Author Topic: Epidemics: Bird Flu, TB, AIDs, Superbugs, Ebola, etc  (Read 255846 times)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile
second post
« Reply #1050 on: June 05, 2021, 06:09:15 AM »
since he is an old white male he can't accuse those who point out his failings as being sexist racist or other phobe

so he instead calls them anti science :

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-evidence-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt/

and of course , out of spite we have all the leftists defending him tooth and nail
 and thanking him

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Re: Epidemics: Bird Flu, TB, AIDs, Superbugs, Ebola, etc
« Reply #1051 on: June 05, 2021, 07:31:36 AM »
NRO has me paywall blocked.  May I ask you to paste the article?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile
Andrew McCarthy on Wuhan virus lead
« Reply #1052 on: June 05, 2021, 12:25:22 PM »
The Lab-Leak Theory: Evidence Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
June 5, 2021 6:30 AM

Experts from China and the World Health Organization joint team visit Wuhan Tongji Hospital in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, February 23, 2020. (China Daily via Reuters)
Every good prosecutor will tell you that the best case is a strong circumstantial case — and that’s exactly what we have.

‘Of course, it’s only circumstantial evidence. We may never know the truth.”

If I’ve heard this once, over more decades than I care to admit, I’ve heard it a thousand times. It is the rote dismissal of circumstantially based cases, and it is almost always wrong.

We can no longer afford to be wrong when it comes to the origin — the generation by regime-controlled Chinese scientists, almost certainly by accident — of a pandemic that has caused nearly 4 million deaths globally (now closing in on 600,000 in the U.S.), in addition to geometrically more instances of serious illness, trillions of dollars’ worth of economic destruction, and incalculable setbacks in the educational and social development of tens of millions of children.

I was a prosecutor for a long time, and prosecutors are in the business of proving stuff. Every good one will tell you that the best case is a strong circumstantial case. It is the most airtight and least problematic kind of proof.

Circumstantial cases are a tapestry of objectively provable facts. No one of those facts, by itself, establishes the ultimate conclusion for which all the interconnected facts collectively stand. Instead, each single fact supports a subordinate proposition that must be true in order for the ultimate conclusion to be valid. Stitch enough of those subordinate propositions together and the ultimate conclusion is inexorable.

We have a natural human reluctance to trust circumstantial evidence. In our own lives, we know what we know — or at least what we think we know — because we have lived it. We don’t need to run down a plethora of clues to grasp our own experiences. We can describe them firsthand. If we worked in a lab that came under scrutiny, we could tell everyone how an accident there happened — or assure them that it didn’t happen. Ergo, we reason, what we really need is direct evidence, someone like ourselves who can narrate the goings-on.

Only then, we tell ourselves, can we really know. Even when all the disparate circumstantial trails lead to the same answer, we instinctively ask how we can trust that answer unless and until it has been confirmed by someone who was there.

But that is not how it works in the real world. Once you get beyond the narrow limits of your own experience, everything else is about what you can trust. And you quickly realize you can trust a constellation of objective facts that fit together (i.e., circumstantial evidence) more reliably than the subjective account of a witness — “direct” evidence — whose entanglement in a controversy may erode his credibility.

The murderer is apt to tell you he didn’t do it. And even the murderer who tells you he did do it is apt to be lying about something significant. Maybe he’s currying favor with the prosecutor, who has demanded testimony against an accomplice in exchange for a reduced sentence; maybe he is settling a score with the accomplice; maybe he has mistakenly assumed that the accomplice was complicit because of what some intermediary told him.

When we are trying to judge a scenario we did not personally witness, we always want a firsthand witness to look us in the eye and say, “Here is what happened.” But even as we listen to such testimony, we realize that we are still in a realm of epistemic uncertainty. For now, we need to consider the witness’s motives, biases, intelligence, scrupulousness, and capacity under the circumstances to have perceived what happened, recall it accurately (for memory plays tricks on us all), and relate it clearly.

What’s the upshot of all that? Well, it means we’re necessarily right back to circumstantial evidence.

When it comes to something of consequence, we don’t take the direct witness’s word for it. We demand corroboration. And how do we corroborate a witness’s testimony? The same way we prove a circumstantial case: by establishing that the subordinate facts line up with the testimonial version of events — that, for example, the records show the alarm triggered just when the witness says the break-in happened; that a nearby surveillance camera captured a streaking vehicle matching the getaway car’s description only 20 seconds later; that the next morning, a series of suspicious cash deposits started to be made at banks just a few blocks apart from each other; and so on.

Apodictic knowledge eludes us. That’s the human condition. Whether we are in the position of relying on circumstantial evidence, direct evidence, or some combination of the two, we are forever at a deficit. Our knowledge is imperfect and our premises may be flawed (and constantly reminding oneself of that is what separates good intelligence analysts from bad ones). Notice that in the criminal justice system, where we apply the most exacting evidentiary standards, the requirement is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, not proof beyond all possible doubt.

There is no proof beyond all possible doubt.

