I found it hilarious that an article seeking the reason why trust in Science is declining opened with this sentence: As we are approaching the end of the fourth year of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed close to 7 million people worldwide and 1.2 million in just the US alone, both estimates being almost certainly significant undercounts of the true toll, I was depressed to see yet more evidence indicating significantly declining trust in science and science-based interventions to combat disease, such as vaccines.
It's finally happening. I've been rolling my eyes at my colleagues for about a decade now, telling them that their dogged insistence that Climate Change is Real and All Vaccines Are Safe and Effective would backfire. By wrapping those subjects in the mantle of Science, a temporary propaganda boost was obtained at the expense of undermining the long term prestige of the sciences. Science built its reputation as a method for ascertaining truth, which made it very useful as a vector for propagating lies. People don't like being lied to send eventually catch on.
Of course, The Scientists refuse to look in the mirror to discover the source of this collapse in public credulity. No, it's the kids who are wrong.
I have to say I bought dangerous climate change hook, line and sinker although I honestly thought I looked at all the argument for and against completely objectively but I knew covid was a psyop from Day One. I haven't totally given up on climate change yet, however, since realising that medical science is essentially fraudulent and that "science" cannot be trusted in the least I'm definitely shaky on it. A big difference from covid though is that it was never spoken as one voice from the beginning. In Australia (and the rest of the world), a lot of media and people prominent in government rubbished it and while there's certainly much more of a move towards it, the prominent hostility at the beginning distinguishes it from a classic one-voice psyop like covid.
What's interesting is that the climate change people don't seem to be concerned about what looks to me like very clear geoengineering going on with all the patterns in the sky. There seems to be this kind of divide on "conspiracy" thinking. You're either with the mainstream or you're a conspiracy theorist, any questioning of anything labels you.
I, also, believed the lies about global warming, but for a scientific reason. The capitalist class wasn't doing anything to reduce CO2 emissions, which, according to their claims, were the cause of runaway warming that would soon make Earth uninhabitable.
Given the scientific fact that the capitalist class is enthusiastic about destroying Terra and never evidenced the slightest concern for humanity or the planet, I believed that they were trying to kill us.
Then I humbled myself before God, and God told me, "How can you believe that I would abandon my children? Didn't I raise up Trump to be a Trumpet?"
Why wouldn’t you trust The Science™️ that created and disseminated the engineered virus, then gaslit you about its origins? The Science™️ that poisoned people with massive overdoses of hydroxychloroquine in their “studies” in order to falsely disprove its efficacy? The Science™️ that pushed experimental, expensive, and deadly Remdesvir instead of inexpensive and off label ivermectin which had already been around 4 decades with over 4 billion doses dispensed?
Dec 4, 2023·edited Dec 4, 2023Liked by William M Briggs
The thing is very often the truth about something can be determined without "science". Things we can easily know:
--- there were no signs to any of us that there was a pandemic of any kind and without 24/7 propaganda delivered by government and media no one would have had a clue that there was anything amiss
--- without a test no one would have known they had a special illness and the test only ever had Emergency Use Authorisation - hellooooo
--- mortality rise only occurred after measures were introduced
So many things you can know without "science" to tell you ... as your substack name says.
The military says "We will open fire on you and your family if you are a Rightist and you protest." Over 70% of Americans trust them.
Medical doctors say "We are in the pay of major pharmaceutical companies and our goal is to keep you sick so that you become a captive consumer of our pills." Over 70% of Americans trust them.
Police say "We will shoot your dog and throw you in prison for the rest of your life if you make a Rightist meme." And over 60% of Americans trust them.
They are not saying that in a literal sense, but all branches of the regime currently in power in the West are clearly hostile to their native populations. For the military I was referencing that female servicemember who went viral a couple years ago for saying she wanted to shoot anyone resisting lockdowns. For the police I was referencing Douglass Mackey. I was being hyperbolic, of course, but the writing is on the wall, my friend.
The military is NOT what many people believe it is.
It is as infected with PC-Prog rot as any sector of the federal government. In fact, the military is probably MORE infected than some federal sectors.
They WILL respond to their masters when told to take actions against American civilians.
They're doing it already.
