Statue of Death, personified as a human skeleton dressed in a shroud and clutching a scythe, from the Cathedral of Trier in Trier, Germany (from here).

So what about that question? Is the Coronavirus (COVID-19) a hoax? Well, there are people using that expression. Yet we are quite dumb, not as clever as we either fear others might be, or we like to think we are. There are opportunists who see any crisis as an opportunity to press their agendas (Global Warming and Socialism for example). To explain their actions, their efforts to frighten people, make the Coronavirus (COVID-19) appear more monstrous than it is, we don’t need to assume they created it. That said, some of the happenings in recent years have given us cause to be suspicious. No doubt everyone has their favorites. Here are just a few of mine.

So, should we be alarmed? Well, we ought to be more careful about protecting each others rights. That includes thanking God for the good news about the Coronavirus (COVID-19) and getting our economy back to normal so that everyone can provide for themselves. Dependent people are just to easy to frighten and to push around.

Consider some of that news.

COVID-19 Lethality Not Much Different Than Flu, Says New Study ( reports this.

In the new study, the researchers sought residents through Facebook to whom they could administer the antibody tests. The results were an unadjusted prevalence of coronavirus antibodies of 1.5 percent. After making various statistical and demographic adjustments, researchers calculated the likely prevalence ranged from 2.49 to 4.16 percent. At the time that these tests were administered, there were about 1,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 32* deaths from the disease in Santa Clara County. The upshot is that “these prevalence estimates represent a range between 48,000 and 81,000 people infected in Santa Clara County by early April, 50- 85-fold more than the number of confirmed cases.”

Using these data, the researchers calculated the infection fatality rate, that is, the percent of people infected with the disease who die: “A hundred deaths out of 48,000-81,000 infections corresponds to an infection fatality rate of 0.12-0.2%,” they report.* That’s about the same infection fatality rate the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates for seasonal influenza. (from here (

New York releases antibody testing data: 14% of population may be infected with coronavirus ( reports this.

New York may have 13.9% of its population infected with coronavirus, meaning 2.7 million residents could have had the virus, preliminary state results Thursday showed.

New York heath officials conducted an antibody test of a sample of 3,000 people in recent days. The immediate results, released Thursday, suggested a death rate of about 0.5% of those infected because about 15,500 New Yorkers have died of confirmed COVID-19 cases. (continued here (

We keep getting more and more reason to believe the virus is not as dangerous as we first feared. What we have confirmed instead is that that nasty virus is highly contagious. Fortunately, as Table 2 shows here, Provisional Death Counts for Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) (, the virus mostly kills the elderly. Therefore, younger people can continue to go to school and to work, practicing some social distancing, while the elderly practice more severe forms social distancing (which may do some good if it works as well as we think).

Consider how many people the flu kills. See 2019-2020 U.S. Flu Season: Preliminary Burden Estimates ( To slow its spread, we wash our hands and cover our mouths when we cough and sneeze. When we are sick, we avoid the elderly and vulnerable. We may even stay at home. But we cannot completely halt the spread of the flu. All we can do is stop everyone from getting the flu at the same time, which would cause lots of problems.

Other Views






  1. No, the virus is no hoax.
    However those overhyped models and predictions and the frenzied doom and gloom media reportage are definitely hoaxes.
    Many politicians spread the hoax deliberately or because they fell for the hoax.
    From the start I was sceptical of all these doomsday scenarios for good reasons.
    I’m old enough to have lived through many scares. Here are just a few examples.

    – Dying forrests because of acid rain
    – Aids
    – Mad cow desease
    – The Y2K Bug (Melting nuclear reactors and civilisational collapse)
    – We were all going to get skin cancer (ozon hole)
    – Swine flu

    Without exeption all these examples turned out to be way less severe and catastrophic than predicted.
    Given this experience and given the media’s tendency to blow real or potential danger out of any proportion because sensationalist headlines and breathless reporting sells much better than cool, calm and objective reporting using common sense, critical thinking and logic, I’m more than justified to be sceptical of the newest care.
    The burden of proof, why this time it’s really, really, different is on those who peddle this newest scare.
    Already we can see that the threat of the wuhan virus was way overblown.
    The Imperial College’s Neil Ferguson who started this panic and who significantly influenced the decisons of many goverments was completely off the mark.
    For the US he predicted 1.1 million deaths in the best case and to 2.2 million deaths in the worst case.
    This is not the first time that he has made a totally overblown prediction with desastrous consequences for the economy and for human life.
    The particular model was involved in one of the scares I listed.
    If you want to know which one it was, read this highly interesting article.
    “How Wrong Were the Models and Why?”

