Covid-19

[paulatky]

Thanks duncanand disorderly.

Grumps
Re: Staying at home for 3 weeks...
Unread post Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:22 am

paulatky wrote: ↑
Where had 3 weeks come from. At least 5 months

Grumps replied
Just a guess, but I think it came from the prime

minister when he mentioned 3 weeks

It was from the Staying at home for 3 weeks thread.

There had been a number of posts made to it before I asked where did the 3 weeks come from.

Although he had not contributed to that thread before,Grumps decided to relpy to to me.

He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Thanks duncanand disorderly.

Grumps
Re: Staying at home for 3 weeks...
Unread post Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:22 am

paulatky wrote: ↑
Where had 3 weeks come from. At least 5 months

Grumps replied
Just a guess, but I think it came from the prime

minister when he mentioned 3 weeks

It was from the Staying at home for 3 weeks thread.

There had been a number of posts made to it before I asked where did the 3 weeks come from.

Although he had not contributed to that thread before,Grumps decided to relpy to to me.

He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

Jesus shut up you boring idiot

[taio]

Thanks duncanand disorderly.

Grumps
Re: Staying at home for 3 weeks...
Unread post Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:22 am

paulatky wrote: ↑
Where had 3 weeks come from. At least 5 months

Grumps replied
Just a guess, but I think it came from the prime

minister when he mentioned 3 weeks

It was from the Staying at home for 3 weeks thread.

There had been a number of posts made to it before I asked where did the 3 weeks come from.

Although he had not contributed to that thread before,Grumps decided to relpy to to me.

He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

I think it's time for you to leave it alone. The thing most wrong here is you attributing a post to him when he didn't even write it. On the same thread on the same day he also wrote this which isn't unreasonable either:

I don't normally get involved in your guessing games, but I'll stick my neck out and confidently state that the lockdown in its current format will not last 5 months, it's not even lasted that long where it started in China, where restrictions are starting to get lifted
Once the cases and deaths get to a level that the NHS can cope with, the restrictions will be lifted here. Yes people will catch the virus, and some will still die, just like all other illnesses, but it will be at a manageable level
Common sense tells you countries can not shut down for 5 months

[Grumps]

Thanks duncanand disorderly.

Grumps
Re: Staying at home for 3 weeks...
Unread post Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:22 am

paulatky wrote: ↑
Where had 3 weeks come from. At least 5 months

Grumps replied
Just a guess, but I think it came from the prime

minister when he mentioned 3 weeks

It was from the Staying at home for 3 weeks thread.

There had been a number of posts made to it before I asked where did the 3 weeks come from.

Although he had not contributed to that thread before,Grumps decided to relpy to to me.

He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

I really don't get you at all, is it an illness?
First you put a post up saying it was mine, when it wasn't.
Then above you put words in my mouth
All I did was say it came from the PM, never said anything else, so where your last paragraph comes from I've no idea
You've had an awful afternoon, shown to make things up, quote a post from someone else, and make it look like it came from me
Now just give us all a favour and disappear for a bit, please.

[Rileybobs]

Thanks duncanand disorderly.

Grumps
Re: Staying at home for 3 weeks...
Unread post Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:22 am

paulatky wrote: ↑
Where had 3 weeks come from. At least 5 months

Grumps replied
Just a guess, but I think it came from the prime

minister when he mentioned 3 weeks

It was from the Staying at home for 3 weeks thread.

There had been a number of posts made to it before I asked where did the 3 weeks come from.

Although he had not contributed to that thread before,Grumps decided to relpy to to me.

He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

More lying and misinformation from you. You’re having a mare.

[TheFamilyCat]

Jesus shut up you boring idiot

That bit was edited out of The Bible unfortunately.

[duncandisorderly]

This thread has been a wonderful diversion this afternoon.

[paulatky]

I think it's time for you to leave it alone. The thing most wrong here is you attributing a post to him when he didn't even write it. On the same thread on the same day he also wrote this which isn't unreasonable either:

Those people deemed most vulnerable will have to stay isolated for at least that time. Having done 12 weeks because that was the initial period it would be daft not to give it another 8 weeks after that.

