If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Yes Steve, and the excess mortality in that country was post the roll out of vaccines.in the first 6 months of 2021 for deaths within 28 days of vaccines alone was 5562.
Canada by the way did not have an unusual excess deaths number in 2020 4% increase that ihas been within the norm increase for the prior decade each year.
A few "back of the napkin" calculations,"
54% percent of the Scotland's population was vaccinated by June 2021 2021. 62,500 deaths from all causes in 2020, so over 6 months (2021)
you would expect approximately 15625 deaths from all causes among the vaccinated group 54% of 62,500). The chances are
1 in 6 that among the deaths are those vaccinated within that month you would get a total of 2604 deaths.
So taking out the background deaths (2604?) excess deaths within this group appear to be 5522-2604= 2918
deaths that are likely related to the vaccine. 3000 excess deaths from vaccines is an astounding number.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Sunday, 27th February, 2022, 02:44 PM.
Yes and that is what I pointed out, please read the post.
Ummm. Let's recap here:
You dared somebody to produce numbers showing excess deaths in **2020**.
I did, citing a link that you originally posted.
You then claimed that those excess deaths in **2020** were because of vaccines.
I then pointed out how that was absurd. In my post I quoted the entirety of your post.
You then went back and substantially edited your post about the excess deaths in 2020, and now it's focusing on 2021.
Sorry Sid, you posted something flat-out wrong, then went and edited it to read completely differently after you were called on it. You've done that before in this thread. I don't care to play that game. Plonk.
You dared somebody to produce numbers showing excess deaths in **2020**.
I did, citing a link that you originally posted.
You then claimed that those excess deaths in **2020** were because of vaccines.
I then pointed out how that was absurd. In my post I quoted the entirety of your post.
You then went back and substantially edited your post about the excess deaths in 2020, and now it's focusing on 2021.
Sorry Sid, you posted something flat-out wrong, then went and edited it to read completely differently after you were called on it. You've done that before in this thread. I don't care to play that game. Plonk.
Yes, the deaths were up in Scotland but the important point to note is that across the world we did not see any unusual increase in excess deaths in 2020, In Canada, for example, we were up 4% on deaths between 2019-2020. This is in line with normal increases in population etc. https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ths-in-canada/
As for the increase above the norm in Scotland, even the Scottish government is not convinced it is attributable to Covid indeed, Scotland is an exception but not the rule.
Peter, let me explain why Sid's position on the abilty of Big Pharma is not ludicrous.
This is what I have often seen in my day to day work over the last several years:
Big Pharma sponsors self fulfilling prophecies as 'clinical trials', i.e they compare a group receiving more drugs for more patients for a longer duration to a group receiving nothing (instead of comparing it to a group receiving minimal drugs targeted at selcted patients, till they work (which is usually a short duration). They then have opinion leaders (who are also their paid consultants) go around advocating this success of more drugs for more people for longer durations (hiding the fact that the right question was never asked in the clinical trials), with the audience often being at a posh restaurant busy enjoying a delicious dinner and just putting down the fork and knife momentarily to clap when they hear the opinion leaders say 'this should be practice changing for the welfare of our patients!' Then these same opinion leaders, who are also 'guideline developers', carve the pharma-favoring practice in stone by publishing their guidelines, which is all what many physicians read to help them keep up with the latest developments in practice, and save them from 'malpractice lawsuits'....
Get it? Doctors are as good as any person in the community, but just like many theologicians have mesmerized all the good people in our communities for centuries, so has big pharma mesmerized doctors...
Hi Dilip. Your comments are very interesting.
The first thing they've prompted me to do is to say thank you to Bob Armstrong for teaching me something about activism; something I should have clued into a long time ago but for whatever reason (apathy?) didn't. None of us, even those blessed with great wealth and power, can tackle the world's big problems on our own. So therefore, if we want to see effective movement towards improvement, we all need to play a role in a bigger effort. For years now, Bob has been taking the role of facilitator of discussion. He encourages people to think about big issues and to discuss them in a focused way, to stay on track. Sorry, Bob, that I didn't appreciate your efforts earlier.
