The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Curious Corona Coincidence
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

++Addition++As of a few hours subsequent to this post being published, Trends results for the month of November 2019 now return “Hmm, your search doesn’t have enough data to show here”.

I’m 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like “wuhan disease”. The same result for November 20th came up over and over. Rest assured that is not a doctored screen shot. My concerns about deep state intelligence have up to this point been abstract and philosophical. At this moment, they’re feeling much rawer than that. Maybe it is also just a coincidence–an admittedly quite curious one.

From Ron’s most recent addition to the American Pravda series:

But with the horrific consequences of our own later governmental inaction being obvious, sources within our intelligence agencies have sought to demonstrate that they were not the ones asleep at the switch. Earlier this month, an ABC News story cited four separate government sources to reveal that as far back as late November, a special medical intelligence unit within our Defense Intelligence Agency had produced a report revealing than an out-of-control disease epidemic was occurring in the Wuhan area of China, and widely distributed that document throughout the top ranks of our government, warning that steps should be taken to protect US forces based in Asia. After the story aired, a Pentagon spokesman officially denied the existence of that November report, while various other top level government and intelligence officials refused to comment.

Could the prospect of a contagion pandemic beginning in China have sparked the curiosity of a few members of said “top ranks of our government” to the extent that they did a bit of searching on their own? I went through Google Trends US search results month by month for all of 2019 for the phrase “wuhan virus”. The only month that returns results–as opposed to “Hmm, your search doesn’t have enough data to show here”, as is the case for December of 2019–is November, and only for a single day of that month, the 20th:

Curious coincidence if that’s all it was. Quite curious indeed.

 
Hide 43 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Could the prospect of a contagion pandemic beginning in China have sparked the curiosity of a few members of said “top ranks of our government”

    It might have. but the assumption would be that this was like SARS, 5 -15% of infected dying, but lacking the high person to person respiratory tramisability needed to be grow into a world pandemic. The initial assumption would be it was what the Chinese themselves then thought: a catastrophe for China and its links to the outside world that risked being cut by a panicking West, but could not in fact spread worldwide and become a pandemic. The National Center for Medical Intelligence and other branches of the Defense Intelligence Agency, probabally picked up some of the unusual activity and references to it through it routine hi tech c surveillance of China and mentioned it but it probably was not considered that important enough for memo to the top brass for inclusion in the national daily intel digest of immediate threats. In my opinion people have a very exaggerated expectation of intelligence agencies being super-intelligent.

    The first thing the Chinese said was the Wuhan disease had a fatality rate of 5-15 per cent and NYC Biodefense Centre chief Professor Ian Lipkin said. “On December 31st, researchers there [Wuhan] identified it as a coronavirus but said, ‘It’s not highly transmissible’”. On the 24th of January the WHO said “it is very clear right now that we have no sustained human-to-human transmission”.

    If the information available to the DNI was properly correlated they might have been able to determine by early December that there were too many patients for a disease that was really only caught at wet markets and in hospital interactions without protective measures and so the Wuhan was disease highly transmissible and would spread internationally and become a global pandemic, but if you believe them about what they knew and when, the Chinese authorities were more than a month away from realising that themselves. I suspect China knew the truth about the Wuhan disease for a few weeks before they told anyone because they needed time to prevent the outside world deciding on things affecting China before it was ready.

  2. Wow. Quite a find. That’s bound to make a splash.

  3. “top ranks of our government”

    Doesn’t look good for Top Ranks (TRs) does it. Do you suppose Orange Man is among the TRs? Serious question.

  4. Can you still replicate that search? Because I just tried it and got not enough data.

    P.S. I enjoy the Audacious alliterative aphorisms.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Wow. I am now getting the same. I'm 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like "wuhan disease". The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

  5. @res
    Can you still replicate that search? Because I just tried it and got not enough data.

    P.S. I enjoy the Audacious alliterative aphorisms.

