Now we are moving to common ground. Certain facts can be known, but the majority of "knowledge" nowadays comes from media, conjecture, spin doctors, image managers etc. My example of meeting someone to know them is one extreme, and actually even having met is no guarantee of knowing someone.

When it comes to politicians or celebrities or any public figure, you have a muliverse of opinion from which to select and build your impression of a person. To one person, Corbyn may seem to be a decent well intentioned humane individual striving to create a more acceptable society. To another he might seem to be an irresponsible half wit intent on destroying the status quo.

It's the same person, but the impression you have of them is moulded by the media, social media, spin doctors etc. Both their own media, supportive media or antagonistic media.

So what you "know" is in fact the impression spun by your preferred media. You refer to your sources as responsible media (is there any such thing?) but one man's meat is another's poison.

So coming back to Cummings and the assertions.

"Unqualified" - since we do not know what his role is on Sage, we cannot say this beyond the fact that he has no medical qualifications. But that does not make him unqualified to say, chair the meeting or provide layman balance. Think parent governors with no teaching knowledge, think non executive directors on corporate bodies.

"Unelected" - I don't believe all of the members of said committee are elected in the sense of parliamentary election. Maybe none are MPs: it's an advisory body with membership probably nominated by a commons select Committee.

So if we accept the things you "know" as true, I would contend that these facts have only marginal relevance.

The remainder of your experience and reason is purely conjectural based on informed reading of selective media. It's opinion, no more, and opinion gleaned from media with specific axes to grind.

This is not a criticism of you - everyone tends to believe what they want to believe where it suits their own objectives. Eg my perspective on Corbyn, yours on Cummings. But they are beliefs not facts, reason or experience.

As is rapidly becoming clear, I don't trust any media, social or real. It's all propoganda for one cause or another. Not exactly yet a conspiracy theorist, but heading that way as regards manipulation of public opinion.

It's nothing new, but it's been cranked up given the surging access to other people's views, which simply distort and invalidate reality.

I'm not saying Cummings won't eat our children, but at this point I don't accept the demonisation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I dont plan to follow the media pointers on this one