You've likely seen the memes and posters that say stuff like "I Believe: Science Is Real" and that is followed by a bunch of emotional sentiment about equal rights and stuff like that. I'm personally all about equal rights and liberty for all, except when it comes to huge multinational corporations like pharmaceutical companies (which are in some cases legally seen as "people" who deserve rights!) but the problem I have and felt the need to write about is about the "Science Is Real" part...
Sure, duh. Science exists but do these people that spread these memes even think about what they are spreading and what they even mean by that?
So what is science?
Well the scientific method is something I was first exposed to in high school and that involves coming up with a hypothesis and developing an experiment to test the hypothesis in order to determine if in fact that hypothesis was correct. It should have a limited number of variables so the experiment can be duplicated by yourself and others in order to be sure that the outcome doesn't change because of an unrecognized variable (some overlooked environmental variable for example).
So the question that I would ask anyone spreading the rhetoric (my opinion is that most memes essentially turn into rhetoric) is what science are you
talking about that is "real"? This statement is of course often lumped in with a bunch of other rather propagandist rhetoric (stating the obvious) such as "Love Is Love" and stuff about human rights about about lives mattering. Sure, lives matter but if they matter so much why are powers that be putting us in endless lockdowns and limiting our happiness to the point where we now have the highest suicide rates possibly in recorded history?
But let's get back to science...
Having read a lot about corruption in science it's clear to me, and it should be clear to you, that when an interested party pays for a scientific experiment (study) that they have a vested interest in the outcome it is very easy for that funding to influence the outcome.
Add to that the way statistics can be manipulated in medical studies, and example being summarizing the data with a "relative risk" assessment rather than an "absolute risk" assessment and the "reality" of science can easily be thrown out the window before that data reaches the headlines on CNN or MSNBC.
So is it even true then that "Science Is Real"?
My only answer that I'm getting at in this post is that depends on your definition of "science" (here I've pointed to the scientific method as an example) as well as your definition of "real".
If you think it can't be bought then you'll likely go down with the herd, and this is your right. Just like when you read a book you should know who the author is in order to determine how much you should trust the information in the book, well the same goes for science. Know, not only the author of the study, but also who funds the study and what the relationship is between the funding of the study and the scientist that is conducting it.
When it comes to the "jabs" that everyone is talking about right now, one thing that should be quite clear is that all of the (unpublished) data is being reported as "relative risk" assessment and NOT "absolute risk". I've done other posts where I go into more detail about what that means but the important thing to understand here is the reason for this.
If they were reported as absolute risk it would be patently obvious that there is no need for the jab in the first place!
If you're asking why that is let me explain...
If you have 30,000 participants and only 300 (this is in some cases higher than the actual numbers! but it makes the numbers simpler) got sick this means that only 0.1% of the general population (the participants in this case) are getting sick AT ALL. Not life threatening - but just a cold or flu type of sick.
Most of those 0.1% would normally recover just fine with a bit of extra vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, etc.
So why would a potentially life threatening jab be administered to any of these people who have such a low risk of dying?
(Of course their risk of dying shoots way up once they get the jab and even this is starting to get reported even in the mainstream media because they simply can't ignore it anymore - it's just too obvious!)
So this is why they use "relative risk" so they can boast numbers like 94.5% effective when in fact they are completely meaningless numbers!
Why are they meaningless?
Because we are talking about only 0.1% of the entire base of the study and breaking down only THOSE people and out of those 300 people who got sick and who didn't, and even in this case there is a lot of manipulation of "cohorts" (groups) in the studies in order to come up with high percentage numbers that can be reported as success in the media. Somehow these companies get away with not even publishing their raw data!
Denis Rancourt, a prominent publish scientist is now being banned from ResearchGATE after taking a stand against the standard narrative and reporting on it. He is quite an example of the censorship of valid science. After all science isn't "real" science if there's not an open debate and discussion about the outcome of the experiment.
Here's a recent interview where he discloses important information about legitimate science and the crossroad in history which we find ourselves:
So this brings us to the news of the week, suspension of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. They call it a "pause" but clearly this product (along with all the others in fact) is falling right in line with all the other controversies that this company has found itself in for decades. Here is a good summary of the Johnson & Johnson rap sheet:
Is this the type of brand you can trust?
