The Peril of Running a Country Based on “Models”

Mid-Day Update: Guest Piece by Gregg Updike

There are models, and then there are models. I build models of ships as a hobby, I strive for accuracy, and after consulting up to a dozen sources I probably have the most accurate models of various navies possible for a reasonable price. The models, however do not talk to me so I have no actual confirmation that my model ships are absolutely accurate.

I can’t remember the actual name of the Bill and Melinda Gates ‘model’ that the CDC is using exclusively, I don’t care – it doesn’t matter, but for the sake of discussion I’ll call it the CNN model.

Apparently all the ‘experts’ at the CDC are using only the CNN model, which is like saying the pundits are only using one political poll from the MSM (D) to be able to determine the odds of who is going to win a political race. At this point the CNN ‘model’ is as accurate and as biased as a MSM (D) political poll.


The chart above shows what utter garbage the IMHE model truly is.

Why can’t we at least use the RCP (Real Clear Politics) method where they average numerous polls, however flawed they might be, as a means to get a clearer picture of what is really happening with the spread and impact of this ‘pandemic’? It would also show which models are the most accurate.

Better yet, how about actually inputting actual and broad based data into the model, rather than worse case agenda driven speculation! Typically a collaboration of anything – ‘diversity’ of ideas if you will – will generate a better and more accurate result; otherwise we may well get a highly inaccurate outlier, which is what appears to be happening.

It is a given that our political polling is generally skewed to the left to drive rather than reflect public opinion, with the majority of polls going that way, while the Rasmussen poll typically shows right of center results and it has an enviable and historically accurate record. Rasmussen is often shown as an outlier but since it is included in the RCP equation it drives the data towards a more accurate reflection of real public thought. We apparently have no such counter ‘model’ showing ‘diversity’ in fighting this economy-crippling ‘pandemic’.

The real question is how come we are not using data from several ‘models’? How come the methodologies used in this one ‘model’ are not better shown? Even the largely flawed methodology of the MSM political polls is usually available to be analyzed where they oversample Democrats, or they poll all adults, or registered voters instead of likely voters.

It has been said statistics don’t lie, but statisticians do, and GIGO (garbage in, garbage out) results in flawed results – so why are we continuing to follow this paradigm regarding this ‘pandemic’ when so much is at stake and the ‘experts’ are wrong so often? By any logical and objective analysis the ‘experts’ and their one ‘model’ fits all system has been consistently and grossly wrong. That being the case, the ‘pandemic’ modeling that EVERYONE at the CDC seems to relying on must be extremely flawed.

By the way, this GIGO standard is also used in most if not all ‘Climate Change’/’Global Warming’ theoretical ‘models’ to produce the desired apocalyptic and dire results. This becomes the left’s template by which they produce ‘solutions’ to another unseen enemy. The ‘solution’ always calls for the destruction of our capitalistic economic system via draconian world taxes and major behavioral changes. Ever notice how dictatorial communist systems or developing countries are never called to reform their ‘carbon footprint’ in the name of “saving the planet”?

Their ‘expert’ opinions derived from their opaque crystal ball are and will always be wrong when GIGO is inputted, which has produced dire economic results for millions of people. So why are we determining the future of a twenty plus TRILLION dollar economy and the fate of 328 million people’s livelihood and health using such a flawed one size fits all system?

Two reasons for putting so much credence in this poll, I mean ‘model’:

One, it is just the way bureaucracies everywhere have always done things – never think out of the box, and be slow to react to new facts, opinion, input, and legitimate presidential orders;  and

Two, an absolute hatred for the current president: Donald Trump. If as much effort was put forth by the MSM (D) in calling out the officials on all levels who are responsible for being so unprepared and not ensuring adequate equipment, rather than pointlessly bashing Trump’s efforts at every opportunity, we would be in much better shape.

That is an absolute reality, because ever since he became president his agenda has been opposed and he has been maligned and demonized by his vast array of opponents. In their minds he can do nothing right, and ALL his programs and ideas are failures, and will lead to disaster. Add in a generous supply of slanderous accusations and fraudulent investigations and you get the current situation where the goal is not to work together in any way, but to hamstring Trump and make sure he get a little as possible accomplished.

The fact is Trump and his policies have been proven correct and beneficial to the country virtually every time while the MSM (D) and their ‘experts’ have been proven wrong. I can’t remember when our media and their ‘expert’ opinions have been right in any meaningful way on any story.

The other purpose of all this misinformation, doom and gloom pessimism leveled at the outsider Trump is to send a powerful message to any future reform-minded person that they better not dare try to invade the District of Corruption’s turf. This is the war that is actually being fought: Who runs and controls this country – the entrenched unelected bureaucrats of the Deep State and their Globalist Allies or We the People?