    Wow. I am now getting the same. I’m 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like “wuhan disease”. The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

    • Agree: Colin Wright, res
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Is it possible to run the same queries on another search engine, say, one that doesn't like putting its thumb on the scale as much as Google?
    , @WorkingClass
    A cover up? Perpetrated by the TRs? Did somebody break this before you did AE? Or are you more dangerous than you knew? Ron needs to make sure this gets wide circulation. Come to think of it, why is this thread still up? And what am I doing here! I could be next. AAARRRGG!
    , @res
    That is unsettling. By any chance do you have the rest of the page around in a screenshot? Or can you get to it in your browser history? I'd be interested in seeing what the interest by subregion or related queries looked like.
    , @Elmer's Washable School Glue
    Yikes, that is scary. When I think about national intelligence I usually jump to assassinating foreign politicians or massive data banks full of transcripts, but the specificity and rapid response would suggest there are actual spooks reading this blog...

    On the other hand, slightly expanding the date range of the search causes the original result to return, with a bump on the 20th: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2019-10-23%202019-11-30&geo=US&q=wuhan%20virus

    Are our glowing friends really so incompetent as to "fix" the data for only one date range, ignoring every other? Or is it just being buggy?

  6. @Audacious Epigone
    Wow. I am now getting the same. I'm 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like "wuhan disease". The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

    Is it possible to run the same queries on another search engine, say, one that doesn’t like putting its thumb on the scale as much as Google?

    • Replies: @Bruno
    Almost Missouri, if some people did a google search the 20th November, how do you « think » another search engine could track that ?

    But Ive checked and it’s O. It’s quite weird. Hope you have kept a proof AE.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I'm unaware of any other SE that offers anything like Google does with Trends. If anyone else is, please share.
  7. @Audacious Epigone
    Wow. I am now getting the same. I'm 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like "wuhan disease". The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

    A cover up? Perpetrated by the TRs? Did somebody break this before you did AE? Or are you more dangerous than you knew? Ron needs to make sure this gets wide circulation. Come to think of it, why is this thread still up? And what am I doing here! I could be next. AAARRRGG!

  8. @Audacious Epigone
    Wow. I am now getting the same. I'm 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like "wuhan disease". The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

    That is unsettling. By any chance do you have the rest of the page around in a screenshot? Or can you get to it in your browser history? I’d be interested in seeing what the interest by subregion or related queries looked like.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I don't have either. Subconsciously going through the motions, I realize that I'm constantly opening and closing tabs rather than entering new searches in existing tabs. I slapped that SS together in paint and cut out the rest. IIRC, there were just two states with results for drilling down further, California and Texas--I'm about 95% sure of that.
  9. @Almost Missouri
    Is it possible to run the same queries on another search engine, say, one that doesn't like putting its thumb on the scale as much as Google?

    Almost Missouri, if some people did a google search the 20th November, how do you « think » another search engine could track that ?

    But Ive checked and it’s O. It’s quite weird. Hope you have kept a proof AE.

  10. @res
    That is unsettling. By any chance do you have the rest of the page around in a screenshot? Or can you get to it in your browser history? I'd be interested in seeing what the interest by subregion or related queries looked like.

    I don’t have either. Subconsciously going through the motions, I realize that I’m constantly opening and closing tabs rather than entering new searches in existing tabs. I slapped that SS together in paint and cut out the rest. IIRC, there were just two states with results for drilling down further, California and Texas–I’m about 95% sure of that.

  11. @Almost Missouri
    Is it possible to run the same queries on another search engine, say, one that doesn't like putting its thumb on the scale as much as Google?

    I’m unaware of any other SE that offers anything like Google does with Trends. If anyone else is, please share.

