Researchers have published the results from a troubling new study that confirms Covid mRNA shots are responsible for spikes in serious and potentially fatal health issues.
The groundbreaking study found direct links between the injections and cases of vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS), various types of cancer, heart failure, and brain disorders.
The study’s paper was reported by Thailand’s leading English-language corporate media outlet, the Bangkok Post.
The researchers found that people who receive multiple Covid injections, i.e., a double dose of mRNA shots from Pfizer-BioNTech followed by a “booster,” can cause all sorts of health horrors to manifest, potentially resulting in sudden and early death.
When delta smelt were listed as a threatened species, the biggest cause of their population decline was identified as reduced freshwater flow into the estuary. This makes the water saltier, which leads to dehydration. This is similar to the reason humans shouldn’t drink saltwater when they’re thirsty. Because of this, a recovery plan was made that mandated increased freshwater flow for the smelt, which meant less water for agriculture.
They were willing to cause environmental damage to agriculture for a relatively unremarkable fish, all for political reasons.
Record Rain
The net is a water shortage. It was blamed on global warming, but that just shows the level of lowness they will go to in California for political gain.
Now, with the flooding that happened yesterday, there is an abundance of water, but since it’s regulated against the farmers, it will be diverted away and crops will likely suffer later in the year.
An intense, long-lasting atmospheric river is moving across California — bringing widespread power outages and the potential for mudslides and life-threatening flooding as it dumps heavy rain and snow. Follow our live coverage here. This is what’s happening:
• Rare high flood risk persists: A firehose of rain has parked over Southern California, including Los Angeles, worsening the high risk of flooding throughout Monday. Torrential rainfall and “locally catastrophic” flooding is possible in Orange County through Tuesday, according to the National Weather Service office in San Diego.
In the end, climate change will be blamed for what was government mismanagement and stupidity.
It’s just another step in the climate staircase that is built on government regulations. In fact, if they’d stop laundering money through yet another scare tactic to distract the population, there would be no water shortage since nature took care of it already.
Unfortunately, California is the canary in the coal mines of the US. This craziness needs to be stomped out and put to death before it fully infects the rest of the country.
(The Epoch Times)—With considerably lower efficacy rates, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause more deaths than save lives, according to a new study whose researchers called for a “global moratorium” on the shots and “immediate removal” from childhood immunization schedule.
The peer-reviewed study, published in the Cureus journal on Jan. 24, analyzed reports from the initial phase 3 trials of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. These trials led to the shots being approved under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in the United States. The study also looked into several other research and reviews of the trials. It found that the vaccines had “dramatically lower” efficacy rates than the vaccine companies claimed.
Moreover, based on “conservative assumptions, the estimated harms of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines greatly outweigh the rewards: for every life saved, there were nearly 14 times more deaths caused by the modified mRNA injections.”
It only took four years, the courage of a handful of independent medical experts who risked their careers by contradicting the federal government, the mainstream media, and the medical establishment, and the fact that something resembling the free press remains viable in this country, thanks largely to the internet.
Now, finally, the truth about the COVID-19 vaccine is beginning to be made known to the public. It confirms the many previous warnings such as these: here, here, and here.
It’s a research paper entitled “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” that appeared on the internet at the Cureus Journal of Medical Science. The abstract bears your close reading and then re-reading, especially if you are one of the millions of Americans who did what public health gurus like Dr. Anthony Fauci incessantly told us to do and “followed the science.”
Here’s the abstract, but I’ve broken it into multiple paragraphs to aid your reading, and I’ve included my own emphasis of highlights (it is one long paragraph on the website):
Our understanding of COVID-19 vaccinations and their impact on health and mortality has evolved substantially since the first vaccine rollouts. Published reports from the original randomized phase 3 trials concluded that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could greatly reduce COVID-19 symptoms. In the interim, problems with the methods, execution, and reporting of these pivotal trials have emerged.
Re-analysis of the Pfizer trial data identified statistically significant increases in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the vaccine group. Numerous SAEs were identified following the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), including death, cancer, cardiac events, and various autoimmune, hematological, reproductive, and neurological disorders. Furthermore, these products never underwent adequate safety and toxicological testing in accordance with previously established scientific standards.
Among the other major topics addressed in this narrative review are the published analyses of serious harms to humans, quality control issues and process-related impurities, mechanisms underlying adverse events (AEs), the immunologic basis for vaccine inefficacy, and concerning mortality trends based on the registrational trial data.
The risk-benefit imbalance substantiated by the evidence to date contraindicates further booster injections and suggests that, at a minimum, the mRNA injections should be removed from the childhood immunization program until proper safety and toxicological studies are conducted.
What those of us who opened their eyes know. It was a lie to begin with, it didn’t stop transmission or prevent Covid, It kills people and those behind it committed crimes against humanity.
And finally to Mr. Pfizer Travis Kelce, I hope the money was worth it. You already have to put up with Taylor, the celebrity bicycle that many have ridden. Now, you have to live with the uncertainty of health issues. Enjoy
“For the first time in a published and peer-reviewed paper, scientists are calling for a ‘global moratorium on modified mRNA products’ after surveying data from Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID-19 ‘vaccine” trials.'”
“The scientists found that the trials were rushed, presented low efficacy, were contaminated with residual DNA impurities, and that the ‘vaccines’ present many ‘biological mechanisms’ that can cause serious adverse events. The authors also advised the COVID shots should be removed from the Childhood Adolescent Immunization Schedule until proper safety studies are conducted,” the report confirmed.
Stunningly, the study provided a “generous estimate” that two lives were saved from COVID for every 100,000 shots.
For the past 35 years, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned us that emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, predominantly carbon dioxide (CO2), are causing dangerous global warming. This myth is blindly accepted — even by many of my science colleagues who know virtually nothing about climate. As a scientist, my purpose here is to help expose this fairy tale.
The global warming story is not a benign fantasy. It is seriously damaging Western economies. In January 2021, the White House ridiculously declared that “climate change is the most serious existential threat to humanity.” From there, America went from energy independence back to energy dependence. Another consequence has been the appearance of numerous companies whose goal is to “sequester CO2” as well as “sequester carbon” from our atmosphere. However, this so-called “solution” is scientifically impossible. Life on Earth is based on carbon! CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant!
Generations have been brainwashed for decades into believing this imaginary “climate crisis,” from kindergarten through college, and in mainstream media and social media. Indoctrinated young teachers feel comfortable teaching this misinformation to students. Dishonest climate scientists feel justified in spreading disinformation because they need governmental support for salaries and research.
The evidence contradicting the climate apocalypse is vast. Some comes from analysis of Greenland and Antarctica ice, in which air trapped at various depths reveals CO2 levels of past climate. Proxy records from marine sediment, dust (from erosion, wind-blown deposition of sediments), and ice cores provide a record of past sea levels, ice volume, seawater temperature, and global atmospheric temperatures.
From his seminal work while a prisoner of war during WWI, Serbian mathematician Milutin Milankovitch explained how climate is influenced by variations in the Earth’s asymmetric orbit, axial tilt, and rotational wobble — each going through cycles lasting as long as 120,000 years.
It is widely recognized that Glacial Periods of about 95,000 years, interspersed with Interglacial Periods of approximately 25,000 years, correspond with Milankovitch Cycles. Multiple incursions of glaciers occurred during the Pleistocene, an epoch lasting from about 2.6 million to 11,700 years ago, when Earth’s last Glacial Period ended. Around 24,000 years ago, present-day Lake Erie was covered with ice a mile thick.
Within each Interglacial Period, there’ve been warming periods, or “Mini-Summers.” For example, within the current Holocene Interglacial, there have been warmer periods known as the Minoan (1500–1200 B.C.), Roman (250 B.C.–A.D. 400), and Medieval (A.D. 900–1300). Our Modern Warming Period began with the waning of the Little Ice Age (1300–1850). Today’s Mini-Summer is colder so far than all previous Mini-Summers of the last 8,500 years.
How did CO2 get blamed for global warming? French physicist Joseph Fourier (1820s) proposed that energy from sunlight must be balanced by energy radiated back into space. Irish physicist John Tyndall (1850s) performed laboratory experiments on “greenhouse gases” (GHGs), including water vapor; he proposed that CO2 elicited an important effect on temperature. However, it’s impossible to do appropriate experiments — unless the roof of your laboratory is at least six miles high. Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius (1896) proposed that “warming is proportional to the logarithm of CO2 concentration.” Columbia University geochemist Wallace Broecker (1975) and Columbia University adjunct professor James Hansen (1981) wrote oft-cited articles in Science magazine, both overstating the perils of CO2 causing dangerous global warming — without providing scientific proof.
Most of Earth’s energy comes from the sun. Absorption of sunlight causes molecules of objects or surfaces to vibrate faster, increasing their temperature. This energy is then re-radiated by land and oceans as longwave, infrared radiation (heat). Princeton University physicist Will Happer defines a GHG as that which absorbs negligible incoming sunlight but captures a substantial fraction of thermal radiation as it is re-radiated from Earth’s surface and atmospheric GHGs back into space.
The gases of nitrogen, oxygen and argon — constituting 78%, 21%, and 0.93%, respectively, of the atmosphere — show negligible absorption of thermal radiation and therefore are not GHGs. Important GHGs include water (as high as 7% in humid tropics and as little as 1% in frigid climates), CO2 (0.042%, or 420 parts per million [ppm] by volume), methane (0.00017%), and nitrous oxide (0.0000334%, or 334 ppm).Water vapor (clouds) has at least a hundred times greater warming effect on Earth’s temperature than all other GHGs combined.
As atmospheric CO2 increases, its GHG effect decreases: CO2’s warming effect is 1.5°C between zero and 20 ppm, 0.3°C between 20 and 40 ppm, and 0.15°C between 40 and 60 ppm. Every doubling of atmospheric CO2 from today’s levels decreases radiation back into space by a mere 1%. For most of the past 800,000 years, Earth’s atmospheric CO2 has ranged between about 180 ppm and 320 ppm; below 150 ppm, Earth’s plants could not exist, and all life would be extinguished.
Today’s global atmospheric CO2 levels are ~420 ppm. Even at these levels, plants are “partially CO2-starved.” In fact, standard procedures for commercial greenhouse growers include elevating CO2 to 800–1200 ppm; this enhances growth and crop yield ~20–50%. As shown by satellite since 1978, increased atmospheric CO2 has helped “green” the Earth by more than 15 percent, substantially enhancing crop production.
If global atmospheric CO2 was ~280 ppm in 1750, and it’s ~420 ppm today, what’s the source of this 140-ppm increase? Scientists estimate that human-associated industrial emissions might have contributed 135 ppm — with “natural causes” accounting for the remaining 5 ppm.
In Earth’s history, the highest levels of atmospheric CO2 (6,000–9,000 ppm) occurred about 550–450 million years ago, which caused plant life to flourish. CO2 levels in older nuclear submarines routinely operated at 7,000 ppm, whereas newer subs keep CO2 in the 2,000- to 5,000-ppm range. Meanwhile, ice core data over the last 800,000 years show no correlation between global warming or cooling cycles and atmospheric CO2 levels.
CO2 in our lungs reaches 40,000–50,000 ppm, which induces us to take our next breath. Each human exhales about 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day, which means Earth’s 8 billion people produce daily 18.4 billion pounds of CO2. But humans represent only 1/40 of all CO2-excreting life on Earth. Multiplying 18.4 billion pounds by 40 gives us 736 billion pounds of CO2 per day. This approximates the overall CO2 excreted by the total animal and fungal biomass on the planet.
Daily emissions from worldwide industry in 2020 were estimated to be 16 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents. If one metric ton is 2,200 pounds, then “total industrial emissions” amount to 35,200,000,000 (35.2 billion) pounds of CO2 per day. This means that the entire animal and fungal biomass (736 billion pounds) puts out more than 20 times as much CO2 as all industrial emissions (35.2 billion pounds)!
Can any clear-thinking person comprehend the facts above and still create a company with idiotic plans to “sequester CO2” or “sequester carbon”? Scientifically, “net zero” and “carbon footprint” are meaningless terms. There is no “climate crisis.”
If you try to find these facts on the web, good luck! Out of every 10 hits on any climate topic, you’ll be lucky to find one or two sites with truthful scientific data.
The door of a nearby classroom displays a poster of Abraham Lincoln with the caption: “Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.” It is advice that our 16th president surely would have offered — had he lived to see the rise of this global warming quasi-religion.
For those who are not doctors, which happens to be most of us, we depend on those few who have dedicated years of their lives to the scientific and medical fields to help inform us so we can make good decisions about our own health. Heading into the pandemic, a public largely jaded toward media and the government still placed high trust in their doctors. That trust has largely been betrayed during the Covid-19 pandemic years. CDC and FDA consultant Dr. Paul Offit’s response to concerns that the mRNA Covid shots may not be safe is an example of that betrayal.
In this specific case, the Florida Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, called for an end to the use of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Covid-19 shots, due to the discovery of DNA fragments in the vaccines, including the SV-40 promoter, which is associated with cancer. The concern is integration, which is when foreign DNA becomes incorporated into chromosomal DNA, becoming part of the human genome.
Dr. Ladapo wrote to the FDA on December 6, 2023 asking if the proper assessments have been conducted on the mRNA shots to address the following risks, identified by the FDA in a 2007 publication about plasmid DNA vaccines:
DNA integration could theoretically impact a human’s oncogenes – the genes which can transform a healthy cell into a cancerous cell.
DNA integration may result in chromosomal instability.
The Guidance for Industry discusses biodistribution of DNA vaccines and how such integration could affect unintended parts of the body including blood, heart, brain, liver, kidney, bone marrow, ovaries/testes, lung, draining lymph nodes, spleen, the site of administration and subcutis at injection site.
Since April 2022, the unvaccinated fared better than the COVID vaccinated from a mortality perspective (this could be true earlier than April 2022, but I currently lack the data to show this): there were no COVID “humps” and the seasonal increase in mortality was lower than for the vaccinated.
COVID hasn’t been killing anyone since April 2022 in any significant numbers. This means that there was absolutely no reason for anyone to get a booster shot after April 2022. Even if the vaccine were safe and worked perfectly, there is no data supporting such a need.
The flu vaccines have a “Day 0” mortality rate that exceeds the “1 excess death per M doses” criteria for a safe vaccine. The flu vaccines are clearly unsafe and should be immediately pulled from the market. Flu vaccines also have no hospitalization benefit whatsoever as was pointed out in a JAMA paper published in April 2023. The flu shots simply kill people for no benefit. The data is in plain sight for all to see.
The CDC never cites the Medicare data as proof of vaccine safety and efficacy for any vaccine because the data shows the opposite. All data is kept hidden from public view. So you’ll never see any of the graphs shown in this article from the CDC even though they have the data. They basically only publish data that fits the narrative.
The mRNA COVID vaccines should be pulled from the market. They are literally doing the opposite of what was promised.
The flu vaccine should be pulled as well. While the flu vaccine isn’t nearly as deadly as the COVID vaccine, it is an unsafe vaccine with no measurable clinical benefit.
Burn baby burn, disco inferno. The arctic freeze proves that they can’t hold a charge in the cold. Ford lost 4.4 billion on EV production because no one wanted them, or could afford them.
Now, we know why we can’t afford to own them.
Electric vehicles (EVs) appear to have caused multiple fires at manufacturing factories in recent months, sparking a reminder about EV safety.
Most recently, the Detroit Fire Department responded to a three-alarm fire involving lithium-ion batteries at General Motors’ Factory Zero last month, according to Detroit Free Press.
“Our initial investigation indicates a forklift accidentally punctured a container with battery materials, causing the fire,” Tara Stewart Kuhnen, GM spokeswoman, said in an email Wednesday.
