Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

PFIZER MISSED DEADLINE TO TURN IN MYOCARDITIS DATA

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 9, 2023

Pfizer missed a deadline to turn over internal studies on myocarditis, per an FDA order. The deadline came and went. Now, they quietly have a new date in June. Why the delay on such important data? And, why does the FDA set arbitrary deadlines which aren’t enforced?

NEW MAJORITY IN CONGRESS TARGETS CDC & WHO IN 2023

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 9, 2023

As Biden announces the coming end of the Covid Public Health Emergency in the US, the new majority in Congress appear to not be letting agencies off the hook. The past three years of remarkably poor public health policy have placed the CDC, WHO, and Social Media companies in the sights of numerous committee investigations, and new legislation seeking answers and medical freedom.

UNPRECEDENTED: FAA LOWERS BAR FOR PILOT HEART HEALTH

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 9, 2023

Airline pilot and co-founder of US Freedom Flyers, Josh Yoder, and Clinical Cardiologist, Dr. Thomas Levy, join Del to discuss the recent FAA change to the heart test limits and the coincidental timing of the change coming amid increasing concerns over myocarditis from the COVID-19 vaccine.

February 14, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

Covid Narratives ‘By the Numbers’

These numbers are estimates, but I think they make my point.

By Bill Rice, Jr. | February 13, 2023

As far as I am concerned, here are the Covid numbers that matter most.

N = 40,000 – Estimated number of mainstream “journalists” in America.

N = 0 – Estimated number of these journalists who have published a major story questioning any of the authorized Covid narratives.*

Note: For the purposes of this article, I’m not counting journalists who work for, say, Fox News or The Epoch Times as “mainstream journalists.” If I did, the above number would not be 0 … but it would still be minuscule.

*At the end of this article, I list 29 elements of the “authorized Covid narrative.”

N = 100,000 – Estimated number of credentialed “scientists” in America. (Note: About 2,000 per state).

N = 95,000 – Estimated number of credentialed scientists in America who support all the Covid narratives.

N = 5,000 – Estimated number of contrarian scientists who do not support all the Covid narratives.

N = 0 – Number of scientists who support the Covid narrative who have been banned by social media.

N = 2,500 – Estimated number of contrarian scientists who do not support the narrative who have been banned by different social media platforms (50 percent).

N = 1.074 million – Estimated number of active physicians in the U.S.

N = 5,000 – Estimated number of active physicians who have publicly disagreed with key parts of the authorized Covid narrative. (About 100 physicians in each state).

N = 99.995 percent – Approximate percentage of active U.S. physicians who have been unwilling to speak out against any of the authorized Covid narratives. (Approximately 0.046 percent have been willing to speak out publicly against the authorized narrative).

N = 600 – Approximate number of U.S. Senators and Congressmen who have served in Congress since the official pandemic began.

N = 5 – Approximate number of members of Congress who have publicly and consistently challenged key aspects of the authorized Covid narrative. (0.083 percent of Congress – less than 1 percent).

N = 0 – Number of Covid tribunals or Commissions authorized by U.S. government to date.

N = 60 percent – Approximate number of federal politicians who would have to support such tribunals to create them.

N = 500 – Approximate number of Substack authors who routinely challenge elements of the authorized Covid narrative.

N = 5 million – Approximate number of regular readers of “Covid contrarian” Substack sites.

N = 300 – Approximate number of “mainstream” press organizations in America (about 250 large newspapers and about 50 national sites).

N = 250 million – Approximate number of Americans who get Covid stories from “mainstream” news sources.

N = 2,040 – Estimated number of coroner or medical examiner officials/offices in the U.S. in 2018.

N = 0 – Estimated number of coroners or public medical examiners who have spoken out publicly about vaccine injuries or deaths.

N = 500 – Number of Fortune 500 companies.

N = 0 – Number of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies who publicly challenged elements of the authorized Covid narrative.

Expressed differently …

About 0-in-40,000 mainstream journalists and editors (not counting a few at Fox News or The Epoch Times) are willing to speak out against the official Covid narrative.

About 0-in-2,040 medical examiners/coroners are willing to speak out about possible vaccine deaths and injuries.

About 0-in-500 CEOs of Fortune 500 companies criticized elements of the official Covid narratives.

About 1-in-200 physicians have been willing to challenge the authorized Covid narratives.

About 1-in-120 elected members of Congress have been willing to challenge at least some elements of the authorized Covid narrative.

As a percentage …

  • Zero percent of “mainstream” journalists have challenged parts of the official Covid narrative.
  • Zero percent of CEOs at Fortune 500 companies challenged parts of the official Covid narrative.
  • Zero percent of coroners and medical examiners have raised any questions about an increase in all-cause deaths.
  • Fewer than 1 percent of the members of Congress have spoken out in a conspicuous and consistent manner.
  • Zero percent of Democratic politicians at the state or national level have spoken out against parts of the Covid narrative.

On the other hand …

  • Maybe 75 percent of “alternative media” or Substack journalists who write about Covid have challenged aspects of the authorized Covid narrative.

The Question …

Given the above estimates, what’s the probability something substantial or meaningful will be done to expose elements of the Covid narrative as false or even as “crimes against humanity?”

I would say the probability of this happening is very close to zero percent.

I would also argue that maybe 80 percent of Americans don’t care or want any of the possible Covid lies or frauds exposed as such.

However, I would argue that maybe 20 percent of Americans do care passionately about seeing “the truth” exposed, and would like to see the officials who are most guilty/responsible exposed and punished.

What all of the above tells me is …

What this thought exercise (or “by-the-numbers” presentation) shows is that Congress, elected officials, the mainstream press, corporate leaders and almost all physicians and scientists do not care at all about the views of approximately one-fifth of the country. 

This also tells me that the only things that really matters are the views of the mainstream press and the politicians. Really, the only organizations that could hold substantive hearings or tribunals that would “have teeth” and make a difference (change narratives) are official elected office holders.

I’ve always assumed politicians DO or will respond to pressure from voters or the public … but the only pressure or media they pay attention to is the “mainstream” media reports … so the mainstream media does matter.

