Lack of Intelligence of Government Advisors

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

FFS. Don't start him off about racism.

I invariably don't start, I invariably respond to inaccurate or outdated beliefs or bigoted comments.

 

[Trazor]

You mean the government advisor was incapable of forming a report to convey what he really meant?

He really didn't need to, you are the only one in this thread that misses that correlation.

That was never the issue.

The surge/spike is the issue, otherwise your original rant had no point.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

He really didn't need to, you are the only one in this thread that misses that correlation.

He did need. If he can't present his evidence concisely and accurately he's not suitable to be a government advisor.

You omitted to mention, that only about three, including yourself, have taken a contra-position to what I said.

One has agreed with what I said.

The others have made no direct comment on the issue.

transam has left a couple of his little piles of nonsense as usual.

The surge/spike is the issue,

That was never the issue, it was a strawman argument introduced by you and motorbiking.

The issue was the inability of a government advisor to express himself and present his argument concisely and accurately.
Most of the whole thread has proven that my original position was appropriate, because we are discussing what he really meant.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Don't start him off about racism.

I invariably don't start, I invariably respond to inaccurate or outdated beliefs or bigoted comments.

Is that not what I said?

 

[motorbiking]

That was never the issue, it was a strawman argument introduced by you and motorbiking.

No it was a request for the evidence.

Why were you so annoyed at the person's statement if you had no evidence it was wrong?


The facts seem to be, some situations where social distancing is disregarded are not as risky as others. As a result something we think might be very risky at spreading covid, turns out not to be.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

No it was a request for the evidence.

Evidence of what, of what the government advisor had said? It's available on iPlayer, apparently.
But it wasn't that evidence that you wanted. it was evidence of something that was irrelevant to my OP.

Why were you so annoyed at the person's statement if you had no evidence it was wrong?

Because of his obvious lack of either considering all the process that are required, or his inability to form a more coherent report.
And I was especially referring to the calibre of that government advisor.

The facts seem to be, some situations where social distancing is disregarded are not as risky as others. As a result something we think might be very risky at spreading covid, turns out not to be.

Not disputed. It explains why his report was potentially misleading, unless he specifically covered all the required processes to allow the one isolated activity to occur.
If I recall correctly, his report was not accompanied by any evidence, just a picture of a crowded beach.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Is that not what I said?

If that was what you meant.
What you said implied that I initiate such discussions.
On only one occasion that I recall, did I initiate a discussion about race. It was a BBC/UO video discussing the myth of race.
It was deleted quickly, for no fathomable reason, by mods.
A subsequent reference to it was also deleted.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If that was what you meant.
What you said implied that I initiate such discussions.

No - I said "Don't start him off...".

Why do you have such trouble with the language?

Are you actually French and while speaking very good English do not perfectly understand the subtleties?



Re thread:

Perhaps the advisor did not realise there might be a person who thought people could have a day at the beach without travelling there and home again.

 

[Trazor]

What colour is Black, Bobby?

This post of mine was not to raise any racism issues, but merely to point out Bobby would argue that Black was White.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

No - I said "Don't start him off...".

Which inmplies that I initiate such discussions.
If that is not what you meant, you should choose your words more carefully, for example, "don't start a discussion about race" would suffice to convey what you claim you meant without giving any implication as to who initiates such discussions.

Why do you have such trouble with the language?

Why can you not consider that it may be you?

Re thread:

Perhaps the advisor did not realise there might be a person who thought people could have a day at the beach without travelling there and home again.

Perhaps the advisor genuinely didn't take into account the other required activities to arrive at the beach to enjoy a day on a crowded beach.
We'll never know.
But I can consider it from one aspect, that of the government advisor not being sufficiently precise, or not being sufficiently holistic in his approach.

Whereas you and others assume you know exactly what the reporter meant to convey.

Who is making the greater assumption? Mine is based on an open ended question. Yours is based on an assumption of what you think the reporter really meant to say.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

This post of mine was not to raise any racism issues, but merely to point out Bobby would argue that Black was White.

But it allowed Eflimpudence the opportunity to raise his favourite subject.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Interesting to note which part of my last post you chose not to reply to - the JohnD tactic?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Interesting to note which part of my last post you chose not to reply to - the JohnD tactic?

By all means repost it. I see no reference whatsoever to JohnD.

Ahh, I see you inserted a hyphen. That changes the meaning somewhat.

Please repost the bit that you are referring to, I'm not familiar with anything such as "the JohnD tactic".

 

[EFLImpudence]

It was I who mentioned the JohnD tactic.

Wake up.


Repost what? 'It' could apply to anything of non-specific gender.

 

[Trazor]

I'm not familiar with anything such as "the JohnD tactic".