[claretonthecoast1882]

That bit was edited out of The Bible unfortunately.

[paulatky]

More lying and misinformation from you. You’re having a mare.

Where is there a lie in that ?

[ksrclaret]

Just when you think this thread has hit rock bottom, claretonthecoast pops up with some of his customary anger.

[paulatky]

I really don't get you at all, is it an illness?
First you put a post up saying it was mine, when it wasn't.
Then above you put words in my mouth
All I did was say it came from the PM, never said anything else, so where your last paragraph comes from I've no idea
You've had an awful afternoon, shown to make things up, quote a post from someone else, and make it look like it came from me
Now just give us all a favour and disappear for a bit, please.

Where have I put words in your mouth.

I copied the post that is still there .
You can check it still.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Just when you think this thread has hit rock bottom, claretonthecoast pops up with some of his customary anger.

you think that’s anger ?

Wow, you could actually be more spineless that I thought. Keep strong kid

[Rileybobs]

Where is there a lie in that ?

To be honest I could have quoted any of your posts and the chance would be there would be either a lie or misinformation in it. I quoted you just to direct my post towards you, but the lie is that you claim that grumps was wrong when he said the 3 weeks came from the PM. He wasn’t wrong. The initial period of lockdown was 3 weeks, he correctly pointed that out.

You’re most blatant lie is copying a post from someone else and editing it so that it is attributed to a poster. Why would you even do that? If anyone thought you had an ounce of credibility left then this should put paid to that.

[ksrclaret]

you think that’s anger ?

Wow, you could actually be more spineless that I thought. Keep strong kid

Oooh I say matron, calm down dear

[Grumps]

Where have I put words in your mouth.

I copied the post that is still there .
You can check it still.

The last sentence of your post at the top of this page

[taio]

Those people deemed most vulnerable will have to stay isolated for at least that time. Having done 12 weeks because that was the initial period it would be daft not to give it another 8 weeks after that.

He said this:

but I'll stick my neck out and confidently state that the lockdown in its current format will not last 5 months

[paulatky]

To be honest I could have quoted any of your posts and the chance would be there would be either a lie or misinformation in it. I quoted you just to direct my post towards you, but the lie is that you claim that grumps was wrong when he said the 3 weeks came from the PM. He wasn’t wrong. The initial period of lockdown was 3 weeks, he correctly pointed that out.

You’re most blatant lie is copying a post from someone else and editing it so that it is attributed to a poster. Why would you even do that? If anyone thought you had an ounce of credibility left then this should put paid to that.

The PM didnt say we had to stay in for 3 weeks . He said the advice to isolate would be reviewed in 3 weeks which is totally different in my my mind.

I did not alter any post . If you go into Grumps profile and look at his posts , because he had quoted someone else Grumps name appeared at the top. I apologised to him for that.

[paulatky]

He said this:

but I'll stick my neck out and confidently state that the lockdown in its current format will not last 5 months

But there will be a lockdown of sorts for that time.

[taio]

But there will be a lockdown of sorts for that time.

He clearly suggested there might be but not in its 'current format'.

[paulatky]

The last sentence of your post at the top of this page

What words ??

I have copied and pasted your exact post

[Rileybobs]

The PM didnt say we had to stay in for 3 weeks . He said the advice to isolate would be reviewed in 3 weeks which is totally different in my my mind.

I did not alter any post . If you go into Grumps profile and look at his posts , because he had quoted someone else Grumps name appeared at the top. I apologised to him for that.

You asked where the 3 weeks came from, Grumps pointed out that it came from the PM, which it did. Not sure why we need to go over this. You’re wrong, everyone else can see it, just leave it.

[dsr]

You’re most blatant lie is copying a post from someone else and editing it so that it is attributed to a poster. Why would you even do that? If anyone thought you had an ounce of credibility left then this should put paid to that.

When you do a search for key words, the answers come up on plain text that don't show whether it is original comment or quotes. If you don't know that, you might assume that the words written under the poster's name were written by that poster; and then you copy and paste without ever going to the post, and you have misquoted.