    In contrast to former scares, this one has succeeded in scaring the s**t out of the people, causing unprecedented desastrous consequences.

    Scientists and “experts” are not infallible and they are not neccessarily the noble, altruistic, impartial human beings for the simple reason that they are humans beings.
    As such they are susceptible to all temptations, corruptions, deceptions and irrationality that every human being is suseptible to.
    This is reason enough not to follow them blindly but to use critical thinking and common sense.

    For those who still want to tell us that we should always follow the experts, I have a simple question:
    Should President Truman have followed the suggestion of general MacArthur, the expert for war? Should he have nuked China?

    1. Specifically to your last sentence… “listen to the experts” or “listen to the scientists” is an alternative to listening to those without any knowledge on a subject that requires some technical expertise.. typically politicians. Your Truman/MacArthur example was all about killing people and expanding a war.. a moral decision. MacArthur had strategic ability (although not infallible in his career) but Korea was slowly evolving into a political war… the proverbial “police action”… and MacArthur was used to fighting wars to win. Truman made not only a moral decision to not drop the bomb but also keep MacArthur from running into China and expand the war. MacArthur only out of line when he opposed Truman’s decision out to the world… defying his CoC.
      Seems to me a prez “listens to the experts” depending on the preferred final outcome… then makes a decision. In our current situation, would appear that the goal of this Prez is to restore the economy regardless of the human cost.. collateral damage in lives is acceptable, regardless of the projected numbers by the “experts/scientists”. To the other extreme, minimizing the loss of life and focusing on a vaccine or treatment before returning to open a stalled economy is the other goal.

      1. Would it kill you, to quote me correctly?
        I’m not talking about “listen to the experts”. I’m talking about “always following the experts”.
        Big difference.
        You essentially confirmed my point with regards to MacArthur.
        You are obsessed with President Trump. I’m not interested in participating in your obsession.
        Thanks but no thanks.
        I will only say this: Not restarting the economy also incurs human costs.

        1. To your last sentence.. yes keeping the economy closed.. or more to the point, restricted… does have a cost. So… who judges the value of human life? After all, the latest numbers suggest “only” 2% of Americans are dying from this thing… and something like 20% recover by way of a hospital stay and the suffering on the machine. The remaining either don’t know they have it or had it and are passing it on… and a number haven’t gotten it thus far. Not worth “wrecking” the economy over?
          The face mask/distancing/stay-at-home mediation seems to suggest the virus can be inhibited from running.. IF we keep going with the mediation. For how long? Seems the goal is, until a vaccine.. and until said vaccine is produced and distributed. So, the balance question is how long can we expect our economy to limp along like it has before we can’t recover at all.

          For economy to work at all it needs people.. the public.. feeling good about spending money again. The spending of money creates demand and demand stimulates production.. and jobs. I personally do not see people willing to rush out and buy goods and services they don’t need if and when some states “open up”. People are going to be way too cautious.. and will save for the next round of the disease and possible re-unemployment. There is NO confidence in government being able to do anything, no confidence in leadership at any level, no confidence the economy will hold up, no confidence jobs won’t go away again, and no confidence in the overall economic outlook given all the reports of Great Depression-like numbers.

          In the meantime.. stress and misguided politics are assigning the mandatory masks, distancing, and stay-at-home as being tyrannical efforts for government to take away rights… and of course, anything political that happens means guns are going to be taken away… so clowns bring their guns to a demonstration regarding a disease.

          So I might recommend that before you decide to hunker down on your fave political opinion you consider the entire picture of survival.. and far less about your politics.

          I AM obsessed with Trump being President. My question is, why aren’t you?

          1. “who judges the value of human life?”
            You do! Every time you drive a car you decide that driving a car is worth the risk of dying in a car accident.
            There is no life without risk. Even staying at home can get you killed.

            “2% of Americans are dying from this thing”
            That’s an awful lot of dead Americans. 6.4 millions? Really? Man. Get your facts straight.