The newspaper also reported another fire at the property in October that involved an autonomous electric car. It states the fire department’s report mentions a battery fire.
However, Kuhnen told the newspaper that a non-battery-related component caused the second fire.
Outside Detroit, the Auburn Hills Fire Department responded to a November fire at Chrysler’s Tech Center.
Multiple media reports say Chrysler’s fire involved an EV as well.
Interestingly, it turns out Big Government has no interest in the carbon footprint of any of the politically connected. This report about the US State Department not bothering to calculate carbon emissions despite an order to do so was published this summer.
The State Department didn’t keep tabs on the carbon pollution associated with flying hundreds of federal officials to the last two global climate summits, the Government Accountability Office said in a report made public Thursday.
Failing to do so ran afoul of a 2021 executive order by President Joe Biden that directed agencies to track the greenhouse gas emissions their operations produce, including official air travel, GAO said.
The report was requested by Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who have all criticized the administration’s climate policies.
“Americans are tired of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. who don’t practice what they preach when it comes to protecting the environment,” Capito said in an email to POLITICO’s E&E News.
It will be interesting to see how many other challengers Kerry and the rest of the billionaire class at Davos experience in this year’s session.
In his speech at Davos, Kerry indicates he is clearly worried about the climate scam being dismantled if former President Donald Trump gets reelected. He assures everyone that “the marketplace” has been so saturated with climate nonsense that Trump won’t be able to hit the reverse button.
Health leaders are meeting at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos on Wednesday to discuss ways to prepare for ‘Disease X’ – a term coined by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2018 to describe the unknown, hypothetical pathogen that could cause the next pandemic.
According to some experts, Disease X could result in 20 times more fatalities than the coronavirus pandemic.
The elites meet in their annual country club meeting of sex, drugs and insider trading at DAVOS as they plan how to screw the rest of the world.
DAVOS want's you to know that YOU are killing the planet.
For two whole weeks- The 1000 planes, limos, SUVs, the food, the drinks, the hotels, the clothing, the accessories, the shoes, the escort services, 5000 police, the private guards, the waiters, the snacks and nibbles,… pic.twitter.com/gee7G5Vdkm
Besides the climate scam, the new scare is Disease X. Covid didn’t work to control the population so they have to re-invent the wheel. No one knows exactly what the new disease is, but like climate scares, it’s 20 times worse than Covid.
It’s remarkable that these crisis’s occur on election years, but that reveals the pattern of their behavior.
It comes after warnings from experts that a hypothetical new pandemic could kill 20 times more people than the recent coronavirus outbreak. It is hoped that with the correct research framework in place and enough knowledge in place on a global level, a future pandemic could be eliminated in just 100 days.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has warned of a potential Disease X since 2017, a term indicating an unknown pathogen that could cause a serious international epidemic. Speaking to the WEF on its Radio Davos podcast last year, author Kate Kelland said that extensive research into already-known families of viruses would help humanity prepare and create a vaccine quickly for the the next outbreak.
She said: “Because scientists were working for decades or more on Sars vaccines and also on Mers vaccine, they found out some very key pieces of information about coronaviruses. If we do that kind of homework on every one of the 25 or so viral families that we already know have the potential to cause disease in humans … then we can actually gain a lot of knowledge ahead of time about something that doesn’t exist yet.”
I predict the attendees at Davos will remain oblivious to how their policies will be received.
The 2024 program is one for the ages. Attendees will watch Pfizer’s Albert Bourla and Open AI’s Sam Altman talk about Artificial Intelligence (AI). They’ll see depopulation advocate Bill “Bugman” Gates advancing the climate hoax. John Kerry will appear on four different stages to discuss the “energy transition.” We will also see Klaus Schwab sit down for a 1 on 1 with the second highest ranking Chinese government official.
So while they are dining on caviar, designer drugs and prostitutes, they are planning the next move to rule the world by killing off more people. Either that or it’s an election scare to try and screw Trump again so they can pull the strings around the world.
The first joke or fantasy here is that Benedict Arnold/John Kerry is stepping down to help Biden’s re-election campaign. They either have given up or are throwing a hail Mary to resort to using him.
Next, the obvious that the sane people really know, more evidence that the climate is fine and the whole climate emergency is just a political distraction (and money laundering)
One of the things to remember about climate change madness is that it has all the scientific validity of the flat earth theory or the ancient medical belief in humors. That is to say, it’s a sealed universe driven by self-reinforcing faith and fantasy without any serious reality attached. The last two days have brought two new examples of the delusions and outright lies that drive the climate change narrative.
On the delusion side, we have Axios’s horror that the earth is within 1.5 degrees of the global warming limit set at the Paris Climate Accords, paired with its assurance that (and I’m quoting more accurately than Claudine Gay ever would), “The climate of 2023 was the hottest seen in at least 125,000 years…” (Emphasis mine.)
There are a couple of obvious problems with that article.
First, the Paris Climate Accords was a political agreement aimed at keeping the U.S. economy flat while other nations, which burn filthy coal, were unfettered. Let’s just say that I don’t take its “limits” seriously—although, of course, the climate changistas do.
Second, and this is the more important one, it’s nonsense to pretend we know to a “half-a-degree Celsius” how hot it was 125,000 years ago. Humans began keeping temperature records in the mid-19th century. Everything before that is guesswork. Some of it is scientifically detailed guesswork based upon ice core samples and tree rings, but it’s still estimates without precision.
The man who sold his soul for fame admitted another Covid lie. It seems that most of the restrictions was about controlling the masses, disrupting elections and personal wealth for some.
Fauci, 83, revealed to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic that the “six feet apart” recommendation championed by him and other US public health officials was “likely not based on scientific data,” according to Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), who is also a physician.
Schools nationwide remained closed well into the second year of the pandemic as a result of the social distancing guidelines, which were disputed by both research studies and other health officials.
“It never struck me that six feet was particularly sensical in the context of mitigation,” Dr. Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health who served as President Biden’s COVID response coordinator for 15 months, told the New York Times in March 2021.
A world-renowned biologist has blown the whistle with explosive allegations against globalist power elites and the pharmaceutical industry.
Biologist Bret Weinstein dropped several bombshells during a new interview with independent news anchor Tucker Carlson.
While raising the alarm about the power grab of the United Nations (UN) World Health Organization (WHO), Weinstein left Carlson stunned when he stated how many people have died from Covid mRNA injections.
He cited scientific evidence that shows 17 million died globally as a result of the shots.
“So I’m not a math genius, but one in eight hundred shots times billions is a lot of people…17 million deaths from the Covid vaccine?” Carlson asked.
“Just for perspective: I mean, that’s like the death toll of a global war,” Carlson noted.
First, this de-populationist buys up all the farmland in the country to contaminate or restrict the food supply, then becomes the left hand of the insect as food promoting WEF.
This stuff is not only disgusting, it will help kill you. Only eat grass feed hormone free meat.
An international investigation has exposed the gruesome reality being the globalist push to flood the food supply with biotech products such as Bill Gates’ lab-grown “meats.”
Dutch investigative journalist Elze van Hamelen has published a new report to raise the alarm about the “tsunami of fake foods” being rolled out by the biotech industry.
Despite claims from the green agenda elite, fake meats are not about your health or the environment.
Van Hamelen warns that these products are a tool to phase out farmers and ranchers so the agriculture industry can be replaced with ultra-processed food products that can be controlled by patents.
Creating lab-grown meat is “insanely expensive,” van Hamelen notes.
The production of these “foods” is also plagued by bacterial and viral contamination.
Despite the pharmaceutical-style manufacturing, lab-grown meat isn’t considered a pharmaceutical product.
This means that no human testing is required.
Instead of directing your food dollars to corporate supermarket chains or fake food products, van Hamelen recommends supporting small farmers growing real food.
Lab-grown products may one day represent 80 percent or more of the “meat” consumed worldwide.
This shift would be a dramatic departure from the way humans have eaten for centuries.
Of course, this change in the food supply will only impact the general public as the wealthy elite will continue to eat traditional meat products.
You begin to wonder whether the government is really out to get us or is just dumb as shit. The conspiracist in me remembers Covid and the 2020 elections. Lock everyone down while committing crimes, the old magicians watch my hand and not the door behind me trick.
Well, they’ve got a new list of stuff to scare the under educated with. The reason I question it is that the hotbed is the United States when in fact a lot of the shady practices are known to be in China.
Between 2000 and 2021 at least 16 pathogens reportedly escaped from research laboratories, according to a new study published in The Lancet Microbe — but the study authors said their findings may “only represent the tip of the iceberg” in terms of numbers due to a lack of standard reporting requirements.
A team of researchers surveyed peer-reviewed articles and online reports in English, Chinese and German, looking for all indications that a pathogen accidentally “escaped” from a lab or that an infection was determined to be “laboratory-acquired” during the study period.
In addition to the 16 episodes of pathogenic “escape,” the researchers found 309 instances of lab-acquired infections caused by 51 different pathogens.
Seventy-seven percent of those infections were caused by bacterial pathogens, 13.9% were caused by viruses, 7.1% by parasites, 1.6% by fungi and less than 1% by a prion agent.
Eight of the cases were fatal, and six of those deaths were caused by bacteria, such as Yersinia pestis, which causes plague, or Neisseria meningitidis. One death was caused by Ebola virus.
The vast majority of infections occurred as an outcome of “procedural errors,” breaches of biosafety or risk mitigation procedures, which included using the wrong personal protective equipment, having inadequate training or mishandling samples.
Needlestick injuries, spills, splashes, open vials, animal bites or “unknown reasons” caused the remainder of the infections.
Most illnesses occurred in North America, Europe and Asia with the U.S. accounting for more than three-quarters of the infections. The majority of pathogen escapes were “internal,” meaning they were confined to the lab, but a few escaped into the broader community.
I’m not surprised that the CDC and the NIH are behind a lot of this. They were behind us having to bend over and taking it in the ass over Covid. They are taking away freedoms from us one at a time, like being pecked to death by a pack of ducks
Cause of Climate Change? It Isn’t Carbon Dioxide, Expert Says:
The Earth’s rotation around the sun affects the planet’s temperature, says Soon, a visiting fellow on the Science Advisory Committee of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)
Glaciers, for example, “melted away because the sun started to get … brighter and provided more solar energy to the climate system,” according to Soon.
Throughout his career, Soon, a former researcher with the Center for Astrophysics-Harvard & Smithsonian, says he has sought to pursue the facts surrounding shifts in the climate because “science is not about belief.”
“Science is about data,” he said.
Many people think that it is “rising carbon dioxide that is the main factor … that affects climate change, and that is wholly untrue,” Soon says. “That is such a distorted view that I think it needs to be corrected.”
Someone should shut up Kerry and Biden also. It would stop the waste of money (laundering) on this, but then it doesn’t fit the climate narrative does it.
I suppose everyone says this. I can’t change anything so I’m not going to try to. I’m just trying to enjoy these times. If I’d told myself what to do/not do, it would have turned out different. It might have changed the whole space/time continuum, and I don’t want to tempt God or the Sci Fi world.
Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery and the present is gone in an instant.
Govt. Researchers: Flu Shots Not Effective in Elderly, After All:
An important and definitive “mainstream” government study done nearly a decade ago got little attention because the science came down on the wrong side. It found that after decades and billions of dollars spent promoting flu shots for the elderly, the mass vaccination program did not result in saving lives. In fact, the death rate among the elderly increased substantially.
The authors of the study admitted a bias going into the study. Here was the history as described to me: Public health experts long assumed flu shots were effective in the elderly. But, paradoxically, all the studies done failed to demonstrate a benefit. Instead of considering that they, the experts, could be wrong–instead of believing the scientific data–the public health experts assumed the studies were wrong. After all, flu shots have to work, right?
So the NIH launched an effort to do “the” definitive study that would actually prove, for the first time, once and for all, that flu shots were beneficial to the elderly. The government would gather some of the brightest scientific minds for the research, and adjust for all kinds of factors that could be masking that presumed benefit.
But when they finished, no matter how they crunched the numbers, the data kept telling the same story: flu shots were of no benefit to the elderly. Quite the opposite. The death rate had increased markedly since widespread flu vaccination among older Americans. The scientists finally had to acknowledge that decades of public health thought had been mistaken.
Terror at Tesla as robot ‘attacks’ engineer, leaving ‘trail of blood’
It happened in The Matrix, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., 2001 A Space Odyssey and now in real life.
A robotic malfunction at Tesla’s Giga Texas factory resulted in a violent encounter where an engineer was attacked by one of the company’s robots, resulting in significant injuries and leaving a ‘trail of blood.’
According to the Daily Mail, while working on software programming for non-functional Tesla robots, the engineer was suddenly pinned against a surface by a robot tasked with manipulating aluminum car components, with its metal claws inflicted an injury that left an ‘open wound’ on the worker’s left hand.
That means that 29% are either under educated or believe what they are told and act like sheep.
There is enough evidence out there to show that it’s not safe and effective and in fact does damage. It’s killed more people than Covid-19 did.
I have friends and neighbors who are 4 jabs deep now. I found out you can’t tell people anything because they are going to believe what they want. I don’t even tell them I’m not because they don’t want to hear it. Some think they are protecting themselves, others just gave up and got it. That’s how effective the propaganda was. It was 1930 in Germany level of disinformation.
Anyway, here is the story:
After initially promising that the Covid vaccine would prevent Covid, then promising it would at least prevent transmission, then promising it would prevent illness, public health experts have had to admit all three promises are untrue. The government and pharmaceutical industry continue to press even healthy people and children to get formulations of Covid vaccines, each of which carries potential risks both known and unknown.
The following is from Sharyl Attkisson:
Less than one-third of Americans, 29%, have gotten the new Covid-19 vaccine that was released this fall. In contrast, 47% of U.S. adults say they have gotten the annual flu shot this year.
Another 20% of U.S. adults indicate they plan to get the new Covid-19 shot, which could bring the level of current vaccination against Covid-19 to close to half of Americans, but that still falls below the combined 63% who have gotten or plan to get the flu shot.
These results are based on Gallup’s latest Covid-19 survey update, conducted Nov. 30-Dec. 7 with more than 6,000 adult members of Gallup’s probability-based panel.
Gallup had found that over seven in 10 U.S. adults had received the earlier versions of Covid-19 vaccines, which were first available to the public in late 2020 and early 2021.
The past two years, booster shots to those initial vaccines were made available. The new shot can be given to people regardless of whether they have been previously vaccinated against Covid-19.
Older Americans, those aged 65 and older, are getting the updated Covid-19 shots at higher rates than the general population — 46% have already done so.
However, seniors are still more likely to have gotten the annual flu shot, with 68% saying they had.
This year, public health officials have also recommended that older Americans get vaccinated against respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV.
To date, 22% of U.S. seniors have gotten an RSV vaccination.
In addition to age differences, vaccine intentions for both Covid-19 and flu differ by party identification, but more so for Covid-19.
Whereas nearly half of Democrats (48%) have gotten the updated Covid-19 shot, 20% of political independents and 10% of Republicans have.
Eighty-two percent of Republicans say they will not get the updated Covid-19 shot.
Sixty-one percent of Democrats, 38% of independents and 35% of Republicans have gotten the flu shot this year. Half of Republicans, 52%, say they will not do so. (Continued…)
However, people have noticed the booster shots do not work as advertised. And the fact there is no discernible seasonal pattern to infections is also not helping the case for an “annual preventative shot,” as the pharmaceutical companies had planned.
When the temperature drops below 40 degrees, which occurs over 200 days per year in Eau Claire, electric vehicles experience a reduction in range and efficiency, with losses of up to 40% when the heating system is in use.
While the truck was up on the lift, Liz Fox, a service adviser at the shop, told me that while not many electric vehicles come in for repairs, when they do, repairs typically take longer and are more expensive than repairing internal-combustion engine vehicles.
