In the cause of observational causality, another important aspect is that the cause should predict the effect better than the effect predicts itself. In this case we indeed find that Excess Mortality predicts itself poorly —of course, for a time delay equal to 0, it does predict itself, for all other time delays, it has littl…
In the cause of observational causality, another important aspect is that the cause should predict the effect better than the effect predicts itself. In this case we indeed find that Excess Mortality predicts itself poorly —of course, for a time delay equal to 0, it does predict itself, for all other time delays, it has little to no explanatory power.
From this we can conclude that, based on the data sets used, Administered Doses do cause Excess Mortality. Of course, our “briliant experts” are still stuck in the 19th century wrt statistical methods. I do not expect that they will be able to explain the excess mortality with their current methods, simply because 5 months is a hugh time delay, and because here is typically little knowledge of observational causal methods.
About the method
The method used is based on correlations. The current state-of-the-art is based on Information Theory, but that’s too out of the ordinary for layman, and even experts, so we better not go there. When I have time in a couple of weeks I might run the information theoretical causal analytics.
About the data
As mentioned, the data sets from Holden’s sources were used. We selected only EU countries, we did not differentiate between sexes and age groups. Finally we used monthly data due to time restrictions on my side (I simply do not have time to search for, or create weekly data sets for the excess mortality)."
JP, I think you're referring to the butterfly effect, but that effect is nonsense. A snowball can keep expanding going down a steep wet snowy slope, but once the slope ends, it stops expanding and stops moving. The air movements from butterfly wing motion diminish over time. There's nothing to make them expand. Air molecules don't attach to the small air mass around a butterfly.
Conventional science is plagued with bad assumptions. Quantum physics is in the same boat. See some of the papers in the Quantum Physics section of this site: http://milesmathis.com/
Continued...
In the cause of observational causality, another important aspect is that the cause should predict the effect better than the effect predicts itself. In this case we indeed find that Excess Mortality predicts itself poorly —of course, for a time delay equal to 0, it does predict itself, for all other time delays, it has little to no explanatory power.
From this we can conclude that, based on the data sets used, Administered Doses do cause Excess Mortality. Of course, our “briliant experts” are still stuck in the 19th century wrt statistical methods. I do not expect that they will be able to explain the excess mortality with their current methods, simply because 5 months is a hugh time delay, and because here is typically little knowledge of observational causal methods.
About the method
The method used is based on correlations. The current state-of-the-art is based on Information Theory, but that’s too out of the ordinary for layman, and even experts, so we better not go there. When I have time in a couple of weeks I might run the information theoretical causal analytics.
About the data
As mentioned, the data sets from Holden’s sources were used. We selected only EU countries, we did not differentiate between sexes and age groups. Finally we used monthly data due to time restrictions on my side (I simply do not have time to search for, or create weekly data sets for the excess mortality)."
I came to a similar conclusion of a delay using data in VAERS - https://howbad.info/secondpeak.html
Thank you!
This is great analysis...thank you.
I read your post. If I'm not mistaken, your "optimal" delay is 180 days? If so, again very close to 5 months.
Thank you Craig Paardekooper for all your amazing work.
Some amazing minds on here seeking the truth
That there is so much for us left to learn is a beautiful thing indeed.
JP, I think you're referring to the butterfly effect, but that effect is nonsense. A snowball can keep expanding going down a steep wet snowy slope, but once the slope ends, it stops expanding and stops moving. The air movements from butterfly wing motion diminish over time. There's nothing to make them expand. Air molecules don't attach to the small air mass around a butterfly.
Conventional science is plagued with bad assumptions. Quantum physics is in the same boat. See some of the papers in the Quantum Physics section of this site: http://milesmathis.com/