            You don’t seem to understand the basics of the economy.
            The choice between economy and health is a false one and it’s easily explained why.
            Let’s consider the simplest of economies, an agrarian society where everyone is a farmer.
            Whether the virus out there has a 10%, a 1% or a 0.1% chance of killing the farmer, eventually the farmer has to leave his house and work in the field or he will die of starvation. That is 100% certain.
            Simply put: no work, no eat.
            Let’s take the next step. An economy consisting of farmers and everybody else like carpenters, smiths etc.
            Those who are not farmers trade their products and services for food. If the non-farmers have nothing to trade with, they will die of starvation.
            Again, no work, no eat.
            You can add any amount of complexity but it always boils down to: no work, no eat.
            You can also print as much money as you want. The amount of food and other products does not magically change.
            Again, no work, no eat.
            Besides, it’s universally understood that poor societies have a poor healthcare system. That’s why in certain African countries people die of diseases the treatment of which costs just a few bucks and a few minutes at your doctor in developed countries.
            In poor countries many people can’t even afford relatively inexpensive treatments.
            Simply put: poverty kills.
            If you make a country poor, people will die. That’s why the choice between economy and health is a false one.
            Economy IS life.
            The longer you keep an economy shut down, the poorer the country gets, the more people will die.
            Currently pretty much most countries affected by Corona massively increase their debts and print massive amounts of money.
            How long can a country sustain the current situation?
            You can figure it out yourself.
            Debt/GDP ratio of US in 2019 106%
            Debt/GDP ratio of Greece in 2017 176%

            I choose not to address the rest of your post because it consists of the usual irrelevant cheap talking points and highly speculative assumptions.
            Here in Germany the opening of the economy works just fine. I badly need a haircut. Seems that only in your Trump deranged vision of America people are too scared to enjoy the blessings of an open economy.

            “I AM obsessed with Trump being President. My question is, why aren’t you?”
            Because I’m not insane! Obsession is unhealthy and clouds judgement.

          2. I certainly can’t answer one bit for the German economy. All I can do to keep tabs on the crap going on here. I now understand why Trump (and his idiocy) means nothing to you.
            Obsession is indeed not a good thing as in its extended emotional application it affects quality of life. My “obsession” against the Orange Man is not quite there yet.
            Your application of economics is a bit simplistic… and had I known you reside in Germany I’d have saved my blabbering to avoid your embarrassment.
            Excellent command of English grammar, btw. That impresses me.

          3. The basics of economy and human biology are the same everywhere.
            You understand nothing. In Germany many people are as pathologically obsessed with our Chancellor Merkel as those suffering from an unhealthy anti-Trump-syndrome. Not I.
            Even if I lived in America I wouldn’t suffer from that disease.
            Simplistic? That’s how science works. Breaking down the complex into its simplest form. In thermodynamics we can assume that the human body sonsist 100% of water and our calcualtions are still sufficently accurate.
            An apt description I must say.

          4. @artaxes
            I am German myself. The US has 3800 confirmed cases per million, Germany 2060 with way more testing and in deaths its 230 vs 93 per million. Unlike in Germany, daily new infections in the US are only verrrrrrrry slowly coming down, whereas in Germany they are coming down nicely, due to the efforts put into social distancing and economic shutdown measures. That’s exactly why you could only get haircuts again starting last Monday. Yes, I am happy, too, that the economy can start working again, and I hope, that we still will be able to keep infections in check. That will take a lot of effort.

            In case you missed it, I posted statistics on total weekly deaths in NYC, that number increased by a factor of 6 before the effects of the lockdown kicked in.

            BTW, as you are in Germany, one word: Waldzustandsbericht.

          5. Soryy.. I’m not German nor am I in Germany, although I probably could play a German on TV if the pay is good.

          6. Hehe.. nice try, Liz. Keeping in mind this self-centered, arrogant, schmuck has an approach like most Trumpian Conservatives… “What they want us to do is against my rights therefore I will shoot down their reasonings for taking my rights away.”… let’s try it this way.

            Let’s say this guy refuses to wear a mask and one of my loved ones walks by him.. let’s say a spouse… and my spouse becomes ill and tracing determines he was the one doing the shedding… am I entitled to take retribution against him for taking away my spouse’s right permanently? Or.. let’s say it the way it is… in my rage and despondency can I simply kill him to avenge my spouse’s death? Does he accept responsibility for his purely politically inspired carelessness?

            This clown completely misses the fact that the mask and distancing protects others from him as well.. in the event God, in all his wisdom, has elected him, regardless of his demonstrated lack of intellect or questionable gene pool, does not feel the effects but, can pass it on.