“Switching to EVs is really costly, and it’s going to be really time-consuming.” Fox told me. She cited a recent case where nearly two months were spent troubleshooting and sourcing components on a broken EV, despite having a certified electric vehicle technician.
EAU CLAIRE, Wis.—Here in Wisconsin, where fewer than one-tenth of 1% of vehicles are fully electric, it’s rare to see an EV outside the city.
That’s why the latest international climate conference, Conference of the Parties (COP28), which advocated widespread adoption of electric vehicles, should have Wisconsinites concerned.
When the temperature drops below 40 degrees, which occurs over 200 days per year in Eau Claire, electric vehicles experience a reduction in range and efficiency, with losses of up to 40% when the heating system is in use.
My visit to my local automotive shop to have the tires rotated on the family Ram truck was unaffected by the 13-degree Fahrenheit weather.
While the truck was up on the lift, Liz Fox, a service adviser at the shop, told me that while not many electric vehicles come in for repairs, when they do, repairs typically take longer and are more expensive than repairing internal-combustion engine vehicles.
“Switching to EVs is really costly, and it’s going to be really time-consuming.” Fox told me. She cited a recent case where nearly two months were spent troubleshooting and sourcing components on a broken EV, despite having a certified electric vehicle technician.
She’s not alone. A recent report shows that repair costs for EVs are 56% more expensive than traditional vehicles—and purchase costs are often 50% higher.
A new special report by The Heritage Foundation, “Powering Human Advancement,” shows how access to affordable, abundant energy is essential to living. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)
“Depriving people in any society of reliable and affordable energy denies them access to clean water, adequate medical care, affordable transportation, and economic opportunities, which will limit any human advancement, especially in the most vulnerable of countries,” the report states.
Governments and international organizations cannot force renewable energy and electric vehicles before people are ready. That’s a recipe for crisis.
Construction sites in Eau Claire feature battered pickup trucks and SUVs driven by construction workers, who can’t afford EVs. There is no subway in Eau Claire, bus service is limited, and people can’t rely on bicycles due to snowy weather and long distances.
Affordable transportation provides a means to a job, a ride to school, and to take weekend trips and vacations with the family.
In contrast, EVs are popular as second cars with upper-income individuals who have short commutes. Americans value the freedom to choose gasoline-only, hybrid, or electric vehicles, and for that freedom, it’s crucial to have alternative choices. But the organizers of COP28, supported by President Joe Biden, don’t want Americans or residents of other countries to choose which vehicles to buy.
This erosion of choice is not only detrimental to consumer freedom, but also to the livelihood of auto producers and car dealers. Look no further than last month’s letter to Biden signed by about 4,000 auto dealers, who were disturbed at the surging supply of unsold electric vehicles on their lots.
Even with subsidies to car manufacturers and tax credits for buyers, only 7% of new-vehicle sales are electric, well below Biden’s 2030 goal of 60%.
Codifying the recommendations of COP28 would require that America generate an additional costly 1.4 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity, or 30% of current output, to support the charging needs of a full fleet of electric vehicles.
Over the past two decades, nearly $7 trillion has been spent globally on subsidies for wind and solar energy. Despite this substantial investment, these sources contribute only 2.3% to the global supply of energy. Pairing fully electric vehicles with costly and unreliable electricity is a recipe for disaster.
Wisconsinites appreciate the benefits of affordable energy and the mobility of gasoline-powered cars. As a cold Christmas approaches, they know that COP28 recommendations won’t fly here in the Badger State.
Per Pfizer’s interim 2-month, Phase-3 data that they submitted to the FDA on November 20, 2020, Pfizer was measuring the effectiveness of their mRNA injection from preventing COVID-19 symptoms confirmed by a positive PCR-test versus placebo (aka, not getting injected with mRNA-LNPs).
You can see from the chart below (pulled directly from Pfizer’s FDA submission) that 8 out of 17,411 participants (0.05%) in the Pfizer mRNA injected group came down with COVID-19 symptomsconfirmed by a positive PCR-test within 2 months or less after their second mRNA shot, versus 162 out of 17,511 (0.93%) in the placebo group.
In recent years, every COP had been dominated by an angry motion from the radicals, which was ultimately defeated in the final hours. Ironically these noisy motions tend actually to inhibit progress on the big green agenda, so I welcome them.
COP 28 was no different. The basic idea was to finally mention fossil fuels in the final statement after 27 COPS did not so. Makes sense, given that burning fossil fuels are the supposed reason for the climate alarm.
Seemed simple enough, but the radicals had to go full bore on it. They demanded an agreement to actually phase out fossil fuels. Out in the sense of none. No oil, no gas, no coal, nothing.
To see how radical this phase-out stuff really is, note that the alarmist abomination called net zero does not do this. The net in net zero specifically allows for future fossil fuel emissions, provided these are offset in some way. Moreover, it allows for unlimited fossil fuel use if carbon capture can ever be made to work. Net zero is about emissions, not fuel.
Moreover, a lot of fossil fuels are used as petrochemical feedstock, which does not create CO2 emissions. As my colleague Ron Stein strenuously points out, petrochemical products are fundamental to our way of life. Phasing out fossil fuels would mean ending petrochemicals.
A lot of countries objected to this radical phase-out insistence. Some were oil and gas producers, and the radical press focused on them. But a bunch of others were countries that rightly saw fossil fuel as powering economic improvement. This humanitarian side of the argument seldom got reported.
There was an exquisite moment in the middle of all this mindless ho-ha. The moderate President of COP 28 had said there was no science supporting the need to obliterate fossil fuel use. The radicals were outraged and said so.
A new paper in a top scientific journal shows they accidentally cause our cells to create vast numbers of random misshapen proteins; no one has any idea how serious the risks of those might be
How scary is a new paper showing mRNA Covid shots accidentally cause our bodies to make many different proteins and not just the Covid spike, as the shot’s promoters have claimed for three years?
Scary enough the paper’s authors began spinning their work as soon as they put it out. University of Cambridge professor Anne Willis, the study’s co-senior author, told reporters that mRNA “technology is amazing and it’s going to be revolutionary… but we’ve just made it a whole lot safer going forward.”
In all, almost 10 percent of the proteins that the mRNA Covid jabs make the body produce appear to be “wrong,” rather than the intended spike protein.
In the Cell paper, the authors show that neither Covid-19 itself nor the DNA-based Covid vaccine from AstraZeneca produce similar proteins. The effect is limited to the mRNAs.
The authors also reported they could find a biological response to the wrong proteins in mice and in humans. They warned that these proteins “could activate T cells that target host cells,” and that their other effects “could include increased production of new B cell antigens.”
T and B cells form the core of our immune system. In other words, the mRNA jabs may accidentally cause the body to attack its own tissues, as well as make antibodies that don’t work against the spike protein.
Would 92% of American adults have gotten a Covid shot had they known the “vaccines” only offered a 0.85% reduction in risk? Would young men have taken the jab if they had known it did not prevent transmission?
Americans came to understand that the media campaigns supporting the shots were fraudulent. The touted benefits – preventing infection and transmission – were lies. In response, fewer than one in five Americans elected to receive “boosters” despite multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has now brought a suit to bring accountability for the fraud that resulted in record profits for the pharmaceutical industry. Last week, he filed a complaint alleging that Pfizer misrepresented Covid vaccine efficacy and “conspired to censor public discourse” in violation of Texas’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).
Paxton alleges that the $75 billion Pfizer has raked in through sales of Covid vaccines were the “direct and proximate result” of the company’s deceit.
The DTPA requires Paxton prove two questions to succeed in his case. First, he must establish that the company lied or failed to disclose known information concerning its Covid vaccine. Second, he must prove that the company’s fraud was designed to promote sales of the shots.
According to the CDC, the COVID-19 pandemic has claimed the lives of over 1.15 million Americans. However, after nearly four years of death and economic carnage, there’s been an underwhelming effort to get to the bottom of where it originated, so this may never happen again.
Independent presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr. attests that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. And that a deliberate cover-up by powerful individuals who stood to benefit financially and professionally obscured the truth from the world.
In an October 2023 lecture, David E. Martin, Ph.D., detailed how we can know that SARS-CoV-2 is a manmade bioweapon that has been in the works for 58 years
The virus called “coronavirus” was first described in 1965. Two years later, the U.S. and U.K. launched an exchange program where healthy British military personnel were infected with coronavirus pathogens from the U.S. as part of the U.S. biological weapons program
In 1992, Ralph Baric at University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, took a pathogen that used to infect the gut and lungs and altered it with a chimera to make it infect the heart, causing cardiomyopathy. This research was part of the efforts to produce an HIV vaccine
In November 2000, Pfizer patented its first spike protein vaccine. Between 2000 and 2019, vaccine trials using this technology proved it was lethal, yet in the summer of 2020, the clinical trials for the SARS-CoV-2 shots went straight into human trials
mRNA spike protein was publicly described as a bioweapon 18 years ago. In 2005, at a conference hosted by DARPA and The Mitre Corporation, the mRNA spike protein was hailed as a “biological warfare-enabling technology,” i.e., a biological warfare agent
(Mercola)—The video above features a lecture David E. Martin,1 Ph.D., gave in Dornach, Switzerland, in late October 2023. Martin is a national intelligence analyst and founder of IQ100 Index, which developed linguistic genomics, a platform capable of determining the intent of communications.
This technology has allowed Martin to scan and review millions of patents, resulting in a paper trail2,3 that conclusively proves SARS-CoV-2 is a man made bioweapon that has been in the works for 58 years.
Unambiguous Admission of a Premeditated Plandemic
As he is now in the habit of doing, Martin opens his lecture with a quote by Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance. During a March 27, 2015, forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Catastrophic Events, Daszak noted4 that unless an infectious disease crisis is at an emergency threshold, it tends to be ignored.
“To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs (medical countermeasures) such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine,” Daszak said, adding:5
“A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.”
Once again proving that this is a money laundering hoax.
The fact that these global-warming alarmists are surrounded by Earth’s deepest pools of fossil fuels makes their Hajj infinitely ironic.
Also astonishing is the nearly immeasurable impact of these people’s gyrations. They blow trillions of dollars, bludgeon human freedom, and yet do shockingly little to fix their vaunted “climate crisis.” One practically needs an electron microscope to find their promised reductions in allegedly venomous carbon dioxide or supposedly lethal temperatures.
According to #ActInTime’s Climate Clock high above Manhattan’s Union Square, humans have—at this writing—five years and 228 days until we boil to death in a cauldron of steaming carbon.
Since The End is scheduled for Saturday, July 21, 2029 (mark your calendars!), Big Government liberals offer jaw-droppingly paltry climate benefits, despite their spine-chilling predictions and unbridled interventionism.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s proposed Clean Power Plan was a diamond-encrusted specimen of do-nothingism. According to a May 2015 analysis by their own Energy Information Agency, between 2015 and 2025, the Clean Power Plan would have slashed real gross domestic product by $993 billion, or an average of $39.7 billion per year. It would have sliced real disposable income by $382 billion, or $15.3 billion annually. It also would have chopped manufacturing shipments by $1.13 trillion, or $45.4 billion per year.
The Energy Information Agency forecast a decrease of 0.035 degrees Fahrenheit. This would have cranked a thermometer from 72 degrees Fahrenheit way down to 71.965 degrees.
Great, wearing a mask made us even more stupid. The social media Karen’s and Chad’s are struggling for a triple digit IQ as it is. The Covid particle is so small anyway that a mask preventing Covid is as effective as a chain link fence is stopping mosquitos.
It was about controlling the masses anyway
Excerpt:
Findings from the study showed a substantial decline in executive function, which refers to higher-level cognitive skills governing control and coordination. Alongside this, the study’s cohort showed a marked decline in working memory, which is crucial for short-term memory storage and various cognitive processes.
“Significant worsening of executive function and working memory was observed in the first year of the pandemic across the whole cohort, in people with mild cognitive impairment, and in people with a history of COVID-19,” the authors wrote.
The negative impact on cognitive function persisted into the second year, notably concerning executive function across the entire cohort and working memory within specific subgroups.
Cognitive Decline
Key factors for this cognitive decline were identified via regression analyses. Those factors included the fact that, amid lockdowns, people were exercising less and consuming more alcohol across the entire cohort. These factors also contributed to more people experiencing loneliness and depression.
The authors noted that concerns were expressed about the neuropsychological effects of the pandemic social restrictions, with particular respect to the context of potentially increased dementia risk in older adults.
Failure theaters continue to play in Dubai during the United Nations Climate Conference of Parties (CoP28).
To begin with, getting to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was more challenging than normal for some participants…as Germany experienced a record-breaking level of snowfall for any December in recorded history.
The airport in Munich resumed limited operations Sunday morning after being closed for nearly a day because of record snowfall that disrupted transportation across the region.
About 17 inches of snow fell in parts of southern Germany on Saturday, an unusually large amount for early December, and what local news media reported was the biggest daily snowfall in Munich in December since records had been kept.
Then, he lets out the only gas that is dangerous while making specious claims.
In a desperate bid to remain relevant, former Vice President Al Gore slammed the UAE, saying its position as overseer of international negotiations on global warming this year was an abuse of public trust.
The comments, made to Reuters in an interview on the sidelines of the conference in Dubai, reflected skepticism among some delegates that COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, head of the UAE’s national oil company ADNOC, can be an honest broker of a climate deal.
“They are abusing the public’s trust by naming the CEO of one of the largest and least responsible oil companies in the world as head of the COP,” Gore said.
But, the truth comes out anyway:
Kaboom at #COP28… conference president Sultan Al Jaber rejects climate hoax:
"I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve… pic.twitter.com/yhoJZFDytj
There is “no science” that says the world should phase out fossil fuels to curb global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, according to Sultan Al Jaber, the president of the COP28 climate summit, the Guardian and the Centre for Climate Reporting report.
“There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C,” Al Jaber said in an online event last month, the remarks from which the Guardian reported on December 3, days after the COP28 summit in Dubai began on November 30.
Al Jaber made those comments in response to questions from Mary Robinson, the chair of the Elders group and a former UN special envoy for climate change.
In its own analytical documents, the Pfizer corporation classified its experimental mRNA treatment (in this case, under the trade name Comirnaty) as “very highly hazardous”. It did not announce this finding publicly, nor did it endeavor to make potential recipients of the treatment aware of the risk. Not to inform patients of the dangers was highly illegal, but it didn’t matter — Pfizer is too big to punish. No one involved in the process will ever be held accountable. No one will go to jail. And the major players will go to their graves as extremely wealthy people.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the German blog TKP:
Pfizer classifies its own C19 modRNA product as “highly dangerous”
The modRNA products are moved through the body with the help of so-called lipid nanoparticles and transfected into the cells. The two lipids used by Pfizer, ALC-0159 and ALC-0315, had no approval before 2020 except for “research purposes”. In Pfizer’s safety data sheets they are assigned a medium toxic potential; in the syringe they cause a “high toxic potential.” It’s unbelievable that the authorities would allow something like this to be injected into the upper arms.
TKP published a detailed analysis on December 9, 2021. It quotes the company that produces these lipids. She writes on her website: “ALC-0159 is one of the components of the BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, along with ALC-0315, DSPC and cholesterol. This product is for research use only and not for human use.”
And further: ALC-0159 and ALC-0315 are discussed in the EMA Assessment Report for the first conditional marketing authorization starting on page 22.
It says:
“All excipients except the functional lipids ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 and the structural lipid DSPC comply with the Ph. Eur. The functional lipids ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 are classified as novel excipients. The two structural lipids DSPC and cholesterol are used in several finished products that have already been approved.”
His parents were related, no wonder he makes inbred comments like this. When you are insulated from the real world and have the carbon footprint of a city, this is the kind of argument you make while showing the world what a fool you really are. The King has no clothes. (see at the end of the post how he lives a hypocritical life)
“Net Zero” is a list of unrealistic goals laid out by the World Economic Forum (WEF), with backing from the United Nations (UN), that seeks to advance a globalist collectivism agenda.
Thinly veiled as environmentalism, the unachievable goals of “Net Zero” would bankrupt society and make the public dependent on an unelected corporatocratic elite.
Yesterday, King Charles III delivered a speech at the opening ceremony of COP28.
He said that “they” needed $4.5 to $5 trillion per year to drive the transformation that’s needed because of “climate change.”
“28 eight years ago I was most touched to be asked to speak at the opening of COP21 in Paris which of course culminated in the Paris agreement,” Charles III said at COP28.
The Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 during the COP21 climate conference stipulates that the increase in the global average temperature is to be kept well below 2°C above “pre-industrial levels” and that efforts are pursued to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above “pre-industrial levels.”
However, as former renewable energy manager and head of the German Wildlife Foundation Fritz Vahrenholt discovered in 2017, closer inspection of the treaty text reveals that the term “pre-industrial levels” is nowhere defined in this epochal UN document.
It could have been worse. King Charles could have ascended to his desert dais and pronounced that we had just 96 months to avert “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse”. But that was the Right Charlie back in 2009, giving us the benefit of his sandwich-board scientific wisdom. These days it is all fashionable bad weather and undefined “tipping points”. The man is now King, and at COP28 he threw away his irksome politically-neutral constitutional role, wrapped himself in Guardianista pseudoscience, and punched down hard on the poor who will be forced to pay for the collectivist madness that is the Net Zero project.
King Charles is no friend of general humanity. Speaking at COP28, he said: “The Earth does not belong to us, we belong to the Earth.” As with many know-your-place elitists, he appears to abhor the impacts that humans have on the planet. He exhibits, sadly on a world stage, a snobbish distain for capitalism – what used to be dismissed in British aristocratic circles as ‘trade’. This capitalist trend over the last 200 years has harnessed the power of natural hydrocarbons to raise billions to a standard of living and health unimaginable to previous generations. In 2009, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and the “age of convenience” was over.
Not for the new British King, it need hardly be observed. He lives a life of pampered indulgence where no expense is spared to ensure his every comfort. On his accession to the throne, he added considerably to his Palace Portfolio. To spread his malevolent Net Zero fantasies, he has a fleet of cars, private planes and even a personal train at his command. He uses these to call for “transformational action” to be taken to save the planet. In his COP28 speech, he called for the restoration of nature, the need for sustainable agriculture, and co-operation between the public and private sectors.
I think he’s been playing outer space too long. He was a lot better at beating Romulan’s than dealing with climate change. Hey Bill, no one has died yet and no one is going to from this hoax.
Actor William Shatner, notable for his role as Captain James T. Kirk in “Star Trek” warned that humans were “all going to die” due to the perils of climate change.
During an interview on “Good Morning Britain” on ITV, Shatner cast blame on “stupid humans” for the climate crisis and warned that humans could face extinction. Shatner expressed hope that King Charles III, who is set to give the opening speech at the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP28, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, will speak up about the climate crisis.
“He’s got to say, ‘We’re all going to die,’” Shatner said. “That’s what he should say to open up with. ‘Very quickly we’re going to die. Much sooner than we expected, we’re going to die.’”
Here is the whole Thing. But not getting the jab in the first place was the better decision.
Excerpt below.
Congressional Research Service SUMMARY Compensation for COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries More than 260 million Americans, and billions of people worldwide, have received one or more doses of a vaccine to protect against Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most common side effects of COVID-19 vaccines are mild and generally resolve in a few days. In rare instances,COVID-19 vaccines can cause serious adverse events.
Individuals who believe they are injured by COVID-19 vaccines may seek compensation for those injuries and associated harms or costs. Absent an applicable federal law, individuals allegedly injured by a vaccine might seek redress by filing a state tort law claim against the vaccine manufacturer. However, federal law has two distinct compensation regimes that limit legal liability for vaccine manufacturers and provide potential compensation—without requiring a showing of fault—for individuals harmed by adverse reactions to vaccines.
For injuries and deaths associated with most vaccines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for routine administration in the United States , the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) may provide compensation. During public health emergencies declared under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) may provide compensation for injuries and deaths resulting from the administration of “covered countermeasures,” which may include vaccines.
The VICP and CICP regimes are similar in some ways, but the programs serve distinct purposes. Compensation through CICP is generally less comprehensive than through VICP. CICP is a regulatory process administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). CICP compensation is available only for death or serious injuries resulting from a covered countermeasure. A claimant must generally file a request form and associated documentation with HRSA within one year of the date that the covered countermeasure was administered. For injuries not listed by the Secretary of HHS on a Countermeasure Injury Table, the claimant must demonstrate that the injury was a direct result of the countermeasure’s administration based on compelling medical and scientific evidence. HRSA makes decisions regarding eligibility and compensation; judicial review is not available. CICP compensation is limited to reasonable medical expenses, loss of employment income, and a death benefit when the claimant’s death is a direct result of the administration of a covered countermeasure.
Under the Secretary of HHS’s current PREP Act Declaration for COVID-19, FDA-authorized or -approved COVID-19 vaccines are covered countermeasures. While a PREP Act declaration is in effect, CICP is the sole remedy available for injuries related to covered countermeasures, so CICP—and not VICP—will apply to injuries resulting from COVID-19 vaccinations while the Declaration remains in effect. Due to COVID-19, the number of CICP claims has increased dramatically. As of February 1, 2023, CICP has received 11,252 claims alleging injury or death relating to COVID-19 countermeasures. Of those, 8,067 claims (71.7%) relate to COVID-19 vaccines. HRSA has not yet compensated any CICP claims relating to COVID-19 countermeasures.
When coverage under the PREP Act Declaration for COVID-19 ends, COVID-19 vaccine injuries could be compensated through VICP, contingent on additional regulatory and statutory changes. To be included in the VICP, (1) the vaccine must be recommended by the CDC for routine administration to children or pregnant women; (2) the vaccine must be made subject by act of Congress to the excise tax that funds VICP; and (3) the Secretary of HHS must add the vaccine to the Vaccine Injury Table, which lists injuries and conditions associated with vaccines covered by VICP. Should all of these changes occur, COVID-19 vaccines would be covered by VICP.
To receive compensation through VICP for a vaccine-related injury or death, the injured person or their estate must file a petition with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, generally within three years of the onset of the first symptom or significant aggravation of the injury, or within two years of death or four years of the first symptom resulting in death. To receive compensation, petitioners must show either that they experienced an injury listed in the Vaccine Injury Table within the time frame specified in the Table, or prove that the vaccine was the “but-for” cause of their injury. Special masters determine eligibility and compensation; their decisions may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Successful petitioners may receive medical expenses, lost income, a set death benefit, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. Petitioners who are dissatisfied with the compensation they receive, or whose claims are delayed, may opt to pursue civil actions in court, subject to certain limitations on vaccine manufacturer liability.
So we have COP28, where the global elites take private jets to an oil producing nation to both make a ton in fossil fuels and restrict the USA from producing oil, thus becoming economically sound. All the while, China and India are much greater carbon sinners. The difference is that currently, the US is the ATM of both the world and the climate liars.
What confounds me is that people have been brainwashed enough to actually believe in this money laundering hoax. Are they that under educated? It’s the same crying wolf theme every time, if you don’t send money, the world is going to end.
Can you imagine a more hilariously ignoble end to the great push to green the global economy, than for the centrepiece of the green movement to transform into a giant oil and gas market?
Dubai’s climate shambles exposed: UAE energy tsar Sultan Al Jaber secretly used COP28 talks to push his own oil and gas projects, in latest shock revelations about warming meet
The UAE’s Sultan Al Jaber used climate talks to bag oil and gas deals: report
He controversially heads both the UN’s climate meet and the UAE’s main oil firm
“The global environment crisis may demand responses that are comparatively radical…. It will call for … a Strategic Environment Initiative.” (Al Gore, 1989)
Al Gore might be the the slickest of the 70,000 expected at the United Nations’ Conference of the Parties (COP28) climate meeting in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from November 30th until December 12, 2023. Gore is the world’s #1 climate barker–and has made tens of millions of dollars from his “crisis.” He has one of the highest CO2 footprints on the globe … but he is different, you know.
So what’s new with Al Gore’s pitch? Not much. His crisis in the 1980s is still the crisis of 2023. We are in a “planetary emergency.”We are almost out of time. There is hope with a new energy future….
Mid-course correction not. Sort of like Enron, the climate crusader until its demise.
—————-
Just to document the yawns that 99 percent of the world have toward the never-ending crisis, read excerpts from his Washington Post editorial, “Earth’s Fate Is the No. 1 National Security Issue” (May 14, 1989).
The world is in a crisis–and we are ignoramuses for not seeing what is so clearly obvious (“don’t look up,” they say 34 years later). And an all-of-government (Biden’s phrase) to arrest the ‘crisis’ that only the experts and politicians can see, not us boiling frogs (as one person recently said about us uncleansed).
Our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this. Today’s climate pattern has existed throughout the entire history of human civilization.
That was Al Gore in 2007. According to Gore, the climate was “shiftless” for thousands of years — a paradigm of stability.
Gore’s quote was a restatement of Michael Mann’s 1998 “hockey stick.” Mann argued that the Earth’s climate held steady for all of human history (the hockey stick handle), until suddenly, in the 1900s, the temperatures increased, representing the upturned blade of the hockey stick.
How is it that the last six great ice ages started with far more CO2 in the atmosphere than we have now?
Is it true, as many experts note, that temperatures drive CO2 levels, and not the other way around?
How does anthropogenic CO2 drive climate when it makes up less than 5% of total CO2 (with most coming from the oceans, volcanoes, decaying vegetation, and forest fires)?
Isn’t the sun the most important cause of climate, and what effects follow from sun spots and solar flares?
If greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the most significant drivers of climate change, then why do we focus on CO2, when water vapor (i.e., clouds) is a far more impactful GHG? (In fact, there have been a flurry of recent published studies on the effects of clouds.)
Today’s example is Jeff Bezos. An honorable mention to Bill Gates. It’s people like this that makes me question their motives and the whole climate scam. Do as I say, not as I do.
Excerpts:
online critics torpedoed Bezos for reportedly traveling via helicopter to party on Bill Gates’ superyacht — just days before attending the COP26 climate summit in Scotland via private jet.
A spokesperson for Bezos told Observer.com at the time the billionaire used sustainable aviation fuel for his travels and pays for carbon offsets, which fund projects that reduce greenhouse gas pollution and cancel out carbon emissions generated by the trips.
Jeff Bezos — who has pledged to spend billions of dollars to help fight climate change — nonetheless owns a $500 million superyacht that generates thousands of tons of carbon emissions each year, according to a new analysis by Indiana University researchers.
The Amazon founder’s 417-foot sailing yacht “Koru,” produces an astounding minimum of 7,154 tons of greenhouse gasses annually — roughly 447 times the entire annual carbon footprint of your average American, the Indiana researchers found.
“But because they are so rich and so powerful, they feel like they are entitled [to travel in carbon-producing superyachts], whereas you and I should drive less, should eat less meat,” she said.
Boating industry experts have fawned over Koru’s “green” ability to travel via wind power, but Barros sniffed that Bezos’ three-masted goliath generates a slew of greenhouse gasses just by heating and cooling the vessel and powering the ship’s various over-the-top luxury amenities such as its sauna, pool and theater.
Bezos’ wealth insulates him from the impact of environmental crises, said Dario Kenner, author of “Carbon Inequality: The Role of the Richest in Climate Change.”
“There is an emotional and physical disconnect from the rich and climate change,” said Kenner.
“The poorest people live closest to toxic air facilities, refineries, places where pollution is dumped,” he said, explaining land is cheaper in those areas.
New research: COVID vaccinations led to millions dying
Exclusive: Chuck Norris offers dozens of links to data implicating Fauci, CDC, Pfizer, others
By Chuck Norris Published November 13, 2023 at 12:56pm
Over the past several months, I’ve been barraged with scientific studies and previously undisclosed government documents which have shown that COVID vaccinations led to millions of deaths, and continues to.
I was compelled to pass this research along to Americans and all the people of the world, whom I love dearly, to allow them to make up their own minds. Especially important is the video at the end of this column by an international banker who is dying from the COVID vaccines, along with his mother. Please watch it after you read the below evidence that gives the exact reasons he says what he does in the video.
Here’s just a small sample of recent studies and reports showing the detrimental effects of COVID vaccines around the country and world:
“A new scientific report challenges the idea that COVID-19 vaccines have prevented deaths after researchers assessed all-cause mortality in 17 countries and found that COVID-19 vaccines didn’t have any beneficial effect on reducing mortality. Instead, researchers found that unprecedented peaks in high all-cause mortality in each country – especially among the elderly population when COVID-19 vaccines were deployed – coincided with the rollout of third and fourth booster doses.”
“Conservative public interest advocacy group Defending the Republic (DTR) has obtained almost 15,000 pages of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data, claiming the data show an ‘utter lack of thoroughness’ of the trials and calls the vaccine’s safety into ‘serious doubt.'”
“A top Pentagon official has confirmed that cases of myocarditis soared among U.S. service members in 2021 after the COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out.”
“COVID-19 cases among vaccinated seniors soared in 2021, according to newly disclosed data acquired by U.S. health agencies but not presented to the public. Humetrix Cloud Services was contracted by the U.S. military to analyze vaccine data. The company performed a fresh analysis as authorities considered in 2021 whether COVID-19 vaccine boosters were necessary amid studies finding waning vaccine effectiveness. Humetrix researchers found that the proportion of total COVID-19 cases among the seniors was increasingly comprised of vaccinated people, according to the newly disclosed documents.”
Imagine a factory that can make humanoid robots that can walk, run, and work like us. Sounds like a sci-fi movie, right? Well, it’s not. It’s RoboFab, and it’s opening soon here in the U.S.
Concerns over humanoid robots
Some people are really nervous about these humanoid robots, and for good reason. There is a lot to take into account, including ethical issues and potential safety risks.
Many individuals may feel uncomfortable or deceived by humanoid robots that mimic human emotions and intelligence. Others might be worried about them taking their jobs.
Consequently, we should approach the use of humanoid robots with caution, acknowledging their capacities while being aware of their limitations.
Terminator, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., 2001 A Space Odyssey, The Matrix and all of the rest of them, the AI Robots kill the humans. AI always goes bad and we are toast.
Robot grabs then brutally slaughters worker, allegedly mistaking him for a box of paprika
An industrial robot brutally slaughtered a South Korean robotics technician Tuesday, allegedly mistaking him for just another container of organic material in need of stacking.
The victim, a man in his 40s, was attempting to diagnose an issue with a pick-and-place robot’s sensor at the Donggoseong Export Agricultural Complex in the southern county of Goseong, as there was an equipment test planned for later in the week, reported the Register.
The paprika-sorting robot, reportedly created and installed by the victim’s employer, spotted the man with its sensor, figured him for a box of vegetables, then seized him using its arms and tongs. After grabbing the technician, the robot apparently smashed him against a conveyor belt.
According to the Korean-language Yonhap News Agency, the victim’s face and chest were crushed. He was taken to a hospital, where he later died.
It’s hard to believe that the media/Government/grifter group has been able to keep the lie going this long. Dear Greta, the world didn’t end in 2023 and you have been used like every other tool the climate elitist’s have used. The truth is that it is about money and power by claiming catastrophe after catastrophe that never happen.
Let’s start with Germany, who shut down nuclear power, is cutting natural gas and coal and wonders why their energy costs are skyrocketing.