So far at least, the reporting and commentary of “the alternative” media – which is actually sane and still capable of critical thinking and is still willing to be skeptical of pronouncements of officials and experts … and which is growing in size  – doesn’t matter.

Basically, a significant population cohort (20 percent, per my estimate) is being ignored by officials and the mainstream press, but is still fighting as hard as they can to bring attention to issues that the people and organizations “that matter” still don’t want to discuss or investigate.

In short, the dichotomy of views on “what’s important” – and what should change or be exposed regarding Covid topics – is nothing short of stunning.

“Our” side is definitely in the minority, but 20 percent of people is still a significant percentage of the population.

In a nutshell, the mainstream press, politicians, bureaucrats, corporate leaders, physicians, scientists, coroners, etc. hold views that are 180-degrees opposite the views of 20 percent of the country.

Re-stated: All the important people and organizations think nothing like myself and probably 99 percent of my readers … or the millions of readers who now visit Substack or “alternative media” sites every day.

All I can say is that all of this is… bizarre.

***

Defining the ‘Authorized Covid Narrative’ …

Above, I make many references to organizations or groups that supported all or most elements of the “authorized Covid narrative.” So what are the parts of the “authorized Covid narratives?”

Here’s a quick effort to define these elements. Most of these statements are still considered to be “settled science.” For what it’s worth, I would argue that every one of these ‘authorized” narratives is/was dead wrong.

N = 29 – Elements of the “authorized Covid narrative” (Partial list).

N = 0 – Groups or individuals cited above who challenged or disputed any of the following statements.

The Covid vaccines are “safe” – i.e. they don’t produce adverse reactions and/or have never led to any deaths. Anyone who died after a vaccine didn’t die from the vaccine.

The Covid vaccines are “effective” – they prevent infection and transmission.

Vaccines are superior to natural immunity at preventing infection and spread.

Alternative treatments like ivermectin or HCQ do not work and should not be allowed or prescribed by doctors. (C19 is not a “treatable” illness via existing medications).

Asymptomatic spread is a major cause of transmission. (People who don’t have symptoms are a major or important avenue of virus spread).

The virus can be spread from physical surfaces.

The virus can be easily spread outdoors.

Masks prevent the spread of the virus and prevent people from getting infected … and should thus be mandated.

C19 poses a serious mortality risk to everyone, including children and healthy people under the age of 60.

Testing of non-symptomatic people is an excellent way to prevent infections and spread and should either be mandatory or strongly encouraged by employers and officials.

Remdesivir saves lives and should be given to many people.

More than one million Americans have died “from” Covid.

There has NOT been an increase in “excess” mortality in America in the last two years. And if there has been, the cause of these deaths must be Covid – even after widespread administration of Covid vaccines, which are 95 percent effective at preventing severe cases and deaths.

There has been no increase in deaths of people 18 to 64.

There has been no increase in deaths from young people playing sports.

Lockdowns prevented cases and thus serious infections and deaths. Absent lockdowns, millions more people in the world would have died from Covid.

Closing schools saved countless lives. Ceasing routine medical procedures and diagnostic surgeries saved many lives. Cancelling church services saved many lives. Not allowing family members to visit their loved ones in the hospital or nursing home saved countless lives.

Closing non-essential businesses saved the economy by preventing countless Covid cases and deaths.

Lockdowns and business closings did not increase suicides, suicide attempts, drug overdoses, depression, alcohol abuse or domestic abuse …. or, if they did, dying from suicide or drug overdose is better than dying from Covid.

Trillions of dollars in Covid expenditures did not accelerate or cause inflation.

Censorship of “disinformation” has saved countless lives.

Cancelling sporting events, concerts, plays, family reunions and keeping people from traveling to see family saved countless lives.

The novel coronavirus did not begin to spread around the world until “latter January” 2020. There were zero cases of Covid in communities in America before January 2020.

Everyone who had Covid symptoms before mid-January 2020 had the flu or some other virus, but not Covid, because Covid was not spreading until February 2020.

Wide-spread use of ventilators were very important to saving lives. Officials saved countless lives by getting more ventilators in hospitals and doctors saved countless lives by making sure they put patients on ventilators.

Boosters save lives.

People who have been vaccinated or boosted get Covid far less often than people who do not.

If you have been vaccinated or boosted, your case of Covid will be less severe than people who have never received a shot.

February 13, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

The Silencing of the Inconvenient Truth About Face Masks

BY DR GARY SIDLEY | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | FEBRUARY 13, 2023

How might strong advocates of community masking – who happen to occupy positions within the hierarchy that provide opportunities to influence research activity – go about achieving their aims? I suggest it would include some combination of discouraging the undertaking of robust research about mask effectiveness and potential harms, impeding and delaying the publication of unfavourable findings, and undermining the value of rigorous empirical science. A look at the history of the Cochrane mask reviews seems to offer an illuminating case study of these insidious forces in action.

Cochrane reviews are widely recognised to provide the most authoritative and comprehensive evaluation of the scientific evidence regarding specific healthcare interventions, and their raison d’être is to inform the decision-making process. On January 30th 2023, the latest version of the Cochrane review of the effectiveness of physical interventions (including masks) in reducing the spread of respiratory viruses was published. In keeping with their earlier reviews, the overarching conclusion of the authors confirmed what we already knew: masks achieve no appreciable reduction in viral transmission. Arguably of more interest are the indications that powerful forces within the academic world were at work to obstruct the dissemination of this inconvenient truth.

In regard to the potential benefits of mask-wearing, the findings of the review were emphatic: after considering 12 research trials (ten in the community and two among hospital workers) the main takeaway message was that face coverings made “little or no difference to influenza-like or COVID-19-like illness transmission”. When only studies where respiratory infections had been confirmed in a laboratory were included in the analysis, the conclusion was even more stark: “Wearing masks had no effect on… influenza or SARS-CoV-2 outcomes”. Furthermore, the type of mask used – the surgical variety or the higher-quality N95/P2 respirators – made no difference to the outcome.