In fact the J&J shot uses the same type of adenovirus vector as the also quite controversial (due to adverse reactions in Europe) AstraZeneca vaccine. These are DNA vaccines that use a weakened adenovirus to carry the mRNA to the cells in order to reprogram the DNA to create the spike protein and trigger the immune system.
One of the main problems that I have with this type of technology, and the same goes with the newer mRNA tech, is that in reprogramming the immune system it is likely triggering an imbalance between the normal balance of "Cell Mediated Immunity" (Th1) and "Humoral Immunity" (Th2) favoring the latter and the Th2 specific antibody production. This may in fact sacrifice the other important aspects of the immune system.
Of course the issues that have triggered the "pause" of J&J has more to do with the direct effects of altering DNA on blood coagulation (thus the so called "rare" blood clots in vital organs such as the lungs, brain and heart.
So are these events as rare as what the US media is reporting (1 in 1 million) or more along the lines of what is starting to be reported in Europe with the very similar AstraZeneca (1 in 40,000). This is a huge difference!
On March 23, which was fairly early in the J&J release, David Knight reported about the first two deaths from this shot:
So are deaths from these shots becoming hard for the media to ignore?
Well this past week a celebrity reporter did die shortly after her shot at age 47. This well known reporter was a frequent contributor on CNN and MSNBC as a legal analyst.
BROOKLYN, New York, April 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Celebrity legal analyst and television personality Midwin Charles has died at age 47, her family confirmed in a tweet posted Tuesday. Charles’ untimely death comes just over a month after receiving her first injection with Pfizer’s experimental mRNA vaccine against COVID-19. No cause of death has yet been announced.
Charles, a regular contributor on CNN and MSNBC, received a dose of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine on March 1. After her inoculation, she posted about it on Twitter, boasting of the efficiency of the process and encouraging others, saying “Let’s do this!”
The legal commentator uploaded another post a few hours later, noting she was deathly allergic to peanuts, apparently giving her concern enough to want to take her EpiPen to the vaccination clinic, “in case I went into anaphylaxis (sic) shock,” she said.
In previous posts you may have seen my reports about Dr Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer VP now turned critique of the experimental mRNA technology injections.
Are you concerned about the "new variants" of coronavirus?
In this recent interview he shares quite a bit of information but one of the discussed topics was the variants. He clarified that these so-called variants are only 0.3% different and that the difference would need to be at least over 30% difference in order for a "new booster" to be needed!
So are the new "variants" just fear porn?
He shares a bunch of additional information about this new technology:
Yeadon clarifies that based on the current research we don't know where the mRNA goes once it's injected and we don't know how long it resides in the body. He also explains that depending on where the mRNA resides (which will vary from person to person!) it will vary how much spike protein will be produced and this relates to blood coagulation and thus the potential for blood clots in various organs.
Keep in mind that all of the Covid shots trigger mRNA spike protein production so they all have this potential with blood coagulation/clots.
Of course these are just the short term adverse reactions, the long term have simply not been studied at all at this point!
While this is not my usual here I'm going to close with a bible verse which is strangely fitting:
Revelation 19:20 - And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
This could easily be interpreted with reference to these latest vaccines and if it is, well this isn't looking so good for those who get tricked into submitting to the shots. Not sure about you but I'd sure rather stay away from a lake of fire burning with brimstone, thank you.
I'm sure plenty of Biblical scholars out there can share thoughts about this in the comment section.
So much going on these days and I realize this was a lot to pack into a single post but I hope you've found this helpful.
If you did find this post useful and informative please share it with your friends that care to learn about these topics. And type in your questions below in the comments.
Image courtesy of: █ Slices of Light ✴ █▀ ▀ ▀
Image courtesy of: Valerio Belloni
TV personality who boasted of being vaccinated, pressuring her mom to do the same dies after receiving jab
Bible Verses About Mark Of The Beast
Photo By Johnny Silvercloud
Photo By phillyfamily
