Reply To: SARS cov2 and Covid 19


Home Forums Discussion Forum SARS cov2 and Covid 19 Reply To: SARS cov2 and Covid 19

#65036
Clark

But the ultimate responsibility does not lie with Steph and the other contrarians. All of us have been immersed lifelong in a political and media environment that we know cannot be trusted (WMDs in Iraq?), but at the same time subconsciously inculcates certain attitudes. Here is an example:

  • Report on face masks’ effectiveness for Covid-19 divides scientists – Guardian
  • Experts clash over research into efficacy of public wearing even homemade face coverings
  • “A row has erupted among scientists over a new report into the use of face masks by the general public”

How did the Guardian find this “division”, “row”, “clash”, “eruption”? Did a reporter walk into some university and find a load of scientists shouting at each other? Did some scientists hear that the Guardian had an article coming out, and phone the Guardian switchboard as a matter of urgency? Or is it more likely that some Guardian writer ‘phoned around some universities to find some “human interest”, to secure some “column inches” and the associated payment? No matter. How about this one:

  • Coronavirus: should everyone be wearing face masks? – Guardian again.

This time, just to make the point, we have a face-to-face in red and blue circles to make our “scientists” look like gladiators! I could cite hundreds of examples, and we haven’t even descended to the gutter tabloids yet. Remember it was Delingpole of the respectable broadsheet Telegraph who gave space to Yeadon. Dave thinks that some pathologist or whatnot that the Daily Mail has run several articles from is “the expert” to be trusted.

Is it any wonder that Steph thinks that “science” is “divided” and “changeable”, and can all be dismissed as “opinion”?

When did the corporate media ever tell us that evidence is what matters rather than “experts”?

And in the realm of conspiracy theory, the corporate media (with their near universal reach) inculcate by example. Media Lens have an excellent article on this:

Conspiracy Theories Malign And Benign – Face Masks And Israeli Training Of US Police

Last week, Mail on Sunday columnist Peter Hitchens tweeted on the use of face masks:

“the primary purpose of enforced muzzle wearing in public spaces (which protects nobody against anything) is to humiliate the wearer and make him or her accustomed to unquestioning obedience to authority”.

This was indeed a conspiracy theory – literally, and also, in our opinion, in the deranged and dangerous sense commonly used by journalists.

Remarkably, Hitchens was suggesting that governments around the world have ordered the public to wear face masks as part of a vast global conspiracy, presumably involving thousands of professional scientists, to train us in obedience to authority. Perhaps Hitchens also believes that the enforced wearing of seat belts in cars and on planes is part of the same sinister plan ‘to humiliate’ democratic citizens ‘and make him or her accustomed to unquestioning obedience to authority’.

Why, that’s exactly what Dave has claimed on this very thread! Yet Dave is no sheeple who’d shoot a little boy in cold blood to force him to conform to a lie! No way; Dave has seen right through the “MSM”. And he isn’t the source of the “superciliousness, condescension, wrath and resentment” either.

Because the corporate media indoctrinates subconsciously, I have to assume that I’m susceptible too; I wouldn’t be conscious of it, that’s what “subconscious” means. I therefore simply won’t have it in my house. No telly, no radio, no newspapers, no browsing from corporate media homepages. I’ll follow a link; that’s how I found the Guardian examples above. But I won’t let the corporate media set the agenda.

Instead I inspect the evidence, and check that the scientific consensus is consistent with it. And nearly always, it is.

Entertainment by Frank Zappa:

  • “I’m the slime oozing out from your TV set”YouTube, several minutes.