TheTeapot Posted November 6, 2021 Share Posted November 6, 2021 1 minute ago, Banker said: The fact that many think the pandemic is all over because of double vaccinated, assume you don’t find interesting? I found it interesting how it exclusively blamed human behaviour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted November 6, 2021 Share Posted November 6, 2021 3 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said: It’s proper concerning stuff. It’s fairly easy to see why government people couldn’t work with her in hindsight. I’m not sure hindsight is needed. It was obvious at the time. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annoymouse Posted November 6, 2021 Share Posted November 6, 2021 Its really quite disappointing to read these latest posts from Dr Glover, what an earth happened there? Is she just deliberately attempting to rile forum members? What on earth for? Why is she wasting her time taking pot shots at anonymous forum members? I don’t even understand why she would stoop that low in the first place? It literally doesn’t make any sense to me, having always respected Dr Glover and her posts on here. Well, I’ve now seen a different side that I don’t like at all, clearly she likes the drama and being the centre of attention, well here is one less supporter/follower, I’m starting to think everything that was said against her might actually be true. It wasn’t that long ago she was hoping to have the Dr Glover Spat thread deleted, she didn’t really like her name being dragged through the mud (understandable and I fully supported her) and here she is dragging her own name through the mud and inadvertently directing people to the very forum she clearly didn’t want to be associated with in the first place, utterly bizarre behaviour. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 3 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said: Unfortunately those who argued for Glover’s genomics were using the pseudo science just to bash the Ash. She was happy to ride the wave. An apology from her would not be inappropriate. Genomics is not a "pseudo science" and never will be. As I understand it genomics is a powerful tool to assist your track and trace efforts. Dr Glover criticised the amount IOMG were charging for PRC testing and broke down the likely costs involved and posted them on here. I pointed out an element that was missing and she readily agreed that it was something she had omitted. To me there's the rub. I simply can't imagine any IOMG public servant EVER admitting that they had made an up-fuck. Little wonder they couldn't get on... 2 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Blonde Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 5 minutes ago, P.K. said: Genomics is not a "pseudo science" and never will be. As I understand it genomics is a powerful tool to assist your track and trace efforts. Dr Glover criticised the amount IOMG were charging for PRC testing and broke down the likely costs involved and posted them on here. I pointed out an element that was missing and she readily agreed that it was something she had omitted. To me there's the rub. I simply can't imagine any IOMG public servant EVER admitting that they had made an up-fuck. Little wonder they couldn't get on... Thanks for that, Rachel. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momo65 Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 Perhaps those alleging genomics is a pseudo-science could tell us their level of scientific education then we could judge where the pseudo- prefix should be afixed? 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 13 hours ago, Annoymouse said: Its really quite disappointing to read these latest posts from Dr Glover, what an earth happened there? Is she just deliberately attempting to rile forum members? What on earth for? Why is she wasting her time taking pot shots at anonymous forum members? I don’t even understand why she would stoop that low in the first place? It literally doesn’t make any sense to me, having always respected Dr Glover and her posts on here. Well, I’ve now seen a different side that I don’t like at all, clearly she likes the drama and being the centre of attention, well here is one less supporter/follower, I’m starting to think everything that was said against her might actually be true. It wasn’t that long ago she was hoping to have the Dr Glover Spat thread deleted, she didn’t really like her name being dragged through the mud (understandable and I fully supported her) and here she is dragging her own name through the mud and inadvertently directing people to the very forum she clearly didn’t want to be associated with in the first place, utterly bizarre behaviour. +1 This is little different to Twitter where a lot of people hide their real names. I do it here so that I can talk freely and pass on any info that may come my way, not that I often have much interesting to say. Many people know who I am anyway! I really don't understand the vitriol either, she's tarring everyone on this forum with the same brush as perhaps a couple of people who dared to question her? We all know that anonymous forums, especially Twitter, attract some people who feel brave enough to be even more stupid than they are in real life but I have lost a bit of respect for her views now. It does make me wonder if this is why she was shunned by government in the first place? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 17 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said: Unfortunately those who argued for Glover’s genomics were using the pseudo science just to bash the Ash. She was happy to ride the wave. An apology from her would not be inappropriate. No, the way she was treated and the infamous shredding episode were the undoing of Ashford. Up to that point, I would say he had pretty full support. She has nothing to apologise for in that debacle. Genomics was and still is a very useful tool in this battle, but the window of opportunity to use it on the island has long gone. However, along with others, I am disappointed by her current behaviour. I thought she would be above name-calling and the internet spats, after all she has science on her side. 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheldon Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 8 minutes ago, Gladys said: However, along with others, I am disappointed by her current behaviour I was disappointed with her stereotypical gender-bashing too, Gladys, but I made allowances for it on the off chance she was just on the blob. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 It's a bit distasteful all round. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 26 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said: Oh dear the attention seeking and the bizarre foot stamping continues. How dare people on here not kiss ass like her Twitter doom fetishists It feels like I am living in a parallel universe as my recollection that in general fawned basically over anything she has said and been totally unquestioning of her. I appreciate a few have not but in the main I think they were questioning whether genomics was purely just another tool in the fight against Covid and whether its use really would have made a huge difference to the IoM based on the policies the IoM adopted. If she thinks she has been the subject to abuse, then I am not sure how she would describe the how the likes of Quayle, Ashford, Callister etc get treated on here. I just hope she is slightly more accurate when processing results. reports etc. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 21 hours ago, finlo said: You're DR Glover I knew it! I think you'll find he's Professor Ashford. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 What does gaslighted mean ? Serious question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, hissingsid said: What does gaslighted mean ? Serious question. Gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse that's seen in abusive relationships. It's the act of manipulating a person by forcing them to question their thoughts, memories, and the events occurring around them. A victim of gaslighting can be pushed so far that they question their own sanity. Edited November 7, 2021 by Max Power 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 Thank you Max serious stuff then, I don’t do Twitter so I am not familiar with some of the nuances of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.