|
|
| There are 46 comments on this blog. |
|
|
Kookyshit.
|
|
|
In federal court Pfizer admitted everything and forced the judge to throw out the case because it is a bioweapons military program with no civilian legal accountability.
The case is some random person vs Pfizer.
However the complainant is and expert in drug trials and was hired by Pfizer. When they reviewed what was going on, it was absurdly illegal and completely in violation of all drug development laws.
Pfizer was ordered by the military to do fake trials as a show. Quality control is non existent as the mRNA vaccine is produced by military subcontractors.
Do not believe me... go look it up
|
|
|
Typos, due to thumb typing.
|
|
|
I wouldn’t blame your thumbs for what you typed up.
|
|
|
@rider
can he, blame it on the rain?
Like those two German dudes, mochi blueberry, no, uhmmm. Milli vanilla. Yes
|
|
|
“Pfizer was ordered by the military “
What utter bullshit. Like… steaming hot, fresh from the bull’s ass stink-of-bad-alfalfa cow dung.
|
|
|
Maybe he could blame it on the boogie?
|
|
|
More nonsensical horseshit by the "possessed"
1) Anytime the opening sequence of a podcast tries to sell you supplements then you should be on high alert for horseshit, bullshit, or some shit!
2) The podcast was deftly spun to make it appear that the cause of death was due to the vaccine.
3) FEMA does have a program to reimburse FUNERAL RELATED expenses due to a death that can be attributed to COVID but nowhere in that program (link attached) does it mention a requirement, or even a connection, with having received the vaccine. ANYONE can apply for this reimbursement when a family member died as a result of COVID, or a complication associated with COVID. It doesn't matter if they received the vaccine or not!
4) The vaccine, although highly effective, is not a 100% cure or insurance policy against contracting COVID. Vaccines only provide a statistically superior advantage of protection.
5) Death Certificates (DC) are not always accurate. Many times the authority submitting the DC take the easy way out. One of the most common catchall phrases is "Systemic Organ Failure" instead of actually identifying the original problem that started the downhill slide that resulted in systemic organ failure.
6) A family member can actually change a DC! I have done it myself! I had a family member with pancreatic cancer die - not from the pancreatic cancer itself, but from sepsis, a bloodborne pathogen (in this case, e-coli in the bloodstream) contracted while being treated in the hospital. The original DC stated cause of death as Pancreatic Cancer. I submitted a change to list "Bloodborne Pathogen" as the primary cause of death with Pancreatic Cancer being an underlying factor. Today, that is still the official version of the death.
@AFMadness - do you ever bother to research any of the nonsense that Alex Jones tries to claim, or do you just take his word as the absolute truth about anything. Alex Jones is a fool! And those that aspire to be his proxy are no different. Talk about sheep!
I am a big fan of free speech, but there are limits. What Alex Jones does is really no different than standing up in a movie theater and yelling "FIRE!", which is clearly not covered by the free speech doctrine. What he does is not necessarily an call to violence, but he clearly intends to incite stupidity (and sell supplements).
I have no problem with FEMA covering funeral expenses for people dying of COVID, unless they refused to get the vaccine, then I think their only financial recourse should be to sue Alex Jones for the entire cost of the medical expenses when they were not covered by Medicare, which could be in the 100's of thousands - each! Maybe someone will take a page of the Sandy Hook plaintiff's book and go after that idiot! That may be the only way to silence his toxic mouth and the insane bullshit that spews out of it!
Final note: The CDC reports that as of August 2021, 99% of COVID-19 [related] deaths in the US were among unvaccinated people! By June of 2021 there were over 600,000 deaths in the US attributed to COVID. Do the math! I wonder how many of those dead people thought Alex Jones was the messiah. As it turns out, Darwin was right - the gene pool will police itself!
|
|
|
@MrAdm1n123456789
Can you please provide a link to the action against Pfizer in federal court.
|
|
|
Ok, you asked for it, here by popular demand.
Wonder why this didnt make the rounds in the US news. Maybe its fake? Is this a lie, not real? Maybe chatgpt created this, who knows. Make up ur own mind, but please, Do Your Own Research.