Many, many examples. The first peek at the degradation of the military, in targeting American citizens in our own country, was the multiple programs collecting intelligence on Americans by the NSA (which is the military--commanded by a 4 star general/admiral), revealed by Edward Snowden.
Even before that, though, was the massacre of the Branch Davideans. It appears the DOD was involved, possibly Delta Force, maybe others provided equipment and, at least, tactical advice and guidance, but also possibly hands-on participation.
Since the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, the entire Deep State, including DOD, are deeply immersed in targeting American "dissidents." The Joint Terrorism Task Forces are focused on "domestic threats," read that as "you and me."
The military is also deeply involved in the covert action operations that they term "anti-disinformation," which began during the federal covid operations. There is a breaking story, right now, that reveals both US and UK military-sponsored contractors working with various federal agencies to target and retaliate (de-platform, de-monetize, censor, silence, etc.) American citizens exercising their right to speak freely:
"CTIL Files #1: US And UK Military Contractors Created Sweeping Plan For Global Censorship In 2018, New Documents Show"
Don't believe anybody who tells you that the US military (as a whole--of course, there would be some who'd balk) would refuse to take harsh action against Americans. They're already doing it. Shooting, strafing, bombing are not that much of a step past their current actions.
And don't ever forget: they've done it before. They plundered, burned, raped, robbed, murdered their way through the South. Those were all American soldiers, following the orders from the chain of command--right up to the President, who ordered it.
Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' Constitution!
Yes, this is what I think. Most soldiers and police will do what they are asked when the time comes. Many veterans and current servicemen don't want to believe this, but as you said it has been done on many different ocassions. You forgot the National Guard being used to force desegregation of schools. That was in the 50s when the country was 90% White and extremely high trust, yet American servicemen still pointed guns at unarmed women! I have no doubt there will be patriotic individuals who will refuse orders if such an event happens, and that that class will likely be most heavily represented in the boots on the ground. I do not think the actual American people will be totally destroyed, but there are dark days ahead for us all.
"Most soldiers and police will do what they are asked when the time comes."
A steady paycheck, health care, retirement in early 40s, with a pension for the rest of their lives, with the hope of triple dipping--getting a civil service job at 42, retiring again in late 50s, then segueing into a government contracting job that they retire from again, all with pensions--keep the uniforms saluting compliantly and doing whatever their masters order.
Just last week:
"United States military leadership at the Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota recently sent service members a text message warning them that their “continued service” could be in jeopardy if they attended a local rally featuring a speaker from an organization that has historically been supportive of former President Donald Trump."
I have just left that wall last year, I’m subject to being stood to man that wall, there’s no such sentiment nor writing, and to the point if anyone wanted to give soldiers that order they would not dare, would not be obeyed, and would be in fear of their lives to do so... we may not be able to restore Constitutional government, we can damn sure not comply (they’re cowards, I’ve met them).
FB posts are not writing on the wall, and Douglas Mackay is an example of lawyering and not really representative of the police. The FBI it seems will do anything for a good eval... there’s not enough of them.
You’re seeing a Phantom Army, no, not there. There’s just a bunch of contemptible coward Karen’s bluffing their way to the end. Their actual Shock Troops? The Media.
Think about that.
There’s “Be Not Afraid” and there’s “Dude are you fsking serious?” <<< we are here.
I was convinced by a film called "9-11 Mysteries" that those buildings were demolished from within by explosives. Either thermite or something even more powerful from the unacknowledged special access projects, aka the secret space program. More than 30,000 architects and engineers agree with this assessment, so my criticism isn't of them, but of the engineering authorities (eg Popular Mechanics, universities), which, like death authorities, betrayed their mission.
Definitely. Came down symmetrically so coordinated and prepared in advance. Amazing how everything was blown to dust and all the stories above the impacts disappeared into powder as the controlled demolition continued.
Sigh. No. WTC 1 & 2 were designed to withstand the impact of a 707; 747s weren't built yet, and are *much* heavier and carry much more fuel. The asbestos fireproofing on the central columns was considered a health hazard, and was removed above a certain level which escapes me now, but was below the impact point. Lastly, the fire weakened the steel to the point that it softened (not melted) and could not hold up the floors above the fire; at which point the floors pancaked down, destroying the building.
