As you listen to this, it’s amazing how they talk in one voice, as if that makes it more right or actually correct. It’s as if they were coerced to say the narrative that they told about Covid and the Vaccine. It was this pattern recognition that tipped me off to the farce that was the jab.
You can read the body language of Bill Gates and tell that he is lying. The news reporters are just puppets reading whatever they are told to. The hags of The View try to shame people. You can see Evil speaking in Klaus Schwab (and Gates). I sounds like they are the Devil’s spawn as they talk.
It’s all too clear when they protested that people “don’t do your own research”. It’s what the Russians were told before communism, the Nazi’s were told before Hitler. They tried to shut people down from being safe. It was the only thing that kept some of us from making bad decisions. It’s how I learned what a farce the whole Covid story was.
There was enough group think going on here to know that they lied. Judge for yourself. YMMV
As I read about California trying to buy votes with reparations, it occurs to me that California can’t afford it nor were they in the slavery issue to begin with. It’s about being woke. No one mentions that the first slave owner in America was black, or that South America was by far a worse offender of slavery than the United States by millions of people. They let it go on longer and didn’t fight a civil war on behalf of stopping it.
It’s never mentioned that slavery still exists in North Africa today or that the people who sold the slaves were blacks to begin with.
A generation of Americans are being raised on half-truths and lies about the history of slavery in America.
They are given the impression that America was uniquely bad and that American slavery was uniquely bad. They learn nothing about slavery elsewhere. Among the many lies they are told are that “black slaves built America” and that America is systemically racist.
Since the only mortal enemy of the Left is truth, here are some truths about slavery.
America’s Slavery Compared to Slavery Elsewhere
If you are interested in morality and committed to truth, you do not ask, “Who had slaves?” You ask, “Who ended slavery?”
Who had slaves?
Every civilization throughout history had slaves: Asian societies, Africans, Native Americans, and other Indigenous peoples around the world, and the Muslim/Arab world, which may have had the most slaves of all.
Who ended slavery?
There was only one thing unique about slavery in the West: It raised the issue of the morality of slavery, ferociously debated it, and finally abolished it there, before it was abolished in any other civilization.
If you care about moral truth rather than, for example, promoting America-hatred, you must recognize—and you must teach—that America was one of the first slave-holding societies to abolish slavery. This even includes Africa.
Cornell professor Sandra Greene, a black scholar of African history, notes, “Slavery in the United States ended in 1865, but in West Africa it was not legally ended until 1875, and then it stretched on unofficially until almost World War I.”
The numbers of slaves.
According to the authoritative SlaveVoyages.org, the total number of black slaves imported from Africa into America was 305,326. The number of black slaves other countries imported from Africa into the rest of the New World—i.e., into the Caribbean and South America—was 12,521,337.
In other words, other countries imported 41 times the number of black slaves into the Western Hemisphere than the United States did, including the years before American independence).
Yet, the American Left never mentions this important moral point—because the Left-controlled education system suppresses facts it finds inconvenient, and the Left is not interested in morality or truth, but in vilifying America.
And then there is Arab/Muslim enslavement of blacks. Professor Paul Lovejoy, in his “Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa” (Cambridge University Press, 2012), reveals that from the beginning of Islam in the seventh century through the year 1600, the estimated number of Africans enslaved by Muslims was about 7 million. After 1600, it was about a million per year.
Do American students ever learn about the Arab/Muslim slave trade? How many know, for example, that a great percentage of the African male slaves were castrated so that they could not have families?
‘Black Slaves Built America’
This is another lie of the Left.
Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th century—the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.
But University of Illinois professor of economics Deirdre McCloskey answered this:
Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk … That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production …
The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.
But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.
First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).
Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported 4 million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically?
Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?
“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.
“America is systemically racist.”
This is the Great Left Lie.
Four million black people have emigrated to the United States since the 1960s—and tens of millions more would if they could. Are they all fools? Why would anyone move to a country that is systemically bigoted against them? Did any Jews emigrate to Germany in the 1930s?
Blacks have emigrated to the United States because they know what Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the black woman who fled her homeland of Somalia and who now writes and lectures in America, knows:
What the media do not tell you is that America is the best place on the planet to be black, female, gay, trans, or what have you.
Blacks emigrating to America know what Algerian writer Kamel Daoud, writing in Le Monde and Le Point, knows:
It is forbidden to say that the West is also the place to which we flee when we want to escape the injustice of our country of origin, dictatorship, war, hunger, or simply boredom. It is fashionable to say that the West is guilty of everything.
As regards American slavery and everything else, always remember this: Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value. It is not a left-wing value.
Alissa Heinerscheid, Bud Light’s head of marketing, said in March that “I had a really clear job to do when I took over Bud Light. It was, this brand is in decline, it’s been in decline for a really long time, and if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future for Bud Light.”
Bud Light sales dropped by about 28% in May when compared to sales figures from last year following controversy over the company’s partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. The Journal reported that the company recently informed wholesalers that it would buy back unsold cases of beer that have passed their expiration dates.
The Human Rights Campaign, the country’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group, has downgraded Anheuser-Busch’s equality score for the company’s handling of the backlash from a Bud Light promotion last month that featured transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney as a new spokesperson, USA Today reported on Monday.
A wave of conservative backlash harshly criticized the company for working with Mulvaney, with calls for a boycott appearing to be the reason for a drop in the sales of Bud Light, Business Insider reported.
HRC’s senior vice president of programs, research, and training Jay Brown said the group decided to revoke Anheuser-Busch’s equality score after several attempts over the last month to contact the company’s executive team went unanswered.
The group said it had asked the company to release a statement backing Mulvaney and transgender customers, shareholders, and employees.
Anheuser-Busch had previously held a perfect score and was designated a “Best Place to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality,” which meant the company took “concrete steps to establish and implement comprehensive policies, benefits, and practices that ensure greater equity for LGBTQ+ workers and their families,” according to HRC’s website.
“We don’t make this decision lightly,” Brown said. He emphasized that demonstrating backing for the LGBTQ+ community is particularly important in the current atmosphere, with numerous anti-LGBTQ bills under discussion in legislatures across the nation.
If it bleeds, it reads. That used to be the excuse for lying. Now, it’s just the ministry of propaganda, if anyone remembers the 30’s in Germany, or 1984 also.
The media has abandoned even the cover of pretending to be fair and unbiased. They just parrot the (deep) state talking points. They are in lockstep. Even Fox has gone state sponsored. Lachlan Murdoch and his liberal wife just pulled Foxweiser with the firing of Tucker Carlson. I lost trust in them around the 2016 election anyway, not that I trusted them to begin with.
Meathead, a relative of my asked why I didn’t watch the news to find out what happened. I said it’s because you’ll never find out by listening to the news.
Judge for yourself, but don’t be a sheep. They told people that if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. If you liked your (insurance) plan, you could keep your plan. The Covid jab was safe and effective. January 6th was an insurrection.
Even an idiot could find a pattern here, excepting meathead.
It finally came out. AB is truly woke. Their main customer base for decades is men, the beer drinkers. I don’t know the white/black breakdown other than 13% of the population is black, so I’m guessing more white beer drinking men.
Anheuser-Busch, the parent company of Bud Light, has pledged to purge its white, male employees in an effort to have a “more diverse and inclusive environment,” according to footage found on the company’s website. The company has seen its sales collapse since the disastrous Dylan Mulvaney advertisement campaign which wiped billions off the firm’s value, and chased millions of customers away.
In the video, one employee of Anheuser-Busch explains, “we’re still 40 percent women, and 60 percent men, still predominantly white: so there’s still work to be done.” The “work” to be “done” is apparently replacing white male workers with alternatives.
In doing this, another employee says, “I feel like I finally found my voice as a black woman, and I’m not prepared to lose it.”
Discussing the #CheerstoDiversityAndInclusion campaign, Anheuser-Busch’s European Diversity and Inclusion Manager, Lara Laila Gärber explains, “at AB InBev, what we wanted to do is ensure that diversity and inclusion is fully integrated in our business strategy.”
Anheuser-Busch has lost billions of dollars as a result of its decision to embrace diversity by partnering with Dylan Mulvaney for the now infamous ad campaign. The stock has also since been downgraded by HSBC.
Back to me.
As a person sitting in the grandstands watching the shit show, I’d say they were cutting their own throats. Not everything is for everybody every time. Different people like different things. Why you don’t promote your customers instead of demeaning them for the sake of woke and pleasing Blackrock ESG for your proper CEI scoring (how woke you are for DEI, CRT, etc.).
Bud Light sales began dropping in the first week of April and kept falling for weeks. The boycott has hurt other Anheuser-Busch beers, too, including Budweiser, Michelob Ultra and Busch Light. Sales volumes for rivals Coors Light and Miller Lite in the first week of May were up about 16% and 17%, respectively, according to Bump Williams.
Sure, it’s easy to say go woke, go broke, but this would be in textbooks in colossal marketing mistakes, except the colleges are just as woke. They’ll provide cover for this unless someone wants to actually teach success.
No spin in the world is going to be able to hide the sales numbers. They thought it would blow over, but they underestimated how sick the normal person in America is getting from having this woke crap shoved down our throats by the coastal elites.
Keep hiring those Harvard grads to lower your sales even more. I’d be hiring a bunch of male toxicity employees who actually understood the product and the customer. I bet Don Draper would do better in his sleep than this.
Bias is bias, discrimination is discrimination. Disparaging someone for the color of their skin, any color is racist. It’s sexist to judge against another sex. Funny how they promote dozens of genders, but discriminate against males. They are doing what they blame others for, the heights of hypocrisy.
For all the carping they do about being discriminated against, how come they haven’t hit the roof on all the erasing women lately? As I point out through the evidence below, feminists don’t care about women. They care about promoting themselves and/or getting money. They’ll wear pink pussy caps if they can hate someone like a politician, but won’t fight for the actual cause.
They are quiet while companies erase them or push them aside for men, pretending to be women. I don’t care what they want to be called, they still need a prostate exam and will never have ovaries or Fallopian tubes. They are straight men.
Next and possibly one of the worst is the latest SI swimsuit cover. There is a man who took thousands if not hundreds of thousands from actual females when they put him on the cover. The link will take you to him in a woman’s bathing suit. I don’t want to have to look at it. The Swimsuit edition used to be about gorgeous females. It provided teenagers with endless one handed page turning.
The stories we bring to you this month focus on the status of women who live under Islamic Law (sharia). The Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan are among the world’s regimes under which some of the most horrific human rights abuses against women occur. Islamic Law consigns women to a second-class status under which the rights of men are accorded a superior status. Such unequal treatment derives from the Qur’an, which allows Muslim males to marry up to four women in addition to those “that your right hands possess” (i.e., sex slaves, Q 4:3) and to grant male children inheritance “equal to that of two females” (Q 4:11). In Surah 4:34, the Qur’an tells Muslim men that if they “fear disloyalty and ill conduct” from their wives, they should admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and “beat them”. Muslim men are told in Q: 2:223 that “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how you will” (no such thing as marital rape under sharia). [Editor’s Note — ‘tilth’ is cultivated land ready to seed.]
Regarding the requirement that women must cover their hair and wear concealing clothing, this derives directly from Surahs 28:31 and 33:59, which connect covering up with not being “molested” (i.e., raped, by Muslim men). In this spirit, the IRI is cracking down on women and girls who have been in the forefront of the uprising against the Tehran regime since the September 2022 murder by the so-called “morality police” of the young Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, for supposedly allowing some hair to show under her hijab.
Just to prove they don’t care, a man with full dick and balls is masquerading as a sorority sister and getting a boner while ogling the girls. He’s not trans. He’s an Animal House or Revenge of the Nerds pervert who is scamming the system to ogle girls because he is a loser who couldn’t get one the real way.
The lawsuit also alleges that ‘Mr. Smith has, while watching members enter the sorority house, had an erection visible through his leggings.’
‘It’s a weird gut wrenching feeling that every time I leave my room I’ll walk past him in the hall in whatever setting that may be.’
Seven members of the University of Wyoming Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority are suing after the chapter admitted a 21-year-old biological male who identifies as female.
The lawsuit notes that the individual, who goes by the name Artemis Langford (referred to in the lawsuit as Terry Smith), is 6’2” and 260 pounds, often sits in the women’s common area on the second floor and watches them for several hours without saying a word.
The group of women filed the complaint against Langford himself, as well as Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity base in Ohio, the organization president, and Kappa Kappa Gamma Building Co. in Wyoming.
Langford does not live at the house but often visits it and watches the women, according to the suit. However, he is currently set to move into the house in September.
The complaint details an incident in which “One sorority member walked down the hall to take a shower, wearing only a towel,” and “She felt an unsettling presence, turned, and saw Mr. Smith watching her silently.”
The lawsuit also alleges that “Mr. Smith has, while watching members enter the sorority house, had an erection visible through his leggings.” Langford reportedly makes no attempts to appear feminine but simply identifies using “she/her” pronouns.
On May 15, the women made an appearance on the Megyn Kelly show to talk about the issue. One of the women, named Jaylyn, said that “It’s a weird, gut-wrenching feeling that every time I leave my room, I’ll walk past him in the hall in whatever setting that may be. And it’s never a pleasant encounter and that’s the scary part. This just goes to show that we need women’s spaces for that reason. Our house is our home.”
The women also said that several members have already left the sorority.
Langford’s personal Instagram page features only five posts—four of which are photos of women’s feet. Some of the accompanying captions read: “This young girl has perfect feet” and “I’ve always had a mild foot fetish.”
Campus Reformreported in October when Langford was first admitted to the sorority—making it the first at the university to induct a transgender person.
Campus Reform made its best attempts to contact the relevant parties for comment. This article will be updated accordingly.
The study to which I refer is not new. It is new to me, though, so I feel utterly free to share my thoughts because the study confirms what anybody who has spent time around condescending liberals instinctively knows.
The Yale writeup of the study is a perfect example of how clueless liberals are, and how blind to reason academics are so often.
New research suggests that bias may also shape daily interactions between racial minorities and white people, even those whites who tend to be less biased.
According to new research by Cydney Dupree, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Yale SOM, white liberals tend to downplay their own verbal competence in exchanges with racial minorities, compared to how other white Americans act in such exchanges. The study is scheduled for publication in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Notice how the discussion begins? They claim to be studying Whites who are LESS BIASED. The assumption is that White liberals are not biased against Black people, while their research shows exactly the opposite as we shall see. The researchers are liberal, know that liberals are good, and therefore liberals are not the biased ones. Conservatives, who behave the same with both Whites and minorities, are the genuinely biased ones.