What do I have for you here boys and girls. Pfihzer rep, under oath, in front of the European Union parliament. Would have been nice to have these kind of hearings in the US. Hmmm
So, this is from Australia, I believe, but I’ve seen it on other, non RUSSIAN channels. if you can stomach hearing some truth from sources outside the US, hear it is THE SPEED OF SCIENCE girl. Ya, know, that scientific approach to bring a product to the market. Listen to the language this fine wise lady uses. Also, she is under oath.
Remember - Stop the Spread (fear and shame propo). Safe and Effective (yet pharma had a, not responsible clause) and the Speed of Science (phew, I sure hope all my vaccines in the future are produced at the speed of science, that sounds safe)
Look for your news outside the US. Its a big journalistic world out there.
What say u?
|
|
|
Also, the full context is available if you need that. This is old news by the way. I�m surprised no one knows about. It was all over outside the US
|
|
|
This anti-vaxx talking point that Pfizer didn't test if the vaccine reduced transmission, while maybe technically true, is still misleadiing at best due to other factors:
Vaccine companies test for safety and efficacy before putting out their product. The efficacy tests are usually tests showing a reduction in *symptomatic* disease. Pfizer passed this test with flying colors when it was initially tested against the variants that were around at the time (late 2020).
Usually a reduction in transmission goes hand in hand with a reduction in symptomatic disease, but Pfizer didn't technically test for the former. The fact that the vaccine was effective against symptomatic disease and tested safe was enough to get it out in an emergency situation.
Afterwards, multiple studies were done in early 2021 (see graph below) by academic institutions that show that Pfizer and other vaccines reduced *asymptomatic* infection greatly, which is a proxy for transmission, because if you don't get infected, you can't pass it on! So we *did* learn that the vaccine reduced transmission, even if Pfizer didn't technically do this study initially.
So, this anti-vaxx talking point, it garbage, like 99.9999% of the stuff they put out, to fool people who don't have experience in this topic area.
Unfortunately, when Delta and Omicron eventually came out, their immune-evasive properties made the studies below obsolete, as the vaccine was no longer very good at preventing transmission. Damn virus!
|
|
|
Finally, note at the bottom of the graph above that nasal loads from people who were vaccinated and then exposed to the virus were very low, per CT values measured by PCR. This is the most important determinant of transmissibility. So until Delta came around, vaccinated people were rarely passing on the virus to others.
|
|
|
Sorry, that's not a graph. That's a table.
|
|
|
@rider
Please, your a brilliant super villain, this topic deserves your A game.
I never heard technically, this doesnt stop the spread. I heard this Batman.
If you dont take the safe and effective vaccine, your a nut.
You trumpet.
Your not anything in this society and u dont care about others.
You should be shunned.
On and on
This dribble shame fear based propaganda was spit out for 2 years. That fruit was just falling of the tree. All spit by experts, experts.
Leana Wen, being one of many brilliant, wise experts. Link below. This peace of work actually pinned an article in The Atlantic on how we should forgive the experts who got it wrong during covid.
Fuk that.
Im gunna draw attention to these experts. They deserve our focus. These beautiful, wise, servants of the people were only tryin to help. Right. We need to celebrate their contributions.
Intelligent people like Leana need to be given credit for the selfless service they provided during covid.
I Will shower all these folks the praise they so desire. And point out all their wisdom.
Remember, Phfizer was working at the speed of science. I feel so safe and effective with big pharma experts running the show.
Unfortunately, I have so much shame and fear, I cant appreciate what they gave the world.
Idk if any of you folks have been able to escape the cult the Christian church. I know first hand. All these experts and their wisdom sound a lot like what the church says. Be afraid, God will punish you. Shameful you living with that person, get married u degenerate. You are a SINNER from birth, thats why you need Jesus.
Covid experts, stop the spread you selfish piece of shit.
Covid expert, think of you grandma.
Covid expert, take one for the team, you naracist trumpet, anti vaxxer.