    • Replies: @res
    I haven't used this, but would it do the trick?
    https://about.ads.microsoft.com/en-us/resources/training/microsoft-advertising-intelligence-tool
  12. @Audacious Epigone
    I'm unaware of any other SE that offers anything like Google does with Trends. If anyone else is, please share.
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  13. @Audacious Epigone
    Wow. I am now getting the same. I'm 100% sure I entered those parameters multiple times by cut+pasting the URL as I was opening new tabs and running other potential search terms like "wuhan disease". The same result for November 20th came up over and over. I assure you that is not a doctored screen shot.

    Another curious coincidence. An unsettling one.

    Yikes, that is scary. When I think about national intelligence I usually jump to assassinating foreign politicians or massive data banks full of transcripts, but the specificity and rapid response would suggest there are actual spooks reading this blog…

    On the other hand, slightly expanding the date range of the search causes the original result to return, with a bump on the 20th: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2019-10-23%202019-11-30&geo=US&q=wuhan%20virus

    Are our glowing friends really so incompetent as to “fix” the data for only one date range, ignoring every other? Or is it just being buggy?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I'm not getting enough data for a result on those parameters. A second instance of the search term results disappearing?
  14. Honestly, I think you put too much faith in google having good data and programming, A.E. I just put in the past 5 year period, and then a 1 year back period and it gave that same spike to exactly 100, but at a different time, and with some additional searching at much lower rate afterwards. I took screen-shots, and I can post them tomorrow (getting tired here), or you can do the same. Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it’d be a 10,000 or a million times higher.

    I don’t trust these numbers from google, even if they do come in nice graphical form.

    • Replies: @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it’d be a 10,000 or a million times higher.
     
    The way google trends searches display data is by taking the maximum interest in the timespan, setting it to 100, and indexing all other days (or whatever granularity is used) against that. So all days are a "percentage" of the top day's searches. Hence, as long as data is returned, at least one point will always be 100.

    Otherwise I agree with your general idea: bumbling incompetence is a more likely explanation than meddling G-men. I just tested the original search again and it randomly worked.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    URLs for the specific parameters would be greatly appreciated.
  15. It’s a glitch in the Matrix…

  16. Well, I’ve only rarely used Google Trends, so I can’t address this strange anomaly.

    But someone mentioned to me that a “Blue Checkmark” economist on Twitter took notice of the same remarkable “precognitive” abilities of our Defense Intelligence Agency demonstrated in November, so perhaps the topic is starting to get around and various people are reacting:

  17. @Achmed E. Newman
    Honestly, I think you put too much faith in google having good data and programming, A.E. I just put in the past 5 year period, and then a 1 year back period and it gave that same spike to exactly 100, but at a different time, and with some additional searching at much lower rate afterwards. I took screen-shots, and I can post them tomorrow (getting tired here), or you can do the same. Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it'd be a 10,000 or a million times higher.

    I don't trust these numbers from google, even if they do come in nice graphical form.

    Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it’d be a 10,000 or a million times higher.

    The way google trends searches display data is by taking the maximum interest in the timespan, setting it to 100, and indexing all other days (or whatever granularity is used) against that. So all days are a “percentage” of the top day’s searches. Hence, as long as data is returned, at least one point will always be 100.

    Otherwise I agree with your general idea: bumbling incompetence is a more likely explanation than meddling G-men. I just tested the original search again and it randomly worked.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    OK, thank you for that, Elmer's.

    No units were on the y-axis side, and the x-axis doesn't even have tick marks. That's a shoddy way to do it to begin with it, but your explanation makes sense.
  18. This blog post finally pushed me to write a new blog post myself, about the sudden death of celebrity chef Gary Rhodes.
    https://thenodster.wordpress.com/2020/04/26/did-covid-19-kill-gary-rhodes/

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    How's your state of mind relative to August of last year? If unburdening yourself to someone else would be of any use, let me know.
  19. Sometimes when you find something interesting on the internet, you have to acquire a local copy (download, screen shot, etc.) before it gets flushed down the memory hole…

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    The image included in the post is a screenshot of the Trends results. It's not much, but it's something.
  20. The Chinese PRC is well known for cover ups. The CIA may have gotten some intel in November 2019, but only small tidbits. This virus may have been raging for several months before the PRC officially could not hide it anymore. Their cover up contributed to the global pandemic with censored data analysis.