          7. Let’s say this guy refuses to wear a mask and one of my loved ones walks by him.. let’s say a spouse… and my spouse becomes ill and tracing determines he was the one doing the shedding… am I entitled to take retribution against him for taking away my spouse’s right permanently?

            Am I entitled to take retribution against folks like you for financial crisis and damages incurred?

    2. I am always amazed at people who claim things did not turn out to be as bad as they were predicted, while not mentioning the mitigating actions taken that averted the projected outcome.

      – Dying forrests because of acid rain
      International treaties on the reduction of SO2 and NOX emissions. SO2 emissions down by about 30% from 1980 to 2010.

      – Aids
      Drugs for Aids management, the situation in Africa still is bad, especially in South Africa with over 15% of the population being infected

      – Mad cow desease
      Dealt with by ban on British Beef. I am still prohibited from donating blood, as I spend too much time in England back then.

      – The Y2K Bug (Melting nuclear reactors and civilisational collapse)
      Read up, There was a massive campaign patching the software.

      – We were all going to get skin cancer (ozon hole)
      International regulation of the use of chlorofluorocarbons. The ozone hole over Antarctica, with its impacts on Australia, is only slowly getting better since about 2000.

      – Swine flu
      vaccination. it helps

      1. I agree with you on mitigating risk. Not long ago (though it feels very long ago), I posted a video from the med group and it asserted that “if these measures work, they will seem like an over reaction…because they worked”.
        I remember taking spoonfuls of bone meal powder in my oatmeal growing up, for the added benefit of calcium and protein. Then the origins of CJD were discovered and I felt like a ticking time bomb for the next 20 or so years.
        Mitigation matters.
        That said, Iowa is not New York city (case in point, NYC was late to the program and look what happened there). Iowa can get back to work. Georgia apparently can too because they’re doing just fine. I think Colorado should also.

        The problem is (think I’ve said this before), everything is political. For example, you’ve cited the covid statistics for Germany as better. Aren’t they using a lot more plaquenil (aka Hydroxychloroquine), and earlier, for covid patients? Whereas over here, Trump said, “hey this looks like it might be promising…” which caused half of the population, empowered by the magic of selective information never-Trump channels, to froth at the mouth and demand people stop drinking fish tank cleaner like Trump told them to.
        It’s nuts. It truly is nuts.

        Trump says, hey we might need to worry about this, let’s stop travel. The media demands unfettered travel.
        Trump says, hey we might need to shut things down because this looks bad. The mayor of NY says, “don’t worry about this, go out and about. Not shutting down schools”.
        Now Trump says, maybe we can start opening things up and the left is again frothing as though economic collapse is better than attempting to open up in some areas.

        We now have been talking about Trump’s activities for three or so years. See whose commentary/predictions have stood the test of time. Start with Flynn, those comments for some folks haven’t aged well, to say the least.

        As a side note, they are now saying covid as a pre-existing condition will likely be disqualifying for military service (due to damage to the lungs).

        1. Aren’t they using a lot more plaquenil (aka Hydroxychloroquine), and earlier, for covid patients?

          Not that I am aware of. If there is reporting about it in Germany, it is about how neither hydroxychloroquine nor chloroquine seem to be helping. That is in line with what I read in the news about results from clinical studies. I had a bit of a look around and even the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, which to be honest I suspected we had but did not know, points out that both drugs have to prove efficacy. Doctors are allowed to try treatment, but it is strongly to do it only within the frame work of a clinical study, or failing that, not outside of a hospital setting. Only to go on over pages of known dangerous side effects.

          Trump says, hey we might need to worry about this, let’s stop travel. The media demands unfettered travel.

          Stoping travel has its place, if done properly. You don’t base it on nationality, you verify where people came from (and not just the last hop) and you quarentine those that are still allowed to come (which I think was implemented). You do it early, before the virus has taken a foothold already, and you are aware that you have not stopped the virus, all you have done is buy yourself a couple of weeks time to put up your defenses: PPE and testing. Neither of the latter happened in a meaningful way for a couple of wasted weeks.

          As a side note, they are now saying covid as a pre-existing condition will likely be disqualifying for military service (due to damage to the lungs).

          I am not surprised, given the CT-images I have seen from some mild cases.

          Localised approaches should be a good idea, as there is no one-size-fits-all solution. In Germany the latests relaxations of the rules are contingent to having no more than fifty new infections per 100,000 inhabitants in a Landkreis (these government units have between 60,000 and 1.2 million inhabitants, if I had to guess a median, I’d put it between 100,000 and 200,000).

