“It’s Time For The Scientific Community To Admit We Were Wrong About COVID & It Cost Lives”

Real “mea culpa”, ongoing and rapid revision of history, or further narrative management with regard ‘amnesty’ over what “the others” did to those who thought for themselves over the last few years…

In no less a liberal rag than Newsweek, Kevin Bass (MS MD/PHD Student, Medical School) has penned a quite surprising (and ‘brave’) op-ed saying that “it’s time for the scientific community to admit we were wrong about COVID and it cost lives…”

As a medical student and researcher, I staunchly supported the efforts of the public health authorities when it came to COVID-19.

I believed that the authorities responded to the largest public health crisis of our lives with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise. I was with them when they called for lock-downs, vaccines, and boosters.

I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.

I can see now that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public about its own views and policies, including on natural vs. artificial immunityschool closures and disease transmissionaerosol spreadmask mandates, and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially among the young. All of these were scientific mistakes at the time, not in hindsight. Amazingly, some of these obfuscations continue to the present day.

But perhaps more important than any individual error was how inherently flawed the overall approach of the scientific community was, and continues to be. It was flawed in a way that undermined its efficacy and resulted in thousands if not millions of preventable deaths.

What we did not properly appreciate is that preferences determine how scientific expertise is used, and that our preferences might be—indeed, our preferences were—very different from many of the people that we serve. We created policy based on our preferences, then justified it using data. And then we portrayed those opposing our efforts as misguided, ignorant, selfish, and evil.

We made science a team sport, and in so doing, we made it no longer science. It became us versus them, and “they” responded the only way anyone might expect them to: by resisting.

We excluded important parts of the population from policy development and castigated critics, which meant that we deployed a monolithic response across an exceptionally diverse nation, forged a society more fractured than ever, and exacerbated longstanding heath and economic disparities.

A students adjusts her face-mask at St. Joseph Catholic School in La Puente, California on November 16, 2020, where pre-kindergarten to Second Grade students in need of special services returned to the classroom today for in-person instruction. – The campus is the second Catholic school in Los Angeles County to receive a waiver approval to reopen as the coronavirus pandemic rages on. The US surpassed 11 million coronavirus cases Sunday, adding one million new cases in less than a week, according to a tally by Johns Hopkins University.FREDERIC J. BROWN / AFP

Our emotional response and ingrained partisanship prevented us from seeing the full impact of our actions on the people we are supposed to serve. We systematically minimized the downsides of the interventions we imposed—imposed without the input, consent, and recognition of those forced to live with them. In so doing, we violated the autonomy of those who would be most negatively impacted by our policies: the poor, the working class, small business owners, Blacks and Latinos, and children. These populations were overlooked because they were made invisible to us by their systematic exclusion from the dominant, corporatized media machine that presumed omniscience.

Most of us did not speak up in support of alternative views, and many of us tried to suppress them. When strong scientific voices like world-renowned Stanford professors John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya, and Scott Atlas, or University of California San Francisco professors Vinay Prasad and Monica Gandhi, sounded the alarm on behalf of vulnerable communities, they faced severe censure by relentless mobs of critics and detractors in the scientific community—often not on the basis of fact but solely on the basis of differences in scientific opinion.

When former President Trump pointed out the downsides of intervention, he was dismissed publicly as a buffoon. And when Dr. Antony Fauci opposed Trump and became the hero of the public health community, we gave him our support to do and say what he wanted, even when he was wrong.

Trump was not remotely perfect, nor were the academic critics of consensus policy. But the scorn that we laid on them was a disaster for public trust in the pandemic response. Our approach alienated large segments of the population from what should have been a national, collaborative project.

And we paid the price. The rage of the those marginalized by the expert class exploded onto and dominated social media. Lacking the scientific lexicon to express their disagreement, many dissidents turned to conspiracy theories and a cottage industry of scientific contortionists to make their case against the expert class consensus that dominated the pandemic mainstream. Labeling this speech “misinformation” and blaming it on “scientific illiteracy” and “ignorance,” the government conspired with Big Tech to aggressively suppress it, erasing the valid political concerns of the government’s opponents.

And this despite the fact that pandemic policy was created by a razor-thin sliver of American society who anointed themselves to preside over the working class—members of academia, government, medicine, journalism, tech, and public health, who are highly educated and privileged. From the comfort of their privilege, this elite prizes paternalism, as opposed to average Americans who laud self-reliance and whose daily lives routinely demand that they reckon with risk. That many of our leaders neglected to consider the lived experience of those across the class divide is unconscionable.

Incomprehensible to us due to this class divide, we severely judged lock-down critics as lazy, backwards, even evil. We were dismissed as “grifters” who represented their interests. We believed “misinformation” energized by the ignorant, and we refused to accept that such people simply had a different, valid point of view.

We crafted policy for the people without consulting them. If our public health officials had led with less hubris, the course of the pandemic in the United States might have had a very different outcome, with far fewer lost lives.

Instead, we have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines and the healthcare systema massive concentration in wealth by already wealthy elitesa rise in suicides and gun violence especially among the poor; a near-doubling of the rate of depression and anxiety disorders especially among the younga catastrophic loss of educational attainment among already disadvantaged children; and among those most vulnerable, a massive loss of trust in healthcarescience, scientific authorities, and political leaders more broadly.

My motivation for writing this is simple:

It’s clear to me that for public trust to be restored in science, scientists should publicly discuss what went right and what went wrong during the pandemic, and where we could have done better.

It’s OK to be wrong and admit where one was wrong and what one learned. That’s a central part of the way science works. Yet I fear that many are too entrenched in group-think—and too afraid to publicly take responsibility—to do this.

Solving these problems in the long term requires a greater commitment to pluralism and tolerance in our institutions, including the inclusion of critical if unpopular voices.

Intellectual elitism, credentialism, and classism must end. Restoring trust in public health—and our democracy—depends on it.

The problem was not people’s ignorance of the facts, it was the organized antagonism and censorship against anyone presenting data that was contradictory to the mandate agenda. This is setting aside proclamations like those from the LA Times, which argued that mocking the deaths of “anti-vaxxers” might be necessary and justified.  After two years of this type of arrogant nonsense it’s hard to imagine people will be willing to pretend as if all is well.

The active effort to shut down any opposing data is the root crime, though, and no, it can never be forgotten or forgiven.

People are still livid…

One cannot help but notice that the timing of the Atlantic’s appeal for passive forgetfulness and now this op-ed mea culpa coincides with the swiftly approaching end of the COVID emergency declarations, amid a growing political backlash to the last two years of meaningless lock-downs and mandates, and Democrats were instrumental in the implementation of both.  A large swath of the population sees one party as the cause of much of their COVID era strife.  

Perhaps the mainstream media is suddenly realizing that they may have to face some payback for their COVID zealotry?  “We didn’t know! We were just following orders!”  It all sounds rather familiar.

Communist Historians Clear Name of Communist Scientists

J. Robert Oppenheimer // 1904-1967

DECEMBER 19, 2022

NY Times:Robert Oppenheimer Cleared of ‘Black Mark’ After 68 Years

The physicist and architect of the American atomic bomb was stripped of his security clearance in 1954 after what is now called a flawed investigation.

