- This topic is empty.
May 17, 2020 at 17:35 #53709SAGuest
I did not mean that we have to accept everything but to accept the fact, otherwise I would just be suggesting that activism is futile.
Yes of course we should be diligent in looking at sources on both sides but quite often the sources from Pharma are well published or at least the science of it is well published. Many drugs are not necessarily discovered initially by big pharma, quite often they wait until something is proved to work and then big pharma is good at scaling it up for production. This is true of many industries and it is well known that university especially in the US are subsidised to do research exactly to feed the big corporations which are generally shy in taking risk by doing basic research and await until discoveries are made. But the tactics of the anti vaccine movement have always seemed dubious and their publications are always sketchy and not peer reviewed. They often rely on sensation headlines and on disgruntled and often discredited scientists like Wakefield and Mikovits. Unfortunately this is more likely to reduce scrutiny by true scientists because of the undesirability of this association.May 17, 2020 at 18:21 #53718ClarkGuest
Paul, take heed; SA wrote
– “Unfortunately this is more likely to reduce scrutiny by true scientists because of the undesirability of this association”
That’s exactly what I’ve been trying to tell you about “chemtrails”, Twin Tower demolition theory etc. It’s not just “true scientists”; there are hundreds of millions of critical thinkers in the world. Valid points get besmirched when they’re submerged in bunk.
– “quite often the sources from Pharma are well published or at least the science of it is well published.”
It’s good science, but it’s up to the companies whether they publish or not. Other good science that disadvantages their products is simply never published, hidden behind commercial confidentiality and NDAs.May 17, 2020 at 21:03 #53731Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 17, 2020 at 18:21
At present my comments get whisked off into the ether for ‘pre-moderation’; I have a couple which haven’t yet appeared, maybe they won’t.
Re Chemtrails, I expect you are getting out as much as possible during this nice weather, so check a couple of things out.
The only Chemtrails I have seen are high-altitude planes flying approx. West to East, and less flying East to West, on parallel courses. In the evenings, under suitable conditions, lots of parallel lines of cloud are visible to both East and West, running approx. N-S (or Vicky Versa) at certain times (around 18.00 – 19.30 in evening) and I believe at certain times in morning.
This is a rare chance to notice this, because there are very few passengers flying, so very little Civil aircraft (some freight), most of which fly low and don’t leave trails as they have already descended to low altitude to prepare to land.
Check this out, and if you have an explanation for the few trails formed during the day, and for the multiple old lines in the evening (identical to those under normal conditions pre Covid 19). If they were formed by ordinary civil aircraft, how come we don’t see them flying during the day, yet the trails still appear in late afternoon/evening in a North/South-South/North direction?
My conclusion is the military planes and planes contracted by them do the spraying over the sea, and they blow over the land later on. How many Chemtrails (or ‘Persistant Contrails’, if you wish) do you see going North/South or Vicky Versa?May 19, 2020 at 17:42 #53880ClarkGuest
I’ll look specifically for that Paul. But all I have noticed out of the ordinary is the relative lack of aircraft altogether. I’m under the collation point for Heathrow here, plus I can see Stansted to the north. On clear a day like this I’d expect to see at least fifteen aircraft at any time, half a dozen of them crossing London in a queue heading for Heathrow. But since the covid, it went down to about one every ten minutes, and it has increased a bit in the last week or two.
I’m enjoying it! It’s blessed quiet. And so’s the main road, the A12, about three miles from here. I used to hear it roaring day and night, but it’s much quieter now.
I haven’t noticed any parallel cloud lines, and I have been watching the sky. I’ve been getting Venus in the telescope on clear evenings, and I’ve been watching satellites go over because I’ve been looking for Starlink, a ‘procession’ of satellites in a line, but despite the prediction pages I haven’t seen this yet.
– “At present my comments get whisked off into the ether for ‘pre-moderation’”
Yeah, I think the mods are being stricter. Marginal ideas about scientific issues used to seem not to matter, but now with covid-19 among us, wrong information really can cost lives, and lots of them. It’s important that people respect the social distancing restrictions.
There’s an irony here in that the tougher the restrictions the sooner they can be gone. Done right, proper restrictions would fix the problem in five weeks. It has been nearly eight weeks now, but Boris’s lot couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery. They are literally making us sick. Is the UK now incapable of manufacturing masks? C’mon! It’s a bit of fabric and some elastic!May 19, 2020 at 20:23 #53890ClarkGuest
So it’s 20:15 and I’ve just set up the telescope to look at Venus. I don’t know my cloud types and I’m crap at judging altitude, but here goes.
It’s pretty clear here, just a bit of possibly stratus to the north. It’s cloudier in the distance over London, maybe cirrus making lines from south-west to north-east. There was a line that may have been a contrail before I saw it cutting across these from south-east to north-west, at a lower altitude, I think, but it’s lost its shape and seems to be becoming a cloud.
Glorious lack of aircraft; I can’t see one right now. There are no vapour trails above at any height, all around here.May 20, 2020 at 15:17 #53926Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 19, 2020 at 20:23
The parallel lines I talked about are old trails, on the horizon to the East and West in certain conditions, occasionally visible to the East in the morning, and visible in the East and West around or just before sunset. They are equidistant parallels (I may have forgot that in previous comment. I’ve seen partial sets of lines in the distance of a dozen or more, but they are not clear enough to photograph.
Even with the few aircraft and vehicles, there is still enough pollution to blank out the stars – the other evening was clear, yet all I could see was the moon and Venus over London.
It is well documented by Geoengineering Watch that military planes and their contractors are virtually always spraying trails over the Pacific, quite a way out, parallel to the California coast, which disrupt the normal rain clouds which would normally form.
They have radar tracking maps showing them.
If you ever meet a retired pilot (Civil or RAF – an active pilot is less likely to spill the beans) ask them about the trails. Maybe they’ll open up, because they must know what is going on.May 20, 2020 at 16:00 #53927Paul BarbaraGuest
Gates allegedly bribes Nigerian Senate to pass Mandatory Vaccine Law:
‘Bill Gates offered House of Reps $10m bribe for speedy passage of compulsory vaccine bill – CUPP alleges‘. (Daily Post).
‘…The Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP), on Monday, alleged that it has intercepted a human intelligence report that the Nigeria House of Representatives leadership was poised to forcefully pass the compulsory vaccine bill without subjecting it to the traditions of legislative proceedings.
In a statement issued and signed by the spokesperson of the opposition political parties, Barrister Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere and sent to DAILY POST in Abuja on Monday, the body urged lawmakers in the lower chamber to rise against impunity.
The body in the statement alleged that a sum of $10 million was offered by the American Computer Czar, Bill Gates to influence the speedy passage of the bill without recourse to legislative public hearing, a development they averted as anachronistic, adding that the Speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila should be impeached if he forces the bill on members…’
Just one case of Gates alleged bribery seeing the light of day – I suspect it is the tip of the iceberg.May 21, 2020 at 02:53 #53955Paul BarbaraGuest
You will need to translate this, but it does cover the Covid 19 Lockdown pretty well:
‘COVID – 19: BIG PHARMA ACTORS BEHIND CONTAINMENT‘.
‘…The British government has promoted the concept of an “immunity passport” as a way to loosen draconian containment measures. It is very possible that facial recognition technology dictates who can leave containment and return to work. To obtain a passport, individuals must upload a picture of their face to the application with their identity card (passport or driver’s license). They are then tested to see if they have had the virus and developed immunity. The app will then generate a QR code, which the employer will use to verify identity and immunity before allowing the employee to return to work…’
Achtung! Show me your papers! I suspect it won’t be too long before the skeptics start to realise that the NWO, One World Government’ (Gulag) was not a Loony Tune Tin-Foil-Hat figment after all.
‘… From 2012 to March 2018, Sir Patrick Vallance was President of Research and Development at GSK. He went directly from GSK to his post as chief scientific adviser to the British government…’
The US ain’t the only one with ‘Revolving Doors’; we may be Uncle Sam’s poodle, but we’re smart, and can learn new tricks.May 21, 2020 at 09:52 #53972ClarkGuest
Covid-19 could be crushed in five weeks if only we’d all cooperate. With each other, I mean, not with authority. It’s just a virus, the ultimate in parasitism, and we should stamp it out for our common humanity. If we let it run riot we give it hosts to mutate in and evolve, not to mention letting it effectively waterboard a million pensioners for a week until it kills at least half, and that’s just in the UK. Bloody thing probably escaped from a lab; we could crush it and we should.
Covid-19 is a political litmus test; the most macho, right-wing, racist governments get the highest death tolls – Bolsonaro, Johnson, Trump. Women in charge have handled it best; New Zealand, Germany, Denmark, Iceland, Finland.May 23, 2020 at 02:04 #54090Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 21, 2020 at 09:52
They did not contrive to create and unleash Covid – 19 in order for it to be ‘crushed’ in five weeks.
See ‘VIDEO: The “Lock Step” Simulation Scenario: “A Coronavirus-like Pandemic that Becomes Trigger for Police State Controls”
It looks to me like a very-well thought out plan, even down to the ‘stolen Coronavirus specimens’ from a Canadian lab, to the building by France of the Wuhan Level 4 Biosecurity lab, and Gates’s organisation $370 million grants to the Wuhan lab.
The PTB have learnt some since 9/11, so I figure they set out some pretty rock-hard ‘Red Herring’ trails beforehand, a lot stronger than they did in the 9/11 case. They probably even instigated the Chinese experimenting on Coronaviruses in Wuhan.
But I do not believe the ‘Pandemic’ came from there, I believe it was intentionally brought in by the US Military Contingent to the Wuhan World Military Games, which opened on October 18th 2019, ‘co-incidentally’ on the same day as the Event 201 Coronavirus Pandemic Simulation was held in New York by Gates and cronies.
This time they want their ‘blame China game’ to stick, unlike their Saudi ‘hijackers’, Pakistani ISI General sending $100,000, ‘magic fireproof Passport’ and ‘Top Gun’ Hani Hanjour narratives.
Another major step towards the NWO plans for a ‘One World Gulag’. How the Gestapo would have loved a ‘tracking app’.May 23, 2020 at 08:37 #54095Paul BarbaraGuest
Clark, here in pdf is one of your ‘Bete Noirs’, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and your Cochrane Review:
‘…I have been blamed for causing, through the media, a vaccine scare. In defense of my position and in accordance with the precautionary principle, having reviewed all the available evidence for MMR vaccine safety, I simply recommended a return to single measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines in preference to MMR and encouraged further research. In the NBC interview, it was put to me that I was alone with a few parents in believing that the MMR vaccine was unsafe. I responded by saying that 15 years ago this was, indeed, an unusual opinion held by only a handful of physicians. I was able to say, however, that my position on the deficiencies in the relevant vaccine safety studies have now been reinforced by the systematic analysis of Dr. Thomas Jefferson and colleagues from the Cochrane Collaboration, an internationally respected body that provides independent scientific oversight. They wrote, “The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and postmarketing is largely inadequate” (Jefferson, Price, Demicheli, & Bianco, 2003, p. 25). In an interview with Richard Halvorsen concerning his 2007 book The Truth about Vaccines, one of the lead authors of the Cochrane review left no doubt as to his true feelings when he said, “The safety studies of MMR vaccine are crap. They’re the best crap we have but they’re still crap” (Child Health Safety, 2009 ~). With respect to my suggested return to the protection of children with single vaccines, Jefferson and colleagues wrote, “We found limited evidence of safety of MMR compared to its single-component vaccines from low risk of bias studies” (Jefferson et aI., 2003, p. 25). More recently, Dr. Lou Cooper, former head of the American Academy of Pediatrics, made the comment in Newsweek that “There’s been grossly insufficient investment in research on the safety of immunization” (2009 ~), and, to the Institute of Medicine, that “[Vaccine safety] research has been done on the cheap” (Wrangham, n.d. …’
So Dr. Wakefield doesn’t have horns, after all.May 23, 2020 at 08:43 #54097SAGuest
I am so sorry to see that it seems that not all conspiracy theories are equal, some seem to be more equal than others.
I am not for any sort of censorship but I am surprised to see such a long standing forum continuing with the repetition of all the most outlandish conspiracy theories over and over again, and conflated into one big CT about world government and it seems that you are condoning this. I am truly surprised.May 23, 2020 at 17:47 #54116ClarkGuest
Paul, do you think it’s right to bullshit?May 23, 2020 at 23:48 #54117Paul BarbaraGuest
Is that how you say you disagree? The PTB lay open their plans way in advance, they hold drills and simulations on the day, yet you still don’t see it?May 24, 2020 at 08:21 #54128ClarkGuest
No, I’m saying I can see some stuff that I know to be bullshit, because I know enough background. Now how do I tell you? Because I expect you’ll just dismiss it, or find some way to assume I’m wrong, because that’s what you’ve always done. But it’s sat right there and I know it’s bullshit, so how do I tell you?May 24, 2020 at 19:27 #54140Paul BarbaraGuest
It now appears they the US was holding ‘simulations’ from January to October 2019:
‘New York Times : Before Virus Outbreak, a Cascade of Warnings Went Unheeded‘.
‘…The outbreak of the respiratory virus began in China and was quickly spread around the world by air travelers, who ran high fevers. In the United States, it was first detected in Chicago, and 47 days later, the World Health Organization declared a pandemic. By then it was too late: 110 million Americans were expected to become ill, leading to 7.7 million hospitalized and 586,000 dead.
That scenario, code-named “Crimson Contagion” and imagining an influenza pandemic, was simulated by the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services in a series of exercises that ran from last January to August..’
I sure wish I had a crystal ball like theirs….
And would you believe it, T’rump does a pirouette:
‘…President Trump moved from dismissing the coronavirus as a few cases that would soon be “under control” to his revisionist announcement on Monday that he had known all along that a pandemic was on the way…’May 24, 2020 at 21:50 #54144ClarkGuest
Are you just going to ignore what I just told you?May 25, 2020 at 07:53 #54156SAGuest
You have indulged Paul for too long. He pretended to be hurt and has avoided answering my questions. His methods are clear, he does not answer but bombards you with lots of new links and counter arguments and when you look at the mm and answer him he just moves on to the next conspiracy.May 25, 2020 at 09:41 #54160ClarkGuest
SA, yes, that is so. But I know that Paul is a kind person. My thoughts about this are not clear at present; hopefully I’ll have some better idea what to write later.
Meanwhile, would you discuss something with me? On May 17, 02:49, comment #53661 you wrote:
– “.. I will not accept that bad science and bad pharma are the be all of everything that is going on. I have my own experiences and know what it is all about.”
– “Anti Vaxcers are dangerous and cause death of children whilst pretending to be concerned about children. They are often connected to ‘natural movement’ and websites that practice quackery and profiteer from alternative medicine.”
There are two points I’d like to address here. Regarding the second quoted section, such arguments have been highly polarised for a long time and this seems to be the source of the impasse in communication, so regarding the first section, please tell me a bit about your own experience. And I’d be interested anyway.
What I suspect is that trust is essentially personal, but the modern way of relating has become very impersonal, especially in text communication such as this. So I think that we have to establish interpersonal trust before communication can be effective. Writing that reminded me of some thoughts from the Quaker Advices and Queries 13; “pray that your ministry may arise from deep experience, […] with sensitivity to the needs of others”, and one of the guiding principles at Wikipedia, “assume good faith”.
Returning to the first section, there is much distrust on both sides, there is genuine care on both sides, and there is profiteering which exploits both sides. Division itself seems to our first obstacle.May 25, 2020 at 12:59 #54168Paul BarbaraGuest
Grow up.May 25, 2020 at 13:11 #54169SAGuest
I am very reluctant to talk about personal matters openly in such a public forum. I have in the past written about some of my personal experiences with regards to the drug thalidomide and a big scandal where a certain drug company profiteered by getting a drug that was manufactured in the 50s licensed for the use of treating myeloma in such a way that with the acquiescence of licensing authorities, they manage to be able to be the sole provider of drug to the NHS even though it was available widely from other sources, at 6 times the price on flimsy basis and the NHS had to fork up the difference. The original research on myeloma and thalidomide was done by many in the field using generic thalidomide manufactured in many labs around the world for very small cost. The bad days of pharma entertaining doctors lavishly are gone but through collusion with the system, they still manage to bribe through providing ‘Educational support’ for the conference circuits, and that helps governments pretend that this is pure education and continuing professional education, which is mandated to continue with your profession, by not providing adequate funding for this activity through official channels. A few years ago government funding for research has also been slowly privatised in such a way that basic scientific research was discouraged, at the expense of what is called ‘translational research’ often in collaboration with industry, targeting research in areas that is suitable for quick realisation of the commercial potential for such research.
But my attitude is that this is unfortunately the world we live in. There is often no need for conspiracies from big Pharma. They can do what they like and often can produce good medicines and occasionally produce major flops and cock ups. But to target one aspect of the whole world we live in, and to tar professions such as medicine and science with the conspiracy brush is not constructive. Many people have to work within the constraints of the system.
I of course admire Ben Goldacre’s work and his two books, but why I said what I did is that it does not begin and end there. In fact if you look at his recent tweets on covid-19, they are a bit restrained to put it mildly.
This may also give you a flavour of what happened with thalidomide.May 25, 2020 at 15:47 #54187ClarkGuest
– “to tar professions such as medicine and science with the conspiracy brush is not constructive.”
I agree. It both causes, and is itself, polarisation of what should be a discussion. That’s why I’m trying to draw the sides together; I’m going after the the root cause, not the symptom. But…
– “I am very reluctant to talk about personal matters openly in such a public forum.”
Isn’t everyone? That seems to me a big part of the problem. We get all sorts of comments, generally from one ‘side’ or the other, but never with any perspective of the experiences that lead to the motivations behind them. The centre is missing. Instead we stand like massed armies opposed across a battlefield, when we should be sat in the middle, in a circle, raising one finger when we have a point we wish to contribute. As I said before, dividing us is Mammon’s primary technique. With us all fighting each other, Mammon needs no weapons, Mammon just harvests the casualties with a laugh.
All the technical details in your comment ring true; they seem much like the material in Goldacre’s books. I have been looking at Goldacre’s Twitter stream recently; he was lamenting “lockdown” boredom, but celebrating Opensafely, his and his team’s secure medical data analytics project, which looks like an excellent piece of work.May 25, 2020 at 15:49 #54188ClarkGuest
Paul, I take it that’s a yes, then? I’d much rather you came and sat in the circle. We will all have to eventually, or perish at each other’s hands.May 25, 2020 at 17:01 #54190Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 25, 2020 at 15:49
I’ll happily join in, but let’s keep it civil.
We are all entitled to our opinion; censorship should not come into this.
The NWO is hardly a conspiracy nowadays – it seems everyone from the local dog-catcher to the Pope has openly endorsed it.
And this ‘Pandemic’ fits right in with their agendas, control, RFID (whether by injected chip, or mandatory carrying of a ‘smart-phone’ with an ID app), mandatory (or hard to avoid) vaccinations, push towards cashless society, tracer technology. No wonder Gates and Fauci always have a big smirk on their mugs.May 25, 2020 at 18:30 #54191ClarkGuest
Paul, sorry, I realise now. I wasn’t accusing you of bullshitting. There is other people’s bullshit in what you posted; I’m trying to alert you that you’ve been bullshitted. That’s why I asked whether you object to bullshit. Not everyone does. Some people seem to think that bullshit’s OK so long as it points in their preferred direction, or even if it just points away from what they oppose. Personally I’m for truth, even when it isn’t what I’d prefer. I figure that when we have a problem to solve we have to face it for what it is; we have to solve the actual problem rather than what we’d prefer it to be, or our solution is likely to be irrelevant.
So I’d like to check where you stand. Do you have a principle against bullshitting as I do, or do you think it can be useful sometimes?May 25, 2020 at 21:19 #54206Paul BarbaraGuest
Obviously I won’t post something I know is not true, I may on occasion fall for some BS post, and re-post it, but I certainly don’t do it intentionally.
As a Christian (not a very good one, but a dedicated one) truth is extremely important – ‘The truth shall set you free’.May 25, 2020 at 22:57 #54211SAGuest
In which case why did you not answer my posts when I found out that Dr Mikovits had published results that could not be verified.
We may all sometimes get a bit off track but as Clark says, if we want to fight the PTB as you put it we must be focussed and rational as otherwise we get marginalised.
I am sorry if you feel I have appeared to defend big pharma, I don’t but we have to accept that we can’t fight them by trivialising some very important issues by following quacks.May 26, 2020 at 01:48 #54214Paul BarbaraGuest
@ SA May 25, 2020 at 22:57
Re Dr. Mikovits, I used her own words in her defence against the Italian version of Goldacre.
I am not aware he responded to her response, or if the correspondence stopped at that point.
I don’t believe having a paper withdrawn because the results could not be duplicated amounts to ‘discreditation’. Demonising or discreditation occurs to perfectly good people (like Assange, for example) when they have upset governments or big industries, and the MSM happily join the melee. Dr. Mikovits certainly upset Fauci, because she accused him of passing copies of her and another scientist’s work to his colleague Gallo, and then stalling on publishing till Gallo had duplicated their work; Gallo then published, and got the patents. That’s her story, and I for one believe her. Perhaps if you watched ‘Plandemic’ you would see her side of the story (apparently she now has a top-selling book out, despite all the censorship and demonisation).
I am in my late 70’s, so would be included in the ‘at risk’ group for the Covid – 19; but I certainly won’t be lining up for it. I regularly refuse the flu, pneumonia and shingles shots, and I’ll be after refusing Gate’s cocktail (or anyone else’s) ‘Pandemic’ shots.
When you previously almost ‘ordered’ me to go back and check on the 4 vaccines I mentioned to Clark, you entirely missed the point. I had already given the information in a previous comment, and was too busy to trawl through to find it again. If Clark had been interested, he could have trawled back, but like me he doesn’t have time to waste.May 26, 2020 at 04:47 #54220ClarkGuest
I’ve been looking into this. Mikovits at WPI deliberately sent faked samples in 2009. That’s why the work couldn’t be replicated, which led to Silverman retracting his whole lab’s contribution and the paper being withdrawn in 2011. Her fraud was eventually discovered by a blogger called Abbie Smith, a graduate student in virology at the University of Oklahoma:
– “But thats not what Silverman found. He didnt find mouse ERVs. He didnt find the same exogenous viral sequence over and over. He didnt find the same XMRV provirus in every sample because of contaminating cell line DNA.
He unquestionably found VP62 plasmid in the samples he got from the WPI… and only in the CFS patient samples.
Meanwhile, at the WPI, they say they get FANTASTIC results with their assays. The 67% positive rate flew up to, what, 100% after the Science publication…
And yet, when WPI/Mikovits are given samples where they do not know beforehand who is ‘supposed’ to be positive and who is ‘supposed’ to be negative, they cannot differentiate between CFS/Healthy/Positive controls. 50:50, implying that half of the people they say are positive are really negative, and half of the people they say or negative are positive, or in other words, they have no idea what they are doing.
When samples are collected from ‘XMRV positive’ patients without any ‘processing’ at the WPI, the samples come up negative.
And yet the CFS samples shipped to Bob Silverman in 2009 were contaminated with XMRV PLASMID before his lab touched them, after WPI touched them, after Silverman gave them the VP62 plasmid.”
– “But to all you frauds out there– remember this: Individually, scientists are smart folks. And even smart folks get screwed over now and then. But together, we are always smarter than you.”May 26, 2020 at 06:38 #54224SAGuest
You seem to deliberately miss the point. Mikovits was discredited because she falsified data and as both and Clark demonstrated. She made a piece of CT fiction called plandemic and accused various people of other misdemeanours which may or may not be true. Writing a top seller does not justify what she says.
Also remember none of us have time to waste, it is not unique to you.
I , like Clark, do admire your painstaking efforts but it helps to be discriminating in order to aim your punches well. It is of course your choice whether you have a vaccine or not. I get the yearly flu jab but have turned down the shingles vaccine.
Many of us also dislike the fact that one individual like Gates, can have so much sway on health issues, but that is the system that allows this and the system has to be fought intelligently and pointedly.May 26, 2020 at 06:40 #54225SAGuest
Otherwise we all get discredited and we don’t want that.May 26, 2020 at 23:22 #54252Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 26, 2020 at 04:47
Thanks for the two links to the Blogs. It seems the allegations or implied fraud is initially contained in an anonymous blog. I tried to work my way through the two links, but was hopelessly lost in the scientific jargon.
Has Dr. Judy Mikovits been charged with fraud? If so, what was the outcome?
I refuse to condemn her without hearing her response to this.
It certainly looks bad, but it is not beyond possibility, or even probability, that if the PTB want to discredit a person badly enough, they can make a pretty convincing job of it.
We have Julian Assange, and even Craig himself, as examples of false allegations, although both those cases are full of holes.May 27, 2020 at 01:10 #54254Paul BarbaraGuest
Clark, I’ve now got the hang of putting ‘Links’ in without the url, but often the ‘Link’ ability is missing from above the dialog box. Why is that, and how does one get around it?May 27, 2020 at 02:05 #54258ClarkGuest
– “Has Dr. Judy Mikovits been charged with fraud?”
The institute sacked her. I don’t think it’s a criminal offence to fake data or supply fake samples; it isn’t money or property, which is all Mammon’s legal system really cares about. Doctors can get struck off the register of doctors like Wakefield was, but that isn’t a criminal procedure either.
Silverman probably worked out what she’d done, and that’s why he took his name and everyone in his lab off the paper. If a scientist had made a mistake they’d withdraw or retract, but Mikovits refused to do that which is why the journal did it instead.
Scientists don’t accuse each other of scientific fraud; it isn’t the done thing. Almost everyone who becomes a scientist does so because they are curious about the laws of nature, they want to discover things, so faking data is unthinkable. So instead scientists say things like “Dr Smiths results are untenable”, and leave it to Dr Smith to retract. It’s scientific honour, if you will. Dr Smith has presumably made a mistake, and Dr Brown having posted in the literature that the results are untenable, it is then up to Dr Smith to account for that. If Smith can’t or doesn’t, he’s discredited, but not a criminal. But no one reputable will ever cite his papers again.
It’s quite quaint really; you can see this in action on this thread. I think SA must be a scientist. SA never called Mikovits a fraud. SA said that Mikovits is “discredited”, Mikovits’s results “couldn’t be replicated”, Mikovits “published results that could not be verified”, everything but actually calling her a fraud.
The blog posts aren’t too difficult to understand; I’ll talk you through them tomorrow or as soon as I get the time.May 27, 2020 at 02:31 #54263Paul BarbaraGuest
I am aware what SA and Clark think about Dr. Judy Mikovits, but to help balance the discussion here is the lady herself: others may also be reading this thread, whilst not commenting for whatever reason: ‘Plandemic’ Documentary (26 minutes). Dr. Judy Mikovits also has a best-selling book out, ‘Plague of Corruption’.
“Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.” — Albert Einstein
The same quote applies to of those who in a knee-jerk reaction holler ‘conspiracy theory’ to every disagreement with the government or MSM ‘narratives’.May 27, 2020 at 02:48 #54264Paul BarbaraGuest
Whilst some people think it is preposterous that covid – 19 might be a bio-warfare product, perhaps they will question why America is dragging it’s feet about allowing inspections of it’s bio-labs.
‘China, Russia can initiate probe of US bio-labs‘.
‘…Lavrov said at a news conference following an online meeting of foreign ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) on Wednesday that “These [US] laboratories are densely formed along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation, and, accordingly, next to the borders of the People’s Republic of China,” the Xinhua News Agency reported…’
‘…In response to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s previous groundless accusation of the Wuhan lab, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said at a press conference on May 8 that “According to open records we have access to, China has only two P4 labs, the highest bio-safety level lab, while the US has 13 that are either in operation, under expansion or in planning, according to a February report by the Federation of American Scientists.”
“The US also has 1,495 P3 labs, not including many other labs it built in territories of the former Soviet Union, like in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, and in many other places around the world… the US has been the only country that has blocked the resumption of negotiations on a verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention,” she remarked….’
Does anyone reading this really believe the US has all these labs around the world because they want to save people’s lives? Have they really built hundreds of bases all around the world only to ‘stop wars’?
As Dr. Judy Mikovits says in the above video, she worked at Fort Detrick, and Ebola could not infect humans till they (the scientists, including herself) ‘showed them how’.May 27, 2020 at 06:15 #54266SAGuest
You have done it again. You start with one subject which is very political and which is mostly factual. We all know that the US indulges in shady research and even now have become more openly opposed to any treaties concerning WMD that tie US hands but are very keen to get others , like Syria and Iran to comply, even by bombing and killing. This unites most of those writing in this blog, with some exceptions. That the US is indulging in bioweapons and that they have established labs in Georgia and Ukraine, which they have converted into near rogue states for their purposes and under the protection of the hegemon is in no doubt.
But then you slip into science, not your forte, if I may say so and continue to quote Dr Mikovits. In previous posts, both Clark and I have explained to you why Dr Mikovits is not an authority to be trusted, despite her own claims. I shall not repeat all of this evidence again because you know them but I shall add the following two facts that are easily verifiable.
For a scientist to become authoritative enough to be credible and to have sway on an argument, they have to have a track record in work in an area and to consistently published in that field and with high quality research that endures, is replicated and advances science. To take one example you quote from Plandemic:
As Dr. Judy Mikovits says in the above video, she worked at Fort Detrick, and Ebola could not infect humans till they (the scientists, including herself) ‘showed them how’.
