Follow FACTUAL NEWS on

Vaccines and COVID

Global Warming

Green New Deal

“What we’re actually seeing in the data is the exact opposite of what is being suggested by groups like ICAN — these vaccines are very safe. With, you know, a few very rare known exceptions,” Belongia said. “But overall, it’s very clear that the benefits of the vaccines greatly outweigh the risks.”

( Aaron Siri and other representatives of Siri & Glimstad, filed the FOIA litigation for ICAN)

“Siri told Reuters that ICAN thought it was important to look beyond one week, since some potential vaccine-related side effects could appear weeks after vaccination. But most side effects occur soon after vaccination, so including longer intervals would include more events that are unrelated to the vaccine.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/10/scicheck-posts-distort-misleading-analysis-of-covid-19-vaccine-safety-data/

ICAN's analysis included responses reported beyond the first seven days post-vaccine and it counted all reports of people seeking medical attention up to a year after receiving the shot. ICAN did not specify when after vaccination they received the care, nor did the data indicate what the care was for ………………………………………………………………………….  
It's notable that ICAN has a history of vaccine skepticism. Its founder, Del Bigtree, is known for producing the 2016 documentary “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe," which may be why the group's findings have received scant media coverage. https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/new-data-is-out-covid-vaccine-injury-claims-whats-make-it-2022-10-12/

Two merged clips of the Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky discussing the protection from COVID-19 for those vaccinated in March 2021 and August 2021 are presented in a way that is missing context.

A study released by the CDC on August 25 based on data collected in Los Angeles found that unvaccinated people are 29 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than those who are vaccinated.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-
walensky-clips/fact-check-merged-clips-of-
cdc-director-rochelle-walensky-discussing-
vaccine-protection-from-severe-covid-19-are-missing-context-idUSL1N2PX1IZ

2023 Feb: the majority of the reported adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination in pediatrics were mild to moderate, with few being severe. Injection site discomfort, fever, headache, cough, lethargy, and muscular aches and pains were the most prevalent side effects.

Few clinical studies recorded significant side effects, although the majority of these adverse events had nothing to do with vaccination.

In terms of efficacy, COVID-19 disease protection was achieved in

Conclusions: Based on available data, COVID-19 immunizations appear to be safe for children and adolescents.

Furthermore, multiple studies have proven that different types of vaccines can provide excellent protection against COVID-19 in pediatric populations. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9964251/

PLACEBO --- SEARCH: how many vaccine studies use a placebo ?

The bottom line is that, as far as COVID-19 vaccines are concerned, clinical trial data will be presented to regulatory authorities... but also to fellow scientists. And it will be scrutinized by good-faith researchers and by anti-vaccine activists alike. Only by interpreting the data in light of solid scientific judgment and not ideological denialism will we be able to make a sound decision. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/
covid-19-health/placebos-used-vaccine-trials-do-not-please-everyone

Vaccine trial design can raise challenging ethical questions, especially regarding the use of placebo controls when an efficacious vaccine exists. . ………………………………………………………………………………
The framework sets out the conditions under which placebo use is clearly acceptable and clearly unacceptable in vaccine trials.  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0264410X14005374?via%3Dihub

Paul Offet is a well known promoter of Vaccines, and pediatrician. Claims Vaccines are all placebo controlled.

Aaron Siri is a successful attorney in sueing Pharma companies to release data they have been trying to keep private, and has gotten people like Rachael Walenski to admin under oath that the vaccines do not prevent transmissions, and were not tested for that.

She also claimed under oath that “the only reason we put the Civid vaccine on the childhood vaccination schedule is so underprivileged children would have free access to it.

This is after admitting that she knew it was not efficacious for children and had harmful side effects greater than the risk for Covid.

Here is an article describing Aaron Siri challenging Paul Offet on his claims that the vaccines are placebo tested. I think Aaron won this round quite convincingly.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/08/
a_renowned_vaccinologist_and_
the_placebocontrolled_clinical_trials_that_werent.html

SEARCH do vaccines  use adjutants to weaken the immune system ?

Adjuvants help the body to produce an immune response strong enough to protect the person from the disease he or she is being vaccinated against.

So adjutants strengthen the immune system ! 

Please don’t repeat arguments that have been rebutted “vaccines were never tested to stop transmission”

Whatever one concludes from any missing-context-“testimony”   --- is overridden by the scientific evidence that “unvaccinated people are 29 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than those who are vaccinated” proving that it also ( with reduced expression of symptoms) considerably REDUCES TRANSMISSION .

WHERE IS THE REBUTTAL TO THIS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?

There is no “incredible spikes in side effects“.    ----  ICAN analysis included responses reported beyond the first seven days post-vaccine and it counted all reports of people seeking medical attention up to a year after receiving the shot. But most side effects occur soon after vaccination, so including longer intervals would include more events that are unrelated to the vaccine.”