What NR’s Jim Geraghty has chronicled for months is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the coronavirus pandemic was generated by an accident — a lab leak, a not-uncommon mishap in medical research conducted by fallible human beings — at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Ditto the important work of Nicholas Wade, Vanity Fair’s Katherine Eban, our own Michael Brendan Dougherty, and a few intrepid others.

Lab accidents are common, and have been known to spawn infectious diseases (including the escape of SARS1 from the Chinese National Virology Institute in Beijing “no less than four times,” according to Wade). WIV scientists were conducting gain-of-function research on bat-based coronaviruses, in particular their capacity to infect humans. The bats in which are found closely related (but, importantly, not identical) viruses do not inhabit the vicinity of Wuhan — they are nearly a thousand miles away from that densely populated city and have limited flight range. The likelihood of naturally occurring interspecies transmission (outside a lab setting) is infinitesimal. The lab conditions in Wuhan were insufficiently safe — grossly so, it appears. Several of the lab’s researchers fell ill (at least three severely enough to be hospitalized) right at the critical time, in autumn of 2019, before the first identified case of infection with SARS-CoV2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

Here, two additional points are salient. First, those implausibly claiming that the circumstantial case is weak always skip past the inconvenient fact that the circumstantial case for their preferred theory of natural transmission (from bat to human, directly or through an intermediary species) is so weak as to be negligible — there being, most tellingly, no known existence of a bat (or pangolin, etc.) in which a virus matching SARS-CoV2 has been found.

Second, we are not in a U.S. prosecution. The presumption of innocence that obtains in U.S. criminal trials does not apply in other contexts, and China is not entitled to it. Nor is China vested with the privilege against self-incrimination. We are fully within our rights to conclude that the monstrous regime in Beijing is not an innocent actor, and that it has sealed records, silenced witnesses, and hidden evidence because it knows both that SARS-CoV2 was generated by an accident in one of its labs and that its sundry deceits in concealing this fact undermined any possibility of containing the damage — to catastrophic effect.

On the same rationale, we can justifiably infer that American officials who zealously maligned sensible, informed efforts to investigate the lab-leak theory were motivated not by some adherence to science but by the awareness that the U.S. government knew about and was supportive of China’s virological research.

China and its abettors have much to account for. Unless and until China comes forward with convincing evidence that the lab-leak theory is wrong, the position of the United States and the world must be that China is culpable. We should stop spouting the untenable and irresponsible drivel that, because the case is “circumstantial,” the truth may never be known. We know plenty.


ANDREW C. MCCARTHY is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, an NR contributing editor, and author of BALL OF COLLUSION: THE PLOT TO RIG AN ELECTION AND DESTROY A PRESIDENCY. @andrewcmccarthy


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Re: Epidemics: Bird Flu, TB, AIDs, Superbugs, Ebola, etc
« Reply #1056 on: June 07, 2021, 08:39:03 AM »
Well, that is curious , , ,


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Gates said this:
« Reply #1058 on: June 07, 2021, 12:37:16 PM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: July 17, 2021, 05:54:56 PM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile
Yusen Zhou
« Reply #1060 on: June 07, 2021, 03:00:32 PM »
good find GM

not much comes up on him
did he die of covid
or was jailed or executed
by CCP?

https://covid19.elsevierpure.com/en/persons/yu-sen-zhou/clippings/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
WSJ: Makary: The Power of Natural Immunity
« Reply #1061 on: June 08, 2021, 01:02:36 PM »
The Power of Natural Immunity
Studies show it’s durable and widespread. If you’ve had Covid, you can get by with one shot of vaccine.
By Marty Makary
June 8, 2021 12:55 pm ET


The news about the U.S. Covid pandemic is even better than you’ve heard. Some 80% to 85% of American adults are immune to the virus: More than 64% have received at least one vaccine dose and, of those who haven’t, roughly half have natural immunity from prior infection. There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health leaders should pay it heed.

Only around 10% of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests, but four to six times as many have likely had the infection. A February study in Nature used antibody screenings in late summer 2020 to estimate there had been seven times as many actual cases as confirmed cases. A similar study, by the University of Albany and New York State Department of Health, revealed that by the end of March 2020—the first month of New York’s pandemic—23% of the city’s population had antibodies. That share necessarily increased as the pandemic spread.

The contribution of natural immunity should speed up the timeline for returning fully to normal. With more than 8 in 10 adults protected from either contracting or transmitting the virus, it can’t readily propagate by jumping around in the population. In public health, we call that herd immunity, defined broadly on the Johns Hopkins Covid information webpage as “when most of a population is immune.” It’s not eradication, but it’s powerful.

Without accounting for natural immunity, we are far from Anthony Fauci’s stated target of 70% to 85% of the population becoming immune through full vaccination. But the effect of natural immunity is all around us. The plummeting case numbers in late April and May weren’t the result of vaccination alone, and they came amid a loosening of both restrictions and behavior.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile
spies shipping to china deadly viruses
« Reply #1065 on: June 09, 2021, 04:11:44 PM »
why were they not in jail awaiting execution ?

instead of giving every Chinese spy a chance to escape back to China

like Swalwell's girlfriend

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile



G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile
Chaga
« Reply #1072 on: June 20, 2021, 07:08:57 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/300k-americans-may-live-chronic-100101667.html

almost certainly , not mentioned of course , is the fact these  infected people are mostly illegals who  bringing their diseases with them.

God forbid anyone in medicine should say politically incorrect things even when true

"listen to science"


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Intel agencies flinching
« Reply #1075 on: June 23, 2021, 10:10:52 AM »
Head of U.S. Intelligence: We May Never Know COVID-19’s Origin

On the menu today: Avril Haines, the U.S. director of national intelligence, ominously declares in an interview that the U.S. intelligence community is no closer to determining how the COVID-19 pandemic began, and may never know with certainty; the need to end the crisis mentality on evictions; and Vice President Kamala Harris apparently thinks she’s “winning” something by refusing to spend a day visiting the border.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence: Hey, We May Never Know the Origin of COVID-19

Avril Haines, the U.S. director of national intelligence, did a surprisingly extensive interview with Yahoo News, and said quite a bit about the ongoing U.S.-intelligence review of information relating to the origin of COVID-19. Almost nothing she said was particularly encouraging — starting with her declaration that “nearly a month into the review, it appears that the intelligence community is no closer to settling on one explanation of how the deadly virus originated”:

Asked if it’s possible the intelligence community will never have “high confidence” or a smoking gun on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Haines responded, “Yes, absolutely.” Haines, who studied physics at the University of Chicago, held out the possibility of a eureka moment but refused to predict a breakthrough. “We’re hoping to find a smoking gun,” she said, but “it’s challenging to do that,” adding that “it might happen, but it might not.”

Haines said she has been closely overseeing the review, which involves dozens of analysts and intelligence officials, and has immersed herself in the details. She is regularly briefed by analysts who represent the rival theories, which may explain her caution about predicting a breakthrough. “I don’t know between these two plausible theories which one is the right answer,” she said in the interview. “But I’ve listened to the analysts, and I really see why it is that they perceive these two theories as being in contest with each other and why it’s very challenging for them to assess one over the other.”

If, after a 90-day review, specifically in response to a directive from the president, the U.S. intelligence community’s answer is, “Well, we just don’t know how this pandemic started,” it will be not just a colossal disappointment; it will also set off a million conspiracy theories about coverups.

The U.S. intelligence community has access to all kinds of information that we mere laymen don’t — signals intercepts of every kind from the NSA, satellite photos and footage, information from allied intelligence services such as the “Five Eyes,” and who knows, hopefully at least one human source in the Chinese government. There’s that rumor of a high-level defector, although some unnamed U.S. official told the Daily Beast that’s not true — but governments aren’t usually eager to confirm rumors of major-league defections. (If that denial is accurate, that raises the question of just where Dong Jingwei, vice minister of the Ministry of State Security, currently is.) At minimum, the U.S. intelligence community should be able to determine if anyone of significance within the Chinese government secretly feared or believed that the pandemic was indeed the result of a lab leak. Between the early lying, the delayed release of key information to the WHO, the taking down of previously accessible databases of virus information, the refusal to allow a WHO team to visit for a year, the refusal to turn over raw data on the first COVID-19 patients, and the suppression of academic research into the virus’s origin, Lord knows the Chinese government has been acting like it’s guilty from the start. And then there’s this simple fact, laid out in Katherine Eban’s piece in Vanity Fair:

Dr. Richard Ebright, board of governors professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University, said that from the very first reports of a novel bat-related coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, it took him “a nanosecond or a picosecond” to consider a link to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Only two other labs in the world, in Galveston, Texas, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina, were doing similar research. “It’s not a dozen cities,” he said. “It’s three places.”

There was one comment from Haines in that interview with Yahoo that seemed a little curious:

Haines even posited a third, hybrid theory for the virus’s origin. “It could be, for example, a scenario in which a scientist comes into contact with an animal that they’re sampling from” and contracts the virus in that way.

A scientist contracting the virus while collecting a sample is not morally or ethically all that different from a lab leak. (That particular scenario doesn’t seem all that unlikely, considering the fun-and-games images of bats hanging off the hats of the researchers with exposed skin collecting the samples, and Tian Junhua’s description of the time he “forgot to take protective measures. Bat urine dripped on him like raindrops” and self-quarantined for two weeks.) In either case, an effort at virus research that the institutions publicly insisted was safe was not safe and set off the worst pandemic in modern history. The only mitigating factor would be that no gain-of-function research was involved.

There is no bigger question facing the world right now than how this awful pandemic got started. Sure, thanks to vaccinations, the pandemic’s effect on American life is getting smaller each day. But this progress comes after more than 617,000 Americans succumbed to the virus, at least $16 trillion in economic losses, a lost year of schooling for almost all of America’s kids, the health effects of the “long-haulers,” and a million other disruptions and tribulations in the lives of ordinary people, all around the globe. We’re almost at 3.9 million deaths worldwide, and have more than 179 million cases worldwide. There’s also a good chance that all of these official figures underestimate the true toll in lives lost.

No one wants to go through this again, which means we have to know how it started. A “We just can’t figure it out” from the part of the U.S. government that is specifically assigned to protect us and and find out what other countries are hiding isn’t going to cut it.

By the way, even if this pandemic turns out to be proven to be the result of a lab leak, the risk of human beings catching a new virus from some animal is still a real and persistent risk, and animal smuggling and wet markets represent a significant continuing danger. (Yulin, China, hosted its annual Dog Meat Festival again this year. Dog lovers, you’re not going to want to click on that link.) The global scale of the illicit collection and trafficking of wild animals and their carcasses is jaw-dropping. Also, depending upon whom you ask, anywhere from 200,000 to 2.7 million pangolins are poached each year.

There are a lot of people who would prefer “We’ll never know” to “Yes, at least 4 million people worldwide are dead because of negligence and recklessness in the top virology lab in China.” Because if it’s that latter scenario, then the rest of us will have to do something about it, and the free nations of the world are already drifting into a new cold war with China, even without confirmation of our worst suspicions. Xi Jinping has been preparing for this conflict his entire life; the Chinese Communist Party has been researching, developing, and experimenting with new methods to maximize its leverage over other countries for decades.

It is not overstating it to declare that the upcoming intelligence-community report on the origins of COVID-19 may be the most consequential assessment of the U.S. government since George Kennan’s “Long Telegram” in 1946, recognizing the threat of international Communism and more or less inventing the concept of “containment.”

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Intel agencies flinching
« Reply #1076 on: June 23, 2021, 12:11:25 PM »
 :roll:

Head of U.S. Intelligence: We May Never Know COVID-19’s Origin

On the menu today: Avril Haines, the U.S. director of national intelligence, ominously declares in an interview that the U.S. intelligence community is no closer to determining how the COVID-19 pandemic began, and may never know with certainty; the need to end the crisis mentality on evictions; and Vice President Kamala Harris apparently thinks she’s “winning” something by refusing to spend a day visiting the border.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence: Hey, We May Never Know the Origin of COVID-19

Avril Haines, the U.S. director of national intelligence, did a surprisingly extensive interview with Yahoo News, and said quite a bit about the ongoing U.S.-intelligence review of information relating to the origin of COVID-19. Almost nothing she said was particularly encouraging — starting with her declaration that “nearly a month into the review, it appears that the intelligence community is no closer to settling on one explanation of how the deadly virus originated”:

Asked if it’s possible the intelligence community will never have “high confidence” or a smoking gun on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Haines responded, “Yes, absolutely.” Haines, who studied physics at the University of Chicago, held out the possibility of a eureka moment but refused to predict a breakthrough. “We’re hoping to find a smoking gun,” she said, but “it’s challenging to do that,” adding that “it might happen, but it might not.”

Haines said she has been closely overseeing the review, which involves dozens of analysts and intelligence officials, and has immersed herself in the details. She is regularly briefed by analysts who represent the rival theories, which may explain her caution about predicting a breakthrough. “I don’t know between these two plausible theories which one is the right answer,” she said in the interview. “But I’ve listened to the analysts, and I really see why it is that they perceive these two theories as being in contest with each other and why it’s very challenging for them to assess one over the other.”

If, after a 90-day review, specifically in response to a directive from the president, the U.S. intelligence community’s answer is, “Well, we just don’t know how this pandemic started,” it will be not just a colossal disappointment; it will also set off a million conspiracy theories about coverups.

The U.S. intelligence community has access to all kinds of information that we mere laymen don’t — signals intercepts of every kind from the NSA, satellite photos and footage, information from allied intelligence services such as the “Five Eyes,” and who knows, hopefully at least one human source in the Chinese government. There’s that rumor of a high-level defector, although some unnamed U.S. official told the Daily Beast that’s not true — but governments aren’t usually eager to confirm rumors of major-league defections. (If that denial is accurate, that raises the question of just where Dong Jingwei, vice minister of the Ministry of State Security, currently is.) At minimum, the U.S. intelligence community should be able to determine if anyone of significance within the Chinese government secretly feared or believed that the pandemic was indeed the result of a lab leak. Between the early lying, the delayed release of key information to the WHO, the taking down of previously accessible databases of virus information, the refusal to allow a WHO team to visit for a year, the refusal to turn over raw data on the first COVID-19 patients, and the suppression of academic research into the virus’s origin, Lord knows the Chinese government has been acting like it’s guilty from the start. And then there’s this simple fact, laid out in Katherine Eban’s piece in Vanity Fair:

Dr. Richard Ebright, board of governors professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University, said that from the very first reports of a novel bat-related coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, it took him “a nanosecond or a picosecond” to consider a link to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Only two other labs in the world, in Galveston, Texas, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina, were doing similar research. “It’s not a dozen cities,” he said. “It’s three places.”

There was one comment from Haines in that interview with Yahoo that seemed a little curious:

Haines even posited a third, hybrid theory for the virus’s origin. “It could be, for example, a scenario in which a scientist comes into contact with an animal that they’re sampling from” and contracts the virus in that way.

A scientist contracting the virus while collecting a sample is not morally or ethically all that different from a lab leak. (That particular scenario doesn’t seem all that unlikely, considering the fun-and-games images of bats hanging off the hats of the researchers with exposed skin collecting the samples, and Tian Junhua’s description of the time he “forgot to take protective measures. Bat urine dripped on him like raindrops” and self-quarantined for two weeks.) In either case, an effort at virus research that the institutions publicly insisted was safe was not safe and set off the worst pandemic in modern history. The only mitigating factor would be that no gain-of-function research was involved.

There is no bigger question facing the world right now than how this awful pandemic got started. Sure, thanks to vaccinations, the pandemic’s effect on American life is getting smaller each day. But this progress comes after more than 617,000 Americans succumbed to the virus, at least $16 trillion in economic losses, a lost year of schooling for almost all of America’s kids, the health effects of the “long-haulers,” and a million other disruptions and tribulations in the lives of ordinary people, all around the globe. We’re almost at 3.9 million deaths worldwide, and have more than 179 million cases worldwide. There’s also a good chance that all of these official figures underestimate the true toll in lives lost.

No one wants to go through this again, which means we have to know how it started. A “We just can’t figure it out” from the part of the U.S. government that is specifically assigned to protect us and and find out what other countries are hiding isn’t going to cut it.

By the way, even if this pandemic turns out to be proven to be the result of a lab leak, the risk of human beings catching a new virus from some animal is still a real and persistent risk, and animal smuggling and wet markets represent a significant continuing danger. (Yulin, China, hosted its annual Dog Meat Festival again this year. Dog lovers, you’re not going to want to click on that link.) The global scale of the illicit collection and trafficking of wild animals and their carcasses is jaw-dropping. Also, depending upon whom you ask, anywhere from 200,000 to 2.7 million pangolins are poached each year.

There are a lot of people who would prefer “We’ll never know” to “Yes, at least 4 million people worldwide are dead because of negligence and recklessness in the top virology lab in China.” Because if it’s that latter scenario, then the rest of us will have to do something about it, and the free nations of the world are already drifting into a new cold war with China, even without confirmation of our worst suspicions. Xi Jinping has been preparing for this conflict his entire life; the Chinese Communist Party has been researching, developing, and experimenting with new methods to maximize its leverage over other countries for decades.

It is not overstating it to declare that the upcoming intelligence-community report on the origins of COVID-19 may be the most consequential assessment of the U.S. government since George Kennan’s “Long Telegram” in 1946, recognizing the threat of international Communism and more or less inventing the concept of “containment.”


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
It Came From Science Fiction
« Reply #1078 on: June 27, 2021, 02:37:27 PM »
It Came From Science Fiction

body snatchers

As a kid I was fascinated with other-worldly tales, but the first one to really scare me was “The Pedestrian”, 1951, by Ray Bradbury—the story of a guy out walking at night, stopped by an unmanned police vehicle wanting to know why he was not at home watching his ‘viewing screen’. Bradbury had it all right, even driverless cars, and most of all, an understanding that life functions around oppressive control by an elite.

If we view present circumstances as ‘science fiction’, what is the plot for this story? Instigators for the ‘great reset’ (Make Back Better) include well-known Malthusians (who want most of us dead), advocating precipitous actions to reduce global population—now.

We know who these people are—those same ones who devastated Libya, the Middle East, Venezuela, Ukraine. Well-meaning serial killers, who after their first 20,000 murders, seem able to take it in stride—and to set their plan in motion. Just as the Mongols would build a timber wall around existing fortification walls of a city under attack, isolating the inhabitants in terror, the ‘resetters’ took it upon themselves to isolate the world population by raising a ‘wall of fear’ for a virus that amounted to no more than a bad flu.

Using masks that do no good and issuing stay at home orders that kept people indoors (scientists knew we were safer outdoors), commanding obedience for the ‘efficient cause’ of their plan, gene therapy, disguised as vaccines—gene therapy that in previous SARS trials was known to cause blood clots.

An interesting plot twist, because why would a gene-therapy, known to cause blood clots, be rushed to market?

Why would toxicology study protocol, always done before human trials, be abandoned? And why would a ‘vaccine’ with only emergency-use status be promoted as ‘safe’ (an obvious lie), and offered to pregnant woman and children?

In terms of sci-fi population reduction, pregnant women and children would be two important categories.

Meanwhile, in the real world, we have been lied to about the facts of science, suppressed by a coordinated effort on the part of government and WHO/CDC, since 2019. Even now, with their diabolical spokesperson, Fauci, thoroughly discredited, he remains in power while a ‘whitewash’ job is done to resurrect him.

What Bradbury didn’t have was the idea of digital vaccine passports, which are the truly necessary element to this narrative because, from a digital data center, the elite would be able to make us marionettes dance at will.

They are already promoting and bringing out booster shots to deal with viral variants. But the variants are 99.7 similar to Covid 19, making boosters totally unnecessary to mount an immune response.

We are told this is a novel virus. This is not a novel virus—60% similar to the ‘com-mon cold’ and 80% similar to earlier SARS viruses, meaning a great many persons have strong immunity against it—natural immunity, which gets compromised by the ‘jabs’.

Without testing for naturally-occurring antibodies resulting from fighting off earlier viruses, healthy persons are ‘jabbed’ and stripped of natural ability to mount a defense.

Let me reiterate—I write fiction—and this is an exercise in science fiction.

But why, in dealing with this virus are we cajoled into injections that are not vaccines and are unable to eradicate the virus?

Why did they only deal with the part that is the spike protein and not the whole virus?

Going after one aspect, the spike protein, gives the virus time to devise a way around that little wall they put up—extended the life and times of a virus which would have passed through much more quickly if it had been left alone.

From a Bradbury perspective, what is the plot now? Booster shots are not vaccines so what is it about booster shots that could change reality on the cellular level?

Vaccine passports would change cellular reality, but because we have a Bill of Rights. we are the nation who can stop it. Canada and Britain, in fact the entire EU, have no guaranteed rights—they do what they are told.

Given that the viral response is a bunch of tyrannical crap (even without sci-fi), built on lies and PR, we had better use our rights.

If we do not step-up and we get vaccine passports, what then?

As with digitally lock-downed currency, the elite would gain total control.

As political, medical and economic screws tighten, as with taxes, it only gets worse. At first, without your booster appearing on your phone, you don’t fly, then it changes—you can’t get gas or a quart of milk.That’s the good scenario. Since our friends on high can rationalize the murders of 20,000, what happens when they see the need to kill-off another 5 or 6 billion?

No worries—you’re strong and healthy—not one of those ‘dribblers’ with brain clots. You get assigned to a burial detail that spans the globe. One of the fortunates with job security.

Suppose the only persons subsidized are those willing to be chipped. Or worse than that, one of the boosters has the chip (they fail to mention) in it because tyrannical Malthusians differ from others—being up to the task—doing what has to be done.

Is this fiction? The elite know this virus is not acutely lethal yet they spent a fortune promoting fear, while keeping actual facts to themselves in a disinformation campaign.

For the elite to prevail, the gullible need be enlisted as shills, giving the elite ‘immunity’ from the herd. With the virus, if they can get enough of us ‘jabbed’, the rest can be corralled into an ignominious grouping—’anti-vaxxers’—where name calling is all that’s needed.

No matter that you willingly took vaccines for polio and smallpox, you are an anti-vaxxer—one who refuses to acquiesce to dictated, inevitable, cellular data-dumps.

Is this article science fiction?

Do we give the elite the benefit of simply being stupid, taking us forward, technologically, to place from which we cannot get back—where one can never un-vaccinate and may never be free from hideous illness that persists?

Are the elite simply morons who didn’t realize what they were doing? If the answer is yes, is the suppression of gold, the stripping of American rights, and the destruction of our economy, just bad planning by morons.

Or does Ray Bradbury see it otherwise?


You can get on my blog email list at: erik@neverhadaboss.com


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Informed consent?
« Reply #1081 on: June 30, 2021, 03:29:41 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18124
    • View Profile
Re: Informed consent?
« Reply #1082 on: June 30, 2021, 06:21:49 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMxuNvVgxlU

Wow.  Why did school children and pregnancy aged women need to take the vaccination in the first place?  They were at roughly zero risk of dying of covid and inefficient carriers of it.

Offering ice cream to children to have their RNA permanently altered?

In Washington state, free joint with vax.  Presumably to adults.  Nothing says informed consent like free joint.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2021, 06:35:52 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18124
    • View Profile
Fauci emails, gain of function dispute
« Reply #1083 on: June 30, 2021, 06:36:24 AM »
The Fauci Lab leak coverup referred to in the previous link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNxoVFZwMYw

No "gain of function" research was an important point of contention in the Rand Paul - Fauci exchange.  Fauci's denial was presumably under oath in Senate testimony.  Is there no consequence for catching America's most trusted expert lying to the world under oath?

It seems that one reason we aren't ruthlessly going after the Chinese regime for this totally unnecessary catastrophe is that Americans were complicit.

Research that can shut down the world for a year and kill more people than a large scale war was conducted under level II security - 'hey, shut that door when you leave' - and the Americans were funding and approving it.  Again, no consequence? 
« Last Edit: June 30, 2021, 06:38:18 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Fauci emails, gain of function dispute
« Reply #1085 on: July 01, 2021, 08:26:28 AM »
The Fauci Lab leak coverup referred to in the previous link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNxoVFZwMYw

No "gain of function" research was an important point of contention in the Rand Paul - Fauci exchange.  Fauci's denial was presumably under oath in Senate testimony.  Is there no consequence for catching America's most trusted expert lying to the world under oath?

It seems that one reason we aren't ruthlessly going after the Chinese regime for this totally unnecessary catastrophe is that Americans were complicit.

Research that can shut down the world for a year and kill more people than a large scale war was conducted under level II security - 'hey, shut that door when you leave' - and the Americans were funding and approving it.  Again, no consequence?

C'mon Doug, it's been made very clear that the cloud people don't have to obey the laws we do.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Shelter in Place was counter productive
« Reply #1087 on: July 05, 2021, 07:08:44 AM »
Shelter-in-place orders didn’t help, researchers find

May have contributed to deaths

BY TOM HOWELL JR. THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A little-noticed study says government orders to “shelter in place” during the COVID-19 fight did not save lives and spurred an uptick in excess deaths in some places, especially overseas.

Researchers from the RAND Corporation and the University of Southern California studied excess mortality from all causes, the virus or otherwise, in 43 countries and the 50 U.S. states that imposed shelter-in-place, or “SIP,” policies.

In short, the orders didn’t work.

“We fail to find that SIP policies saved lives. To the contrary, we find a positive association between SIP policies and excess deaths. We find that following the implementation of SIP policies, excess mortality increases,” the researchers said in a working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).

The increase was statistically significant in other countries in the weeks following the imposition of shelter-in-place orders. In the U.S., excess deaths rose in the weeks following the order before subsiding 20 weeks later under the orders.

The findings undercut blue states that relied on stay-athome methods as the treatment of choice throughout the pandemic, while providing a measure of vindication for GOP leaders who said they were harmful and that constituents could protect themselves.

Former President Donald Trump told Americans to stay home to slow the spread in March 2020 but criticized ongoing

shutdowns as counterproductive overreach throughout 2020.

Researchers counted all excess deaths to avoid a messy debate over what constituted a COVID-19 death. They pointed to reported upticks in deaths of despair — including drug overdoses, homicides, and unintentional injuries in 2020 — and delays in diagnosing other health conditions as part of the reason the orders fell flat.

“There’s little evidence these policies saved lives and there is some evidence they led to an increase in deaths of despair,” Neeraj Sood, a study author and USC professor, told The Washington Times.

He said government moves often lagged behind choices that individuals made to mitigate their risk of catching COVID-19, blunting the anticipated impact of shelter-in-place orders.

“People respond to the pandemic on their own. They’re invested in their own self-interest and self-preservation,” he said.

Mr. Sood said he might have received criticism over the paper six months ago, but most of the reaction has been positive or constructive as the team accepts comments ahead of submission to a peer-reviewed journal.

“I really haven’t gotten any negative comments saying, like, ‘You guys are ruining public health’ or ‘Why did you write this paper?’” he said. “I haven’t gotten any of those, surprisingly.”

Researchers found the shelter-inplace orders had only a modest impact in restricting movement, although people in American neighborhoods with higher incomes tended to stay put more than lower income ones, and mobility was more restricted in Europe than in U.S. states.

Shelter-in-place orders did slash excess mortality in the island nations of Australia, Malta and New Zealand, and the state of Hawaii, which is also an island chain, the researchers found.

It is possible that islands saw a benefit because “they were able to keep out kind of the inflow of people into the population,” Mr. Sood said.

The paper also looked at the trajectory of deaths compared with the timing of the orders, and found they remained counterproductive.

If the orders were implemented when excess deaths were on the rise, “then the results from the event study would be biased towards finding that SIP policies lead to excess deaths,” the researchers wrote. “However, we find the opposite: countries that implemented SIP policies experienced a decline in excess mortality prior to implementation compared to countries that did not implement SIP policies.”

Researchers said it is difficult to game out how the virus would have spread in the absence of the orders. But they thought it was important to take a longterm look at stay-at-home orders that were imposed in spring 2020 to keep hospitals afloat. The lockdowns became a preferred method in many places during the up-and-down fight with the coronavirus until vaccines arrived last December.

“The implication is this is not a great policy for saving lives, and vaccinations are a greater investment,” Mr. Sood said.

The researchers said they looked realworld impact of shelter-in-place policies that occurred instead of what might have been the “ideal” policy, or if there had been better compliance with them.

Amesh Adalja, a health expert who wasn’t involved in the study, said it will take some time for the world to tease apart which policies were effective in mitigating the fallout from the pandemic.

“That being said, in general, public health tends to favor voluntary recommendations rather than official government force, such as stay-at-home orders for the uninfected. It may be the case that in certain situations the stay-at-home orders created a paradoxical increase in risk as people gathered at homes where indoor transmission took place,” said Dr. Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

Shutdowns exacted a massive economic toll and knocked children out of in-person learning for a year or even longer, prompting soul-searching around the method and a push to improve the development and approval of therapies or diagnostics that can detect future threats.

“No discussion of shelter in place orders is complete without realizing that the only reason that the governors thought they needed them was because of massive missteps at the federal level in January, February [and] in most of March of 2020, in which evasion, lack of preparation, botched testing and a litany of other mistakes put the country in a situation in which undetected chains of transmission were bubbling up and putting hospitals into crisis,” Dr. Adalja said.

The RAND and USC researchers said in light of their study, “continued reliance on SIP policies to slow COVID-19 transmission may not be optimal.”