Well how about that?! After nearly seven decades, it turns out that communist psychopath scientist St. Robert Oppenheimer wasn’t a communist after all – thus sayeth the communist whorestorians and the communist Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. So, it must be true that he was actually a loyal American who bled red, white & blue, right? (rolling eyes). Suuuuure. Next they’ll be telling us that Karl Marx has been falsely accused of being a Marxist!

From the article:

“The Secretary of Energy on Friday nullified a 1954 decision to revoke the security clearance of J. Robert Oppenheimer, a top government scientist who led the making of the atomic bomb in World War II but fell under suspicion of being a Soviet spy at the height of the McCarthy era.

In a statement, the Energy Secretary, Jennifer M. Granholm, said the decision of the Atomic Energy Commission, to bar Oppenheimer’s clearance was the result of a “flawed process” that violated its own regulations.

As time has passed, she added, “more evidence has come to light of the bias and unfairness of the process that Dr. Oppenheimer was subjected to while the evidence of his loyalty and love of country have only been further affirmed.”

Historians, who have long lobbied for the reversal of the clearance revocation, praised the vacating order as a milestone.”

The supposed clearing of the “black mark” on Oppenheimer’s sainted name means absolutely nothing so many years after the fact; but it does offer us a good “teachable moment” to review what a wretched human being that “the father of the atomic bomb” truly was.

The Fake News of the day transformed the mediocre TRAITOR into a genius saint. After he was stripped of his security clearance in 1954, he was then cast as a living martyr — a testament to the evils of “McCarthyism” and “antisemitism.”

J. Robert Oppenheimer was a “theoretical physicist” — one who practices “science” by conjecture and elaborate mathematical calculations, not actual experimentation. While teaching physics at Berkeley, Oppenheimer, over the objections of some concerned military men, was named the wartime head of the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos Laboratory, in 1942. Though his technical role in creating the monstrous weapon –which Jewish mad scientists such as Albert Einstein and Leo Szilard hoped to drop on German civilians — was nil to minimal, it is Oppenheimer who, absurdly, gets the historical credit as “father of the FAKE atomic bomb.” (((They))) always manage to get the credit for everything, don’t they?

In his role as Project Director, Oppenheimer — who himself had more communist front affiliations than one could shake a hammer & sickle at — opened the door and “looked the other way” as a whole rats’ nest of subversive Jews and other Marxists penetrated Los Alamos and passed on the secrets to their Soviet contacts. As a result, Stalin would have a bomb of his own by 1949 — way sooner than was expected. Though others associated with the Los Alamos espionage ring would in due time be disgraced, arrested or even executed — Oppenheimer the enabler was too important of a chess piece to sacrifice.

One year after the end of World War II, the communist-infested administration of Harry Truman named Oppenheimer as chairman of the General Advisory Committee of the newly created United States Atomic Energy Commission. Under the pretext of averting “nuclear proliferation”, Oppenheimer would use that position to lobby for international control of nuclear power (world government). During the “McCarthy Era”, those stances, together with his past associations with admitted Communist Party members — (including his brother, his wife, his landlord, and his ex-girlfriend!) — led to the revocation of Oppenheimer’s security clearance. Imagine that — telling an outspoken One-Worlder who absolutely reeked of redness that he may no longer have access the nation’s top secrets. Oh those horrible, horrible “McCarthyites!”

And thus was born the legend of poor Bobby Oppenheimer — the persecuted Jew who had a black mark wrongly attached to his good name.

The fiendish Jewish mad scientists dreamed of burning cities full of “German civilians”. They had to settle for Japanese (supposedly)

1. Katherine Oppenheimer was a member of the Communist Party. A prior husband, before Oppenheimer, was a Communist partisan who was killed during the Spanish Civil War. She was impregnated by Oppenheimer (her future husband) while married to her 2nd husband. She became an alcoholic in later years. // 2. Robert’s brother, Frank Oppenheimer, was also a member of the Communist Party. // 3. Jean Tatlock — a “bisexual” and Communist Party member — was romantically involved with Oppenheimer during the 1930s. Oppenheimer was introduced to her at a fundraiser for the Communist side of the Spanish Civil War. Ms. Tatlock died by suicide in 1944. // 4. Mary Ellen Washburn was Oppenheimer’s landlord at Berkeley. She too was a Communist Party member; and had introduced the mad scientist to Jean Tatlock.

On a personal level, Red Robert was truly a rotten human being and quite insane (aren’t all Jewish Marxists?) An event which occurred in 1924 tells us all we need to know about the true character and mental state of this sainted charlatan. Oppenheimer had been accepted to study as a physicist at the prestigious Christ’s College of the University of Cambridge. While there, he was placed under the tutelage of a brilliant experimental physicist named Patrick Blackett — a true genius who would go on to become famous for his work on cosmic rays and magnetism. Due to his own ineptitude in the laboratory (true science) — Oppenheimer became insanely jealous of Blackett’s skills as an experimental physicist. Oppenheimer’s “clumsiness” in the lab is a matter of admitted historical record. Frauds like Oppenheimer and Einstein may know how to crunch numbers, but they can neither discover nor invent — and they know it!

In 1926, while on vacation with two friends, the mad young man confessed to them that he had to return to Cambridge immediately. In a fit of jealous wrath, Oppenheimer had coated an apple in noxious chemicals and placed it on Blackett’s desk. Afterwards, probably fearful of being discovered, he wanted to make sure that Blackett was alright. Fortunately, Blackett had not eaten the poisoned fruit. When informed of his dirty deed, the University began to move ahead with plans to press charges against the would-be potential murderer. After the intervention of his wealthy and well-connected parents, Oppenheimer was instead placed on academic probation and ordered to undergo psychiatric evaluations.

On another occasion, the insecure and ever-jealous psychopath tried to strangle a fellow roommate (and future famous writer) named Francis Fergusson, after he had announced to Oppenheimer that he had just gotten engaged to be married. Fergusson easily fended off the 130 pound weakling, and remained sympathetic to his pathetic school mate. Yet he had always and would always regard Oppenheimer as mentally ill. (here) Indeed, Oppenheimer himself later told Fergusson that his troubles were caused and fueled by personal frustration with his experimental inabilities. (here)

Incompetence at experimental science, a crackpot, an envious weakling, an almost murderer, a violent genocidal psychopath, and a communist — what could possibly go wrong by placing dangerous state secrets into the hands of such a miserable Marxist miscreant? Let’s keep that black mark on his name by sharing this article.

J. Robert Oppenheimer // 1904-1967

How do climate doomsayers explain the current state of Arctic ice?

By Vijay Jayaraj

With ice coverage for July and August remaining above the ten-year average of 2010–20, the extent of summer sea ice in the Arctic has surprised experts who once predicted that such levels would be impossible.

This stands in stark contrast to the dominant climate narrative that predicts the dwindling of summer ice in the Arctic.  Some politicians had even claimed that parts of the Arctic would be ice-free by now.

With the seasonal Arctic melt technically over, it is fair to conclude that the extent of ice in the summer of 2022 has been greater than the ten-year average.  On most days in July and August, sea ice levels were above the ten-year average and significantly more than the previous few years.

The Japanese National Institute of Polar Research provides a useful visualization in the graph below.  This year’s Arctic sea ice — shown in red — is compared with the ten-year average and the levels of the previous few years, including that of 2012, when ice had reached its lowest of the period tracked.


Data of sea-ice extent in square kilometers in the Arctic Ocean from June 2002 to the present and decadal averages of 1980’s, 1990’s, 2000’s, and 2010’s are included.
Source: National Institute of Polar Research, 
https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent.

According to the Danish Meteorological Institute, the extent of Arctic sea ice was much greater than the last five years, as shown in the below graph.


Arctic Sea Ice Extent.
Source: Danish Meteorological Institute, 
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php.

Summer temperatures in the Arctic remained at levels similar to the 44-year average of 1958–2002, with no marked increase in warming.  In the graph, temperature is shown in the Kelvin scale; the horizontal blue line is freezing, or zero degrees Celsius and 32 degrees Fahrenheit.


Daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel as a function of the day of year.
Source: Danish Meteorological Institute, 
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php.

Now, here’s the big question: why were internationally acclaimed climate scientists unable to predict this marked increase in the extent of summer sea ice?  Is it because their overall approach is biased toward supporting the theory that carbon dioxide is warming the planet to dangerous levels?  Or is it because their models are incapable of predicting future temperatures?

The answers must come from the doomsayers themselves.  They need to explain why Arctic summer temperatures have been not at all different from the 44-year average and why summer sea ice is above decadal averages.

Acknowledging that we have yet to understand the complex climate system will undermine the credibility of scientists and political institutions advancing destructive energy policies to address a fantasy of climate catastrophe.

Melting of Arctic ice has been used as a major data point in the justification of restrictive energy policies adopted by many countries.  It is ironic — and infuriating — that millions across the world are suffering from high energy prices and blackouts at the same time that Arctic sea ice has been at its greatest extent in five years!

Europe is facing rapidly rising electricity prices and a natural gas shortage.  Citizens in the U.S. are experiencing high energy prices as their access to cheap fossil fuels is restricted by government’s infatuation with solar and wind power.  China is scampering to reduce blackouts.  All this could have been avoided if political leaders had not promoted a false climate emergency.

It makes no sense to force people to live in darkness in the name of climate policy when the policy-makers themselves have so little understanding of the planet’s mechanisms of warming and cooling.  Acknowledge the infancy of climate science and liberate people from energy tyranny.

Vijay Jayaraj is a research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, VA.  He holds a Master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K. and resides in India.

Climate Change Alarmism Debunked AGAIN: Arctic Sea Ice Is Now 3% Below Its 30 Year Average

According to the latest report from the EU’s Earth observation programme, Arctic sea ice is just 3 per cent below its 30 year average.

Whoops, narrative fail!

The Daily Sceptic’s environmental editor Chris Morrison explains the data:

The red line on the graph on the left plots the 2021 record and it can be seen that it is an improvement on recent years. Deviations from the average in March and September shown on the right have both eased in recent years.

Of course in historical and geological terms these changes are insignificant, but they are likely to put a dampener on the generally hysterical tone about polar weather encountered in most climate change debate. This tone was set back in 2009 when former US vice president Al Gore reported there was a high chance that the North Pole would be summer ice free by 2013.

So far as climate catastrophism is concerned, the Arctic is the gift that keeps on giving. Discussing a crackpot scheme to ‘save the Arctic ice’ by sprinkling it with glass, the BBC Future Planet site noted in 2020 that the area was in a “self-destructive feedback loop”. Much of the ice was said to be “rapidly vanishing”.

Morrison goes on to document how Arctic sea ice has grown and abated for hundreds of years of historical records and well before man started emitting carbon dioxide to any significant degree.

gulf sea ice

As we highlighted last year, one of the authors of the United Nations IPCC report who focused on “extreme” consequences of man-made global warming lauded the fact that “people are starting to get scared” about climate change and that this would “affect the way they vote.”

However, doomsday climate change prophecies have been proven spectacularly wrong time and time again.

According to a much heralded 2004 report, man-made climate change would cause “millions” of deaths, major European cities being sunken, nuclear war and global environmental riots… all by 2020.

Related article: Al Gore’s 10 Global Warming Predictions, 16 Years Later — None Happened!

As we highlighted back in January 2020, Montana’s Glacier National Park was forced to remove all signs that read “glaciers will all be gone by 2020,” after the doomsday scenario didn’t happen.

glacier national park removes signs 2020 750x394

So-called “climate experts” have got it wrong time and time again on absolutely everything, from Paul Ehrlich’s prediction of millions of deaths from famine by the 80’s, to Al Gore’s absurd claim that the Arctic would have “ice free” summers by 2013.

arctic sea ice cap

At the end of the 70’s, climate experts said that a new ice age was coming. It didn’t happen.

None of it ever happens, yet the same “experts” are still given platforms and vast funding to insist we reduce our living standards, while voices of dissent are silenced by government decree, Big Tech censorship and social media algorithms.

Reference: Summit.news

Doomsday Cukoo Clock Adds Anti-Vaxxers & Jan 6ers

Picture
FEBRUARY 07, 2022


Doomsday Clock

At Doom’s Doorstep,
 It is 100 Seconds to Midnight

It’s that most frightening time of the year again when the trumpets of Mount Olympus summon the bewildered boobs of the overlapping tyrannical kingdoms of Normiedom & Libtardia  to obedient attention. Hush up and drop to your knees, boys and girls. The “Scientists of Oz,” whose sacred calling it is to keep and unveil the corny-as-can-be “Doomsday Clock” , have a dire warning for us all — so dire, in fact, that it ranks as the most serious harbinger of doom in the history of the catastrophic cuckoo clock:

From this year’s proclamation by the Keepers-of-the-Fake:

In view of this mixed threat environment—with some positive developments counteracted by worrisome and accelerating negative trends—the members of the Science and Security Board find the world to be no safer than it was last year at this time and therefore decide to set the Doomsday Clock once again at 100 seconds to midnight. This decision does not, by any means, suggest that the international security situation has stabilized. On the contrary, the Clock remains the closest it has ever been to civilization-ending apocalypse.”

Be afraid, boys and girls. Be very afraid. No seriously, this time, it’s for real …. really. They’re not joking.

Back in the day when school children were terrorized with “Duck and Cover” drills, the “Doomsday Clock” was introduced (1947) by Globalist scientists who used it to sell the sheeple on the idea that all nations should one day hand over control of armaments to the U.N. as the only way to avoid “doomsday.” Though that radical proposal — originated by the communist Robert Oppenheimer and cryptically proposed by President Eisenhower during his “Atoms for Peace” speech (here) — never came to fruition, the fear of “the bomb” was in fact successfully used by the cunning Globalists to expand America’s bullying “leadership role in the world” , consolidate “the free world” ; build the framework for today’s European Union; expand NATO and implement various power-grabbing U.N. treaties.

With the end of the Cold War, the “Doomsday Clock” , though still “calculated” each year, faded into relative obscurity. But now, thanks to America’s “withdrawal from world leadership,” the minute-hand of the commie cuckoo-clock has been moved ahead by an additional 20 seconds from 2018’s advance of 30 seconds.

Among those engineering the commie calibration for this year’s cuckoo-clock were 13 Nobel Laureates.  The standard stooges chosen to solemnly present this year’s unveiling (in masks, of course) included, for the first time, a Black woman — a “scientist-of-color” you could say. According to the article, the hysterical Rachel Bronson (president and CEO of the “Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” which puts on this annual circus) had this to say:

“The clock has never reached midnight, and Rachel Bronson, Bulletin president and CEO, hopes it never will. “When the clock is at midnight, that means there’s been some sort of nuclear exchange or catastrophic climate change that’s wiped out humanity,” she said. “So we never really want to get there and we won’t know it when we do.”