Being the media darlings has not prevented the German Greens from collapsing in the public opinion polls. 40% of green voters have taken their approval away since it peaked in popularity at 23%.
A series of unpopular, draconian policy proposals along with cronyism scandals have resulted in a body blow for Green Party popularity in Germany.
Accusations of cronyism have surfaced after a top advisor of Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck awarded state contracts to family members and other close associates.
Secretary for Climate Affairs Dr. Patrick Graichen is accused of having awarded government contracts to a research institute run by multiple members of his family. He also appointed his best man to head the German Energy Agency.
The woes for Graichen may also be compounding as “a suspicion of violations of citation rules” regarding his doctoral thesis has surfaced.
Thanks to Woosterman for those images, and 90 Miles from Tyranny for this one.
Like believing that you can live on sustainable energy while it is a ruse to launder money, like the Ukraine.
Climate Scam: Scotland’s wind turbines have been secretly using diesel generators. 🤡 pic.twitter.com/NMAvjeONMx
— Dr. Anastasia Maria Loupis (@DrLoupis) May 22, 2023
And for the number one liar and grifter of this scam, the hero of Tim O’Reilly, James Governor and Tom Raftery. All people I had to deal with who spread these lies. I don’t think even they believed all of this.
According to an analysis, published this month in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data, the vaccine makers hid fatality data from regulators in order to qualify for Emergency Use Authorization.
Pfizer-BioNTech delayed reporting vaccine-associated deaths among BNT162b2 clinical trial participants until after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the product.
The vaccine makers also failed to account for a large number of subjects who dropped out of the trial.
The authors of the paper described it as a “forensic analysis,” defined by the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology as “the use of scientific methods or expertise to investigate crimes or examine evidence that might be presented in a court of law.”
What the analysis shows
Corinne Michels, Ph.D., retired distinguished professor of biology at Queens College, New York, led the DailyClout Pfizer/BioNTech Documents Investigations Team on what the authors claim was the first independent examination of original data from the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) clinical trial.
Investigators looked at each of the 38 deaths occurring between July 27, 2020, the start of phase 2/3 of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine trial, and March 13, 2021, the end date culminating in Pfizer-BioNTech’s 6-month interim report.
This trial phase involved 44,060 subjects. Half received a dose of BNT162b2, half got a placebo consisting of an inactive sterile salt solution.
The trial was unusual because at week 20 after the FDA issued the EUA for the vaccine, trial subjects in the placebo group were allowed to switch to the vaccinated group and receive their first BNT162b2 shot.
Switching from the placebo to the vaccinated group — or “unblinding” — normally occurs when the benefit of the drug is so great that not treating subjects becomes unethical. For example, investigators might consider unblinding a cancer trial if at some point all untreated patients deteriorated or died but all treated patients improved.
Unblinding conditions may be specified in the study design, but they usually involve input or review from medical ethicists.
Of 20,794 unblinded placebo subjects in the Pfizer trial, 19,685 received at least one dose of BNT162b2.
Normally the decision to unblind a vaccine trial would be based on the product’s safety and effectiveness in reaching certain endpoints or objectives. Endpoints for a drug to prevent viral infections might be a positive test or self-reported COVID-19 illness (the “case” numbers that drove much of COVID-19 policy), illness requiring hospitalization or death.
But, perhaps unexpectedly, after 33 weeks the data revealed no significant difference between deaths in the vaccinated and placebo groups for the initial 20-week placebo-controlled portion of the trial.
After week 20, after most former placebo subjects had received the vaccine, deaths among those in the vaccine group continued unabated.
The authors revealed “inconsistencies” between data presented in Pfizer-BioNTech’s 6-month interim report and subsequent publications by Pfizer-BioNTech trial site administrators:
“Most importantly, we found evidence of an over 3.7-fold increase in the number of deaths due to cardiac events in the BNT162b2 vaccinated individuals compared to those who received only the placebo.”
This means that 79% of relevant deaths were not recorded in time to be included in Pfizer’s regulatory paperwork.
By not including relevant subject deaths in the case report, Pfizer obscured cardiac adverse event signals, allowing the EUA to proceed unchallenged.
How did Pfizer get around legal, ethical obligations?
The Pfizer-BioNTech data, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, uncovered four additional deaths in the vaccine group and one more in the placebo group — but Pfizer failed to include these data in their FDA submission despite an explicit study design requirement to do so.
These data, and how they differ from what Pfizer-BioNTech reported in their applications, are summarized in Table 3 of Michels’ study.
One case involved a 63-year-old woman who died 41 days after receiving the shot, but whose death only entered the data pool 37 days later. Another was a 58-year-old woman whose death 72 days after vaccination went unreported for 26 days.
Had Pfizer-BioNTech met their legal and ethical obligation to report all serious adverse events their data would have shown equal deaths in placebo and vaccine groups — which would have shown no clear benefit for the vaccine.
How were they able to skirt those obligations?
For one, they were able to hide behind the the 2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which provided an almost impenetrable liability shield for vaccine manufacturers for “medical countermeasures” in response to any “public health emergency.”
Second, because COVID-19 was viewed as a national health emergency, regulators abandoned the established, patient-centered, safety-based approval process requiring years of preclinical animal testing — and Pfizer-BioNTech unsurprisingly went along.
Timing of death reports raises questions
Michels also raised issues regarding total death reports and their timing.
Since the death total from both study groups, 38, appeared “surprisingly low” to study authors — particularly during a pandemic — they undertook their own analysis based on population mortality expectations at the time.
Assuming that age-adjusted death rates for the study subjects were similar to those of the general population, they estimated that 222 subjects should have died from July 27, 2020, to March 13, 2021. The reported number, 38, is just 18% of the expected number.
Michels explained this by the large number, 4.2% of “discontinued subjects.” The most concerning of these were subjects “lost to follow-up,” which means missing scheduled visits or other required activities.
Pfizer-BioNTech tried to reach these subjects via phone, certified mail or through their emergency contact but despite their efforts could not account for 395 subjects who had dropped out.
The authors wrote:
“These are not insignificant numbers and could easily account for the low number of deaths reported in this safety period of the trial. Given the importance of knowing the status of each trial subject, there should have been greater effort to locate these individuals.
“Additionally, Pfizer/BioNTech was responsible for oversight of the trial sites. Sites with excessive numbers of lost to follow-up should have been evaluated for performance.”
Michels was also concerned over how certain trial centers had many dropped-out subjects while others had none or just a few.
Ninety-six of 153 trial sites (63%) reported 0 or 1 subjects lost to follow-up and 34 (22%) reported 2-5 dropouts. But four sites reported more than 20 subjects lost to follow-up, amounting to about 5% of all trial subjects.
Since the vaccine makers were responsible for trial site oversight, the authors wrote, “Sites with excessive numbers of lost to follow-up should have been evaluated for performance.”
Finally, based on the data, it appears Pfizer-BioNTech was in no hurry to enter death reports before the EUA submission deadline, particularly for the BNT162b2 group.
Of the 38 reported deaths only one case was added on the day the subject died. Delays of 20+ and 30+ days were common.
One death took 72 days to find its way into the database, and all were entered as occurring on the reporting day, not on the actual date of death.
Of the eight subjects in the vaccine group that should have been reported by Dec. 10, 2020, the EUA application cutoff, the average reporting delay was 17.5 days for subjects in the vaccine group, but just 5.9 days for deaths among subjects in the placebo group.
Look at the last sentence where other riders had to cut their career short. No mention of the obvious though.
Continental rider Mark Groeneveld has died of a suspected cardiac arrest, aged just 20, hours after competing in a race, his X-Speed United team has confirmed.
X-Speed United described Groeneveld as a “cherished member” of the team and someone with a “remarkable spirit” and an “infectious smile.” He had been with the team for the 2023 season, his first year racing at Continental level.
The Dutch rider had been in Hong Kong this week to compete at the Hong Kong Cyclothon, which was won by Jayco-AlUla’s Lukas Pöstlberger, but was forced to abandon the race as a result of a mechanical problem.
According to a report by the Dutch local newspaper, Noordhollands Dagblad, Groeneveld collapsed a while after the race and could not be resuscitated by paramedics. The team said it was working with authorities to determine the cause of Groeneveld’s death but that initial information suggested that it was as a result of a cardiac arrest.
“It is with a heavy heart that we inform the passing of Mark Groeneveld, while on a project in Hong Kong. On Monday, October 23rd, XSU and the world lost another great soul. Our deepest condolences go out to his family, team members, and friends,” the X-Speed United team wrote on its Facebook page. “We understand that this is an incredibly challenging period, and we encourage you to reach out if you need any assistance or emotional support. Your well-being is of utmost importance to us.
“While the circumstances of Mark’s passing are currently under investigation, we have received preliminary information that suggests it may have been due to a heart attack. We are working closely with the relevant authorities to gather all the facts and provide the necessary support to Mark’s family during this painful period.
“Mark was an incredible individual and a cherished member of our team. He had a remarkable spirit, always ready to lend a hand behind the scenes with his infectious smile and warm-hearted nature. His presence brightened our days, and he will be deeply missed by all who had the privilege to know him. Take care of yourselves and each other during this trying time.”
Several riders have put an end to their careers this season as a result of heart issues. Nathan Van Hooydonck, Sep Vanmarcke, Wesley Kreder, and Niklas Eg all quit during this season.
London is being ruined like many big European cities.
More woke BS:
As always, it is a good idea to look at what the global elites are writing and planning, often in plain sight. The PHD is the work of EAT, a non-profit, green activist operation that says it is dedicated to transforming the global food system to mitigate climate change. To pursue its aims, it has a number of partners including the Stockholm Resilience Centre and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. Needless to say, the show is funded by numerous foundations chanelling money, often described as philanthropic, to fund ways to control rather than gain outright ownership of the means of production. Often described as ‘stakeholder capitalism’, the money buys influence, if not effective control, over wide swathes of industry, politics, media, academia and science.
An Italian girl I knew sarcastically told me that their country discovered America.
What really happened is that people have been living on most of the continents for ages, and it was a surprise to find them. Countries explored and conquered all the time until relatively recently given the history of the world.
That is why it’s bullshit that somehow America was discovered in 1492. America as the United States was created around 1776, but people had been moving around, establishing cultures that died out either naturally or by conquest. It happens. That’s why indigenous people day is also nonsense.
So biker girl, Columbus stumbled upon a place they didn’t know about, while sailing the wrong direction and looking for something else. Take credit for pizza instead.
Traditionally, researchers believed that humans arrived in North America around 16,000 to 13,000 years ago. Recently, however, evidence has accumulated supporting a much earlier date. In 2021, fossilized footprints from White Sands National Park in New Mexico were dated to between 20,000 and 23,000 years ago, providing key evidence for earlier occupation, although this finding was controversial. Pigati et al. returned to the White Sands footprints and obtained new dates from multiple, highly reliable sources (see the Perspective by Philippsen). They, too, resolved dates of 20,000 to 23,000 years ago, reconfirming that humans were present far south of the ice sheets during the Last Glacial Maximum. —Sacha Vignieri
Human footprints at White Sands National Park, New Mexico, USA, reportedly date to between ~23,000 and 21,000 years ago according to radiocarbon dating of seeds from the aquatic plant Ruppia cirrhosa. These ages remain controversial because of potential old carbon reservoir effects that could compromise their accuracy. We present new calibrated 14C ages of terrestrial pollen collected from the same stratigraphic horizons as those of the Ruppia seeds, along with optically stimulated luminescence ages of sediments from within the human footprint–bearing sequence, to evaluate the veracity of the seed ages. The results show that the chronologic framework originally established for the White Sands footprints is robust and reaffirm that humans were present in North America during the Last Glacial Maximum.
Of course the joke of my family, Marian,a niece by marriage in Denmark thinks Elizabeth Warren is the “bomb”. The retards are on my wife’s side of the family
If they still believe the Covid vaccine actually works on the population least likely to get sick from it, you shouldn’t waste money sending kids there. They proved they don’t believe the facts or science.
No College Mandates, an advocacy group that argues against the Covid-19 vaccine for higher education, counts 79 colleges and universities that require their students to be vaccinated this fall semester.
“There are 79 colleges in the US still mandating COVID vaccines when there should be zero just like the rest of the world. Do Not Comply!” No College Mandates posted on X.
The advocacy group said “COVID injections for one of the lowest risk populations” is “insanity.” They added higher education has “zero efficacy and safety data for the the newly approved COVID injections. It is incomprehensible that this remains a reality.”
Many of these schools mandating Covid vaccines are situated in or around Democratic-controlled metro areas (map courtesy of X user Broken Truth).
If you are curious about which colleges have lifted mandates, the group has published a spreadsheet listing those institutions (read: here).
In 1984, Dreamscape was released. Dennis Quaid was at his height of entertainment as far as I was concerned.
The story was him getting into other peoples dreams. It was entertaining, especially when you found out that if you died in your dream, you died in real life. It was like dying in the Matrix in a later series.
Scientists helped volunteers unlock their creative potential through “targeted dream incubation”
They created a device called Dormio that could help guide participants through targeted dream incubation
The study was built off of an earlier study by French sleep researchers
Short naps can help people’s brains come up with creative solutions to problems, especially when they are guided to dream about a particular topic, a newly published study has found.
Scientists from Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) published a paper Monday in the journal Scientific Reports that found that power naps can do wonders in unlocking people’s creative potential.
Researchers found that the creative mind is particularly fertile during the earliest stage of sleep, known as hypnagogia, in which a person is drifting between sleep and waking, according to MIT News.
The scientists said they determined that when people are prompted to dream about a particular topic during that sleep phase, they perform much more creatively when they are later asked to perform tasks surrounding that topic.
This “Inception”-like process of “hacking” dreams is called “targeted dream incubation.”
“When you are prompted to dream about a topic during sleep onset, you can have dream experiences that you can later use for these creative tasks,” Kathleen Esfahany, a neuroscientist at MIT and one of the lead authors of the study, said in a statement.
The new paper was built off of an earlier study from 2021 by French sleep researchers who found that participants who woke up from hypnagogic sleep were more likely to solve math problems. the Daily Beast reported.
In their study, Harvard and MIT researchers tried to determine whether the same transient sleep state could also work with more creative tasks such as storytelling.
The researchers created a device called Dormio that could be used for targeted dream incubation. It includes a glove connected to a smartphone or laptop app that measures three physiological markers of sleep — changes in muscle tone, heart rate and skin conductance.
As the participant enters hypnagogic sleep, the app prompts them with a specific dream topic. Just before they enter the next stage of sleep, the app will wake them up, ask them to report what they were dreaming about and record their response.
“One of the goals of our group is to give people more insights into how their brain works, and also what their cognitive state is and how they may be able to influence it,” said Pattie Maes, an MIT technology professor and co-author of the study.
During the experiment, the researchers split up 49 participants into four groups, with one group given a Dormio device and 45 minutes to nap and prompted to dream about a tree. Another group was also given Dormio and napped but was not prompted and only asked to observe their own thoughts. The other two groups remained awake.
After the two groups finished their naps, the scientists asked all 49 participants to write a creative story that included the word tree.
They found that the group with the most creative stories about trees was the one that was prompted by the app in their dream. Meanwhile, the group that took a nap but was not prompted had the second-best output.
The creativity of the stories was judged by people who read each one and were not told which group wrote the stories.
Novak Djokovic was willing to sacrifice being the all time majors winning record holder for his health. I’ll pull for him at the US Open and other tournaments for sticking to his principles and not getting jabbed.
Aaron Rodgers wouldn’t get jabbed either, and proved it wouldn’t stop him by only missing one game when he got Covid.
Joe Rogan pissed off Big Pharma, Big Government and the other Covid commies by taking Ivermectin, HCQ, mono-clonal antibodies and beating it in 3 days.
Look at this Instagram post by Rodgers, pranking Moderna and praising another warrior.