On and on 24/7 SHAME on you, your going to HELL
Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha. Shame and fear is such weak sauce, once u realise it
Party on brothers and sisters.
|
|
|
Also,
Shame and fear is a strategic tool of the clueless and ignorant. Go re-read1984.
Stop spreading shame and fear.
Never accept an ultimatum based on shame and fear. Our RULERS dont.
Dont you want to have the American dream? Start living like it.
|
|
|
You ask these people for evidence and all they post are podcasts and youtube videos lol
Lawsuits are public record. If it happened, post the record.
You ranting about 1984 is ironic as hell when you're letting a propagandists with a money motive teach you how to think.
|
|
|
I heard Covid-20 is gonna be lit tho
|
|
|
Some people round here need to get laid.
|
|
|
AFM - please crawl back under the rock you came from...and while you're at it...go seek therapy.
|
|
|
Please feel free not to take any of the COVID vaccines. We were too quick to mandate them.
Thank you
|
|
|
@rak
I posted a YouTube video that shows Leana Wen making us feel wonderful. That was not to peer review anything. It was to show her doing her side hustle on propaganda shows. It was to show you the shame and fear based ideology that we all were subjected to by experts. Scientists should be more factual. with your own ear you hear.
Go up a bit further, I posted a Phfizer xectutive, under oath, saying phizer never tested the vaccine for stopped the spread. That feed came from the European Union parliament video and was also not to peer review. You saw and heard Phfizer under oath, we didnt test that. So with your own eyes and ears, you have heard. What are u gunna do with it?
Under oath means, dont lie or you may go to jail. Right. Im sure you have seen movies about that, right. Maybe youve watched breaking bad in the past and understand. Dont lie under oath.
On a propo show you spit misleading narratives, right. They technically lie in spirit, but there not under oath.
Rank and file speak the truth under oath. There she was speaking her truth. There she was telling us that their product was safe and effect. Righhhttt. Oh, but she didnt say that. She said they never tested for it. But that their product is the bestest ever. Because Phfizer moves at the speed of science. Wow so sci fly. They must be safe and effective.
If u did not direct that at me, forgive. But make it more clear whom your chatting about.
|
|
|
@rak.
Ahh, re read, u did direct that at me.
Why did you take the jab? For the team? Because your a man of science? Because Biden said so.
(Ya, know there are people groups who have been experimented on via government programs. Black men syphilus. Do you know that one? Islamic communities in the US have had, what appears to be CIA psyops being worked on them, post 911)
Were you gunna take it when the dems under trump said, we aint taking that trump vaccine? Were u a man of science then?
I smell team player all over you.
God damn, get woke or go broke, brother. The shit Im spitting is an inconvenient truth. Please read more from outside the US.
|
|
|
@ Marrisa, So tell us, If you were doing a show say anywhere between The View and Infowars. Who would your sponsors be ?
Please don't say Pfzier, as they are #1 in Billions paid out in lawsuits filed against them.
But since you have all this time to research for your self, verify it on your own.
People will only believe what they want to see. The rest they are not ready for. I don't see you as very open minded. Pretty, well educated perhaps. But it's mostly the so called well educated that look down upon those who are not.
I think that you just can not get past Alex's personality and once that happens nothing gets through.
And btw, alex has been sued
|
|
|
@AFMadness
I must say that at last we have something we can agree on;
"People will only believe what they want to see. The rest they are not ready for."
That is painfully evident in seeing these blogs, but that sword cuts both ways!
I would never chastise someone for believing in anything, whether they had a college degree or never even finished the 5th grade. Our personal opinions are an aggregate of our upbringing, our education, and our lifelong experiences. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Who really cares if you believe in aliens or think the earth is flat? Really, what's the harm? Who cares if you believe in God or if you are an atheist? These are profoundly personal choices, and your beliefs are, and should be, protected in a free-speech society. But when you INSIST that your beliefs are the only real truth and that anyone who doesn't think or believe like you do is ignorant and wrong, then you are nothing more than a moral terrorist. But even then, you have a right to be a moral terrorist, as long as you do no physical harm to anyone else.