Liberal=good. It is a law of nature.
So how do liberals behave, these truly good and unbiased people?
The team found that The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes. There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”
In other words, Democrats talk down to Black and Hispanic people, while Republicans do not.
Republicans treat their audiences of whatever race the same, and with the same basic respect for their intelligence and ability to reason.
Hmmm. Who is “less biased?”
What about in work settings? Perhaps liberal politicians treat minorities as if they were children, but the average liberal treats their Black colleagues just the same as their White colleagues?
Nope, they too assume that Blacks are stupid.
The researchers found that No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”
Hmm. Patronizing? Why would anybody assume that treating people as if they are stupid and incompetent is patronizing?
Dupree and Fiske suspect that the behavior stems from a liberal person’s desire to connect with other races. One possible reason for the “competence downshift,” as the authors describe it, is that, regardless of race, people tend to downplay their competence when they want to appear likeable and friendly. But it’s also possible that “this is happening because people are using common stereotypes in an effort to get along,” Dupree says.
Initial data from follow-up studies suggest that describing a black person as highly intelligent, thus reversing the stereotype, or as already highly motivated to get along with whites, thus removing the need to prove goodwill, can reduce the likelihood that a white person will downplay their competence in their interactions with the black person.
Do you see what they are doing here? Liberals treat minorities as if they are clumsy children because they want to be liked. They are just super nice people, that’s all.
Conservatives, those meanies, treat everybody the same, proving that they hate minorities and are a bunch of White supremacists. If they were truly good people they would treat Black people like children, as liberals do. Or something.
Despite all the evidence that White liberals are racist–they assume that Blacks cannot understand complicated things and that Blacks are incompetent–the researchers actually characterize the White liberals as “allies” to minorities.
While many previous studies have examined how people who hold racial bias behave in multi-racial settings, few have studied how whites who are more well-intentioned interact with people of other races. “There’s less work that explores how well-intentioned whites try to get along with racial minorities,” Dupree says. “We wanted to know their strategies for increasing connections between members of different social groups—and how effective these strategies are.”
Conservatives are the ones who aren’t well-intentioned. We know this because they treat minorities like they treat everybody else. We know liberals are well-intentioned because they treat Blacks and Hispanics like little children.
Yeah, you go with that.
There is, of course, an alternative explanation for why White liberals behave as if they look down on minorities as inferior: it may be because they look down on minorities because they believe them to be inferior.
Ever consider that? Isn’t that the assumption in every affirmative action program? In every attempt to eliminate testing requirements? In fact, in every DEI initiative is an assumption that minorities are incapable of achieving success on their own.
Most Whites, particularly socio-political liberals, now endorse racial equality. Archival and experimental research reveals a subtle but reliable ironic consequence: White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whites—that is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent. In an initial archival demonstration of the competence downshift, Study 1 examined the content of White Republican and Democratic presidential candidates’ campaign speeches. Although Republican candidates did not significantly shift language based on audience racial composition, Democratic candidates used less competence-related language to minority audiences than to White audiences.Across five experiments (total N= 2,157), White participants responded to a Black or White hypothetical (Studies 2, 3, 4, S1) or ostensibly real (Study 5) interaction partner. Three indicators of self-presentation converged:sophistication of vocabulary selected for an assignment, competence-relatedtraitsselectedfor an introduction, and competence-related content of brief, open-ended introductions. Conservatism indicators included: self-reported political affiliation(liberal-conservative), Right-Wing Authoritarianism (values-based conservatism) and Social Dominance Orientation (hierarchy-based conservatism). Internal meta-analyses revealed that liberals—but not conservatives—presented less competence to Black interaction partners than to White ones. The simple effect was small but significant across studies, and most reliable for the self-reported measureof conservatism. This possibly unintentional but ultimately patronizing competence-downshift suggests that well-intentioned liberal Whites may draw on low-status/competence stereotypes to affiliate with minorities
Liberal racism is a very real, measurable phenomenon, based upon the assumption that minorities are unintelligent, incompetent, and lack self-control.
The latter is made clear by the criminal justice policies the Left is putting forward: they refuse to hold minority criminals responsible for their actions because, apparently, they do not believe they are competent moral actors capable of behaving in a civilized fashion.
That assumption is not true, and in fact, encourages criminality among minorities who are assured they will catch a break. For many, it becomes rational to behave as a criminal because they can get away with it.
The statistics are actually pretty clear that success in America is not determined by race. Whites are, among ethnic groups, pretty much in the middle of the pack in income compared to other racial groups. This data is a bit old, but the chart is so easy to understand that I chose to use it. The current data is not much different.
It’s like the movie War Games. The media is the enemy this time. The emerging pattern is that they’ve started (and lost) almost all of the wars recently. This war is against the middle class, the everyday Joe six-pack and flyover country.
The high IQ part of this is to ignore them and pay attention to the facts.
The true economic, social, and political cost of the measures proposed by governments (in the West only) to destroy their nations’ businesses and jobs and to impoverish every household is becoming ever more visible. At last, therefore, a few brave souls in the scientific and academic communities are beginning to question what I shall call — with more than a little justification — the Communist Party line on climate change.
Three devastating equations have emerged, each of which calls fundamentally into question the imagined (and imaginary) basis for the economic hara-kiri by which the West is throwing away its gentle and beneficent global hegemony. Power and wealth are passing inexorably from the democracies of the West to the communist-led tyrannies of the East.
However, the three equations stand firmly in the way. It is these three equations — simple enough to be explained here for the general reader, yet devastating enough utterly to destroy the official climate change narrative — that will soon lay low the enemies of prosperity, democracy, and liberty who have, until now, gotten away with undermining the West, no less from within than from without, by their childishly apocalyptic climate change narrative.
The first of these equations was presented to you here a few months ago. Therefore, I shall summarize that discussion briefly. The equation comes in two versions: the wrong version, on the basis of which the climate science establishment felt improperly confident that unabated emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmless greenhouse gases would soon bring about Thermageddon, and the corrected version, which shows that IPCC’s predictions of large and dangerous global warming are false and without scientific foundation.
The system-gain factor is the variable by which the predicted 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 in the air is multiplied to obtain the predicted final warming by doubled CO2 after taking account of feedback response, a knock-on, additional warming signal driven by and proportional to the direct or reference signal.
The erroneous version of the equation neglects what engineers call the base signal, the 260 K direct sunshine temperature. Climate scientists call this the emission temperature. It is the temperature that would obtain at the Earth’s surface in the absence of any greenhouse gases.
The 29 K total greenhouse effect is the sum of 8 K direct warming by natural greenhouse gases, 1 K direct warming by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, and 20 K total feedback response.
Multiply the 1.2 K direct doubled-CO2 warming by the erroneous system-gain factor 3.2 to get climatologists’ 3.85 K final doubled-CO2 warming. Sure enough, the average final or equilibrium doubled-CO2 warming predicted by the general-circulation models in the sixth and latest generation of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project is 3.85 K.
But the corrected system-gain factor bears in mind — as climatologists in this crucial respect do not — that the sun is shining and that, therefore, the dominant 260 K sunshine temperature must be included in the corrected equation. Therefore, the system-gain factor is not 29 / 9, or 3.2, but (260 + 29) / (260 + 9), or just 1.1. Then the final warming to be expected in response to the 1.2 K direct warming by doubled CO2 is not 3.85 K, but more like 1.3 K, which is small, harmless, and net-beneficial.
Climate scientists made their error when they borrowed the physics of feedback from a branch of engineering physics known as control theory. They did not understand what they had borrowed. When I pointed out their grave error to the world’s most eminent climatologist, he said he did not believe that the feedback processes in the climate (chiefly the extra water vapor — itself a greenhouse gas — that the air can hold as it is directly warmed by the non-condensing greenhouse gases) would respond to the sunshine temperature.
So I asked him how the inanimate feedback processes in the climate knew that at any given moment, such as the present, they should not respond in the slightest to the 260 K sunshine temperature but should respond violently and extremely to the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases. A Kelvin is a Kelvin is a Kelvin, I said. He had no answer to my question. He shuffled off, looking baffled.
It was hitherto unnoticed that feedbacks such as the water vapor feedback (the only one that really matters — all the others broadly self-cancel) necessarily respond to the entire 269 K input signal or reference temperature. Therefore (I shall not show the working for this, but trust me), just 0.01 unit of increase in feedback strength would add as much as 1 K to the final warming by doubled CO2. But it is entirely impossible to measure feedback strength directly by any method, and certainly not to a precision of only a few hundredths of a unit.
Therefore, after correction of climate scientists’ error, no method of deriving predictions of anthropogenic global warming that is based on feedback analysis — as just about all of the current official predictions are — is capable of producing predictions that are any better than mere guesswork.
The IPCC, not realizing this even though it has been told about the error, bases very nearly all of its predictions upon feedback analysis. Its 2013 Fifth Assessment Report mentions “feedback” more than 1,100 times, its 2021 Sixth Assessment Report more than 2,600 times. In short, the IPCC’s entire analysis of the “how much warming” question is meaningless and valueless.
How could so crass a mistake have been made? The answer is that when the climatologists asked the control theorists how to calculate feedback response, they were told that they should base the calculation only on the gain signal (in the climate, the 9 K direct warming by natural and anthropogenic greenhouse gases) and on the 20 K feedback response. Control theorists do things this way because in typical control-theoretic applications, such as electronic long-distance telephone circuits or factory control processes, the feedback response signal is 10 to 100 times larger than any other signal in the circuit. Therefore, neglecting the base signal usually makes no significant difference to the calculation, so they neglect it.
In the climate, however, it is the other way about. The base signal in the climate, the 260 K sunshine temperature, is almost 30 times the 9 K direct warming by greenhouse gases, and 13 times the feedback response. The sunshine dominates. Therefore, as common sense would in any event dictate, one cannot ignore it in carrying out the “how much warming” calculation.
The significance of this first equation, then, is that it proves beyond reasonable doubt that climatologists’ profitable but misguided whining about the rate of future global warming is based on a very large and very serious error of physics that has gone undetected until now because different scientific disciplines — here climatology and control theory — are increasingly narrow in their specialization. The climate scientists did not (and do not) understand the control theory they had borrowed, and the control theorists did not (and do not) realize what climate scientists have done with the borrowed theory. It is in this disastrous interdisciplinary compartmentalization that the climate change scare is rooted.
The truth is that one must use methods other than feedback analysis to derive estimates of future anthropogenic warming. But all such methods, which are based on observation rather than theoretical manipulation of data in climate models, show far less global warming than diagnosis of feedback strength from the models’ outputs shows.
The simplest observational method is this. The IPCC in 1990 predicted that until 2090, the world would warm by between 0.2 and 0.5 K/decade, with a midrange estimate of 0.3 K/decade (i.e., 2 to 5 K per century equivalent, with a best estimate of 3 K). Likewise, now as then, the IPCC predicts that final warming in response to doubled CO2 in the air will be 2 to 5 K, with a best estimate of 3 K. However, according to the University of Alabama in Huntsville, which maintains the most accurate and up-to-date satellite temperature record, since the IPCC’s First Assessment Report in 1990 there has only been 0.136 K warming per decade.
This slow warming is equivalent to less than 1.4 K per century or, per CO2 doubling, well below the lower bound of the IPCC’s range of predictions, and less than half its midrange prediction.
Note how close that 1.36 K is to the 1.3 K we obtained by correcting official climatology’s error of feedback analysis. A more elaborate method, known as the energy-budget method, also shows about 1.3 K warming per century or per CO2 doubling, with a range of 1 to 2 K. The first equation, then, powerfully suggests that our sins of emission have not caused and will not cause a problem, crisis, emergency, or apocalypse.
But let us pretend, just for the sake of argument, that climatologists had not perpetrated their elementary error and that, therefore, there might, after all, be an impending cataclysm. In that case, what can we do about it? The second of our three equations demonstrates that the currently favored method of Saving the Planet — replacing coal and gas generation with windmills and solar panels — will make little or no difference to global temperature.
Our second equation says excess generation E by wind and solar power in a given grid is the difference between the installed nameplate capacity N of wind and solar in that grid (their output in ideal weather) and the total mean hourly demand D for electricity from that grid.
Obvious though this equation seems, grid operators and governments are, as far as we can discover, wholly unaware of it. But by rights it ought to signal the E = N — D of any further costly destruction of the countryside and the oceans, the birds, bees and bats, the whales and dolphins by ugly solar panels and wind turbines.
Douglas Pollock, the Chilean engineer who discovered the equation, has investigated several Western national grids and has plotted the results on the graph below.
The United States could, if it wished, add more wind and solar power to its grid, but the cost would be enormous and the CO2 emissions abated surprisingly small, because coal and gas-fired backup generation must be kept running at wasteful spinning reserve at all times in case the wind drops and the sun goes down.
However, the seven countries listed as already exceeding the fundamental hourly-demand limit on wind and solar capacity will not reduce CO2 emissions at all if they try installing any more wind and solar power. All they will do is to drive up the cost of electricity, which is already eight times greater in the West than in China or India, where the expansion of the world’s cheapest form of electricity — coal-fired power — is continuing rapidly.
This second of our equations also puts an E = N — D to the notion that replacing real autos with electric buggies at twice the capital and running costs will reduce emissions. It won’t, because in most Western countries, wind and solar power are already at or above their Pollock limit, so that the power for the buggies will have to come from coal and gas, at least until the soi-disant “Greens” abandon their sullen opposition to the peaceful use of nuclear power.
The Traffic-Light Tendency — the Greens too yellow to admit they’re really Reds — are opposed to coal-fired, gas-fired, oil-fired, nuclear, and hydroelectric generation. Yet wind and solar power, which they favor, cannot keep the lights on 24/7; are cripplingly expensive; are cruel to landscape, seascape, and wildlife; and, though their exceptionally low energy density, do more environmental damage per MWh generated than any other form of power.
Why, then, do the climate communists advocate wind and solar power and oppose just about everything else? They do so precisely because there is no quicker or more certain way to destroy the economies of the hated West and to end its hegemony than to destroy its energy infrastructure. For that, and not Saving the Planet, is their true objective. What they advocate makes sense when seen in that light and makes no sense otherwise.