Bitch, please.

Sadly, the libtarded simpletons who go ga-ga over this type of stuff are likely to buy such preposterous Globalist bullshit simply because politicized “scientists” are the ones selling it – as if “scientists” are infallible and incorruptible.

The felonious fright-fest recently added another new twist which alludes to the Holy Work of countless bloggers and You Tubers like yours truly here  — namely, “cyber-enabled disinformation campaigns.” You see, boys and girls, the one thing that the Globalists never saw coming was the potential networking power of the military project (ARPANET) — which became the Internet — and its ability to immediately counter and neutralize the Fake News of the Piranha Press. It is not the physical doom of humanity that concerns these demented devils, but rather, the doom which awaits them if enough normies ever figure out their ghoulish game. So, in a sense, the clock is ticking, but in a positive way from our perspective.

In closing, let us say that we here at The Anti-New York Times hold true men of science in very high regard. However, not all those claiming to be “scientists” are actually practicing real science. Their ignorance can be even more pronounced when they wander off into matters political and philosophical. Apart from the fact that many of these academic ass-clowns are just well-paid liars, there is also a whole category of “scientists” that fit the observation once made by James Watson – a co-discoverer of the DNA double-helix structure:

“One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that, in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.”

Tell it, Professor Watson, tell it!

On an unrelated but very interesting note, that’s the same James Watson that the usual suspects blacklisted, drove into poverty and forced to auction off his Nobel Prize for Science because he stated that DNA differences among races impact intelligence and achievement. Fortunately, Russian billionaire and friend-of-Putin, Alisher Usmanov paid $4.8 million for the Nobel medal — and then promptly returned it to Watson! (here)

Israel Is Now #1 In Covid Cases Per Capita, Proving All The Draconian Measures Are Utterly Worthless

Despite the fact that Israel has implemented some of the most draconian COVID-19 pandemic measures in the world, the country is now number one in the world in new cases, according to local reports.israel covid empty streets

Jerusalem’s Via Dolorosa empty due to corona-virus fears

According to the Times of Israel, a leading health expert in the country said that 0.6 percent of the population was testing positive daily for the virus — most likely the latest variant, omicron, which is highly contagious but also very mild.

Prof. Eran Segal of The Weizmann Institute said at that rate, Israel currently leads the world in per capita infection rates, even though the population is required to get the latest version of vaccines available and despite heavy quarantine and lockdown regimes.

However, Segal tried to excuse the high infection rate:

But Segal noted it was likely that Israel was not truly the country with the highest infection rate. Rather, he attributed the figures to Israel being a leading country in the number of tests performed each day, relative to its population size.

Israel is followed in the highest daily cases worldwide ranking by Mongolia, Peru, Canada and Georgia.

The fact is, either you’re the number one country, per capita, in daily infections — or you’re not. And right now, Israel is No. 1, period, no matter how you look at the data.

But instead of realizing that this novel coronavirus is not the world-ender that the world has been propagandized to believe, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett is quadrupling down on idiot policies that have not worked yet and are never going to work (because viruses virus — that’s what they do and nothing humans do will stop them from spreading).

The PM “announced Thursday that mandatory quarantine for schoolchildren who were exposed to coronavirus carriers would be scrapped entirely,” the Times of Israel reported. “According to the plan, starting next Thursday, children up to the age of 18 will no longer need to isolate after being exposed.

“Instead, all students — both vaccinated and unvaccinated — will need to conduct two antigen tests a week — on Sundays and Wednesdays — and present negative results when entering educational institutions,” the outlet continued. “Children who test positive for COVID-19 will still need to isolate until testing negative.”

Bennett said that the government will begin distributing “millions” of test kits so that testing can be done at home, an endeavor that is costing tens of millions of dollars to carry out.

Bennett’s order comes as 146,000 school-aged children were already in quarantine due to testing positive for the virus, while another 142,000 were forced into quarantine because they had been ‘exposed’ to the virus (which means nothing considering the virus is literally everywhere).

“Wherever we can make it easier for the public, we will. We are taking Omicron seriously, but also looking at the bigger picture,” Health Minister Nitzan Horowitz said.

Education Minister Yifat Shasha-Biton called Bennett’s order “a brave decision,” while noting further that “it would have been easier to close the education system, but our duty is to save every boy and girl” from the damage of repeated quarantines — even while ordering them into repeated quarantines.

These lunatics literally have no self-awareness at all when it comes to their pandemic decisions.

But that’s not all. Regarding the overall state of the pandemic, Segal predicted that the current outbreak sweeping the country will end soon.

“We are very close to the height, or even at the height of the Omicron wave,” he told Channel 12 news.

What about the next variant? And the next? And the ones after that?

Why haven’t any of these measures ever been implemented for influenza, which sweeps the globe annually, showing up as a different strain?

Viruses… are going to virus. ‘The science’ has shown us this for centuries. Why civilized democracies can’t seem to understand this elementary scientific principle when it comes to COVID-19 is mind-boggling.

Source and reference: NaturalNews.comTimesOfIsrael.com

People Don’t ‘Trust The Science’ Because Too Many Scientists Are Liars With Agendas

By Brandon Smith

There has been an unfortunate shift in Western educational practices in the past few decades away from what we used to call “critical thinking.” In fact, critical thinking was once a fundamental staple of US colleges and now it seems as though the concept doesn’t exist anymore; at least not in the way it used to.

Instead, another form of learning has arisen which promotes “right thinking”; a form of indoctrination which encourages and rewards a particular response from students that falls in line with ideology and not necessarily in line with reality.

people don’t 'trust the science' because too many scientists are liars with agendas

It’s not that schools directly enforce a collectivist or corporatist ideology (sometimes they do), it’s more that they filter out alternative viewpoints as well as facts and evidence they do not like until all that is left is a single path and a single conclusion to any given problem. They teach students how to NOT think by presenting thought experiments and then controlling the acceptable outcomes.

For example, a common and manipulative thought experiment used in schools is to ask students to write an “analysis” on why people do not trust science or scientists these days. The trick is that the question is always presented with a built-in conclusion – that scientists should be trusted, and some people are refusing to listen, so let’s figure out why these people are so stupid.

I have seen this experiment numerous times, always presented in the same way. Not once have I ever seen a college professor or public school teacher ask students: “Should scientists today be trusted?”

Not once.

This is NOT analysis, this is controlled hypothesis. If you already have a conclusion in mind before you enter into a thought experiment, then you will naturally try to adjust the outcome of the experiment to fit your preconceived notions. Schools today present this foolishness as a form of thinking game when it is actually propaganda.

Students are being taught to think inside the box, not outside the box. This is not science, it is anti-science.

Educational programming like this is now a mainstay while actual science has taken a backseat. Millions of kids are exiting public schools and universities with no understanding of actual scientific method or science in general.

Ask them what the equations for Density or Acceleration are, and they’ll have no clue what your are talking about. Ask them about issues surrounding vaccination or “climate change”, and they will regurgitate a litany of pre-programmed responses as to why the science cannot be questioned in any way.