      2. “immer das gleiche Lied” (same old song).
        I’m always amazed that people still use the same bunk argument that you use.
        The argument that those extreme, hysteric and overblown predictions didn’t come true because of mitigation measures is bunk because there is no scientific proof for that.
        I’m not worshipping science or scientists but I love the scientific method.
        I’m shure you know that a hypothesis/theory is scientific if and only if it is falsifiable. This means that there must be a test which shows that the hypothesis/theory is false. Unless you state the criteria which must be satisfied in order to falsify your hypothesis/theory it has the same weight as the legends of big foot, dragons and unicorns.
        I’m waiting for you to tell us which test would falsify your hypothesis/theory.
        As a reminder here is your hypothesis/theory: The most extreme predictions didn’t come true because of mitigation measures.
        Feel free to correct me, if I misrepresented you.

        “– The Y2K Bug (Melting nuclear reactors and civilisational collapse)
        Read up, There was a massive campaign patching the software.”

        I’ve been a software developer and programmer since before the year 2000 and I’ve been programming and using computers excessively since the earliy 1980s.
        So, I feel I’m more than qualified to speak about the Y2K craze.
        I lived it close up and personal.

        I knew immediately that the claims of melting nuclear reactors due to Y2K were bullcrap for very simple reasons.

        1. No programmer with more than two braincells makes critical functions dependent on the value of the current date.
        To do so, you’ve got to be completely insane and you deserve to be shot, hung, quartered and burned and your name be remembered in eternal shame.
        The only possible exceptions are things like orbital mechanics where the date is critical.
        But then you wouldn’t want your space ship tumbling out of control on 1/1/2000, would you?

        2. It’s inconceivable that embedded systems which regulate things like steam pressure would depend on the current date. Due to the scarcity of CPU-power and memory such systems didn’t waste precious resources handling dates but they used simple integer counters instead. This means that even if such systems depended for some strange reason on the elapsed time they would not be affected by the change from year 1999 to 2000.

        3. Nuclear power plants are designed to run for many decades and it would be exceedingly stupid to use software/hardware that is not designed to run many decades as well.

        4. The most critical systems in a power plant are the many embedded system and microcontrollers running practically autonomously.
        These systems are controlled by just a few or even one single system.
        In the worst case you just would need to set the clock of the main system(s) back to 1990. That’s it. That’s all.

        Solid and knowledgeable people always knew that the scare about melting nuclear reactors was baloney.
        But the media did not go to the solid and knowledgeable people.
        Without fail they went to the nutjobs, wackadoodles and looney tunes.
        The scarier and crazier a story is, the more clicks and views it generates, the higher TV ratings it genarates and the more newspapers it sells.
        Of course, only completely clueless people are still trying do defend the wackos of Y2K today.

        As for mitigation, you will never be able to proof your claim that mitigation averted the prophecied Y2K apocalypse.
        I’ll explain later why.
        The Y2K problem was real but it affected only a tiny percentage of hardware and software and therefore it was clear that it could never cause the much feared societal collapse.
        Software bugs are not viruses. That’s why there would never be a “cascading effect” crashing more and more computers.
        In the mid 1990s most of the software was already “Y2K compliant” and most programming languages already reserved enough memory for date values to handle years greater than 1999 without problem.
        Same goes for the PCs. By the late 1990s there were hardly any PCs from the 1980s in use.
        Nevertheless, due to media-induced fear countless people needlessly dumped their PCs and bought new PCs.
        The software that needed to be reviewed was primarily software written in archaic and exotic languages like COBOL from the 1960s, 1970s and the early 1980s running on mainframes.
        Lots of COBOL programmers already in retirement were recalled (for good money, of course).
        To understand why you will never be able to proof that mitigation averted a catastrophy you need to understand how programmers work.
        When a programmer tasked with identifying and replacing program code that uses 2 digit years finds such code he does NOT try to determine whether the code would cause catastrophic problems or minor, negligible irritation.
        To determine the severity of the effects caused by the code the programmer would need to set up and run elobarate, complicated tests which would consume much more time than simply changing the code and testing its correct function.
        That’s why there is no way in hell, you can ever tell whether the code would have caused major problems or whether it would have almost no effect.
        Furthermore, the amount of money spent for software patches is no metric for the scale of the mitigation.
        In fact, it’s completely irrelevant, since the programmer could spend most of the time sifting through the code only to find that few or no changes are necessary.