So to our third simple but decisively powerful equation. Let us pretend not only that there may be a global warming Armageddon (though we have proven there will not be), but also that we can do something about it by the proliferation of windmills and solar panels (though we have proven that we can achieve nothing by that method except crippling our grids and vastly increasing the already prohibitive cost of electrical power, further turning the terms of trade to the advantage of the communist-led countries that are vastly increasing their coal-fired generation).
How much global warming would worldwide attainment of net zero emissions by 2050 prevent? It is a measure of the extent to which such little debate as the far left have permitted on the climate question has been stifled, and of the extent to which the objective of climate policy is political rather than scientific or existential, that this question does not seem to have been asked before.
I was in Parliament the other day, talking to a Conservative M.P. I asked him what he thought about global warming. He said, “I’m a mathematician, so I know we have to show leadership by getting to net zero emissions by 2050.”
“So,” I replied, “if the whole world followed the policy of just about all the British governing class and went to net zero emissions by 2050, how much global warming that would otherwise have occurred by that year would be prevented?”
His face was a picture. He had clearly never thought of asking that surely elementary question. When I told him the answer, he was dismayed. But the answer is not in doubt, for the necessary equation is again unchallengeably simple.
First, we need to know how much global warming would occur on present trends. Typically, one goes back at least 30 years, so let us go back to 1990, the date of the IPCC’s First Assessment Report. Since then, our sins of emission have added one 30th of a unit of influence every year in a near-perfect straight line. All those trillions squandered on trying to make global warming go away have not altered that third-of-a-century-long trend one iota.
Now, if the whole world went immediately to net zero emissions today, we should be able to abate 27/30 units of our influence on the climate. But if we get there in a straight line over the next 27 years, we shall abate about half of those 0.9 units — i.e., 0.45 units.
Next, how much global warming would each unit we abate prevent? Here, as throughout, we are using official figures. The IPCC says that the warming over the next 70 years if we suddenly doubled the CO2 in the air today would be 1.8 C. This is known as the “transient doubled-CO2 response,” or TCR. And, again according to the IPCC, there is an “effective radiative forcing,” or ERF, of 3.93 units of anthropogenic influence in response to doubled CO2. Therefore, temperature change per unit of influence is 1.8 / 3.93, or 0.46 K per unit.
Multiply the 0.45 units the world would abate if all nations went to net zero by 0.46 K per unit, and the total warming prevented by global net zero emissions would be just 0.2 K.
The M.P., on being told this strikingly puny figure, said: “Oh, well, there must be a very large uncertainty in that number.”
“No,” I said, “there isn’t. The IPCC predicts up to 5 K warming this century. But even if the whole world actually got to net zero emissions, which it won’t because the communist-led nations are expanding their coal-fired capacity at a very rapid rate, somewhere between 0.1 and 0.3 K of that warming would be prevented by 2050. The midrange estimate is 0.2 K.”
In fact, even less warming than this would be prevented. For we have used official midrange estimates to calculate the 0.2 K warming that even global net zero would prevent. But those estimates are proven to have overstated the true medium-term rate of global warming by more than double. So the true warming the world would prevent if all nations, rather than just those of the empty-headed West, were to go together to net zero would be less than 0.1 K.
Then I added the clincher. I told the M.P. that the U.K. National Grid had estimated $3.6 trillion as the cost of re-engineering the grid to meet the net zero target; that electricity generation accounts for less than a quarter of U.K. emissions; and that, therefore, the cost to the U.K. of getting to net zero by 2050 would be more than $15 trillion, or six years’ total annual GDP.
Therefore, I said, every $1 billion the world squanders on trying to get to net zero emissions by 2050 would prevent only one 16-millionth of a degree of warming. Did he, as a mathematician, consider that to be value for money?
The M.P. capitulated. “The trouble with you, Monckton,” he said, “is that you take impossible positions on everything, and you’re always right.”
Now, the purpose of this unusual exercise has been to reduce the apparently complex global warming argument to just three equations so simple that they can be explained to a layman without too much difficulty, and then to explain them. In my submission, any one of these three equations, on its own, would in a rational world be more than sufficient to lead Western governments to abandon all their global warming mitigation policies at once.
The three equations together are devastating. There is no global warming problem; even if there were, our current method of addressing it will make no difference; and even if the whole world attained net zero by 2050, global temperature would barely change.
These three arguments are simple, but they are strong. It is only because the far left have captured the debate and have silenced discussions such as this that governments have allowed themselves to be fooled. Soon, that will change, whether the far left and their paymasters and instructors in the FSB and the Ministry of State Security like it or not. For the laws of physics, of economics, and of mathematics are not up for repeal.
I wonder if the rest of the world is getting tired of the MSM egging on the mentally deficient or deranged people. They gang up like the mean kids on the playground who got together to bring someone down to build themselves up.
Anyway, here is some woke crap because that is what it is. Look below for definitions from the left who try to ruin our lives with speech restrictions. Here’s your woke hint. If it’s about straight, white, christian men, it’s bad, ergo woke.
The word “woke” has become synonymous with leftism. At its core, “wokeism” is essentially a cult-like religion for the far-left, who think everything that is pro-America or pro-tradition is somehow an attack on specific, marginalized groups. “Woke” people parade throughout the nation as professional victims and make everything about them, and take narcissism to a whole new level. The Media Research Center defines the word “woke” or “wokeism” as people or ideas who are committed to the most extreme left-wing views on issues like race, gender, crime, climate, the economy, and more. Woke people think that burning down buildings is a way of peacefully protesting. Woke people believe that abortion is healthcare and that you can pick any gender you want to be. They think Antifa is a myth and that we should stop using existing, reliable, and abundant domestic sources of energy. In practice, woke people push against common-sense morals and values and promote the perpetual victimhood of groups they’ve deemed “marginalized.” While it’s evident these ideologies are nuts, the media has become obsessed with these woke ideas while vilifying traditional values and normalcy. They silence opposition through censorship or by ignoring and dismissing other people’s opinions as “racist” or “hateful.”
Trying to silence someone for their beliefs is a cross between 1984 and Communism.
Critical Race Theory = anti-white positioning, or negation of people of European descent.
The Defense Department in October launched a 30-day review of Wing — the now-former education activity chief diversity equity and inclusion officer — after her Twitter posts with disparaging comments about white people resurfaced.
Marvel used to make good movies. Mimicking real life, the guys were the hero’s with support from others. There was good story telling and we liked the hero’s, faults and all. They came through for us every time. Now, this:
Naturally, Alonso was a woke quota queen who lobbied to ruin Marvel movies with homosexuality, transvestites, and outright idiocy like changing the X-Men to the “X-People,” or some such nonsense.
Anyway, it looks to me, based on the box office numbers, that Alonso was pretty successful at ruining the Marvel juggernaut. Thanks primarily to woketardery, Marvel’s box office is down, and so is the audience’s goodwill. Marvel feminized Thor, gave us a hairy man-on-man kiss in the Eternals, desexualized everyone, and introduced new characters who are no fun at all because they are too busy whining about racism, sexism, and getting misgendered.
So cut the woke crap. Look what it is doing for Bud Light, Fox News, Maybelline, Smirnoff and others.
BREAKING: The mass shooter in Allen today was a Hispanic male with what appears to be a gang tattoo on his hand. I’m putting a screenshot of it as it is against the 1984 truth speak narrative rules.
Of course it is an illegal because they have lost control of the border.
This isn’t about guns, it is about criminals invading the country. If they really cared, they would recognize that fentanyl is killing more Americans than guns. The media is protecting the failure in the White House.
Let’s not forget that Kamala Harris is the border czar. Since she is doing nothing, it’s squarely on her.
We know it was created by a murderer who chopped up his girlfriend and is on Lenin’s birthday. The connection to communism is more than that coincidence.
It’s also not based on science, rather it is a religion for those worshipers (the uneducated).
They consistently fail to follow actual science and this year is no different. I’ve ranted about it as I find it so unbelievable that those who celebrate it want to show how wrong they are. Instead, I’ll link and put excerpts to the recent story about how wrong they got it on methane this time. I had to work with this crowd of ignorance when I got forced into supporting the fake green initiative. Even then I couldn’t believe how wrong they were, until I found out they did it for the money.
Remember all that talk about methane being the scariest greenhouse gas? The claims are behind the war on meat, rice, farts, gas stoves, fracking, and just about everything else in the known universe that improves human life.
Well, except farts. They really don’t improve human life that much, unless you have gas pains. Man, it sucks when you have gas pains.
The science behind the claims that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas is pretty straightforward, if you look at only part of the science. Methane indeed traps more heat inside the atmosphere than CO2, by a wide margin. It disperses much more quickly, with a short life in the atmosphere, but if you only consider the warming impact it indeed is quite powerful.
Yeah, well, there is a huge problem with that claim. While technically true in some abstract sense, it is much less true when you look at all the effects methane in the atmosphere has on global temperatures. In other words, it is the sort of claim that relies upon your ignorance of the multiple effects of methane gas in the atmosphere–some of which are known widely, and many of which even climate “scientists” didn’t know when they made their wild claims about doom from leaking natural gas.
New research shows that methane is still a powerful greenhouse gas, but nothing like what is claimed regularly.
This is the sort of thing that happens all the time in climate research, where variables are viewed and modeled in isolation based upon a limited set of data, and then the “scientists” extrapolate the heck out of the limited data and come up with models that are, frankly, ridiculous.
Then they pick the most extreme outcomes from models with the worst outcomes, and call it “settled science.” It is exactly the sort of thing you see in nutrition research, for example. Creating simplistic models from limited data interpreting complex and highly interdependent systems as if they mirror the falling of a bowling ball and a feather in a vacuum.
And the results, as you can see in the real world, are quite different. Bowling balls and feathers fall at the same rate in a vacuum, but once you introduce the atmosphere a feather can “fall upwards” on a breeze while the bowling ball crashes down as predicted.
Methane is a greenhouse gas with dual personalities. It heats Earth’s atmosphere 28 times as potently as carbon dioxide, gram for gram. But its absorption of the sun’s radiation high in the atmosphere also alters cloud patterns — casting a bit of shadow on its warming effect.
Also, you may note that key point: gram for gram. There are a lot more grams of CO2 than methane out there. Altogether the findings change the equations quite a bit, and those equations are still very simplified versions of the real world. Simplified versions that in all likelihood don’t reflect reality.
The result is “counterintuitive,” says climate scientist Robert Allen of the University of California, Riverside. It happens because of the way that methane’s shortwave absorbance affects clouds in different layers of the atmosphere, Allen and colleagues’ simulations suggest.
When methane absorbs shortwave radiation in the middle and upper troposphere, above about three kilometers, it further warms the air — leading to fewer clouds in that upper layer. And because methane absorbs shortwave radiation high up, less of that radiation penetrates down to the lower troposphere. This actually cools the lower troposphere, leading to more clouds in that layer.
These thicker low-level clouds reflect more of the sun’s shortwave radiation back out to space — meaning that less of this solar radiation reaches Earth’s surface, to be converted into longwave radiation.
One of the biggest problems with climate science, as it stands, is that it cannot explain the natural variations in the Earth’s temperatures, which have swung wildly more than anything predicted from human activity. Clearly, those natural variations need to be understood first before adding in anything that human beings do.
Not that human beings are doing nothing. We are. The scale may not be understood, but the fact itself is pretty easy to understand. We are changing the atmosphere and the reflectivity of the Earth, changing the biome, and such changes will have some effect on the climate. But any claims that we have a clear idea of what those changes will be exactly are pure bunkum. We don’t. We don’t know the scale, and we don’t know the what.
What we do know is that massive changes to the economy will have drastic impacts on human well-being, just as the vast industrialization has improved lives and extended lifespans dramatically. Tens of years have been added to lifespans, food security has been established for almost everybody, and the prospects for further improvements without industrialization of the third world drop dramatically.
And, of course, we know that every single prediction of the apocalypse has been laughably wrong.
Let’s compare it to the 45th President, whom the above attack by claiming he did what they actually did, like take under the table deals with Russia/Ukraine/China, cause racial divide and hurt race relations, break the law, weaponize the Justice Department, Divide the country, assault women (Hillary did it by attacking the victims of her rapist husband). The dichotomy is mind-boggling.
Trump did it while being attacked by the media, celebtards, the justice department, both houses and parties of congress and social media.
1. Unemployment and economic growth.
•Unemployment rates for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and those without a high school diploma all reached record lows.
•Unemployment for women hit its lowest rate in nearly 70 years.
•Lifted nearly 7 million people off food stamps.
•Poverty rates for African Americans and Hispanic Americans reached record lows.
•Income inequality fell for two straight years, and by the largest amount in over a decade.
•The bottom 50 percent of American households saw a 40 percent increase in net worth.
•Wages rose fastest for low-income and blue-collar workers – a 16 percent pay increase.
•African American home ownership increased from 41.7 percent to 46.4 percent.
Trump, of course, is a “racist” and “sexist” to liberals; it is one of their prime charges against him, with absolutely no proof. It is hard to understand, though, why a man who hates minorities and women so much would institute policies that would be so beneficial to them.
2. Tax Relief
•Strengthened America’s rural economy by investing over $1.3 billion through the Agriculture Department’s ReConnect Program to bring high-speed broadband infrastructure to rural America.
•More than 6 million American workers received wage increases, bonuses, and increased benefits thanks to the tax cuts.
•A typical family of four earning $75,000 received an income tax cut of more than $2,000 – slashing their tax bill in half.
•Doubled the standard deduction – making the first $24,000 earned by a married couple completely tax-free.
•Doubled the child tax credit.
•Since the passage of tax cuts, the share of total wealth held by the bottom half of households has increased, while the share held by the top 1 percent has decreased.
•Over $1.5 trillion was repatriated into the United States from overseas.
•Created nearly 9,000 Opportunity Zones where capital gains on long-term investments are taxed at zero.
Americans were able to keep more of the money they earned. Only a Marxist (yes, Democrat) would object to that.
•Instead of 2-for-1, Trump eliminated 8 old regulations for every 1 new regulation adopted.
•Provided the average American household an extra $3,100 every year.
•Removed nearly 25,000 pages from the Federal Register – more than any other president. The previous administration added over 16,000 pages.
Mr. Trump was very pro-business, something else that is anathema to the Left. Yet, the removal of onerous, needless regulations, not only helped small business owners, but cheapened costs and provided more money for average Americans.