In the alternative media we often refer to this as being “trapped in the Matrix,” and it’s hard to think of a better analogy. People have been rewarded for so long for accepting the mainstream narrative and blindly dismissing any other information that when they are presented with reality they either laugh at it arrogantly or recoil in horror. The Matrix is so much more comfortable and safe, and look at all the good grades you get when you say the right things and avoid the hard questions and agree with the teacher.

Given the sad state of science in the West these days surrounding the response to covid as well as the insane and unscientific push for forced vaccinations, I thought it would be interesting to try out this thought exercise, but from an angle that is never allowed in today’s schools:

Why don’t people trust the science and scientists anymore?

This is simple: Because too many scientists have been caught lying and misrepresenting their data to fit the conclusions they want rather than the facts at hand. Science is often politicized to serve an agenda. This is not conspiracy theory, this is provable fact.

That’s not to say that all science is to be mistrusted. The point is, no science should be blindly accepted without independent examination of ALL the available facts. This is the whole point of science, after all.

Yes, there are idiotic conspiracy theories out there when it comes to scientific analysis, but there are a number of scams in the world of science as well.

The usual false claim is that the average person is ignorant and that they don’t have the capacity to understand scientific data. I do find it interesting that this is the general message of the trust-science thought experiment. It fits right in line with the mainstream and government narrative that THEIR scientists, the scientists they pay for and that corporations pay for, are implicitly correct and should not be questioned. They are the high priests of the modern era, delving into great magics that we dirty peasants cannot possibly grasp. It is not for us to question “the science”, it our job to simply embrace it like a religion and bow down in reverence.

Most people have the capacity to sift through scientific data as long as it’s transparent. When the facts are obscured or spun or omitted this causes confusion, and of course only the establishment scientists can untangle the mess because they are the ones that created it. Let’s look at a couple of examples directly related to human health…

GMO Crops And The Corporate Money Train

The propaganda surrounding Genetically Modified Organisms is relentless and pervasive, with the overall thrust being that they are perfectly safe and that anyone who says otherwise is a tinfoil hat crackpot. And certainly, there a hundreds if not thousands of studies which readily confirm this conclusion. So, case closed, right?

Not quite. Here is where critical thinking is so useful and where reality escapes the indoctrinated – Who paid for these studies, and do they have a vested interest in censoring negative data on GMOs?

Well, in the vast majority of cases GMO studies are funded by two sources – GMO industry giants like Monsanto, Dupont and Syngenta, or, government agencies like the FDA and EPA. Very few studies are truly independent, and this is the problem. Both the government and corporations like Monsanto have a vested interest in preventing any critical studies from being released on GMO’s.

Monsanto has been caught on numerous occasions hiding the dangerous health effects of its products, from Agent Orange to the RGBH growth hormone used in dairy cows. They have been caught compiling illegal dossiers on their critics. The industry has been caught multiple times paying off academics and scientists to produce studies on GMOs with a positive spin and even to attack other scientists that are involved in experiments that are critical of GMOs. Research shows that at least half of all GMO studies are funded by the GMO industry, while the majority of the other half are funded by governments.

There has also long been a revolving door between GMO industry insiders and the FDA and EPA; officials often work for Monsanto and then get jobs with the government, then go back to Monsanto again. The back scratching is so egregious that the government even created special legal protections for GMO companies like Monsanto under what is now known as the Monsanto Protection Act (Section 735 of Agricultural Appropriations Bill HR 993) under the Obama Administration in 2013. This essentially makes GMO companies immune to litigation over GMOs, and the same protections have been renewed in different bills ever since.

Beyond the revolving door, the government has approved many GMO products with little to no critical data to confirm their safety. Not only that, but in most cases the government has sovereign immunity from litigation, even if they’ve been negligent. Meaning, if any of these products is proven to cause long term health damage the government cannot be sued for approving them unless there are special circumstances.

If they could be held liable, you would be damn sure the FDA would be running every conceivable test imaginable to confirm GMOs are definitively safe without any bias attached, but this is not the case. Instead, the government actively propagandizes for GMO companies and uses hired hatchet men to derail any public criticism.

I, for one, would certainly like to know for sure if GMOs are harmful to the human body in the long term, and there is certainly science to suggest that this might be the case. There have been many situations in which specific GMO foods were removed from the market because of potentially harmful side effects. Endogenous toxins of plants with modified metabolites are a concern, along with “plant incorporated protectants” (plants designed to produce toxins which act as pesticides).

There is data that tells us to be wary, but nothing conclusive. Why? Because billions of dollars are being invested by corporations into research designed to “debunk” any notion of side effects.

If the same amount of funding was put into independent studies with no bias, then we might hear a different story about the risks of GMOs. All the money is in dismissing the risks of GMOs; there’s almost no money in studying them honestly.

The science appears to be rigged to a particular outcome or narrative, and that is lying. Science is supposed to remain as objective as possible, but how can it be objective when it is being paid for by people with an agenda? The temptation to sell out is extreme.

Covid Vaccines And The Death Of Science

I bring up the example of GMO’s because I think it is representative of how science can be controlled to produce only one message while excluding all other analysis.

We don’t really know for sure how dangerous GMOs are because the majority of data is dictated by the people that profit from them and by their friends in government.

The lack of knowing is upheld as proof of safety – but this is not scientific. Science and medicine would demand that we err on the side of caution until we know for sure.

The same dynamic exists in the world of covid vaccines. Big Pharma has a vested interest in ensuring NO negative information is released about the mRNA vaccines because there is a perpetual river of money to be made as long as the vax remains approved for emergency use by the FDA. It may be important to note that the FDA has said it will take at least 55 YEARS to release all the data it has on the Pfizer covid vaccines, which suggests again that there is a beneficial collusion between the government and corporate behemoths.

In the meantime, anyone that questions the efficacy or safety of the vax is immediately set upon by attack dogs in the media, most of them paid with advertising dollars from Big Pharma. These attacks are not limited to the alternative media; the establishment has also gone after any scientist or doctor with questions about vaccine safety.

There are clear and openly admitted ideological agendas surrounding covid science which have nothing to do with public health safety and everything to do with political control. When you have the head of the World Economic Forum applauding the covid pandemic as a perfect “opportunity” to push forward global socialist centralization and erase the last vestiges of free markets and individual liberty, any rational person would have to question if the covid science is also being rigged to support special interests.

Luckily, the covid issue is so massive that it is impossible for them to control every study. Instead, the establishment ignores the studies and data they don’t like.

The virus is being hyped as a threat to the majority of the public and as a rationale for 100% vaccination rates, by force if needed. Yet, the median Infection Fatality Rate of covid is only 0.27%. This means that on average 99.7% of the population at any given time has nothing to fear from the virus. This is confirmed by dozens of independent medical studies, but when was the last time you heard that number discussed by mainstream government scientists like Anthony Fauci?

I’ve never heard them talk about it. But how is it scientific to ignore data just because it doesn’t fit your political aims? Again, deliberate omission of data is a form of lying.

What about the multiple studies indicating that natural immunity is far superior in protection to the mRNA vaccines? What about the fact that the countries with the highest vaccination rates also have the highest rates of infections and their hospitalizations have actually increased? What about the fact that the states and countries with the harshest lockdown and mask mandates also have the highest infection rates? What about the fact that the average vaccine is tested for 10-15 years before being approved for human use, while the covid mRNA vaccines were put into production within months? That is to say, there is NO long term data to prove the safety of the covid vax.