    China does not like to expose the outside world to what goes on there.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    Why would the Pentagon so adamantly deny the memo ever existed? What accounts for the Pentagon's cover up?
  21. TX and CA, that would be Camp Stanley and SF020 (probably from IAD53.) With AMERITHRAX, CIA was calling their shots in the media like Babe Ruth pointing to the stands, to hype the mass hysteria. This time, with the government-issue whoppers unraveling in real time as Russia and China make official public inquiries, the usual foreshadowing gets a bit touchy.

    USG foreknowledge of internationally wrongful acts in breach of jus cogens would entail responsibility for global restitution, reparations, satisfaction by prosecution, and compensation with interest – or under different legal precedent, justify nuclear attack (1907 Hague Convention/Hiroshima-Nagasaki.)

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Gulp, I'm in big trouble now:

    https://youtu.be/-BSPofB6Hu0?t=29
  22. @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it’d be a 10,000 or a million times higher.
     
    The way google trends searches display data is by taking the maximum interest in the timespan, setting it to 100, and indexing all other days (or whatever granularity is used) against that. So all days are a "percentage" of the top day's searches. Hence, as long as data is returned, at least one point will always be 100.

    Otherwise I agree with your general idea: bumbling incompetence is a more likely explanation than meddling G-men. I just tested the original search again and it randomly worked.

    OK, thank you for that, Elmer’s.

    No units were on the y-axis side, and the x-axis doesn’t even have tick marks. That’s a shoddy way to do it to begin with it, but your explanation makes sense.

  23. @Elmer's Washable School Glue
    Yikes, that is scary. When I think about national intelligence I usually jump to assassinating foreign politicians or massive data banks full of transcripts, but the specificity and rapid response would suggest there are actual spooks reading this blog...

    On the other hand, slightly expanding the date range of the search causes the original result to return, with a bump on the 20th: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2019-10-23%202019-11-30&geo=US&q=wuhan%20virus

    Are our glowing friends really so incompetent as to "fix" the data for only one date range, ignoring every other? Or is it just being buggy?

    I’m not getting enough data for a result on those parameters. A second instance of the search term results disappearing?

  24. @Achmed E. Newman
    Honestly, I think you put too much faith in google having good data and programming, A.E. I just put in the past 5 year period, and then a 1 year back period and it gave that same spike to exactly 100, but at a different time, and with some additional searching at much lower rate afterwards. I took screen-shots, and I can post them tomorrow (getting tired here), or you can do the same. Why is it exactly 100? Would it be 100 in early February of this year, as it shows? No way, it'd be a 10,000 or a million times higher.

    I don't trust these numbers from google, even if they do come in nice graphical form.

    URLs for the specific parameters would be greatly appreciated.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    A.E. I have to get back on the tablet that I used and saved the images on. I thought it might be bad to upload those to embed here, as I don't have good software to shrink them with, and was beat last evening. . Let me see if I have time now.

    BTW, here's a real oddity: I look for images of various things for my blog very often, using bing because it seems to be the best for images. Well, anytime I type in ANYTHING regarding "Corona" and something else, along with "images" (which you have to do to get them), I get the same damn thematic map of the COVID-one-niner in the US, with the tan circles. There is not any array of images that one can normally click on to peruse them. That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.) On google, I can get the normal array of images.
  25. @Nodwink
    This blog post finally pushed me to write a new blog post myself, about the sudden death of celebrity chef Gary Rhodes.
    https://thenodster.wordpress.com/2020/04/26/did-covid-19-kill-gary-rhodes/

    How’s your state of mind relative to August of last year? If unburdening yourself to someone else would be of any use, let me know.

    • Thanks: Nodwink
  26. @Adam Smith
    Sometimes when you find something interesting on the internet, you have to acquire a local copy (download, screen shot, etc.) before it gets flushed down the memory hole...

    The image included in the post is a screenshot of the Trends results. It’s not much, but it’s something.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
  27. @Ding-ding-ding-ding
    TX and CA, that would be Camp Stanley and SF020 (probably from IAD53.) With AMERITHRAX, CIA was calling their shots in the media like Babe Ruth pointing to the stands, to hype the mass hysteria. This time, with the government-issue whoppers unraveling in real time as Russia and China make official public inquiries, the usual foreshadowing gets a bit touchy.

    USG foreknowledge of internationally wrongful acts in breach of jus cogens would entail responsibility for global restitution, reparations, satisfaction by prosecution, and compensation with interest - or under different legal precedent, justify nuclear attack (1907 Hague Convention/Hiroshima-Nagasaki.)

    Gulp, I’m in big trouble now:

    • Replies: @iffen
    This is just great, AE. I enjoy and appreciate your blog, but I have to confess that I am having second thoughts about it if you are going to get us all waterboarded for life.
  28. @Audacious Epigone
    URLs for the specific parameters would be greatly appreciated.

    A.E. I have to get back on the tablet that I used and saved the images on. I thought it might be bad to upload those to embed here, as I don’t have good software to shrink them with, and was beat last evening. . Let me see if I have time now.

    BTW, here’s a real oddity: I look for images of various things for my blog very often, using bing because it seems to be the best for images. Well, anytime I type in ANYTHING regarding “Corona” and something else, along with “images” (which you have to do to get them), I get the same damn thematic map of the COVID-one-niner in the US, with the tan circles. There is not any array of images that one can normally click on to peruse them. That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.) On google, I can get the normal array of images.

    • Replies: @anon
    That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.)

    I thought duckduck was using Google? In any event, are you clearing your browser cookies before attempting a new search? If not, they try that. The sites often read data from your browser to make search more "efficient". You might even delete the relevant part of your search history in order to make the search closer to memoryless.
  29. OK, A.E., I moved them to the server, and shrunk em to 25% to get them to fit here (unz software probably shrinks them to fit anyway).

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Google Wuhan Flu A.jpg

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Google Wuhan Flu A.jpg

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Well, that's some shit. Let me put underscores in the names, as the software here dicked up the file names (on this browser I have NO 5-minute EDIT window, yet, for pictures, I've found I cannot do preview either! I'm working in the blind.)

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Goog_Wuhan_Flu_A.jpg


    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Goog_Wuhan_Flu_B.jpg
  30. @Achmed E. Newman
    OK, A.E., I moved them to the server, and shrunk em to 25% to get them to fit here (unz software probably shrinks them to fit anyway).

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Google Wuhan Flu A.jpg


    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Google Wuhan Flu A.jpg

    Well, that’s some shit. Let me put underscores in the names, as the software here dicked up the file names (on this browser I have NO 5-minute EDIT window, yet, for pictures, I’ve found I cannot do preview either! I’m working in the blind.)

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I can't quite tell where the bumps up are on those screenshots. You're saying they were in 2019 but not in November, or that they are in November of 2019?
  31. anonymous[411] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dr. Doom
    The Chinese PRC is well known for cover ups. The CIA may have gotten some intel in November 2019, but only small tidbits. This virus may have been raging for several months before the PRC officially could not hide it anymore. Their cover up contributed to the global pandemic with censored data analysis.

    China does not like to expose the outside world to what goes on there.

    Why would the Pentagon so adamantly deny the memo ever existed? What accounts for the Pentagon’s cover up?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Hard to blame China for hiding information about coronavirus from the world if US intelligence already knew about it in November of 2019.
  32. @Audacious Epigone
    Gulp, I'm in big trouble now:

    https://youtu.be/-BSPofB6Hu0?t=29

    This is just great, AE. I enjoy and appreciate your blog, but I have to confess that I am having second thoughts about it if you are going to get us all waterboarded for life.

  33. It’s actually “COHENcidences”…

  34. At least you’ll meet lots of like-minded do-gooders at Camp No! Every BWTC treaty party is doing this and more, capitalizing on CIA’s half-assed OPSEC.

    Remember Fruitfly malware? Pat Wardle first found it among OSX users in Ohio. Life science people. The indictment of the patsy, I mean diabolical lone wolf hacker Durachinsky cited intrusions into DOE – but not Battelle. Go figure. The highly-localized “coronavirus” search spike early in 2017 must’ve been a hoot, because CIA mad scientists were crapping bricks. The “sakura” hack that August – appropriation of OPM adjudication files – was a bravura finale after the SCO had everything they needed. A signal, as it were. Chinese countermeasures are very exquisitely proportional – you might even say it’s personal. Ask William Bennett. People like Boyd Yount are going to be looking over their shoulders for a long time.

    But restitution will eventually be national in scope. The US BWTC delegation rejected the ad hoc group’s draft protocol at the Third Review Conference, tried to revoke the ad hoc group mandate, and fought the Implementation Support Unit. And now we see why. Allied nuclear-armed nations speaking for >80% of the world’s population are fed up.

    Seriously, you, Dr. Unz, Godfree Roberts and his Bio-Weapon Truth Commission, you deserve to be as revered as the early abolitionists. This is historic civil society work that “insider threats” can’t help with yet.

  35. anon[295] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    A.E. I have to get back on the tablet that I used and saved the images on. I thought it might be bad to upload those to embed here, as I don't have good software to shrink them with, and was beat last evening. . Let me see if I have time now.

    BTW, here's a real oddity: I look for images of various things for my blog very often, using bing because it seems to be the best for images. Well, anytime I type in ANYTHING regarding "Corona" and something else, along with "images" (which you have to do to get them), I get the same damn thematic map of the COVID-one-niner in the US, with the tan circles. There is not any array of images that one can normally click on to peruse them. That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.) On google, I can get the normal array of images.

    That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.)

    I thought duckduck was using Google? In any event, are you clearing your browser cookies before attempting a new search? If not, they try that. The sites often read data from your browser to make search more “efficient”. You might even delete the relevant part of your search history in order to make the search closer to memoryless.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Thanks for the suggestions #295, but I did try this on computers at work that are kinda de-personalized, i.e., I think the cookies are wiped often and things like that (it won't let me make comments or any responses on unz, for example). I've seen the same thing in a number of places - here's a post about this.

    Well, it's like a commenter above said. You've got to keep taking screenshots to keep up with the weird stuff.
  36. @anon
    That is just really odd. The site has been programmed to fixate on that map. Same with duckduckgo. (I am told that it uses bing data.)

    I thought duckduck was using Google? In any event, are you clearing your browser cookies before attempting a new search? If not, they try that. The sites often read data from your browser to make search more "efficient". You might even delete the relevant part of your search history in order to make the search closer to memoryless.

    Thanks for the suggestions #295, but I did try this on computers at work that are kinda de-personalized, i.e., I think the cookies are wiped often and things like that (it won’t let me make comments or any responses on unz, for example). I’ve seen the same thing in a number of places – here‘s a post about this.

    Well, it’s like a commenter above said. You’ve got to keep taking screenshots to keep up with the weird stuff.

  37. @Achmed E. Newman
    Well, that's some shit. Let me put underscores in the names, as the software here dicked up the file names (on this browser I have NO 5-minute EDIT window, yet, for pictures, I've found I cannot do preview either! I'm working in the blind.)

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Goog_Wuhan_Flu_A.jpg


    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/Goog_Wuhan_Flu_B.jpg

    I can’t quite tell where the bumps up are on those screenshots. You’re saying they were in 2019 but not in November, or that they are in November of 2019?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Well, as I wrote, these idjits have no tick marks on the x-axix. From just scaling in my head, the 12-month graphs has that spike in early 2020, and the 5-year one has it sometime end-of-19 to early 20. The spike seemed to jump in time depending on which time-scale I clicked.

