Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Plandemic Video, the Wisdom of Confucius, and YouTube Censorship
The Plandemic video seemed pretty ridiculous to me. All I could discern was a sea of unjustified and tragically unexplained claims in which were raised a few islands of genuine concerns.
The root problem here is neither new nor especially complicated: Our government, journalists, academics, and other elites have not heeded the wisdom of Confucius highlighted here, and as a result they have lost the trust of the people. (See here on the catastrophe of that loss of trust.)
That the elites have largely earned our distrust, however, does not mean that we can abandon all standards of evidence. For all I know, the people named in the video may be the jerks the good doctor says they are. However, she gave me no evidence for it beyond her own testimony (none that I could understand, anyway).
And that brings us to YouTube and Facebook, which are censoring sources they consider dubious rather than allowing a freedom of speech wherein those sources and their refuters are allowed to converse.
YouTube and Facebook, please stop censoring. You yourselves have, by and large, never thoroughly studied science, logic, philosophy, history, religion, or law. You lack the expertise needed to refute these claims. Let the ignorant speak, and let the informed correct them. You will do the most good by supporting the process of rational conversation.
Most importantly, YouTube and Facebook, you have now joined the elites. When you censor others, you are making yourselves one of the reasons people are inclined to believe in vast conspiracies when they hear of them.
Published in Culture
Just some really snappy tunes.
Much of it was her personal story, which I would suppose is laid out more fully in her book and in the rest of the film. Whether those do an adequate job remains to be seen. I agree that one would like more information about the virus, and lots of other things, too, such as the full story on her and Ruscetti’s HIV research, but again, this film is mainly a long-ish trailer. However, I have no difficulty believing that there are vicious battles among scientists over money, fame, and power. The party line in the sciences seems to me to be pretty firm, and woe to him who tries to defy it.
Thanks—I hadn’t looked at that site for awhile, and the piece on hydroxychloroquine is a case in point. Why has this drug been shoved aside? Do we not all understand that it had nothing to do with the fact that Trump mentioned it and everything to do with money? The two cases that Mikovits mentions—the old, cheap drug that supposedly helped autism and the “wrong treatment” she says were chosen for AIDS seem to me like parallel cases, so at least food for thought.
No, I don’t understand what you say about HCQ. I think that it hasn’t been proven to be effective yet, and I’m not sure why. There are a lot of invalid and irrational arguments for the efficacy of HCQ, and a lot of decent evidence that it is promising, and a lot of theorizing about bad motives that do not strike me as plausible.
I haven’t watched the video, and perhaps will, so I won’t comment on it now.
I do not like the hate and invective that is being poured out on Bill Gates. As far as I can tell, he and his wife decided to devote a large portion of their fortune to philanthropy, and specifically to fund health improvements. I’ve seen some stories indicating that he is pro-abortion, and I would oppose him on that issue, and wish that he would not spend his money to support abortion. However, he seems to be spending vast sums of his fortune to fund efforts to cure dread diseases, and to promote public health generally. I find this admirable.
I do not see anything that he’s done that would make him worthy of the abuse that is sometimes heaped upon him. I am, quite frankly, a bit embarrassed that there seem to be a number of people on my political side who are ascribing terrible motives to Mr. Gates, when everything that I see suggests that he is acting in a way worthy of our respect.
I may disagree with some of the policy solutions that he proposes, or that are advocated by various organizations that he has funded. I do not think that they are evil.
I do not like the hate and invective that is being poured out on Bill Gates.
I love you. Please roll up your sleeve.
Wow, what a clever response. Viciously slander a man, and then this. I do find it quite pathetic.
The world of “science” as it is today:
That’s funny. I can’t tell if it’s serious, or not. Is the point that the “holistic” folks know everything and the rest of the medical establishment are corrupt idiots; or is the point that the “holistic” folks are idiots?
I have quite an aversion to believing anything advocated by someone claiming a “holistic” approach. Whenever I’ve looked into their claims — which has not been very often — I’ve found them to be quacks peddling nonsense, complaining that they are being shut out by the medical community.
Oh yeah. I totally believe that.
No, I don’t understand. I knew nothing about this. I guess I’d better try to track down that article.
I guess I’d better try to track down that article.
Which piece on hchl. exactly?
Merry Christmas.
You are demonstrating a lack of Vision.
It’s called Pseudoscience Behind the Assault on Hydroxychloroquine. I’ve just noticed that there is a second, shorter piece called Many Effects of Hydroxychloroquine against Covid-19.
How is Mikivits a holistic person? Or Pusztai? Or a dozen other heroes of science, some of whom are only known by those in the rapidly growing activist movement that exists to expose the corruption of what passes for science in our nation.
Pusztai + GMO foods
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_geneticfood36.htm
Increasingly, the potatoes, tomatoes, corn, and other vegetable products that we buy in the supermarket are genetically modified. Food inspection authorities and biologists experimenting with the manipulation of DNA structures for large food companies claim that these products have undergone sufficient testing and form no danger to public health.
According to the experts featured in ‘Scientists under Attack – Science in the Magnetic Field of Money,’ however, this is a blatant lie.
Big public companies have commercial interests that result in censored research results and crucial questions that go unanswered. Microbiologist Àrpàd Pusztai found 36 significant differences between rats that had eaten genetically modified potatoes and rats that had eaten “normal” ones.
End of Part One
Part Two of Arpad Pusztai
Among the first group the liver was less well-developed, but when Pusztai announced this in a television interview, he was fired. After publication of negative research data in Nature magazine, his colleague Ignacio Chapela was attacked online in a viral marketing campaign to discredit his results.
The editors of Nature proceeded to write an editorial admitting that they should not have published the data, bringing their prestigious publication’s independent reputation into question.
The same applies to universities that accept large sums of money from businesses performing food research.
Can scientists still be trusted?
SNIP It’s no wonder why GMO expert Dr. Michael Hansen of the Consumers Union, the organization that publishes Consumer Reports, concluded that Dr. Pusztai’s potato research is, “a much better-designed study than the industry-sponsored feeding studies I have seen in peer-reviewed literature that deal with Round-Up Ready soybeans or Bt corn.”
####
This is what Tucker Carlson was talking about in one of the videos I posted on Ricochet yesterday: that science can flourish only inside an atmosphere where there is an open ended spirit of knowledge seeking and debate, and not under serious and severe industry, institutional or media censorship. The endlessly revolving door from industry to governmental agencies and back to the executive suite at the originating industry is no friend to science.
@repmodad It should be noted that Mikivits’ stance on the contamination of vaccines with mouse tissue viral material is on the same page as the many observations and studies regarding the inclusion of monkey tissue viral material inside the polio vaccines.
It is almost like Mikivits’ formal critics, from inside the Big Pharma forces, are denying the significant history of the problems with vaccines. However, these same science-deniers want us to trust them? (See what I did there: I tossed Big Industry’s gate keepers usual derogatory insult back at them!)
As you say, Stina, if vaccines are to be mandated, then the manufacturers of the vaccines must accept liability. Although correlation is not absolute causation, to my way of thinking when such problems arise at a point in history when a regulated mandated increase in vaccines comes about, the overall situation should be impartially independently examined.
Any thinking person examining the statistics regarding American children’s decline in health since 1986, and notices the prominent and supposedly “inexplicable” rise in autism, a rise in learning disorders, a rise in skin problems like eczema, a rise in childhood rheumatoid arthritis, a rise in seizure disorders, a rise in chronic stomach problems, Tourette’s, narcolepsy, paralysis and SIDS, and then noticing this rise first took off within a few years after the Vax Industry was allowed immunity from liability, that thinking person understands the American public deserves some real answers.
The Vaccine Industry’s lack of interest in showing itself not to be at fault reminds me of the Sherlock Holmes observation about the dog that didn’t bark. What is true in the world of criminal malfeasance is also true in the world of Corporate Malfeasance.
@sandy Jerry, for some of us, this is not our first rodeo. We know from our earlier involvement about the play book, and it is always the same: Big Media supporting Big Industry.
There was a time, prior to my involvement with 1996 MTBE, that I really thought there was something spooky about scientists who worked in industry and who came out with policies based on industry research studies that I felt in my gut might kill far more people than if those scientists got ignored, but it was a gut feeling. All I had was a feeling.
Then came my involvement with MTBE, the toxin gas additive and waste product, and over a course of two years, I started to understand.
1 There is a playbook utilized to gain whatever the Major Interest wants. Step one is that the goal is always given a label like “Cleaner air” “environmentally sound policy” or as we see with COVID “we have to do it industry’s way or we all die.” The COVID forces are also using “It is for the elderly and vulnerable among us” and now most recently “It is for the children”
2 Media will always back up the Industry
3 Truth is the first casualty. Truth has to be eliminated as if it isn’t, then there is no way the playbook will triumph
I put the entire citations of my experience here, starting at reply 33: http://ricochet.com/749390/game-changing-stanford-univs-random-survey-the-supposed-s-of-covid-were-38-times-off-the-mark/comment-page-2/#comments
Much of Mikivits’ information was sourced on the very videos that youtube then took down.
Also it is always a bit difficult to go before the public and offer up information. How should a person handle presentations? Many viewers get nervous the minute they know something will be “scientifically presented.”
For instance I can, as a semi-expert on it, tell you MTBE, the gas additive is bad. I can put together 4 or 5 sentences on why I give it an “evil villain” status in the world of chemicals.
But if I explain its molecular composition, inconsistencies of the Air Resources Board’s pamphlets & advisories, the findings of the Italian researcher, how MTBE behaves as a substance once inside the compression cycle of an automobile, the work of each and every panel member who testified in Calif hearings as to its great riskiness, then the people sitting in their chairs watching the youtube then lose interest.
It is a damned if you do damned if you don’t situation.
Also, when an individual criticizes a person for not sourcing statements, perhaps one should consider how the scientist rose for years thru the ranks of a scientific organization, and was an esteemed member of that org until somewhere along the line the individual ruffled the feathers of the power structure, it might be good for the individual to remember they wouldn’t have gotten as far as they did if they were stupid.
How should we discuss the many queries you are posing and that both you and I think are valid queries? But unless and until the public understands the current world of Corporate Science and how it stands before us like the emperor, without any clothes, those queries of ours cannot be fully examined. Because otherwise how can we overcome the objections of the “experts” who will lie to us, to shoot down our ideas about our queries.
Merry Christmas.
Pro Tip:
I’ve listened to 8 podcasts which Dr. Mikovits appeared on – many of them are still available, if not on YouTube then on BitChute and the audio portion on iTunes and other podcast platforms.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ts42IGOjnxS1/