The COVID pandemic is no joke, just ask the families of the 1,130,662 people who have died in the U.S. from it as of yesterday. But what I question when I look at that appalling figure is how many of those people who died did not get vaccinated because someone like Alex Jones, or his proxies, told them the whole thing was a joke, or conspiracy, and that he knew better than the medical professionals and experts in suggesting that a medicine for deworming sheep was the best treatment (until he supplanted that suggestion with his own line of supplements).
Even Alex Jones has a right to his own opinions, regardless of how outlandish they are, even when he professes his opinions to a national audience, until he commits actual harm. When he steps way out of his area of expertise and convinces people to do things that could result in their personal injury, or death, then he is morally irresponsible at the least, and maybe even legally responsible in fact. That is what upsets me about Alex Jones. A guy that only finished high school essentially attempts to give medical advice in a way that can result in causing people to die, and some people not only think that he has a right to do it, they aspire to be his proxy and promote it as well.
I don't have anything against Alex Jones personality; he is one hell of a salesman and if I wanted to sell supplements, I would want him to do it too. I find some of the things he says to be quite entertaining, but only in their absurdity. I just have a real problem with his moral character, or should I say lack of moral fiber. But at least I understand his motivation; he is in the business of making money and promoting conspiracy theories is his product, and those that buy into his nonsense are his customers. He doesn't even need to believe in them himself (which is evident in his backpedaling on Sandy Hook and Pizzagate), he only needs to sell them. What I don't understand is the motivation of his proxies!
I have no problem with Pfizer. They are a huge corporation with all the problems that large corporations experience. And like all corporations, they make mistakes too. Even understanding that their main purpose in being a corporation is to make profit for their shareholders, I still believe that they do not intentionally do things to hurt the public. They will certainly make some bad decisions that are profit motivated, but I believe that those decisions are based on their belief that there would be no harm to the public; and sometimes they get it wrong. But no one seems to be interested in the good they have done, the lives that they have saved with their research and development and the products that came of that effort - if you are a conspiracy theorist the only thing that matters is the mistakes, and the damage those mistakes have caused, and how that supports the conspiracy narrative.
I took the time to research Alex Emerick Jones because I like to have a complete understanding of any topic that interests me, regardless of whether I am for or against the subject matter. My question to you is this; in a previous blog I cited 3 different articles on why people believe in conspiracy theories. Did you bother to read even one of those? I'm betting not. When you posted this blog topic, did you bother to investigate the truthfulness of what was being said, or did you just believe it by default because it came from your preferred source of information? Or are you simply a provocateur that gets pleasure in creating chaos and discontent?
Whenever I get even the slightest inclination that someone might be trying to poke butter up my butt you can bet that I will investigate it! So if you don't like my responses to blogs that you author, then put the butter away.
|
|
|
I don't have time to read all that. Here is a clip of a day in the life of a Corporate media person. 4 minutes.
My opinion of many of them is they are doing a disservice to us all.
There is another comment I'd like to make on "Being Total Cause" over one's own life. But don't have time for that at the moment. Instead most become In Effect of it. All the BS I see on local / Corporate media is to put one in total Effect. Nothing is Cause coming from them. As Cause gets Demonized.
Now Wouldn't you want to be Total Cause over your own life ?
.
|
|
|
Well, when you get a chance to read you can look at the attached.
|
|
|
it's easier to fool people than it is to convince then they have been fool" Mark Twain. Nothing tickles my funny bone than read blogs here between seen guests 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
Well I did read one of those three links that were posted about conspiracy theories, however my question to anyone still remains the same, Just how many facts does it take to dis spell a theory ?
But thank you for playing the middle road and listening to both sides.
I still disagree with anyone that thinks more people died being unvaccinated. Now sure a lot of Seniors in Assisted Living homes did in the beginning and with all the adverse reactions to this mRNA shot, in the past the FDA would have been pulled it off the market. But they are all in Lock Step.