    I'll do a few more now.
  38. @anonymous
    Why would the Pentagon so adamantly deny the memo ever existed? What accounts for the Pentagon's cover up?

    Hard to blame China for hiding information about coronavirus from the world if US intelligence already knew about it in November of 2019.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Hard to blame China for hiding information about coronavirus from the world if US intelligence already knew about it in November of 2019.
     
    If US intelligence already knew about it in November 2019 that kind of suggests that the US was hiding information about coronavirus from the world.
  39. @Audacious Epigone
    I can't quite tell where the bumps up are on those screenshots. You're saying they were in 2019 but not in November, or that they are in November of 2019?

    Well, as I wrote, these idjits have no tick marks on the x-axix. From just scaling in my head, the 12-month graphs has that spike in early 2020, and the 5-year one has it sometime end-of-19 to early 20. The spike seemed to jump in time depending on which time-scale I clicked.

    I’ll do a few more now.

  40. @Audacious Epigone
    Hard to blame China for hiding information about coronavirus from the world if US intelligence already knew about it in November of 2019.

    Hard to blame China for hiding information about coronavirus from the world if US intelligence already knew about it in November of 2019.

    If US intelligence already knew about it in November 2019 that kind of suggests that the US was hiding information about coronavirus from the world.

  41. Following up on Coronavirus Correlates by State:

    Perhaps the most obvious correlation one would expect is per capita cases vs population density. However, that’s not at all apparent if you look at this snapshot taken last week. But there is more structure than r would indicate. Specifically, it looks like there are two processes in superposition, one negatively correlated and one positively correlated.

    I animated the time-series here.

    It’s pretty obvious that the early data shows a substantial negative correlation. However that may, in part, be due to a power-law distribution of population across counties in the low population counties (that don’t vary that much in size) which, when combined with low case counts, e.g. 1, yields a negative slope on the log-log scale. I say “in part” because I don’t think this “shot noise” can explain all, or even most of the negative slope component as the counts rise.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I'm thick. What is the population scale on the right vertical axis specifically telling us?
  42. @James Bowery
    Following up on Coronavirus Correlates by State:

    Perhaps the most obvious correlation one would expect is per capita cases vs population density. However, that's not at all apparent if you look at this snapshot taken last week. But there is more structure than r would indicate. Specifically, it looks like there are two processes in superposition, one negatively correlated and one positively correlated.

    I animated the time-series here.

    It's pretty obvious that the early data shows a substantial negative correlation. However that may, in part, be due to a power-law distribution of population across counties in the low population counties (that don't vary that much in size) which, when combined with low case counts, e.g. 1, yields a negative slope on the log-log scale. I say "in part" because I don't think this "shot noise" can explain all, or even most of the negative slope component as the counts rise.

    I’m thick. What is the population scale on the right vertical axis specifically telling us?

    • Replies: @James Bowery
    What is the population scale on the right vertical axis specifically telling us?

    It is supposed* to be, and is now the population size given as a power of two**. For instance, the lightest yellow circle is Los Angeles county with a population of a little over 2^23 or 8M.

    *I was relying on a software package (plotly) to automatically assign those numbers and it has a bug that I had failed to notice until your "thick" question alerted me.

    **That software package does not offer one the option of a log color scale.
  43. @Audacious Epigone
    I'm thick. What is the population scale on the right vertical axis specifically telling us?

    What is the population scale on the right vertical axis specifically telling us?

    It is supposed* to be, and is now the population size given as a power of two**. For instance, the lightest yellow circle is Los Angeles county with a population of a little over 2^23 or 8M.

    *I was relying on a software package (plotly) to automatically assign those numbers and it has a bug that I had failed to notice until your “thick” question alerted me.

    **That software package does not offer one the option of a log color scale.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS