วีดีโอ

@@MasterChannel-qh7cf I think I still need to post one of a grasshopper high in a tree jumping in and kicking a butterfly off a fruit. I didn’t even see the grasshopper when I filmed the slow motion takeoff of the butterfly, LOL. (Fairly sure I only posted it privately on Facebook). Even in slow-motion I had to slow the footage down to see it well. Stay tuned 😂.

@@prying_minds The video is good, you can post the other one as well. I have a lot of videos on my channel about insects, you can watch them. Insects are great for observation and recording. They have a very good internal organization.

not on the model I have. You can only attach one wire to the guide wire terminal on the base stations. For models which have more than one guide wire terminal, one per terminal, and each sends out a unique signal so they can be recognised. The mower will follow the one it finds first.

ah, sorry, not sure why my comments are gone. possibly due to the renaming of my channel...

keep a minimum of 24in from one boundary wire to the other keep a minimum of 12in from the guide to any boundary wire. Disable GPS, this enables dispatching to areas. Calculate the square footage (or meters) of each area Calculate what % of the total is in each area. Set the corridor width for the guide to 0 (I later tried 1, but start with 0) Set Drive past wire to the minimum (25cm on mine) Use the manual to figure out the distance to the spot in each area you want to start mowing at (“How to measure the distance to a remote area”) Dispatch to the areas using the guide wire Return to the station using the guide wire (it’s not the default, delay the other choices). This should get you started. Note that the mower doesn’t actually discover the narrow passage, despite what you might think. It will almost always successfully use the guide wire when leaving or returning to the station. Because it doesn’t actually know where the narrow passages are, two things will happen. It will mow in the narrow passage if it randomly enters the passage (my sidewalk, LOL) During it’s random cutting it will sometimes find the narrow passage and it will try to continue to try to randomly change directions while trying to cut in the passage. It usually finds it’s own way out, randomly, but if I notice, I stop it and drag it out of the passage. I’d provide more info but my mower is in need of a new battery. (my fault) That’s all I recall at the moment. The exit angles and distances are not related to narrow corridors, unless you have the base station in a narrow corridor. That is not recommended however.

If possible, test your layout with wires on the surface before burying them.

Where did you get the 600,000 false positives number for the UK? Having pre-existing conditions does not mean they didn't die from COVID-19. Pre-Existing conditions increase the risk of dying from COVID-19. Many who die of other diseases also have pre-existing conditions and comorbidities. This isn't unique to the coding of COVID-19 deaths. I'd like to see proof people getting "hit by a bus" has any statistical relevance. It's a very rare occurrence, but a convenient image to lean on. You'd be better off taking about motorcycle deaths, because there are way more of those. However, you would still need to prove that those deaths are actually coded as COVID deaths. Let's imagine for a moment that you could prove there is a significant number of traffic deaths which were coded as COVID-19 deaths. That would not explain the excess deaths that are being demonstrated, and which correlate fairly closely in timing and volume to the COVID-19 deaths. Technically it's not the labs that decide how many cycles are used in PCR testing, it's the medical authorities. There are of course pros and cons to using a lot of cycles. One of the primary goals of testing is to be able to do contact tracing in order to isolate people who have been exposed and halt as much of the transmission as possible. There is no way to know whether the test is being done early or late in the infected individual's timeline with the virus. When the goal is primarily to stop the spread of the virus, you want to catch as many cases as possible. Some of those cases may be early cases that will develop into more intense cases, some will already be intense cases, and some will be cases which are waning away in the late stages. Yes, in early June 2020 the World Health Organization suggested on a Monday that asymptomatic spread was "very rare". On the next day, Tuesday, a top WHO official clarified on that scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to others. So only a day after suggesting that such spread is “very rare.”, there was a correction issued. Unreliable information sources continue to cherry pick the Monday quote. There is no question that there is asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread, but there is still room to debate how much. As published Jan 11 2021, one model predicts "Overall, the model predicted that 59% of coronavirus transmission would come from people without symptoms, including 35% from people who were pre-symptomatic and 24% from those who never showed symptoms at all." I don't understand what argument you are making by saying "in the UK we have won the war against the Flu very few if anyone has caught the flu this flu season". A reduction in Flu cases and deaths is expected due to the mitigation strategies implemented to battle COVID-19.

It’s pretty obvious it’s not a list of all diseases. As for clearly identifying which diseases, they are labelled on the Y-axis. Your graph title would be truthful, and a little more descriptive. The original site which posted the graph was truthful in the title, if less accurate. I don’t see any attempt at deception in their title. As for the purpose of only showing infectious diseases, (and not every infectious disease) I don’t have a problem with their choice. There is only so much room on a graph to show data. Showing everything is impractical, and people would tune out with that much detail. Why only infectious diseases? Well, I presume they did that partially due to room on the graph. But also because in order to demonstrate how serious it is, it makes sense to compare it to similar diseases which are also infectious. I look at it this way, if I’m looking for a vehicle to tow a boat or a trailer, I will be looking for a subset of the overall vehicles available. There wouldn’t be much point in looking at Mini Coopers, or motorcycles, or cruise liners, or jets. Sure, maybe an 18 wheeler could do the job, but it’s different enough to omit from the list. I would focus on vehicles with a towing package and enough other features which are relevant. In the same fashion, to gauge the seriousness of COVID, and to consider appropriate responses to it, it makes sense to compare it to other infectious diseases. (How they spread, how to fight them, how dangerous they were in comparison, their impact on the economies of the world). None of that excludes us from looking at it in other ways. It’s still okay to look at it from other perspectives too. It just doesn’t make sense to do it all in one graph. Fill your boots, create your own graphs. I provided links to the data sources.

