The second sentence of the abstract of a new paper about trust in scientists, which is generally high but in some places low, provides the very reason for distrust: “Public trust in science can help decision-makers act based on the best available evidence, especially during crises such as climate change or the COVID-19 pandemic.”
"But only because scientists in the name of Science first created the damned bug, and then repeatedly botched its “solutions”."
No. The covid pandemic advertised itself as a psyop from the getgo including (but certainly not limited to) the following:
--- showing us - against reality - people laid out on hospital floors and falling flat on their faces
--- telling us nonsense about a Chinese research team finding two species of snake, the Chinese cobra and the many-banded krait, to be "reservoirs" of the virus and in the same article have someone call this "complete garbage" (pushing out nonsense and then debunking is a common feature of psyops)
--- letting us know big pandemic exercises were conducted only months before
In psyops they only do for real what they want for real and fake the rest. They didn't want a virus, they only wanted us to believe in one. I knew nothing of the "no viruses proved to exist" movement when covid hit but I knew there wasn't a virus purely from applying the psyop lens ... and then a number of courageous and intelligent scientists reviewed the scientific literature claiming isolation of the virus and showed it was all bunkum. And then I learnt all about the HIV>AIDS scam and how virology and vaccinology have both been completely fraudulent sciences from their inception.
Just found out yesterday the key study all MDs cite on the effectiveness of SSRI's was not only wrong but was actually fraudulent. The STAR D review showed that the researchers engaged in so much manipulation of the research that the real results showed 3% of study participants got relief from SSRIs - not 67% as the study concluded. 20+ years of poisoning people with SSRIs and getting them incredibly dependent on them. My GF has been on high doses for years and is now terrified of stopping cuz the detox is awful and takes a long time.
I doubt all studies and all scientists, from the outset now. They have to prove everything or I won't believe them. And if they don't want to bother earning our trust, that's on them.
DEVELOPING: France has passed a new law which will send you to jail for 3 years if you criticize mRNA ‘vaccines’ or ‘gene therapy’
According to the law, which was passed quietly and secretly through the French parliament on Wednesday, advisement against mRNA or other treatments which are deemed ‘suitable’ based on current ‘medical knowledge’ can lead to a 3 year prison sentence and up to a $48,400 fine.
Article 4 of the new law, or Article Pfizer as it’s being referred to by freedom fighters in the legislature, is a prejudgment of “alternative medicine” and a threat to whistleblowers.
Ominously, during what little debate was fielded before the passage of this fascist law that eliminates informed consent, warnings were parroted that “the next pandemic is coming” and mRNA technology is the only solution.
"Scientists, even PhD-bearing mathematical prodigies, can be stupid."
Weak too; this has always been the case but is certainly more pronounced today. Strict "DEI" and "CC crisis" adherence are closely tied with: funding, acceptance within groups, fame and tenure.
When modernity discarded the men in white lace for men in white synthetic lab coats for her ethical justifications, it was always bound to eventually become corrupted and infiltrated, if only so the government power could decapitate any resistance. The seminaries were flooded with marxist fags (See School of Darkness, Bella Dodd), the halls of science were filled with ideologues whose idea of the scientific method is to shovel word salad that is equivalent to reading bone dice in pig intestines.
The aftermath has proven that the COVID-19 event wasn't much more than a seasonal illness. The over treatment of the elderly and those with compromised immune systems made it seem worse.
The problem with trusting science is that science is itself a system of mistrust. One where every statement must be proven true by rigorous empirical demonstration.
In science consensus in meaningless. Nothing can proved by an appeal to authority.
Is there a scientific consensus about the role of gravity in the organization of the physical world? After all gravity has been a central inquiry of physical science since Newton 350 years ago.
No, Theoretical Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder lays out: " ... the five currently most promising approaches to a theory of quantum gravity that physicists are presently pursuing. These are: string theory, loop quantum gravity, asymptotically safe gravity, causal dynamical triangulation, and emergent gravity." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5foUTeRdqII
Gravity was key concept to Newton and Einstein, the most important intellectual figures in the History of Science, and we still have 5 theories floating around.
"Climate Science" and Epidemiology, are by way of contrast to the study of gravity, just mumbo jumbo. Claims that outsiders must "trust the science" are just bullying bovine excrement.
No. Every claim made by any science must be proven true by the claimant. And outsiders should regard anyone who says otherwise as a grifter.
At this point I don’t trust anyone
We lose our way when we make science an infallible religion.
This class of Scientists don't want to own the bad.
They are Journalists at heart.
And everyone wonders why witches used to be burned.