These are easily observable scientific facts, but we never hear about them from corporate scientists or government scientists like Fauci. Instead, Fauci argues that criticism of his policies is an attack on him, and attacking him is the same as “attacking science.” In other words, Fauci believes HE IS the science.

And doesn’t that just illustrate how far science has fallen in the new millennium. Real scientists like Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR technique, call Fauci a fraud, but they are ignored while Fauci is worshiped.

The Global Cooling, Global Warming And Now Climate Change Fraud

I can’t even get into climate change “science” here, I would have to write an entire separate article about the fallacies perpetrated by global warming academics (did you know that global temperatures have only increased by 1 degree Celsius in the past century? Yep, just 1 degree according to the NOAA’s own data, yet, institutions like the NOAA continue to claim the end of the world is nigh because of global warming).

The stringent bottleneck on science today reminds me of the Catholic church under Pope Innocent III when church authorities forbade common people from owning or reading a bible. These laws remained in effect well into the 13th century. Instead, the peasants were to go to church and have the texts read to them by specific clergy. Often the bible readings were done in Latin which most people did not speak, and interpreted however the church wished.

It was only the invention of the printing press in the 1400s that changed the power dynamic and allowed bibles to be widely distributed and information to spread without church oversight. Much like the creation of the internet allows the public to access mountains of scientific data and methodologies at their fingertips. The free flow of information is an anathema according to the establishment; they argue that only they have the right to process information for public consumption.

Cultism requires excessive control of data and the complete restriction of outside interpretations. As information becomes openly available the public is then able to learn the whole truth, not just approved establishment narratives.

Science is quickly becoming a political religion rather than a bastion of critical thought. Conflicting data is ignored as “non-science” or even censored as “dangerous.” Government and corporate paid studies are treated as sacrosanct. Is it any wonder that so many people now distrust the science? Any reasonable person would have questions and suspicions. Those who do not have been indoctrinated into a cult they don’t even know they are a part of.

Our Ancestors Might Have Known The Secrets Of Levitation

Did the ancients know the secrets of levitation? Is it possible that our ancient ancestors knew the secrets of levitation? Technology that has since been lost in time and space?

Is it possible that great ancient civilizations like the ancient Egyptians, Olmec, Pre-Inca and Inca deciphered the secrets of levitation and other technologies that have been labeled by today’s society as impossible, mythological?

And if they did, is it possible that they used these ‘forgotten technologies’ to erect some of the most incredible ancient constructions on our planet?

There are dozens of amazing megalithic sites on our planet that defy our modern-day capabilities: Tiahuanaco, the Pyramids of the Giza plateauPuma Punku, and Stonehenge among others.

012bpuma2bpunku.jpg
Puma-Punku

All of these sites were built using incredible blocks of stone that weight up to hundreds of tons, blocks of stone that our modern-day technologies have a hard time dealing with.

So why did the ancient use such megalithic blocks of stone when they could have used smaller blocks and achieve a similar if not identical result?

Is it possible that ancient man possessed technologies that are lost today? Is it possible they had knowledge that surpasses our very own understanding?

According to some researchers, it is possible that ancient man mastered the ‘art of levitation’ which allowed them to defy known physics and move and manipulate massive objects with extreme ease.

Tiahuanaco: Defying Modern-Technology

Tiahuanaco2bbolivia2bgate.jpg

13,000 feet above sea level stand the incredible ancient ruins of Tiahuanaco and its incredible ‘Sun Gate’. “La Puerta del Sol” or Sun Gate is an elaborately carved structure that is composed of stone blocks that weigh over ten tons. It is still a mystery how ancient managed to cut, transport and place these blocks of stone.

Temple Of Jupiter Baalbek

Baalbek2bgranite2bmegaliths.png

The Temple of Jupiter located in Baalbek, Lebanon is another masterpiece of ancient engineering where huge blocks of stone were put together to form one of the greatest ancient sites on Earth. The foundation of the Temple of Jupiter contains three of the most massive stones ever quarried by mankind. The three foundation blocks together weigh 3,000 tons.

If you ask yourself what type of vehicle would be used to transport them, the answer is NONE. Somehow, ancient man was able to quarry, transport and put them into place with such precision that not a single sheet of paper could fit in-between them.

At Baalbek, we have the ‘stone of the pregnant women’ which is one of the largest stones ever cut my mankind, with a weight of 1,200 tons.

Egyptian Pyramids: A Mystery To Mainstream Science

Giza Pyramids Orion's Belt

The Egyptian pyramids are one of the ‘mission impossible’ constructions that have caused amazement among everyone who has had the opportunity to visit them.

Even today, no one knows for a fact how ancient man was able to erect such marvelous structures. Mainstream science has proposed that it took a workforce of around 5000 men, working for twenty years to build them using ropes, ramps, and brute force.

Abul Hasan Ali Al-Masudi, known as the Herodotus of the Arabs wrote about how the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids in the distant past.

Al-Mas’udi was an Arab historian and geographer and was one of the first to combine history and scientific geography in a large-scale work. Al-Masudi wrote about how ancient Egyptians transported the huge blocks of stone used to build the pyramids. According to him, a ‘magic papyrus’ was placed under each of the blocks of stone which allowed them to be transported.

After placing the magical papyrus beneath the blocks, the stone was struck with a ‘metal rod’ that made the blocks of stone levitate and move along the path paved with stones and fenced on either side by metal poles. This allowed the stones to move for around 50-meters after which the process had to be repeated in order to get the blocks of stone to where they needed to be.

Was Al-Masudi objective when he wrote about the pyramids? Or is it possible that just like many others, he was simply amazed by their magnificence, concluded that the ancient Egyptians must have used extraordinary means to construct the pyramids?

What if, levitation technology was present on Earth in the distant past and ancient civilizations like the Egyptians, Inca or Pre-Inca knew the secrets of levitation?

Reference: Ancient-Code.com

Why Isn’t Anyone Talking About Natural Immunity?

Daisy wrote an article recently on the “othering” of the unvaccinated. She went into detail regarding how individuals are blaming the unvaccinated for absolutely everything going wrong these days. I share her concern. There is a long, detailed history of the “othering” of a population leading to all sorts of horrors.

why isn’t anyone talking about natural immunity?

However, it is wrong at a more mundane level, as well. Public discourse surrounding the pandemic seems to focus solely on vaccination as a means of achieving herd immunity. Those who have recovered from the disease and have natural immunity, are being completely ignored.

But why?

Natural Immunity.

The most frustrating thing to me, the past year and a half, has been the constantly changing narrative and the dismissal of formerly well-understood scientific truths. Natural immunity is one of those concepts from freshman biology that many seem to completely disregard these days.

I think this is a natural effect of the “cult of expertise” we have in the United States. Seemingly, anyone with specific credentials is automatically deferred to, regardless of how competent they are… or more insidiously, where their financial interests lie.

If more of us were willing to think critically about the “science” in the news these days, we could be more confident in managing our health. A healthy, confident population willing to argue and drag its feet on accepting medical treatments with which they aren’t comfortable is hard to push around.

A population willing to do anything to just “get back to normal” is not.