No thermite, no explosives, no controlled demolition.
A controlled demolition wouldn't have spread debris across hundreds of square blocks.
Science is a process of asking questions and performing experiments. But because mathematics and statistics can be manipulated based on the personal bias and desires of the “scientists and their funding sources” by carefully selecting the data ranges and criteria, etc. they can be used to get any results you like.
“New studies reveal alcohol consumption improves health ” are very common results from college and university researchers who spend their weekends getting hammered and want to validate their partying.
Anthony Esolen had a meditation on shrewdness at The Catholic Thing this weekend. Among other insights that arise from comparing the Serpent's shrewdness with Adam's poor attempt, we visit Proverbs 12:23,
"A cautious man concealeth knowledge: and the heart of fools publisheth folly."
I don't understand how anyone remains in the Catholic Church. The Church had teenaged girls imprisoned in every major city. They ritually impregnated them and on important Satanic dates they extracted the fetuses and ate them. Francis is the white pope (from Nazi Argentina) and the black pope is the head of the Jesuits -- the black nobility of Venice. They're demons. "
Christy Campbell — The Daughter of George Bush You Never Heard Of"
Perhaps it would be constructive to delineate the limits of scientific knowledge more precisely. Science cannot tell someone if he should dump the middle aged woman who bore his children and leave her for a younger and more attractive woman. It cannot tell me if I should cleverly contrive the accidental death of my rich old uncle who has named me the principal beneficiary in his will. Neither can it tell me what happens to me after death, whether or not God exists, how the universe came into being, and so on and so on.
I agree that science can stimulate deeper questioning, as in "How could all of the intricate laws of mathematics and science just have come about by accident? Maybe there is a God after all."
There is a problem with your "if-then" statement. In the first clause "love" is strictly defined to be the love of God, where in the second clause "love" could be used to describe many different sorts of human love, not all of which are right and good.
It does say in I John that "He that loveth (loves) not knoweth (knows) not God; for God is love."
I was perfectly civil in all my comments but was given no warning or explanation. I wonder how people justify to their own minds banning someone in that manner, I really do.
A scientific principle in my book is that banning only occurs:
--- At the very least with warning unless what is said is over the top against human decency
--- Where warning is given, it should be with regard to persistent repetitive argument that clearly contradicts fact, irrelevance or ad hominem - and, of course, in most cases moderation is sufficient rather than outright banning.
As someone doing the banning I'd really want to tell the person why they're being banned, it would be against everything I believe in to simply silence them.
I notice that at least one of the comments I made still stands (no reason to check the others), however, my final comment was removed and presumably caused the ban. This comment made criticism of another article by David Gorski - on germ theory (pushed out by a commenter) - where I merely pointed out that:
--- It's not just alternative medicine people who reject germ theory, it's also medical doctors and PhD-credentialled scientists
--- the fact that pre-Pasteur germ-theory like theories had been developed doesn't validate germ theory
--- Bechamp wasn't the only person who opposed Pasteur
--- The Pasteur scholar, Gerald Geison, recognises Pasteur's fraudulence and explains the results of his experiments as "He guessed right," but this can be seen as circular reasoning. We believe in rabies because of Pasteur's experiments even though they didn't follow the scientific method because his experiments prove rabies. What we need to do is look at what the so-called disease rabies allegedly is.
--- Pasteur is recognised as a fraud by the mainstream and even if the fact that he was a fraud doesn't automatically discount germ theory it means our minds should surely be more open to the possibility
--- It's a pretty straightforward matter to debunk a scientific paper. You can either:
Repeat the experiment to see if the same results occur
Point out the unscientific method used in the experiments outlined
This is a fascinating discussion Mike Stone (who I highly recommend and who owns the viroliegy site linked to above) had with ChatGPT on the scientific methods used to isolate viruses at the end of which the AI bot finally admitted - unscientific!
>The uses to which Science are put are not Science. Thinking the uses of Science are Science is scientism.
Bingo. Numerous scientists often confuse the principles of science with the specific actions that should be derived from scientific findings, thus intertwining science with scientism. Allowing politicians and individuals lacking scientific background to manipulate the public's trust in the true essence of scientific discovery, by granting them the opportunity to exploit it for personal gain.