•Immediately withdrew from the job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
•Ended the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and replaced it with the brand new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
•The USMCA contains powerful new protections for American manufacturers, auto-makers, farmers, dairy producers, and workers.
•Negotiated another deal with Japan to boost $40 billion worth of digital trade.
•China agreed to purchase an additional $200 billion worth of United States exports and opened market access for over 4,000 American facilities to exports while all tariffs remained in effect.
•Imposed tariffs on hundreds of billions worth of Chinese goods to protect American jobs and stop China’s abuses under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
•Achieved a mutual agreement with the European Union (EU) that addresses unfair trade practices and increases duty-free exports by 180 percent to $420 million.
•Successfully negotiated more than 50 agreements with countries around the world to increase foreign market access and boost exports of American agriculture products, supporting more than 1 million American jobs.
Economics is not something most Americans understand very well, thus the benefits of the above are not easily understood, or quickly perceived or felt, by most. Yet, the list is clear enough to make the Left angry. Mr. Trump negotiated trade deals that benefited the United States. He still had much to do in that regard, but he was denied another four years in which to do it. Obviously, the country has suffered greatly the last two years because of that.
It’s going to be hard to live in the state of denial for much longer. People don’t just have strokes or heart attacks this young. History shows that.
Sooner or later, the evidence of what Pfizer, Moderna, Fauci, Gates and the rest of them have done will become clear. How much longer will the press and social media try to keep people’s heads in the sand?
It’s very rare that a democrat doesn’t get re-elected in Chicago. She’s one of the few in the last 4 decades. She didn’t get re-elected because she did a bad job as mayor, not because it is racist or sexist as she claims. Chicago is the last place that would happen,
We listened to claims of starting WWIII for 4 years by the screeching media and politicians. In the last 2 years, we just armed the other side to fight against us. It’s as if those in charge want our nation to fail, or want a hand in taking us down. I’m sure they got their 10%.
How are we safer? How did they preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?
Here is a more complete list of US-supplied and left behind equipment list now controlled by Taliban:
-2,000 Armored Vehicles Including Humvees and MRAP’s -75,989 Total Vehicles: FMTV, M35, Ford Rangers, Ford F350, Ford Vans, Toyota Pickups, Armored Security Vehicles etc -45 UH-60 Blachhawk Helicopters -50 MD530G Scout Attack Choppers -ScanEagle Military Drones -30 Military Version Cessnas -4 C-130’s -29 Brazilian made A-29 Super Tocano Ground Attack Aircraft 208+ Aircraft Total -At least 600,000+ Small arms M16, M249 SAWs, M24 Sniper Systems, 50 Calibers, 1,394 M203 Grenade Launchers, M134 Mini Gun, 20mm Gatling Guns and Ammunition -61,000 M203 Rounds -20,040 Grenades -Howitzers -Mortars +1,000’s of Rounds -162,000 pieces of Encrypted Military Comunications Gear -16,000+ Night Vision Goggles -Newest Technology Night Vision Scopes -Thermal Scopes and Thermal Mono Googles -10,000 2.75 inch Air to Ground Rockets -Recconaissance Equipment (ISR) -Laser Aiming Units -Explosives Ordnance C-4, Semtex, Detonators, Shaped Charges, Thermite, Incendiaries, AP/API/APIT -2,520 Bombs -Administration Encrypted Cell Phones and Laptops all operational -Pallets with Millions of Dollars in US Currency -Millions of Rounds of Ammunition including but not limited to 20,150,600 rounds of 7.62mm, 9,000,000 rounds of 50.caliber -Large Stockpile of Plate Carriers and Body Armor -US Military HIIDE, for Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment Biometrics -Lots of Heavy Equipment Including Bull Dozers, Backhoes, Dump Trucks, Excavators
Much of the information included in the above list is public record.
But that was not enough.
Now the Biden administration is going to send the Taliban terrorists millions in humanitarian aid.
It really is as if we lost the war and now we’re paying reparations to the terrorists. You just can’t make this up!
The U.S. has agreed to provide humanitarian aid to a desperately poor Afghanistan on the brink of an economic disaster, while refusing to give political recognition to the country’s new Taliban rulers, the Taliban said Sunday.
The statement came at the end of the first direct talks between the former foes since the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. troops at the end of August.
There was no immediate comment from the U.S. on the weekend meeting. The Taliban said the talks held in Doha, Qatar, “went well,” with Washington freeing up humanitarian aid to Afghanistan after agreeing not to link such assistance to formal recognition of the Taliban.
The Whitehouse Press Gaffe spokesperson confused Biden with Obama (who is half white). She is confused by many things like facts and the truth, but this one is a doozy. She couldn’t have been the best candidate for the job, just the most woke and the most letters in the alphabet of weirdness.
(I’m counting on that last paragraph for a new round of censorship, enjoy while you can)
The biggest problem I have in my arguments is timing. I get out talked by people who tend to be wrong. Only later does the truth come out or I can express myself, but no one (except me) cares by then.
Like most introverts, I think things through, throw out the things that are wrong, then come up with a salient and correct argument. All of this is well after the discussion took place.
While being pressured to get the jab during Covid, I knew it was wrong and listened to everyone regurgitating the media and government lies (paid for by the Big Pharma companies). Since I was an island, it was everyone against me. There was nothing I could say that anyone would listen to other than my black friends. They remembered Tuskegee like I did.
The lesson? Stop trying to be right, learn patience for the facts to come out. They are coming out now.
This would have also helped me a lot earlier in life if I’d have known. I didn’t understand that I was an introvert though and thought I could go toe to toe with extrovert talkers not afraid to be wrong. I lost a debate to an imbecile in 8th grade when I clearly had the facts. He had the class popularity and the class went with him as he made up stuff.
It was similar in politics. The 2016 election won me a $100 bet, not that anyone cared. The 45th President continues to be right, so they just throw dirty underwear against the wall until something sticks. He is the comeback champion in rhetoric though so I stopped talking about that also. I was an island politically also. I lost every discussion on that one also even though my facts were proven right over time.
I found out that a lot of people don’t have a sense of history or really understand anything other than reading and repeating talking points they are told to think. Social media is making idiots out of the next generations. Knowing how to find information is not the same thing as understanding why things are the way they are.
I was already recognizing the pattern of facts that led to the truth, just not when I wanted it. I’d never make it as a lawyer or politician.
Maybe that’s why I write about this. It gets my thoughts (mostly cogently) in order and documents my position. It’s all I have sometimes. Since the internet is forever, here you go in the future if you read this.
Very rarely in my life do I have the proper comeback. It’s not satisfying when I do compared to the frustration of not being drop quick witted and precise information when needed.
So, I just have decided to let some stuff pass. It gets me out of talking to the under educated anyway.
The other lesson?
“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
I never really bought into the whole meteor’s killed the Dinosaurs business as there is too much science unexplained. Those that espouse this theory remarkably agree with the other non-confirmed theories that usually are about money (like Al Gore’s investments in companies that pollute). It’s usually a denial of science and/or religion.
Why don’t I buy it? I’d like a little more evidence, like finding the hole where it hit millions of years ago, some meteor remains and residue from the dead animals with non Earth elements for example. They can identify an animal’s sex (so far only male or female, none of the other genders), so finding out if they got hit by a meteor or the fallout would seem probable.
MCALLEN, Texas (KABB) — NASA confirmed that a 1000-pound meteor entered the atmosphere on February 15.
According to NASA, the meteor was seen at around 5:23 p.m. near McAllen, Texas. The meteor’s speed was about 27,000 miles per hour, and it had the same amount of energy as 8 tons of TNT.
Although meteorites tend to hit Earth’s atmosphere at high speeds, they slow as they travel through the atmosphere, breaking into small fragments before hitting the ground. Meteorites cool rapidly and generally are not a risk to the public.
There were no reports of injury or property damage.
“Although meteorites tend to hit Earth’s atmosphere at high speeds, they slow as they travel through the atmosphere, breaking into small fragments before hitting the ground. Meteorites cool rapidly and generally are not a risk to the public,” NASA said in a statement.
Anyone who finds these meteorites is urged to contact the Smithsonian Institution so they can be studied.
Facts are tough things to argue against, especially when people are dying as the consequence. Here are some examples of what is now coming to light. I for one am glad as people need to wise up about being played, before they are played again.
“You can’t say that civilization don’t advance, however, for in every war they kill you in a new way.” – Will Rogers
The country’s National Statistical Institute compiles death figures weekly and releases them in English once a month.
They tell a story that mRNA jab advocates may not want to hear.
Bulgaria has very low Covid vaccination rates, likely because generations of Communist misrule left Bulgarians deeply suspicious of government promises of miracle cures.
And Covid hit Bulgaria hard from late 2020 through early 2022. The epidemic tore through unhealthy middle-income Eastern European countries, and Bulgaria has rates of smoking, obesity, and cardiovascular disease that are off the charts. Its Covid death rate was more than double that of Western European countries like Spain, and its overall mortality rate higher still.
But now the epidemic is over. And deaths in Bulgaria are plunging – not just to normal, but well below it.
(If memory serves, Bulgaria had only a 20% vaxx rate)
There are clear contradictions between the World Health Organization’s (WHO) directives regarding the need for COVID-19 shots in Africa and the actual situation on the ground.
The WHO is still calling on all countries to get the COVID-19 jab into at least 70% of their populations and warns that developing countries are at grave risk due to low jab rates. Meanwhile, Africa, where less than 6% of the population is jabbed, has fared far better than countries with high injection rates. A large-scale survey in Uganda also shows COVID-19 is no longer a clinical issue.
Variants have also gotten milder (less pathogenic) with each iteration, yet the WHO warns that new variants may create “large waves of serious disease and death in populations with low vaccination coverage.”
The explanation for the disconnect between the WHO’s priorities and what’s happening in Africa can be explained when you look at the focus of the WHO’s Catastrophic Contagion exercise. It focused on getting African leadership trained in following the pandemic script. The WHO needs additional pandemics in order to justify its pandemic treaty, which will give it sole power to dictate countermeasures, and it needs to eliminate the African control group, which shows the COVID-19 “vaccines” do more harm than good.
The WHO also has every intention of implementing climate lockdowns once it has the power to do so. To that aim, the WHO’s director of Environment and Health has suggested combining health and climate issues into one.
the start of the vaccination campaign. Suddenly, an excess mortality appears that is no longer dependent on age, and which is no longer compensated for by subsequent phases of a mortality deficit. This is particularly evident in the younger age groups. Up to the time of the vaccination campaign, for example, there was no excess mortality in the 15-29 age group. But since vaccination started in this age group, suddenly more 15-29 year olds are dying than expected. There are hardly any phases of a mortality deficit anymore, and excess mortality is rising and rising. In December 2022, 22.5% more people died in this age group than expected – an age group in which nobody normally dies so easily. A similar pattern is found in the 30-49 age group and the 60-79 age group. And even in the 80-plus age group, where initially phases of excess mortality were always offset by subsequent phases of a mortality deficit, this changed in 2022. There, too, a worrying steady increase until the end of December 2022 is observed.
The course of stillbirths is also striking. We have analysed stillbirths based on the data we received from the Federal Statistical Office of Germany. Here is the corresponding results figure:
The COVID pandemic is in the rear view mirror. We have plenty of data about it, including studies telling us how well our countermeasures worked.
A dozen scientists from around the world conducted a massive metastudy of our efforts to fight COVID, as well as similar efforts to fight the flu, and they published the results in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
The authors examined 78 different studies on the efficacy of different mitigation efforts such as masking, distancing, screening, quarantining, and hand-washing. How did these interventions affect the spread of the flu, COVID, or similar viruses?
The studies included were diverse. They covered epidemics as well as periods of low transmission. They covered rich countries and poor countries, suburban schools and inner-city neighborhoods, hospitals and villages.
Most important was what they had in common: They were all randomized controlled trials or at least cluster-RCTs. These are the gold standard for studies because they have the greatest chance of avoiding confounding factors. Non-randomized, non-controlled trials — for example, observational studies — can be compromised if, say, people become more likely to wear masks at times or places that already have higher rates of spread, or if people who wore masks were also more fastidious hand-washers.
So, what did the studies find?
For starters, hand-washing was effective in stopping the spread of these illnesses. That’s not surprising.
But here’s the most eye-opening finding: “Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness/COVID‐19-like illness compared to not wearing masks.” In other words, masks didn’t do much — if anything.
It’s possible that a community could drive down spread if everyone wore well-fitted high-quality masks such as N-95s or respirators, but there is no conclusive evidence that it does.
With that in mind, think back to late 2020 to mid-2022, when mayors, governors, school districts, and even the U.S. Department of Transportation and Joe Biden were forcing masks on unwilling people — especially children — even when viral transmission was very low.
Early on, when public-health officials told us to wear masks, they were simply playing it safe. But as time went on, even as the efficacy of masks became more doubtful, the officials switched from asking to mandating.
They went beyond mandating, of course, and attacked everyone who resisted their mandates as selfish grandma-killers. The mayors and county executives who required masks knew they didn’t work, obviously, because these same mayors and county executives personally refused to wear these masks in exactly the situations where they were mandating the masks.
What happened in the past happened in the past. The mask mandaters in 2020 had an excuse. The mandaters in 2023 don’t. Today, they should all personally and publicly fess up and explain why they made the mistakes they did.
If the mask mandaters don’t explain the source of their error, they are immolating whatever authority and credibility they have left.
By May 2020, it had become apparent that the standard practice of putting COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation with ventilators was a death sentence
Between 50% and 86% of COVID patients placed on life support ended up dying
By May 2020, doctors had also found that high-flow nasal cannulas and proning led to better outcomes than ventilators
The World Health Organization promoted the use of ventilators as a way to purportedly curtail the spread of virus-laden aerosols, thereby protecting other patients and hospital staff. In other words, suspected COVID patients were sacrificed to “protect” others
The matter becomes even more perverse when you consider the fact that many “COVID cases” were patients who merely tested positive using faulty PCR testing. Hospitals also received massive incentives to diagnose patients with COVID and put them on a vent
By May 2020, it had become apparent that the standard practice of putting COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation with ventilators was a death sentence.1 As early as April 9, 2020, Business Insider reported2 that 80% of COVID-19 patients in New York City who were placed on ventilators died, which caused a number of doctors to question their use.
The Associated Press3 also publicized similar reports from China and the U.K. A U.K. report put the figure at 66%, while a small study from Wuhan, China, put the ratio of deaths at 86%. Data presented by attorney Thomas Renz in 2021 showed that in Texas hospitals, 84.9% of patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.4
The lowest figure I’ve seen is 50%.5 So, somewhere between 50% and 86% of all ventilated COVID patients died. Compare that to historical prepandemic ratios, where 30% to 40% of ventilated patients died.
High-Flow Cannulas and Proning Were Always More Effective
Meanwhile, doctors at UChicago Medicine reported6 getting “truly remarkable” results using high-flow nasal cannulas in lieu of ventilators. As noted in a press release:7
“High-flow nasal cannulas, or HFNCs, are non-invasive nasal prongs that sit below the nostrils and blow large volumes of warm, humidified oxygen into the nose and lungs.
A team from UChicago Medicine’s emergency room took 24 COVID-19 patients who were in respiratory distress and gave them HFNCs instead of putting them on ventilators. The patients all fared extremely well, and only one of them required intubation after 10 days …
‘Avoiding intubation is key,’ [UChicago Medicine’s Emergency Department’s medical director Dr. Thomas] Spiegel said. ‘Most of our colleagues around the city are not doing this, but I sure wish other ERs would take a look at this technique closely.’”
The UChicago team also endorsed proning, meaning lying in the face-down position, which automatically improves oxygenation and helps alleviate shortness of breath.
Yet despite these early indications that mechanical ventilation was as unnecessary as it was disastrous, placing COVID patients on life support is standard of care to this day, more than three years later. How could that be?
How China and the WHO Created Ventilator Hysteria
In a September 30, 2020, Substack article,8 journalist Jordan Schachtel described how China and the World Health Organization came up with and nurtured the idea that mechanical ventilation was the correct and necessary first-line response to COVID:
“In early March, when COVID-19 was ravaging western Europe and sounding alarm bells in the United States, the WHO released COVID-19 provider guidance9 documents to healthcare workers.
Citing experience ‘based on current knowledge of the situation in China,’ the WHO recommended mechanical ventilators as an early intervention for treating COVID-19 patients. The guidance recommended10 escalating quickly, if not immediately, to mechanical ventilation.
In doing so, they cited the guidance being presented by Chinese medical journals, which published papers in January and February claiming that ‘Chinese expert consensus’ called for ‘invasive mechanical ventilation’ as the ‘first choice’ for people with moderate to severe respiratory distress.
The WHO further justified this approach by claiming that the less invasive positive air pressure machines could result in the spread of aerosols, potentially infecting health care workers with the virus.”
That last paragraph is perhaps the most shocking reason for why millions of COVID patients were sacrificed. They wanted to isolate the virus inside the mechanical vent machine rather than risk aerosol transmission.
In other words, they put patients to death in order to “save” staff and other, presumably non-COVID, patients. If you missed this news back in 2020, you’re not alone. In the flurry of daily reporting, it escaped many of us. Here’s the description given in the WHO’s guidance document.
Strangely enough, while the U.S. quickly began clamoring for ventilators, China started relying on them less, and instead exported them in huge quantities. As noted by Schachtel, “China was making a fortune off of manufacturing and exporting ventilators (many of which did not work correctly and even killed patients11) around the world.”
COVID Patients Effectively Euthanized
That ventilation and sedation were used to protect hospital staff was also highlighted by The Wall Street Journal in a December 20, 2020, article,12 which noted:
“Last spring, with less known about the disease, doctors often pre-emptively put patients on ventilators or gave powerful sedatives largely abandoned in recent years. The aim was to save the seriously ill and protect hospital staff from COVID-19 …
Last spring, doctors put patients on ventilators partly to limit contagion at a time when it was less clear how the virus spread, when protective masks and gowns were in short supply.
Doctors could have employed other kinds of breathing support devices that don’t require risky sedation, but early reports suggested patients using them could spray dangerous amounts of virus into the air, said Theodore Iwashyna, a critical-care physician at University of Michigan and Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals in Ann Arbor, Mich.
At the time, he said, doctors and nurses feared the virus would spread through hospitals. “We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patients’ benefit, but in order to control the epidemic and to save other patients,” Dr. Iwashyna said ‘That felt awful.’”
As noted in a January 23, 2023, Substack article,13 in which James Lyons-Weiler revisits the ventilator issue and the shocking reason behind it, “euthanizing humans is illegal. Especially for the benefit of other patients. It should feel awful.”
The matter becomes even more perverse when you consider the fact that many “COVID cases” were patients who merely tested positive using faulty PCR testing.
The Apocalypse doesn’t have to taste awful. Get long-term preparedness food that’s actually edible from my new store, Late Prepper. Use promo code “jdr” for 15% off!
Some of you may remember Erin Olszewski, a retired Army sergeant and frontline nurse who blew the whistle on the horrific mistreatment of COVID patients at Elmhurst Hospital Center in Queens, New York, which was “the epicenter of the epicenter” of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.
She described14 a number of problems at Elmhurst, including the disproportionate mortality rate among people of color, the controversial rule surrounding Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders, lax personal protective equipment (PPE) standards, and the failure to segregate COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients, thereby ensuring maximum spread of the disease among noninfected patients coming in with other health problems.
Olszewski also highlighted the fact that COVID-negative patients were being listed as confirmed positive and placed on mechanical ventilation, thus artificially inflating the numbers while more or less condemning the patient to death from lung injury.
Making matters worse, many of the doctors treating these patients were not trained in critical care. One of the “doctors” on the COVID floor was a dentist. Residents (medical students) were also relied on, even though they were not properly trained in how to safely ventilate, and were unfamiliar with the potent drugs used.
At the time, Olszewski blamed financial incentives for turning the hospital into a killing field. Elmhurst, a public hospital, received $29,000 extra for a COVID-19 patient receiving ventilation, over and above other treatments, she said.
If Elmhurst had infection control in mind when ventilating patients, they certainly didn’t follow through, as COVID-positive and negative patients were comingled — a strategy Olszewski suspected was intended to drive up the COVID case and mortality numbers.
Killing for Profit
Others have also highlighted the role of financial incentives. In early April 2020, Minnesota family physician and state Sen. Scott Jensen explained:15
“Medicare has determined that if you have a COVID-19 admission to the hospital you’ll get paid $13,000. If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator, you get $39,000; three times as much.”
Dr. Joseph Mercola
Former CDC director Robert Redfield also admitted that financial policies may indeed have resulted in artificially elevated hospitalization rates and death toll statistics. As reported August 1, 2020, by the Washington Examiner:16
“… Redfield agreed that some hospitals have a monetary incentive to overcount coronavirus deaths … ‘I think you’re correct in that we’ve seen this in other disease processes, too.
Really, in the HIV epidemic, somebody may have a heart attack but also have HIV — the hospital would prefer the [classification] for HIV because there’s greater reimbursement,’ Redfield said17 during a House panel hearing … when asked by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer about potential ‘perverse incentives.’ Redfield continued: ‘So, I do think there’s some reality to that …”
In addition to receiving exorbitant payments for COVID admissions and putting patients on a ventilator, hospitals are also paid extra for:18
COVID testing for all patients
Use of remdesivir
When everything is said and done, a COVID patient can be “worth” as much as $250,000, but for the maximum payment, they have to leave in a body bag. If we know anything, it’s that profit motives can make people commit atrocious acts, and that certainly appears true when it comes to COVID treatment.
In the U.S., hospitals also LOST federal funding if they failed or refused to administer remdesivir and/or ventilation, which further incentivized them to go along with what amounts to malpractice at best, and murder at worst.
We need harsh, hard investigations with consequences — and activists need to write bills tying the hands of protocolists to prevent them from ever again killing one patient to hypothetically save another — under threat of a murder charge. ~ James Lyons-Weiler
Patient Rights Have Evaporated
There’s also evidence that certain hospital systems, and perhaps all of them, have waived patients’ rights, making anyone diagnosed with COVID a virtual prisoner of the hospital, with no ability to exercise informed consent. As noted by Citizens Journal in December 2021:19
“We now see government-dictated medical care at its worst in our history since the federal government mandated these ineffective and dangerous treatments for COVID-19, and then created financial incentives for hospitals and doctors to use only those ‘approved’ (and paid for) approaches.
Our formerly trusted medical community of hospitals and hospital-employed medical staff have effectively become ‘bounty hunters’ for your life.
Patients need to now take unprecedented steps to avoid going into the hospital for COVID-19. Patients need to take active steps to plan before getting sick to use early home-based treatment of COVID-19 that can help you save your life.”
There Must Be a Reckoning
There’s no telling how many COVID patients have already lost their lives to this medical malpractice, and it must stop. Patient rights must be reestablished and be irrevocable, we need to hold decision-makers to account, and lastly, we have to somehow ensure that our hospitals cannot be turned into killing fields for profit ever again. As noted by Lyons-Weiler in his January 2023 article:20
“We need harsh, hard investigations with consequences — and activists need to write bills tying the hands of protocolists to prevent them from ever again killing one patient to hypothetically save another — under threat of a murder charge.
We need legislation for ‘on-demand’ scripts for off-label medicines that patients want for potentially deadly infections — regardless of ‘FDA Approval’ (FDA does not, by definition, have to ‘approve’ off-label scripts.”
COVID Treatment Guidance
While SARS-CoV-2 has become milder with each iteration, I still believe it’s a good idea to treat suspected COVID at first signs of symptoms — especially if you’ve gotten the COVID jab. COVID hospitalization and death are now “pandemics of the vaccinated,” to reuse and rephrase one of the globalist cabal’s favorite mantras.
Currently spanning 67 pages when printed, the document lists relevant legislation, regulations, executive orders, and other pertinent events from 1907 through the present which have enabled the “COVID vaccine” bioterrorism attack to take place with a full “legal” architecture serving to facilitate its crimes and provide full immunity for every criminal involved.
“The basic goal of the architects, which has been achieved,” Watt writes, “was to set up legal conditions in which all governing power in the United States could be automatically transferred from the citizens and the three Constitutional branches into the two hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary, effective at the moment the HHS Secretary himself declared a public health emergency, legally transforming free citizens into enslaved subjects.”
There is a pattern here. With the recent revelation that the CIA was involved with the death of JFK, it is starting to develop at a macro level.
Although we have 3 equal (HA!) branches of government, the CIA wants to control them and everything else. They and the FBI seem to be trying to run things from the inside, thus the Deep State.
As I put this together, the facts will come out, but the pattern has been there the whole time. Some branch of the government is trying to be king or dictator.
Covid, Biden mistakes and secret documents, Mar-A-Lago and other things are just tactics.
It’s there for big thinkers to see. It was big thinkers who dreamed this up and have been living this dream for decades. It’s all behind the back of the public who live their lives worried about the price of eggs, rather than their subjugation.
DARPA, the creators of the Internet apparently had the mRNA jab well before Covid escaped from the Wuhan Labs.
(LifeSiteNews) — Former pharmaceutical executive and researcher Alexandra “Sasha” Latypova has laid out compelling arguments for why the “cartel” that orchestrated the dissemination and uptake of “biowarfare agents” — marketed as “COVID-19 vaccines” — operated with “very clear intent to harm” and to execute a “mass genocide of Americans.”
Latypova worked more than 25 years in the pharmaceutical industry specializing in research and development, including data analysis, clinical trials, and technologies, while also co-founding multiple research organizations before retiring at a relatively young age.
Having been alarmed by government policy during the COVID crisis, she began conducting several levels of investigation that most recently revealed how the COVID-19 “vaccines” were fully produced, controlled and distributed by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) with pharmaceutical manufacturers such as Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen only serving as “figureheads” in a broader public relations campaign to provide the product with an appearance of medical legitimacy.
As Latypova has explained, the DoD managed to classify these “vaccines,” not as medicines or pharmaceuticals but as “COVID countermeasures” under the authority of the military, which means they are not required to comply with U.S. law governing the manufacturing quality, testing, effectiveness, safety, and labeling of medical products.
Yet while such laws did not apply to these “COVID-19 vaccines,” the government advanced an orchestrated public relations façade that standard testing, monitoring and approval processes were being strictly observed by the CDC and FDA, even as many thousands of injuries and deaths had been steadily documented and independent medical experts and media sounded alarms only to be canceled my legacy and social media corporations.
In an early December video lecture, the former pharma executive laid out evidence for how the DoD, HHS, and other U.S. government agencies, along with other governments and pharmaceutical companies, were involved in “a conspiracy to commit mass murder through bioterrorism and informational warfare operations worldwide.”
“The evidence is overwhelming that there is an intent to harm people by the COVID 19 injections, so-called ‘vaccines,’ and other nonsensical COVID response measures implemented in lockstep by governments all over the world,” she explained.
I’ll do more later on this, but it has been developing in my mind for a while. At least it is out there in case something happens to me, or questions whether I’m sane to see this or not.
This is their manual for vaccine propaganda. It’s all right there in it. All the tactics spelled out with instructions. When people say it seems like they are “reading from a script”, well they actually are. This is the script.
I finally found a lot of people like me. I’ll link to the article below, but the comments by the people are most revealing.
I thought I lived on an island regarding Covid and the jab. I now see a lot of people who have been through these scares before, don’t trust the government, saw through the propaganda, actually looked at the science, refused to be sheep and various other reasons.
I saw the pattern developing early that caused me not to trust anyone on this. There was too much pressure and not enough evidence of anything but the 1930’s in Germany all over. I wasn’t going to line up and comply like a sheep being led to slaughter
I find this refreshing to see that the beating I took over not being jabbed was worth it. It will go down as one of the biggest scamdemics pushed on us. Note how much the word trust is used.
In the bigger picture if you want to fill up your faith cup and recognize the scale of commonsense assembly in our nation, take the time to read through the 2,000+ responses.
The feedback you are providing is exceptional and trust me when I say that far more people are reading these responses than you could fathom. Additionally, the responses have reasserted my belief in the scale of our national assembly. There are far more of us, ordinary, hardworking, commonsense, pragmatic and smart people, than the self-described intellectual elites would ever admit.
In addition to the responses below, there have been hundreds of emails answering the question, which suddenly made me realize that no one has really ever asked this question before in a format that provides ordinary people with the ability to respond.
There is also a yearning to talk about this issue, publicly and with deliberation; massively so. And I am hopeful (insert grin here) this small corner of the internet is about to push this conversation into a much larger national forum. Our nation needs a big conversation about this.
If I had to pick a single phrase to encapsulate the myriad of phenomenal responses to the question I would use the phrase, “intellectual discernment”; which again provides buckets of faith that a large number of people are wide awake, albeit part of what I call a potato revolution growing safely underground.
Also, unbeknownst to front page readers I am stunned at the people in/around operation warp-speed, these are people in government directly attached to the issue, who have contacted CTH on the backside, stepped forward and said they also didn’t take the shot because, well, despite their belief in the purpose and principle at the time, things were just not adding up and ultimately seemed sketchy. They couldn’t talk (so they felt), couldn’t even hint at their concern; but when it came to making the personal decision, they waited.
I also owe it to you to answer the question of my own status, which is a big heck no – I did not take the jab.
Why? Because in the preceding years of all my research into the rapidly exposed corruption of our government, there was just no way in hell I was going to trust that same system. A system that literally was working outside the constitution and legal framework of our nation to destroy a sitting U.S. President is going to suddenly care about my health. Nope, it did not align. I also looked at the datapoint of the U.S.S. Comfort delivered to New York City under the grandest of media proclamations about impending medical doom, only to see the ship sit empty and completely unused despite the scale of the narrative that surround its purpose.
Lastly, and more obliquely, the datapoint of one of my heroes Franklin Graham assembling a NY field hospital to serve over 20,000 patients; another massive endeavor that sat empty and without use. However, prior to the hindsight, it was the in-real-time fight from officials in/around the area who tried to block Samaritans Purse from setting up the facility. If the SARS-CoV-2 issue was as great a threat as declared, then why would anyone fight to keep out a field hospital that could provide such relief. It just didn’t make sense.
Those issues, and others, formed the baseline of my inability to reconcile the key issue of ‘trust’ needed to believe in the vaccine. Additionally, I am healthy and not within any of the risk factors. However, I also feel strongly that each health decision is unique to the individual person, and everyone was making the best decisions for them based on the available information at the time; so, I carry no judgement for those who made a different choice.
I stood alone in my world on a lot of things since 2016. Now, instead of wearing a tin foil hat, it’s all being proved true. I don’t even bother with I told you so. I doubt the discernment of people around me a lot more.
Enjoy and share
This next one is not something I’m expecting. They thought I was the crazy one for not getting Jabbed, thinking putting America first was a good thing and that Biden is more abusive to females than Trump. They just wanted to be offended and were.
I don’t even bother with being right to them anymore. I don’t have to be when they are wrong so consistently. I don’t bother saying it anymore. Fortunately, it’s on my blog for years and they can’t mis-state what I’ve said all along.
The doors were opened from the inside to let them in. Those wearing MAGA hats were Federal Agents who caused it. Pelosi could have authorized the National Guard. Twitter banned Trump’s tweet telling everyone to stop it and go home. AOC thought she was being attacked, but was many blocks away not even near the action except for FOMO.
They lied, censored justice and now people are still sitting uncharged in jail, some who weren’t even there.
Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., is a physician and writer:
Beginning Jan. 6, 2021, the government-media deep state cabal sharply pivoted from accusing President Donald Trump of “colluding with the Russians to steal the 2016 presidential election” to “incitement of insurrection,” a charge for which he was impeached a second time and now the farcical January 6 committee is recommending criminal charges.
An organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects.
As for Trump’s supposed role, in his January 6 speech, he promoted the First Amendment’s protections of “freedom of speech and assembly” and “the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Here are his exact words, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Trump went further tweeting, “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence!” How exactly was this a call for a violent overthrow of the government?
This was not a call for violence, revolt, or rebellion. In fact, President Trump authorized National Guard troops, but only Speaker Pelosi or D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser could order deployment. And neither did. The January 6 Commission ignored this.
Capitol Police welcomed protesters inside the U.S. Capitol building, and the only death was at the hands of a Capitol Police officer, fatally shooting an unarmed female military veteran.
As the FBI admitted to embedding informants in the January 6 protests, it begs the question of the FBI’s role in inciting this so-called “insurrection.” How did the FBI know to place informants there? It takes months to train and embed informants, suggesting that the FBI knew these protests would happen, well in advance, but did nothing to stop or prevent them. Or did they play a role in creating these protests through their informants? Did the FBI aid and abet this “insurrection”?
Questioning or challenging election results is hardly unusual. Just ask Al Gore who mounted all sorts of legal and media challenges in 2020. Or Democrats who contested Trump’s 2016 electoral college victory. Were these insurrections?
What’s the common theme? Government agencies actively promoting one favored political party while damaging their political enemies, Soviet-style, to influence elections and disrupt Constitutionally based government. In other words, an insurrection.
I usually have the same ones, I don’t make them. If I’m going to do something, I’m already doing it and will continue.
I work out all the time and see the new people at the gym trying to get into shape or lose weight every year this time. They are usually gone by February. A certain day in the year can’t replace internal fortitude. You have passion about something and do it or it won’t continue. You lose interest or gain interest in something else. (That is the same reason I hate my birthday, it’s not going to make you any happier. I refuse to make some day more special because others say so, the same with exercising beginning on NYD)
I got lucky on Covid. I never took the clot shot for the Wuhan virus. I know the next crisis is leaving the station to be here in time for the 2024 election cycle. Don’t buy it. I hope to discern it quickly and not fall for that either. I’ll be watching though.
The one thing I will do even more diligently is protect myself from the WEF, the US government, Big Pharma and Washington. They have shown no interest in anyone other than themselves. They got away with one scaring everyone with Covid, but I hope to stay even more awake to this as well as wake up the sheep that have been in line. They either got lucky with the timing or that was a trial run. Only time will tell.
They did more to stop Hydroxycholoroquine and Ivermectin than they did Fentanyl. They opened the borders that let more of this death drug in.
I’ve been getting a lot of hits from China recently. If it is the government, history is not on your side. Stop the shit and enjoy your economic freedom before you cut your own throats. I don’t expect that to happen. I look for worse things.
If the readers are Chinese citizens, find a way to stop the CCP from ruining your country. That is your resolution. I’ll keep posting the truth
Personally, I talked about exercise above, but looking at everything skeptically and trying to protect myself and inform others will also continue.
My wish for others besides being saved is to wake up and stop believing what you are told. We formed a country by not putting up with this crap from people who think they are the ruling elite. We killed them to stop the shit that the current government is jamming down our throats. I can’t believe that people would be the sheep that they have been since 2020.
I’ll be more introverted, it happens in life. I’ve got other issues to work on, but I’ll still look for an escape before I go somewhere and size up the people in the room as to who is a threat.
I’ll fight woke also. That is as racist and discriminatory as anything. It’s get-evenism (I made that up). It’s a bullshit scheme to steal free money. I started the year by dropping Hulu because of Disney.
Only one un-Jabbed person below. There was no science, it was an artful political display of how to manipulate the masses with fear. Look, we had SARS, MERS, H1N1, bird flu, endless flu seasons. We’d been through way worse and the evidence was there.
Most people I know finally woke up to this lie now try to justify why they took it. They all willingly couldn’t wait to jump in line thinking that it was safe, effective and actually worked to stop Covid. All it did was condition the masses to comply.
I enjoyed the 2 years of grief I got for not getting jabbed. I never bought it and was just biding time for the truth to come out. Some just believed it and didn’t even question the science or the lack of the scientific method used. Those are the ones I laugh at the most now.
The propaganda to get it alone should have tipped people off that they were lying.
I’m in the smallest pink block below. I couldn’t be happier with this decision now the they damage that the vax causes is more deadly than Covid.
This one is for meathead
In short, they screwed the population for control and money. The sheep went right along and did what they were told.
Because if he was really guilty, this many investigations and impeachments would have produced actual evidence, like an illegal e-mail server or payments from FTX or Burisma or the CCP. That is overlooked though if you are in the deep state.
From the best economy ever to crap in 18 months. #FJB #LGB
No bias from big tech, nothing to see here
Sooner or later, enough of us figure it out. If we don’t, say goodbye to America, at least the one that was greats
Creative and talented people can weave a story highlighting the benefits of a product or service (or person) in a way that is eloquent. Avoiding the pitfalls that you know exist, or handling them deftly to the point where they are diminished compared with the benefits of the offering is an art.
It used to be that actual journalists would hold feet to the fire if they smelled any excrement flowing out of the mouth of the speaker so that they had to somewhat come clean. When you preach to the sheep, you can say anything. They’ll eat shit as quickly as they eat the truth.
Then there is Lying.
Here is an example of outright lying over the truth that is self evident to any audience, the speaker, the journalists and the world, yet no one says what is true either spoken or written, other than a few outlets.
The current White House spokes puppet blamed a president who left a secured border and hasn’t been in power for 2 years for the current disaster at the border. Even she doesn’t believe what she is saying. She is blaming Trump for what Biden has actually done.
JEAN-PIERRE: “ — especially because of what the last administration did, and they completely gutted the system. And we know that this has been a multidecade-long problem. We need to modernize the system, and this is something that the President has put forth and we are looking for Congress to act. We are asking Congress to act.”
It’s okay! Biden’s administration has a “six-point” plan to combat the border crisis.
But should support or have concerns with Title 42 ending?
Jean-Pierre said, “What Americans should know is that the President has done — has done the work to deal with what we’re seeing at the border since day one.”
What I can’t believe are the sheep that believe this, but I guess that’s what they get for believing the media, the government and social media. None of them are your friends or care about you. They care about them and you are the pawn.
If you think we are going to forget that the Covidiots pulled everything short of Concentration Camps to get us jabbed, guess again. A lot of people paid a horrible price for the lies these people told. We were banned, ridiculed, quarantined and ostracized for not being sheep. Some were denied organ transplants. The un-jabbed were the butt of every reason things were going wrong.
Remember this lie? “It’s a pandemic of the un-vaccinated”. It turns out to be the opposite. This is only topped by the vaccine is safe and effective and stops the transmission of Covid
The un-jabbed weren’t the experimental subjects for an untested gene therapy that was neither safe nor effective. It didn’t prevent or stop the transmission of Covid. In fact it is now killing more than Covid did. (I’ll save the de-population issue, but look up WEF or Gates foundation…..the evidence is there).
Now, they want us to forget that they knew they lied and want forgiveness for murder and medical malpractice. Sweep it under the rug.
Not a chance in hell. We won’t forget what you did. It should be enough to know that the un-jabbed won’t go through the damage that the vax is doing to the sheep that got it I got a good taste of what it’s like to be discriminated against,
See Kid Rock Below for what they’d go through and why, the bastards.
The consequences are beginning to appear. If you want a trend, start watching the immune system damage to the vaxxed.
Let’s look at the lies and what they did to you and me. Keep in mind that we, the un-jabbed didn’t forget. We don’t even need retribution because the jabbed will have their own suffering. Those that tried to force it on us will live in infamy as liars and manipulators without facts.
It’s time to correct the narrative and reveal the facts.
You can ask for forgiveness, but you can’t take back the lies.
Of course this is not the news you’ve been fed, but then it comes from the same people who fed you lies about Covid.
The below comes from one of the finest sources of actual truth about the climate. It is the truth that comes with facts from Anthony Watts.
It took 3 years for the evidence that the jab and a lot of Covid was lying by people who wanted to get rich or control the masses. The world’s Governments, WEF, Big Pharma, MSM, Fauci, Birx and a few others come to mind here.
Now for Climate change. It’s about money. They create a crisis (the world is going to end, the ocean will cover our land, send us money) and then do the money laundering. It was FTX before that ponzi scheme took effect.
There was no consensus (the 97% was an Al Gore lie propagated by the press). COP27 was about money (I’ll get to that in a later post) and the Science is never settled. It’s because actual science has to be challenged to prove it is true.
Dr. Indur M. Goklany, has 30-plus years in federal and state governments and the private sector, during which he has written more than one hundred monographs, book chapters, and papers on topics ranging from climate change, human well-being, economic development, technological change and biotechnology to sustainable development.
He has been a visiting fellow with the American Enterprise Institute and was the first Julian Simon Fellow at the Political Economy Research Center in Bozeman, Montana. Working for the U.S. Department of the Interior, he has represented the United States at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in the negotiations leading to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Yet these companies stopped advertising on Twitter which is purging child porn and enabling free speech.
Abbott Laboratories Allstate Corporation AMC Networks American Express Company AT&T Big Heart Petcare BlackRock, Inc. BlueTriton Brands, Inc. Boston Beer Company CA Lottery (California State Lottery) CenturyLink (Lumen Technologies, Inc.) Chanel Chevrolet* Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.* Citigroup, Inc. CNN Dell Diageo DirecTV Discover Financial Services Fidelity First National Realty Partners Ford* Heineken N.V. Hewlett-Packard (HP) Hilton Worldwide Inspire Brands, Inc. Jeep* Kellogg Company Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc. Kyndryl* LinkedIn Corporation MailChimp (The Rocket Science Group) Marriott International, Inc. Mars Petcare Mars, Incorporated Merck & Co. (Merck Sharp & Dohme MSD)* Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook, Inc.) MoneyWise (Wise Publishing, Inc.) Nestle Novartis AG* Pernod Ricard PlayPass The Coca-Cola Company The Kraft Heinz Company Tire Rack Verizon Wells Fargo Whole Foods Market IP Yum! Brands
Last week, San Francisco’s rules committee unanimously approved a version of a draft policy stating that robots can be ‘used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option’.
Members of the city’s Board of Supervisors Rules Committee have been reviewing the new policy for several weeks as reported by Mission Local.
The original version did not mention robots until Aaron Peskin, the Dean of the city’s Board of Supervisors, initially added that ‘robots shall not be used as a Use of Force against any person’.
However, the SFPD amended Peskin’s addition and replaced it with a line that could give robots the authority to kill suspects if the life of public or police was at risk.
According to Mission Local, Peskin eventually decided to accept the change because ‘there could be scenarios where deployment of lethal force was the only option’.
The equipment policy states that the SFPD currently has 17 remotely piloted robots, of which only 12 are functioning.
In addition to granting robots the ability to use deadly force, the proposal also authorizes them for use in ‘training and simulations, criminal apprehensions, critical incidents, exigent circumstances, executing a warrant or during suspicious device assessments’.
While most of the robots listed in the SFPD’s inventory are primarily used for defusing bombs or dealing with hazardous materials, newer models have an optional weapons system.
The department’s QinetiQ Talon can also be modified to hold various weapons — a weaponized version of the robot is currently used by the US Army and can equip grenade launchers, machine guns, or even a .50-caliber anti-materiel rifle.
Before I start the post, let’s put the real crux of this on the table. It is a false crisis that was generated on wrong data to get money. I worked in this field and know the players and the facts. It is about stuffing their pockets and distracting the attention from the real problems. It is a go to for everything.
There is no better evidence than COP27 that did nothing to pretend to solve the supposed crisis. It was a bunch of elites in private planes who voted to move money from rich nations to poor. The reality is they are moving the money into their own pockets. They penalize the weak who will pay, and dismiss those who are the worst polluters as they get money under the table for that also.
“There is no doubt that these emails are embarrassing and a public-relations disaster for science.” – Andrew Dessler, “Climate E-Mails Cloud the Debate,” December 10, 2009.
It has been 12 years since the intellectual scandal erupted called Climategate. Each anniversary inspires recollections and regurgitation of salient quotations. These quotations speak for themselves; attempts of climate alarmists to parse the words and meaning distracts from what was said in real-time private conversations.
And the scandal got worse after the fact when, according to Paul Stephens, “virtually the entire climate science community tried to pretend that nothing was wrong.” Whitewash exonerations by the educational institutions involved and scientific organizations– was a blow to scholarship and standards as well. The standard of fair, objective, transparent research was sacrificed to a politically correct narrative about the qualitative connection between CO2 forcing and temperature (see Wiki).
Fred Pearce’s The Climate Files: The Battle for the Truth About Global Warming (2010) was a rare mainstream-of-sorts look at the scandal. Michael Mann is the bad actor, despite his I-am-the-victim take in his account, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars(2012). 
On November 19, 2009, a whistle-blower or hacker downloaded more than 1,000 documents and e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University (United Kingdom). Posted on a Russian server, these documents were soon accessed by websites around the world to trigger the exposé.
These e-mails were part of confidential communications between top climate scientists in the UK, the United States, and other nations over a 15-year period. The scientists involved had developed surface temperature data sets and promoted the “Hockey Stick” global temperature curve, as well as having wrtten/edited the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) physical-science assessment reports.
Branded “Climategate” by British columnist James Delingpole, the emails provided insight into practices that range from bad professionalism to fraudulent science. Bias, data manipulation, dodging freedom of information requests, and efforts to subvert the peer-review process were uncovered.
There is a lot more at the link above, but here are some salient facts.
Man-Made Warming Controversy
“I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards ‘apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data’ but in reality the situation is not quite so simple.”
—Dr. Keith Briffa, Climatic Research Unit, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Sep. 22, 1999.
“Keith’s [Briffa] series…differs in large part in exactly the opposite direction that Phil’s [Jones] does from ours. This is the problem we all picked up on (everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably consensus viewpoint we’d like to show w/ the Jones et al and Mann et al series).”
—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Sep. 22, 1999.
“…it would be nice to try to ‘contain’ the putative ‘MWP’ [Medieval Warm Period]…”
—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, June 4, 2003
“By the way, when is Tom C [Crowley] going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.”
—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Aug. 3, 2004.
“I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but it’s not helping the cause, or her professional credibility.”
—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, May 30, 2008
“Well, I have my own article on where the heck is global warming… The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
—Dr. Kevin Trenberth, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Oct. 12, 2009.
Let me end with some actual Climate facts:
That extreme cold has hit the South Pole this month.
That the South Pole had record cold temperatures in the six-month winter of 2020-2021
That 2022 was a relatively mild hurricane period, just like the ten years after Hurricane Katrina hit.
That we had extreme cold weather in the U.S this month along with record snow in the Northeast.
That the Arctic icecaps have been expanding the last ten years, contrary to predictions that the ice would be gone by now.
That the coral reef off Australia is growing with a vengeance
That wildfires were down 80% from the last five-year average.
After 150 years of exponential growth of crude oil and coal use, and rapid growth in the population and all the other components we are told cause warming, the dire predictions have all been false.
The temperature is only up one to two degrees after a Little Ice Age ended in 1860 and the Earth now has a temperature similar to over 1,000 years ago in the Medieval Warming Period.
Why do they always go there. History shows it’s never worked yet the same group thinks they can do it better. It’s going on right now with the WEF, UN, COP27 and the rest of the one world wonders. Well, feast on this:
After the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, Communism was dead. Or so we were told at the time. However, it should be clear by now that Communism is the John Barleycorn of political ideologies:
They worked their will on John Barleycorn, but he lived to tell the tale.
That is, Communism was thought to have been destroyed, but not only did it survive, it eventually came to dominate those who believed they had destroyed it. (A full-length exegesis on this conceit may be found in my 2008 essay “John Barleycorn Was Dead”.)
The 21st-century version of the victorious ideology is not called “home-brewed ale”, but rather “Progressivism”, or the “New World Order”, or “Global Governance”, among other terms. The process of imposing the new global utopia is, of course, referred to as “the Great Reset”. Which is currently well underway, and will probably be completed before most people realize what is happening.
One of the features of latter-day Communism is that it has always been able to count on a multitude of fellow travelers among the members of the political class in the liberal democracies. The Soviets recruited agents of influence in Western governments and cultural circles, but they really didn’t have to work all that hard to find them; there was always a pool of idealistic intellectuals who were eager to embrace the utopian vision provided by the Socialist Revolution.
Communism is primarily a disease of the intellectuals. The proletariat — the purported beneficiaries of the socialist revolution — are generally indifferent to the allure of progressive utopias. But those who hold multiple advanced degrees are especially attracted to the idea of a glorious future planned and implemented by technocrats. They can draw up detailed plans for the construction of an ideal political economy, but they lack the political power to realize their dreams. Achieving such power tends to consume all their energy for well over half their lives; hence the pursuit of power becomes an end in itself.
They get them young with the college professors. How many of them do you think are conservatives or middle of the road? About 4 percent. Most of the mush heads don’t have a chance. It’s why they vote liberal when they aren’t educated properly. Usually they keep the single women, as demonstrated by the last election. They are the easiest to persuade.
I see the current administration trying to take us down that road in the (thinly veiled) guise of climate change and woke. I don’t buy it.
The answer is that it is about money and power. The intellectuals think they know more and need to tell others how to live and what to do.
Bear in mind, the rest of us are getting tired of this charade and are well educated in how to live. Let the power go out and see who survives and who gets robbed.
Who, other than the far left and right don’t think the election was rigged in 2020? There is enough Zuckerbucks, midnight mail boxes, stopped counting and faked floods (Atlanta) that even my dog can see through it.
It’s the people revolting, at the ballot box. It’s why our deep state has to rig the voting, DOJ, media, Big Tech and whatever else they need to stay in power.
I’m not fully confident that an actual win by one side couldn’t be overturned by shenanigans either in an October surprise or vote tampering.
After Covid-19, I don’t trust anyone from a government agency. I do trust the will of the people and for a moment in time, they had their say in Italy.
It used to be that most Americans were mainly brainwashed into buying specific products and services by watching television, reading the newspaper, noticing billboards, and seeing films. Propaganda was a front-loaded “machine” that was quite linear in its approach to influence buying motives of consumers. With the invention of the internet and social media, everything changed.
The consumption of news, products, services, lifestyles, pornography, and now most medical “choices” are made online, after “consuming” artificial intelligence. This is how technology has been created and disseminated to chronically DAMAGE humanity, and it’s happening like a tsunami engulfs a coastline, every day.
Machine learning regulates nearly everything users see in front of them online, often in unethical, harmful ways
An artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm regulates the content chosen to be placed in front of user’s eyes specifically to influence their purchases of products, services, and information, based on what they talk about, type about, and search for using smart devices. Ever just talk to a friend about anything, then minutes later an ad pops up on your smart device, selling exactly what you just talked about? That’s AI. Smart devices are almost always RECORDING, whether or not you have the camera, microphone, or app “open” or “live.”
For example, Facebook’s AI software analyzes videos, stories, photos, and even memes, then gathers together ‘recommendations’ for you. Add in some key misinformation and suddenly you find yourself buying what Fakebook told you to buy, and believing what Fakebook calls news.
Google search engine uses AI to guide everyone AWAY from any information about natural health and AWAY from any information that exposes prescription medications and vaccines as the dangerous, experimental mediums they really are. Google blocks, bans, censors and bankrupts people, businesses and organizations that do not support the communist narrative that attempts to control all Americans’ lives and livelihoods.
A forthcoming study co-authored by a Tel Aviv University researcher appears to confirm widespread fears about the negative impact of Facebook, the world’s biggest social media platform, on its users’ mental health and self-image.
A detailed examination of data showed a correlation between a “statistically significant worsening in mental health symptoms, especially depression and anxiety” and the rapid introduction of the social media network.
Some of the benchmarks include a 20% rise in those who reported anxiety disorders; an increase of 25% to 27% in the proportion of students expected to experience moderate to severe depression; an additional 7% of students experienced “severe depression” since gaining access to the network.
The introduction of Facebook, the study found, led to increased utilization of mental healthcare services.
Who doesn’t know Facebook is at best a waste of time and at worst, life destroying. It certainly is political having funded part of the mail in fraud in the last election and Zuckerbucks 2.0 is underway.
One of the best things I ever did in Social Media, of which I have been an early adopter (and un-loader of the bad ones. I miss nothing from people who want to be seen or appreciated.
Now the Introvert inside of me is loving having cut connections with my past. Facebook presented me with a list of people I hoped never to see again. I got most of them out the way we did it before social media. Then this intrusion.
I couldn’t take the political dumbassery (a word I apparently made up) from people I thought had brains.
I also got to see who matured past high school and who didn’t. I didn’t need to see that either.
Be smart, get rid of it. I read recently that the average person wastes 1.5 hours a day on social media. Don’t be that person.
Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 entry by anesthetic compounds
In order to test a membrane-disruptive mechanism for HCQ inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 viral entry, we compared HCQ to anesthetics (tetracaine and propofol) which are known to be membrane-disruptive. HEK293T cells overexpressing ACE2 were infected with a retrovirus pseudotyped with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (SARS2-PV). A segment of the spike protein binds to ACE2 and recapitulates viral entry47,48. A luciferase encoded in the pseudotyped virus is then used to quantitate viral entry (Fig. 1b–d).
Treatments with HCQ, tetracaine, and propofol all robustly reduced SARS2-PV entry into HEK293T cells overexpressing ACE2 (Fig. 1b). The cells were first treated with drugs (50 µM) for 1 h, then the drugs were removed. After the treatment and subsequent drug removal, SARS2-PV was applied such that the virus was never exposed to the drugs, thus avoiding potential direct effects of cholesterol on the viron. HCQ had the greatest effect on viral inhibition with almost a 90% reduction in SARS2-PV luciferase activity (Fig. 1b).
The study is linked above, but given that they all lied (see a post or two below) and the pattern appears.
Robert Redfield, a self-described friend of Anthony Fauci and former CDC director, talked to Substack writer Paul D. Thacker about Fauci possibly funding gain-of-function research and the lab-leak theory.
“The potential for conspiracy is really on the other side,” Redfield said in the article published Thursday. “The conspiracy is Collins, Fauci, and the established scientific community that has acted in an antithetical way to science.”
Redfield was reportedly “very concerned” when at the outset of the pandemic Fauci promoted theories that the pandemic originated in a Chinese wet market, and dismissed theories that it originated in a lab in Wuhan, China.
“I told Tony that I’m very concerned that he was championing this theory that it came from animals, but there is another theory: that it came from a laboratory,” Redfield added.
The video shows that the companies producing the vaxx were making $1000 a second. The NIH, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others promoting the jab paid to have Ivermectin outlawed as a cure. Having no cure was the only way to get emergency authorization for the mRNA jab.
I could drone on about what I’ve already said, it was about power, money, control and the election.
I usually don’t post a video, but arming yourself with information to make a better decision next time could be life saving. It’s only 13 minutes, but gives you the story to know that this should have been handled differently and a lot of lives would have been saved.
A new peer-reviewed study found that regular use of ivermectin reduced the risk of dying from COVID-19 by 92%.
The large study was conducted by Flávio A. Cadegiani, MD, MSc, PhD. Cadegiani is a board-certified endocrinologist with a master’s degree and doctorate degree in clinical endocrinology. The peer-reviewed study was published on Wednesday by the online medical journal Cureus. The study was conducted on a strictly controlled population of 88,012 people from the city of Itajaí in Brazil.
Individuals who used ivermectin as prophylaxis or took the medication before being infected by COVID experienced significant reductions in death and hospitalization. According to the study, those who took ivermectin regularly had a 92% reduction in their COVID death risk compared to non-users and 84% less than irregular users. “The hospitalization rate was reduced by 100% in regular users compared to both irregular users and non-users,” the study stated.
The impressive reduction for regular ivermectin users was evident despite the regular users being at a higher risk for COVID deaths. The regular users were older and had a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and hypertension than irregular and non-users.
Irregular users of ivermectin had a 37% lower mortality rate reduction than non-users. The study defined regular users as those who used more than 30 tablets of ivermectin over five months. The dosage of ivermectin was determined by…
There are 129,000 of them. I don’t care and am not going to read them as I think there is a two tiered standard of justice right now. I think he’ll get off and the media is protecting him. They did with Hillary, Clapper, Wray, Mueller, Holder, Lynch, Strzok and tramp Lisa whatever, McCabe, Wray and the list goes on. They, like Hunter can do whatever and get away with it, like OJ.
I want to hear how Garland is not prosecuting this, but can raid Mar-A-Lago…..
I also expect to be censored even more, like I care now.
And the blame is on you for not being better educated and studying history. We started this country to get away from what the current administration is trying to do.
And I’m tired of the media hiding what happened on January 6th. It’s like hiding Hillary’s emails, or Hunter Biden’s laptop. I ask myself why, but know the answer. Do you ask yourself why and how is what they are doing affecting you?
No, those of us who didn’t get jabbed are the better educated, less likely to jump at what the government lies to us about and made good decisions about our bodies.
They made fun of us at first, but those of us with long term thinking and the ability to see the big picture. Now, we are getting a return on our investment of educating ourselves before being lemmings.
Covidiots to me are still wearing masks thinking they work. They get boosted with a cocktail made for a variant that doesn’t exist anymore. Most of all, they believe the news being reported.
Yes, I just came out the other side of Covid, still alive to talk about it (along with 99.8% of those who were infected). That never changed my position on what was right, wrong and dangerous.
I just can’t believe so many people fell for the ruse that is the jab. They are the long term study for the effects of the what is now inside of them.
