I left school at the age of 16, at the end of year 5 in Scotland, and started University a week after my 17th birthday. I was bored of school by then and when I went to University they gave me a grant (those were the days) and a student Union card which allowed me to buy drink in most establishments (ditto).
I was, with hindsight, probably too young and too immature to make the best use of my first year but I was seriously bored of school and really wanted to do something else.
I don't think that I was that atypical. Many people, including those even less academically inclined than me, do not enjoy school and show precious little commitment to it. At the moment most of these end up doing some largely pointless college course which often reduces their employability given the very poor habits that college inculcates (poor attendance, no reward for effort (since everyone passes) and far too much downtime). I seriously question whether such people would benefit at all from 2 more years of compulsory schooling.
I am rather more taken with the argument that we start formal learning a bit soon but even if we accept that argument has merit I do not think that we should be adding years to the other end.
Good thread header though, thanks Richard.
But what is Scottish education like, Mr L. I suspect it is similar to the French and the American style - very mechanical, lots of rote learning and not much imagination and creativity - in fact very similar to what Gove and his evil genius did their best to impose on England.
If that is the case, I am not surprised that pupils there get bored very quickly.
I friend of mine at Oxford had left school in Scotland at 15. He graduated with a first in maths at 18, so I got the impression that Scotland’s education system had to be pretty good...
I think that he may have just been a tad exceptional... As a sample size that was probably less than optimal.
You mean not everyone in Scotland gets a first in maths?
I have good statistical evidence that almost exactly 50% of the population is barely numerate at all!
Unfortunately David it will be Tory evidence and therefore not worth the toilet paper it is written on.
If it was a lab leak, why did the Chinese do such a useless job of combatting it?
To be fair, I can think of lots of good reasons, the most likely of which is that the people in the lab will have tried to cover up any leak. The Chinese government is unlikely to be kind to people who killed thousands, shut the entire country down, and opened China up to significant criticism from abroad.
The fact that they have been so shit in dealing with it, and have such poor vaccines, is however evidence against them having deliberately created this virus as a weapon and released it into the wild. (Mind you, there's lots of other evidence against that too: like why would you release it in your own country.)
Doesn't rule out deliberate development but accidental release.
'The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,' Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.
Which is simply not true.
Ignoring the fact that if the laws of physics prevent it, then you probably can't do it in a lab, the reality is that nature (and the human body itself) is chock full of four positively charged amino acids in a row.
CV19's genome is 96% the same as an existing bat virus. It's possible that the other 4% is man made. But the reality is that new diseases cross the animal-human barrier all the time, and 96% the same as something we have already seen is pretty much par for the course. If it was 75%, that would be amazing, but 96% is slap bang in the middle of normal variations
There are lots of possibles here: it's possible that 100 different bat viruses escaped the lab, and the reason this one survived is because it was the most transmissible.
It's also entirely possible that this virus crossed the animal-human barrier somewhere else, and Wuhan was just unlucky.
But those people who know about virology and amino acids seem to be a lot more sceptical of the "designed" theory than you.
For a smart guy, you are singularly stupid, surprisingly often
I wonder why virologists might be unkeen on the "design theory". Sit down and try and think about it, if you can
There. See?
If it is ever proven that an altered, weaponised virus escaped a lab and killed many millions then the careers of many virologists will come to an end overnight. No more research grants, no more international conferences, no labs where they can tinker with microbes, nothing. Their professional lives will cease as they know it, and they will come under deep and unpleasant scrutiny.
A few might end up in jail. They will also be globally denounced and unpopular. I can see the odd one or two getting lynched. Seriously
In that atmosphere, if you were a virologist, which scenario would you loudly favour, lab or market? You might tell yourself you are neutral and scientific, but really, you aren't. You're human and you are desperate to believe this didn't come from a lab, and that is affecting your judgement
We've seen it with some of the specialists on here
You propose further investigations into the origins, yet say the people capable of such investigations can't be believed if they reject your theory.....what is the point of further investigations? Just believe harder and you can get past 70/30.
I know you jest, but it is actually a problem. The people who have the greatest expertise in this field also have a huge conflict of interest: they are professionally and emotionally biased towards dismissing the lab leak hypothesis
I'm not sure what you do about it
As a pragmatist, all you do is add it to the long list of questions to which we will never know the answer to, "like does god exist?" "what are we doing here?" and never give it a moments more thought. Far more productive than asking for more investigations, when you wont trust the outcome of such investigations.
I think the answer is to construct an inquiry which is not LED by virologists, but which employs them and instructs them
And who exactly is going to lead this report which is going to be totally free from national, financial or professional self interest so can be believed by the West, China and the rest of the world?
You have more chance of forming a committee that reports back to the world on the existence of god in the same time frame.
If it was a lab leak, why did the Chinese do such a useless job of combatting it?
To be fair, I can think of lots of good reasons, the most likely of which is that the people in the lab will have tried to cover up any leak. The Chinese government is unlikely to be kind to people who killed thousands, shut the entire country down, and opened China up to significant criticism from abroad.
The fact that they have been so shit in dealing with it, and have such poor vaccines, is however evidence against them having deliberately created this virus as a weapon and released it into the wild. (Mind you, there's lots of other evidence against that too: like why would you release it in your own country.)
Big difference for me between Lab Theory Study Accident and Lab Theory Deliberate Weapon. The latter smells a bit 'yellow peril' and fu manchu. But the less lurid proposition is worth taking seriously from what I read.
So Lab Accident is OK because you've decided it's no longer racist, but Weaponised Virus is not OK because it is, still, according to you, "racist"
Has it occurred to you that assessing the various possible sources a of pandemic on the basis of whether they are "racist" or not is just bewilderingly stupid, and is one of the reasons we dismissed a highly plausible thesis for a year
You have misconstrued me. Maybe I was asking for it with "yellow peril" but still, I gave no consent. The reason I'm dubious about China having manufactured Covid as a weapon isn't because the notion is racist. It's because it makes no sense to me. But as it happens I'd say it's clear there is sinophobia at play in certain quarters on this one. And, yes, this is a factor for me. The Trumpian alt right may one day push a theory about something that rings true, but it's a day I'm still waiting for.
Er, the Trumpite right pushed the lab leak theory, which was dismissed for a year (even banned on Facebook) because it came from Trump, That's the theory you now accept might well be true
Did it? Somebody questioned this the other day. Trump spent a lot of time scapegoating China and calling it "China virus". But not so vocal on lab leaks in particular. If he had any sort of hard intelligence on this you'd think he would have been shouting it from the rooftops.
Now we've all reluctantly admitted that Trump was right and it came from the lab (possibly) what if it turns out Himmler was right and we live on a hollow earth?
If it was a lab leak, why did the Chinese do such a useless job of combatting it?
To be fair, I can think of lots of good reasons, the most likely of which is that the people in the lab will have tried to cover up any leak. The Chinese government is unlikely to be kind to people who killed thousands, shut the entire country down, and opened China up to significant criticism from abroad.
The fact that they have been so shit in dealing with it, and have such poor vaccines, is however evidence against them having deliberately created this virus as a weapon and released it into the wild. (Mind you, there's lots of other evidence against that too: like why would you release it in your own country.)
Doesn't rule out deliberate development but accidental release.
'The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,' Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.
Which is simply not true.
Ignoring the fact that if the laws of physics prevent it, then you probably can't do it in a lab, the reality is that nature (and the human body itself) is chock full of four positively charged amino acids in a row.
CV19's genome is 96% the same as an existing bat virus. It's possible that the other 4% is man made. But the reality is that new diseases cross the animal-human barrier all the time, and 96% the same as something we have already seen is pretty much par for the course. If it was 75%, that would be amazing, but 96% is slap bang in the middle of normal variations
There are lots of possibles here: it's possible that 100 different bat viruses escaped the lab, and the reason this one survived is because it was the most transmissible.
It's also entirely possible that this virus crossed the animal-human barrier somewhere else, and Wuhan was just unlucky.
But those people who know about virology and amino acids seem to be a lot more sceptical of the "designed" theory than you.
There are two or three specific variants in the COVID-19 virus that massively increases its efficacy as a human vital agent (eg the precise design and location of the furin cleavage site)
To have one of these mutations would be highly unusual. To have multiple mutations, that occurred simultaneously (or at least where we have been completely unable to identify the precursors) is highly highly improbable.
The simple answer is probably the correct one. It is also extremely dull and unexciting:
1. The lab collected the base virus. We know they collected similar viruses 2. The lab tweaked the virus. We know they were undertaking gain of function modifications (from grant applications) including insertion of the furin cleavage site (from published papers) 3. The virus escaped from the lab
It’s a combination of stupidity, greed, negligence, and sheer bad luck. Like pretty much every other disaster that has occurred in the modern world.
To the extent that China is to be blamed it is in respect of slipshod regulation, a cover up and their willingness to encourage foreign travel at a time they knew what was coming
Meanwhile, the panic flapping and screeching about the Indian variant continues to intensify. The fact that nearly half of the adult population, including the vast bulk of the most vulnerable, have already been double jabbed counts for nothing. Once again, the more widespread the coverage afforded by the vaccines becomes, the more useless they are claimed to be.
It didn't really even show a Cummings effect, it showed a difference in the Labour number (in their polling, Labour had shot up at the expense on other left of centre parties). T
he Tory number was still well into the 40s....42-45% is the consistent Tory number since the vaccine bounce.
Its the Labour number that is all over the place, somewhere between 28% and 36%.
Yes, the conservatives dropped 2 to (42%) but lib dems and greens also dropped 2
We have yet to see the Boris bounce after his wedding...
That sort of thing is done in private these days. After all he’s not Henry VIII
Well, as we know, there's polling and there's polling so I thought I'd liven your Monday evening with another of my "European tours" of the polls.
Let's kick off in Germany with another INSA poll (changes since last poll): CDU/CSU-EPP: 25.5% (-0.5) GRÜNE-G/EFA: 21.5% (-0.5) SPD-S&D: 15.5% (-0.5) FDP-RE: 13.5% (+1) AfD-ID: 11% (-0.5) LINKE-LEFT: 6.5%
Another "high" number for the FDP and within just two points of the SPD - the thought the FDP might come third in front of the SPD now looks at least plausible even if still incredible.
One part of Europe where politics looks quite stable currently is Greece - remember, the Greece that was going to crash out of the Euro, the Greece whose chaos overshadowed the formation of the Coalition in 2010?
I wonder if we are seeing a re-alignment to a new duopoly with the FF/FG split which has dominated Irish poltics for decades being replaced by a new SF/FG split with FF fading away.
WHill have reduced Lib Dem Odds down in C&A down to 8/1 (from 10/1)... still not that attractive but anyone got a sense if a David Steel`surge' is happening?
Comments
You have more chance of forming a committee that reports back to the world on the existence of god in the same time frame.
To have one of these mutations would be highly unusual. To have multiple mutations, that occurred simultaneously (or at least where we have been completely unable to identify the precursors) is highly highly improbable.
The simple answer is probably the correct one. It is also extremely dull and unexciting:
1. The lab collected the base virus. We know they collected similar viruses
2. The lab tweaked the virus. We know they were undertaking gain of function modifications (from grant applications) including insertion of the furin cleavage site (from published papers)
3. The virus escaped from the lab
It’s a combination of stupidity, greed, negligence, and sheer bad luck. Like pretty much every other disaster that has occurred in the modern world.
To the extent that China is to be blamed it is in respect of slipshod regulation, a cover up and their willingness to encourage foreign travel at a time they knew what was coming
That sort of thing is done in private these days. After all he’s not Henry VIII
Well, as we know, there's polling and there's polling so I thought I'd liven your Monday evening with another of my "European tours" of the polls.
Let's kick off in Germany with another INSA poll (changes since last poll):
CDU/CSU-EPP: 25.5% (-0.5)
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 21.5% (-0.5)
SPD-S&D: 15.5% (-0.5)
FDP-RE: 13.5% (+1)
AfD-ID: 11% (-0.5)
LINKE-LEFT: 6.5%
Another "high" number for the FDP and within just two points of the SPD - the thought the FDP might come third in front of the SPD now looks at least plausible even if still incredible.
One part of Europe where politics looks quite stable currently is Greece - remember, the Greece that was going to crash out of the Euro, the Greece whose chaos overshadowed the formation of the Coalition in 2010?
Changes since last election (2019)
ND-EPP: 47% (+7)
SYRIZA-LEFT: 25% (-6)
KINAL-S&D: 8% (unc)
KKE-NI: 7% (+2)
EL-ECR: 5% (+1)
MeRA25~LEFT: 4% (unc)
On these numbers, Mitsotakis and the New Democracy Government would be re-elected with an increased majority but the election isn't until July 2023.
Closer to home and the latest Red C poll from Ireland (changes from 2020 election)
SF-LEFT: 29% (+4)
FG-EPP: 29% (+8)
FF-RE: 14% (-8)
Greens-G/EFA: 5% (-2)
SOC DEM→S&D: 5% (+2)
LAB-S&D: 3% (-1)
S-PBP~LEFT: 2% (unc)
AONTU-*: 2% (unc)
I wonder if we are seeing a re-alignment to a new duopoly with the FF/FG split which has dominated Irish poltics for decades being replaced by a new SF/FG split with FF fading away.
This thread has died
I hope the comments were as good as the thread header.