WHERE IS THE REBUTTAL TO THIS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?

SEARCH:    uk mathematicion   excel vaccine efficacy

Can’t find anything 

SEARCH: Covid vaccination how rare is  myocarditis

The highest risk group is males between 12 and 17 years of age. And in that highest risk group, the myocarditis risk after the second dose, which is the highest, is 35.9 per 100,000 people. May 16, 2023 

SEARCH: how bad is the myocarditis from Covid vaccination

First of all, myocarditis after vaccination for the most part appears to be transient, and these patients recover.

In comparison, getting COVID could lead to more severe, more prolonged myocarditis.

Secondly, there are ways to reduce the risk for myocarditis, like spacing apart the first and second dose. 

SEARCH: vaccine autism

A CDC study published in 2013 added to the research showing that vaccines do not cause autism

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html

 It is very likely that the answer to what causes autism will not reside solely in genetics or in environment but in a combination of the two.

Whatever factors go into the mix, they most likely have their effect during fetal life:

a person with autism is born with autism. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5501015/  

SEARCH [in the PAST YEAR]: are diseases exploding in occurrence

“It looks like there aren't many great matches for your search” 

And now to address ALL of the email reply with NO links to corroborate the arguments. Where did all of this “evidence” come from?
Please don’t reply without links to backup the statements!

================

March 10, 2023 Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, has responded on behalf of Cochrane:

"Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work',
which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

This is so bad.

Alan Siri is a brilliant attorney. He force Pfizer to release their clinical data in 24 months, rather than 75 years. It shows incredible spikes in side effects.

Here is the laugher:

Suffice to say all reputable trials of a new drug/vaccine start out using a placebo.

This is provably false.

No vaccine trials have ever been done before release of a vaccine.

Worse, the few trials that have been done, have compared with either the adjacent, or a different vaccine.

This is important.

Imagine I have created a vaccine of anything, and claim it is safe. The way vaccines are made is they all use adjutants to weaken the immune system, so the body cannot reject the vaccine. These include many toxic substances, including molecular aluminium, lipid particles, DNA fragments from brewing the vaccine, etc. (forget the ingredients for now)

They always do their vaccines, using a “placebo” with ALL the adjutants.

This is like testing whether your b12 injection is safe, which contains arsenic, and the placebo also contains arsenic. You will never see a signal.

Claiming someone is “anti vax” is not scientific. Siri got Rachael Wallinski, under oath, to grudgingly admit the vaccines were never tested to stop transmission, and ini fact they do not stop transmission. This was under oath. (I can dig up a source if you want, perhaps video)

There is a famous mathematician in northern UK, who demonstrated with excel, how you can use the Pfizer double shot criteria, to get 86% efficacy on the shots just by maths. And that is what they did. Why do you think there is a 2 week or 3 week period, after a shot, where you are considered “unvaccinated”?

Its so the maths works out. If you want to see the excel, I can dig it up (or a video explaining it)

SO if the vaccines have 86% efficacy, not by function, but by math tricks, what is going on?

It is now proven, according to Paul Offet, a huge vaccine supporter, that there is a causal link between the Covid shots and myocarditis, which is a lifelong problem. Most cases, only athletes will suffer in the short term (notice how so many athletes are “collapsing” or outlying at young ages?)

The Covid is a bioweapon used on humanity. Its scary. 

I love how Hofer, the vaccine pusher, refused to debate Robert Kennedy because “he is not credible”, or “he is a good debater and will trick me”. Even with 2.5 million dollars going to charity for a 2 hour debate? If I have science on my side adn the other person is an idiot, show up and humiliate them. At worst you raised 2.5 million dollars for charity. 

You need to dig into these…..

Here is a dumb example. No vaccine has been tested for links to autism, yet to claim there is a relationship is “lunacy”. It is “proven” that there is no link. I suspect you agree with this.

However, I have two interesting data points. Autism has grown from 1 in 30,000 or so, to 1 in 30 among male babies. Quite a shocking change. There is no curiosity on “what is causing this”? But as a point of interest, we do have ONE large cohort who have not taken any of the vaccine schedule. Amish. And interestingly, there are pretty much zero amish autistic children. 

I would say that makes for an interesting coincidence and should arouse curiosity among medical scientists.

Another interesting data point, is a simple survey that was taken of parents with Autistic children. The survey should have had a smooth distribution curve, with this question:

When you first saw symptoms of autism in your child was it before, or just after, a scheduled vaccine?

Virtually no one surveyed said just before. 

Did you know death rate among the under 40’s has jumped since 2021? Insurance companies in multiple countries have reported on this, calling this a 5 sigma event. Why?

The data is there everywhere you look. There are huge safety signals on this vaccine. “Turbo cancers”, shingles outbreaks, myocarditis, tinnitus, asthma, etc etc. Weird diseases are exploding in occurrence. All a coincidence, nothing to see here.