        So, I say to you: If you want to proof that mitigation prevented the prophecied Y2K apocalypse, go ahead, make my day!

        1. First off, I find it exceedingly annoying, when people being made aware of a glaring omission in their argument — instead of gracefully admitting the omission — go into attack mode. It get’s worse, when these people try to chicken out by trying to reverse the burden of proof. If anyone here has anything to prove, it is you, because you started with the claim that the listed problems were overhyped and now you stand empty handed. It is getting even worse, when they try grandstanding and intimidation, by waving around their perpurted knowledge of the scientific method and demand of others work that they are themselves unwillling to spend. They never expect to be called on their bluff. BTW, you’re the new kid on the block, so you probably do not know, that I am a physicist. Try grandstanding elsewhere.

          1. No programmer with more than two braincells makes critical functions dependent on the value of the current date.
          Not intentionally, anyway.

          Nobody would be so stupid, as to build a rocket booster from two pieces and seal the gap with three rubberrings, right? Not for passenger spacecrafts.

          Nobody in his right mind would build a modern passenger aircraft that needs to be powered down every 120 days, unlest it may have a chance to simply fall out of the sky, like the 787.

          No good software engineer, would write an OS that needs to be rebooted after about 49.7 days, because the millisecond counter rolls over, right? Does this sound familiar, or was Windows 95 before your time as a programmer? IBM had interfaces lock up after about 1.5 years.

          All of the above are examples popping up on the first page, when searching for embedded systems rollover bugs. These things happen, because systems are complex, specifications not always clear and complete, and products are designed under strong financial and time contstraints. So given the above examples, it would have been reckless, not to check and mitigate against Y2K in critical systems. And don’t get me even started on climate change. You’ll be even more out of your depth, than you are in programming.

          1. @marmoewp

            The real problem with the Y2K bug is that the older systems had far less RAM and disk space to work with. In addition, they were slower. Therefore, whenever the programming could be simplified, it was. Nevertheless, although some Y2K pitfalls were most certainly out there waiting for 1/1/2000, the problem was also a great software upgrade marketing tool. Nobody could afford to take the chance of not upgrading.

            Since just about every system was upgraded that could be upgraded, we really don’t know how serious the Y2K problem actually was.

            The Y2K problem illustrates why doomsayers are almost always right. Nobody wants to take the chance of them being right. Therefore, we adopt their fixes, and the doomsayers take credit when nothing bad happens.

            Global Warming is a rare exception. Here the doomsayers overreached. Because the pain of giving up fossil fuels would be too great if we actually gave up fossil fuels, we have been testing the doomsayers predictions for 40 years. So far we seem to be getting more hot air from the doomsayers than Global Warming.

          2. @Tom
            Speaking of the scientific method. James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies from 1981 to 2013. made a projection, of how the global temperature of Earth was going to develop. He had to make guesses / scenarios, how much greenhouse gases mankind would emit and plugged those into a mathematical model of how temperature would respond. The remarkable thing is, that model was falsifiable and prevailed in the test.


            But hey, never mind, it does not show what you like to see, so put the scientific method in the wastebin, if it stands in the way of your ideology.

          3. @marmoewp:
            Your overly emotional response tells me that I must have hit a nerve.
            Reminds me of a squealing pig.

            ” If anyone here has anything to prove, it is you, because you started with the claim that the listed problems were overhyped and now you stand empty handed. ”

            Dude, the only one who has to prove somethiog, is you.
            Those who made all these doomsday predictions have already proven to be wrong for the simple reason that their crazy predictions have not come true.
            Of course those clowns tried to convince us that their scenarios did not become reality because of mitigation.
            The burden of proof is on them because they’ve made the claim in the first place. So far I’ve seen no proof for their claims.
            You just repeated their second hypothesis/theory which tries to explain the failure of their first hypothesis/theory.
            The burden of proof is therefore on you.
            I suspect, the reason why you are reacting so emotionally is because you have been called out for the first time and you’ve been caught with your pants down.
            If you had proof you would have told us so. You have nothing.
            Although my intention was not to initimidate you, I understand perfectly well why you feel intimidated.
            It’s because you have nothing.

            I also understand why you try to attack my character.
            Again, it’s because you have nothing. You have no good argument.

            In your pathetic attempt to discredit me, you only have embarrased yourself again and you have shown how completely clueless you are.

            I have stated the following:
            “It’s inconceivable that embedded systems which regulate things like steam pressure would depend on the current date. Due to the scarcity of CPU-power and memory such systems didn’t waste precious resources handling dates but they used simple integer counters instead. This means that even if such systems depended for some strange reason on the ELAPSED TIME they would not be affected by the change from year 1999 to 2000.”

            I expect a physicist to understand the difference between a particular date and elapsed time (in physics usually called t).
            All of the examples you have cited actually prove MY point because the problems involve the elapsed time and not the date.
            In your Boeing 787 example a signed 32 bit integer counter is used to count the elapsed time in units of 10 msec.
            The counter starts counting when the system is powered on and after 248 days the counter rollover happens.
            Why should the counter rollover happen on any partcular date, say your birthday?
            For that to happen the system had to be powered on precisely 248 days before your birthday.

            For rollover problems to cause catastrophic consequences precisely on 1/1/2000 all of the following things had to be true:

            – There is a rollover problem in the first place
            (That happens only if an insufficient number of bits is used to count the elapsed time).

            – The counter rollover is not handled correctly (bug).

            – The rollover happens precisely on 1/1/2000
            (For that to happen the counting of elapsed time must have started precisely on a specific date).

            – The problem caused by the rollover bug must have significantlly critical consequences for the function of the whole system.

            I guess you have a better change of beeing struck by lightning while having outdoor sex on a perfect summer day.

            You see, it takes a lot more to be a programmer than just using the next best google search results.

Comments are closed.

Blog at

Up ↑

Artaxes' brainbench

Truth in an age of deception

Not of this World

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Mount Vernon, Ohio.

Life Project Blog

Finding Clear and Simple Faith


Government, Economics and Figure Skating

Power of the Holy Spirit

"You know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God." ~Jesus


A site for the Glory of God

"From The Heart of A Shepherd" by Pastor Travis D. Smith

Daily Devotional Meditations and a Biblical Perspective on Current Events

Meerkat Musings

There's a Meerkat in all of us

Sillyfrog's Blog

"Once a pond a time..."

TOWER AND FLIGHTS (An AmericaOnCoffee Blog)

In The Beginning Man Tried Ascending To Heaven via The Tower Of Babel. Now He Tries To Elevate His Existence To A Heavenly State of Consciousness Thru The Use Of Hallucinogenic Drugs. And, Since The 20th Century, He Continually Voyages Into Outer Space Using Spacecrafts. Prayer Thru Christ Is The Only Way To Reach Heaven.

Christ in You

... Life and Love in Jesus

Mark 1:1

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (NIV)

Jill Domschot

Joy in the Southwest


Here are some of the things I have learned from studying the Bible

BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

Insightful Geopolitics

Impartial Informative Always

Libertas and Latte

Ramblings of a Disgruntled Patriot and Coffee Slave

A Blog About Surviving Trauma

My Life After Narcissistic Abuse

Blue Skies and Green Pastures

All about Jesus, Peace, Love, and Running


From A Garden To A City - The Prophetic Journey

Philosophy is all about being curious, asking basic questions. And it can be fun!

Faithful Steward Ministries and FSM Women's Outreach

Christian Outreach Ministry Dedicated to God, County, and Community

Jesus Quotes and God Thoughts

“God’s wisdom is something mysterious that goes deep into the interior of his purposes.” ~Apostle Paul

The Lions Den

"Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture, while adding some gracious ferocity.”


Life through the eyes of "cookie"

Rudy u Martinka

What the world needs now in addition to love is wisdom. We are the masters of our own disasters.

The Recovering Legalist

Living a Life of Grace

Write Side of the Road

writing my way through motherhood

Freedom Through Empowerment

Taking ownership of your life brings power to make needed changes. True freedom begins with reliance on God to guide this process and provide what you need.

John Branyan

the funny thing about the truth

Victory Girls Blog

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Mount Vernon, Ohio.

The Night Wind

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Mount Vernon, Ohio.

He Hath Said

is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort; let it dwell in you richly, as a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life

quotes and notes and opinions

from a Biblical perspective




The view from the Anglosphere

bluebird of bitterness

The opinions expressed are those of the author. You go get your own opinions.

Pacific Paratrooper

This site is Pacific War era information

My Walk, His Way - daily inspiration

%d bloggers like this: