Are you saying that people who think covid was overblown aren't get enough public attention?
Just check out The Congressional "American Health and Nutrition Roundtable" that happened recently.

It had your friend's Casey and Calley Means

Select to expand quote

japie said..

No I can't. Not because I don't want to. Or that I cannot. It's because it would be an utter waste of time. The only reason I posted more than usual over the weekend was because we were inundated by rain so I had some spare time on my hands.

As I do at this minute. The slab is prepared and we are waiting for he concrete to arrive.

However if you cared to delve into it you could. There are numerous science professionals, medical professionals, politicians and legal professionals pursuing the issue.

Unfortunately they do not get any media coverage. Which is simple to explain. The main stream media is captured. As are pretty much all of the bureaucratic organisations such as the WHO, CDC, TGA.

However the truth will out. As is evidenced by the growing reluctance to vaccinate. All vaccinations.

And the growing public acceptance that the legacy media is pretty much a propaganda operation. Which is why the likes of X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially.

Podcasters are rapidly replacing the likes of the ABC and CNN.
Anyway concrete pump is here. Have a good day.

X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because ignorant people like to read about what they believe in, not what is actually going on.

Select to expand quote

remery said..

japie said..

No I can't. Not because I don't want to. Or that I cannot. It's because it would be an utter waste of time. The only reason I posted more than usual over the weekend was because we were inundated by rain so I had some spare time on my hands.

As I do at this minute. The slab is prepared and we are waiting for he concrete to arrive.

However if you cared to delve into it you could. There are numerous science professionals, medical professionals, politicians and legal professionals pursuing the issue.

Unfortunately they do not get any media coverage. Which is simple to explain. The main stream media is captured. As are pretty much all of the bureaucratic organisations such as the WHO, CDC, TGA.

However the truth will out. As is evidenced by the growing reluctance to vaccinate. All vaccinations.

And the growing public acceptance that the legacy media is pretty much a propaganda operation. Which is why the likes of X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially.

Podcasters are rapidly replacing the likes of the ABC and CNN.
Anyway concrete pump is here. Have a good day.

X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because ignorant people like to read about what they believe in, not what is actually going on.

X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because at base level most human beings know that in order to unearth the truth it is essential to listen to conflicting evidence.

When one side of the narrative is obscured, (or more accurately censored), they will become suspicious and find a way to listen to the other side.

This is precisely what is happening regardless of how often or how loudly you proclaim otherwise.

And this is precisely why freedom of speech laws are written into the constitutions of so many countries. Our ancestors realised with crystal clarity that when dialogue ends violence ensues.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because at base level most human beings know that in order to unearth the truth it is essential to listen to conflicting evidence.

When one side of the narrative is obscured, (or more accurately censored), they will become suspicious and find a way to listen to the other side.

This is precisely what is happening regardless of how often or how loudly you proclaim otherwise.

And this is precisely why freedom of speech laws are written into the constitutions of so many countries. Our ancestors realised with crystal clarity that when dialogue ends violence ensues.

An if you go right back to the first post in this threat, you will see how peer-reviewed scientific publications self correct the science though publication, where it occurs, of conflicting data and analysis. X, Telegram, and Rumble on the other hand just publish made-up stuff that appeals the the majority of their ignorant readers. (hint... that's you)

X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because at base level most human beings know that in order to unearth the truth it is essential to listen to conflicting evidence.
When one side of the narrative is obscured, (or more accurately censored), they will become suspicious and find a way to listen to the other side.
This is precisely what is happening regardless of how often or how loudly you proclaim otherwise.
And this is precisely why freedom of speech laws are written into the constitutions of so many countries. Our ancestors realised with crystal clarity that when dialogue ends violence ensues.