It is plausible to assume that the conclusions of the Cochrane scholars did not make easy reading for the pro-mask establishment. The Covid era has been characterised by extraordinarily high levels of censorship of views that did not tally with the dominant public health narrative, and this silencing of alternative perspectives has often been evident within the academic and research spheres. A close inspection of the two most recent updates to the Cochrane review – their development and content – suggests that these malign forces of suppression may have been targeting this initiative in an effort to dilute the impact of its masks-are-ineffectual message. There are five observations consistent with this premise.

1. Scarcity of robust studies

It is intriguing that, three years after the start of the Covid event, there is a dearth of prospective randomised controlled trials (RCTs) – the type that provide the most robust kind of scientific evidence – to evaluate the efficacy of community masking as a means of reducing viral transmission. In the words of the Cochrane review authors, there was a “relative paucity” of such studies “given the importance of the question”. In a politicised environment, where Covid policy was often determined without recourse to empirical evidence, perhaps those in power did not want to fund research that would provide a definitive answer to the question of whether masks offered an effective viral barrier, particularly in light of the earlier discouraging results?

2. Unpublished research

In November 2020, the Danish mask study – the first RCT of mask efficacy specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus – found that masks achieved no significant benefit for the wearer. Despite this ground-breaking conclusion, the research was initially rejected by at least three prestigious medical journals. This publication bias is also evident in the current Cochrane review where the authors, when discussing the range of RCTs included in the analysis, state that: “We identified four ongoing studies, of which one is finalised, but unreported, evaluating masks concurrent with the COVID‐19 pandemic” (my emphasis). Why would a finalised RCT, on such a pressing issue as mask effectiveness, not be published? The most likely answer, in this censorial environment, is that it came to the ‘wrong’ conclusion.

3. A disregard of the harms of masking

Very few of the studies included in the Cochrane review addressed the potential harms of wearing masks; harms were “rarely measured and poorly reported”. When one considers the wide range of credible negative consequences (physical, social and psychological) associated with mass masking in the community, this is a glaring omission. Once again, the most plausible reason for this inattention to harms in mask research in the last three years is political pressure – Government policy makers urgently sought evidence to support their premature decisions to impose mask mandates, to demonstrate their effectiveness as a viral barrier, and were disinclined to investigate the potential harms.

4. Publication delays

A blatant indication of top-down censorial influence on the ‘masks don’t work’ message is the way that publication of one of the Cochrane review updates was delayed. The previous 2020 version, incorporating updates up until January 2020, had passed peer review and was finalised by April of the same year. Extraordinarily, its publication was delayed until November 2020 due to “unexplained editorial decisions“. According to lead author, Dr. Tom Jefferson, this extra scrutiny was “a very unexpected event in Cochrane, especially during a period in which the topic of the review and the setting of policy was of global importance”.

It is unlikely to be coincidence that this window of delay corresponds to the period when the U.K. and other Governments, under intense pressure from pro-mask groups, U-turned and imposed mask mandates on their populations. In the midst of this policy flip-flop, it would have caused considerable political embarrassment to our public health leaders should the Cochrane group – the source of the most authoritative and comprehensive scientific evidence – have broadcast its conclusion that masks are ineffective as a viral barrier. In the words of Dr. Jefferson, by the time their report was published in November 2020, “the advisers had changed their minds about the evidence, and the policies had been set”.

The latest Cochrane review update includes studies up to October 2022. Its publication three months later suggest that this edition was not delayed, presumably because, at a time when most of society is unmasked, its conclusions are likely to evoke less discomfort for policy makers.

5. Editorial interference

An explicit example of the top-down interference with the Cochrane review process (referred to above) is an editorial that accompanied the 2020 edition. Including statements such as, “Waiting for strong evidence is a recipe for paralysis”, the content of this commentary appears totally at odds with the ethos of the Cochrane initiative. Indeed, this decisions-before-evidence assertion mirrors the proclamations of pro-mask zealot Professor Trish Greenhalgh, who has previously stated that the rigorous search for empirical evidence is the “enemy of good policy“.

In the words of Dr. Jefferson, the 2020 Cochrane editorial “seemed to undermine our work” and had the effect of “completely subverting the precautionary principle”. The lead author of the editorial was Dr. Soares-Weiser (Cochrane’s Chief Editor) who is “responsible for ensuring that the Cochrane Library meets its strategic goals of supporting health care decision-making by consistently publishing timely, high-priority, high-quality reviews”. Clearly, the 2020 Cochrane mask review failed her ‘timely’ criterion and her trivialisation of the value of empirical evidence is at odds with the ‘high-quality reviews’ aspiration.

Dr. Gary Sidley is a retired NHS consultant clinical psychologist and a co-founder of the Smile Free campaign that opposes mask mandates.

February 13, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Inside an Australian Quarantine Camp

By Bobbie Anne Flower Cox | Brownstone Institute | February 12, 2023

After I won my landmark “quarantine camp” lawsuit against Governor Hochul and her Department of Health a few months ago, people from around the globe started reaching out to me. Some wanted to simply send congratulations on a job well done, and thank me for giving them hope that this tyranny that somehow magically took hold contemporanously in countries around the world, could be defeated.

But many others wanted more than that. They wanted actual help. They wanted to know how they could fight back against the intense tyranny in their countries. So, I started doing interviews and presentations to groups based in the UK, South Africa, Canada, and Australia. I shared with them my legal theory behind my case, the separation of powers argument, and all about my courageous plaintiffs (Senator George Borrello, Assemblyman Chris Tague, Assemblyman [now Congressman] Mike Lawler, and a citizens’ group called Uniting NYS).

I told them about the other wonderful group of NYS Legislators that supported us with an Amicus Brief (Assemblymen Andy Goodell, Will Barclay and Joseph Giglio), and the battles that we fought and won along the way, as the Attorney General tried tactic after tactic to stall, derail and destroy our case. I shared all that I could with them in the hopes that it would assist them in their countries, as they pushed back against their government abuses.

At first I was taken aback by the response from those who reached out to me from abroad. It was hard for me to imagine that all those foreigners were watching our quarantine case so intently. Many told me they’d heard about it through “alternative media” sources, and had been quietly cheering me on and praying for a win. This made me realize that the utter helplessness brought on by the flagrant despotism of so many nations’ governments was eerily simultaneous – and equally frightening to all citizenry, no matter which country one called home.