The second thing, Dilip, is that your remarks point out a potential avenue of activism for you. If you see through Pharma's sham drug trials then there must be significant numbers of your colleagues who see the same things as you. Maybe you can play the role of activist among your colleagues and light a spark that eventually brings changes to the Pharma industry.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Tuesday, 1st March, 2022, 11:47 AM.
Reason: Added 'eventually'
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Yes, the deaths were up in Scotland but the important point to note is that across the world we did not see any unusual increase in excess deaths in 2020 ....
Sid, this is so typically you that it's laughable! You can never say something like, "Oh. Yeah. Oops. Good catch, Steve." You always have to twist and turn and keep on arguing and shifting the topic until the other person either concedes or leaves (presumably in disgust). You can never allow yourself to be in error.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Sid, here's what you said in another part of this thread (bold text 'bolded' by me):
Then, when Steve Douglas DID show you a country, using data already posted by you, you said this, among other things:
Sid, this is so typically you that it's laughable! You can never say something like, "Oh. Yeah. Oops. Good catch, Steve." You always have to twist and turn and keep on arguing and shifting the topic until the other person either concedes or leaves (presumably in disgust). You can never allow yourself to be in error.
Frankly, I found the tone of Steve's reply "oh please Sid" was a bit cheeky. As if he had discovered America. As it turns out Scotland is not a good example as the statistic is under scrutiny by the Scottish parliament as I pointed out to him in the referenced link. It is very odd that a routine death stat had to be obtained via a freedom of information request according to the link that Steve provided.
Sid, here's what you said in another part of this thread (bold text 'bolded' by me):
Then, when Steve Douglas DID show you a country, using data already posted by you, you said this, among other things:
Sid, this is so typically you that it's laughable! You can never say something like, "Oh. Yeah. Oops. Good catch, Steve." You always have to twist and turn and keep on arguing and shifting the topic until the other person either concedes or leaves (presumably in disgust). You can never allow yourself to be in error.
This is because Sid is only interested in supporting his narrative, because he is a clown.
The first thing they've prompted me to do is to say thank you to Bob Armstrong for teaching me something about activism; something I should have clued into a long time ago but for whatever reason (apathy?) didn't. None of us, even those blessed with great wealth and power, can tackle the world's big problems on our own. So therefore, if we want to see effective movement towards improvement, we all need to play a role in a bigger effort. For years now, Bob has been taking the role of facilitator of discussion. He encourages people to think about big issues and to discuss them in a focused way, to stay on track. Sorry, Bob, that I didn't appreciate your efforts earlier.
The second thing, Dilip, is that your remarks point out a potential avenue of activism for you. If you see through Pharma's sham drug trials then there must be significant numbers of your colleagues who see the same things as you. Maybe you can play the role of activist among your colleagues and light a spark that eventually brings changes to the Pharma industry.
Peter, I am glad to see that you are shifting your position from"ludicrous" to Dr's should be forming activist groups. Dr's in this country that have done that are smeared and threatened with losing their licenses from the pharma corrupted health bureaucrats at the College of Physicians and Surgeons. What type of pollyannish world do you live in?
Last night the initial Pfizer "vaccine" trial results were released in the US as per a court order where the pharma controlled FDA wanted them released in 75 years from now. These results were withheld for the last 12 months which is unprecedented and the FDA refused at the time to have independent medical safety boards monitoring these drug trials.
We have not even scratched the surface yet of long-term effects but early indications show serious neurological diseases are on the rise as are cancer cases, myocarditis, strokes, and heart disease. Here is a remarkable partial list of adverse events reported in the document I provided the link to. How many do you think would have volunteered for the Jab with the proper informed consent of these possible adverse outcomes?
The fatality rate was 3% (!) and adverse events were 93%(!) with close to 25% of adverse events ongoing at the time the report was finished last year.
I interpret this data to say that among those experiencing severe adverse events, the fatality rate was 3%. I didn't see any information concerning % of people experiencing these adverse events.
Here is a random report from a google search that gives an idea how many adverse events per vaccine administered in Ontario
I interpret this data to say that among those experiencing severe adverse events, the fatality rate was 3%. I didn't see any information concerning % of people experiencing these adverse events.
Here is a random report from a google search that gives an idea how many adverse events per vaccine administered in Ontario
Tweet
Comment