The worst thing a politician can do is implement the recommendations of a scientist.
"But only because scientists in the name of Science first created the damned bug, and then repeatedly botched its “solutions”."
No. The covid pandemic advertised itself as a psyop from the getgo including (but certainly not limited to) the following:
--- showing us - against reality - people laid out on hospital floors and falling flat on their faces
--- telling us nonsense about a Chinese research team finding two species of snake, the Chinese cobra and the many-banded krait, to be "reservoirs" of the virus and in the same article have someone call this "complete garbage" (pushing out nonsense and then debunking is a common feature of psyops)
--- letting us know big pandemic exercises were conducted only months before
In psyops they only do for real what they want for real and fake the rest. They didn't want a virus, they only wanted us to believe in one. I knew nothing of the "no viruses proved to exist" movement when covid hit but I knew there wasn't a virus purely from applying the psyop lens ... and then a number of courageous and intelligent scientists reviewed the scientific literature claiming isolation of the virus and showed it was all bunkum. And then I learnt all about the HIV>AIDS scam and how virology and vaccinology have both been completely fraudulent sciences from their inception.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/dissenters-of-the-covid-narrative
Just found out yesterday the key study all MDs cite on the effectiveness of SSRI's was not only wrong but was actually fraudulent. The STAR D review showed that the researchers engaged in so much manipulation of the research that the real results showed 3% of study participants got relief from SSRIs - not 67% as the study concluded. 20+ years of poisoning people with SSRIs and getting them incredibly dependent on them. My GF has been on high doses for years and is now terrified of stopping cuz the detox is awful and takes a long time.
I doubt all studies and all scientists, from the outset now. They have to prove everything or I won't believe them. And if they don't want to bother earning our trust, that's on them.
Looking forward to a paper on trust in pediatricians.
See this yesterday? https://www.wsj.com/science/environment/geoengineering-projects-cool-planet-weather-f0619bf7
Breaking News:
DEVELOPING: France has passed a new law which will send you to jail for 3 years if you criticize mRNA ‘vaccines’ or ‘gene therapy’
According to the law, which was passed quietly and secretly through the French parliament on Wednesday, advisement against mRNA or other treatments which are deemed ‘suitable’ based on current ‘medical knowledge’ can lead to a 3 year prison sentence and up to a $48,400 fine.
Article 4 of the new law, or Article Pfizer as it’s being referred to by freedom fighters in the legislature, is a prejudgment of “alternative medicine” and a threat to whistleblowers.
Ominously, during what little debate was fielded before the passage of this fascist law that eliminates informed consent, warnings were parroted that “the next pandemic is coming” and mRNA technology is the only solution.
What are they planning for the world?
OMG I totally forgot about the one-way grocery store isles! Aghhh.
The sense of entitlement just rolls off the document.
"Scientists, even PhD-bearing mathematical prodigies, can be stupid."
Weak too; this has always been the case but is certainly more pronounced today. Strict "DEI" and "CC crisis" adherence are closely tied with: funding, acceptance within groups, fame and tenure.
When modernity discarded the men in white lace for men in white synthetic lab coats for her ethical justifications, it was always bound to eventually become corrupted and infiltrated, if only so the government power could decapitate any resistance. The seminaries were flooded with marxist fags (See School of Darkness, Bella Dodd), the halls of science were filled with ideologues whose idea of the scientific method is to shovel word salad that is equivalent to reading bone dice in pig intestines.
The aftermath has proven that the COVID-19 event wasn't much more than a seasonal illness. The over treatment of the elderly and those with compromised immune systems made it seem worse.
I counted 239 authors.....hmm
The problem with trusting science is that science is itself a system of mistrust. One where every statement must be proven true by rigorous empirical demonstration.
In science consensus in meaningless. Nothing can proved by an appeal to authority.
Is there a scientific consensus about the role of gravity in the organization of the physical world? After all gravity has been a central inquiry of physical science since Newton 350 years ago.
No, Theoretical Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder lays out: " ... the five currently most promising approaches to a theory of quantum gravity that physicists are presently pursuing. These are: string theory, loop quantum gravity, asymptotically safe gravity, causal dynamical triangulation, and emergent gravity." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5foUTeRdqII
Gravity was key concept to Newton and Einstein, the most important intellectual figures in the History of Science, and we still have 5 theories floating around.
"Climate Science" and Epidemiology, are by way of contrast to the study of gravity, just mumbo jumbo. Claims that outsiders must "trust the science" are just bullying bovine excrement.
No. Every claim made by any science must be proven true by the claimant. And outsiders should regard anyone who says otherwise as a grifter.