Our quarantine camp lawsuit win against New York’s governor was almost akin to the proverbial shot heard around the world. Almost. Not quite. One big difference is that my lawsuit was (and still is today) heavily censored. Mainstream media barely covered it when we won, except for an article here and there in the New York Post and my interview on OAN Network. Epoch Times TV did a deep-dive interview with me on their wildly popular show, American Thought Leaders, but still yet, the Epoch Times is not legacy, mainstream media that continuously pours over the airwaves day in and day out.

Local and alternative media were covering it, but not mainstream media. I previously wrote an article about the censorship of my quarantine case which you can read here.

With my exposure to citizens from countries far and away, I was hearing tales of horrific happenings. Things that I simply could not believe governments would do their people, especially in countries that were supposedly “free”. And yet, here they were, telling me stories, sending me news articles or photos or actual video footage of atrocities I could not wrap my head around.

Some of the images are forever burned into my memory, no matter how hard I try to erase them. And at the end of each story that someone recanted, or each video that I watched, I thought to myself, “Thank God we won our quarantine camp lawsuit here in New York.”

I realized that we had not only stopped this complete totalitarianism from taking place in my home state, but we had likely stopped it from spreading across the nation to the point where quarantine camps would become the “new norm” as a way to (supposedly) stop the spread of a disease – or to punish someone the government didn’t like. (Remember, the languange in the reg we got struck down said the government did NOT have to prove you actually had a disease)! For more details on the reg and our lawsuit, go to www.UnitingNYS.com/lawsuit

Through my connection with Brownstone Institute, I was introduced to a wonderful and brave Australian who had spent two weeks in a quarantine camp in northern Australia. Let’s refer to her as “Jane”. I share with you now her first hand account that she shared with me of what happened and what it was like, replete with photographs from inside the camp.

At the time Jane was in the camp, Dan Andrews was (and still is) the Premier in Australia. The country had very strict COVID19 policies, which Jane points out, were constantly changing. Literally, the government would change a policy whilst people were flying mid-air, and upon landing at their destination, they’d be arrested because they now suddenly were in violation of a new COVID policy just issued!

The rule at the time was that no Australian was allowed to leave their state, unless you had a “legitimate reason” to do so, and in order to actually leave, you had to first quarantine for 2 weeks. Not in your home. No, don’t be silly! You had to quarantine in a facility that was run by the government. Some people got to choose which facility, others did not. There was a large camp in the Northern Territory near Darwin, and then there were many quarantine hotels scattered throughout the country.

Reportedly, the quarantine hotels were a total nightmare where you were shut into a room for 2 weeks, no exiting your room, no going outdoors allowed, and some rooms didn’t even have windows! But living in Melbourne, a large city in southest Australia, was just as bad. The government would only let you out of your home for ONE HOUR/day, with a mask on, and you couldn’t stray more than 5 kilometers from your house. You not only couldn’t leave the city, you couldn’t leave the country!

Forget having anyone visit – no guests were allowed in your home. The government set up a hotline so that Australians could call and report any of their neighbors who were disobeying the COVID mandates. The police would often check on the citizens to see if they were complying. They’d phone you, and if you didn’t respond within 15 minutes, they’d come knock on your door! The camp where Jane was quarantined seemed almost like a holiday, comparatively speaking. Well, not really.

So how it worked was that, if you had family or friends or business in another state, you had to first go to a government facility to quarantine for 2 weeks. Again, only if you had what the government deemed to be a legitimate reason. Jane needed to leave Melbourne, so she packed up her bags, booked an absurdly expensive flight to the Northern Territory, and off she went to the quarantine camp in Darwin for 2 weeks. Did she go “voluntarily”, of her own free will? That’s a very fine line of semantics there folks. Yes, she herself booked her flight and packed her bags to go, but it was only because the government told her that was the only way she could leave Melbourne. I don’t consider that free will. I hope you share my view.

The quarantine camp:

The camp had rows of trailer-like buildings that housed the inmates – I mean the there-of-their-own-free-will Australians. Jane was put into a unit that had a bedroom and a bathroom. Each unit had a small front stoop, sort of like a porch (see photo below). You were allowed to sit outside and talk to a neighbor, through a face mask of course, if you could stand the sweltering heat. Police were constantly patroling the camp, walking past the trailers, ensuring everyone was complying with the “social distancing” requirements and the forced masking, etc.

You weren’t allowed to do anything other than sit on your front stoop, or walk “laps” through the camp… as long as you stayed the proper distance from others, wore your mask, and didn’t try to do anything else. There was a swimming pool, but you were only allowed a dip in the pool twice during your 2 week stint there, and that was only if you were going to do some laps… no games allowed!

The food was terrible. No alcohol allowed. Cell phones and internet were allowed, at least when Jane was there. She said one woman tried to escape, but she was caught and then put into solitary confinement.

Now, sit down for this next part. The government restricted you from leaving your town, your state, your country, forced you into quarantine hotels or a camp if you were able to convince them that you had a real reason to cross a state border, treated you like a criminal, and get this – YOU had to pay for it!! And it was not cheap. The price tag was $2,500 for an individual, $5,000 for a family at the camp. The “hotels” apparently were more costly at $3,000 for the 2 weeks.

There were more details that Jane shared with me, but I cannot cover all here. At this point, I’m going to close out this story with a part of my conversation with Jane that really struck me. She could tell that I was flabbergasted by the things she was telling me. She could hear it in my voice, but also in the long pauses in between my questions after she would answer the litany of inquiries I was throwing at her.

My underlying astonishment was obvious… “How could your government do these things to its people?!”

Her response was immediate and direct, “We don’t have your Second Amendment. If we had, our government never would have treated us this way.”

Let that sink in for a minute.

Lawsuit update:

As I mentioned above, we defeated New York’s quarantine camp regulation when we won our lawsuit last July against Governor Hochul and her DOH. The Attorney General filed a notice of appeal, and had 6 months to appeal the win. Elections were November 8th. Not surprisingly, no appeal was filed, until…

The first week of January, just days before their 6 month deadline was up, the Attorney General asked for an additional 2 months to appeal our victory over quarantine camps! Unfortunately, the Court granted the request, despite our objection.

For more information about the case, the timeline, or if you’d like to support our lawsuit against the Governor and her quarantine camp regulation, go to www.UnitingNYS.com/lawsuit

Together, we win this!

Bobbie Anne is an attorney with 25 years experience in the private sector, who continues to practice law but also lectures in her field of expertise – government over-reach and improper regulation and assessments.

February 12, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

Two Top Climate Scientists Find Further Evidence That Global Warming Has Been Exaggerated

BY CHRIS MORRISON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | FEBRUARY 12, 2023

Up to one fifth of all warming reported across the planet by around 20,000 weather stations is invalid due to corruption from non-climatic data. This finding is the latest revelation from two atmospheric scientists seeking to measure the effect of human-caused urban heat on global surface temperature measurements. The news is sensational because it depresses further the major slowdown in warming observed since around 1998. With the global temperature warming by little more than 0.1°C over the last two decades, it makes claims of 4°C warming by the end of the century seem even more implausible.

The latest finding arises from the ongoing work of Dr. Roy Spencer and Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville. The two scientists looked at the 19,885 temperature stations in the Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) distributed around the world from latitudes 20N to 82.5N. They found that over the last 40 years, virtually all of them had experienced growth associated with human settlement. The global work is said to be at an early stage, but “very preliminary calculations” are said to suggest that urban heat averaged across all stations is about 10-20% of GHCN trends.

Major global temperature compilers such as the U.S.-based National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) claim to remove urban heat effects by homogenisation techniques, but the scientists say this is unlikely. Abrupt changes in station data can be removed, but they cannot correct “for any sources of slowly increasing spurious warming”. In their latest work, the scientists undertake a critical investigation of NOAA’s homogenisation procedure and astonishingly conclude it is on average “spuriously warming station temperature data trends when it should be cooling them”. The detailed reasons are given in the latest note published by Spencer, where he asks why NOAA adjustments are going in the wrong way? “To say the least, I find these results …. Curious,” he says.

The GHCN forms the core of all the major global surface temperature datasets including the Met Office’s HadCRUT. In the recent past, all these datasets have been subject to considerable upwards retrospective adjustments, and these have largely removed the pauses and slowdown seen over the last two decades. This has enabled further ‘record’ high temperatures to be declared, and the continued Net Zero-helpful promotion of improbable multi-centigrade warming in the near future. Last month, NOAA claimed that the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2010.

In a recently published paper, Nicola Scafetta, a climate research scientist at the University of Naples, noted that the Met Office HadCRUT database had recorded warming of 0.03°C per decade during the hiatus years of 2000-2014. In 2013, Scafetta noted that HadCRUT version 4 increased the warming to 0.08°C per decade. HadCRUT5 further adjusted the 2000-14 figure to supply warming of 0.14°C per decade. A period of pause – a pause that the Met Office actually wrote about – was converted to strong warming. Needless to say, accurate satellite temperature data shows the first pause, along with a current one that is over eight years long.

In their ground-breaking work, Spencer and Christy use a satellite dataset of urbanisation called ‘Built Up’ to determine the average effect that urbanisation has had on surface temperatures. Urbanisation differences were compared to temperature changes from closely-spaced weather stations. Earlier findings suggested that in the last 50 years, there was a remarkable 50% less warming across the eastern United States. Again the work is preliminary and the scientists suggest it is likely to be at the upper limit of de-urbanisation adjustments. Nevertheless, there were many surprises, not least in data from airports. These places contribute many readings to global datasets, but massive distortions were found. One of the worst examples was Orlando International Airport where the warming was measured at 0.3°C per decade. This fell to a de-urbanised figure of just 0.07°C.

In fact, NOAA does make a serious attempt to track U.S. temperatures away from any urban or human corruptions. A rarely-publicised database is compiled from 114 nationwide stations designed to provide continuous recordings well away from any urban heat distortions. The measurements started in 2005, and to date show little if any warming. It is called the US Climate Refence Network, and the latest graph is posted below.

Intriguingly, the scientists are finding that the strongest urban heating occurs at near-rural sites. Others have noted that the urban heat effect is strongly non-linear with, for example, a 2% increase in urbanisation at rural sites producing much more warming than a similar rise at an urban site. “This means that a climate monitoring dataset using mostly rural stations is not immune from spurious warming from creeping urbanisation, unless there has been absolutely zero growth,” they commented.

There is increasing evidence that surface databases that supply a global temperature are too inaccurate to rely on. Yet they provide bedrock data for collectivists to argue that the climate is collapsing and only a strict political re-ordering of society along Net Zero lines will save the planet from Armageddon. Satellite readings are widely used in climate science but their temperature findings are largely ignored in favour of adjusted and corrupted surface measurements. As regular readers will recall, Dr Spencer is a former NASA scientist and has plotted temperature data from satellites for over 40 years. Last year his blog page providing current monthly readings was ‘demonitised’ by Google Adsense on the grounds of “unreliable and harmful claims”.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

February 12, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

The CDC Lied: The mRNA Wasn’t Meant to “Stay in the Arm”

By Robert Kogon | Brownstone Institute | February 10, 2023

The CDC’s information page on Covid-19 vaccines contains the following bullet points on “How mRNA COVID-19 vaccines work:”

First, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle or upper thigh, depending on the age of who is getting vaccinated.

After vaccination, the mRNA will enter the muscle cells. Once inside, they use the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein…. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it, leaving the body as waste.

Or, in other words, as we have long been told, “it” – the mRNA – “stays in the arm.” And then, after having instructed the muscle cells to produce the spike, is disposed of.

But look at the below picture from a recent presentation on mRNA vaccination at the European Parliament. The picture was posted on Twitter by Virginie Joron, a French member of the parliament. The speaker is no less an authority than Özlem Türeci, the Chief Medical Officer of BioNTech: the German biotech company that developed what has come to be known to most of the world as the “Pfizer” Covid-19 vaccine.

Have a closer look at Türeci’s slide, which tells a very different story than that which the CDC has been telling Americans for the last two years.

