{::'KayCeeS::} Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/ I started a previous thread to ask the question of why we believe what we believe. Surely a rational and level-headed society constantly searches for new information to make the most informed choices possible. It's not about politics, obviously. It's about all of our welfare as human beings. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 The website of Swiss Policy Research, an anonymous, pseudo- scientific research group that claims to be exposing pro-NATO propaganda. The site has published false claims, including about COVID-19. Proceed with caution: This website severely violates basic journalistic standards. Score: 17.5/100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: The website of Swiss Policy Research, an anonymous, pseudo- scientific research group that claims to be exposing pro-NATO propaganda. The site has published false claims, including about COVID-19. Proceed with caution: This website severely violates basic journalistic standards. Score: 17.5/100 Still more legit than the washington post 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, westside2 said: Still more legit than the washington post Sure, then why won’t the people who run the site reveal who they are? Jeff Bezos is waiving hi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Why start a new thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{::'KayCeeS::} Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, meazza said: Why start a new thread? If you click the link genius you will understand why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBBills Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just FYI facts are not allowed to be posted in PPP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 hour ago, {::'KayCeeS::} said: If you click the link genius you will understand why. I did. Post it in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Fact #1: Only the government can save us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, KD in CA said: Fact #1: Only the government can save us. Except when it's donald trumps government, then it must be stopped at all costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBUFFALO716 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, meazza said: Except when it's donald trumps government, then it must be stopped at all costs. Not true Trump can solve everything on his own only he can do it he told us so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 15 hours ago, {::'KayCeeS::} said: https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/ I started a previous thread to ask the question of why we believe what we believe. Surely a rational and level-headed society constantly searches for new information to make the most informed choices possible. It's not about politics, obviously. It's about all of our welfare as human beings. Hi. Sorry to intrude. @{::'KayCeeS::} PM'd me about this site asking if I was aware of it. I wasn't. This is my take FWIW, no salesman will call, I have no intention to hang here much less fact-curate here. First of all the site is set up to look very good and authoratative, with references and a quote from Camus about honesty. After review, I would say that's probably ironic. Right off the bat, the front page "overview" states as factual things that are not considered factual but at best emerging or debatable by sources I consider reputable. Digging further into two statements made, that I know something about, I find that they appear to be well referenced, but in fact the references used are highly selective, with some good factual references dismissed as inappropriate for one or another reason and focus on rather ratty data. This isn't a case of new information or suppressed information being brought forth; it's a case of being highly selective about which sources are utilized and which disregarded, not in a way which relates to the scientific merit or soundness of the data. Intrigued, I looked into the background of the site itself. In contrast to sites I consider legitimate, I can not find information about the contributors maintaining the Covid-19 section of this site or their credentials or affiliations, nor can I trace the ownership or the funding of this site. For a scientist, this is a Giant Red Flag. If you are a reputable scientist, you sign your work and stand behind your views. You also disclose potential conflicts of interest in funding. If you aren't willing to do so, there's usually a reason - and it's not a favorable reason indicating openness, transparency, and willingness to withstand challenge. So, digging into the website itself a bit, I find that some well-respected Swiss sources believe the site to be propaganda generated outside Switzerland: https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/147252/1/Medienstrukturen.pdf https://www.br.de/nachrichten/deutschland-welt/faktenfuchs-wie-glaubwuerdig-ist-swiss-policy-research,S128XLH If you don't read German, Wiki says this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Propaganda_Research Prior to May 2020, the site was known as "Swiss Propaganda Research" The editors of the site are unknown Stephan Russ-Mohl, professor of journalism and media management at the Università della Svizzera italiana, considers the articles on the SPRS to themselves serve as propaganda, rather than being serious research on the subject. He has noted that the anonymity of the website creates doubts over the reliability and authenticity of its research, particularly in a country such as Switzerland, which has full freedom of its press I would not consider this a reputable source of information about covid-19. @{::'KayCeeS::}Thanks for sending me the PM with the link. I slept on it and decided to put this up since I saw it had been posted here. Not to worry, I won't be back. Please don't tag me in your subsequent discussion though if you do, I have a fine collection of Naomi Wu videos that shall be at your service. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 14 hours ago, KD in CA said: Fact #1: Only the government can save us. It will be gone by April Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{::'KayCeeS::} Posted October 3, 2020 Author Share Posted October 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Hi. Sorry to intrude. @{::'KayCeeS::} PM'd me about this site asking if I was aware of it. I wasn't. This is my take FWIW, no salesman will call, I have no intention to hang here much less fact-curate here. First of all the site is set up to look very good and authoratative, with references and a quote from Camus about honesty. After review, I would say that's probably ironic. Right off the bat, the front page "overview" states as factual things that are not considered factual but at best emerging or debatable by sources I consider reputable. Digging further into two statements made, that I know something about, I find that they appear to be well referenced, but in fact the references used are highly selective, with some good factual references dismissed as inappropriate for one or another reason and focus on rather ratty data. This isn't a case of new information or suppressed information being brought forth; it's a case of being highly selective about which sources are utilized and which disregarded, not in a way which relates to the scientific merit or soundness of the data. Intrigued, I looked into the background of the site itself. In contrast to sites I consider legitimate, I can not find information about the contributors maintaining the Covid-19 section of this site or their credentials or affiliations, nor can I trace the ownership or the funding of this site. For a scientist, this is a Giant Red Flag. If you are a reputable scientist, you sign your work and stand behind your views. You also disclose potential conflicts of interest in funding. If you aren't willing to do so, there's usually a reason - and it's not a favorable reason indicating openness, transparency, and willingness to withstand challenge. So, digging into the website itself a bit, I find that some well-respected Swiss sources believe the site to be propaganda generated outside Switzerland: https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/147252/1/Medienstrukturen.pdf https://www.br.de/nachrichten/deutschland-welt/faktenfuchs-wie-glaubwuerdig-ist-swiss-policy-research,S128XLH If you don't read German, Wiki says this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Propaganda_Research Prior to May 2020, the site was known as "Swiss Propaganda Research" The editors of the site are unknown Stephan Russ-Mohl, professor of journalism and media management at the Università della Svizzera italiana, considers the articles on the SPRS to themselves serve as propaganda, rather than being serious research on the subject. He has noted that the anonymity of the website creates doubts over the reliability and authenticity of its research, particularly in a country such as Switzerland, which has full freedom of its press I would not consider this a reputable source of information about covid-19. @{::'KayCeeS::}Thanks for sending me the PM with the link. I slept on it and decided to put this up since I saw it had been posted here. Not to worry, I won't be back. Please don't tag me in your subsequent discussion though if you do, I have a fine collection of Naomi Wu videos that shall be at your service. Hapless, I appreciate your dedication to this. As always everyone can read and make up their own mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Not to worry, I won't be back. Please don't tag me in your subsequent discussion though if you do, I have a fine collection of Naomi Wu videos that shall be at your service. Yes!! Sorry, had to reply to that after looking up who “she” was lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Lead by example; not by Trump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 6 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Yes!! Sorry, had to reply to that after looking up who “she” was lol At your service. Here's one for apartment dwellers. And yes, she. When she gets up and you see the bottom half of that outfit 😂 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Incompetence 360 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 24 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: At your service. Here's one for apartment dwellers. And yes, she. When she gets up and you see the bottom half of that outfit 😂 ...I check for the top half at Party City weekly.....always out of stock....dammit................ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts