I never liked MIT anyway. Socorro tech is where it is at. MIT is for chubs. I could never stand being a professor because I can’t stand dealing with troglodytes. All you need to assess the average intelligence of humans is a 5 minute conversation in any subreddit with any topic slightly related to logic or science or mathematics. I mean, I consider people with 130 IQ kinda smart but more dumb really. Now mind you 100 IQ is average and way below 130 and half the people on Earth are dumber than that. I could never, ever, in a million years deal with that in a classroom.
I have an engineering buddy. He’s probably the smartest guy I’ve ever met and, no offense to him, I think he’s pretty dumb. Like, I was crunching the numbers in my head and noticing the CDC’s number of positive tests was way to freaking high to not have loads of false positives. Well, turns out I was right because the CDC reduced the “cycles” of the PCR test from 29 to 28 I believe. Since it is logarithmic it is an absolutely massive change. He was 100% convinced the scamdemic is real. What it really is is a case study in bad science and how easy it is to mislead the public.
Anyway it’s basically impossible for them to prove how many false positives exist or don’t exist unless they do a randomized sampling with different kinds of tests. We’re talking thousands of each kind of test. The tests fail for different reasons and you can extrapolate what the true false positive rate is from the different test results. Well back then they hadn’t done that and were just spamming the same easily available test on repeat while going OMG THE COVID NUMBERS ARE SPIKING! Reality check: false positives blew it out of proportion, causing people to go get tested, which further inflated the false positives.
Anyway they caught onto it (a bit at least) and rolled back the sensitivity of the PCR tests. I was 100% right and he was wrong. It’s just a bit of math involving Baye’s theorem, an exponential function representing the rate of the spread of the virus using the R-not value for covid which is available in papers. Basically even if you assume no lockdowns, no masks, and assume covid can transmit as fast as their highest estimates, it still doesn’t come close to explaining the number of positive tests, ergo false positives.
Those clowns are going to tell you they just want the sensitivity of the test as high as possible so that not a single covid case can slip past the test. In other words that’s code for we’re going to jack the number of false positives through the roof because we want to miss no real cases. FYI, if you had a “test” where you just assumed someone is infected it would have a 100% sensitivity aka it have a 0% of letting any sick person slip through. Well, that’s basically what they did. They jacked the sensitivity of the tests so out of whack it basically just said “Yep, you’ve got ThE ViRuS”.
But the real nail in the coffin was when the numbers started rolling in for who was supposedly dying from covid. The average number of comorbidities was 3 I believe. It’s hard to say covid was what whacked them when they already were dying of 3 other things. Furthermore the average age of death was greater than the average lifespan currently. So the people dying are actually super old who are on the absolute verge already.
Furthermore the vaccine data started rolling in. Do you know how many lives the vaccines claim to save? For one of them it’s like 6 serious infections in 18,000 people. That’s like 0.03%. It doesn’t even claim to save their life, it just claims to prevent “serious” infections. Mind you that can mean you can still get the wu-flu and die from it because it doesn’t take a “serious” case to whack somebody who has 3 other serious conditions.