Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/
Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
The ‘Enlightenment’ supposedly dethroned the religious occult and ushered in an era of 'rationality' and 'progress'. All hail. Before the 17th century all was dark, misshapen, ugly, superstitious, base, if not debased. Dandies and men in periwigs ‘saved civilisation’. So the story is told.
Few if any of the attendant myths around the Enlightenment are really true of course.
Modern science, innovation, technological application and political-economic improvements had already been on a long and extraordinarily interesting 1000-year journey before the 'Rational Enlightenment' declared itself. The main thrust of this so-called ‘Enlightenment’, purveyed by its self-interested, and self-declared 'geniuses', was to divorce religion and superstition from the pursuit of truth and liberty which was only found in ‘reason’. Reason is never defined. We can correctly state that much of what passes for reason is entirely unreasonable. So too is the worship of the ‘Enlightenment’.
The 'intellectuals' of the Enlightenment, many of whom were deists and in some cases atheists, had to declaim against the Christian medieval world, inventing the nonsense that it was a 'Dark Age'. As opposed to modern society where biological gender reality does not exist; endless war is freedom; reality is optional due to ‘relativity’; plant food controls ‘climate’; Biden won 81 million votes and 50% of all registered voters in 2020; Corona was a pandemic; and drugs convey health, amongst other shibboleths of the ‘age of science’.
Which age is philosophically darker?
The bastard stepchildren of ‘The Enlightenment’, namely Socialism, Communism and the varous strains of Marxism (political, cultural, sexual), developed 'scientific' approaches to managing and understanding the political-economy. Hegelianism, Marxism, dialectical materialism, statism, stage theory, class warfare and declarations of how the world really worked, rallied around this supposedly 'scientific' theory of world affairs. All of this leads to statism.
At the other end of the spectrum, deposited like cow faeces onto the farmer’s field, we have the hyper-individualisation which emanates from the ‘Enlightenment’. This has lead to social atomisation, ‘woke-ism’ the destruction of the normative family, ‘my biological truth’, and the mental illness of queer, pan-gendered sexual perversion, itself a massive market and industry for the government-pharma mafia. In other words societal and individual collapse.
Few of these main philosophical outputs from the ‘Enlightenment’ was or is rational. Only the mentally unfit would declare transexuality a healthy ‘normal’ and ‘reasonable’ condition. By denying the long history of Christianity and the important role that faith plays in developing reason and science and in defining reasonable boundaries and limits, the Enlightenment opened up a vacuum into which any swaggering theory of power with clarity and 'science' attached to it would enter.
The effects have been shattering
Much of the derivative from Enlightenment thought was simply gibberish laced with virulent strains of anti-Semiticism and profoundly inane anti-Christian bigotry. None of the Enlightenment's ‘geniuses’ did any real research into the Medieval world of course, nor did they understand the thousands of inventions within the political-economic and social spheres which were developed over from 500 to 1500 AD and which made the 17th century so reasonably comfortable to live in, compared to previous epochs. When you research the ‘philosophes’ the most striking feature is the lack of originality and complete ignorance of past history.
The very concepts of ‘reason’ and natural law rights are found in medieval theology and Scholasticism of course, as are the ‘discoveries’ of ‘natural laws’, or those patterns in nature which seem to underlie physical observation and experimentation. Such attitudes were informed in part by ancient cultures, including the Roman, Greek, Jewish and Near Eastern.
Human society was thus well acquainted with ‘Enlightenment’ ideals more than 800 years ago. This was long before effeminate men in garish costumes plagiarised such ideas and claimed them as their own. Where did parliaments (reasoned debate) and universities (reasoned education), both 12th and 13th century constructs found in many states contemporaneously, emanate from? Did the physics emanating from the cathedral school at Chartres in the 12th century categorise itself as dark and superstitious?
The arrogance and hubris of the Enlighteners is an undeniable and outstanding characteristic of their cult.
Are we as clever as we think?
Isn’t our modern philosophy of Scientism and love of all things ‘science’ and ‘secular’ a delusion? We rejoice in our ‘modernity’. The reality is that tooling, innovation and technology are not based on ‘science’ and never have been. A horse plough was not designed from abstract physics. A canal is not a derivative of algebraic theory. Watermills did not invoke Pythagoras. A steam engine has no correlation with research models. Electricity owes nothing to cosmology or physics. Buildings have always been constructed using evidential calculations and experience not abstract theories. Mathematical theory has no relationship to the chance discoveries of transistors which power modern devices.
What then ‘science’? Isn’t hands-on work and practicality the real driver of innovation?
The danger with 'Scientism' as elucidated by the Enlightenment was aptly stated in 1977 by the great Italian historian and philosopher, Augusto del Noce (1910-1989) who foretold that the scientific management of society would result in a totalitarianism. Noce presciently predicted, 'a war against all forms of knowing that are not deemed as scientific'. ‘Science and reason’ would thus become instruments of power, ideologies perverted by privileged elitists. Scientism would wage war on all other ideologies. With confidence we can say:
The irony is obvious. The Enlightenment, which supposedly was a revolt against the superstition and power of the church, is directly responsible for establishing what it was attacking, namely a cult managed by an elite who would enforce 'the right way of thinking and believing.'
The Enlightenment appropriated the Christian ideals of natural law rights, reason, rational debate and declared these to be ‘new inventions’. Most of us would call this theft. This appropriation came however, with an important caveat.
The age-old belief that the human was unique and thus had a singular responsibility to improve this world and live by normative moral constructs and objective reason was rejected. The Enlightenment went in the opposite direction. Natural law, natural rights, the immaterial, the emotional, even the rational which will differ based on the person, culture, history and context of a person’s life; would be perverted and twisted. Only approved ‘reason’, managed by the ‘reasonable’ and wise elite would rule.
Various cults of Scientism and ‘reason’ have long been offered. Utopia’s based on ‘rationality’ include Plato’s ‘Republic’ which was managed by rational ‘guardians’. Plato tried to implement his utopia of reason in Syracuse Italy and was ejected by violence and threats. Saint-Simon and the French revolutionary Enlighteners established a ‘Church of Science’ which was a 19th century precursor to the Reich Church of the Nazis. Utilitarianism [Rousseau, Bentham], or personal pleasure with no restrictions based on your rational objectives became popular and has led to atomisation and the imposition of state-protected groups such as LBGTQ+. Many sub cults of reason have been offered, and all are just variations on Enlightener themes.
The creation of the perfect utopian society, inhabited by the 'perfect man' is in many ways the end objective of the Enlightener obsession with ‘reason’ [pace Saint Simon, Robert Owen]. This has created a deranged focus on using state power to 'mould' children, people and the average citizen to do what 'was in the best interests of society'. The Corona plandemic was clearly an expression of such power and beliefs, itself an echo of Communism and Nazism totalitarian control. Education, the media, and governmental supremacy have been deployed to reform the individual so they can participate in a rational society of perfection.
The elite know best. Science is the only path. Follow and obey. Platonic ideals were plagiarised and repackaged during ‘The Enlightenment’.
Imagine if today some 'genius' declared that the era between 1500 and 1900 was a 'Dark Age', full of nothing but pain, superstition, occultism, illiteracy, dirt, darkness and ignorance. Such a ‘philosophe’ could justify this conclusion by pointing to:
colonialism, black enslavement, witch burnings;
destruction of the Ameri-Indians through plague and war;
abiogenesis and other unscientific gibberish;
‘germ theory’ a monstrosity with no proof;
the establishment of the health-pharma-drugs mafia complex;
frauds which dominate the cults of ‘evolution’ and naturalist ‘science’;
Communism, Marxism, various bloody revolutions;
the lack of hygiene and sanitation;
grinding, absolute, soul destroying poverty for the masses;
indentured white slavery in the US and Australia (30-50% of the US population in 1700 were white slaves, called ‘indentured servants’ - what is a rose?);
the endless stories of war, imperialism, poverty, disease, early death and hopelessness;
the satanic industrial mills of the 18th and 19th centuries and what must be termed white-slavery;
creating the antecedents for the global wars of the 20th century
A declaration that 1500-1900 was a ‘Dark Age’ would not be entirely wrong. But this era is a part of a larger picture, which eventually bequeaths in spasms of progress, encased in an inimitable complexity that is difficult to comprehend, the ease of life we now enjoy in our modern, albeit bankrupt, world. Yet this is what occurred during the 17th century. All eras previous to this were simply branded 'backwards'. How occultist and how bigoted.
Augusto del Noce's 1977 declaration is thus prescient, but also quite obvious when viewing Western development in the 18th and 19th centuries. If an era dethrones man from his central place in the cosmos, and violently attacks faith as 'irrational', and scorns any expression of non-scientific belief, than surely a new cult is being thrust onto society to replace the old order. Cui bono?
Given Ferdinand Braudel’s ‘long view’ of history, why wouldn't 'science and rationality' be used for political totalitarianism and power-mongering ends?
It is duly ironic that Enlighteners, and their various cults of ‘science’, technocratism, progressivism, positivism, rationalism, humanism, secularism and globalism, all premised on ‘reason’, use religious fervour and pre-modern techniques to silence their critics and propagandize their cult. Modern inquisitions abound, abetted by state and corporate power. Heretics are crushed and often killed. All of this is deemed ‘modern’.
Ironically, the self-loving modern secularist-Enlightener, promoting ‘The Science’, has become the intolerant, irrational, cult member that the Enlightenment tried to eradicate!
Further, we can ask pace the prescient insightful Noce, this simple question: ‘Isn't science and elevating reason above all else just a form of totalitarianism?’ Isn't the God of Science as much an act of faith as the God Yahweh or the Trinity of Christ ? Science, whatever that word might mean, riven with corruption, deceit, fraud and ignorance, cannot explain everything and has great trouble explaining anything.
How then can 'Scientism' be reasonable when the very foundations of that rationality have been removed? These are questions that the modern Enlightener, happily pickled in the myths of Enlightenment propagada, would never bother to contemplate, further confirming that Scientism is little more than a cult.
All hail the King.
==Del Noce
Augusto del Noce, The Problem of Atheism (Volume 84) (McGill-Queen's Studies in the History of Ideas). 2022
Augusto del Noce, Carlo Lancellotti, The Crisis of Modernity (Vol 64), 2014.
Augusto del Noce, Carlo Lancellotti, The Age of Secularization (Studies in the History of Ideas, #74), 2017
Isaiah Berlin was a 20th century Russian-Latvian-Jewish polymath, who resided in England, with skills spanning philosophy, naturalism and writing. He was both a defender and critic of the Enlightenment. He discussed ‘Monism’ or the idea that one answer existed for a question.
According to Berlin, ‘Monism’ sat between Einstein’s ‘Relativity’ in which reality does not exist and which as a science and philosophy can be easily eviscerated (see here); and ‘positivism’ or extreme rationalism, the faith and cult that only ‘reason’ matters. His writings and critiques were prescient and are important as Western Civ is confronted by the ‘monism’ of ‘The Science’. Berlin wrote that ‘Monism’ possesses 3 components:
all questions have one answer,
there is a method to determine the answer and,
the answers are all compatible with each other (or make sense in a larger perspective or view).
Berlin discusses individuals in the context of Monism, citing for example that Plato is a very good ‘Monist’ whilst Machiavelli is not. This is a heuristic or ordering device for Berlin. Authors and philosophers can be categorised using ‘Monism’ as a classifier. Eras as well can be identified as patterns or trends for or against a ‘Monist standard’. We could classify for example the poorly named ‘Reformation’ as a rebellion against monistic Church power; or the current ‘climate rebellion’ against the monism of hydrocarbon-based civilisation and its power structures.
Berlin alleged that ‘Monism’ was the default cultural belief within Western civilisation, from Plato to modern philosophies. The Enlightenment for instance, offers up ‘reason’ (never defined), to be the one true guiding principle in life. The Enlightenment is a singular example of 'Monism’ and a very appropriate one. Berlin’s point about ‘Monistic’ faith or belief in ‘the one way’ is not as abstruse as it might sound.
The monistic faith of ‘The Enlightenment’ is rarely criticised. This ode to reason as an article of faith was in the main a contrived philosophy, leading to an era littered with propaganda and self-serving declamations. Newton’s medieval ‘giants’ were not only memory-holed but reduced to myth, fable and ignored. Culture and history were erased. Great works of art and architecture debased. Long eras of massive technological, intellectual and social progress foresworn and mocked.
According to ‘The Enlightenment’ hospitals, hospices, eye-glasses, mechanical clocks, blast furnaces, wind mills, steel, libraries, universities, ships, guilds, schools, writing scripts, books, extended trade, money, printing presses, steam engines and the like sprang out of mud or thin air (pace modern physics which believes in virtual positrons appearing and disappearing every second). Debauching the past and being ignorant is unenlightened.
If we take Berlin’s critique of ‘rationality’ at face value there is plenty in the ‘modern world’ which is far from ‘Enlightened’ when one looks at art, entertainment, academia, science, politics, morality or education. What is a woman? What ingredients comprise the mRNA shot? The addiction to ‘science’ or to ‘enlightened reason’ at the expense of everything else which makes life worth living, is simply a cult. It is a religious article of faith that the 17th-19th centuries were ‘Enlightened’. Given that few read or critically assess history or events, it is an easy lie for the great mass to ingest.
Berlin would probably agree with much of the above. He criticises the derivative philosophies of The Enlightenment, ‘positivism’ (hyper-rationality) and phenomenalism (physical objects are just things observed by sensory stimuli and are not necessarily real or existing), espoused by Hume, Kant et al, because both are reductive, or can be reduced to an essence and they equate meaning with ‘truth’. Berlin objected that the Enlightenment was often irreducible and had little connection to physical or objective reality. The same can be said of ‘science’.
The progenitors of the Enlightenment, namely, Platonism, Aristotelianism, Scholasticism, Cartesianism, Lockean and Humean forms of empiricism, Kantianism, and Hegelianism all reflect Monist tendency. These abstract and often useless intellectualisations end in the Enlightenment and its ‘positivist’ philosophy. It is obvious to any human who is sentient and upright that much of life and existence has precious little to do with reason.
We know that reason is usually optional for many. Take your average white-collar, middle-class man. He will describe himself as a rationalist-humanist, who is against the imposition of religion and has no time for the immaterial. How happy he is in his ‘reason’. He follows ‘science’.
Let us observe the emotional energies invested by this adult man into what must be termed a silly sport like football or something similar. Here we see energy, emotion and dedication. A religious devotion. The man will know everything about ‘his team’. Compare this fanaticism against the limpid, sanguine and apathetic reaction by the same man when he loses his freedom, is locked down, forced to wear a face nappy and is injected with poisons against the unreasonable and non-scientific claim of a flying virus. No energy, no emotion, and no dedication or even interest in what really matters in life. Surveying this very common person and making such comparisons does not inspire much faith in ‘reason’ or critical thinking.
Given human nature, Berlin was convinced that Monism led to a patriarchal political structure, with strictures on human freedom and expression. These ideas are expressed in ‘The Decline of Utopian Ideas in the West’. In this work Berlin outlines his view that the Enlightenment Monist theology would lead to a decline in personal liberty, as one form of governance is exalted above all others. This is basically, ‘what is right for me is right for you’, or in the modern newspeak, ‘what is right for everyone must be right for you’.
In the modern world if the elite or experts simply ‘know’ what is best and you do not, they have the right to coerce your compliance, because it is in everyone’s ‘best interest’ to do so. ‘No one is safe until we are all safe’ and other propaganda are simply expressions of this monistic rule. It is entirely a materialist-Darwinian concept, in which humans are not individuals, and do not have God-given rights, but are instead simply material to be shaped, formed, ordered about and regulated.
You obey, therefore you are.
Berlin writes, “In this way, the rationalist argument, with its assumption of the single true solution, has led by steps which, if not logically valid, are historically and psychologically intelligible from an ethical doctrine of individual responsibility and individual self-perfection to an authoritarian State obedient to the directives of an elite of Platonic guardians.”
This is a prescient point. It perfectly describes where Western Civ now finds itself. We are now hostages to the Platonic guardians called ‘The Science’ and its totalitarianism or as some of us call it, Scientism.
We see ‘Monism’ all around us today. We now have ‘The Science’, a cult of abject worship of an undefined philosophy related to technological advancement which has nothing in actual fact to do with science. In reality engineering preceeds theory and is fundamentally at odds with, and unrelated to, abstract mathematics or arcane theories called ‘science’. This truism is utterly lost in today’s worship of technology. Science is now conflated with technology, the two are entirely detached.
In the modern world, ‘Science’ is now the elite guardian of all. Only ‘The Science’ can be followed, and there is ‘One’ monistic answer. This Monism is reflected in Corona and endless drugs and vaccines, ‘Climate Change’, Gender fluidity, White racism, and public policy run by ‘experts’, ‘scientists’, and ‘academics who are specialised in the subject area’ and in every imaginable domain.
With monistic Scientism, there is no possibility of dissent. People are censored, pilloried, fired, bullied, threatened and impugned if they declare ideas or positions contrary to those of the Monist elite. Freedom, individuality, God-given rights and common sense are now sacrificed to political theology and the Enlightenment credo that there is only ‘One’ answer.
Berlin was in some ways a prophet. He oscillated between supporting ‘Enlightenment’ ideals and being wary of their inevitable outcome in the ‘One theology to rule them all’. Unlike most ‘intellectuals’ Berlin saw the threat darkly, he could not commit himself to a Vico-esque critique of ‘reason’ but he saw well enough where it would end. Even given his equivalency, Berlin is worth a read given the state of our world and the Scientism which abounds.
==End
Liberty, editor Henry Hardy, 2002. A single volume dedicated to Berlin’s views on ‘liberalism’ and freedom.
The Proper Study of Mankind, editor Henry Hardy 2002. A great overview of Vico, Herder and Enlightenment critics. Well worth a read to get ‘another side of the story’ qua the ‘Enlightenment’. Vico and Herder are largely unknown but had great influence as critics of rationalism and ‘positivism’.
“I agree with you that Dr Gerson’s cancer therapy had great merits and know with which difficulties Dr Gerson had to struggle. I would be grateful to you if you try to tell the people of America about Dr. Gerson’s merits and about the results he obtained with his therapy….I wish you the best with this difficult task.” Dr. Albert Schweitzer
“In the hand of the physician, nutrition can be the highest and best remedy.” Dr Max Gerson
Dr Max Gerson cured Albert Schweitzer of his type II diabetes, his daughter’s chronic skin condition, and saved his wife’s life from tuberculosis which ‘modern medicine’ could not resolve. Gerson and Schweitzer became life-long friends. Such success for Max Gerson was not unusual. Originally his therapy targeted tuberculosis and diabetes but he noticed it also arrested and often cured cancer.
In the 1940s and beyond he began to focus on restoring health to those afflicted by various cancers. According to his patients and notebooks Gerson’s success rate at stopping or remediating the spread of cancer in those deemed ‘terminal’ or beyond the help of ‘modern medicine’ was over 60%. These successes were confirmed in US Senate hearings in the 1946.
Few know of Gerson or his methods. There is a reason for that. It is called the American Medical Association, a creature of the Rockefeller Foundation which is the gatekeeper and curator of ‘medical science’. If you don’t promote drugs, pills, opioids, vaccines or chemical therapies, you will be censored, de-registered, de-licensed and increasingly in the ‘modern world’ de-banked. You might even end up murdered or ‘suicided’. The censorship of any treatment that does include expensive chemical brews is rife and endemic in the ‘modern world’.
Gerson’s approach is classified by the colossally ignorant Wikipedia as dangerous and ineffective. Unlike say the Corona quackcinations, or chemotherapy. This is typical of Scientism.
Dr. Max Gerson was born in Wongrowitz, Germany, in 1881, attending the universities of Breslau, Wuerzburg, Berlin, and Freiburg, graduating in 1909 and becoming a licensed physician in Germany. Gerson and his family fled the Nazi regime ending up in the US in 1936 and Gerson received a license to practice medicine in the state of New York in 1938. He became a U.S. citizen in 1942. In 1946, Dr. Gerson appeared before the Pepper-Neely Congressional Subcommittee, during hearings on a bill to fund cancer treatment research, providing evidence that naturopathy could cure cancer. He astonished the entire hearing with his success stories.
Case history of 10 cancer patients clinical observations theoretical considerations and summary
In 1958, after 30 years of clinical experimentation, Dr. Gerson published A Cancer Therapy: Results of 50 Cases to detail his theories, treatment, and results. His research included soil issues, the electricity of cells, how cancer cells ferment glucose, oxidizing enzymes, sodium/potassium balance, connective tissue, and other technical issues related to cancer. His treatment and approach were holistic. Cancer was (and is) a disease of the entire body. More here
“If there is proof that HIV is the cause of AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” [K. Mullis, Dancing Naked in the Mind Field, 1998, pp 171-4]
Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize for Chemistry and co-inventor of the polymerase chain reaction technology (PCR)
The Corona scam-plan-demic used templates from the Spanish Flu and AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) as part of its implementation. The AIDS scamdemic is mostly an untold story. The population at large just assumes that a ‘virus’, emanating from monkeys, which miraculously showed itself in the early 1980s, has caused a ‘sexually transmitted’ contagion. A cogent explanation of the AIDS fraud can be found in ‘Virus Mania’ chapter 3. This chapter lays out quite clearly why the AIDS fraud was fabricated; how it was carried out and why the Corona fraud possessed such a close resemblance.
In the ‘modern world’, most people don’t read; the vast majority know little to nothing of history, even very recent history; and the mass defer, bow and collapse before authority, whimpering their abject humiliated compliance to whatever the authority figure or agency of truth demands. Critical thinking within society has never been lower. The fact that AIDS provided a ready-made runbook for the Corona fraud is largely an unknown truth. But in the age of the sheeple, this is not a surprise.
In the past 40 years since its creation, the ‘AIDS’ drug and remedy market has provided some U$ 500 billion in total revenues for the pharmaceutical industry. A similar amount has been invested by governments in ‘AIDS Research’. The ‘AIDS’ industry over the past 40 years is therefore a U$ 1 Trillion market.
‘AIDS’ currently provides about U$30 billion in per annum revenues for pharmaceutical firms. Globally, at least U$ 30 billion a year is poured into AIDS ‘Research’ by governments. In 2024, just in the US alone, $28 billion will be invested by government into AIDS ‘Research’ and ‘solutions’. The total market size for ‘AIDS’ is therefore some U$60 billion per annum.
Within 10 years, the pharmaceutical industry will be earning over $ 50 billion per annum in drug revenues alone related to ‘HIV-AIDS’. No doubt ‘AIDS Research’ which has produced no value, no products, and no solutions, will likewise be worth U$ 50 billion by 2034. Follow that money to find ‘The $cience’.
AIDS is therefore a very lucrative market. There is no incentive whatsoever to find a ‘cure’ for ‘AIDS’. Given its amorphous character, there can never be a cure for ‘AIDS’. AIDS is everything and it is nothing. Like cancer, AIDS is the cash cow that pharmaceutical firms and their benefactors will milk forever. In fact, during the past 40 years
AIDS ‘research funding’ and financing, has often been greater than that other great fraud – cancer ‘Research’. From nothing, US ‘health’ agencies in the 1980s, have created an enormous market for themselves and their business partners the pharmaceutical firms, around the phantom they call ‘AIDS’.
AIDS as a market, provides the pharmaceutical criminality posing as an industry, with such largesse that you can buy the entire coterie of congresses, parliaments, regulatory agencies and media across the G20 as a cost of business. ‘Emoluments’, graft and bribes, will ensure compliance and obeisance when the cabal decides on the timing and implementation of the next great scamdemic from non-existing flying viruses. This was proven to be true with the Corona plandemic.
AIDS is still one of the largest businesses in Africa. Africans can ‘test’ ‘positive’ for AIDS at a very high rate, with many suffering from illnesses and symptoms now attributed to ‘AIDS’ including, malaria, tuberculosis, malnutrition, weight loss, diarrhoea, fevers and lethargy. To ‘save’ Africans, retro-viral drugs are issued at enormous profit. Tests, consultancies and other drugs to cure the after-effects of the AIDS ‘cure’ also comprise large market opportunities. Make them sick with drugs, supply more drugs as ‘remedies’.
AIDS is supposedly a sexually transmitted disease, yet there is no single, coherent definition of AIDS. According to the WHO the HIV ‘virus’ attacks white blood cells causing ‘AIDS’ and renders the victim weak and prone to degradation and injury from disease including tuberculosis and cancer. This virus is passed on during sexual contact, or through blood transfusion. There is no cure, though using condoms and refraining from anal sex with the ‘HIV’ infected are recommended, as are expensive drugs and therapies if one becomes infected with ‘HIV’.
As of 2024 some 40 million people globally are declared ‘HIV positive’, or at risk from contracting ‘AIDS’. The symptoms of AIDS are similar to many other conditions and diseases. It is a big tent. According to World Health Organisation’s 1986 definition of AIDS, symptoms can include weight loss, malnutrition, diarrhoea, itching, lethargy, and complaints known to any abuser of drugs and alcohol. In low income and impoverished countries these ‘symptoms’ would cover most of the population. This is not ‘scientific’. More here
“The word “virus” is derived from the Latin word for poison. Viruses are associated with all forms of life (bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes). Viruses are infectious, obligate intracellular parasites whose genomes consist of either DNA or RNA. Virus genomes direct their own replication and the synthesis of other viral components, using cellular systems in appropriate host cells. Virus particles (known as virions) are formed by assembly from newly synthesized components within the host cell. Virions are the vehicle for transmission of the genome to the next host cell or organism.”