Any intelligence analyst worth his salt, or ‘journalist’ or ‘news’ organizations for that matter, would never use only one source for information, no matter how trusted. Anything the MSM (D) puts out concerning Trump is nothing better than supermarket tabloid trash and in most cases worse. Real analysis involves gathering and vetting even proven correct sources from as wide a spectrum as possible.

A competent and objective analysis of any problem requires constant scrutiny. Reliability and accuracy of sources is always questioned and confirmed. Look at any detective in any crime documentary and you will see that the facts must mesh with the evidence. If one irrefutable fact clears a suspect, the suspect is cleared regardless of the other circumstantial evidence that makes him appear guilty. In other words, if any switch in a circuit is turned off, the light doesn’t come on.

Anyone can be wrong or make an honest mistake once in a while, but to be so consistently wrong in vital areas where people’s mental, physical, emotional, and economic health and livelihood hinges on them getting it right, is at best unforgivable, and most likely criminal.

That is all

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cameron Howe

” Anything the MSM (D) puts out concerning Trump is nothing better than supermarket tabloid trash and in most cases worse.”

I think one of the most egregious examples of this lately was the husband and wife that drank fish tank cleaner because it contained hydroxychloroquine. The husband died. The wife claimed they drank it because POTUS told them to. I even had people at work saying HCQS is dangerous because of how the media spun that story.

Steven Crowder recently did some digging, and called up one of the reporters on the story. To say the story wasn’t properly vetted is an understatement. I encourage everyone to watch that video. Sorry I can’t post a link from my current device.

mike lee

They are doing the same thing with the NYSE. They are using models to control everything, which I think is ridiculous.

Jimmy MacAfee

Try to guess where the wind begins and ends. This is your model.

Jimmy MacAfee

Models. Take fluids, and make assumptions on viscosity; ignore the oddities (non-Newtonian substances, like plasma, or its alter-ego, Ooblech (corn starch and water.) Both are liquid, but both act differently when a shear force is applied to them: one becomes less viscous, the other becomes more viscous. It would be tempting to leave out oddities like these when developing models about fluid mechanics, and those assumptions based on fluid models are always tainted by variables – like these – but also by turbulence, which disables the models, and makes it impossible to make long-term predictions. Thinking chaos theory here:

“The branch of mathematics that deals with complex systems whose behavior is highly sensitive to slight changes in conditions, so that small alterations can give rise to strikingly great consequences.”

I would suggest that movements, actions, speed and duration in human society, as well as human emotional behavior (the greatest variable of all) are more likely to align themselves with chaos theory, and thus models about viruses that try to engage all the above, involving all that I’ve listed, are inherently flawed and unreliable.

You might as well try to guess where a single molecule of water will be half a mile downstream in a raging river.


I thank everyone for their kind and thoughtful comments.

Max Bouknecht

I’m a retired computer development engineer. I’ve had experience with computer models going back to the 1970s. Models come in a variety of designs, but these predictive models are subject to human opinions far more than any others because the algorithms and the input data are created by humans. Any predictive model can be created to produce a desired result. We have seen this for years in the “climate change” fraudulent scam. So what we are seeing now for this pandemic must be taken very lightly because there are so many political agendas in play. And, major universities, like much of the federal government, have become very politicized.


BOOM… Mike drop full stop… You nailed it completely.

Only those with a paralyzed brain won’t (refuses) see what you so clearly laid out.

Carlos Dangler

Gregg, I always enjoy your take on things.
The current model is not reflecting the pandemic, but rather it is reflecting the “dempanic”.

phineas gage

I think you have answered the question pretty well. First, bureaucratic inertia and the inherent tendency of any bureaucracy to act in a way that will increase its importance and power. Second, an unprecedented level of bias and hatred that borders on the irrational.

That is the danger, because we’re supposed to be talking about science here. In science models are essential to interpreting limited data, forming conclusions, and making predictions that can formulate new hypotheses. When conducted in the proper way, science is a beautiful thing, the most efficient epistemological approach ever devised for gaining truth about the physical world.

The trouble is when it becomes corrupted by monolithic political ideology and money, as has now occurred throughout wide swathes of American science, particularly at the highest levels. And any scientist that works for the government, such as the CDC, is at greater risk. It is every bit as much of a bubble as the news media–the same people talking to each other every day with bias reinforcement. These are people that know better, but no longer care. Moreover, many are behaving irrationally in a fundamentally rational discipline. That’s a bad combination.

This perverse form of science is dangerous and malignant, and the abuse of models are just one part of it. We first saw this in the climate change wars, but now we see it in a much more immediate way in this crisis where lives and the national economy are on the precipice.

A leader in these times must be bold, flexible and pragmatic. The scientists advising Trump by definition will not do that. He is on his own with every hand against him.

Scroll to top