Statistics

New Scientific AI Computer Model Shows Experts Should Be Launched Into Space

Two exciting new models have been released. One says the vaccinated should fear the unvaccinated. The second, a new scientific Artificial Intelligence computer mathematical model, has concluded Experts should be launched into space.

William M Briggs, who calls himself the Statistician to the Stars!, is lead author of the second study. “This exciting new model, done on a computer, is very scientific. It has many science equations in it. It concludes Experts have to be launched into space.”

Dr Briggs has a PhD degree from an Ivy League university, which allowed him to code his mathematical science model on a computer. “Not only should Experts be launched into space,” said Dr Briggs, “But they should not be afforded the luxury of a spacesuit.”

Dr Briggs also said that the model insists this should be done as soon as possible.

Dr David N. Fisman, co-author of the new model on covid vaccination, and one of the Experts who will soon be slung into the outer void, said, “I don’t like the idea. But I am powerless to dispute a computer science math model. My fate is sealed,” he added.

It’s true, dear readers. My model is on a computer and is therefore indisputable. Fisman is at least wise enough to understand this. He, Afia Amoako and Ashleigh R. Tuite, are responsible for the peer-reviewed paper “Impact of population mixing between vaccinated and unvaccinated subpopulations on infectious disease dynamics: implications for SARS-CoV-2 transmission” in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

Here’s how propagandists are portraying the paper: “Being with unvaccinated people increases COVID-19 risk for those who are vaccinated: modelling study”.

The research published Monday in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that vaccinated people who mix with those who are not vaccinated have a significantly greater chance of being infected than those who stick with people who have received the shot.

In contrast, unvaccinated people’s risk of contracting COVID-19 drops when they spend time with people who are vaccinated, because they serve as a buffer to transmission, according to the mathematical model used in the study.

Ah. A mathematical model. Well, there’s no questioning these. Right?

This mathematical says that your vaccine stops working when you’re withing so many feet of an unvaccinated person. Just as the Kamala Harris speculated when she said we had to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated.

Vaccines are funny things! When they appear in mathematical science models. Like this one (my emphasis):

Methods: We constructed a simple susceptible–infectious–recovered compartmental model of a respiratory infectious disease with 2 connected subpopulations: people who were vaccinated and those who were unvaccinated. We simulated a spectrum of patterns of mixing between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups that ranged from random mixing to complete like-with-like mixing (complete assortativity), in which people have contact exclusively with others with the same vaccination status…

The emphasized words tell you all you need to know. That—and do let me know if you’ve heard this before—all models only say what they are told to say!

Here’s a video on that. And a paper.

A model that says the vaccinated should stay away from the unvaccinated was told to say that.

It is, of course, possible for a model to be told something useful. Did this one?

Writing of this amazing new work, physician Byram W. Bridle, says “Fisman, et al. is only thinly veiled hate speech under the guise of science.”

Bridle identified a number of places where the model was told to say the wrong things. The list is large. I’ll quote only one (the shortest):

Fatal flaw: “We did not model waning immunity”. I was flabbergasted by this assumption. COVID-19 ‘vaccine’-induced immunity is ridiculously short-lived. In contrast, naturally acquired immunity is much longer-lived. This differential effect would have had a major influence on the outcome of the mathematical model. This assumption by the authors ignores obvious scientific facts.

He also, God bless him, had the patience to work through the Fisman model, which is in Excel (yes). Bridle found the whole thing revolved around one bad assumption. “Correcting only this one assumption completely reverses the conclusions of the paper.”

Once again, and all together: all models only say what they are told to say. And this one was told to say something asinine.

Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here; Or go to PayPal directly. For Zelle, use my email.

Categories: Statistics

19 replies »

  1. Interesting space ejection expert model. Could you perhaps look at simulating the effect of including Sir Patrick Vallance, UK Chief Scientific Advisor to the government and a prominent source of daily doom & gloom on TV over the past two years into the model. His new thing is predictable, climate lockdowns to save the planet. And Boris says that massive taxes and enormous surcharges to pay for the 4% mean contribution renewals have made to energy supplies have resulted in energy being significantly cheaper. I would like to see a computer model simulate the level of improvement to all our lives if these two buffoons were included in the space shot passenger list.

  2. Even better now that I think of it, let’s do an actual experiment and measure the results directly.

  3. No [A.I. etc] Computer Model would be autonomous; it would need a facility for learning by asking questions, in addition to one for evaluating the answers; yet it would lack the facility to understand.

  4. I was tinkering with an online election simulator. I was able to tweak the model to make Trump get 102% of the vote in Massachusetts. If that’s not proof the election was stolen, I don’t know what is.

  5. I have a question for Dr. Briggs: assuming there are 10 million experts, how long would it take the combined rocket capabilities of the US, Russia, China, the EU, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and North Korea ( although who is to say Dear Leader has not already fired up a few fallen out of favour experts) at say, six experts per load, to rid us of experts? Of course trips will run in the millions causing a massive negative effect on Climate Change so some experts will have to be scheduled on later flights to calculate negative climate effects. However once these are known they can be dispatched.

  6. I have peer-reviewed the calculations in your rocket model, Dr. Briggs, they are correct, and the results have been published in a prestigious journal, The Quarterly Bulletin of Flaming Scientific Flim-Flam.

    You may proceed to launchpad.

  7. Apologies, this is my fault. When i realized that Epidemiology and computer models were akin to UFO sightings, I should have pursued it harder. I shouldn’t have stopped.

    But I ran into these random weird things. I asked a Master’s Candidate what I thought was a throw away question. She was creating a visual measuring device that could measure things with a camera. “What was the measurement of the item in question?”

    I truly thought this was a way to interact with the presentation that was a softball. “Here are the measurements we got with our camera”, “Here are the measurements we got with calipers”.

    Instead I got snarked. I have been slapped many times since then.

    I didn’t fight back hard enough. Maybe, if I had fought back, they wouldn’t have taken over the entire system.

  8. Your model has a fatal flaw in that it fails to consider lengthy submersion in a rain barrel as an economical alternative to deportation to the Moon. Economics, as we all know, are difficult to model, but in this case you should give it a shot.

  9. Back when the Mulatto marauder was POTUS, back when he had his NASA fella speak about Muslim outreach In an interview last month on Al-Jazeera, NASA chief Charlie Bolden said that one of NASA’s foremost tasks is to engage with Muslim nations. few expected the day would arrive when it could launch the malign midget into space.

    Indonesia has a crap load of volcanoes and oodles of Muslims and they should get the chance to launch tiny Tony directly into the Van Allen Belt and see if its is really all that it is cracked up to be.

    Up until now, the Indonesian Space Program (ISP) has consisted of scientists trapping mice, mesmerising them into a coma and then they put the mice in a Wok atop a giant metal grille that has been placed over a volcano and then they take cover and wait for an eruption.

    I wish this for Tiny Tony.

  10. Since flawed Excel spreadsheets are science now, I’m chief scientist of the US.

  11. The good folks at Rebel News has an excellent take-down of the Fisman model and conflicts:

    “Assumptions — not science — go viral in legacy media, in frantic push for unvaccinated segregation”

    https://rebelne.ws/37VCdOC

  12. Excel is the gateway drug to bad reasoning. The only thing worse than an excel model is a .ppt chart with an embedded excel behind it, preferably with employee PII included.

  13. I’d say there’s enough rocket fuel to fire the usual suspects into space. Not the ones you mention, of course, they’re of little interest to people getting o with their lives.
     
    The mission could be called the Voyage of the voyeurs. That’s dynamite! Nothing like an on line persona to get those types into big trouble pretending. ..huge!

  14. What’s wrong with a model built in Excel? Excel is the greatest piece of software ever developed. Easy to use, intuitive, ubiquitous, flexible, powerful….

  15. My computer model of computer models only produced a recursive turtle function.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.