It’s been a point of contention when Covid hit whether to be jabbed or not. I procrastinated getting jabbed at first until I could figure out fact from fiction. I soon understood that the jab was poison (ex-Pfizer exec called it a bioweapon). I have years of studying Crisper-Cas research so I knew the science behind it does not have enough of a track record, nor any long term results to know the DNA damage.
I also watched the propaganda arm of the government trying to force it on everyone before approval. Once they said it was an emergency and bypassed FDA approval, then indemnified the Pharma companies from damage and death. How does this not add up to being wrong to every neuron of IQ on what to do? How did people not see that they were being coerced, manipulated with lockdowns and fed a pack of at best misinformation.
I then looked at what data was suppressed and why, what medications were working as an actual cure and why, and the jab effectiveness at preventing Covid.
I have a relative I call meathead who said I’m intelligent, so why didn’t I get jabbed? It’s because I’m more intelligent than the sheep.
If you want to know how you’d have acted in 1930 in Germany when told to comply, you now know what you’d have done if you were a covidiot or a sheep.
MY COURSE OF ACTION
For 2 years, it came down to me taking Ivermectin instead of getting jabbed and I have been unaffected until last week.
While moving to a new state, mixing with too many people finally caught up with both people in my house. We’ve both tested positive, but have taken 2 different directions in life on how to deal with it.
Backing up, I’m giving credit to God on this as an answer to prayer. I didn’t know what to do in the beginning. I finally made my decision and I believe God revealed to me what I should do. After that, my eyes were opened up to me knowing I was on the right path. My life was flooded by scientific information being actively suppressed by fake book, Google, Twitter and the rest of big Tech. The rest of the sheep in my family pressured me relentlessly to get jabbed and they were wrong and now know it (except meathead)
I’d also like to say thank you to Aaron Rodgers and Joe Rogan. Both went against the grain and didn’t get jabbed. They also took a beating for not being sheep, but proved the world wrong. They didn’t get cancelled, but not from lack of trying. Both got Covid and in less than a week for both it was over. It kept my belief that I was choosing the right path. I enjoy knowing that they are like me in life.
MY PLAN OF ATTACK
The more I studied and read reports, the more I knew that the jab was more malicious than a preventative. It kept popping up that countries using HCQ and Ivermectin had reduced cases of Covid and a faster cure. That it was banned as a cure just lit up in neon that it both worked and was a danger to the profits of the jab.
I called it “my plan” of attack because it was prior to Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers doing the same thing. Before then, I didn’t know many Americans that have tried it (because they were smothering the news that it worked). I’m glad I’m not famous, because they took a beating for challenging the status quo and won.
All my friends got jabbed and some have gone on cruises, the lamest of all vacations. They got Covid on the cruise after a negative PCR test just to get on board, 3 jabs and all the proof in the world that they don’t have it and are protected. They got it before I did. Everyone I know who got jabbed also got Covid. There is my personal evidence that the jab is not a vaccine for Covid and doesn’t prevent transmission to others. Speaking of sheep.
THE TIME LINE
First, the other person in our house tested positive a week ago Thursday, 3 days ahead of me. That person is double jabbed and boosted, 3 stabs in the arm.
I didn’t tell anyone what to do as everyone needs to decide for themselves, as did I. After testing positive though, I made the jabbed person take the Ivermectin because I could trust it more than the jab. It helped speed up healing, and it did. At some point you try to cure it, because nothing prevented it.
I finally tested positive on Sunday but didn’t feel it until Monday. By this time, jabbed person had been in bed for 3 days and had respiratory issues and some other severe symptoms.
Seven days later, jabbed person was coming back to life but is tired and was still hacking and is constantly tired. I woke up after 3 days like Joe and Aaron did, feeling much better. I was tired for a a week and had a nagging cough, the same for jabbed person.
At the end, we had it about the same amount of time. Surprisingly, I wasn’t as sick. The jab (let alone 3) was supposed to lessen the effects of Covid. Most of all, I didn’t have the spike protein running through my veins artificially. The final count was 10 days for the vaxxed, 8 for the unvaxxed.
HOW DID IT GO?
I took vitamin C, B complex, Quercetin, Zinc, D, A, NAC, melatonin and now HCQ and Ivermectin. I also rinsed my nose with a solution of salt water and hydrogen peroxide. I’ve done that all through Covid though. I gargle with Peroxide as well.
My symptoms were a slight headache the first day, but more of a hangover feeling. My stomach was funky like after you drank too much the night before. It took 4 of days to get over that, I had a lot of practice at that before I stopped drinking.
I walked the dog just fine on day 2 and hung stuff in the house on day 3.
Day 4 found me dealing with the residual effects. I occasionally coughed up some stuff breaking up but every cold I’ve had was worse. I was a little tired, but then I wanted to watch the Tour de France and Formula 1.
Day 5 is just more of the same. I hauled a bunch of garbage first thing. I took it easy just because I’m not young anymore and know I needed the rest.
Day 6 was just getting better. I’m not ready to save the world, but it’s getting better. I’m driving for 4 hours on Day 7 to take care of house details. It turns out getting jabbed not only didn’t work, it made it worse.
THE BULLSHIT I GOT FROM THE DOCTOR ABOUT GETTING MEDICINE TO CURE IT
I asked my Dr for Ivermectin or HCQ over a year ago so that I would be ready to deal with it. She said that you don’t know the drug interaction (I don’t take anything other than vitamins) so I knew it was lying. Both have proven to be safe for decades with almost every other drug and I don’t take much.
We had a biological discussion on gene editing so it was clear she knew the truth, but was being silenced by the threat of a license revocation. I expected that answer and knew I’d be getting Ivermectin at the feed store and would have to find the HCQ. To protect the pharmacy, I won’t mention them but I found a source.
I maintain that everyone needs to make their own choice. As I type this I’m listening to the other in my house who has an awful cough and told me they feel terrible and have the entire time unlike me.
So other people told me they took the jab for me because that is what they told them on TV, and the internet. I knew that was wrong by how much the government was pushing it on us. I’ve written ad nauseum about coercion, payments under the table and de-population conspiracy (I documented who has said what and their global power grabs, look under Gates or Schwab in the tag cloud). I chose not to get into that fight and let the cards fall where they may.
Everyone who thought I was misguided and a conspiracy theorist will get a lesson in this. If you can’t challenge science, then it is propaganda – Aaron Rodgers.
Think I’m the only one who doesn’t trust it?
My intentions the whole time was get infected, but protect myself as much as possible so I don’t have to get jabbed and still get the NATURAL immunity and anti-bodies. I’ll still eat the horse de-wormer and laugh every time I do. I know there are no unknown side affects ruining my insides the rest of my life. I guess I won’t have any worms or malaria either. I got it and it worked.
It turns out that even Pfizer and Moderna admit it is gene therapy, not a vaccination. I instinctively knew this and it finally came out. There is no explaining it to anyone who is vaxxed though.
I’ve not been dealing with Covid much lately on my blog because I thought most of this was known. Banning HCQ and IVM told me that was a cure and they couldn’t launder money through the political parties. They are safe, effective and have a track record of curing a lot of things, including Covid-19. It’s why I knew to look into them as a cure, not a preventative.
While it may be obvious to those paying attention that the experimental mRNA treatments have caused profound damage to the health of people across the globe, the extent of the problem is still vague even if we know its widespread. However, thanks to a new research study that was published this week by the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), we are finally starting to see the bigger picture, and the ‘safe and effective’ narrative should finally be able to be destroyed once and for all.
According to the study, mRNA vaccines from both Moderna and Pfizer were more likely to cause a “severe” adverse reaction (vaccine injury like myocarditis, etc.) than prevent covid hospitalizations. And not just a little more either. Moderna’s vaccine was found to cause “15.1 serious adverse events” for every 6.4 people kept out of the hospital.
Pfizer’s mRNA jab was even worse. Clocking in at an astonishing 10.1 serious adverse events per every 2.3 prevented hospitalizations – which is nearly 5 to 1.
Keep in mind that Covid-19 is only moderately more dangerous than the flu in the first place. The serious medical complications linked to the vaccine are much more life-threatening than the virus itself. And yet, Pfizer’s vaccine is 5x more likely to cause a serious adverse event than prevent a serious case of Covid-19, per the study.
It was so easy to see. At least I know I’d never be a Nazi and would stand up for the truth.
It’s a lot of people who think they are progressive, until things don’t go their way.
The decision is what the courts say it is, especially the Supreme Court. I’ve got my view, but that’s not important. That people will openly be racist in today’s society is telling. They came out of the woodwork against Clarence Thomas, arguably one of the most influential black man currently serving our country. He’s leagues ahead of Lloyd Austin, Jean-Pierre, the new Scotus judge and other diversity hires by the current administration.
It’s usually the celebtards and the MSM that reveal themselves first. They are usually the least intelligent, which is why they are first to die when the Communists take over. The America haters.
Hating someone for the color of their skin, including their own color is racist. Any color and probably every color has racist people. It’s just that these are the most vocal and the one’s that should be the least racist.
The first Racist is Samuel L Jackson, who said if this M****r F****r (Trump) gets elected, I’m moving my MF ass to South Africa. This was in 2016 and and did nothing of course. I wanted him to leave and stop ruing our lives.
This time, he’s called Clarence Thomas, uncle Clarence, nee uncle Tom.
Whoopi Goldberg, known for unrealistic and batshit opinions on the View said this:
Whoopi Goldberg, co-host of “The View,” reacted to the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade by issuing an overtly racist threat toward Justice Clarence Thomas, who is black, about his marriage to his wife Ginni, who is white.
“You better hope that they don’t come for you, Clarence, and say you should not be married to your wife, who happens to be white,” Goldberg yelled, suggesting that conservatives in America would seek to ban interracial marriage (another stupid statement).
“They will move back, and you’d better hope that nobody says, you know, well, you’re not in the Constitution. You’re back to being a quarter of a person,” she added.
Lori Lightfoot, failed mayor of Chicago was even less eloquent with F*** Thomas. Hard to respect Chicago for electing a person of this low moral character and ability to run Mayberry, let alone Chicago.
It is a common belief that only certain races can be racist. This proves that anyone can be. A man upholds the law and does what he is charged to do, overruling a flawed legal decision that Ruth Bader Ginsberg said needed to go. Jackson has said enough stuff to disqualify himself against what MLK’s dream was and to prove he is racist.
Maxine Waters, well past her sell/use by date spent 4 years calling Trump racist. She ignored the facts that blacks did better under Trump than any president. She said F*** the Supreme Court and paraded on TV like a clown. She has supported the country of Wakanda, doesn’t live in the district she represents, and has been on the wrong side of most things, including race. She can’t even recognize that she is one of the biggest racists if you look at her words and actions.
Kamala Harris can help stepping into the mud said this:
“And a woman myself, and the daughter of a woman, and a granddaughter of a woman,” Harris remarked.
This comment was roundly mocked on social media as a contrast to previous progressive confusion over what a woman is.
US Vice President Kamala Harris speaks about reproductive rights as she virtually meets with abortion providers in the South Auditorium at the White House in Washington, DC on May 19, 2022.
“I’m pretty sure she’s not a biologist,” Media Research Center associate editor Nick Fondacaro tweeted, referring to the past comment by Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson.
Independent Women’s Network Director Julie Gunlok joked, “Oh…so NOW everyone knows what a woman is. Got it.”
Townhall.com managing editor Spencer Brown similarly noted, “Kamala Harris is qualifying her opinion on the Dobbs outcome by explaining that she’s a woman, her mother was a woman, and her grandmother was a woman.”
So next time the media wants to talk about racism. Let’s be inclusive and diverse about it to recognize the truth. Everyone can be racist despite the self appointed judges in the MSM, half of congress and Hollywood.
Not all Black Lives Matter either. Only the liberal ones. They wouldn’t want to kill so many blacks in the womb (Eugenics anyone, the original reason for abortion) if all Black Lives Mattered.
They proved their own case. They are the racists, no matter what they call others. The words you speak come from your heart, so you are racist against blacks. Look in the mirror first.
Anyway, if you want to kill your child, this is legal:
Finally, white people now use the N-word freely, if they are liberals to talk about Thomas. They seem to be taken down, but it’s there and will be. Explain that next time a candidate is racist.
FBI, CIA, New Deal, Green New Deal, Welfare, Fake impeachments, the squad, gun control Food Stamps, Covid, Election fraud, Obamacare, BLM, pronouns, woke, climate scams, vaccines, College Loans, inflation, gas prices, food shortages…….on and on and on.
Once again, my friend George missed the boat and thinks that more gun laws would actually apply to bad guys. These laws only restrict law abiding citizens. I feel sorry for those who read the alphabet news sources of propaganda. He, like others should be better educated at this point in life on these matters.
Go down to the part about socialism and guns. Learn from history.
We went to the same American History classes growing up before they re-wrote the facts.
Anyway, here goes. Steal and re-post as much as possible.
An estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China. Anyone who got in his way was done away with—by execution, imprisonment, or forced famine. https://t.co/RBxIPnxXwm— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) June 17, 2022
Because he took away their guns first, like Stalin, Kim, and the rest of socialist dictators who killed 100’s of millions once the people couldn’t defend themselves.
I have out-law relatives in the socialist paradise of Scandanavia, more precisely in the home of Jante’s Law (also one of the stupidest assumptions about people’s nature). I told them that if you take away guns, people will use knives. If you take away knives, they will use rocks. It progresses to sticks and anything else. Just ask Cain and Abel.
All of this happened right after I told them, but did they listen? No. Guns are bad (to liberals) because conservatives and students of history aren’t afraid of them and built the greatest country in history. They only support leftards and liars like Hillary, Obama and Pocahontas and anyone who wants to tear down America. Bashing the USA is Europe’s favorite sport.
They get to enjoy inflation and lack of prosperity now that that the current administration is screwing the world and them because of it. They are getting a good education in trickle down economics, even in their socialist paradise. It’s just that it’s like plumbing with Biden or socialism, shit flows downhill.
They say they are the happiest country only because of the lowest expectations. They need guns because of the Islamic invasion sucking dry their money that they give 70% to the their government.
My favorite is the half breed James Governor who wondered on twitter who is, why do we need a well armed country and who are we fighting. We are fighting to keep our freedom from people who want communism like James. I’m surprises that you hold a US passport but don’t understand this. Russia, China or Cuba are good places for your dream country.