Mark Twain saw this coming back in the late 1800s
We are always hearing of people who are around seeking after the Truth. I have never seen a (permanent) specimen. I think he has never lived. But I have seen several entirely sincere people who thought they were (permanent) Seekers after the Truth. They sought diligently, persistently, carefully, cautiously, profoundly, with perfect honesty and nicely adjusted judgment- until they believed that without doubt or question they had found the Truth. That was the end of the search. The man spent the rest of his life hunting up shingles wherewith to protect his Truth from the weather.

The quote I was actually looking for was
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

How true that is! 2020 was the epitome of that!

How many of the people you view/read/listen to on Xitter/Telegram/Rumballs (I think my predictive text I'd hilarious) are definitely giving you evidence and facts and not just opinions and flat out lies?

Just look at the whole pet eating thing as an example.
Not too many actual media outlets jumped on that, because they couldn't find evidence to support the claim. While the online 'Freedom of Speech' crowd were happy to not just spread that lie, but also amplify it and expand on it.

Here's an exercise, why don't you look at your 'sources' and see what else they're selling?
I always find it interesting that so many people online claiming that "modern medicine/diets are bad, they've been captured by corporate greed/big industry", are also trying to sell products in the same field.
Their whole online messaging is to try and discredit the mainstream just in an attempt to boost the sales of their own (usually completely unproven and sometimes dangerous) products like supplements or healthtech.

Or like in a recent case, they just accept money from Russia to spread pro-Russia messaging.

I'm not saying major media companies are free of bias or outside influence, but they are at least held to some sort of a standard and level of accountability.

Just look at Tucker Carlson, he spread lies on a major network which resulted in massive damages payout to the company affected by his and the networks lies.

Now he's online without any requirement to stick to facts, he's able to say things like 'modern scientists are now starting realise the theory of evolution is wrong and doesn't explain variety of species and that there must be some intelligent design'.
Why does he say something like this? Because it appeals to his conservative and religious audience.
Does he back up his statement with anything that supports this? No
He just uses your tactic of people either taking your statement at face value and or being turned off by how much effort it takes people having to look it up and prove a negative.

This doesn't help people find the truth, because they're not "listening to conflicting evidence", they're being sold a fantasy.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Mr Milk said..

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

How true that is! 2020 was the epitome of that!

Ah yes, the talk of Ivermectin and Chloro whatever-it-was. Everyone wants to hear of a secret answer, it's far more exciting.

"I always find it interesting that so many people online claiming that "modern medicine/diets are bad, they've been captured by corporate greed/big industry", are also trying to sell products in the same field."

Fascinating! We had a situation where a select few pharmaceutical companies had the opportunity to profit by hundreds of billions of dollars ( which they did), for developing a product which was only useable under emergency use authorisation EUA.
EUA is only valid providing there is no effective medication on the market.
And a relatively small number of practicing doctors are trying to sell their products in the same field!

Books have been written about this! You have the temerity to defend an industry which has an established record of criminal behaviour against whistle blowers who risked everything because they could demonstrate they were right.

Mind boggling!

Select to expand quote

remery said..

FormulaNova said..

P.S. clearly the comment about being interested in the mRNA malaria vaccine was a sarcastic comment. Well, I hope it was clear or Psycho Joe has just had another side effect from his novel vaccine trial.

So far this year there have been 295,000 malaria deaths.

Bill Gates has donated over a billion to fight against malaria - a disease that affects more than 200 million people each year.

When I travel to malaria regions I take Malarone (atovaquone 250mg and proguanil hydrochloride 100mg).

Bill Gates said mum! Funny how he only gets involved in things he profits from.

Also funny the trend with established medications that work for years and years until they come off patent.
Almost as though the profit motive is involved!

Select to expand quote

D3 said..
How many of the people you view/read/listen to on Xitter/Telegram/Rumballs (I think my predictive text I'd hilarious) are definitely giving you evidence and facts and not just opinions and flat out lies?

Just look at the whole pet eating thing as an example.
Not too many actual media outlets jumped on that, because they couldn't find evidence to support the claim. While the online 'Freedom of Speech' crowd were happy to not just spread that lie, but also amplify it and expand on it.

Here's an exercise, why don't you look at your 'sources' and see what else they're selling?
I always find it interesting that so many people online claiming that "modern medicine/diets are bad, they've been captured by corporate greed/big industry", are also trying to sell products in the same field.
Their whole online messaging is to try and discredit the mainstream just in an attempt to boost the sales of their own (usually completely unproven and sometimes dangerous) products like supplements or healthtech.

Or like in a recent case, they just accept money from Russia to spread pro-Russia messaging.

I'm not saying major media companies are free of bias or outside influence, but they are at least held to some sort of a standard and level of accountability.

Just look at Tucker Carlson, he spread lies on a major network which resulted in massive damages payout to the company affected by his and the networks lies.

Now he's online without any requirement to stick to facts, he's able to say things like 'modern scientists are now starting realise the theory of evolution is wrong and doesn't explain variety of species and that there must be some intelligent design'.
Why does he say something like this? Because it appeals to his conservative and religious audience.
Does he back up his statement with anything that supports this? No
He just uses your tactic of people either taking your statement at face value and or being turned off by how much effort it takes people having to look it up and prove a negative.

This doesn't help people find the truth, because they're not "listening to conflicting evidence", they're being sold a fantasy.

Good points. I suggest that when people are looking for information about medicine, health, science... don't use google.com Instead go to scholar.google.com and perform the search there. The number of citations is an indicator of the value or the work, and h index the value of the individual. Sure, there are bogus journals and scientists that pose as legitimate researchers, but the vast majority are serious publications.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

Ah yes, the talk of Ivermectin and Chloro whatever-it-was. Everyone wants to hear of a secret answer, it's far more exciting.

I remember in the 70's there were conspiracies about hated fossil fuel companies covering up carburettors and water injection methods that could double fuel economy. Now the cookers have been fooled by the fossil fuel companies to hate on EVs and pretend climate change is not happening.

Similarly the tobacco industry, who lied that smoking was good for us, are now touting themselves as health providers.

Select to expand quote

japie said..
"I always find it interesting that so many people online claiming that "modern medicine/diets are bad, they've been captured by corporate greed/big industry", are also trying to sell products in the same field."

Fascinating! We had a situation where a select few pharmaceutical companies had the opportunity to profit by hundreds of billions of dollars ( which they did), for developing a product which was only useable under emergency use authorisation EUA.
EUA is only valid providing there is no effective medication on the market.
And a relatively small number of practicing doctors are trying to sell their products in the same field!

Books have been written about this! You have the temerity to defend an industry which has an established record of criminal behaviour against whistle blowers who risked everything because they could demonstrate they were right.

Mind boggling!

Books are generally not peer-reviewed. Mind boggling!

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Bill Gates said mum! Funny how he only gets involved in things he profits from.

Also funny the trend with established medications that work for years and years until they come off patent.
Almost as though the profit motive is involved!

Bill Gates has given away over $60 billion. That doesn't seem like a good business model to me.

Care to comment on why chloroquine is no longer used as a malaria treatment? Cooked up a theory for that one?

Select to expand quote

remery said..

japie said..
"I always find it interesting that so many people online claiming that "modern medicine/diets are bad, they've been captured by corporate greed/big industry", are also trying to sell products in the same field."

Fascinating! We had a situation where a select few pharmaceutical companies had the opportunity to profit by hundreds of billions of dollars ( which they did), for developing a product which was only useable under emergency use authorisation EUA.
EUA is only valid providing there is no effective medication on the market.
And a relatively small number of practicing doctors are trying to sell their products in the same field!

Books have been written about this! You have the temerity to defend an industry which has an established record of criminal behaviour against whistle blowers who risked everything because they could demonstrate they were right.

Mind boggling!

Books are generally not peer-reviewed. Mind boggling!

Books don't generally cite peer reviewed study's. Mind boggling!

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

Select to expand quote

remery said..

japie said..

Bill Gates said mum! Funny how he only gets involved in things he profits from.

Also funny the trend with established medications that work for years and years until they come off patent.
Almost as though the profit motive is involved!

Bill Gates has given away over $60 billion. That doesn't seem like a good business model to me.

Care to comment on why chloroquine is no longer used as a malaria treatment? Cooked up a theory for that one?

Oh no, I am sure he is giving away all that money so he can control the world..... Mwwahh hah haa.

I don't think he can win. When he was the shrewd businessman he seemingly screwed people over and succeeded.

Now he has a tonne of money and no need for it, giving it away somehow is negative too. I can't blame him though, its a very good idea. Why die obscenely wealthy and thought of badly when you can use a lot of your wealth, still live a very luxurious lifestyle, and be remembered by a lot of people as someone that used his wealth to improve the world. Not that how you are thought of should matter, but at that level, how much money do you really need, so you may as well do something that makes you personally feel good.

You will never convince the CTers though. There is always some obscure angle that doesn't stack up and when you don't need facts to prove it you cannot lose.

Select to expand quote

remery said..

FormulaNova said..

Ah yes, the talk of Ivermectin and Chloro whatever-it-was. Everyone wants to hear of a secret answer, it's far more exciting.

I remember in the 70's there were conspiracies about hated fossil fuel companies covering up carburettors and water injection methods that could double fuel economy. Now the cookers have been fooled by the fossil fuel companies to hate on EVs and pretend climate change is not happening.

Similarly the tobacco industry, who lied that smoking was good for us, are now touting themselves as health providers.

I remember my father talking about a "deep cycle" battery that would recharge itself. I also remember hearing about 'water powered cars'. Clearly stories told by people that don't understand what they are talking about. But they sound good when there is a villain to hate on.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Fascinating! We had a situation where a select few pharmaceutical companies had the opportunity to profit by hundreds of billions of dollars ( which they did), for developing a product which was only useable under emergency use authorisation EUA.

I'm trying to fact check that $ claim but when I add up the profits of the big vaccine suppliers from what I can find easily I'm getting less than $50B, and that includes all their revenue, not just the covid vaccine. So I think your source is a bit dodgy

www.lifesitenews.com/news/another-study-finds-link-between-covid-shots-and-serious-heart-issues/?utm_source=digest-freedom-2024-10-01&utm_medium=email


An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published February in Vaccine "observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses" of mRNA-based COVID jabs, as well as signs of increased risk of "pericarditis, Guillain-Barr? syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis" and other "potential safety signals that require further investigation."

In April, the CDC was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions, and a study out of Japan found "statistically significant increases" in cancer deaths after third doses of mRNA-based COVID-19 shots and offered several theories for a causal link.

In Florida, an ongoing grand jury investigation into the jabs' manufacturers is slated to release a highly anticipated report on the shots, and a lawsuit by the state of Kansas has been filed accusing Pfizer of misrepresentation for calling the shots "safe and effective."

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Books don't generally cite peer reviewed study's. Mind boggling!

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

Dr. Frederick Fenter, Chief Executive Editor of Frontiers:
"Regardless of the publication stage or subject of a manuscript, if the integrity of an article is called into question, our policy is to investigate. Upon further scrutiny by our Research Integrity team about the objectivity of this paper during the provisional acceptance phase, it was revealed that the article made a series of strong, unsupported claims based on studies with insufficient statistical significance, and at times, without the use of control groups. Further, the authors promoted their own specific ivermectin-based treatment which is inappropriate for a review article and against our editorial policies.
"In our view, this paper does not offer an objective nor balanced scientific contribution to the evaluation of ivermectin as a potential treatment for COVID-19. Frontiers' has published more than 2,000 rigorously peer-reviewed articles on COVID-19 since the pandemic erupted via our Coronavirus Knowledge Hub, and we are acutely aware of just how critical high-quality, objective research in this area is at this time. Frontiers takes no position on the efficacy of ivermectin as a treatment of patients with COVID-19, however, we do take a very firm stance against unbalanced or unsupported scientific conclusions.www.frontiersin.org/news/2021/03/02/2-march-2021-media-statement/

The Editor of the American Journal of Therapeutics hereby issues an Expression of Concern for Kory P, Meduri GU, Varon J, Iglesias J, Marik PE. Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19. Am J Ther. 2021;28(3): e299-e318.The decision is based on the evaluation of allegations of inaccurate data collection and/or reporting in at least one of the primary sources of the meta-analysis contained in the article.1,2 These allegations were first made after the publication of this article.1 The exclusion of the suspicious data appears to raise questions regarding the ivermectin's potential to decrease the mortality of COVID-19 infection.2 Currently, the investigation of these allegations is incomplete and inconclusive.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501341/

In August 2023, Kory was informed by the American Board of Internal Medicine that his board certifications were to be revoked for "spreading false or inaccurate medical information".
Gorski D (August 7, 2023). "The American Board of Internal Medicine finally acts against two misinformation-spreading doctors". Science-Based Medicine.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Can't get any more robust than insurance actuary figures.

"In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022. Indeed, given the well-documented reduction in COVID-19 mortality risk conferred by vaccination, the 14 confirmed vaccine-caused deaths that had occurred by June 2023 are a fraction of the lives saved by vaccination."

actuaries.asn.au/Library/Opinion/COVID19/2023/REPORTV2COVID19.pdf

Select to expand quote

remery said..

japie said..

Can't get any more robust than insurance actuary figures.

"In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022. Indeed, given the well-documented reduction in COVID-19 mortality risk conferred by vaccination, the 14 confirmed vaccine-caused deaths that had occurred by June 2023 are a fraction of the lives saved by vaccination."

actuaries.asn.au/Library/Opinion/COVID19/2023/REPORTV2COVID19.pdf

Words on a page. What caused the excess mortality the kicked off shortly after the jibby jab.

Select to expand quote

remery said..

japie said..

Books don't generally cite peer reviewed study's. Mind boggling!

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

Dr. Frederick Fenter, Chief Executive Editor of Frontiers:
"Regardless of the publication stage or subject of a manuscript, if the integrity of an article is called into question, our policy is to investigate. Upon further scrutiny by our Research Integrity team about the objectivity of this paper during the provisional acceptance phase, it was revealed that the article made a series of strong, unsupported claims based on studies with insufficient statistical significance, and at times, without the use of control groups. Further, the authors promoted their own specific ivermectin-based treatment which is inappropriate for a review article and against our editorial policies.
"In our view, this paper does not offer an objective nor balanced scientific contribution to the evaluation of ivermectin as a potential treatment for COVID-19. Frontiers' has published more than 2,000 rigorously peer-reviewed articles on COVID-19 since the pandemic erupted via our Coronavirus Knowledge Hub, and we are acutely aware of just how critical high-quality, objective research in this area is at this time. Frontiers takes no position on the efficacy of ivermectin as a treatment of patients with COVID-19, however, we do take a very firm stance against unbalanced or unsupported scientific conclusions.www.frontiersin.org/news/2021/03/02/2-march-2021-media-statement/

The Editor of the American Journal of Therapeutics hereby issues an Expression of Concern for Kory P, Meduri GU, Varon J, Iglesias J, Marik PE. Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19. Am J Ther. 2021;28(3): e299-e318.The decision is based on the evaluation of allegations of inaccurate data collection and/or reporting in at least one of the primary sources of the meta-analysis contained in the article.1,2 These allegations were first made after the publication of this article.1 The exclusion of the suspicious data appears to raise questions regarding the ivermectin's potential to decrease the mortality of COVID-19 infection.2 Currently, the investigation of these allegations is incomplete and inconclusive.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501341/

In August 2023, Kory was informed by the American Board of Internal Medicine that his board certifications were to be revoked for "spreading false or inaccurate medical information".
Gorski D (August 7, 2023). "The American Board of Internal Medicine finally acts against two misinformation-spreading doctors". Science-Based Medicine.