Far from “staying in the arm” and entering the muscle cells at the injection site, the injection site is only the point of departure for a journey that is supposed to take the mRNA rather to the lymph nodes. The subtitle of the slide is “Bringing mRNA to the right cells at the right places.” The deltoid is not the right place; the lymph nodes are.

Once in the lymph nodes, a specific sort of cell, the dendritic cells, is supposed to manufacture the spike protein: here colorfully described as the “wanted poster” that will help the immune system to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus in case of subsequent exposure.

A passage from The Vaccine, the book that Türeci and her husband, BioNTech CEO Ugur Sahin, wrote which journalist Joe Miller, explains why BioNTech’s platform specifically targets the lymph nodes:

What Ugur learnt was that the location to which a vaccine delivers its ‘wanted poster’ really mattered. The reason for this, the couple’s team in Mainz later realised, was that not all dendritic cells … were created equal. The ones that resided in lymph nodes – of which the spleen is the largest – were particularly adept at capturing mRNA and making sure the instructions it carried were acted upon. These kidney-bean shaped organs, found under our armpits, in our groins, and at several other outposts in the body, are the information hubs of the immune system. (p. 98)

Indeed, Sahin and Türeci were so determined to get their mRNA into the lymph nodes that they had an earlier mRNA construct injected directly into the patient’s lymph nodes in the groin (p. 104).

Needless to say, such an approach was not likely to obtain wide acceptance as a vaccine! This is why the couple, as explained in their book, needed to package the mRNA in lipid nanoparticles, in order to ensure that mRNA administered by way of an intramuscular injection would, nonetheless, be widely distributed around the body and thus reach the lymph nodes.

This is to say that the wide biodistribution of the mRNA that came to light after rollout was never a bug. It is a feature of BioNTech’s mRNA technology. Having elicited an immune response by way of injection into the groin, Sahin is even said to have wondered, “How substantial could the immune response be if a vaccine got into all lymphatic tissues around the body, and recruited all the resident DCs [dendritic cells] into action?” (p. 105)

So, why has the CDC been lying about this for the last two years and insisting that the mRNA “stays in the arm?” Well, the obvious answer is that the idea of the mRNA staying at the injection site is reassuring, since otherwise we could fear systemic adverse effects of precisely the sort that have emerged since rollout.

It is worth noting, moreover, that in developing its vaccine, as discussed in my earlier article here, BioNTech simply skipped the so-called safety pharmacology studies whose purpose is precisely to test a candidate vaccine for potential systemic adverse effects – and regulators, including the FDA, let the company do it.

Robert Kogon is a pen name for a widely-published financial journalist, a translator, and researcher working in Europe.Follow him at Twitter here. He writes at edv1694.substack.com.

February 11, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

NEW STUDY SHOWS MASKS DON’T WORK AGAINST ILLNESS, BUT WHAT DOES?

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 9, 2023

A definitive study from the Cochrane Collaboration has solidified the uselessness of masking to prevent COVID-19 and other illnesses. However, more studies now show both vitamin D and exercise as cheap, empowering and extremely effective strategies against COVID

February 11, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Austrian Court ACQUITS Doctor Charged Of Falsely Issuing COVID Vaccine Exemption Certificates

By P Gosselin  | No Tricks Zone | February 10, 2023

Austrian physician: vaccine has to be avoided, especially when “a corrupt state and an even more corrupt medical association, made up of puppets of the pharmaceutical industry, coerce people into a potentially lethal vaccination.”

Physician Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen was accused in 2022 of issuing digital exemption certificates for the Covid 19 vaccine for 20 euros to patients who did not want the new controversial medical mRNA technology injected into their bodies.

Despite the privacy rights between patient and doctor, Austrian authorities dragged Sönnichsen to a Salzburg court on charges of fraud and usurpation of authority.

Yesterday, the Salzburg court ruled in favor of Sönnichsen. The acquittal is viewed as a major victory by proponents of patient-physician rights, medical privacy and bodily autonomy.

Compulsory vaccination was introduced in Austria in February, 2022, but was suspended already in March before being dropped altogether in the summer after heated protests.

Story at the derstandard.de here. 

The courageous Sönnichsen was an outspoken critic of the Austrian government’s harsh COVID measures and used scientific arguments to refute the charges against him.

“Sönnichsen pleaded his innocence in the trial. The judge could not recognize a subjective factual element or an intent to enrich,” Der Standard reports. Prosecutors claimed the doctor’s certificates “were issued via the Internet without the patients having been conscientiously examined”, but the defendant “argued that the certificates very much had a medical value”.

The court agreed and acquitted

“According to the judge, the physician had wanted to issue a medical certificate as a doctor to help people not to have to go vaccinate,” Der Standard reports. “After the acquittal, Sönnichsen strongly criticized the Covid policy in an interview with ORF Salzburg. Those who had not been vaccinated had been severely defamed and discriminated against.”

“Biggest medical scandal” and “a crime”

At the end of 2021 in a press conference, Sönnichsen called COVID 19 the “biggest medical scandal of all time”, and at a press conference in Salzburg in November 2021, he warned that the risk-benefit ratio of vaccination against Corona was “highly likely to be negative for most healthy people and especially for children.”

In an open letter to the Salzburg Medical Association at the end of October 2022, Sönnichsen called the Covid vaccination of healthy people “a crime because the harm is much greater than the benefit”.

“Puppets of the pharmaceutical industry”

And now that the overwhelming evidence for the harmfulness of vaccination has come to light, Sönnichsen says the Hippocratic Oath “obliges” him  to issue vaccination exemption certificates, especially “when a corrupt state and an even more corrupt medical association, made up of puppets of the pharmaceutical industry, coerce people into a potentially lethal vaccination.”

February 10, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Robbed? It wasn’t Covid that issued the shutdown edicts.

By James Bovard | Brownstone Institute | February 9, 2023

In his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, President Biden rewrote the history of the pandemic. Biden lamented, “Covid had shut down our businesses. Schools were closed. We were robbed of so much.” But it wasn’t Covid that issued the shutdown edicts.

We were robbed by politicians like Biden who disrupted lives in a futile effort to thwart a virus that infected hundreds of millions of Americans anyhow. There was never solid evidence to justify shutting businesses or schools but that did not deter politicians from promising to save humanity by destroying freedom.

After Pfizer and Moderna, Biden was perhaps the biggest Covid profiteer in America. In 2020, Biden ran one of the most fear-based presidential campaigns in modern history. Biden talked as if every American family had lost a member or two from this pestilence. He routinely exaggerated Covid death tolls by a hundred- or a thousand-fold, publicly asserting that millions of Americans had been killed by Covid-19. Biden was helped mightily by fear-mongering media coverage.

A Brookings Institute analysis noted, “Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to overestimate [Covid] harm. Forty-one percent of Democrats… answered that half or more of those infected by COVID-19 need to be hospitalized.” At that time, the rate of hospitalization was between 1 percent and 5 percent – so those Democratic voters overestimated the risk of hospitalization by up to 20-fold.

In the final debate between the presidential candidates in October 2020, Biden blamed Trump for every Covid fatality: “220,000 Americans dead…. Anyone who’s responsible for that many deaths should not remain as president of the United States.” Biden promised, “I will take care of this. I will end this. I’m going to shut down the virus, not the country.” In a speech on the day before Election Day, he declared, “We’re going to beat this virus. We’re going to get it under control, I promise you.” Biden won the presidency as a result of only 43,000 votes in three swing states. The disruption and damage caused by lockdowns were invoked as proof of Trump’s negligence, rather than seen as evidence of an unprecedented political panic-mongering and repression.

After taking office, Biden issued a flurry of edicts, including mandating masks for anyone on federal property. In September 2021, he mandated that more than 100 million be injected with Covid vaccines, despite proliferating evidence that the vaccines were failing to prevent transmission or infections. In an October 2021 CNN Town Hall, Biden vilified vaccine skeptics as murderers who only wanted “the freedom to kill you” with Covid.

On Tuesday night, Biden announced, “Covid no longer controls our lives.” But Biden extended the official Covid emergency at least until May 11, entitling him to sweeping additional power. Biden still claims that Covid miraculously entitles him to “forgive” half a trillion dollars in federal student debt. And the Biden administration is fighting to perpetuate vaccine mandates on foreign visitors to America and to preserve the president’s prerogative to impose mask mandates.

The carnage from Covid crackdowns is still being tabulated. A 2022 Johns Hopkins University analysis of 24 studies on the impact of lockdowns in the United States and Europe found “no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures, and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality.” The pointless shutdowns did far more damage than Biden will ever admit:

  • A National Bureau of Economic Research analysis estimated that young Americans suffered “171,000 excess non-Covid deaths during 2020 and 2021… a historic, yet largely unacknowledged, health emergency.” Many of those fatalities were “collateral damage” from shutdowns and other Covid policies.
  • Millions of jobs were lost thanks to lockdowns, a major reason why life expectancy in the United States had its sharpest plunge since World War Two.
  • Forced isolation was a Grim Reaper. Deaths from drug overdoses set an all-time record of 108,000 in 2021 and alcohol-related deaths jumped 25% in the first year of the pandemic.
  • The Biden administration suppressed free speech on Twitter and other social media based on a single theme: “Be very afraid of Covid and do exactly what we say to stay safe,” as journalist David Zweig summarized in the TwitterFiles. Official fear-mongering helped boost the percentage of Americans reporting struggling with depression or anxiety by more than 300 percent.

If Biden can shift blame for disastrous Covid policies, politicians will be more likely to pointlessly lock down the nation in the future. Americans deserve to see all the federal records and all the state government records to expose the recklessness and deceit that permeated Covid policies. America will not recover from the pandemic until all the COVID lies and abuses by officialdom have been exposed.

James Bovard, 2023 Brownstone Fellow, is author and lecturer whose commentary targets examples of waste, failures, corruption, cronyism and abuses of power in government. He is a USA Today columnist and is a frequent contributor to The Hill. He is the author of ten books.

February 9, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

A vaccine injury harms everyone in the family

By Anonymous | TCW Defending Freedom | February 7, 2023

‘Just an ear infection, here’s some antibiotics,’ was my hospital diagnosis after a five-minute assessment; strange, as I couldn’t understand how an ear infection could make my eye swell and deliver an excruciating head pain akin to being hit with a hammer four days earlier.

I had an Oxford University/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine on March 28, 2021. I was 54. The government said it would enable people to get back to some kind of normality, both family and work (I was in the clothing industry). It was implied that it was our duty to protect those around us by being vaccinated. Thirdly, I was the carer for my frail 87-year-old father, living alone since my mother’s death in 2006.

The ‘ear infection’ pain got worse, the symptoms debilitating, I thought at one point I was going to die. I’m not a moaner but I just wasn’t comfortable with what I was told, and so began my road-blocked journey to VITT (vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis) diagnosis.

Once a diagnosis is given, it is nigh on impossible to get it changed, and for three months after I was told I had an ear infection I went back and forth to my GP, writing letters explaining my symptoms, asking for neurological referral, all to no avail.

I was eventually granted eye and blood tests. The eye test result recommended neurological assessment, but the killer was being handed my blood test results without explanation, just some notations stating ‘Abnormal see Doctor’.

Now very worried, I decided to see a private neurologist. I hadn’t even sat down before the neurologist, sizing me up in an instant, said ‘Something’s not right’ and suddenly I was an NHS emergency.

NHS MRI/CT scans and blood tests followed and then silence. All the adrenaline ebbs away and one gets back to life . . . until that moment when the phone rings, you see the word HOSPITAL on the display, and your pulse starts racing. It’s that call, and the calm voice you are hearing is telling you there’s a blood clot in your brain.

I didn’t take it in, I started shaking. I asked the neurologist (who is wonderful) to slow down as I couldn’t understand any of it.

A few days later I’m talking to a haematologist, again a wonderful person, and with pills and blood tests under way I had gathered myself and was able to ask questions.