‘This Ends The Debate’: Israeli Study Shows Natural Immunity 13x More Effective Than Vaccines At Stopping Delta.

We’re Not Going “Back To Normal.” 

As early as April of 2020, Daisy wrote that we were never getting “back to normal.” And I agree.

But we can move forward a little more well-informed.

I’ve gotten into some discussions with medical professionals about whether people who have recovered from the disease need to be vaccinated. These conversations would have been seen as utterly ridiculous three years ago. However, now, it seems, we all need to relearn freshman biology. So I’d like to review the concept of natural immunity to help organize my thoughts and maybe help others that feel like their heads are in a whirl.

I’ve got my old college biology textbook – Life: The Science of Biology, by Purves, Sadava, Orians, and Heller. I’ve got the sixth edition, published in 2001, so it’s about 20 years old. I also have a newer college biology textbook because I’m a big nerd. It’s Campbell Biology, by Reece, Urry, Cain, Wasserman, Minorsky, and Jackson, published in 2014. Both textbooks detail how our immune systems work, and both say pretty much the same thing.

We’re never going back to normal? Australian Public Health Chief Says COVID Contact Tracing Is Part Of ‘New World Order’

Our Bodies Have Two Major Ways Of Defending Against Disease.

Our innate defenses are things like our skin and mucus. We’re born with these, and they make it difficult for various pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, and multicellular parasites to enter our bodies. Our bodies also have an immune system that recognizes and attacks any infectious agents that make it past our innate defenses.  

Our immune system is really sophisticated, and in healthy individuals, it works pretty well. Suppose some kind of pathogen makes it past the body’s innate defenses and begins infecting cells within the host. In that case, the host’s body will, in turn, start producing antibodies that will specifically attack the invading pathogen. The host body will continue producing antibodies until either the host dies or the invading cells die, and the patient’s body can return to normal.

The best part is, even after the active infection is over, the host’s body will retain the memory of the antibodies it produced during the infection. So if the formerly infected person reencounters the pathogen, the body will immediately have the antibodies to kill the pathogen. They rarely get sick again, and if they do, it’s generally very mild.

Even The Incredibly Pro-Vaccine Wall Street Journal Had An Article On This Recently.

Usually, the WSJ leaves their articles up on the Opinion Page for about a week. However, within twenty-four hours, WSJ buried this article on natural immunity. Jeff had a great article about alternative media just the other day. This definitely feeds into his narrative about how much good info is getting buried right now.

Anyway, the WSJ article discusses mucosal immunity vs. internal immunity. The author (a neurologist) states that while vaccines stimulate internal immunity, they do nothing to address mucosal immunity. The viruses don’t penetrate the host’s organs, which is why most vaccinated people don’t get really sick. But, the viruses still live and reproduce in mucus-lined mouths and nasal passages. That is why vaccinated people with no symptoms are still spreading Covid like crazy. However, those of us that have recovered have both mucosal and internal immunity.

In Case You Needed Further Proof Of The Efficacy Of Natural Immunity.

An Israeli study showed recently that vaccinated people were 13 times as likely to become infected and 27 times as likely to have symptomatic infections as people with natural immunity. 

Alex Berenson posted this information on Twitter on August 25, and the platform permanently banned him on August 28. However, medical professionals are starting to make noise about it, such as Martin Kulldorff, a Harvard epidemiologist. Hopefully, more people begin to listen.

The Benefits Of Natural Immunity Shouldn’t Be As Shocking As They Seem To Be.

After all, we’ve been observing this with other diseases for a long time. A case in point: when I was a kid, everyone still got chickenpox. We all got to miss school and stay home for about a week. I’m the oldest of eight kids, and I think the vaccine came out when my youngest siblings were kids. But I know the oldest four of us caught chickenpox.

One of my brothers caught it twice. The first time around, he caught it when I did. We were pretty sick for a few days and had a rash that covered our bodies for about a week. I never got chickenpox again. However, my brother picked it up a second time at school. He only had a very slight fever for one day and four or five blisters the second time around. That was it.  

None Of What I’ve Said Above Is Even Remotely Controversial.

In fact, if you look at the history of smallpox, records date back well over 2000 years that smallpox survivors nursed the sick. Even then, it was common knowledge that survivors wouldn’t get sick again.  

Now, is smallpox exactly the same as Covid? No, not exactly. The story of smallpox eradication is an amazing one. Since then, we seem to keep hoping we can destroy every disease with vaccines. But that’s not necessarily realistic. For starters, smallpox has no recorded animal hosts. This means, once you wipe it out in humans, it’s gone. Covid, regardless of whether it originated in animals or a laboratory, is known to live in many different animal species. It will never really go away. Humans may gain the upper hand at times. But, it will always be living and evolving within a variety of animal hosts.

Now Is Not The Time To Despair.

So, should we all throw up our hands in despair over the fact that there is a new disease, unlikely ever to be eradicated, in our midst? No. We’ve been living with the cold and flu viruses for millennia. They won’t be eradicated either because they mutate rapidly and have a variety of hosts.  

I’m not trying to be insensitive to the people that have suffered from Covid. And, as it now seems generally accepted that Covid originated in a laboratory, I’m also not trying to downplay the absolutely evil minds involved in making this disease what it is. But we’ve been living with diseases for millennia. We can learn to live with this one too.

Some People Feel Totally Comfortable With The New MRNA Vaccines.

Personally, I’m not comfortable with the mRNA. But, I won’t try to change anyone’s mind. I had Covid, and I’ve got natural immunity. I was extremely low-risk for complications from Covid. (In my late thirties, close to my ideal weight, and no outstanding vitamin deficiencies.) And sure enough, I only felt sick for about a day.

I never had any fever or respiratory symptoms. I was achy for about twenty-four hours and tired the day after. My sense of taste and smell disappeared, which was why I got tested. They have not returned, which is depressing because I love good food, but I can live without it. No child on this planet should miss one race or one get-together with friends because I can’t properly enjoy coffee anymore.

Others have had it way worse. You can read about Daisy’s experience with Covid HERE . She has also shared with her newsletter readers that she lost a close family member to Covid – a healthy man in his mid-40s who had no comorbidities. Bernie Carr, the founder of ApartmentPrepper.com, has had a lengthy battle that included hospitalization and long-term dependence on oxygen, and Greg Ellifritz, of ActiveResponseTraining.com, came pretty close to dying himself but is on the mend.

For anyone else who is vaccine-hesitant yet still concerned about the disease itself, there are many other treatment options. Again, humanity treated disease for a long time before vaccines entered the scene. Some of the first doctors to treat Covid patients formed Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance to develop and share low-cost treatment options. This article talks about managing the symptoms of Covid at home for those who are not sick enough to require hospitalization. 

This Is Not An Argument For Or Against Vaccines.

If no one were willing to try anything new, we’d never make any progress. But the trials need to be made by fully informed, consenting individuals. That isn’t what we have right now. What we have now is coercion.

I am trying to argue against fear and hysteria. I want to encourage anyone, like myself, who is even moderately scientifically literate, to revisit your old textbooks. Build your confidence to make your own decisions. There’s too much fearmongering out there surrounding this disease. We’re distracted by a disease that 99.5% of infected people under 55 will survive as our rights are taken away, and our international reputation for being even a little bit competent and reliable falls apart. 