Not a single person who didn’t get jabbed regrets it.
Not that it’s going to stop the people who use it to grift money out of the government or have it as their religion.
A coalition of more than 1,600 scientists released a declaration this week entitled “There is No Climate Emergency,” denouncing politically-driven narratives about “imminent” climate crises.
The World Climate Declaration (WCD)—now known as CLINTEL, is a global climate intelligence group dedicated to fostering an approach to climate change grounded in science. For the statement, CLINTEL brought together a diverse group of scientists from all over the world to combat erroneous popular opinions.
A coalition of more than 1,600 scientists released a declaration this week entitled “There is No Climate Emergency,” denouncing politically-driven narratives about “imminent” climate crises.
The World Climate Declaration (WCD)—now known as CLINTEL, is a global climate intelligence group dedicated to fostering an approach to climate change grounded in science. For the statement, CLINTEL brought together a diverse group of scientists from all over the world to combat erroneous popular opinions.
Excerpt Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Funny how Lahaina, Maui just got climate change.
It’s one of the biggest hoax’s as an excuse for money grabbing since Ponzi. Don’t forget these are the same people believing and trying to get others jabbed for Covid-19.
The study, published this month and titled “Global mass of buoyant marine plastics dominated by large long-lived debris,” used “observational data” from coastlines, the ocean surface, and the deep ocean to conclude that the amount of plastic pouring into the oceans every year is about 500,000 metric tons. The researchers’ abstract said that “recent estimates of the oceanic input of plastic are one to two orders of magnitude larger than the amount measured floating at the surface.”
Though this may still sound like a lot, but a widely relied upon 2015 study overshot the “accepted” number by a whopping 1,600%.
Referring to the data cited from the 2015 study led by Dr. Jenna Jambeck from the University of Georgia, the new study explains that “This discrepancy could be due to overestimation of input estimates, processes removing plastic from the surface ocean or fragmentation and degradation.”
The 2015 study with the now-challenged estimate was been adopted as authoritative by a range of media outlets, environmental activists and government agencies.
Nancy Wallace, Marine Debris Program Director at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), called the 2015 study “significant” in a New York Times article. Though she conceded it wasn’t an exact figure, she said it “gives us [NOAA] an idea of… where we might need to focus our efforts to affect the issue.”
To date, Dr. Jambeck’s 2015 study is listed on the NOAA website. Just the News contacted Wallace and NOAA’s media team for comment.
Other entities who accepted the 2015 data as a fact include The World Economic Forum, who said “At this rate, there will be more plastic than fish in the world’s oceans by 2050” and suggested that plastic pollutants “are adding to the climate change problem.” Other proponents of the “conventional wisdom” include UNESCO, The National Geographic Society, Time magazine, The Washington Post, as well as dozens of environmental organizations, such as “Environmental Action” and “Ocean Conservancy” all of whom have cited the “8 million metric tons of plastic pollution” figure.
Outlets like The New York Times, which propped up the 2015 study, have appeared to downplay the new number and double down on pushing a fearful narrative. “There Might Be Less Plastic in the Sea Than We Thought. But Read On,” reads their headline about the new data. “The new research might seem like good news, but the full picture is complicated: The amount of plastic in the ocean is still increasing by about 4 percent every year, according to the study,” the Times added.
Stephen Guertin, Deputy Director of U.S. Fish and Wildlife at the Department of The Interior, also used Jambeck’s study in his 2019 testimony before Congress, repeating that “it is believed that at least 8 million tons of plastic end up in our oceans every year, and make up 80 percent of all marine debris from surface waters to deep-sea sediments.”
And while America has been continually criticized for its role in plastic pollution, with many states passing legislation to severely restrict the use of plastic products, Manhattan Institute waste expert John Tierney says “virtually all the consumer plastics polluting the world’s oceans comes from ‘mismanaged waste’ in developing countries.”
“The Environmental Protection Agency has promoted recycling as a way to reduce carbon emissions, but its own figures show the benefits are relatively small and come almost entirely from recycling paper products and metals, not plastic,” he wrote in a New York Post op-ed, adding that rather than Americans sending plastic to a landfill, “most” of it ends up being shipped overseas to developing nations.
I tell my wife that it’s just another socialist tactic. I see 6 different containers in her home country of Denmark (which is socialist) and they clutter the streets while making the population get in line and obey.
The truth is that if you bury it, it doesn’t get micro plastics in the air and water, where it is far more dangerous. But that would be against the narrative. I could be broken down easily, but that doesn’t let people get controlled like good little commies, handcuffed to the recycling prison chain gang. They are dutiful sheep that are probably also vaxxed against Covid.
It’s approved now as all the payouts are done for the mRNA jabs. Is anyone going to trust the government anymore? How about the doctors that knew it worked and lied?
Oh, and Hydroxychoroquine also worked to cure Covid-19. They lied about that one also.
We knew the people pushing the vaxx knew it wasn’t safe and effective. We didn’t know that it wasn’t safe or effective, we just knew the people pushing it didn’t know either. And that was enough for me not to take it as well as a lot of others.
Doctors are free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID-19, a lawyer representing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said this week.
“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
The government is defending the FDA’s repeated exhortations to people to not take ivermectin for COVID-19, including a post that said “Stop it.”
The case was brought by three doctors who allege the FDA unlawfully interfered with their practice of medicine with the statements.
“The fundamental issue in this case is straightforward. After the FDA approves the human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no,” Jared Kelson, representing the doctors, told the appeals court.
The FDA on Aug. 21, 2021, wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter:
“You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
The post, which linked to an FDA page that says people shouldn’t use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19, went viral.
In other statements, the FDA said that ivermectin “isn’t authorized or approved to treat COVID-19” and “Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? A: No.”
Command or Not
“FDA made these statements in response to multiple reports of consumers being hospitalized, after self medicating with ivermectin intended for horses, which is available for purchase over the counter without the need for prescription,” Ms. Honold said.
A version of the drug for animals is available, but ivermectin is approved by the FDA for human use against diseases caused by parasites.
Ms. Honold said that the FDA didn’t purport to require anyone to do anything or to prohibit anyone from doing anything.
“What about when it said, ‘No, stop it’?” Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, on the panel that is hearing the appeal, asked.
“Why isn’t that a command? If you were in English class, they would say that was a command.”
Ms. Honold described the statements as “merely quips.”
“Can you answer the question, please? Is that a command, ‘Stop it’?” Judge Elrod asked.
“In some contexts, those words could be construed as a command,” Ms. Honold said.
“But in this context, where FDA was simply using these words in the context of a quippy tweet meant to share its informational article, those statements do not rise to the level of a command.”
The statements “don’t prohibit doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID or for any other purpose” Ms. Honold said. She noted that the FDA, along with the statements, said that people should consult their health care providers about COVID-19 treatments and that they could take medicine if it was prescribed by the provider.
“FDA is clearly acknowledging that doctors have the authority to prescribe human ivermectin to treat COVID. So they are not interfering with the authority of doctors to prescribe drugs or to practice medicine,” she said.
Judge Elrod is on the panel with Circuit Judges Edith Brown Clement and Don Willett. All three were appointed under President Donald Trump.
Federal Law
The plaintiffs are Drs. Paul Marik, Mary Bowden, and Robert Apter. They say they were professionally harmed by the FDA’s statements, including being terminated over efforts to prescribe ivermectin to patients.
Dr. Marik has noted that a number of studies support using ivermectin against COVID-19, as the FDA itself has acknowledged. Some other studies show little to no effect.
Federal law enables the FDA to provide information, such as reports of adverse reactions to drugs, but not medical advice, Mr. Kelson said.
“This is something the FDA has never been able to do. And it’s a bright line,” he told the court, adding later:
“The clearest examples of where they have gone over the line are when they say things like, ‘You are not a horse, you are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.’”
Judges indicated they agree that the FDA lacks the power to give medical advice; Judge Clement said, “You’re not authorized to give medical advice.”
But Ms. Honold said the government “isn’t conceding that in this case.”
She also argued that Congress has empowered the FDA to protect public health and make sure regulated products are safe and effective, giving it the “inherent authority to further its mission by communicating information to the public about safe uses of drugs.”
A ruling in favor of the doctors would prevent the FDA from reporting on consumers suffering after cooking chicken with NyQuil or that opioid addiction is a problem, she claimed.
Mr. Kelson said that wasn’t accurate. “It’s when they step beyond that [and] start telling people how they should or should not be using approved drugs,” he said.
Ms. Honold also said that the courts can’t hold agencies accountable when they provide false or misleading information: “The FDA is politically accountable, just like all other executive agencies.”
And they are debating if Covid was man made in the Wuhan labs. Hell, they were making in California.
I’m not a mice lover. I actually don’t care much other than I don’t like to see animals treated cruelly (like Fauci did with dogs). Still, it shows a tremendous lack of respect for live, both human and animals. It also shows the Chinese have a lack of respect for any retribution for doing this to us. Should we look at why the current administration allowed this? We’ve known about Covid for a while. Maybe it’s the same as a spy balloon to Washington.
Through the warrant issued by the Fresno County Department of Public Health, authorities were able to inspect a believed-to-be vacant building in Fresno County, California where they found 900 “inhumanely” treated mice. According to court documents, the Prestige BioTech representative present onsite during the investigation was identified as Wang Zhaolin, who informed the investigators that “these mice were genetically engineered to catch and carry the [Wuhan coronavirus] COVID-19 virus.”
Prestige, the company allegedly running the lab, is based out of Nevada and is the successor to Universal Meditech, Inc (UMI).
The City code enforcement stumbled upon the building at 850 I St. in Reedly in December 2022, when they discovered a garden hose running up into the building through a hole in the wall. On March 3, they obtained a warrant to inspect the property, and in April, the Fresno County public health department issued an inspection order for the illegal bio facility.
Apart from the lab rats, inspectors also found a room used to make COVID-19 tests and pregnancy tests as well as 35-plus freezers and refrigeration units that contained “thousands of bodily fluids, serums, tissues, and other medical items.”
(Photo credits: The Gateway Pundit)
The Mid Valley Times reported: “According to Assistant Director of Fresno County Public Health Humero Prado’s declaration, which was filed in superior court, investigators discovered that one room of the warehouse was used to produce COVID-19 and pregnancy tests. In other rooms, investigators found blood, tissue, and other bodily fluid samples. They also found thousands of vials that contained unlabeled fluids.” As per the court documents, a total of 48 containers – with approximately 44 gallons per container – full of biologics and medical waste were removed a day after the inspection. Another 31 were taken out the next day.
Zieba said that officials have cleared the area of hazardous materials but are still working to empty the warehouse. “Some of our federal partners still have active investigations going. I can only speak to the building side of it,” she added.
Meanwhile, David He, who is another Prestige representative, avoided inquiries on accountability and ownership of the company. He also dodged questions about whether or not they were properly disposing of the hundreds of dead mice. The firm did not even confirm if the biologics contained in the lab were theirs.
City Manager Nicole Zieba disclosed that the biotech company was operating 35 freezers and refrigeration devices without anyone questioning the electrical draw that would be required for a building that “was supposed to be vacant.” On July 5, the team entered the building and saw that the power to the freezers “was lost” but the biological samples were still frozen.
CDC discovers bacterial and viral agents in the “deserted lab”
From May 2 to 4, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s (CDC’s) Division of Select Agents and Toxins inspected the laboratory inside the “unoccupied” building. The documents confirmed that CDC found potentially infectious agents at the location, including bacterial and viral agents: chlamydia, E. Coli, streptococcus pneumonia, hepatitis B and C, herpes 1 and 5, and rubella. The agency also found samples of malaria, coronavirus, and HIV.
According to Prado, the local public health department has been “evaluating and assessing the activities of the unlicensed laboratory.” He said that all of the biological agents were destroyed by July 7 following a legal abatement process by the agency. “The evaluation required coordination and collaboration with multiple federal and state agencies to determine and classify biological and chemical contents onsite, in addition to assessing jurisdictional authority under this unique situation,” he said.
Local officials spoke with Xiuquin Yao, who was identified as the company president, through emails included in the court documents. Yao said that Prestige moved assets belonging to the defunct company UMI to the said warehouse. Officials were unable to get any California-based address for either company except for the previous Fresno location from which UMI had been evicted. “The other addresses provided for identified authorized agents were either empty offices or addresses in China that could not be verified,” court documents said.
NBC News reported that Prestige is accused of failing to comply with orders, including providing a plan for biological abatement and disposal of the materials. Emails sent to Yao and Prestige BioTech requesting comment were not immediately answered as of Thursday, July 27. Also, according to Prado, court documents indicate that the biotech company failed to provide any licensing or permit that allows experimentation or other laboratory activity.
Follow BioTerrorism.news for more news related to bioengineering and other dangerous activities “secretly” done in China-linked labs.
Were you adequately informed about the COVID-19 treatment risks and options? Were you adequately informed about the COVID-19 genetic vaccine risks? Did you have full knowledge and understanding of those risks? Did you make a decision to (or not to) voluntarily accept vaccines or medical treatment(s) for COVID-19 disease? Does your physician check in with you to insure that you are providing continuous and ongoing consent if you are participating in any experimental treatments or clinical research studies?
Were you coerced, enticed, or forced to accept an experimental medical product or procedure without providing fully informed consent?
Who is Robert Malone is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
John Allison, J.D. previously wrote and published an essay (August 2022) on the topic of COVID-19 vaccines and informed consent, and he has now updated his prior essay with additional information (updated late July 2023). Following is his updated essay, with associated references.
COVID-19 Vaccines and Informed Consent
By John Allison, J.D.
Updated July 25, 2023
Introduction.
Most Americans have long assumed that they have a fundamental right to make decisions about their own bodily health and the medical treatments they receive. Informed consent is the ethical and legal principle by which that fundamental right is enforceable. To be able to give informed consent a person needs to be informed about the risks and benefits of, and alternatives to, the proposed treatment.
The fundamental right to informed consent is particularly important with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines which are available in the United States pursuant to Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs). Under the federal EUA statute, people are entitled to be informed about their right to accept or refuse administration of these vaccines, the consequences (if any) of refusing vaccination, and the benefits and risks of alternatives to the vaccines. A different federal statute gives the manufacturers of EUA vaccines, and the people and organizations administering them, immunity from liability suits for damages. Unless courts decide that the immunity statute cannot be applied against people who did not give their informed consent to vaccination, people who suffer severe adverse effects after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine will not be able to recover compensation, for their monetary and emotional distress damages, from the vaccine manufacturers or from the people who vaccinated them. Similarly, the family members of people who die after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine will not be able to recover compensation for their loss.
Opinions and Basis for Opinions.
Based on the results of my research to date, I have arrived at the following opinions with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines that are being widely used in the United States:
1. Government misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines, censorship of credible scientific and medical information about the risks of death and serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, and vaccination coercion, are depriving people of their ability to give informed consent to vaccination. Unless the limited effectiveness of the vaccines and the risks of death and serious adverse effects described in this memorandum are disclosed to people before they are vaccinated, informed consent has not been obtained.
2. Safe and effective drugs on the market for many years, such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, have been proven by reputable doctors to be successful in the early treatment of COVID-19. If those affordable drugs had been allowed to be more widely used in the United States before people needed to be hospitalized, many tens of thousands of people who died from COVID-19 would probably be alive today.
3. The COVID-19 vaccines authorized for use in United States do not meet established criteria for establishing their short-term and long-term safety and efficacy. Serious safety signals – red flags – about these vaccines have been ignored, and continue to be ignored, by the FDA and the CDC. Also, during the past two years it has become clear that the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of COVID-19. Fully vaccinated people can become infected and can spread the SARS-CoV-2 virus to other vaccinated people and to unvaccinated people. All of these vaccines should be taken off the market immediately.