That is not a lie. That is an error.

[Rileybobs]

When you do a search for key words, the answers come up on plain text that don't show whether it is original comment or quotes. If you don't know that, you might assume that the words written under the poster's name were written by that poster; and then you copy and paste without ever going to the post, and you have misquoted.

That is not a lie. That is an error.

Not sure why you keep defending lying. The original claim that Grumps said the lockdown would last 3 weeks is a lie.

Anyway. This isn’t my argument to have, wish I hadn’t got involved. I’m just sick of this poster constantly lying and spreading misinformation.

[Grumps]

What words ??

I have copied and pasted your exact post

Iam finding this really difficult, I don't know whether you're try to wind me up, or really are struggling

To make it easy, read the last sentence of that post, which you wrote, then tell me where I said that.

[paulatky]

When you do a search for key words, the answers come up on plain text that don't show whether it is original comment or quotes. If you don't know that, you might assume that the words written under the poster's name were written by that poster; and then you copy and paste without ever going to the post, and you have misquoted.

That is not a lie. That is an error.

Thank you dsr.

Before covid-19 I didnt post on here much at all and not familiar with all the search facilities.

In looking for the 3 week post I searched on Grumps profiled and eventually found one which had Grumps at the top.At that time I was unaware that he was merely replying to a quote made by someone else. I apologised to Grumps for that error.

[Jakubclaret]

Which is exactly the point, his words gave all those gullible people (which is a lot when you factor the circulation/hits of the rags mentioned) the impression that we'd beat the virus, it would be gone, etc.

He should have just been honest.

Why would anybody think any different? I was slow from the starting blocks creating the thread on 7th February that's more than 2mths from now, people were & still are literally dropping like flies, early February or mid/late February before even hitting march action should have been taken, what more evidence do you need? You look at what's happening elsewhere & work with an effective action plan ASAP. Posters as early as February on here should not be more capable than the government advisors but the facts are 3 of us were, in knowing exactly what was happening & where things were going.

[paulatky]

Iam finding this really difficult, I don't know whether you're try to wind me up, or really are struggling

To make it easy, read the last sentence of that post, which you wrote, then tell me where I said that.

My last sentence

The he in the 2nd line , after 3 weeks, refers to the prime minister not to you Grumps.
Sorry if my grammar is incorrect but I am a statistician not a writer


He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

[tim_noone]

Some pretty amazing stuff on here...and the Forum in general. And Blokes call Women.

[Grumps]

My last sentence

The he in the 2nd line , after 3 weeks, refers to the prime minister not to you Grumps.
Sorry if my grammar is incorrect but I am a statistician not a writer


He got it wrong again as the PM did not say we would be indoors for 3 weeks,he said the advice to stay indoors would be reviewed in 3 weeks time. Quite different.

Who is the "he" who got it wrong again, regarding what the PM said, or didn't say? I read it to mean me.
Now if today was the only time you've accused me of saying it would be over in 3 weeks I might accept you got it wrong.... But it's not is it? You've said it several times previously, and each time I've explained, that my only involvement was to explain to you where people had got the 3 week figure from, I made no comment other than that. I thought maybe you hadn't heard the PMs speech so I was helping you out. God help me I wish I hadn't!!!.

[FactualFrank]

Some posters have stamina, I'll give them that.

You could start from the beginning of this thread, jump 100 pages and feel like you're on the next page.

[thatdberight]

Posters as early as February on here should not be more capable than the government advisors but the facts are 3 of us were, in knowing exactly what was happening & where things were going.

I think peak **** being talked has been reached. We can probably close this now.

[uptheclarets]

To be honest I have found this afternoon’s offering more entertaining than the political crap of the last few days.

[TheFamilyCat]

I think peak **** being talked has been reached. We can probably close this now.

Jakub's curve for talking shite flattened months ago. It's been a plateau since then

[Grumps]

Why would anybody think any different? I was slow from the starting blocks creating the thread on 7th February that's more than 2mths from now, people were & still are literally dropping like flies, early February or mid/late February before even hitting march action should have been taken, what more evidence do you need? You look at what's happening elsewhere & work with an effective action plan ASAP. Posters as early as February on here should not be more capable than the government advisors but the facts are 3 of us were, in knowing exactly what was happening & where things were going.