They've attacked all medicos who stood their ground and questioned the narrative. It had to be done to prevent the story falling to pieces. They've got the resources so to do and they have demonstrated time and again that that is the modus operandi.

Vilify the naysayers, prop up and reward the sycophants.

Ships leaking. They overstepped the mark this time around.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

Words on a page. What caused the excess mortality the kicked off shortly after the jibby jab.

You tell us. You're the one who commented that actuaries know what they are talking about. And actuaries are saying that excess deaths have nothing to do with vaccines.

If you're going to talk the talk, you should be able to walk the walk. It's not like dress up day at school when you pretended to be a scientist.

Select to expand quote

japie said..

remery said..

japie said..

Can't get any more robust than insurance actuary figures.

"In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022. Indeed, given the well-documented reduction in COVID-19 mortality risk conferred by vaccination, the 14 confirmed vaccine-caused deaths that had occurred by June 2023 are a fraction of the lives saved by vaccination."

actuaries.asn.au/Library/Opinion/COVID19/2023/REPORTV2COVID19.pdf

Words on a page. What caused the excess mortality the kicked off shortly after the jibby jab.

Nothing to do with the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 spreading almost unchecked across the nation?

Select to expand quote

japie said..
X, Telegram, and Rumble are growing exponentially because at base level most human beings know that in order to unearth the truth it is essential to listen to conflicting evidence.

When one side of the narrative is obscured, (or more accurately censored), they will become suspicious and find a way to listen to the other side.

Sorry mate

What is actually happening is the opposite - social media gives you a feed of what it knows you like.
So society is becoming more polarised with lefties and righties becoming more extreme. Less middle folks.
Its making people get tons of info on flat earthe, or anti-vax, or japanese motorcyles, or bloody flower propagation if that's what you search for a bit. It doesn't suggest the counterpoint to you. Ever.


The vast majority of CT or alternative truth etc type people are NOT reading the contrary argument at all. Nor having an open mind.

The research around it abounds, and furthermore it just makes sense. The brainwashed raised in a cult people that we marvel at - same thing happening with social media use. Its creating division and hate and violence at worst (in say religion based terror attacks). At best, its polarising a dumb populous incapable of independent thought. Quite apparent here.

The internet WAS a place to find the stuff contrary to the MSM 20 - 30yrs ago. Not at all now..... unless you ignore your feed and deliberately search for the other side to your argument. If you don't, you are literally the sheeple that CT ppl have made fun of for so long.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..

Sorry mate

What is actually happening is the opposite - social media gives you a feed of what it knows you like.
So society is becoming more polarised with lefties and righties becoming more extreme. Less middle folks.
Its making people get tons of info on flat earthe, or anti-vax, or japanese motorcyles, or bloody flower propagation if that's what you search for a bit. It doesn't suggest the counterpoint to you. Ever.


The vast majority of CT or alternative truth etc type people are NOT reading the contrary argument at all. Nor having an open mind.

The research around it abounds, and furthermore it just makes sense. The brainwashed raised in a cult people that we marvel at - same thing happening with social media use. Its creating division and hate and violence at worst (in say religion based terror attacks). At best, its polarising a dumb populous incapable of independent thought. Quite apparent here.

The internet WAS a place to find the stuff contrary to the MSM 20 - 30yrs ago. Not at all now..... unless you ignore your feed and deliberately search for the other side to your argument. If you don't, you are literally the sheeple that CT ppl have made fun of for so long.

Part of the technique is to portray actual scientists, doctors and philanthropists as "elites" who think they are better than everyone else. Then tell poorly educated, stupid and willfully ignorant people that their opinion is just as good as anyone else's. They are easily manipulated... and here we are.

For those of you who listen to podcasts, this series from the BBC outlines how the PR industry undermines good public policy. It comes in 15 minute chunks, so easy enough for people with short attention spans to listen to.

How Made Us Doubt Everything
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/m000l7q1