· SARS-CoV-2 is the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Distinctive spike proteins on the surface of the virus enable the virus to penetrate cells and cause infection.
· According to a mortality analysis by the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, as of July 19, 2023 the United States had a COVID-19 case fatality ratio of 1.1%. The case fatality ratio is the number of deaths divided by the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases. This means that, in the United States, 98.9% of all the people with a confirmed case of COVID-19 survived the disease. Most COVID-19 deaths occurred in elderly people who were in poor health with multiple comorbidities. A study by researchers at Stanford University found that 99.9973% of COVID-19 patients 19 years of age and younger survive the disease.
· The spike proteins on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus mutate, producing the Delta variant which became the dominant form of the virus by the middle of 2021. Continuing mutations of the spike proteins produced the Omicron variant which became the dominant form of the virus by the end of 2021. We are now dealing with sub-variants of Omicron.
· The first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the United States was reported in mid-January, 2020. The pandemic spread. COVID-19 vaccines were not available until the middle of December 2020 when the FDA granted emergency use authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna vaccines. In February 2021 the FDA granted emergency use authorization for the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine. Early in 2021 these vaccines became widely available in the United States and mass vaccination programs began. By the middle of 2021 millions of Americans, including workers in many different occupations, were fully vaccinated.
· According to data on the CDC website accessed on July 18, 2022, in the United States there were 385,670 deaths attributed to COVID-19 in 2020 before the vaccines were widely available. In 2021, when the Pfizer-BioNTech, the Moderna and the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccines were widely available and mass vaccination campaigns took place, there were 463,210 deaths attributed to COVID-19; there were 20.1% more COVID-19 deaths in 2021 than in 2020.
· The COVID-19 vaccines do not produce immunity to COVID-19 because they are not designed to trigger an immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Instead, the vaccines are designed to cause the body to produce spike proteins in order to stimulate an immune response to the spike proteins which are on the surface of the virus. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines use synthetic mRNA genetic instructions to cause the body to produce enormous numbers of spike proteins. The mRNA technology used in those vaccines is a new and unproven technology that has never been used before in vaccines administered to people. The Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine is a viral vector DNA vaccine that also causes the body to produce enormous numbers of spike proteins.
· An internal CDC email produced in response to a Freedom of Information Act request reveals that on January 30, 2021 the Director of the CDC had a conversation with the Director of the NIH about “vaccine breakthroughs” based on an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association a few days earlier. “Vaccine breakthroughs” refers to fully vaccinated people who become infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and contract COVID-19.
· When FDA issued its EUAs for the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson/Janssen COVID-19 vaccines in late 2020 and early 2021, the CDC defined a “vaccine” as a “product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Traditional vaccines for diseases such as smallpox and polio meet that definition, which is consistent with the definition of “vaccine” found in the 1996 edition of Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary: “any preparation used as a preventive inoculation to confer immunity against a specific disease, usually employing an innocuous form of the disease agent, as killed or weakened bacteria or viruses, to stimulate antibody production.”
· In July 2021 an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Barnstable County, Massachusetts led the CDC to reverse its position on the wearing of masks and to recommend that all people wear masks indoors when viral transmission is likely, regardless of their vaccination status. The outbreak involved 469 people with COVID-19 infections; 79 percent of those people were symptomatic. 74 percent of the symptomatic people were fully vaccinated. Five people needed to be hospitalized; four of the five were fully vaccinated. This incident made it clear that the vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of COVID-19. Vaccinated people can become infected and can also spread the SARS-CoV-2 virus to other people.
· Effective September 1, 2021, once it had become clear that the COVID-19 vaccines do not produce immunity to COVID-19, the CDC simply changed its definition of “vaccine” to: “A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.” Internal CDC emails produced in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, including an August 13, 2021 email from Andrew Lowndes at CDC to Alycia Downs at CDC, indicate that the change in definition was intended to justify continuing to refer to the COVID-19 injections as “vaccines.” Redefining the word “vaccine” does not turn these experimental products into true vaccines as the term “vaccine” has been understood by people for many years. These products are, in reality, more accurately described as gene therapy injections that cause the body to produce spike proteins. As Moderna acknowledged in its quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the period ending June 30, 2020, “[c]urrently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.”
· In a recent letter dated April 18, 2023 Dr. Peter Marks, Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, acknowledged the current FDA position “that FDA’s authorization and licensure standards for vaccines do not require demonstration of the prevention of infection or transmission. . . . There is no requirement that the vaccine also prevents infection with the pathogen that can cause the disease or transmission of that pathogen to others.”
· Project Salus, a Department of Defense and Joint Artificial Intelligence Center study, analyzed the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against the Delta variant among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older. The project’s September 28, 2021 report indicates, on page 7, that “In this 80% vaccinated >=65 population, an estimated 71% of COVID-19 cases occurred in fully vaccinated individuals” (emphasis in the report). The report also points out, on page 12, that “In this 80% vaccinated 65+ population, an estimated 60% of COVID-19 hospitalizations occurred in fully vaccinated individuals in the week ending August 7th” (emphasis in the report).
· When the Delta and later the Omicron variants became the dominant form of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, a number of studies in different countries show that most COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths occur among fully vaccinated people. For example, the UK Health Security Agency’s March 3, 2022 COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report contains information in Table 12, on page 43, about deaths between January 31 and February 27, 2022 among patients who died within 28 days of testing positive for COVID-19 or who had COVID-19 mentioned on their death certificate. Of the 3,957 patients who died, 3,429, or 86.6%, had received two or three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. (725 people had received two doses, and 2,704 people had received three doses.)
· Since the Omicron variant became the dominant form of SARS-CoV-2, the effectiveness of the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) diminishes significantly over just a few months. According to a Danish study, which has not yet been peer reviewed, vaccinated people, more than 90 days after vaccination, are significantly more likely than unvaccinated people to be infected by Omicron. A different study published in April of this year, which has been peer reviewed, found that the “risk of COVID-19 also varies by the number of vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19.”
· On July 13, 2022 the FDA granted emergency use authorization for the Novavax adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine for people ages 18 and older, which was later amended to authorize administration of the Novavax vaccine to people ages 12 and older.
· On August 31, 2022 the FDA granted emergency use authorizations for the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna bivalent (Original and Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 strains) vaccines as boosters. No clinical (human) studies were performed on those bivalent vaccines before they were authorized for emergency use. Only non-clinical studies on a relatively small number of mice were performed. On April 18, 2023 the FDA amended and expanded the emergency use authorizations for the bivalent vaccines to make them generally available, and ended the emergency use authorizations for the original (monovalent) Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines.
· On June 1, 2023 the FDA revoked the emergency use authorization for the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine. As a result, only the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna bivalent vaccines, and the Novavax adjuvanted vaccine, are now available in the United States.
· The results of a study published in a peer-reviewed article on April 19, 2023 show that the bivalent vaccines have very limited effectiveness. The authors conclude that “the current bivalent vaccines were about 29% effective when the Omicron BA.4/5 lineages were the predominant circulating strains, and effectiveness was lower when the circulating strains were no longer represented in the vaccine. A protective effect could not be demonstrated when the XBB lineages were dominant.”
· Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine received full FDA approval on August 23, 2021 and Moderna’s Spikevax COVID-19 vaccine received full FDA approval on January 31, 2022. However, those vaccines have not been available in the United States. If they were available in the United States, emergency use authorizations for the COVID-19 vaccines that are available could not lawfully be maintained. Under the EUA statute, one of the mandatory criteria for an emergency use authorization is that “there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative” to the product in question. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines available in the United States are legally distinct EUA products that were not transformed into approved products by the FDA’s approval of Comirnaty and Spikevax.
· It turns out that the spike proteins produced by the body in response to the COVID-19 vaccines are, themselves, toxic to cells. For example, endothelial cells line the inside of arteries to make blood flow smoothly. Damage to the endothelial cells caused by spike proteins increases the potential for microscopic blood clots to form. Those microscopic blood clots can travel to the lungs, increasing the risk of developing pulmonary arterial hypertension which is a serious progressive condition that overtaxes and weakens the heart. There is no known cure for that condition. All of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, as well as the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine, have been shown to cause other serious blood clotting disorders as well.
· In the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines manufactured by Pfizer and Moderna the genetic instructions that cause the body to produce spike proteins are encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles. A preclinical study on laboratory animals conducted by Pfizer and submitted to the regulatory agency in Japan shows that the lipid nanoparticles and mRNA genetic instructions enter the bloodstream and accumulate in several organs, including the spleen, bone marrow, liver and adrenal glands, and concentrate in the ovaries. The body then starts producing spike proteins wherever the mRNA genetic instructions happen to land.
· A number of serious medical conditions have been associated with the COVID-19 vaccines, including blood clotting disorders, cardiac emergencies, myocarditis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, autoimmune disease, spontaneous miscarriages, nervous system disorders and female infertility.
· The COVID-19 vaccines also interfere with the natural immune system, making a person more susceptible to viral infections and cancer. In a May 6, 2021 preprint article, which has not yet been peer reviewed, a group of research scientists in the Netherlands and Germany reported their conclusion that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine “induces functional reprogramming of innate immune responses, which should be considered in the development and use of this new class of vaccines.” They also point out that “inhibition of innate immune responses may diminish anti-viral responses.” A more recent peer reviewed article published June 2022 in Food and Chemical Toxicology explains how the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines subvert innate immunity and dysregulate the body’s system “for both preventing and detecting genetically driven malignant transformation within cells.”
· A laboratory study in Sweden shows that the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine is able to enter a human liver cell line where it is reverse transcribed into DNA within a matter of hours. As a result, the possibility that the COVID-19 vaccines affect DNA cannot be ruled out.
· The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines contain problematic ingredients that should not be injected into peoples’ bodies. Both the Pfizer and the Moderna vaccines contain polyethylene glycol (PEG) as an active ingredient. Several years ago, in 1993, an Expert Panel assessing the safety of PEG recommended against using PEG in ointments applied to damaged skin because some burn patients treated with a PEG-based antimicrobial cream experienced renal tubular necrosis and died of kidney failure. The PEG used in the Moderna vaccine matches the description of a PEG product manufactured by Sinopeg, a company in China. According to the Sinopeg website, that product is for “research use only.” The Moderna vaccine also contains a lipid known by the trade name SM-102. The Pfizer vaccine also contains a lipid known by the trade name ALC-0315. According to the safety information on the website of Cayman Chemical Company, which manufactures SM-102 and ALC-0315, both of those products are “for research use – Not for human or veterinary diagnostic or therapeutic use.” Yet, in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, PEG, and SM-102 or ALC-0315, are being directly injected into people’s bodies.
· As Dr. Peter McCullough pointed out in his October 13, 2021 sworn expert witness Declaration filed in the U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida: “The COVID-19 genetic vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J) skipped testing for genotoxicity, mutagenicity, teratogenicity, and oncogenicity. In other words, it is unknown whether or not these products will change human genetic material, cause birth defects, reduce fertility, or cause cancer.”
· Pfizer reportedly cut corners in the pre-clinical animal testing of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. According to a May 28, 2021 article on the TrialSite News website, which reports on clinical trials, Pfizer performed its pre-clinical animal tests using “surrogate” mRNA instead of the mRNA that is actually in the vaccine.
· Deficiencies in the clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine are explained in a public document prepared by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance, a group of more than 500 independent Canadian doctors, other health care practitioners and scientists. The document also contains information from six months of follow up in the Pfizer-BioNtech clinical trial, indicating that related adverse events were 300% higher in the vaccinated group than in the placebo (control) group, and severe adverse events were 75% higher in the vaccinated group than in the control group. The document can be found at:
· No long-term clinical studies were performed to evaluate the long-term safety of the COVID-19 vaccines. As a result, there is no way of knowing whether or not vaccinated people will suffer severe adverse side effects in the future. This lack of information is of particular concern since the vaccines increase the potential for developing cardiovascular disease and autoimmune disease, which can both take months or years to fully develop. Because clinical trial participants in the placebo (control) group were subsequently given the option of getting vaccinated, and a number of them chose to be vaccinated, there is no longer a statistically viable control group for a study of the long-term adverse effects of the vaccines.
· Pfizer recognizes that the long-term adverse effects of its COVID-19 vaccines are not currently known. In its Agreement to supply Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines to the government of a European country, Pfizer’s subsidiary required the purchasing government, in paragraph 5.5 of the Agreement, to acknowledge “that the long-term effects and the efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.”
· The Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson/Janssen COVID-19 vaccines fail to meet reasonable expectations for product uniformity. Analyses by independent researchers show that some vaccine batches, identified by lot number, are many times more toxic than others. Roughly 80% of the vaccine batches account for 1 or 2 adverse events per batch reported in the government’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Other batches account for hundreds or thousands of adverse events per batch reported in VAERS, and some of those adverse events involved death, disability or serious illness. A recent study in Denmark of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines confirms a correlation between adverse effects and vaccine batch. For vaccines administered in Denmark between December 27, 2020 and January 11, 2022, batches comprising 4.22% of the vaccine doses accounted for 27.49% of serious adverse events, batches comprising 63.69% of the vaccine doses accounted for 71.5% of serious adverse events, and batches comprising 32.09% of the vaccine doses accounted for 1.01% of serious adverse events.
· The government established VAERS in 1990 which is co-managed by the CDC and the FDA. It is intended to be a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems with vaccines in the United States. The number of serious adverse events and deaths that have been reported in VAERS for the COVID-19 vaccines is many times greater than the serious adverse events and deaths reported in VAERS for all other vaccines combined. As of October 7, 2022 more than 31,400 deaths, and more than 230,200 serious injuries, following administration of one of the COVID-19 vaccines have been reported in VAERS. Several thousands of those deaths occurred within a day or two after vaccination. Due to underreporting, the actual number of deaths and serious injuries following COVID-19 vaccination is likely to be higher than the number reported in VAERS. Yet the CDC and the FDA continue to ignore these serious safety signals.
Who would have guessed that after transitioning, it didn’t work out. Now, he can’t even kill himself to end the pain. I put he because at some point he was a guy. For the PC Nazis, I’m still sure he was a dude somewhere in the transition.
Being convicted of crimes that warrant capital punishment is not the only thing Canada does not regard as a valid reason to be killed by the government. Canada will kill its citizens for anorexia, PTSD, being poor, or needing a wheelchair lift, but not for plunging into despair after having been sexually deformed in the name of transgenderism:
On July 26, a biological male calling himself Duchess Lois of Alberta announced that he was denied so-called Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), a euphemism used in Canada to indicate voluntary execution by a medical professional.
Duchess Lois had applied for the lethal service in January on the grounds that his surgery had sterilized him and irreversibly changed his life.
He certainly seems to qualify:
According to the website Pallipedia, applicants for state-approved euthanasia in Canada can cite a “‘grievous and irremediable medical condition’ that produces unbearable physical or mental suffering that cannot be reversed or relieved ‘under conditions that you consider acceptable’.”
However, suicide is frowned up when it is considered to reflect poorly on the woke agenda.
It isn’t surprising that some victims of “gender-affirming care” want to be put out of their misery. On top of the sheer horror of what has been done to them, they endure pain and incontinence:
A huge majority – 81 percent – of those who had gender-affirming surgery in the past five years said they endured pain simply from moving around in the weeks and months after going under the knife.
Researchers from the University of Florida and Brooks Rehabilitation, a health non-profit, showed that more than half of trans surgery patients endured pain during sex, and nearly a third could not control their bladders.
Anyone who would put children on track for these procedures for the sake of advancing LGBT ideology is a fiend likely to burn in hell.
Click on the link to see what is happening to the jabbed. I’m sorry if you got one. All of my friends did too. The Covid jab didn’t stop Covid nor it’s transmission. It was a lie that the current administration told.
Don’t ever trust the government, the CDC, WHO, UN or any organization that says you have to do something again. It is life or death, and they choose your death.
A surprising source of PFAS exposure and pollution is toilet paper, as a recent study reveals.
Toilet paper has been shown to contain significant doses of PFAS chemicals linked to impaired testicular function in men. 👇
A study from March of this year revealed that significant quantities of PFAS are found in virtually every brand of toilet paper on the market. The average American will use 26kg of toilet paper a year. 19+ billion lb of toilet paper are flushed down American toilets each year.
PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) are vicious hormone-disrupting chemicals that are ubiquitous today because of their use in plastics, fire retardants, non-stick coatings, ammunition and contact lenses, among other things. PFAS are also obesogenic and linked to a…
wide variety of other conditions like cancers and auto-immune disorders.
If you want to read more about PFAS, try my latest article for American Greatness.
In the recent study, the researchers looked at toilet paper and sewage from around the world and tested for the presence of 34 different types of PFAS.
PFAS chemicals are regularly used in paper-manufacturing.
Recycled paper will often get a double dose (i.e. once when the paper was first made, then again when it’s recycled).
The PFAS most present in toilet paper and sewage was 6:2 diPAP, which has been linked to impaired testicular function in men (👇).
6:2 diPAP was 91% of all PFAS detected in the toilet paper samples, and 54% in the sewage samples. Toilet paper usage contributes PFAS to the water supply in the parts per billion. The EPA measures dangerous levels of PFAS in parts per TRILLION…
What’s even worse about 6:2 diPAP is that it is a precursor chemical. It can become far worse chemicals by interacting with human waste, including PFOA, among the most dangerous forms of PFAS. It’s likely that toilet paper may be putting large quantities of PFOA into wastewater.
It’s also probable that the anus is therefore also a significant source of PFAS absorption into the body.
Maybe what we need now is a brand of organic PFAS-free right-wing toilet paper…
This has to be a joke. Did someone bother to ask any girl if bonus hole was offensive? I bet if they asked 5, it would have been a problem by person 2.
Like any Vegan is going to believe this or that I care, but maybe they’ll be a lot less annoying about telling you that they don’t eat meat.
You lose IQ points being a vegan. I already knew this before I read about the study when my ex told me she was vegan. That was enough for me to know the lower IQ part.
Here are some excerpt and the rest of the story if you care to read:
Ideally, to test the impact of the vegan diet on the brain, you would take a randomly selected group of people, ask half to stop eating animal products – then see what happens. But there isn’t a single study like this.
There are several important brain nutrients that simply do not exist in plants or fungi
Instead, the only research that comes close involved the reverse. It was conducted on 555 Kenyan schoolchildren, who were fed one of three different types of soup – one with meat, one with milk, and one with oil – or no soup at all, as a snack over seven school terms. They were tested before and after, to see how their intelligence compared. Because of their economic circumstances, the majority of the children were de facto vegetarians at the start of the study.
Surprisingly, the children who were given the soup containing meat each day seemed to have a significant edge. By the end of the study, they outperformed all the other children on a test for non-verbal reasoning. Along with the children who received soup with added oil, they also did the best on a test of arithmetic ability. Of course, more research is needed to verify if this effect is real, and if it would also apply to adults in developed countries, too. But it does raise intriguing questions about whether veganism could be holding some people back.
It’s hard to imagine that people can’t figure out that males and females are different. They are supposed to be. Just because you don’t like yourself, it doesn’t mean that it’s going to make your life any better by trying to be something you are not. If you can’t accept yourself as who you are, don’t think we’re going to accept the fake version of you.
We’ve already found out that men don’t make good women. They can kick ass in girls sports, but can’t sell beer very well as girls. They’ll never be able to have a baby either, kind of the big male/female differentiator.
I see Ryan Mulvanney like all real men do. He was the pussy in school who got his ass kicked. After the butt light commercial, a lot of guys would administer that just out of duty to other men. Instead of bucking up and trying harder, he decided to try and be a girl and was marketing poison.
HERE IS THE REAL STORY, WHY A GIRL CAN’T BE A GUY
Now, we have this girl that is crying because she found out that men are competitive, loners and don’t need other men to cry with in the bathroom.
So speaking of pussies, here is the girl who has pretended to be a guy, crying because she can’t share her feelings with other guys in the bathroom. I’ve got a clue for you girl, guys don’t share their feelings. We never give away any competitive advantage.
This is really sad. Trans man realizes how hard it is to be a man when you’re really a woman.
Males and females are different and no matter what you do to your body, you can’t be the opposite sex. pic.twitter.com/Ib2in2vJrb
Men are in competition with each other. Men vie to express dominance, to establish their place in the pecking order.
If a man steps out of line, and assumes a place in the pecking order that is not agreed upon – this place being based upon established social agreements that no one can see, nor express in words – he is summarily dismissed.
If he still believes the territory, he has assumed, is rightfully his, he will endure all manner of insults and attacks, up to, and including, physical attacks
This begins for boys some time just after the toddler stage, and intensifies throug the teen years, and early adulthood.
Men find this competition exhilarating, though it is also challenging, and often ends in shocking defeats.
We pick ourselves up, nurse our wounds, and go back to do battle on this invisible turf.
This is a fact of manhood that a woman can not know, because, as I said, this pecking order is based upon ESTABLISHED social agreements that no one can see, nor express in words.
I would imagine this must be a shocking fact of life for a Trans “man”, to find that he has no place, because he never fought for it, and is completely unaware of the competition which is raging all around him.
It must be profoundly disorienting.
And it is because these Trans “men” have never fought for their territory – and enter into this competition completely unaware, blind to that which is clear as day to man = that they can never be more than a cheap imitation of man; a mockery of a notion of manhood, perceived from the outside.
Here’s our life, fighting for everything and every inch of ground we gain in life.
You may change your appearance, but you can’t change your gender or ever know what the other gender is like. It’s why men don’t have a clue what girls are thinking. At some point in all of our lives, we give up trying and just live our life. It’s much better that way.
I’ve known this for a long time. I actually like the taste of mineral water, but realized a while back that it has C02 in it when I bought a Soda Stream. It uses C02 tanks. It’s good for the plants so good for the environment.
Now it comes out that that the climatards just figured this out. Bear in mind that Perrier and San Pelagrino have been around well before these weenies were born and there wasn’t a climate problem.
It’s the little victories that count. I find it funny every time I can do something they get upset about, especially when they are wrong. They are in it to ruin our lives and pimp us for more money.
I’ll be toasting to Al Gore when I have a glass tonight.
Now Mineral Water Has Also Become a “Climate Killer”
In the joint large-scale undertaking of an informal ideological Stasi made up of scientists, NGOs and state-related institutions to scour the entire everyday life of Germans for climate-damaging consumption habits and behavior in order to feed the results of the political decision-making process for the gradual implementation of a totalitarian climate dictatorship, no area of life and no detail is spared: The “non-profit” association “a tip:tap” recently commissioned a remarkable study on the climate damage caused by sparkling water. Somebody must have noticed that sparkling water equals carbon dioxide equals CO2 — which is essential for life (on Earth), but deemed a “climate killer” and thus as a trace gas, an alleged “environmental toxin”, for whose symbolic “reduction” Germany is wildly prepared to sacrifice its civilizational prosperity.
The result of the study followed as expected: it now also declares drinking mineral water to be a climate sin. Because: Its consumption in Germany consumes around 1.5 times as much CO2 as the entire domestic German air traffic, calculate the green flunky scientists. Even during its production, mineral water requires many more process steps than tap water because it has to be cleaned after treatment and bottled under higher standards. In addition, the production of the bottles, the transport to the supermarket and the way home from there drive emissions even further up. Overall, according to the study, mineral water produces 202.74 g of CO2 equivalents per liter — tap water, on the other hand, only 0.35 g. This means that still water performs around 586 times better than bottled mineral water.
Inquisition and abjuration mechanisms
Extrapolated to the annual consumption in Germany, which is currently 181.4 liters per capita, and a population of over 83 million, this would add up to three million tons of CO2. Of course: an intolerable situation! The green regulators and prohibition high priests are in demand! Therefore — and in order to promote a climate-friendly way of life — the association logically calls for a switch to consumption limited solely to tap water. Support for this next plan for paternalism and restricting freedom comes from the radical left-wing ZDF [public broadcaster] dirt-slinger Jan Böhmermann: He had already taken up the issue in a typical agitprop manner and also used the opportunity to launch one of his slanderous sweeping attacks — this time against the water provider and well builder “Viva con Agua”.
Among other things, Böhmermann complained that the company not only dared to produce mineral water, but also had no workers’ council and paid its employees too poorly. According to today’s inquisition and abjuration mechanisms, ”Viva con Agua” immediately rolled over and publicly announced that they would fully support drinking more tap water in Germany in the future. The company management also bowed and submissively justified itself that the employees in the filling plant had not previously asked for the formation of a workers’ council and were paid according to the applicable industry standards. This climate of high-handed public accusations and flaunted remorse, along with a bad conscience, does not bode well: It is not impossible that the Greens will start a campaign for a mineral water ban and order the future consumption of only tap water — or better yet, collected rainwater. [And I’m pretty sure that people will have to pay for that water according to the yearly rainfall, and I’m pretty sure that Coca-Cola will be exempt from this madness, too.]
There is more at the link above, but I think you get the drift
Create a scare or panic, then profit from it before the sheep and under educated figure it out.
This fraud has both the climate scam and the leader of fake and biased news, the NY Times in it. When I had to work with New Yorker’s at IBM, they worshiped the Times both for what it said and how we treated it in the land of public relations. My co-worker Tom Belz would quote anti-Bush stuff as well as global warming panic from this bible. I’d laugh it off by telling him it was from the NYT and everyone knew they were lying. The anti-Bush (or anti-truth) rhetoric stopped with the revelation that he graduated both from Harvard and Yale. They couldn’t understand that one of their own wasn’t (then) part of the left cabal.
Then, I had to deal with the zealots like Greenmonk and Internet Trolls like Tim O’Reilly who were sure that then named global warming was the greatest problem in the world and that tides were rising.
A little history provides the facts I knew back then. It was all a lie. While the facts are now it place, I knew they couldn’t predict the weather next week, let alone decades from now.
Many of those beaches are along the East Coast. However, back in 1995, the New York Times ran a story with “experts” genuinely concerned those beaches would be gone in 25 years.
The article covered the assessment conducted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
According to draft sections of the new forecast, some of the predicted effects of climate change may now be emerging for the first time or with increasing clarity. The possible early effects include these:
*A continuing rise in average global sea level, which is likely to amount to more than a foot and a half by the year 2100. This, say the scientists, would inundate parts of many heavily populated river deltas and the cities on them, making them uninhabitable, and would destroy many beaches around the world. At the most likely rate of rise, some experts say, most of the beaches on the East Coast of the United States would be gone in 25 years. They are already disappearing at an average of 2 to 3 feet a year.
Yet, somehow, East Coast beaches remain. Sadly, marine mammals are routinely washing up along the coastal shores, and one of the concerns is that their deaths can be attributed to climate change “solutions.
(Plymouth Rock, the same tide level as 1620)
In addition to these dire predictions being entirely wrong, chasing after solutions to nonexistent problems is turning out to be expensive: Trillion dollars.
No one said that combating climate change would be cheap. Still, a report released during the COP27 climate talks made for a sobering reminder. The report, commissioned by Britain and Egypt as the past and current hosts of the UN summit, said that developing countries alone need a combined $1trn a year in external funding to meet the goals set out in their Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs (the climate action plan set out in the Paris Agreement).
This funding, in addition to the countries’ own expenditure, is needed for things like cutting emissions, dealing with deadly disasters and restoring nature. In one encouraging development, it was reported on November 11th that America and Japan would provide Indonesia with at least $15bn to help retire some coal-fired power stations early.
Time, talent, and treasure is squandered on bad policy built on “narrative science.”
Meanwhile, some recent studies shed light that on the Earth’s past that show the climate has long been in flux.
Researchers from Aarhus University, in collaboration with Stockholm University and the United States Geological Survey, recently published a report on their findings related to samples from the previously inaccessible region north of Greenland. Their findings indicated Arctic sea ice in this region melted away during summer months around 10,000 years ago.
The researchers have used data from the Early Holocene period to predict when the sea ice will melt today. During this time period, summer temperatures in the Arctic were higher than today. Although this was caused by natural climate variability opposed to the human-induced warming, it still is a natural laboratory for studying the fate of this region in the immediate future.
And while the authors argue their study confirms the need to be climate extremists, I assert that their data show man’s impact on the global climate isn’t panic-worthy. In fact, humanity would do better to focus efforts and resources on dealing with local pollution problems and perhaps exploring nuclear energy options.
The experience with Covid should have taught us not to trust global “experts” who offer simple solutions to complex issues. This should be doubly true with the “climate crisis,” especially as the long-term projections made nearly 30 years ago have proven to be wrong.
The good news: The East Coast beaches are still here. The bad news: So is the climate hysteria.
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
They are trying to get gene therapy into everything. I doesn’t take a genius (maybe it does) to see that mRNA isn’t advanced far enough along to function without doing harm. Of course, that could be the actual reason some are doing it.
Like AI, mRNA could be used for good, but it is a tool. People are good and evil. It is the evil that are winning on both topics so far. It’s being used for no good. Just look at the sudden deaths count, especially on young men who got the Covid jab.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced on Monday that enrollment for volunteers has begun for a Phase I clinical trial testing of universal flu vaccine based on mRNA technology.
Messenger RNA, or mRNA, is the same technology behind the widely used Covid shot from Moderna and Pfizer.
“A clinical trial of an experimental universal influenza vaccine developed by researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ (NIAID) Vaccine Research Center (VRC), part of the National Institutes of Health, has begun enrolling volunteers at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina,” according to the news release.
“This Phase 1 trial will test the experimental vaccine, known as H1ssF-3928 mRNA-LNP, for safety and its ability to induce an immune response.”
Researchers are hoping that this vaccine would provide long-lasting protection against many flu strains, eliminating the need for annual vaccinations.
The clinical trial is open to 50 healthy participants ages 18 to 49.
“Three groups of study participants (10 participants each) will be vaccinated with 10, 25 and 50 micrograms of the experimental vaccine, respectively. After evaluation of the data to determine an optimum dosage, an additional 10 participants will be enrolled to receive the optimum dosage. The study also will include a group of participants who will receive a current quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine.”
According to CDC, a quadrivalent influenza (flu) vaccine is designed to protect against four different flu viruses, including two influenza A viruses and two influenza B viruses.
“A universal influenza vaccine would be a major public health achievement and could eliminate the need for both annual development of seasonal influenza vaccines, as well as the need for patients to get a flu shot each year,” said Acting NIAID Director Hugh Auchincloss, M.D. “Moreover, some strains of influenza virus have significant pandemic potential. A universal flu vaccine could serve as an important line of defense against the spread of a future flu pandemic.”
There is more at the link above, but they said the Covid-19 jab was safe and effective, while hiding the test results and getting legal immunity from the murder of more people than Covid itself.
So unless I can’t help it, no mRNA anything for me. Decide for yourself if you want to have something changing your DNA (what messenger RNA can do) and wondering if it is going to kill you.
Lord Monkton has been a shining star on the truth of the climate issue. Here is what he delivers as damning evidence.
I know people who worship the climate as their religion and wouldn’t believe the truth were it this clear. I marvel at how far some will go to be wrong. SMH
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.
WASHINGTON — Self-described “woke” Defense Department schools official Kelisa Wing, whose anti-white social media comments garnered national attention last fall, has been reassigned to an unrelated role, The Post has learned.
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.
By 
Delusions of Adequacy 