What about all the complety false claims at least 2 of those posters have said?

[Fenwick]

I've completely lost track of the argument and counter-argument on this thread. Only one thing to do, I'll just have to re-read the whole thing from post 1...

[thatdberight]

I've completely lost track of the argument and counter-argument on this thread. Only one thing to do, I'll just have to re-read the whole thing from post 1...

No. Really. Don't. You'll be wishing for a bad bout of the title by about page 10.

[TVC15]

I've completely lost track of the argument and counter-argument on this thread. Only one thing to do, I'll just have to re-read the whole thing from post 1...

I’m voting for remaining in Europe.

[FactualFrank]

I've completely lost track of the argument and counter-argument on this thread. Only one thing to do, I'll just have to re-read the whole thing from post 1...

Can you sum it up for me, once you've finished.

[Fenwick]

Can you sum it up for me, once you've finished.

I can sum it up for you now. A lot of very bored people, some armed with actual knowledge, having a sustained pop at each other !

[paulatky]

What about all the complety false claims at least 2 of those posters have said?

You just cant let it go can you.
Then you complain when others reply to you

[Jakubclaret]

I've completely lost track of the argument and counter-argument on this thread. Only one thing to do, I'll just have to re-read the whole thing from post 1...

Nothing really to lose track of, lots of garbage which needs subtracting, the very essence of the embryonic points suggested a s**storm dropping a collassal amount, the points early on lead us to where we are now & going on further beyond, it's a king s**t of poo mountain which was accurately predicted from the word GO.

[Grumps]

You just cant let it go can you.
Then you complain when others reply to you

You'll find I only complain when people lie.

[Zlatan]

You just cant let it go can you.
Then you complain when others reply to you

Just want to check which one you are, were you the one who said China were burning masses of its own people? Or were you the one who said the death rate was 26%?

[thatdberight]

Just want to check which one you are, were you the one who said China were burning masses of its own people? Or were you the one who said the death rate was 26%?

Paul's highlights are:
"(re China) I wouldnt be surprised if the real numbers infected are in the millions and 1,000’s of bodies being burnt daily"

"Re: Cheltenham Festival
Mon Feb 24, 2020 9:40 am
Hope its not cancelled due to coronaviris"

Or was it a million UK deaths (Mar 12) or remember the famous lockdown of London with streets sealed off that he (and only he) reported?

He's repeatedly full of ****. Which is probably why he made such a big deal of the short-lived toilet roll shortage.

[Rileybobs]

Don’t forget that this situation will result in the majority of people losing their homes. Zero credibility.

[Zlatan]

Don’t forget that this situation will result in the majority of people losing their homes. Zero credibility.

I’m not sure that the majority of people will lose their homes, some will though and that is terrible for them. But not the majority.

[Lowbankclaret]

What about all the complety false claims at least 2 of those posters have said?

Grumps, had a search back, not found you mention what you said you would if we hit 10,000 last week.

Must have missed it.

[Grumps]

Grumps, had a search back, not found you mention what you said you would if we hit 10,000 last week.

Must have missed it.

I answered that yesterday, and told you exactly what I thought of you.
Can you imagine anyone basking in the glory of 10,000 deaths, oh sorry of course you can, twice now.
I've also looked back for all the posts where you've responded when people have pointed out your mistakes, and guess what, I Carnt find them
Are they still leaving people to die in Padiham, just so they don't get added to the figures?

[Jakubclaret]

I’m not sure that the majority of people will lose their homes, some will though and that is terrible for them. But not the majority.

Very very debatable far far too early to call, I know a couple of people recently with threatening letters from drysdensfairfax solicitors licking their lips nothing can be done right now but amongst them & others they are ready to pounce after the 3months, 6mths 12mths down the line if things don't improve employment wise a bloodbath ensues, bailiffs & sheriff's vacancies may be listed quite regularly.