Now here is one by American AFMindy the speaker, on the history of Vaccines. Even though it's on Banned
The Dark History of Vaccines: The Man made Origin of Aids and Other Diseases
.
|
|
|
"Just how many facts does it take to dis spell a theory ?"
Should be the other way around. How many facts does it take to make you believe a conspiracy theory? If you are naturally skeptical about things, it should take many,
|
|
|
@AFMadness
I am going to apologize in advance for doing this – I really am. But I warned you about trying to poke butter up my butt and it is evident now that you buy that shit in bulk at Costco.
I have a comprehension, like most people, of generally accepted facts. Sugar tastes sweet. Cayenne Pepper is hot. Crude oil is the result of decomposing plants and animals from millions of years ago. Etc., etc., etc. However, this comprehension is subject to being challenged and, in some cases, reveals new understandings that influence our view of history and thus rewrites the book on generally accepted facts. The most recent example of that is in the field of archaeology where new findings suggest that our knowledge of early humans is not necessarily correct or is at least limited in scope.
When new “knowledge” is presented which challenges the readily accepted facts on any subject I must ask myself some basic questions: “Who did the research (what are their qualifications to even do this research)? What was their goal in doing this research in the first place (is it for academia, or was it corporate sponsored with inherent bias)? Are their findings and conclusions based on verifiable facts or previously verified data (vs. making unsubstantiated claims or expressing only opinions that are deftly structured to appear as facts)?
THAT IS MY FILTER ON WHAT I ALLOW INTO MY BRAIN! In this age of instantly available information a filter like this is required to prevent those with malicious intent from taking over your thought process.
So, yes, I did start to review the clip that you supplied the URL for, and the first question I asked was, “Who is this author?”
OMG! Let’s get to the pure factual information first: AFMindy is the stage name for Mindy Robinson Falls River, Mass., born Melinda Lynn Robinson, DOB 2/14/80, 5’2” tall with a prominent history of being an actress. Her parents are Jane and Bill Robinson. In 2020 she ran (unsuccessfully) for the 3rd Congressional District of Nevada as a Libertarian candidate, finishing 3rd. She had her Twitter account with 210,784 followers suspended on 4/21/20 for TOS violations. Her Facebook account was similarly suspended. She has 44,375 subscribers to her YouTube channel.
If you do a basic Google search for AFMindy the first results will be of her work as a porn star! Go down a little further and you will find numerous entries of her blogging effort in a desperate attempt to get attention. The URL link to her Wordpress account will provide a link to her Facebook page which describes her as a “Constitutional Activist, Conspiracy Realist, and Journalist for DC Patriot.” Another link there will direct you to her Gab.com account which is filled with equally nonsensical content.
I was desperately searching through all of this bullshit to see where her education or credentials for being a journalist were, but it was nowhere to be found! And quite frankly, it is quite obvious that she is nothing more than an “attention whore.” She doesn’t even meet the qualifications for being a “media whore” like Alex Jones. She is an Alex Jones “wannabe” and an aspiring proxy.
Needless to say, after spending all of 2 minutes in discovering who this person is, I didn’t bother to look at the Banned Video you so proudly presented as factual. But my question to is this; did you bother to do any due diligence? Or did the title of the video so perfectly match your preconceived notion of the truth that you did not feel a need to? If you buy butter at Costco in bulk, then the people you rely on for the “truth” are buying it by the truckload! You are the victim of one of the oldest and most effective form of manipulation known to man – you have been effectively brainwashed! And when I use the term brainwash, I mean it a very literal sense; you have lost touch with reality. Your brain is no longer capable of rational thought!
Your attempts to justify your bog posts only dig the hole deeper. How deep do we need to go before you stop doing harm to yourself and your reputation? Or will you continue to dig until the hole gets so deep that the unsupported walls cave in and suffocate you under your own fantasies? You are sick – and you need help. If you cannot afford treatment, then please go start a GoFundMe campaign; I will gladly make a contribution. HX has been good to me, and I can afford to do so. Don’t be afraid to reach out to your brothers and sisters on HX for support in a legitimate endeavor. But at the very least, please, stop digging!
|
|
|
WTF is a conspiracy theory? Let me count the ways. ( @rider; this doesnt specifically have to do with you. I just thought it brought an opening to discuss this. Please chime in if needed.)