I later wrote to my hospital and GP telling them of my diagnosis. I’ve got the ‘Sorry about that’ letters, the ‘we learned a lot/the MHRA didn’t tell us’ etc reasons. And I still have the blood clot I first told them I thought I had as a consequence of my vaccine.

Today, I feel if I’d been admitted on first presentation I’d have recovered. Instead, my NHS-diagnosed VITT blood clot and head pain are a constant reminder, my walking stick an embarrassment, and all the rest: my drooping eye, the vision fluctuation, the increased cranium pressure and broken teeth from my falls, the loss of my driving licence, PTSD, the lumbar puncture, blood thinners and the other procedures/appointments I now have after taking a ‘safe and effective’ vaccine – I can’t even work any more.

The impact has been just as bad for my father. I was pretty much his only link with the outside world, but because of my injury and all that goes with it (not being able to drive, for example) I can’t provide care for him. His health and well-being have suffered greatly. Now he has full-time live-in care, which he has to pay for, and has been in and out of hospitals since.

It’s all dreadfully sad. I have apologised to him and my family for my taking the vaccine. I wish I could turn the clock back and be a normal husband, dad and son again, but all that’s been ripped away from me. Everyone in a family suffers when it’s a vaccine injury, not just the vaccinated.

If you are vaccine injured, or know someone who is, you can contact or read about the the Covid-19 vaccine injury support group, UK CV Family, here. 

February 8, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Varicella-Zoster Reactivation after COVID-19 Illness versus SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination

Larger Ongoing Threat is COVID-19 Vaccination

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | February 6, 2023

Many papers in the medical literature seem to pit a consequence such as myocarditis or stroke as either occurring as a consequence of COVID-19 illness compared with COVID-19 vaccination. Because the denominator is so large for acutely ill hospitalized patients with COVID-19 especially during the first two years of the pandemic allowing ICD code capture of comorbidities, authors erroneously conclude the illness is “more dangerous” or a “bigger risk factor.” These arguments are daft in my opinion since COVID-19 respiratory illness is treatable and a recent paper from Klaassen et al has estimated 94% are already recovered from COVID-19—so it is water under the bridge. Not true for COVID-19 vaccines which are still mandated by some ill-advised schools, employers, and agencies. One way of looking for what is a more pressing and continued problem is to survey the medical literature.

Martinez-Reviejo et al completed a literature review of varicella-zoster reactivation (shingles) and compared cases arising after vaccination and those with the respiratory infection. There were more manuscripts and cases after vaccination. However, the manifestations of varicella-zoster were more severe in those with acute COVID-19 illness which was also high in disease severity.

Martinez-Reviejo R, Tejada S, Adebanjo GAR, Chello C, Machado MC, Parisella FR, Campins M, Tammaro A, Rello J. Varicella-Zoster virus reactivation following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination or infection: New insights. Eur J Intern Med. 2022 Oct;104:73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.07.022. Epub 2022 Aug 1. PMID: 35931613; PMCID: PMC9340059.

I found it curious the authors did not disclose the shingles vaccine status in the tables. The bottom line is that shingles can occur with severe COVID-19 and it is treatable. Acute COVID-19, however is amenable to early therapeutics so severe cases can be avoided and most of us have recovered SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-19 vaccination continues to be an ongoing threat for varicella-zoster reactivation syndromes, some of which are very serious including ocular damage and long-lasting painful cutaneous syndromes.

Klaassen F, Chitwood MH, Cohen T, Pitzer VE, Russi M, Swartwood NA, Salomon JA, Menzies NA. Changes in population immunity against infection and severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants in the United States between December 2021 and November 2022. medRxiv [Preprint]. 2022 Nov 23:2022.11.19.22282525. doi: 10.1101/2022.11.19.22282525. PMID: 36451882; PMCID: PMC9709792.

Martinez-Reviejo R, Tejada S, Adebanjo GAR, Chello C, Machado MC, Parisella FR, Campins M, Tammaro A, Rello J. Varicella-Zoster virus reactivation following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination or infection: New insights. Eur J Intern Med. 2022 Oct;104:73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.07.022. Epub 2022 Aug 1. PMID: 35931613; PMCID: PMC9340059.

February 8, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

The UN calls for a “code of conduct” on social media

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 7, 2023

The  is becoming heavily involved in several initiatives to regulate the digital space and online speech, and judging by the priorities the organization has for 2023, outlined on Monday in New York City, this trend is only picking up steam.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres spoke about those priorities and suppressing the spread of online “hate” speech via what he called misinformation and disinformation made it to the list, among issues like rights-based approach, renewable energy, and a dire warning about the world being closer than ever to total catastrophe – all mentioned in his speech.

Guterres spoke about the subject of “mis- and disinformation” on the internet as a call for action to deal with these threats.

And Guterres had “everyone with influence” in mind – governments, regulators, policymakers, technology companies, the media, civil society. It’s notable that he “squeezed in” this warning about the need to “stop the hate” on the internet in the same paragraph he spoke about UN outreach programs that concern the Holocaust and the Rwanda genocide.

He then moved on to the UN Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech, which included the “call for action.”

“Stop the hate. Set up strong guardrails. Be accountable for language that causes harm,” the UN secretary-general said and explaining the plan on how to do that: by creating a code of conduct for information integrity on digital platforms.

This, Guterres noted, is part of his 2021 report titled, “Our Common Agenda.” In May 2022, a meeting was held at the UN by delegates who gathered to discuss what was dramatically dubbed as “the epidemic of misinformation and disinformation.”

The UN Department of Global Communications was tasked with drafting a code of conduct “to promote integrity in public information.”

In his speech on Monday, Guterres also accused social media platforms of using algorithms to “amplify toxic ideas and funnel extremist views into the mainstream,” and asserted that some platforms tolerate hate speech, which, according to him, is “the first step towards hate crime.”

And as stakeholders, those identified by Guterres, get together to produce the code of conduct for information integrity on digital platforms, “we will also further strengthen how focus on our mis- and disinformation are impacting progress on global issues, including the climate crisis,” he promised.

Critics wonder if this doubling-down on “the war on misinformation” by the UN will serve as an excuse for even more online censorship and if it might clash with members’ own speech protection laws.

February 8, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »