Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Flippin’ Jersey's avatar

I would imagine that GIGO applies here. Who says we can trust the data from the CDC? It would not be to their benefit (cui bono?) to provide accurate information if it would reflect poorly on them, or the US government at large. Every attempt to demonstrate the vaccines may have caused excess deaths always requires “estimating overcounted COVID deaths” or some other data massage since the CDC didn’t do that work themselves. Therefore, all analysis can be dismissed because of “excess manipulation” or other “inaccuracies”. That VAERS reporting of death and adverse side effects coincident with vaccination isn’t enough to trigger an investigation is all the data I need.

certifiably Roger W. Former's avatar

Off-topic, but touching:

I've noticed this duality: a spike is a sudden change in a data trend. But a spike is also a protein. Is the spike protein the protein that causes sudden changes in data trends?

Given that murderers like damned puns, I ask the world: is the spike protein even a real thing, or is it just a figment of our imagination?

If I desired to cause a mass homicide event by causing people to stomp on each other to death, I wouldn't really need a real chemical weapon to create panic. My weapon of choice would be the gullibility and ignorance of the multitudes of people, along with mass bribery and blackmail.

More over, it would be bad for me to device a new incriminating synthetic chemical of any kind.

Not that this reasoning is evidence.

13 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?