Instead, the best policy response may be pharmaceutical interventions in the form of vaccinations and therapeutics when they become available, the researchers said. “Early evidence suggests that initial vaccination efforts have led to large reductions in COVID-19 incidence,” they said. “Policy efforts to promote vaccination are thus likely to have large positive impacts.”

The Biden administration is emphasizing vaccination over shutdowns as it frets over the delta variant that is becoming dominant in the country. Los Angeles and other places are reimposing mask rules to protect people from the fast-moving delta variant but haven’t ordered sweeping shutdowns.


“There’s little evidence these policies saved lives and there is some evidence that they led to an increase in deaths of despair,” study author Neeraj Sood said. ASSOCIATED PRESS


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18124
    • View Profile
Re: Shelter in Place was counter productive
« Reply #1088 on: July 05, 2021, 07:23:36 AM »
Right.  Also violates every word and meaning of the US constitution.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Shelter in Place was counter productive
« Reply #1089 on: July 05, 2021, 10:42:52 AM »
Right.  Also violates every word and meaning of the US constitution.

I'm predicting that the vaccines will kill/maim more people than the Covid.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Re: Epidemics: Bird Flu, TB, AIDs, Superbugs, Ebola, etc
« Reply #1091 on: July 06, 2021, 07:37:43 PM »
Tucker made a fascinating point tonight, worthy of considerable rumination: In several states the average age of Wuhan deaths was greater than the average life span for that state.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
3rd Wave?
« Reply #1094 on: July 11, 2021, 09:59:07 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Say it aint so Dr. Wally , , ,
« Reply #1095 on: July 12, 2021, 06:20:41 PM »
Columbia professor who thanked Fauci for Wuhan lab messaging has links to Chinese Communist Party members | Fox News

Trivia:

Dr. Lipkin and I (known then to us as "Wally"- for Walter) went to college together for two years.

I would accompany him on rhythm guitar as he would play a pretty passable lead guitar.
I saw him on the news in the early days of the Wuhan Virus (Far out! That's Wally!) and reached out to him.

He blew me off.

Nonetheless, the report here is deeply disappointing.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18352
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Holy Fk!!!
« Reply #1097 on: July 16, 2021, 06:21:16 AM »
This is as deep, scary, and evil as it gets.

LISTEN FOR COMPREHENSION!!!

1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_uSZAWQmMM&t=186s

2)

Also see: Dr. David E. Martin | Sitzung 60: Die Zeit ist kein flacher Kreis (odysee.com)

A lot of back and forth here translating the German into English, but the gist of it is this:

Using sound follow the money, apolitical methodology, Dr Martin provides evidence that SARS COV2 is not novel. And shows evidence of patents, timing, relations, obfuscation, etc. going back many years. And much, much more.

Go to 33:21 of the video. By the time you get to the 39:50 point you will quite probably be in "Holy $___" mode. Go back to the beginning, follow the evidence, and so many pieces will fall into place.



3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knXcLOKXUeM

4) Apparently similar evil shenigans are at work as well:  https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/stop-chinas-gene-harvesting_3897051.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-07-13&mktids=e7fe56dde3740be57857227e4102013f&est=vuSD7m8B7AU4HkVIiXc3J5R9dET8Ul4azBtlWuikzDvdw1Aqu228Aaz6%2Fk4tZnM%2FHWe6
« Last Edit: July 16, 2021, 09:18:48 AM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69122
    • View Profile
Re: Epidemics: Bird Flu, TB, AIDs, Superbugs, Ebola, etc
« Reply #1098 on: July 16, 2021, 09:20:19 AM »
Second post:

CCP:  Yup, that is "Wally".

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18124
    • View Profile
Re: Holy Fk!!!
« Reply #1099 on: July 16, 2021, 09:31:44 AM »
quote author=Crafty_Dog
This is as deep, scary, and evil as it gets.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_uSZAWQmMM&t=186s
...


Public private partnerships - of all types - should be unconstitutional.  This one, CDC, in particular has SO much that can go wrong with it.

Like he said, in the first months of this coronavirus they monopolized testing and botched testing.

Where did they get the authority to issue a "lodge in place' order binding in 50 states for 16 months?  And based on what science, the largely discredited spread by surfaces theory?

They have been so wrong all the way through with no consequence.  If you stand up to them you are a nut.  Coincidence that they brought down the Trump economy and presidency?

As mentioned, they need a crisis for zillion dollar research to escalate.  Just like 'climate science'.  That is an enormously perverse incentive.

We found out (?) the virus came out of lab in China.  No one is shocked.  Then we found out the US CDC funded that lab - with no precautions.  No one is shocked.  We thought WHO was a problem.  Perhaps worse was our own CDC.  At least we knew WHO was corrupt.

Sen (Dr.) Rand Paul had his famous gain of function debate with Dr. Fauci.  What have we learned since?  Fauci was, at best, playing with words at best to stick with that denial.  More likely, he was lying through his teeth.  Again, no consequence.

Note:  This video is from May 2020.

What is the lesson going forward from Covid-19?   If we sit still, the lesson will stand that the constitution is provisional and that one or two scientists can shut down the country and the world and put us all under martial law for any or no reason at all at any time.