(Pellett et al, ‘Basics of Virology’, 2014, offering the standard description of a ‘virus’)
Note: Viruses are 250-400 nanometers in size. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter…a small fraction of a bacteria. Not a single isolated and purified virus can be shown. To satisfy your own curiosity you can send FOI requests to various health and governmental agencies and demand to see an example of a purified, isolated virus. They will reply that they don’t have such examples to show you.
One of the claims to support the worldview that ‘contagious diseases’ are spread by ‘germs’, is the ‘genocide’ of Ameri-Indians post-Columbus. It has long been established that the evisceration of Ameri-Indian culture, society and people was perpetrated through a mixture of war, slavery, and disease. Depending on your source, the weighting of war, slavery and disease in this catastrophe varies. ‘Virus hunters’ routinely invoke the post-Columbine era of Ameri-Indian civilisational destruction as ‘proof’ of ‘contagious’ diseases, passed on by White humans and their livestock, to Ameri-Indian natives. This theory is most certainly wrong and is entirely unproven and unsupported by facts or common sense.
Since the 1990s, it has become standard fare to vastly inflate the numbers of pre-Columbine (before 1492) Ameri-Indians in North and South America. The more rancid and extreme population estimates now range between 80-100 million Ameri-Indians in the Western hemisphere pre-1492 A.D. with a general scholarly agreement that 60 million might be a correct estimate. This number is however a conjecture and given the paucity of proofs, more likely a fiction, generated to impress and overawe the reader with the colossal scale of human genocidal destruction, initiated by Christian Europeans upon pagan Ameri-Indians. In this story some 50 million or more Ameri-Indians perished mostly through ‘germs’ over 3 centuries, or the same number who died in Europe from the Black Death in the 14th century, a plague caused by bacteria.
In the 18th and 19th centuries the estimate of the pre-Columbine population in the Western Hemisphere was 8-12 million. This is a more reasonable figure and less tainted by political motives and secular theology than post-modern estimates which provide no proof of numbers ranging from 60-100 million. Ameri-Indian society was a stone-age culture, with settled agriculture existing only in parts of Central America and the Andes ranges. There was no possibility that Central and South America, with a somewhat limited and primitive agricultural base, or North America, with a hunter-gatherer-foraging culture absent of urban centres, could have supported 60-100 million people. Claiming such population figures is unreasonable and unproven.
By contrast Europe in 1500 was a far wealthier, more advanced, civilised and agriculturally innovative culture and possessed maybe 60 million people. The 14th century episode of the Black Death or bubonic plague had erased about half the population. Even despite this catastrophe, it is unreasonable to posit that in 1492, the primal societies of the Western Hemisphere had a similar or even a greater population than a Europe which was littered with small-scale cities and complex agriculture and trade. The less advanced, pre-modern societies of the Americas could never have supported such a mass of people.
The best estimates are that maybe 1 million natives existed north of the Rio Grande pre-1492, some 3-5 million in Mexico and Central America and a further 4-5 million in South America. No cities or advanced agriculture existed north of the Rio Grande. The Aztec and Incan empires were slave-empires, with conurbations comprising the capitals of Tenochtitlan and Cuzco. Advanced agriculture outside of the capital territories were sparse and would never have supported some 50-90 million people. Contrary to historical rewriting there is no proof that massive farming or agriculture was endemic in the Western Hemisphere in the pre-Columbine period.
The Spanish conquered the Aztec and Inca empires with fewer than 1000 men. The annihilation of the Aztecs for example, was accomplished by the Spanish leading a ‘native’ army who had tired of Aztec tyranny, slavery, human sacrifice and exploitation. A few hundred men with guns cannot unseat an empire of some 5 million, or for the revisionist Marxist, the false claim of 30-40 million people. The same was true of the Spanish destruction of the Inca’s, a much-hated elite-aristocratic group, famous for brutality and savagery. It is simply not credible that a handful of Spaniards overthrew a region teeming with neo-Marxist figures of 30 millon or more people. The population of the Americas must have been in the 8-12 million range. ‘Native’ revolts as much as Spanish steel and guns overthrew the two principal empires of the Americas.
Guns and steel were important, but they can’t explain a population reduction of some 75-90% or 6-10 million, over a few centuries. The ‘consensus’ is that disease destroyed these societies far more completely than war and anarchy. For the ‘virus’ hunters the Ameri-Indians were decimated by ‘contagious’ diseases and are thus a totem and proof for the virus faithful. In this belief system, the Whites brought ‘new’ and novel ‘pathogens’ which the Ameri-Indians had no defence against, and they perished en-masse allowing the Spanish to seize power as the population was reduced and enfeebled through contagion.
As colonisation progressed, the carnage by disease accelerated until by 1900 only 10-25% of the baseline pre-1492 Ameri-Indian population remained. It is thus believed and promoted that ‘germs’ effaced 75-90% of the native populations. In particular the smallpox ‘virus’, along with flu and measles explain why the Ameri-Indians were largely exterminated.
Do any parts of these ‘agreed narratives’ make any sense? Did the advent of Whites, with their horses, cows, pigs and ‘infectious’ diseases really initiate ‘smallpox’ and other ‘great killers’, or were other factors at work? Have we got the entire history of ‘disease’ wrong? Do smallpox ‘viruses’ even exist for example? If not, what happened in the post-Columbine Americas?
According to ‘The Science’, the origination of the smallpox ‘virus’ is from bovines or cows, though the quack Jenner believed that ‘horse grease’ from the hoofs of horses, passed to cows from farm workers, was to blame. We are told that ‘influenza’ (Corona viruses) jumped from pigs to humans. Birds and fowl are also alleged to spread ‘influenza’, named ‘bird flu’. It is agreed that horses generated the ‘tuberculosis virus’. Livestock thus creates contagious diseases. When these were introduced into the Americas, so the theory states, contagions were unleashed on the native populations.
The theory around smallpox is:
· Bovines including dairy cows, supposedly suffer from Cowpox
· The ‘cowpox’ in the cow is a part of the genus orthopoxvirus
· The cowpox virus is zoonotic, meaning that it is transferable between species
· This ‘virus’ is supposedly related to the vaccinia virus causing ‘smallpox’ in humans
· In humans the smallpox ‘virus’ is called the variola virus
· Humans contract ‘variola virus’ from exposure cows in any form (milking, farming, slaughtering)
Smallpox has always been seized upon as a great killer of the Ameri-Indians. Smallpox as a virulent disease was supposedly passed on from bovines to humans through the activity of farming, including milking. Close contact is believed to be sufficient for the ‘orthopox virus’ to ‘jump’ species. Ingesting meat, dairy, skin, urine, faeces, or any animal detritus can lead to ‘smallpox’ in humans. Signatures of the disease include pustules or poxes on the hands and face.
For many with immature or compromised immune systems including young children, death can follow. The infection-to-death rate in the 19th century in the slums of the UK from ‘smallpox’ was low at around 0.4-1%. As many doctors commented in the 18th and 19th centuries, smallpox was not a particularly deadly disease if proper non-chemical treatment was given. Why then would the Ameri-Indians die in such numbers? The answer is always ‘lack of immunity’ due to not spending thousands of years with cows. Is this theory validated?
More here
“Heretics in science are still made to suffer from the most severe sanctions this relatively tolerant civilisation has to offer….Science has become rigid, it has ceased to be an instrument of change and liberation…Modern science…inhibits freedom of thought.”
“Science, it seems, is an irresistible force…but only if you believe in the promises….of the science mafia. It is irresistible if you permit it to be so.” (Paul Feyerabend, ‘The Tyranny of Science’ p. 55)
Feyerabend died in 1994. He was an Austrian-born ‘philosopher’ of science and an academic. After World War II he fell in with the ‘logical-positivists’ of Vienna, a cult dedicated to rationality and the ‘positive view’ that only ‘science’, logic and reason mattered in life. Metaphysics, immaterial reality, and non-scientific philosophies were to be completely rejected and rubbished. Logical positivism informed various philosophers from Betrand Russell to Richard Dawkins and the new atheists, and it has long been discredited and revealed as a fraud. It is a dry, desiccated and malformed theology of the mind, unable to even define ‘science’ or ‘reason’. Former atheist Antony Flew, who famously converted to deism after spending 10 years studying microbiology and DNA, roundly demolishes logical positivism in his book, ‘There is a God’. Feyerabend also believed in a higher power, dryly and irreverently characterising God as a ‘superior bastard somewhere’.
A flexible approach
Such were the beginnings of the adaptable and changeable Feyerabend. There is no single description of Feyerabend’s philosophy or beliefs. He was subtle and supple critiquing the cult of science and rationality. He admired the ancient Greeks with their vast corpus of innovative philosophical and scientific endeavours. He was fond of recounting the antecedents of modern thought and ‘science’ within the ancient Greek world. From naturalism, atomism, to sophistry and rhetoric, the Greeks had developed the basic ‘tools’ of what we now use. Feyerabend also appeared to be largely ignorant of the medieval world’s contribution to the same, though he heretically eviscerated the Galileo myth, rightly concluding that the better science and methods lay with the Church (pp 49, 53, 111, The Tyranny of Science). I would say Feyerabend was a ‘classical scholar’ marrying the insights of the ancient world to what he saw around him in the modern.
In various positions of academic and professorial privilege, Feyerabend worked with Karl Popper, amongst many other intellectual luminaries. Popper was an acolyte of the ‘logical positivists’ and Feyerabend became one of his most vocal criticasters. In 1962 Feyerabend produced ‘Explanation, Reduction and Empiricism’, about the ‘incommensurability’ or the lack of standards and proofs of scientific papers, directly attacking the cult of the logical-positivists and declaiming that the objective reality of ‘Science’ was a myth, distorted and corrupted as it was by human motives and mendacity.
This paper was deemed blasphemous and unique in 1962, the same year that Thomas Kuhn created his ’The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’, a thesis rejected by Feyerabend as too neat, tidy, and dogmatic in its phraseology, with its ‘natural progression’ of scientific ‘progress’. For Feyerabend, ‘Science’ however defined, was an ‘anything goes’ forum, with no dialectical inevitability and very few if any ‘revolutions’ of ideas. He was largely correct. The myth of Galileo and the 17th century ‘explosion’ in science for example, has always been propaganda espoused by those opposed to the Church, earnestly vilifying all that came before their supposedly ‘enlightened’ age. Galileo et al can trace all their theories and experimental methods back to the 12th century. Shoulders of giants and all that. Let’s not discuss the embarrassing fraud and made-up data of many of these luminaries.
In analysing the history of scientific development, which for Feyerabend meant the classical civilisations of the ancient world and the ‘modern’ eras; four general propositions were offered.
Proposition 1: The progress of science depends on an openness of world views which conflicts with the totalitarian pronouncements of many of those defenders.
Proposition 2: World views may take a long time, even centuries before they show results which ‘command attention’ or demonstrate value.
Proposition 3: What demands ‘recognition’ in one community or culture has no impact or importance in another community or culture.
Proposition 4: A world view that contradicts established dogma, for instance religious or metaphysical beliefs, does not clash with ‘rationalism’. (p. 43, The Tyranny of Science)
If we accept these postulates at face value, we can see that ‘The Science’ is anything but scientific and rational. As Feyerabend discusses, there is little ‘openness’ in modern science. Much dogma, for example the incorrect theories of ‘relativity’ and Einstein’s ‘postulates’, may take centuries to be proven false and detrimental. Further, real science should not offend rational common sense, a theme that Feyerabend invokes when discussing scientific theory versus factual evidence.
If common sense and natural observation do not support the dogma being pushed as ‘science’ it stands to ‘reason’ that some people, cultures and communities will reject the ‘science’ as observationally invalid. The only way to impose the ‘new science’ is through force and violence. Feyerabend rightly understood that cultural context, worldviews and proofs were both the enablers and inhibitors of science. ‘The Science’ cannot be trusted with interpretations of what is right, or what is incorrect.
“It is that the sciences are not the last authority on the use of their products, their interpretation included. Questions of reality are too important to be left to scientists (just remember Aristotle’s reaction to Parmenides).” (p. 51, The Tyranny of Science).
In his books, ‘Science in a Free Society’ and ‘The Tyranny of Science’, Feyerabend outlines his main objections to ‘The Science’. Scientific rationality, he states, now acts as a form of suppression, often inhibiting and silencing any rivals to its narrowly dogmatic worldview. No one can dispute this claim. ‘The Science’ Gestapo and the use of censorship and violence is rife within any of the cults that reside in the Church of ‘Science’. We saw this during the Corona scamdemic, and you see it every day in the fields of ‘climate’, ‘gender’, ‘vaccinations’, cosmology, biology and almost every domain fueled and funded what Feyerabend rightly terms, the ‘science mafia’, dedicated as they are to materialist-philosophies, logical-positivism or extreme rationalism (though almost all of their religious tenets are a-scientific), money and power.
‘Science is just one of the many ideologies that propel society and it should be treated as such... The competence...and the successes of science are vastly exaggerated... The progress of... good science depends on novel ideas and on intellectual freedom... Most scientists today are devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood of inane papers that now constitutes “scientific progress” in many areas.’ (Feyerabend, Science in a Free Society).
As Feyerabend viewed it, ‘The Science’ imposes a set of doctrines and procedures administered and institutionalised by ‘experts’ that effectively stifles most if not all criticism, free speech and free investigation. In essence, ‘The Science’ destroys truth and reality becoming authoritarian, with an out-of-control scientific rationalism which threatens our freedom through what Feyerabend calls ‘an unholy alliance of science, rationalism and capitalism’, creating an ‘intellectual fascism’ and crushing all opposition.
Feyerabend was entirely correct in calling ‘The Science’ an intellectual fascism, or as I term it ‘Scientism’. Within any form of fascism there is always a deeply ‘religious’ component meaning not traditional faith, but a faith in materialist theology be it Marxism, Socialism, Communism, or Statism. Fascism is therefore a blend of pagan cult doctrines or beliefs including naturalism and materialism, with corporate and governmental power. Depending on the era and context, fascism will take on different structures and forms, but the overwhelming power of the state and its corporate allies, to manage, mould and manipulate the mass to its materialist-statist objectives, is its defining feature. The ‘Church of Science’ to quote Saint-Simon, or the ‘Church of Reason’ if one prefers the French Revolution’s atavistic atheism.
When we consider Feyerabend’s comments on ‘corporate fascism’ we should admit that the ‘West’ does not have ‘capitalism’ whatever that word might mean. Rather what has transpired is the creation of a corporate-fascism, based on a religion of ‘Science’ itself built on materialist-rationality. This reality is simply a plain fact demonstrated and proven by the Corona plandemic, a recognised verity apparent to anyone with eyes and an average IQ. The ‘drugs-government mafia’ is simply one instantiation of many ‘corporate fascisms’ which dominate Western society. There is never one ‘military-industrial complex’, but an endless array of such configurations across the width and breadth of all economic and social endeavor, a fact expostulated long ago by Eisenhower,. As with all varieties of ‘fascism’, one key objective, witnessed during the Corona medical Nazism, is to eradicate all dissent and disagreement.
Where does the ‘tyranny of Science’ lead to? The evisceration of homo sapiens or humanity. Feyerabend termed this ‘de-anthropomorphisation’. The cult of the logical positivists and the church of ‘Science’ leads to the view that nature, chance and materialism inform our reality and can only be explained by ‘The Science’ and ‘experts’ funded by patrons pushing their monotheistic view of ‘Science’.
“From a global perspective, there is corruption at all levels of the public health service, from health ministries to patients – and there are almost no limits to criminal imagination” (p. 21, quoting a 2006 study)
How much worse is government-pharmaceutical criminality in 2024 versus 2006? Add in your own multiple. Money talks and real science walks.
‘Virus Mania’ is a must read if you want to unplug yourself from the matrix and detoxify your mind and body from the overwhelming ‘virus’ propaganda. The authors and contributors are not only educated, literate, practical and intelligent doctors and professionals, but free from the modern matrix and unbeholden to the ferocious and tyrannical power of big government and big pharma. They are honest, brave, and truthful.
The authors oppose the tyranny of Scientism, or the merger of big government and big industry into the Church of ‘Science’ with its divine right to rule. In particular, as evinced curing the Corona fascism, they were and are prophets against the creation of a Medical-Nazi bio-security state, premised on the false theology of flying viruses, merged with governmental and pharmaceutical tyranny. Given the piles of dead which exist of those who oppose the ‘narrative’, murdered by the deep state and pharma, one prays for their continued good health and existence.
The byline of the book says it all:
“How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics making Billion Dollar Profits at Our Expense.”
This post, using the information from ‘Virus Mania’, will focus on the irrationality of ‘virus’ propaganda and how it destroys the rational functioning of perfectly normal people.
Normally intelligent people who self-identify as educated, rational, and who preen as gilded peacocks on their incomes, degrees and social status, are somehow blind to the massive industry that is the drugs-pharmaceutical-military-governmental complex, or more prosaically, mafia. The Corona plandemic/scamdemic by itself increased the profits of the pharma industry by some U$50 billion. Many of these firms are headquartered in New Jersey and the Eastern US or, in the UK. It is not a ‘conspiracy theory’ or a ‘coincidence’ that the locus of Corona planning, propaganda and deranged policy implementation emanated from the east coast of the US and the UK. The entire plandemic was coordinated, synchronised and meticulously pre-planned. Even the words, backdrops, videos and visuals across the G20 were copied and reused.
The wealth generated from this global medical Nazism was many times more than just pure profits if stock valuations are included. Cross investing is legion in the drugs industry and stock valuations are an important metric in recouping investements. ModeRNA as a firm didn’t really exist in 2019, possessing revenues of some U$ 60 million (from investors and their firms) with no profits. During the scamdemic the revenues reached U$ 22 billion with a stock price a hundred times its 2019 value. Investors were delighted.
How many know or care about the pharma largesse accrued during the plandemic? How many politicians, parliaments, and media platforms can you buy with billions in profits? Entire ‘congresses’, ‘health systems’, ‘agencies’, and ‘parliaments’ can be purchased and manipulated. Yet the ‘rationalist, humanist, citizen of the world’, sees not.
Normally intelligent people are blind to the obvious fraud and cannot connect the dots between the invention of ‘epidemics’ and profits, power, control and creating a system of feudal vassalage. This is the theme of ‘Virus Mania’. AIDS, various bird flus, polio, the Spanish flu epidemic (not Spanish and not a flu), and the other ‘common infectious diseases’ are the invention and work of government and pharma with very lucrative drugs as the ‘only cure’. The distracted sheeple, obese on entertainment, sports and sundry illusions, see not and bleat for protection from imaginary monsters as they poison themselves and innocent children with toxins. Autism anyone?
This single volume illustrates in easy-to-understand language, that the entire theology of virology, its upstream scientific studies and claims; and the downstream mainstream media horror stories of various diseases, is an entirely false and perniciously evil paradigm. The endless array of breathless media tales around the destruction to be visited on mankind by H5N1 flu, AIDS, BSE (botulism spongiform encephaly, sounds sciency), Hepatitis C, cervical cancer, various other cancers and ulcers (which are caused by toxins but often attributed to a ‘virus’), Corona, bird flus of different stripes, dengue, Ebola, West Nile and others ad nauseum, are wrong, misleading and often engineered to induce panic which can only be resolved through ‘remedies’ offered by socialised health systems and pharmaceuticals.
Toxins create diseases. Toxic materials suffuse all ‘vaccines’, which when administered can generate immune system destruction and disease creation. Many of these diseases such as autism, ‘attention deficit disorder’, cancer, leukaemia and heart disease have increased on a massive scale since the 1960s, when mandatory childhood ‘vaccines’ were implemented. The number of such interventions has increased from a few in the 1960s, to between 20 and 70 in most locales around the ‘modern world’. We in the ‘enlightened modern era’, are drug addicts and fanatics. We are mentally and psychologically ill.
“As relevant studies reveal, drug toxicities are so severe that the American ‘health’ industry’s pill craze is responsible for about 800.000 deaths each year, more than any illness (including cancer and heart attacks).” (p. 25)
Since the 1960s, childhood and adult diseases have risen astronomically. Many toxins have been amplified in the past 50 years due to industrialisation, including massive amounts of micro-plastics in the atmosphere and the liberal spraying of our skies with chemical ‘trails’ to play God and control the weather. These toxins are then cycled into our ground, food and water contributing to poor health and wrecked immune systems. Along with industrial toxin pollution there can be little doubt that the direct seeding of heavy chemicals and adjuvants into our bodies, for no reason whatsoever, has mightily contributed to the health fiasco we see around us. To deny this fact, based on the factual evidence presented since the 1960s, is to be a denier of reality and common sense.
‘Virus Mania’ deftly illustrates the merger of endless propaganda, with the sordid industrial profit-motive within a theology of ‘science’ and ‘one truth’ (Scientism). The propaganda and brainwashing on ‘germs’ and ambulating, flying ‘viruses’ has been relentless for about 200 years when the drugs industry was formed with government investment (Jenner and the smallpox scam). Normally intelligent people buy into this dogmatic myth, accepting in-toto the unscientific and unproven claims that strands of DNA and RNA are passed from animals to humans (zoonotic transfer); then from humans to humans via aerosols and fomites (germs on a surface). The only solution to survive and demise a disease is through ‘vaccination’.
If you ask supposedly intelligent people, your GP, the local immune system specialist, the ‘virology’ expert, the ‘scientist’ of ‘viruses’, or Professor such and such, for a single proof, which can be replicated, demonstrating the entire process of ‘virus transfer’ end to end, you receive nothing. The best that can be offered is to create ‘models’ of ‘cell cultures’ which are admixtures of material and toxins, and which tell us nothing about the process of animal-to human, and from human-to another human host-transfer.
In place of ‘science’ word salads are used, as if ‘cell cultures’ means anything. It is like saying ‘punctuated equilibrium’ to explain the lack of proofs for evolutionary meta-species mutation. This is one reason why the Common Cold Research Unit in the UK, after 40 years of failure to isolate a single ‘cold’ and ‘corona’ ‘virus’ even using cell cultures, closed its doors in the mid-1980s after consuming well over a £100 million of taxpayer money. Cui bono the peasant might wonder. Where does all this money go?
“The dogma of a single cause for disease was decisively shaped by microbiology, which became predominant at the end of the 19th century, declaring specific microorganisms (viruses, bacteria, fungi) to be the causes of very definite diseases; including mass epidemics such as cholera and tuberculosis. The founders of microbe theory, researchers Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, ascended in their lifetimes to the heights of medicine’s Mount Olympus.” (p. 27)
Monomorphic disease causation is a myth. Cholera, smallpox, typhoid, diptheria, cholera and other common 19th century diseases were spread by human filth, faeces, animal remains, contaminated water and horse manure. Scurvy, yellow fever, beriberi, and pellagra were all thought to be the causation of monomorphic ‘germ’ transmission (p. 67). None of them are. So much for the settled science. More here
“We would expect that for every case of major fraud that comes to light, a hundred or so go undetected. For each major fraud, perhaps a thousand minor fakeries are perpetrated. The reader can supply his own multiplication factor; ours would indicate that every major case of fraud that becomes public is the representative of some 100.000 others, major and minor combine, that lie concealed in the marshy wastes of the scientific literature.” (Broad & Wade, ‘Betrayers of Truth’, 1982, p. 87)
Newspaper reporters Broad and Wade decided to investigate scientific fraud in 1982. Their exercise was to outline in the past few decades some of the more famous and disturbing instances of scientific mendacity. They openly admitted that their investigation was the tip of a massive iceberg, the glittering scum on a pond with endless depths.
“….ours would indicate that every major case of fraud that becomes public is the representative of some 100.000 others” (p. 87)
Chew on that tidbit. For every fake mRNA ‘safe and effective’ study, 100.000 other instantiations of fraud, small and great, exist. Scientific misconduct has only gotten much, much worse since 1982. Does anyone believe that the massive increase in scientific ‘research’ budgets, ‘scientists’, ‘journals’, and ‘papers’ since 1982 has not led to an explosion of what this book unveils? Does anyone believe that scientific fraud has receded since the 1980s? If any such person exists it is best to view them as a leper and avoid contact.
Scientific fraud is as old as humanity. In the modern world, the pace and acceleration of fraud is its most noticeable characteristic. Broad and Wade’s work can be seen in a historical context. Notable figures who have engaged in outright fraud including plagiarism, falsification of data, or providing no data to support their claims include inter alia:
Ptolemy: the greatest astronomer of antiquity (2nd century) lifted many of his theories and observational data from Hipparchus of Rhodes (2nd century B.C.).
Galileo: Performed few if any of the experiments associated with his name. A post on the Galileo myth explodes the propaganda around this self-promoting philosopher who provided no proof for Copernicanism.
Newton: Employed a constant, which does not exist, to make his equations balance and fabricated large tracts of his data to support his theories. Quite likely he borrowed concepts of calculus from Leibniz. His deceit is rarely discussed.
Jenner: A 19th century unlicensed country quack, who concocted a potion including lacerated cow teat detritus, mercury, chloric and arsenic, which he injected into his gardener to ward off ‘smallpox’. When his gardener did not succumb to smallpox (adults don’t contract smallpox in general), he marketed his solution as the saviour against the scourge. He and his Royal Society friends went on to make £ 3 million.
John Dalton: 19th century discoverer of the laws of the chemical combinations which proved the existence of atoms; his elegant and perfect experiments and data cannot be replicated.
Darwin: Plagiarised much of his material on ‘evolution’ and did not supply one single experimental proof of meta-mutations of species, instead relying on philosophy, descriptions and prose.
Mendel: The Austrian monk and founder of genetics invented much of his statistics on peas, which cannot be replicated, and which are far too perfect to be true.
Einstein: Borrowed whole tracts of his theories from others including Lorentz, Minkowski, Fisher and others with referencing their work. Like Newton he employed a fake constant to get his ‘steady state’ universe equations to balance (now termed ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’). Did not perform any physical experiments to support relativity. Instituted arcane maths which do not work when applied to mechanical experiments.
Various-Piltdown man: An early 20th century fraud which for 40 years was taught as proof of ‘evolution’ and the missing link. The skeleton scam was fabricated and dumped into a pit in Sussex not far from Darwin’s residence. It was a farmer’s skeletal remains glued to the skull and jaw of a chimp. It would have taken a real ‘scientist’ about 20 minutes to identify the fraud.
Milliken: 20th century American Nobel winner in physics, for his work on electric charges of an electron, fabricated much of his data and misrepresented his work to beat ‘rivals’.
Freud: Manufactured fraudulent data and conclusions on a large scale to build his theories, practice, and revenues. Freudian psychology is an example of an entire industry saturated with fraud and pseudo-intellectualism.
Alfred Kinsey: A charlatan passed off by the media as a ‘scientist’, Kinsey in the 1970s invented ‘research’, studies and data proving that the ‘gay lifestyle’ was more mainstream than believed and that most men are bi-sexual by nature and that chromosomes are not gender gatekeepers.
Michael Mann: The hockey stick curve of ‘climate’ temperatures which attempts to erase the medieval warming and little ice ages, and which flattens the 1940-70s reduction in temperatures is one of the great frauds in modern science. Independent analysis of the segments of code which were released reveal that any set of variables and parameters will generate a hockey stick (eg U$-GBP exchange rates).
The above are just a few examples. As the quote at the top of the page states, much of what passes for ‘science’ is simply fiction, butchered by criminal deceit. Medical and bio-medical research including pharmaceutical research, is of course an extreme example of ‘scientific’ criminality. But the usurpation of honesty in the pursuit of money and power exists in every domain.
(Tobacco ‘research’ emanating from academics and private institutions guaranteed that cigarettes were safe and effective.)
Broad and Wade analyse why scientific fraud occurs by detailing some 2 dozen extraordinary cases, some of them quite famous (eg the widespread research fraud at Yale). Contrary to the public image of the scientist as a moral saint, wrapped in a white jacket with a pencil behind the ear, earnest, honest, transparent, self-correcting, applying their genius to enlighten the world, or to save it, Broad and Wide paint a far more realistic picture.
‘Science’ at its core is not the golden image sold to the public but riven and saturated with deceit, worst practices, disorganisation, competition, vulgar procedures and simmering violence. All distorted by money and the pressures to publish. The processes of criminality are legion and varied. There are many ways to commit ‘fraud’ and a crime. The means, the motive, the ability to do so abound within ‘science’.
Refreshingly Broad and Wade dispense with the usual nostrum that ‘most scientists are honest’. There is no proof of this. Scientists are just as craven, corrupt, self-serving, hypocritical, criminal, and egotistical as anyone else in society. They identify some reasons why rampant fraud rampages through the ‘Halls of Science’:
1. Fame and recognition
2. Publication and money
3. Replication/Peer review – does not work
4. Scientific methods – which don’t exist
5. Philosophy
6. Public ignorance
Too many sceptics of the Corona fascism accept the ‘normative’ (normie) view that flying viruses exist. This belief is from indoctrination. You have been told your entire life by the ‘The Science’ that flying ‘germs’ relabelled ‘viruses’ have been ‘discovered’ and ‘confirmed’ to exist. Further you have brainwashed that there is a monomorphic relationship between a single ‘virus’ and a single ‘disease’. No evidence for monomorphism of a ‘virus’ exists. This post will summarise why viruses do not exist. Once you free your mind from this non-science, you are better able to defend yourself from medical totalitarianism, health fascism, from criminal quacks and from the state and its partners in the criminal industry of pharmaceuticals profiteering from ignorance and blind, stupid belief.
There are some 200 definitions of a ‘virus’. No single definition is agreed upon, but a common interpretation is an ‘intracellular parasite’. This word salad means nothing. 100 trillion bacteria inhabit each person’s body. The ‘intracellular parasite’ would reference a bacterium which causes cell decay or tissue inflammation. But no such bacteria exist in situ in our bodies. Bacteria are the ‘garbage collectors’ within our complex body and immune systems. They arrive to clean up detritus and decayed cell matter and tissue. They don’t cause the same.
Stating that ‘Corona 19’ ‘genomic’ material is found in your system, is as irrelevant and ignorant as apocryphally stating that your DNA is 98% similar to that of a banana. Truncated ‘strands’ or ‘isolated material’ being ‘similar’ does not mean you are a banana (though many normies are indeed vegetables). Genomic strand correspondence does not mean you are ill or will die.
The etymology of the word virus is from Latin, meaning ‘poison’ or a toxic sap or substance. For 2000 years until the ‘modern’ 20th century, this definition was accepted as factual, meaning that a virus was related to toxic materials and influences. It was not created from abiogenesis (another non-science), nor manufactured from genomic material in our bodies. A virus for 2000 years referenced poisons imbibed and ingested which changed our bodily tissues and cells, fomenting a reaction, labelled a disease.
The modern concept of a virus can be dated back to the 17th century. Pasteur in the 19th century is usually credited with the ‘theory of germs’ forwarded in two phases in the 1860s and 1880s but there are many theories and ideas, akin to Pasteur’s germ theory which long pre-date the mid-19th century. Koch the German competitor to Pasteur, is celebrated for his ‘postulates’ on disease creation which his own experiments on ‘germs’ failed to satisfy. Between Pasteur and Koch, the state with its medical and scientific ‘societies’ declared that ‘germs’, renamed ‘viruses’ were the cause of disease. Every disease was associated with a single ‘virus’. The cure was a drug or vaccine. Profits, power and control over populations was the real objective.
As with Saint Jenner the criminal fraud, Pasteur was a quack and Koch created and issued a ‘vaccine’ for tuberculosis which killed thousands of Germans. Their theories still remain unproven and experimentally unsupported. They do generate billions in profits each year for the drug industry to ‘keep us safe’ from the flying viruses. Obviously, your pet will die from the flying rabies unless you ‘inoculate’ it every year for £200 a shot. You don’t want to be an evil and negligent pet owner and endanger your children by exposing them to rabies right? Alternative theories including Pasteur’s contemporary Bechamp’s terrain theory, explain much better how disease forms in our bodies and those of our pets.
Astrology is more useful and contains more science than modern virology. The following recapitulates the arcane inanity of modern ‘medical science’ around how a ‘virus spreads’:
1. A chicken has a ‘genomic’ sequence labelled a ‘virus’, which if transferred to humans is somehow toxic (humans and chickens have cohabited for millennia, so pace the religion of ‘evolution’ shouldn’t you be immune to chicken DNA material since you are the ‘fittest’?);
2. The clucking creature is petted by your son, or eaten in a ‘wet market’ in Wuhan (the science is ‘certain’ that any contact can result in a transfer), this kicks off the catastrophe;
3. The ‘virus’ leaves the tissue of the chicken through touching, or is present in the tissue through ingestion and enters the body of the new host;
4. This ‘virus’ then finds its way into the respiratory tract and ‘attacks’ your respiratory system, cells, membranes and tissues, causing ‘bird flu’;
5. The ‘bird flu’ and its toxic genomic material ‘spreads’ through ‘recombinant DNA copying’ (more word salads), issuing viral matter into your organs, destroying cells and functionality, it is carnage worthy of a war (imagine a sword wielding viral-DNA chain slaughtering the innocent cells of your body);
6. ‘Influenza’ or cold symptoms include fever, shallow breathing, chest pain, sweating and debilitating muscular weakness;
7. If old, frail, obese, or suffering from pre-conditions (or all the aforementioned) you die;
8. Before you die, the ‘bird flu virus’ lodged into your mucous membranes and nasal cavities, is ejected in ‘water molecules’, which are airborne and float and fly (sometimes for miles, pace the ‘science’)
9. The toxic viral-DNA protected by water sacs, with a distinct ‘genomic’ footprint, will float and fly into a recipient’s eyes, nose, mouth;
10. The water-protected ‘viral DNA matter’ will also be transferred to surfaces and will await a person to touch the surface, collect the viral DNA onto their fingers, they will then rub their face and then somehow the viral matter now released from its water-sac, will ambulate into the nose, eyes, mouth or ears of the recipient host;
11. The new host will then succumb to the toxic viral-DNA admixture which enters the respiratory tract and causes ‘flu symptoms’;
12. The process then repeats until there is an epidemic and the entire globe needs to be shut down, locked down, diapered down and stabbed down.
The above nonsense and stupidity are declared to be ‘science’. For Corona 19 the bat-pangolin ‘virus’ provenance was Wuhan China, and somehow by a series of miraculous transferences, was spread across most of the globe. It is noteworthy that the death rate was the same as the ‘flu’, the symptoms the same as influenza or a bad cold, and that the death rates did not increase in ‘modern nations’ until the stabbinations appeared in December 2020. In Africa and other locales that were ‘vaccine hesitant’ the death rates were a fraction of what they were in ‘modern states’ that happily stabbed 90% of the population, most of them gullible sheeple.
When you view the concept of a ‘viral’ pandemic, it is embarrassing how ridiculous, religious, puerile and fictitious the belief system is. There is more magic and religiosity in this framework than anything seen at a Marian shrine. Not a single experiment can prove any of the above as an end-to-end process, nor even mechanically prove its constituent parts or claims. More here
“Grant Steen (Citation2011a) analysed article retractions and suggested that it demonstrated that research fraud has indeed increased in recent years. In a subsequent paper, Steen (Citation2011b) suggested that apparent increase in incidence of research fraud in medicine is leading to increased harm to patients. Yudhijit Bhattacharjee (Citation2013), suggested that scientific fraud has a range of manifestations, some of which go unchallenged, ‘on a continuum of dishonest behaviours that extend from the cherry-picking of data to fit a chosen hypothesis … to outright fabrication’.” (Source, ‘Research fraud: a long-term problem exacerbated by the clamour for research grants’, 2020)
‘Science’ is full of fraud and quacks and always has been. In this post we list some egregious examples of retracted ‘research’ fraud. It is a tithe of what could be posted. A good book needs to written on the extensive frauds permeating science since the beginning of recorded history. ‘Retractions’ are an insignificant category of the total fraud, but like a canary in the coal mine, a leading indicator of poisons, toxins and catastrophe. In the ‘modern world’, the caveat is always, ‘the fraud and retractions are still a low percentage of publications’. This is because not every submission is audited for fraud and because the definition of ‘fraud’ is vague and ambiguous. The fraud in ‘the science’ is more extensive and pervasive than fraudulent votes in a US election.
[Cambridge University Press, 2022]: Scientific fraud still lacks a precise, universally accepted definition: the borders between unambiguously established fraud, errors, misconduct are uncertain: this frequently complicates decisions on whether or not cases of questionable behaviour can be classified as true fraud…..Also important is the fact that the assessment of the seriousness of suspected cases is incremental: it goes from simple misconduct cases that would border on negligence, to cases of evident fraud, e.g. the fabrication or falsification of data or results, and/or the appropriation (plagiarism) of another person’s ideas or data without giving appropriate credit.
If I use just the last sentence (plagiarism), I will say that Galileo, Newton, Pasteur, Darwin, Koch, Einstein, Hawking, Dawkins and many other ‘scientists’ are frauds. Forget the fact that much of what they proposed was wrong and without basis. Most ‘scientists’, including the aforementioned, were very good at ‘borrowing’ from others without attribution or reference. That is fraudulent.
Further, if every single published paper was fully audited, and we properly defined all the categories of misconduct, the fraud and retraction rate would probably be in the 80% range. It is not just the vapid and breathless ‘research paper-mills’ churning out non-science for psychology, gender, evolution, climate change and the virus-pandemic complex and hundreds of other activist causes. Most scientific research is fraud on an industrial scale, encompassing every known domain, fuelled and mutilated by money, power and government interference. It is largely intentional, not accidental, and is geared towards accruing profits, power, career advancement and state aggrandizement.
The previous sentence is revealed as a fact when one looks at the apogee of outright scientific fraud for money and power in the climate cult. Since the 19th century, this collection of fantasists and green totalitarians have spewn propaganda parading as science on a weekly basis, now premised on fraudulent models, readings, data sources, programming code, and contrived algorithms. Even the Fake News media admits that climate models are useless. A long history of climate predictions and failures, with attendant issues in models which cannot possibly replicate the complex convection systems of long-term weather is collated here. Yet few if any of the ‘climate papers’ are retracted. We should never forget that this criminality was laid naked and exposed in the Climate Gate email scandals. It is fair to say that there is amongst informed critical thinkers a 97% consensus that 97% of all ‘climate studies’ are junk science.
The Corona plandemic followed the same runbook as the climatist religion, as will future ‘pandemics’ and ‘emergencies’. The fraud within the Corona plandemic was outrageous and one of the greatest examples of $cientism. Trillions spent worldwide on a scamdemic when the globe was shut down for almost 3 years. Far more died from the lockdowns, the stabbinations and other policies including treatment protocols, than perished from the ‘virus’. In every country the death from the ‘cure’ was 8-10 times greater than that from the disease (see here). In the UK about 25.000 died from Corona and only from Corona. Over 200.000 died from the stabbinations (‘excess deaths’) and some 20-30.000 from the March to May 2020 lockdown.
There is not a single shred of evidence that ‘viruses’ exist, nor any experimentation showing end-to-end, how a ‘virus’ emitted by a human (sneezing, coughing, touching), is transmitted by air or surface to someone else, how the DNA and RNA of the virus survives outside the host, how this molecule infects a second host and causes the same illness (same DNA, RNA). Yet endless research is published yearly on ‘viruses’ ‘proving’ a correlation with ‘diseases’. They should all be retracted until there is proof that ‘germs’, or ‘viruses’ exist. But they never are.
CV-19 was a ‘pandemic’ when a pandemic was redefined to be ‘cases’ from false PCR tests, not actual people who were sick or dying in real life (the death rates never changed during the plandemic);
mRNA stabs sold as ‘safe and effective’, preventing transmission, disease or even death;
mRNA ‘clinical trials’ proving they were safe and effective when the trials themselves were fraudulent (with the drugs cooked up in a matter of months and the ‘trials’ rushed and scientifically invalid);
Claims that face diapers/nappy rags would stop a 0.3 micron size particle, when diapers were proven in hundreds of studies to be useless;
That the unstabbed would die in legions because they were not ‘protected’ (the unstabbed death rate was far below the stabbed);
The fake PCR tests were ‘gold standards’ in SARS-II virus hunting and if the test was positive you were going to die;
The scariants (mutations) were ‘worse’ than the original CV-19 genomic structure which is anti-science and biologically impossible (mutations don’t add functionality, they destroy);
Models showing that lockdowns were necessary to flatten curves and sombreros;
…etc
Yet we hear that US government ‘scientists’ received U$700 million for their fraudulent research supporting the scamdemic narrative. Cui bono indeed? Below in this post are listed a small sample of fake mRNA studies later retracted or destroyed by real evidence. Yet the mass of that propaganda still persists. Most of that lurid junk science posing as ‘scientific studies’ informed policies and protocols and they still stand to be reused to support and calibrate a ‘response’ to future ‘emergencies’.
Much of what passed for ‘science’ during the Corona Medical Nazism was simply psychological brainwashing and acclimating the mass (the sheeple) to lockdowns, mRNA injectables and totalitarian control including digital IDs and passes, vaccination status and compliance. We see the same brainwashing and anti-reality program with ‘climate’ and ‘boiling’, ‘changing’ or ‘weirding’.
Those of us who have been through a peer-review process and had papers or submissions approved for publication or issue, know that it is a deeply flawed approach. It is the equivalent of forming a committee to create a sausage. Some basic questions a farmer would ask about peer review would reveal just how broken and disjoined it is.
1. Is your purported ‘problem statement’ really a problem? Or is it concocted to fulfil other non-scientific (social, political, activist) objectives?
2. Are you investigating an observed hypothesis, and then going through experimentation to try to shed light on why the observed phenomena behave in the way that they do? Or is it really the reverse, where you are using data, measurements and maybe experimentation, to prove your pre-determined conclusion.
3. Is the research using inductive (bottom up from observations) or deductive (top down from generalisations) logic? Both methods should be used to reach a valid conclusion.
4. Who within peer reviews fully understands the topic, or has time to investigate the claims and their attributed sources in detail?
5. Who in the peer review community understands the data, the code, the schemas, the sources, the logic, the links, the references and attributions? Who can explain any of the backup detail to support the paper’s ‘conclusions’?
6. Are the data sets, code and programming logic, including all documentation, ‘open science’ and accessible to anyone with an interest in the topic? If not how is this ‘scientific’? [If IP protection is used as an excuse, masked or obfuscated data and code can still be presented with documentation explaining how the system logic operates.]
7. Did IT experts verify the application code, data schemas, data sources and logic?
8. Are biases, worldviews, philosophies, conflicts of interest and financing openly declared? Cui bono from the ‘research’?
9. Can I, the little peasant farmer, replicate your research and methods?
The above questions highlight the issues that have always distorted ‘science’. Peer-review as a process is more garbage in-garbage out, than some magical filter of honest appraisal and confirmation. It means nothing to say your paper was ‘peer approved’. You pass mine; I will pass yours. Especially if money, prestige, a professorship, or publication is at stake.
“It turns out that such matter (the ether) exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with “stuff” that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo” (Robert Laughlin, 1993 Nobel prize winner; Laughlin, pp. 120-121)
The ether exists which by itself negates Relativity. It is entirely reasonable and scientifically justifiable to label Einsteinian Relativity as a hoax. Einstein cooked up two theories to explain the mechanics of the universe. The first was called ‘The Special Theory of Relativity’ written in 1905. The second came a decade later in the form of the ‘General Theory of Relativity’. Both are dogmatic gospel within ‘the Science’. Both are wrong. Both have pushed ‘The Science’ into anti-scientific propositions and suppositions, including using both to support the ‘Big Bang’ a paradigm long past its sell date. This post summarises the issues with Relativity and why it is a nonsense and why it explains nothing. More here
There are many proofs against the Big Bang. Few are known or discussed. How would a ‘bang’ create information, structure, order and life? This is a philosophical program not a ‘science’. The ‘10 Easy steps’ from nothing to the ‘Big Bang’ and then to you, is analysed here.
The underlying Philosophy of the Big Bang is deeply religious (link to post)
There is no proof which supports the religious tenets, namely mechancial naturalism, of the Big Bang theology. The Banging religion is anti-humanist, in that it demands a purely naturalistic (pagan) explanation for the creation of the universe, life, intelligence and information. Within this theology, our planet is a poor, reduced spheroid in the fringes of the universe. Humans are unimportant, our species simply a chance causation, designed by a random fluctuation of material and matter, akin to developed bacteria, related to and maybe inferior to the great ape. It is an atavistic theology and philosophy.
Supposedly, pace the Catholic priest and physicist Lemaitre and the industry he helped to create, the following naturalistic process occurred: a cosmic egg containing all universal matter exploded (how formed?), fusion reaction and massive heat ensued, an expansion, slowdown, then acceleration, cooling, isotropy, and homogeneity (disproven), gravity appears, galaxy and planet formation somehow occurred and improbably stardust and inanimate matter became information systems and life. This philosophical nonsense, built as a religio-scientific framework without foundational proof, is sold as ‘fact’. It is anything but factual or proven.
Some reasons why the Big Bang is simply rubbish are given below.
The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another. Matter cannot simply create itself and in the ‘real world’ matter cannot spontaneously arise from nothing, whether or not the instigating event is an explosion. There is no observational evidence to disprove the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Radiation spectrum disproves the Big Bang (links to post with details)
In general, we can say that two things would falsify the Big Bang religion: 1-if the blackbody radiation spectrum is not found and 2-if the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation or CMB possesses a spectrum that is substantially different from a blackbody. Astronomical observations confirm these two objections. The Big Bang is therefore invalid.
Contrary to STR and Banging theology, stellar galaxies should be far less than 1 billion years old, but this is not what ‘The Science’ has found. Exploding Supernovae are young. Galaxies larger than ours are newly created. Super galaxies have formed in short periods of time. According to STR and Banging, the Universe should collapse on itself and either reform or cease to exist. Magical dark matter and dark energy are invoked to prevent a collapse, neither has been found or can even be described. JWT observations suggest that the universe may be a flat disc and not curved.
‘The Science’ has no ‘consensus’ on the size, shape or form of the Universe. It might be expanding. It might be expanding and contracting. It might be in a steady state. It might not be in a steady state. The universe might well be a flat disc pace the JWT data. Or maybe not. Most likely it is a flat disc, but we might never know.
To be fair to the one of the few ‘insights’ from Einstein, Planck probes may suggest a slight curve of the universe which means that time dilation would be valid (clocks on the Earth would run much faster than in space). This is Einstein’s time-dilation and his ‘Twin paradox’ where a twin in space ages less quickly if he is travelling in a rocket near the speed of light (and that is the important variable), than his twin on Earth. Clocks due to gravity, run ‘faster’ on Earth than in space.
If true, this would mean that the billions of years of cosmic space formation would be rendered in the thousands or millions on Earth, depending on the clock dilation impact from a slight curvature and Einstein’s view that large objects due to gravity, slow down time. This by itself would upend modern cosmology and it would be the end of long ages on Earth. You can hear heads exploding at the very idea!
If no time dilation it is still a lose for ‘The Science’
However, if the slight curvature of space is not true and time-dilation is invalid and the JWT flat disc observation is accurate, it is still a lose for cosmology, given that the Big Bang and Relativity promote a fairly large curvature. Yet, ironically but deliberately, in promoting their space-curve dimension, ‘The Science’ does not bother to calculate the impact on time, because it would destroy long ages on this planet. Rocks and hard places.
It must be said that the concept of space and time being merged into a curved 4th dimension is frankly ridiculous, unproven and just another mental experiment. In this theory there is no absolute time, and the past, the present and the future do not exist independently of each other. In real life, time is outside of space and is a human only creation. Inanimate matter does not consider ‘time’.
Cosmic Background Radiation disproves the Big Bang
Cosmic Microwave Background radiation or CMB, disproves the Big Bang theology, and this is confirmed by the James Webb Telescope. The universe as viewed from the Earth is largely isotropic or homogenous but with 4 defined anisotropies or heterogenous patterns. This heterogeneity indicates that the Earth is near the barycentre of the universe. The CMB axis when viewed from the Earth appears to show geo-centricity, once again calling into disrepute the Copernican religion of Sun Worship.
Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations disproves the Big Bang
All of the above has been confirmed by WMAP data which cannot be easily dismissed or explained away. WMAP observations thrust a dagger right into the heart of the Banging model leading to laments about the axis of evil, or the centricity of the Earth within the universe (anathema!).
Philosophy and world-views are always the foundation of ‘The Science’ past or present. In the confused, anti-reality modern clown-world of secular materialism and nihilism, the dogmas of ‘settled science’ are religious gospel to those who believe, and to the powers that benefit. ‘Cui bono’ as the Roman lawyer Cicero supposedly asked. In our world, as evidenced by the Corona scamdemic, the Climate cult, and the flying virus (‘intracellular parasite’) mythology, following money and self-interest is the shortest path to find ‘The Science’. Enrichment and power matter far more than truth or real science.
Scientism’s religious dogma is built upon unceasing propaganda and financial largesse. Within every domain of ‘The Science’ a religious liturgy exists, replete with miracles (Evolution, Relativity), apparitions (non-existent viruses, Co2 causing climate), and virgin births (the Big Bang, life on this planet). ‘The Science’ is far more religious and prone to superstition than any mainline Christian church. Newtonian physics and Einstein’s fantasy world of relativity, which has been extensively excoriated and debunked on this substack, are examples of this truism. Both are venerated, both at the core, are quite wrong.
Starting with Copernicus and Galileo, science turned from mechanical proofs to philosophical and mathematical treatises (the execrable Galileo myth is dealt with here). The heretic can list thousands of mechanical experiments which do not find either the rotational speed of the Earth, nor its 30 km/second canter in space. None can be offered by those who believe in both. This is rather curious given that nearly everyone believes in the 1000 per mile diurnal rotation and the 108.000 km per hour zoom through space. The only defense of Copernican dogma are mathematical representations of physical phenomena, but never mechanical-physical proofs or physical answers. Yet few know this for it is never taught or rarely discussed. And of course, if you question any of it, you will be fired, failed, or declared a lunatic.
Newton developed a physics that interpreted, in mathematical terms, the force of interaction between two bodies. Newton’s theories however, are not independent of the reference frame in which those bodies are contained. The formulas F = ma and F = Gm1m2/r2 will only work in unaccelerated reference frames. This is not how reality operates. Most of reality as Einstein realised, sits within accelerated reference frames of motions and bodies in movement. When Newton’s formulas are applied to accelerating frames of reference they simply do not work unless compensations are added. This obvious error was one that Einstein attempted to resolve with his Relativity magic show but failed to do so as many posts in this substack have outlined.
Within an accelerated ‘frame’ or grid of physical locations, two bodies begin to accelerate or move relative to each other, with a force either being applied to generate the motion (or in the case of universal forces, no force is directly applied to the object per se, but movement occurs). In the image above the frame of reference is the box car. Whether the woman is moving and how fast, depends on your viewpoint or position as the ‘observer’. This philosophical premise leads to the fantasy world of ‘relativity’ which was created by Einstein to fix the flaws in Newtonian physics and to ‘save the phenomena’ and disprove thousands of experiments which could not find the Earth’s movement through space at 30/sec or its diurnal rotation.
Newton never developed the underlying mathematics to explain accelerated motion, or accelerated frames of reference (eg a moving bike and a person running behind it), so he added to his equations ‘fictitious forces’ which we now identify as the centrifugal, Coriolis, and Euler forces. Physics names these as ‘non-inertial forces’ since they produce motion and acceleration. However, the centrifugal and Coriolis forces, even though they are measurable, are not products of matter or energy in the Newtonian system. Newton could therefore never explain where these ‘fictitious’ forces came from or why. They are simply thought experiments and used to make equations balance. Physicist C. Møller described this problem 70 years ago:
…. so-called fictitious forces (centrifugal forces, Coriolis forces, etc.) which have no connexion whatever with the physical properties of the mechanical system itself….It was just for this reason that Newton introduced the concept of absolute space which should represent the system of reference where the laws of nature assume the simplest and most natural form. However…the notion of absolute space lost its physical meaning as soon as the special principle of relativity was generally accepted, for as a consequence of this principle it became impossible by any experiment to decide which system of inertia had to be regarded as the absolute system (Møller, pp. 218-219).
Newton’s first ‘law’ is the law of inertia which was ‘discovered’ in the 14th century. A system of inertia means a system at rest or a body with no changes in motion (i.e. no change in acceleration). If we want to compare ‘systems’ composed of bodies we need a reference point. If the box car is at rest and moves, and we are in it, we can measure our acceleration and speed even though we are at rest, or appear to be at rest in the box car (we are not moving but standing still). The frame of reference is the original state of the box car at rest.
However, for Bangers and Relativists no absolute frame of reference or baseline can exist. In Copernican theory the Earth cannot be a frame of reference given that it is in motion around the Sun and has a diurnal rotation. Newton never allowed the Earth to be at ‘the centre’ as a frame of reference. Instead he imposed ‘space’ as the frame of reference which, as given below, is wrong. Einstein removed space as a frame of reference and imposed relativity - where all objects are in relative motion to one another.
Newton was a pious Copernican and deist (not a Christian). In his philosophy a fixed Earth as an absolute reference point was and is anathema. This led Newton to nominate space as a form of absolute reference from which to derive his equations. But this is disingenuous. How can the vastness of the universe be a reference point especially if as the Bangers sermonize, it is expanding at the rate of 46 miles per second per megaparsec (3.3 million light years)? Fixed absolutes are anathema to Einstein and the Relativity cult. Modern cosmology is therefore at its very core, beset with philosophical and logical confusion. Who is right, Apostle Newton, or Saint Einstein? Physicist Dennis Sciama, a student of Fred Hoyle, explains the underlying conundrum:
Newton’s second law can be expressed in the familiar form: force is mass times acceleration. When we look carefully at this law we find a curious difficulty. For, while the force acting on a body is objectively determined by whatever is exerting the force, the value of the acceleration depends on how it is measured, that is, on which body is taken as providing a standard of rest….
..Newton’s second law applies only if the accelerations of bodies are measured in a special way. Since Newton believed his law to be fundamental, he supposed that accelerations measured in such a way that his law applies are of particular significance, and he called them absolute. Newton’s second law should now be amended to read: force is mass times absolute acceleration. …Consequently for Newton’s second law to be satisfied accelerations must be measured relative to an inertial frame of reference (Sciama, pp. 85-89).
The above statement is entirely sensible. Newton ignored inertial frames of reference. Artificial satellites provide an example. Lower altitude satellites can circle the Earth within 1-2 hours. The higher the altitude, the longer the orbital navigation takes. At about 20.000 miles in altitude, a satellite will take 24 hours to orbit the Earth. If the satellite was moving west to east, following the Earth’s rotation, it would appear to an observer on the ground to be a stationary and fixed object, hanging there, never moving. The Earth is the fixed inertial frame of reference. This example contradicts Newtonian mathematics. More here
This substack has outlined in many posts why the Big Bang theology is broken and discredited. This short post discusses ‘Gamma ray’ bursts, a phenomenon which by itself negates the Copernican principle which states that this planet and its human occupants are of no importance in the vastness of the universe and that random chance and luck are the only verities. Curiously the ‘gamma ray burst’ effect is rarely discussed within the Church of ‘The Science’. It is simply ignored.
We will take as our premise and starting point a book written by Copernican astrophysicist Jonathan Katz, The Biggest Bangs: The Mystery of Gamma-Ray Bursts, The Most Violent Explosions in the Universe, 2002. Surprisingly Katz has a chapter entitled The Copernican Dilemma, a scientific exploration of the key philosophical principle which informs all of modern cosmology.
Katz’s studies have found that, when all the known gamma-ray bursts are calculated and catalogued, they show Earth to be in the center of the universe.
Katz’s work has stood the test of time, yet as a devoted Copernican-Einsteinian he could never bring himself to recognize what is for him and his religion, the god-awful truth that the Copernican principle, the Big Bang, and Einsteinian relativity are science fictions. Many posts on this substack have provided scientific proof as to why that last sentence is factual if entirely upsetting and disconcerting.
What are gamma rays? According to Katz’s glossary, a Gamma ray is “an electromagnetic radiation whose photons have energies greater than about 100,000 eV. Sometimes lower-energy photons (often as low as 10,000 eV) are also called gamma rays, overlapping the definition of X rays...”
A gamma ray is in essence a form of electro-magnetic radiation, generated by radioactive nuclei, with a short-wave, typically shorter than an x-ray, and possessed of high energy. This ‘ray’ is a form of electro-magnetic wave radiation found in space, along with other radiation forms including alpha, beta and neutrino or neutron radiation. Radiation in space is at least 15 times more powerful than radiation found on the Earth and it is one reason out of many, why UFOs and space travel are impossible. All spacecraft would need to be coated in feet of lead and no carbon based life form would long last the travails of endless radiation, not to mention cosmic flares and other apocalyptic events in space including Gamma Ray Bursts.
However, pace our ‘modern culture’, gamma rays are rendered agents of change – mostly as a support for Darwin’s religion. According to the non-science pop-culture, these high energy bursts of radiation can turn a man into the Incredible Hulk, or a lizard. In reality a gamma ray burst (GRB) would destroy your DNA and kill you and all of life on this planet. GRB’s contain massive amounts of energy, equivalent to 1045 watts of energy, which is over a million trillion times more powerful than the Sun. Ouchy.
GRB’s in space occur at the rate of about one per day, but are fast-fading and random, never occurring in the same place twice. During the faked July 1969 Apollo moon mission, not only would the daily GRBs have decimated the crew, but solar flares and cosmic flares, which occurred during that period of time would have annihilated the spacecraft. For example in 1979, much to the chagrin of Bangers, an extraordinarily powerful super GRB emanated from the Large Magellenic Cloud, which is a satellite of the Milky Way and very close to Earth. It would have destroyed everything in its path. Many similar observations have been recorded.
In the context of cosmological theology Katz explains why GRBs are important.
“The uniform distribution of burst arrival directions tells us that the distribution of gamma-ray-burst sources in space is a sphere or spherical shell, with us at the center (some other extremely contrived and implausible distributions are also possible). But Copernicus taught us that we are not in a special preferred position in the universe; Earth is not at the center of the solar system, the Sun is not at the center of the galaxy, and so forth. There is no reason to believe we are at the center of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts. If our instruments are sensitive enough to detect bursts at the edge of the spatial distribution, then they should not be isotropic on the sky, contrary to observation; if our instruments are less sensitive, then the N ∝ S-3/2 law should hold, also contrary to observation. That is the Copernican dilemma.” (Katz, pp. 90-91)
These facts have been known for some 30-50 years but are rarely discussed or emphasized. The entire theology of the Big Bang or its competitor the Steady State theory, once championed by Einstein who created his fraudulent constant to make his equations balance, both pronounce with few exceptions, that the universe is both isotropic and homogeneous. Yet all the evidence from their own observations, known since the 1960s in fact, prove that the universe is not isotropic unless viewed from the Earth, and it is not homogenous.
Copernican apostle Edwin Hubble, whose astronomical discoveries were heralded as proof of the Big Bang and an expanding universe, laid a foundational gospel within the Big Bang Religion that must be followed:
“There must be no favoured location in the universe, no center, no boundary; all must see the universe alike. And, in order to ensure this situation, the cosmologist postulates spatial isotropy and spatial homogeneity, which is his way of stating that the universe must be pretty much alike everywhere and in all directions.” (Edwin Hubble, The Observational Approach to Cosmology, p. 54).
Modern cosmology is fully supportive of the Hubble gospel revelation. Logically however, if the universe is not isotropic, or if it is not homogeneous, the Copernican principle, and even the Copernican theory is disproved. If the universe is isotropic but inhomogeneous the same applies. If the Earth is isotropic but not homogenous it means that from an isotropic center the universe will appear the same in all directions, but the universe will appear different when not observed from the center. Either way, the Big Bang is debunked.
To define the terms:
Isotropic refers to an environment that looks the same in all directions, excluding the observer’s location. For example, if an observer is perched on top of a symmetrical sand hill in the middle of a flat desert, as he looks around the whole circumference of his view, he sees the same grade of hill approaching him, as well as a vast flat desert in all directions.
Homogeneous refers to an environment that appears the same in all locations, but also includes the observer’s location. In this case, the observer is not seated on a sand hill but on the flat desert itself, and as he looks out he sees a flat desert in all directions, including his seated position.
In his studies Katz admits that the universe’s gamma-ray bursts appear to be isotropic, or the same in all directions from Earth but not homogenous.
“To this day, after the detection of several thousand bursts, and despite earnest efforts to show the contrary, no deviation from a uniform random distribution (isotropy) in the directions of gamma-ray bursts on the sky has ever been convincingly demonstrated” (Jonathan I. Katz, The Biggest Bangs: p. 84).
Viewed from the center there is isotropy but the view from outside the center is as Katz admits, inhomogeneity. As Katz goes on to explain, the “Copernican dilemma” for astronomers is that they are required to explain why there are no faint gamma-ray bursts, since, according to the Big Bang theory, the universe is 13.7 billion years old and expansive. If so, then more distant bursts should register more faintly when compared to closer bursts. This is not observed.
Philosophy is always the foundation of ‘Science’. In large part you are your worldview. ‘The Cosmological Science’ and its religious theology of ‘The Big Bang’ are proof of this. Sundry underlying philosophical assumptions always determine the interpretation of data. Other parameters which deform interpretation include data fraud, censorship, money, power, fame, the allure of being published, professorships, awards, and ego-stroking. Scientism and human corruption.
One of the many intemperate and unsolvable scientific issues for ‘The Science’ of cosmology is that of anisotropy, or the heterogeneity of the observable universe. Cosmic Background Radiation is not homogenous throughout the universe, as predicted by Bangers. This cannot be easily dismissed or explained away, cutting as it does, right into the heart of their model, namely a magical explosion of the cosmic egg which contained all the matter in the universe, a nuclear fusion explosion, a massive acceleration thousands of times the speed of light, a cooling period and then uniformity and homogeneity in CMB (cosmic microwave background), with CMB being ‘a relic of the Big Bang’ and the universe’s temperature now a cool 2.725° Kelvin.
If nothing else ‘The Science’ loves uniformitarianism, endless time, slow and gradual, and eventually an equilibrium and stasis. Yet no evidence exists for CMB isotropy or homogeneity. It is all jumbled up. The implications for the Scientism of modern cosmology are momentous and shattering.
[COBE mapping, NASA which supports WMAP observations]
CMB heterogeneity was known back in the 1970s and 80s and this insidious problem prompted a response. In the late 1990s ‘The Science’ with its $25 billion per annum budget created a new project called WMAP or Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, named after the original discoverer of the CMB anisotropies in 1981, David T. Wilkinson. It was launched by NASA in 2001. The real objective was to disprove Wilkinson’s observations. What WMAP actually uncovered astounded and further perplexed ‘The Science’. If Wilkinson was correct, the anisotropy of CMB by itself would disprove the Big Bang. So what did WMAP uncover?
The WMAP images have shown the exact same results as the earlier probe named the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE), only with more clarity. COBE was launched in 1989 and is always used as ‘proof’ of Banging. But the actual data collected by COBE reveals quite the opposite picture, confirmed by WMAP. Both COBE and WMAP show that there is anisotropy in the universe, and that the Sun-Earth ecliptic plane (the black line in the image below) was precisely in the centre, between the red poles (hotter regions) and the blue poles (colder regions). There is a difference of 50mK or 50 millionths of a degree Kelvin from the 2.725° Kelvin of the remaining CMB. This is not what the Bangers predicted or wanted.
(WMAP data and geo-centredness)
One of the first scientists in WMAP to analyse this data was Max Tegmark of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was astounded at the data. The usually reliable mouthpiece of propaganda, the BBC, reported what he found:
“We [WMAP] found something very bizarre; there is some extra, so far unexplained structure in the CMB. We had expected that the microwave background would be truly isotropic, with no preferred direction in space but that may not be the case.” (BBC, 2003)
What Tegmark and others found was a pattern and one that pointed to the Sun-Earth ecliptic plane (Tegmark, et al July 26, 2003). In geek-speak the symmetry of the CMB containing octopole and quadrupole components revealed a curiosity.
“The octopole and quadrupole components are arranged in a straight line across the sky, along a kind of cosmic equator. That's weird. We don't think this is due to foreground contamination,” Dr Tegmark said. “It could be telling us something about the shape of space on the largest scales. We did not expect this and we cannot yet explain it.” (BBC, March 3, 2003)
Note:
Octopole: A multipole configuration with eight equal charges arranged in a circular pattern.
Quadrupole: A distribution of either electric charge or magnetization equivalent to two dipoles that point in opposite direction.
In essence these ‘poles’ are based on a monopole; an analogy would be a musical instrument where there is a fundamental note (say the base A string) but variations or poles of different notes that can be played on that string, more below).
These facts comport with the COBE data. But consider this epiphany. WMAP observations have shown that the 93 billion light year diameter universe was in direct alignment with the 93-million-mile distance between the Sun and the Earth – a ratio of 10-17 to 1. Just another coincidence. In fact, cosmological statistics show that an alignment of the CMB quadrupole and octupole with the Earth is a 0.1% probability equivalent to the death rate from the Corona ‘pandemic’. In other words, not a coincidence.
In a 2004 publication, the ‘Copi team’ of Craig Copi, Dominik Schwarz, Glenn Starkman, and Dragan Huterer admitted that the CMB poles were not only aligned with the Sun-Earth ecliptic, but also hint that they are aligned with the Earth’s equinoxes:
The large-angle correlations of the cosmic microwave background exhibit several statistically significant anomalies compared to the standard inflationary cosmology…the quadrupole-octopole correlation is excluded from being a chance occurrence in a gaussian random statistically isotropic sky at >99.87%….The correlation of the normals [perpendicular vectors] with the ecliptic poles suggest an unknown source or sink of CMB radiation or an unrecognized systematic.
…If it is a physical source or sink in the inner solar system it would cause an annual modulation in the time-ordered data….Physical correlation of the CMB with the equinoxes is difficult to imagine, since the WMAP satellite has no knowledge of the inclination of the Earth’s spin axis (Copi et al, November 26, 2004).
[The CMB Dipole is aligned with the Earth’s equinoxes]
Niall Ferguson to his credit recognizes the role faith plays in both the development of reason, and of the political-economy and its social-environmental evolution. His comments are worth reading at some length. On page 264 he gets to the crux of the matter as to why the West is better than the Rest [to quote his own depiction]:
“Religions matter. In earlier chapters we saw how the 'stability ethic' of Confucianism played a part in imperial China's failure to develop the kind of competitive institutional framework that promoted innovation in Western Europe....But perhaps the biggest contribution of religion to the history of Western civilization was this. Protestantism made the West not only work, but also save and read. The Industrial Revolution was indeed a product of technological innovation and consumption.”
All true. Though Weber's Protestant read, work and save ethic, is indeed a prime source of European dynamism it must also be said that the Catholic Church saved Europe and should be given joint credit for its rise to dominance. The Roman church developed the economy, fought wars of liberation and defence against Islam [including the Crusades which bought Europe 500 years of time to develop]; stimulated the creation of schools, universities, enquiry and debate; and financed science and art. The balance sheet of the Catholic Church is usually taught as a negative. This is nonsense. Even with the sordid foibles, corruption and inquisitorial nature of the Church, its influence in European development is undeniably positive and decisive.
The 'Great Republic' is a book compiled from many essays which Churchill wrote about America, during his many years in politics. This book was formed and edited by his grandson, Winston S. Churchill who was also for a time, an MP in the British Parliament. The book makes for interesting reading because it covers all of American history, including the Revolution, the Civil War, slavery, America's role in two World Wars, and even the creation of Canada. One of the more interesting chapters is named 'The American Constitution'. It is a good read because it gives the reasons why America, and its key foundational text is so outstandingly unique.
One has to wonder what Churchill would say today of the American government's disregard for this document? What would be his reaction to the destruction of the rules of political engagement which allowed in very large part, the creation of the modern world and of American exceptionalism? The Federal government alone now consumes close to 30% of national income, with ownership of key sectors such as auto manufacturing and banking. One doubts very much, that Churchill would be impressed by the totalitarian pretensions of the unDemocratic or anti-Republican parties.
One of Churchill's strengths in his 66 year long political career, was his defense of both democracy; and of the Constitutional division of powers. He admired the US foundational texts as being unique in human history, and the bedrock of the Republican ideal. The US Constitution was not just an piece of parchment concocted by rich, white men, who owned slaves – but rather the apogee of genius, crafted by highly intelligent men, who were successful in life, and knew how a prosperous and well-functioning nation state should be developed.
“Socialism seeks to pull down wealth; Liberalism seeks to raise up poverty.”
[Churchill May 14 1908, Dundee Hall speech].
This is little book a wonderful and new product for Churchilliana. The publishing firm, General Books, copied a number of Churchill's speeches between 1906 and 1912 using optical character recognition software. These full length reproductions were then turned into a book of some 138 pages. They are a fine compilation on Churchill's vision of 'Liberalism', or the establishment of what some might call welfare-capitalism, which merges aspects of socialism and communal responsibility, with trade, free[ish] markets, and aspects of capitalism.
These speeches formed the ideology and political convictions of Churchill the politician during the social-reforming era of 1906 to 1912. This was when the modern welfare state and its important components was created. Churchill became a minister of power during 2 governments serving as MP for Manchester North-West [1906-8], and Dundee [1908-22]. He entered the Cabinet in 1908 until 1910 as President of the Board of Trade and served as the Home Secretary from 1910 to 1911. These crucial 5 years from 1907 to 1912 were essential to restoring the communal health of Great Britain and the many 'have-nots'. Churchill's speeches make the argument as to why this is so and why a safety net of health, insurance, poor relief, and wage floors is necessary. Conservatives might be shocked but yes we do need a minimum welfare state.
The usual lament is that 'we don't build anything anymore' in advanced economies. This is not true. 15 % of GDP is in manufacturing and if one adds in software and technology development – which is a manufacturing process – the number is 30%. IT accounts for about 15% of US GDP making it the single most important industry. There are three factors about manufacturing which the mainstream media never reports.
Euro, soon to be a Zeuro. Europe has long been infected with the disease which first appeared with some force in the mid 19th century from the revolutionary slogans of 1848 to the mindlessness of Nietzsche's sad little writings which attempted to create 'supermen' out of a culture which was becoming socialist. All people, cultures, ideas and nations are equal. Fairness means everyone is the same. Equality is where all people and states are equally poor and miserable. Any 'gaps' in wealth, productivity, talent or initiative must be 'reduced' by government. If you try hard you are a criminally liable idiot, a threat to the state. Life is a large vacation punctuated by periods of unproductive, unsatisfying labour. The tenets of Christian civilization – rationality, gratitude, humility, hard-work, the reduction of the ego, the Golden Rule – are all relics of superstition and stupidity. Narcissism, self-absorption, 'free' benefits, TV and cults are the coveted idols of sophistication.
When your society is built upon the foundations of Rousseau and modern cultural Marxism it is bound to fail. When a currency is created to 'hide the decline', and allow governments more unfettered access to printed money currency, regulations, taxation, and power, the end is only a matter of time. Of course European 'leaders' now 'demand' a fiscal union. That is after all the whole point of the Euro exercise. Create a monetary disaster which implodes fiscal reality, and then offer 'solutions' which involve more government centralization and unfettered power.
Fiat currencies will disappear at least in their current form. When Nixon abolished the Gold Standard in 1971 he did so for self-interested reasons. He was aping the failed but short term policy of Lincoln during the Civil War – print more money all the time – to fund the war effort. That lasted only 4 years, and the inflationary effects were real but eaten up within 5 years by a rebounding economy, growing large and powerful on a unified Continental sized market. Nixon's feat has endured 40 years with a huge increase in the printing of money aligned with zero interest rates in the past 10 years, guaranteeing some form of future financial destruction. There are laws of economics, and we can't ignore them, though the big brains which run the world often times do.
US debt took off post 1971, when the US dollar was decoupled from the Gold standard.
The ancient Greeks set up the Oracle of Delphi as a temple to Apollo the Sun and Music God. The high priestesses were stoned on Datura leaves and mumbled some nonsense to any who brought a question. They were revealing what the 'Earth Mother' forecast. But like Nostradumuses sayings, much of what these stoned women muttered was completely inane and incomprehensible. No matter. The Delphic cult believed. This is essential. Muslims believe they are the chosen ones destined by the moon deity for an after-life of pleasure and endless sex [at least for Muslim men]. Our new Earth Mother cult has to give the cult members a combination of Delphic surety and Islamic rewards. It must in other words, transcend mere paganism and take on the attributes of a religion. To this end I propose the establishment – with tax money – of Churches in every single urban center, with the name of 'Earth Mother Institute'. Thus they will not look like a 'normal church' and won't be vilified by really smart people or the media. We will teach that by following our cult, your life will be purified, you will be moral, you will be superior, and at some point, because you are 'one with nature', you will be rewarded in both this life and the next.
Climate Change is a mythical problem premised on grand lies and fraud. Witness some real world facts: Co2 Emissions today are at their 2nd lowest level in history.
During the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today.
The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.
The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm
Ice Ages are the norm:
“For ninety percent of the last million years, the normal state of the Earth's climate has been an ice age. Ice ages last about 100,000 years, and are punctuated by short periods of warm climate, or inter-glacials. The last ice age started about 114,000 years ago. It began instantaneously. For a hundred-thousand years, temperatures fell and sheets of ice a mile thick grew to envelop much of North America, Europe and Asia. The ice age ended nearly as abruptly as it began. Between about 12,000 and 10,000 years ago, the temperature in Greenland rose more than 50 °F.”
The UN IPCC scam
The fact that Co2 does not cause anything is a scientific fact. The Earth is not a greenhouse and ergo there can be no forcing of water vapour causing global cooling. There are over 1 million impact variables in the earth's convection system. The most common climate is an ice age – a reality completely divorced from Co2 levels or human activity. The sun has more to do with climate patterns than human activity.
No one from the Marxist-Globalist Globaloney Warming cult can explain the creation and the ending of the last ice age. Nor can they posit why Co2 levels which are at their 2nd lowest level in the last 2 million years have any ties to temperature, in spite of local climactic conditions and physical thermodynamics – both of which disprove 'global temperature' as utterly meaningless. The cult can't explain local variations or why the IPCC fraudulent data confirms that the earth is cooling, not warming. IPCC models [26 of them], have proven utterly futile at predicting any real world climate events or temperatures – a fact again left unexplained by the Eco Fascist cult.
Socialist reduction
Socialism always fails. States cannot afford socialized programs. If you deem health care to be a human right than nationalize food, housing, water bottle distribution, and clothing. Health care is no different than any other market. If a socialized system is truly necessary than we should at least have the rational intelligence to allow a functioning market to co-exist in which private insurances, care, and access are subject to price points and supply and demand factors. Not only would that alleviate the stress on state budgets it would improve the morality of the system by both decreasing costs and death rates. The modern dark-age mantra of 'socialism is good' is absurd. Time to move on.
