Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
***
This week’s list is quite long. Many entries – the older ones – come from the references in Böhme (list of 2020-09-26).
I have to admit to disliking face masks intensely and only wearing them where compulsory, but Netz & Eaton is another proof of their efficacy and another argument with which to counter disinformation.
Wu et al. make strong claims of having corrected for all sorts of confounders. As so often we are not shown any data and only given final regression coefficients without any hint of their actual predictive value. I consider their hypothesis highly unlikely and require far more proof than that to accept it.
Of course Covid-19 came unexpected and unintentionally. But that won’t stop politicians from reaping what benefit they can. As Yam et al. show this crisis, like any other, strongly benefits most of the current leaders. The measures initially taken were extraordinarily successful in Germany and would have completely eradicated the disease by the middle of July. (See my daily blog for Cologne 
.) Of course this would have necessitated strict and continuous border controls, something the government refused to do since 2015. One may ask how much of the disruption of measures and of the continuous rise since the beginning of June was intentional.
In Ludescher et al. the tree ring results fit the other proxies quite well except for one single excursion around 1820. Different signals for different proxies are to be expected, seasonality alone accounts for them. In figure 4c by comparison their proposed correction gets rid of most of the 1820 excursion but at the price of fitting the rest of the times series markedly worse. In all I'm not convinced by their conclusion.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