IMHO, this downward spiral may have started whenever the scientists began divorcing themselves from the philosophers.
"...has killed close to 7 million people worldwide and 1.2 million in just the US alone...".
Normally, I shy away from doing maths in public, especially if the numbers involved require me to take off my shoes, but even my meager skills can see some problems with the above statement. He is saying that with 4.23% of the total global population, the US accumulated 17% of the total global Covid deaths??? Wow! If this is correct, the US health care system is far worse than I thought! Worse than the poorest of the poorest nations!! Talk about loosing trust in doctors!!!
Also, his "significant undercounts" statement is nonsense. Especially after Israel was forced to reveal that the number of deaths of people under the age of 50 from just Covid, is Zero. None. Zippo.
I know for a fact that where I live, the Washington state Health Dept caught our local hospital listing traffic accident deaths as "Covid" deaths...twice! And you know that if those Inslee Zombies down in Olympia actually publicly announced this, there is no telling what they actually covered up. Morons.
Let’s have a look at fetal heart defects since 2020... locally we seem to have a problem of babies born with heart defects requiring surgery. As in it backed up adult heart surgery 18 months...
Dr. Briggs, have you looked at @EthicalSkeptic's claim of excess deaths and increases in cancer rates coinciding with vaccine rollout? I'd be interested in reading your thoughts on it.
Number of COVID deaths proved by scientifically acceptable means: zero. The virus was never isolated. No autopsies were done. The test they used was completely fraudulent, never designed to detect illness but to amplify the presence of ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO AMPLIFY.
I trust science: I trust that it'll take a ball bearing around 1 second to free-fall 5 meters, that 100 g of a 40% solution of sodium hydroxide will neutralize 180 g of 20%-concentration aqueous hydrochloric acid,…
What's described in the post is trusting _people_ purporting to speak on behalf of science, many of whom couldn't check the accuracy of the two calculations in the paragraph above, though they are taught in or before 10th grade in Europe.
But those people who speak on behalf of science are geeky looking and have lab coats and credentials and serious looking faces so you should just “believe” what they say. Some of them even wear glasses and use multi-syllable jargon.
It's finally happening. I've been rolling my eyes at my colleagues for about a decade now, telling them that their dogged insistence that Climate Change is Real and All Vaccines Are Safe and Effective would backfire. By wrapping those subjects in the mantle of Science, a temporary propaganda boost was obtained at the expense of undermining the long term prestige of the sciences. Science built its reputation as a method for ascertaining truth, which made it very useful as a vector for propagating lies. People don't like being lied to send eventually catch on.
Of course, The Scientists refuse to look in the mirror to discover the source of this collapse in public credulity. No, it's the kids who are wrong.
Well, it's finally caught up with them.
Good.
None of our so-called elites, scientists especially, it turns out, can assess themselves honestly. The self-righteous lack self-awareness.
I have to say I bought dangerous climate change hook, line and sinker although I honestly thought I looked at all the argument for and against completely objectively but I knew covid was a psyop from Day One. I haven't totally given up on climate change yet, however, since realising that medical science is essentially fraudulent and that "science" cannot be trusted in the least I'm definitely shaky on it. A big difference from covid though is that it was never spoken as one voice from the beginning. In Australia (and the rest of the world), a lot of media and people prominent in government rubbished it and while there's certainly much more of a move towards it, the prominent hostility at the beginning distinguishes it from a classic one-voice psyop like covid.
What's interesting is that the climate change people don't seem to be concerned about what looks to me like very clear geoengineering going on with all the patterns in the sky. There seems to be this kind of divide on "conspiracy" thinking. You're either with the mainstream or you're a conspiracy theorist, any questioning of anything labels you.
I, also, believed the lies about global warming, but for a scientific reason. The capitalist class wasn't doing anything to reduce CO2 emissions, which, according to their claims, were the cause of runaway warming that would soon make Earth uninhabitable.
Given the scientific fact that the capitalist class is enthusiastic about destroying Terra and never evidenced the slightest concern for humanity or the planet, I believed that they were trying to kill us.
Then I humbled myself before God, and God told me, "How can you believe that I would abandon my children? Didn't I raise up Trump to be a Trumpet?"
The idiocy of the statement “I was depressed” discussing science...
What ... feelings?
Over facts?
I wonder if Einstein or Newton ever even Drunk uttered such nonsense. You don’t get to have feelings about results or equations.
Why wouldn’t you trust The Science™️ that created and disseminated the engineered virus, then gaslit you about its origins? The Science™️ that poisoned people with massive overdoses of hydroxychloroquine in their “studies” in order to falsely disprove its efficacy? The Science™️ that pushed experimental, expensive, and deadly Remdesvir instead of inexpensive and off label ivermectin which had already been around 4 decades with over 4 billion doses dispensed?
The thing is very often the truth about something can be determined without "science". Things we can easily know:
--- there were no signs to any of us that there was a pandemic of any kind and without 24/7 propaganda delivered by government and media no one would have had a clue that there was anything amiss
--- without a test no one would have known they had a special illness and the test only ever had Emergency Use Authorisation - hellooooo
--- mortality rise only occurred after measures were introduced
So many things you can know without "science" to tell you ... as your substack name says.
💯💯
The military says "We will open fire on you and your family if you are a Rightist and you protest." Over 70% of Americans trust them.
Medical doctors say "We are in the pay of major pharmaceutical companies and our goal is to keep you sick so that you become a captive consumer of our pills." Over 70% of Americans trust them.
Police say "We will shoot your dog and throw you in prison for the rest of your life if you make a Rightist meme." And over 60% of Americans trust them.
Maybe most people deserve what is happening.
What are you talking about?
Who in the military or police said that?
They are not saying that in a literal sense, but all branches of the regime currently in power in the West are clearly hostile to their native populations. For the military I was referencing that female servicemember who went viral a couple years ago for saying she wanted to shoot anyone resisting lockdowns. For the police I was referencing Douglass Mackey. I was being hyperbolic, of course, but the writing is on the wall, my friend.
You are spot on.
The military is NOT what many people believe it is.
It is as infected with PC-Prog rot as any sector of the federal government. In fact, the military is probably MORE infected than some federal sectors.
They WILL respond to their masters when told to take actions against American civilians.
They're doing it already.
Many, many examples. The first peek at the degradation of the military, in targeting American citizens in our own country, was the multiple programs collecting intelligence on Americans by the NSA (which is the military--commanded by a 4 star general/admiral), revealed by Edward Snowden.
Even before that, though, was the massacre of the Branch Davideans. It appears the DOD was involved, possibly Delta Force, maybe others provided equipment and, at least, tactical advice and guidance, but also possibly hands-on participation.
Since the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, the entire Deep State, including DOD, are deeply immersed in targeting American "dissidents." The Joint Terrorism Task Forces are focused on "domestic threats," read that as "you and me."
The military is also deeply involved in the covert action operations that they term "anti-disinformation," which began during the federal covid operations. There is a breaking story, right now, that reveals both US and UK military-sponsored contractors working with various federal agencies to target and retaliate (de-platform, de-monetize, censor, silence, etc.) American citizens exercising their right to speak freely:
"CTIL Files #1: US And UK Military Contractors Created Sweeping Plan For Global Censorship In 2018, New Documents Show"
https://public.substack.com/p/ctil-files-1-us-and-uk-military-contractors
And much more.
Don't believe anybody who tells you that the US military (as a whole--of course, there would be some who'd balk) would refuse to take harsh action against Americans. They're already doing it. Shooting, strafing, bombing are not that much of a step past their current actions.
And don't ever forget: they've done it before. They plundered, burned, raped, robbed, murdered their way through the South. Those were all American soldiers, following the orders from the chain of command--right up to the President, who ordered it.
Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' Constitution!
Yes, this is what I think. Most soldiers and police will do what they are asked when the time comes. Many veterans and current servicemen don't want to believe this, but as you said it has been done on many different ocassions. You forgot the National Guard being used to force desegregation of schools. That was in the 50s when the country was 90% White and extremely high trust, yet American servicemen still pointed guns at unarmed women! I have no doubt there will be patriotic individuals who will refuse orders if such an event happens, and that that class will likely be most heavily represented in the boots on the ground. I do not think the actual American people will be totally destroyed, but there are dark days ahead for us all.
"Most soldiers and police will do what they are asked when the time comes."
A steady paycheck, health care, retirement in early 40s, with a pension for the rest of their lives, with the hope of triple dipping--getting a civil service job at 42, retiring again in late 50s, then segueing into a government contracting job that they retire from again, all with pensions--keep the uniforms saluting compliantly and doing whatever their masters order.
Just last week:
"United States military leadership at the Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota recently sent service members a text message warning them that their “continued service” could be in jeopardy if they attended a local rally featuring a speaker from an organization that has historically been supportive of former President Donald Trump."
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2023/11/air-force-warns-troops-to-avoid-pro-trump-patriot-rally-report/#google_vignette
That is unprecedented. Can you imagine Bush Jr's DOD threatening soldiers if they went to an Obama rally?
The DOD, along with the rest of the deep state has turned against 52% of the country. Demonizing and criminalizing dissent.
It don't take a weatherman to see which way the wind blows.
It really seems like things will come to a head next year.
Buckle up!
Yes, it’s Doom.
Continue to Cow and Demoralize with Phantoms.
And BTW - the American people haven’t needed force to be used against them since 1865.
Well, whites anyway.
There’s no fight in them , regrettably as I’m white.
You have no fight, and demoralizing posts like this are a big reason why.
The online right is the greatest force for unilateral disarmament and proactive surrender in history.
Don’t worry, I won’t try to change your mind.
You’re right. You’re completely and utterly Doomed.
Give up now- we have nukes.
Now go and await your Doom.
(Meanwhile, everyone who knows is saying no, but you have the Internet, and The Lost Cause).
I specified at the end of my post that I do not think we are going to lose this struggle. I just acknowledge that there is a struggle.
I have just left that wall last year, I’m subject to being stood to man that wall, there’s no such sentiment nor writing, and to the point if anyone wanted to give soldiers that order they would not dare, would not be obeyed, and would be in fear of their lives to do so... we may not be able to restore Constitutional government, we can damn sure not comply (they’re cowards, I’ve met them).
FB posts are not writing on the wall, and Douglas Mackay is an example of lawyering and not really representative of the police. The FBI it seems will do anything for a good eval... there’s not enough of them.
You’re seeing a Phantom Army, no, not there. There’s just a bunch of contemptible coward Karen’s bluffing their way to the end. Their actual Shock Troops? The Media.
Think about that.
There’s “Be Not Afraid” and there’s “Dude are you fsking serious?” <<< we are here.
That's good to hear.
Engineers are holding the fort.. so far... (if that dam breaks -we'll know)
I don't know about that -- what about September 11, 2001? Where were the engineers then?
Ouch. The building was designed such the skin was part of the support structure, unfortunately Osama bin Laden was an engineer.
Word to the wise, engineers always want to overbuild. It’s the accountants that force us to save cost.
I was convinced by a film called "9-11 Mysteries" that those buildings were demolished from within by explosives. Either thermite or something even more powerful from the unacknowledged special access projects, aka the secret space program. More than 30,000 architects and engineers agree with this assessment, so my criticism isn't of them, but of the engineering authorities (eg Popular Mechanics, universities), which, like death authorities, betrayed their mission.
Definitely. Came down symmetrically so coordinated and prepared in advance. Amazing how everything was blown to dust and all the stories above the impacts disappeared into powder as the controlled demolition continued.
Sigh. No. WTC 1 & 2 were designed to withstand the impact of a 707; 747s weren't built yet, and are *much* heavier and carry much more fuel. The asbestos fireproofing on the central columns was considered a health hazard, and was removed above a certain level which escapes me now, but was below the impact point. Lastly, the fire weakened the steel to the point that it softened (not melted) and could not hold up the floors above the fire; at which point the floors pancaked down, destroying the building.
No thermite, no explosives, no controlled demolition.
A controlled demolition wouldn't have spread debris across hundreds of square blocks.