1. Term created by the CIA. (Thats really all that needs to be said) I digress
2. Hillary Clinton starting Russiagate. That seems to be proven now. What a conspiracy theory thats been.
3. How about rich rulers fucking underage hotties on Epstein island. Member that conspiracy theory. How fucking crazy would you be if you suggested that Nom Chomsky is a pedaphile because he visited Epstein and his island. Fukn loon ud have to be
4. Member that hunter biden laptop conspiracy. All those intelligence officers saying it looks like a Russian psyop. Then, the media taking that a step further to, Intelligence officers SAY that the laptop story is Russian propaganda. The intelligence officers story was a real CONSPIRACY. Wonder why Biden dont get pummelled on the debate stage when he referenced it. Where were all the conspiracy theory crys when he said that. Oh, that would have impugned Bidens character. Ignore that one.
Yes, people make shit up. Yes, people speak on matters without enough fact behind them, but pulling the conspiracy card is weak sauce. DONT attack character of the messenger. Fuk that.
Present your evidence. Let others decide based on the evidence. Were all degenerates here.
I masterbate 3 times a day, Im sure I cant be trusted,
|
|
|
Often "the evidence" is cherry picked facts and figures that don't give anything close to the full story authored by someone who has questionable expertise in the field and who could be easily seen as having an agenda if you dig into information about who they are and who sponsors them.
That's why narratives/theories using this "evidence" usually don't make it to peer-reviewed journals.
Also, from a journalistic point of view, facts and figures need to be verified by independent sources. If they aren't they should be taken with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
First of all, I completely agree what Marrisa_G has been saying.
Also, it's not like a hypothesis or theory goes from complete disbelief to being seen as the truth.
Hypotheses or theories can become stronger or weaker based on the quality of new evidence.
Also, a lot of things I just haven't followed or know enough about, because they really don't interest me, like the Hunter Biden laptop story or the Epstein Island story (I don't follow or care much about these types of narratives). I just simply don't know enough about them.
|
|
|
@Jake2k69
I'm not sure what you mean in saying conspiracy is a "Term created by the CIA." Can you clarify that please.
|
|
|
@Mar
Well if it quacks like duck, it is a duck
The CIA traffics in confusion, manipulation, shame, fear. I know it well. I dont need a peer review paper for that. Maybe, it Just fukn sounds like what that organisation would do, when they didnt want the finger pointed at them.
You are aware that a new dump of jfk docs dropped. I seein propo from both sides. Narratives being spun to protect the system. Narratives being spun to point out conspiracy. Whatever. Those docs do seem to say the cia was involved. Inconvenient.
Mar, do you believe in UFOs? For Fuk sake, if you believed in ufos in the past you were a fukn nut job. That guy or girl, who cant be trusted. Right. The goubnerment hasnt endorsed ufos, thats a fukn conspiracy theory. Well at least until 2018. Member when the US military said ufos are. Holy shit. They call um UAPs. Or sumptin else. But there real. Change the text books. Fukn I dont know shit about if there aliens, but our gubnerment lied to us for a long time. My speculation, power. Seems reasonable. Yet, conspiracy.
My point, conspiracy theory is weak sauce. Its used to stop discussion and not to add to it.
You are an intelligent person. I read you missives. Bring evidence, encourage discussion. Thats the onlY way we will be set free. Crack pots are seen right away. You dont need to protect us from crack pots. Encourage research. Encourage free thinking. Racists and bias are seen right away. You dont need to protect us from that.
Honestly, luv ya.
|
|
|
@rider,
I agree, quality of evidence. Yes peer review goes a long way. Yet peer review is controlled by a few. There definitely are gatekeepers in that world. Lets start with the periodicals themselves. They dont have to allow anybody actual access to the peer review process. Gatekeepers decided what the community will peer review. We have pre print. Most anyone can submit. But actual peer review is tightly controlled.
Case - (Im not saying anything either way about covid right now. This was just an observation based on reading pre prints and peer review litature. There was an almost complete blackout of any peer review topics that differed from the states propo during covid. Like a 2 year blackout. In a free society that seemed odd to me, Maybe its just me. Now that blackout is over and there is many peer reviewed articles differing. Interesting.
Lets talk about another thing thats never discussed. Grant money. Grant money is the life blood academia. Where does grant money come from? Lets take health care or climate change.
Health care - billions of dollars of grant money is dolled out by NAID. This is given out to academics who are creating facts, right. Who the Fuk is NAID. Of, shit, thats Dr. Phibes, I mean Faucis old job. He was the head of NAID for the cdc. I would fukn be worried that my next grant check would be cutoff if I went against the cdc on anything important. At least during the blackout phase.
Climate change - the bill and Melinda gates foundation are huge here. I would be worried that my grant check would be cutoff if I ever spoke non official dribble on climate change. So I wouldn't, right.
We live in the fukn United States. This country is about making money.
Its not and never ben about truth, justice, and the American way. Thats mythology
Follow the money baby
|
|
|
One other thing. Do you know that the pharma industry actual funds around 60% of the current yearly CDCs budget. If you look across the western world the funding is even higher in other countries. Britain I think its 92%. But all western countries have gone this way.
We re talking about the whole budget.
Well, when I give money to folks, I have power over them. You think pharma has any power to sway the expertise of the cdc? I do. When your paying for someone else, you have control over them.
|
|
|
@mar or rider
Here cdc website explanation for gift funding. I can provide a better source if needed.
So congress gives 7 old billion and the pharma industry gives 13.7. Maybe some of that gift comes from bill and Melinda, who knows. Well I bet you could find that. I digress.
I guess thats 60%
|
|
|
@Jake2k69
Ok, thanks for clearing that up. I was hoping you were not saying that the CIA invented the term conspiracy because I found 9 separate references of it in the King James Bible. So I think you probably meant to say that the CIA is quick to utter the term "conspiracy" as a means of trying to control a narrative and escape having to tell the real story. No doubt they have a long history of doing that. I realize that people think that I am long winded in my posts but telling a story, or making a point, is hard to do sometimes while also trying to use an economy of words. Words matter! And a misuse of words, sentences, or even paragraphs can sometimes convey the wrong thing. "It doesn't what you say, or even mean to say - it's how it is perceived that counts!"
The only conspiracy theory that has any traction for me is being visited by aliens. I don't necessarily believe or agree that it is true, but if was finally revealed as being true I would not be surprised by it (actually kind of hope it is true! - But I don't declare it to be true just because I hope it to be true!).
You are correct that any organization that gets a majority of their operational funding from a single source is liable to beholding to that source's whims and political leanings. Hence, the need to do proper due diligence and ask "Why is this person saying what they are saying? What is their motivation?" However, I generally defer to the findings and opinions of scientist of higher education levels who have dedicated their entire lives to their field of study for answers to scientific questions as opposed to podcasters or porn stars. That is kind of my primary filter for accepting information, especially when it has the potential of influencing how I live my life. If the veterinarian and the pool guy give me different ideas on how to cure my sick cat, I'm a little more inclined to go with the veterinarian. If I am pregnant and want advice about the fetus I am probably going to ask an OBGYN, not my dermatologist. Call me crazy for being a little closed minded about that sort of thing.
|
|
|
@Mar
I hear you.
Im cool with your long rants.
You make some good points and observations. I agree, generally speaking, that following the advice of experts is reasonable. What turns me off is, when the experts are highly political. Or when those experts get paid by the industry they are suppose to be regulating. At that point, all expertise has to be questioned. Thats all Im sayin. It sucks how much time I have to look into peer reviewed articles. Gone are the days that I can just believe experts, because there experts. Im not even in these fields of study, but the only way to see around the propo is to go to actual study. Ok, enough of that.
Im not saying your sayin this, just example.
If Im hearin, 2+2 is 4 from a an expert, than its 4.