You can find information comparing COVID-19 to other diseases too, as you suggest. Here is a link to one. I bet you didn't know that COVID-19 was briefly the number one cause of death in the USA. At the time this linked article was published (Jan 13th 2021), it was trending to do that again. On top of that, there are at least two COVID-19 mutations which are believed to be at least 50% more infectious (with roughly the same deadliness). www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-is-on-track-to-become-the-u-s-s-leading-cause-of-death-yet-again1/

What narrative do you think that view would tell? You will notice the graph is focused on infectious diseases. I think it's an important distinction. When my grandmother had Cancer, I was able to visit her in the hospice without fear of catching cancer. When my father had heart disease, there was no danger of him spreading it to my mom. When the sister of my daughters friend died in a car accident there was no danger of the first responders "catching" "car accident", etc, etc. Most other diseases already have their own spotlight, research, and fund raising campaigns in place. It's not like they are ignored. The Terry Fox Foundation on it's own has raised over $750 million to fight Cancer. The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, has raised over $1 billion. (I use those two examples because both men grew up near to where I live) You will notice that in the middle of the video there is a graph which does show Coronavirus compared to all other forms of death, and how it has driven the overall death numbers from all causes well above the historical norms. I do recall seeing a suggestion that the measures taken to reduce the spread of Coronavirus would likely also reduce the spread of the flu and other infectious diseases. That is one area that would be interesting to me to look at. The data sources are listed in the description if you want to look into comparing Coronavirus/COVD-19 to other causes of death. Or convince me what useful story that comparing it to non-infectious causes of death might tell.

regarding what I mentioned about measures to combat COVID-19 impacting other diseases, I did a quick search, and this article is interesting. www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03519-3

I too think it’s an important distinction that the number 1 and 2 causes of death (heart disease, cancer) is excluded from the graphics and that it is misleading and moreover not a reason but an excuse. Also the excess death graphic is also incomplete because it does not compare all cases mortality to C19 deaths as you are suggesting. It only compares C19 to other respiratory illnesses. Lastly I saw it first reported in Hong Kong many months ago that the normal cold and flu season was drastically down because of the social distancing measures. All I know is there is too much corruption in this world to put absolute trust into anything. Even science due to the astronomical sums of money involved. In addition if no one questioned science, it would not be science, but a perverted religion.

Some of the reasons why I like looking at all cause mortality is because of guys like Ivor Cummins. By stepping back and looking at total mortality, the large picture, before diving into more detail analysis gives the opportunity to see if all the data correlates or brings out confounders in the data or analysis. Moreover I’ve recently learned that pharmaceutical companies love to market their products using relative risk as opposed to absolute risk obscuring transparency just to make their products seem better. By stepping back looking at data improves the narrative for me. th-cam.com/video/SdKkZLqhmDM/w-d-xo.html

@@Bhatmann I wish TH-cam allowed graphics in comments, LOL. I stand by comparing infectious diseases. Feel free to make your own graph that show COVID-19 in relation to all causes of death. I recently did this for the USA stats, and taking the 2020 total COVID-19 deaths and inserting it into either 2017 or 2018 causes of death (which I only chose because they were the most recent annual stats I found published), in both cases COVID-19 was a stong #3, far outstripping #4. And remember that 2020 was not really a complete year for COVID-19, as it only started to gain steam in March. Specifically for 2018: Heart Diseases 655K Cancers 599K *COVID-19 2020 346K Accidents 167K

I find I agree and disagree with what I think you are saying, LOL. I don't think whether a virus is engineered or natural would have much impact on the effectiveness of herd immunity. The key impacts on herd immunity are things like How infectious the disease is. How long people are contagious. How long people are asymptomatic while contagious. How long immunity lasts once achieved. All of these (and likely other factors) contribute to the difference between diseases, and what percentage population immunity target is needed to (approximately) achieve herd immunity. I'll also mention that herd immunity is a good goal. The method of achieving it is the important part. It's generally far more desirable to achieve herd immunity for a "bad" disease through immunization, than through having the disease rampage through the population creating death and injury. Wear a mask, isolate, wash often, and social distance when you must mix with others.

My channel doesn't have much reach, so I doubt you'll see much, but it wouldn't surprise me to see dissenting opinions.

@@prying_minds Appreciate the response. So when you say 24 in between boundary wires, you mean from one to the other and not to the guidewire in the middle? If so, I think I can make that work for my corridor. I'll give this a shot!

@@prying_minds Really appreciate all the replies. Will do some testing this weekend.

@@espen2729 did u get it working?

@@prying_minds It got better but it still gets stuck sometimes. I guess I'll live with it.

Thanks!