This is not just a totally unverifiable statement, because it is not backed by any research, but is also totally misleading and has no basis in reality. Ebola was not discovered in fort Detrick and has been a disease with local outbreaks in Africa, even before 1999 when Dr Mikovits claims that she taught Ebola to infect humans. So forgive me for not taking this ex scientist seriously if she can make such a naïve statement that you can be taken with.
The second point is that what Dr Mikovits has published in peer reviewed journals is known. Her most renowned work is the paper in 2009 published by Science where she and others showed the presence in many samples of a virus called Xenotropic Murine Leukemia related Virus, (which is really a provirus in mice that can then develop properties of a virus which happens in tissue cultures and can therefore contaminate reagents made through these processes or through therapeutic products made through processes using mouse tissue or cells, which may include some vaccines. It can also be a laboratory contaminant if rigorous procedures are not followed) in a substantial number of samples of patients suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome. This is a syndrome which, like autism, a cause has been sought extensively but not found. Notably Dr Mikovits and others at the time also thought that this virus was also linked to all sort of other things, including incidentally autism! But as discussed earlier, this work has never been confirmed and the original paper was withdrawn by Science magazine. So If you look at Pub Med, the reference point to look at what any researcher has done and put in Mikovits, you will have her list of publications and these are limited to 18 publications, mostly on XMRV as shown here, and nothing since 2011. There is no mention of Ebola and no mention of any active scientific research recently. So please understand Dr Mikovits is not an authority on these matters. I hope we do not have to discuss her again.May 27, 2020 at 06:19 #54267SAGuest
Sorry ‘Science’ is a scientific journal, not a magazine.May 27, 2020 at 10:03 #54272ClarkGuest
– “I am aware what SA and Clark think about Dr. Judy Mikovits, but to help balance the discussion…”
Science is about evidence, not opinion. Mine and SA’s opinion about Mikovits isn’t relevant; she acted in such a way that she is can no longer be regarded as a scientist, by other scientists. She either faked data (basically certain), or failed to cooperate in working out why her data didn’t fit with that of other scientists (she did cooperate at first, or rather her institute did, but the results looked just like they would if previously, she’d faked her data). Anyone who does this doesn’t get a second chance to be respected by other scientists – they faked their data, they simply can’t be trusted. Nature is complicated enough as it is without time-wasters who distort the evidence. And Mikovits wasted years of people’s research time, investigating her claim that wasn’t wrong, it was made up.
At that point she stopped doing science and effectively started claiming that everyone else was faking data, and collaborating to make their faked data look real; “corruption at the highest level” etc. That’s why it’s called “conspiracy theory” in this case, because the only way Mikovits data could be right would be if all the other scientists who worked on this subject were collaborating in secret to make their false data match each other’s before they published in the scientific journals, even new teams who’d never looked at it before.
There could never be any new discoveries under those conditions.
Once you get used to it it’s quite easy to spot this sort of behaviour masquerading as science. Think of all the “free energy” claims; they always have some excuse, like “men in black wrecked the lab and destroyed all the notes; everyone else is lying to protect energy companies’ profits”. There are loads of them. Quite often they manage to attract investment and then make off with the dosh.May 27, 2020 at 11:08 #54274Paul BarbaraGuest
@ Clark May 27, 2020 at 10:03
Apparently there aren’t any actual charges of fraud against Dr. Mikovits, just allegations from a blog. Hardly amounts to ‘discreditation’, though you may think so. I believe Fauci funded the lab, so it wouldn’t be too difficult to get her sacked, I should imagine.
When someone has earned the ire of someone like Fauci, that someone can be framed, money is no object.
Anyhow her video is available, only 26 minutes. It’s always wise to get both sides of the story.
Thanks for offering to ‘talk me through’ the blog; please don’t bother. Though lost in the jargon, I think I got the gist of it. I am more interested in Dr, Mikovits’ response, if she has made one.
Whilst unscientific, there is another factor that influences me – intuition, or gut feeling. My intuition tells me she is telling the truth, and though I may be wrong, I have to take it
Where Mikovits says they ‘showed the Ebola virus’ how to infect humans, I presume she was talking about ‘gain of function’; I believe SA is right about previous human infection.
Re links, do you know why the links etc ability is shown above the dialog box sometimes (it’s there now), yet on other occasions isn’t there? And how does one attach the link if that ability is missing, without adding the url to the comment?