Don’t allow yourself to get swallowed up by fear. The same things that mostly kept us healthy in the past will mostly keep us healthy now. Eat nutritious food, exercise regularly, and get sunshine.

Does this mean that if you are healthy, nothing terrible will ever happen to you? Of course not, just as obeying all the traffic rules won’t necessarily prevent some drunk from slamming into you. We can’t eliminate risk in our lives. All we can do is try to stack the odds in our favor.

How Will You Build Your Resilience And Mental Strength?

Resilience and mental strength are a huge part of prepping. Going back to the first principles, educating yourself will help you gain confidence in your decisions for yourself and your family. Confidence will help you stand firm against the rising tide of crazy we see in the world. Are you confident in your preparations? Have you been educating yourself along the way? Let’s talk about it in the comments section. 

Now is not the time to give in to fear. Now is the time to become strong.

The Federal Reserve and Climate Change?

Picture

AUGUST 31, 2021

NY Times: How Should the Fed Deal With Climate Change?

A study suggested the Federal Reserve could help fight climate change by excelling at its primary job: maintaining a strong economy.

There is so much “fail” — based on so many flawed assumptions –to unpack in this propaganda piece pooped out by Slimes “Senior Economics Correspondent,” Neil Irwin. The ignorance and contorted anti-logic on display here are astonishing, really — all the more so when we consider the “prestige” attached to whatever appears in the pages of “the paper of record.”

Hazmat suits and hip waders on, boys and girls. Let’s clean up some of this juvenile journalist’s fallacious fecal matter.

Picture
Picture
Picture
Irwin’s illogical idiocies will scramble the brains of unsuspecting readers. He badly needs a course in Greco-Roman logic.

Irwin: The climate crisis is at high risk of becoming an economic crisis. 
Analysis: Notice how the lie of the “Climate Con” is always casually stated as an established foundational truth upon which other theories (and endless “studies”) can to be built upon. In sales, this is known as “assumptive selling” — or, in logic, Existential Fallacy.

Irwin: That is an increasingly widespread view ….
Analysis: “Widespread view” — Arguing to Popular Fallacy.

Irwin: … among leading economic thinkers …
Analysis: “leading thinkers” — Arguing to Authority Fallacy.

Irwin: — that a range of economic and financial problems could result from a warming planet and humanity’s efforts to deal with it.
Analysis: Half wrong // half right. It is ONLY the proposed “solutions” to the non-existent “crisis” that will cause economic problems.

Irwin: What should the United States’ economist-in-chief do about it? 
Analysis: Putting aside the fact that man-made “Climate Change”  is a HOAX — How would the Federal Reserve System possibly fight such a phenomenon?

Irwin: That question has taken new urgency as President Biden weighs whether to reappoint Jerome Powell to another term leading the Federal Reserve or choose someone else. 
Analysis: We’re not sure if the Trump-appointed Anglo, Jerome Powell is a closet “White Hat” or not, but we have noticed that “the usual suspects” aren’t too crazy about him — like they were for his nearly half-century long string of predecessors — Janet YellenBen BernankeAlan GreenslimePaul Volcker(here) and Arthur Burns

Irwin: Climate activists and others on the left have argued that Mr. Powell should be replaced by someone with stronger credentials as a climate hawk. Demonstrators backing this cause were planning to protest at an annual Fed symposium.
Analysis: Communist scum protesting Powell and demanding he not get another term? Yep… He’s gotta be a “White Hat” — or at least not a total villain.

Irwin: Among other things, they want the Fed to use its regulatory powers to throttle the flow of bank lending to carbon-producing industries. 
Analysis: Wow! The “climate activists” (who work for the Cabal) want to fight “Climate Change”  — by using the banking system to deny financing to “polluters.” Now that is some scary Communist shit right there.

Irwin: At the same time, some Republicans are assailing the Fed for mere research efforts involving climate.
Analysis: So, in addition to counterfeiting, loan sharking and market rigging — the Fed’s new role is “researching climate?”

Picture
Powell’s true loyalties remain a mystery — but his appointment by Trump broke a long string of Jewish Chairmen running the Fed, and his refusal to to go along with green lending standards is also a hopeful sign.
Picture
Communist street scum with professional banners call for the removal of Powell for his lack of “leadership” on “Climate Change.”
Picture
Paul “Father of the Fed” Warburg
Picture
Picture

Irwin: It is clear there would be a huge outcry on the right if a new Fed chair were to take an activist stance in trying to limit the availability of capital in energy-extraction businesses.
Analysis: The old Republican’t Party of the Bush Clan, Paul Ryan, John McStain, Mitt Romney et al, would have let it pass. But Irwin’s right. The new Trump Party would never permit such a policy.

Irwin: So far, Mr. Powell and other leaders at the central bank have taken a middle ground. They’ve committed to studying the ways global warming will affect the economy, but not trying to manage how loans are allocated
Analysis: It appears that Powell is telling the Warmist Mafia what it wants to hear, but will not give them what they actually want. Good enough.

Irwin: Arguably, one of the more important things the Fed can do to help fight climate change is to excel at its primary job: maintaining a stable, strong economy.
Analysis: What??? I’m confused. How would a “stable and strong economy” prevent “Climate Change ? Wouldn’t more economic activity generate more of the dreaded plant food known as CO2?

Irwin: Consider some surprising public opinion data.  Since 1989, Gallup has polled Americans about whether climate change worried them personally.
Analysis: To digress a bit — the push-pull art of “public opinion polling” involves the deliberate surround-sound saturation of the normie mind with false propaganda about this or that subject — followed by periodic measurements (polls) of the effectiveness of all that repeated lying.

Irwin: The peak was in April 2000, when the share of people worried about the climate was … (very high). That was also one of the best months for the U.S. economy, with unemployment a mere 3.8 percent. …. Climate worry in the survey hit a low in 2010 and 2011, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis … Using a broader range of evidence from both the United States and Europe, two political scientists at the University of Connecticut, Lyle Scruggs and Salil Benegal, found that a decline in climate concern in that period was driven by worse economic conditions, which increased worry about more immediate issues.
Analysis: So, the distinguished (and surely well-funded) “political scientists” needed a “study” to figure out that when times are hard, suddenly fearful or unemployed people have more pressing concerns to worry about than bullshit “Climate Change ?”  — Brilliant! Who’d have ever thunk it?!

Irwin: It raises a dispiriting possibility: As the planet gets hotter, it could make it harder to keep the economy on an even keel. But the worse the economy performs, the more toxic and dysfunctional climate politics may become.
Analysis: In short, the demented freak is worried that the economic damage caused by “Climate Change”will make it harder to further damage the economy with the needed “solutions” to “Climate Change .” But if the historically, notoriously and deliberately destructive Federal Reserve can “do its job” and give us a strong economy (ha ha ha ha ha) — then we can ruin the good times by selling the public on the painful and expensive policies desired by “climate activists.”

***
We’ve said it before and shall say it again and again and again — one couldn’t write better satire than what the “elite” journalists and academics of “The West” regularly put out as news and  “science.”

Picture
Will the Fed go green? Not under Powell’s watch, it seems.
Picture
Skruggs
Picture
Benegal

Academic ass-clowns: the Connecticut comedy duo of Skruggs & Benegal made the shocking discovery that jobs matter more to people than “Climate Change.” 

Picture
“So you guys are telling me that the only way to destroy the economy is to save it first?”