Science is a process of asking questions and performing experiments. But because mathematics and statistics can be manipulated based on the personal bias and desires of the “scientists and their funding sources” by carefully selecting the data ranges and criteria, etc. they can be used to get any results you like.
“New studies reveal alcohol consumption improves health ” are very common results from college and university researchers who spend their weekends getting hammered and want to validate their partying.
'...From this we can argue that not every person should know every Truth, but that is a story for another day...'
In deed, it is ethical to lie to the thief who asks where your valuables are,
Anthony Esolen had a meditation on shrewdness at The Catholic Thing this weekend. Among other insights that arise from comparing the Serpent's shrewdness with Adam's poor attempt, we visit Proverbs 12:23,
"A cautious man concealeth knowledge: and the heart of fools publisheth folly."
I don't understand how anyone remains in the Catholic Church. The Church had teenaged girls imprisoned in every major city. They ritually impregnated them and on important Satanic dates they extracted the fetuses and ate them. Francis is the white pope (from Nazi Argentina) and the black pope is the head of the Jesuits -- the black nobility of Venice. They're demons. "
Christy Campbell — The Daughter of George Bush You Never Heard Of"
https://inscribedonthebelievingmind.blog/2023/06/27/christy-campbell/
"Jessie Czebotar – First appearance on Aquarius Rising Africa"
https://inscribedonthebelievingmind.blog/2023/10/10/jessie-czebotar-aquarius-rising/
Perhaps it would be constructive to delineate the limits of scientific knowledge more precisely. Science cannot tell someone if he should dump the middle aged woman who bore his children and leave her for a younger and more attractive woman. It cannot tell me if I should cleverly contrive the accidental death of my rich old uncle who has named me the principal beneficiary in his will. Neither can it tell me what happens to me after death, whether or not God exists, how the universe came into being, and so on and so on.
Science can lead you to moral thoughts and actions if you take it far enough. Enlightenment and spiritual ascension are also sciences.
1. What do I want?
2. Happiness.
3. What makes me happy?
4. Loving others.
5. What is love?
6. Love is God.
Easy.
I agree that science can stimulate deeper questioning, as in "How could all of the intricate laws of mathematics and science just have come about by accident? Maybe there is a God after all."
The Bible teaches that God is love.
If God is love, then love is God.
Science!
There is a problem with your "if-then" statement. In the first clause "love" is strictly defined to be the love of God, where in the second clause "love" could be used to describe many different sorts of human love, not all of which are right and good.
It does say in I John that "He that loveth (loves) not knoweth (knows) not God; for God is love."
“Trust in hammers drop after nation’s carpenters join cult…”
The comments on that article are fun. It’s the fault of drumpfff!!!
I know it’s been said but it’s not Science, it’s just another cult, another attempted substitute religion. FAIL.
To make God’s word not only falsifiable, but the first Commandment is “must be falsifiable” ....
I AM WHO AM NOT ...?
or maybe
“ I CAN’T EVEN...”
As I scientist myself, I fully support the future hunting and skinning of Scientists, as was done with Berke Breathed's "roving TV mini-cam crews".
(Great strips in Bloom County--hilarious!)
Guess what? I just got banned by Science-Based Medicine for my comments on the article. Badge of honour?
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/trust-in-science-and-vaccines-continues-to-decline-why/
I was perfectly civil in all my comments but was given no warning or explanation. I wonder how people justify to their own minds banning someone in that manner, I really do.
A scientific principle in my book is that banning only occurs:
--- At the very least with warning unless what is said is over the top against human decency
--- Where warning is given, it should be with regard to persistent repetitive argument that clearly contradicts fact, irrelevance or ad hominem - and, of course, in most cases moderation is sufficient rather than outright banning.
As someone doing the banning I'd really want to tell the person why they're being banned, it would be against everything I believe in to simply silence them.
