nCoV-2019.
He shared some of his numbers shortly before publishing his study (Archive).
Would it have generated enough attention if he had simply said it was part of the seasonal flu? That this year, with the addition of a new virus, mortality would be comparable to the level of 2017? Probably not.
Neil Ferguson “prophesied” 2.2 million deaths in the USA and around 500,000 deaths in the United Kingdom. That’s roughly 0.7% of the total population. And that would indeed have been terrifying if over half a percent of the entire population simply died from a new spreading disease. Yet even the earliest findings and data did not allow such a conclusion. I write this because when you consider that the Chinese population makes up about one-sixth of the world population, the first case supposedly occurred in mid-November, but the lockdown only began at the end of January, on January 23, 2020 (how conveniently non-manipulative, especially since Chinese New Year began on January 24, 2020, and most businesses were closed for a week anyway and well prepared for such closures).
Of course, the R0 value was never actually verifiable at any point and was not as high as he assumed. If his lower-end assumed value of R0=2.2 had been the case, and if SARS-CoV-2 had truly been as easily transmissible as they still try to convince us with mask mockery and social distancing, then by the time of Neil Ferguson’s publication of his made-up cherry-picked study on March 8, 2020 (Italy’s national lockdown on March 9), the entire world population would already have been infected—distributed over a 3-day cycle of new infections. After all: A) It was supposedly a completely new virus with no prior immunity in humanity, B) No vaccines existed for a new virus, C) The virus had had a comfortable 4 months to spread globally via cheap flights.
The 3 days are simply my assumption; they are exactly as good as the assumption of 5.1 days that Neil Ferguson gave in the study. I even consider my assumption more realistic, because people usually interact with others sooner than after five days. So let’s find a middle ground and say 4-day cycles after 4 months (November 15, 2019 – March 15, 2020), which equals 120 days. And we again arrive at global total infection.
Once more: We were constantly told it was a completely new virus (which it wasn’t), that it spreads extremely easily—just by breathing (how practical for panic-mongering, since everyone breathes), that there was no vaccine, and that only about four months later were measures taken on a “more sensible” scale globally.
But why should Neil Ferguson no longer be regarded as an expert, and why should one still trust his numbers?
Based on his 2001 models and calculations (Archive), 6 million animals were “disposed of” in Great Britain. This caused economic damage of around 10 billion pounds in the UK alone.
In 2002, The Guardian (Archive) reported a shocking statement from Ferguson that up to 150,000 people in Great Britain could die from mad cow disease. The actual numbers ended up below 200 deaths from BSE-induced variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
Three years later, The Guardian (Archive) presented Ferguson’s latest epidemiological findings. The UN reported a “moderate” global death toll of up to 150 million people. Ferguson was even more concerned and suggested it could be up to 200 million deaths from bird flu. The WHO officially and verifiably reports 455 deaths (Archive) from bird flu (H5N1) over the last 17 years. Call me crazy, but I see a difference between 455 deaths globally over 17 years and 150–200 million.
In 2009, Ferguson apparently recognized his immense miscalculation with bird flu and scaled back the numbers somewhat. This time, only 65,000 people (Archive) would die from swine flu (H1N1) in Great Britain. The WHO reported a global death toll of around 18,500 from H1N1. Even then, the WHO tried to spread maximum panic. And even then, people in Switzerland were told they absolutely had to get vaccinated or there could be massive problems and the population would be drastically reduced. The government and industry in Switzerland miscalculated. Well, the industry perhaps not—they were able to sell their vaccines. But the people back then did not jump on the hysteria train; they remained reasonable, perhaps also because the Swiss media themselves were not fully involved in the panic-mongering. Arte, for example, showed that a vaccine existed in two versions—one with adjuvants and one without. Pandemrix was available for the elite without the highly controversial additives. On this matter, please watch the documentary “Profiteure der Angst” in the video section. Back to Ferguson: once again, his predictions were anything but accurate.
Reminder of the Shepherd Boy Who Always Cried Wolf
So now back to the reminder. How was it again with the shepherd boy who kept raising false alarms? Ferguson has demonstrably reached very often and very deeply into the brown stinking mass, and due to his position he was and is involved as an “expert” for the British government. This time, however, he exerted significant global influence with his numbers regarding COVID-19, which were ridiculous from the very beginning.
The question remains why, after all his monumental miscalculations and the GIGO principles of his methodology, people still believed and continue to believe him.
But it gets even “funnier.” If the elite already received a differentiated vaccine during the swine flu “pandemic,” what does that say about the character and conduct of Neil Ferguson?
Not good at all. His study linked above recommends (a) social distancing of the entire population, isolation of the infected, quarantine, and school closures. In short: lockdown. His graphs, which as I mentioned are wrong, suggest to the viewer that failure to comply would lead to the already mentioned high death rates. Especially the lockdown was supposed to prevent the healthcare system from collapsing. In no hospital could it be proven that COVID-19 overloaded any healthcare system—not even the hospitals that were already overwhelmed by the seasonal flu wave in 2017.
But because Neil Ferguson counted himself among the chosen and higher-ranking people, he let his penis decide that he wasn’t doing anything too wrong. After all, he had no problem inviting the married Antonia Staats to his home to have sex with her. That was supposedly his only mistake in assessing the situation.
I’m not interested in judging his character. No, it’s about the fact that anyone gave even a spark of trust to someone whose bad, inaccurate, and partly arbitrary calculations were used as a basis to drive the economy into the wall. The fact that he had sex with a married woman and that the lockdown wasn’t so binding for himself and his own affairs was simply the final proof that this political game of inflated GIGO calculations must finally have the plug pulled on it.
The same applies to credibility with Drosten and Wodarg. As seen in the Arte documentary, Drosten was already trying to create panic back then, while Wodarg calmly, reasonably, and factually explained why it shouldn’t be overdramatized. And in 2020, the person who was demonstrably wrong in 2009 is allowed to speak unhindered as a super-expert in Germany and, alongside the RKI as head of Charité (directly funded by the BMGF), serve as the mouthpiece in press conferences regarding the measures? At the same time, Wodarg—the one who was exactly right in 2009—is avoided by state media like the plague?
The worst thing is not that the mass media tell people only one side, and governments make one-sided absurd and partly ridiculous demands and impose penalties. No, the worst thing is that people have such a bad memory and even allow themselves to be harnessed into this mentality of irresponsibility and rejection of reason. They even go so far as to think they are being social when they denounce others and rudely snap at them for not wearing a mask—the symbol of 2020’s collective stupidity.
But one last note that Neil Ferguson is not an unbiased expert: The Imperial College London, to be more precise his department, received almost 80 million USD from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in March 2020. Admittedly, it is not so easy for me to prove that Ferguson directly benefited from it, but given the overall situation and the shady nature of the BMGF and its bribes and funding of such people, it is not far-fetched to assume that Ferguson profited from it. The claim that the funding was for malaria research I consider pure window dressing.