If Im hearin, 2+2 is 5 for white men, but 4 for the rest of us, then its probably 7.
It appears to me that the soft sciences in western society are sayin that later thingy.
If its pure hard science, I wont question. I love science. The enlightenment period, that the west went through, was essential for our development. Fukn church running around chopping off heads and burnin bitches at the stake. Or fukn selling heaven to degenerates that wanted to buy into it.
If it smells of propo, whos employer.
If its black and white, whos the cult leader
Thank you Marissa for all thoughts. Together we can reason. We can disagree. We might not always have the same conclusion and we may be adversaries on topics, but I respect you and your thoughts.
|
|
|
Science is racist and brings social injustice to communities of low income and color.
"Scientist Lives Don't Matter"
|
|
|
“There was an almost complete blackout of any peer review topics that differed from the states propo during covid. Like a 2 year blackout“
This is simply not true. At all. There were tons of peer-reviewed articles that tried to objectively explore the issue of mitigations, often coming to some conclusions that may have differed from what you call “the states propo” (which didn’t really exist by the way, as there was in reality considerable variation in responses).
Did you know that the Cochrane made a meta analyses of masks back in 2020? The 2023 review just added new data.
Just go to Google scholar and type “lockdowns” to see all the articles for yourself.
Oh, you probably don’t trust Google to give you an honest search. My bad.
|
|
|
^I apologize for the snarkiness in my response.
|
|
|
@ rider
No you dont, u love it bitch.
You and all your facts, your Fakn the check out me brother.
I guess i was wrong. I remember all those peer review studies on vitamin d. What about all those barn burners around ivermectin. Member that silly horse dewormer drug. Ya know the one that won the Nobel prize for treating humans. What about all those peer reviews on zinc. How about that peer review around how the vast majority of peeps dying have co-morbiddies. Diabetics, obese, immunology-compromised, on and on.
Jesus Christ would be shakin on his cross, mutherfuker. Shame on me.
Yet, Its real odd though, member that ivermectin dewormer drug. Keep that in your mind for a bit. One of the big three, pharma, produce a drug to treat covid. That drug starts with a p. This new one, not generic, acts on the same part of the cell as ivermectin. They both prevent the cell from properly cutting the protein chains. They make the cell unable to reproduce. Thats weird right. If ivermectin, Which is generic, did the same thing, why was it demonised?
Generic baby, generic. Money money money honey
Masks, please sister. What u talking about. The covi was airborne all along. Cloth masks mean shit to airborne. Only tightly fitting n95 works. Why werent we forced into n95s? They didnt care, sounds reasonable.
Google, you mean the company that the grandfather of AI just quit. That company that is scrambling to embed AI into its browser. I guess Microsoft and open AI, chatgpt, are turnin up the heat. Bing browser and chatgpt cummin soon. Google smells market share loss. That company is soulless. What do you think there gunna do.
Race to the bottom. I do luv them bottoms though. Bye bye bye.
Hellll noooo, google sucks balls. Not u @balls, they suck balllllls. Never trust ball suckers. Never.
|
|
|
@ Marrisa ; I am going to apologize in advance for doing this - I really am. But
But ? That right there negates everything after and everyone else how full of shit the rest of an explaination may be. May as well added, Just Kinding J/K after all that, when I know full well when a person who says that, is not.
Instead a Charactor Assassination is done on the person delivering the message.
" I was desperately searching", validates the Typical Liberal stance. When you get down to researching what she and many others have verified in the past it was nothing new to me. It will take you far longer than two minutes to research it out and verify for your self. As to much Faith is put into Google.
I was lucky enough that the Lieutenant Colonel in 1975 ordered the Sgt to stamp my medical record as I have received the Swine Flu shot. At that age I had no idea of any of this and very Greatful for him doing that.
Do you know what Espionage is, how about Counter Espionage and Counter Propaganda which the net is full of these days. So until you / I verify in a proper manor,... It is clear that you have made a choice.
Truth is a hard pill to swallow and some people will continually believe the lie until there dying day.
.
|
| There are 46 comments on this blog. |
|