I notice that at least one of the comments I made still stands (no reason to check the others), however, my final comment was removed and presumably caused the ban. This comment made criticism of another article by David Gorski - on germ theory (pushed out by a commenter) - where I merely pointed out that:
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/germ-theory-denialism-a-major-strain-in-alt-med-thought/
--- It's not just alternative medicine people who reject germ theory, it's also medical doctors and PhD-credentialled scientists
--- the fact that pre-Pasteur germ-theory like theories had been developed doesn't validate germ theory
--- Bechamp wasn't the only person who opposed Pasteur
--- The Pasteur scholar, Gerald Geison, recognises Pasteur's fraudulence and explains the results of his experiments as "He guessed right," but this can be seen as circular reasoning. We believe in rabies because of Pasteur's experiments even though they didn't follow the scientific method because his experiments prove rabies. What we need to do is look at what the so-called disease rabies allegedly is.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/wellness/1993/02/23/louis-pasteur-and-questions-of-fraud/196b2287-f63f-4bac-874e-c33b122d6f61/
https://viroliegy.com/2022/02/25/louis-pasteurs-unethical-rabies-fraud/
--- Pasteur is recognised as a fraud by the mainstream and even if the fact that he was a fraud doesn't automatically discount germ theory it means our minds should surely be more open to the possibility
--- It's a pretty straightforward matter to debunk a scientific paper. You can either:
Repeat the experiment to see if the same results occur
Point out the unscientific method used in the experiments outlined
This is a fascinating discussion Mike Stone (who I highly recommend and who owns the viroliegy site linked to above) had with ChatGPT on the scientific methods used to isolate viruses at the end of which the AI bot finally admitted - unscientific!
https://mikestone.substack.com/p/a-friendly-chat-about-cell-culture
>The uses to which Science are put are not Science. Thinking the uses of Science are Science is scientism.
Bingo. Numerous scientists often confuse the principles of science with the specific actions that should be derived from scientific findings, thus intertwining science with scientism. Allowing politicians and individuals lacking scientific background to manipulate the public's trust in the true essence of scientific discovery, by granting them the opportunity to exploit it for personal gain.
IMHO, this downward spiral may have started whenever the scientists began divorcing themselves from the philosophers.
The author of the article quoted lost me at:
"...has killed close to 7 million people worldwide and 1.2 million in just the US alone...".
Normally, I shy away from doing maths in public, especially if the numbers involved require me to take off my shoes, but even my meager skills can see some problems with the above statement. He is saying that with 4.23% of the total global population, the US accumulated 17% of the total global Covid deaths??? Wow! If this is correct, the US health care system is far worse than I thought! Worse than the poorest of the poorest nations!! Talk about loosing trust in doctors!!!
Also, his "significant undercounts" statement is nonsense. Especially after Israel was forced to reveal that the number of deaths of people under the age of 50 from just Covid, is Zero. None. Zippo.
I know for a fact that where I live, the Washington state Health Dept caught our local hospital listing traffic accident deaths as "Covid" deaths...twice! And you know that if those Inslee Zombies down in Olympia actually publicly announced this, there is no telling what they actually covered up. Morons.
Ed,
Many, many officials lied, on both sides, both claiming too many and not enough covid deaths.
Let’s have a look at fetal heart defects since 2020... locally we seem to have a problem of babies born with heart defects requiring surgery. As in it backed up adult heart surgery 18 months...
Dr. Briggs, have you looked at @EthicalSkeptic's claim of excess deaths and increases in cancer rates coinciding with vaccine rollout? I'd be interested in reading your thoughts on it.
I hardly ever see anything from him since he blocked me long ago when I asked him a question.
I have somethnig on the New Zealand data tomorrow.
Wow, that definitely shades how I view his information. Did you find something suspicious in his analysis?
Number of COVID deaths proved by scientifically acceptable means: zero. The virus was never isolated. No autopsies were done. The test they used was completely fraudulent, never designed to detect illness but to amplify the presence of ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO AMPLIFY.
I trust science: I trust that it'll take a ball bearing around 1 second to free-fall 5 meters, that 100 g of a 40% solution of sodium hydroxide will neutralize 180 g of 20%-concentration aqueous hydrochloric acid,…
What's described in the post is trusting _people_ purporting to speak on behalf of science, many of whom couldn't check the accuracy of the two calculations in the paragraph above, though they are taught in or before 10th grade in Europe.
But those people who speak on behalf of science are geeky looking and have lab coats and credentials and serious looking faces so you should just “believe” what they say. Some of them even wear glasses and use multi-syllable jargon.