We know why, also the “vaccine” does not work against a normal immune system. So they added special adjutants to weaken the part of the immune system that fights internal issues like cancers, auto immune diseases. No one tested if this disabling wore off, but Pfizer claimed this was a 30 day effect, with no testing or evidence to that effect.

There is tons more data. But you have to be interested in it.

Since the vaccine does not prevent you from catching Covid, does not stop transmission, does not reduce hospitalizations, and is known (now) to interfere with natural immunity, what is it for?

Its not even mRNA, as claimed, it is ModRNA, which is a slight of hand, and not the same. ModRNA is essentially gene therapy, banned global as genetic experimentation on humans. Its “leaky” meaning the virus is invented to bypass the body’s defenses.

Consider this… this was most definitely a man made, enhanced functionality virus. They modify it by making changes to its structure and see how it grows, changes, etc. How many of these tests do you think happened? 10? 100? Maybe a thousand? (Gain of function research is time intensive and costly)

What we have done is injected billions of people as Petri dishes, so the virus can mutate. 

I rebut your memory !

 I think you can see that only reputable sources NIH, CDC etc…   ( that I googled) have been in my email replies.  

There are plenty of these reputable sources in my google results (I just picked a few) .

If there were censored studies that I missed --  I doubt anyone can argue that there is not a good reason WHY they were censored and that they were definitely not “Good studies”.

 The link you gave: - Epoch Times to that STUDY  -- includes in its conclusion that all occurrences of  myocarditis were  “mild and transient” (didn’t last).

 SEARCH: is Myocarditis always permanent?

Most people will recover without any lasting effects.

But in rare cases, ……. the inflammation is severe. 

Nobody is ( and I am not) denying that Myocarditis is caused by the vaccine.

Its just that its mild and transient in all Covid cases under 40.

 SEARCH: can you get Myocarditis from covid ( not the vaccine)?

Although the vaccines have proven to reduce severe COVID-19, cardiac complications, particularly myocarditis and pericarditis, have been associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

 On the other hand, myocarditis is also one of the complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC9467278/#:~:text=
Although%20the%20vaccines%20have%20proven,
infection%20(3%2C%206).

REPEAT: getting COVID could lead to more severe, more prolonged myocarditis.

You are googling censored information. Good studies are hidden from search engines.  I am relying on memory.  

But you are still easy to catch in false information from your sources.

Remember there are hundreds of billions of reasons to falsify this data, hide the facts, etc. We live in a post truth society.

The myocarditis data is 2 orders of magnitude off.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/subclinical-heart-damage-more-prevalent-than-thought-after-moderna-vaccination-study-5423864?src_src=partner&src_cmp=ZeroHedge

3% is HUGE. Its not .003%

And, even if YOUR data is correct, it is never ethical to inject people with a risk that is as risky as the thing you are injecting them against.

The risk of dying from Covid for healthy under 40’s is essentially zero. The risk of myocarditis is lets say between 3% and .03%. .03% is scandalously high. 

Myocarditis is NEVER transient. Its a permanent condition. That is cardiology 101. 

Covid itself does not cause Myocarditis

There was no increase in myocarditis in the general population, until 2021, when the vaccines were released.

If the vaccine does not trigger myocarditis, why do you need to space out the doses to avoid it? Seems like a self-defeating comment.

Myocarditis is a factual problem. Not worth arguing about, as the data is crystal clear. You will appear foolish to me if you continue on myocarditis, not being a “thing”.

No response to my evidence that

·       Myocarditis is NOT always permanent

·       mild and transient in all Covid cases under 40

·       getting COVID could lead to more severe, more prolonged myocarditis.

·       There is little risk from the few who get Myocarditis from the vaccine

·       There is more Myocarditis risk from NOT getting the vaccine !

?

Where is the contrary evidence ?

If its lies

This directly contradicts the assertions that

 Please do the SEARCH’s I gave you. Click on the links !

 In the one breath I read:   --- discredit of the NIH and on the next the NIH is being used to show “adverse events with MMR” !

It is too convenient to ignore the NIH/CDC/FDA and also say that all of the corroboration that would have been provided is CENSORED. Leaving no way of substantiating ANY of your “theories”.

 And what little “corroboration” that IS provided is from Alex Jones, Robert Malone, RFK, Pierre Kory,  Peter McCullough, substack.com 

 “unvaccinated people are 29 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than those who are unvaccinated” proving that it also ( with reduced expression of symptoms) considerably REDUCES TRANSMISSION .

WHERE IS THE REBUTTAL TO THIS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?

During May 1–July 25, 2021, among 43,127 SARS-CoV-2 infections in residents of Los Angeles County, California,

10,895 (25.3%) were in fully vaccinated persons,

  1,431 (3.3%) were in partially vaccinated persons, and

30,801 (71.4%) were in unvaccinated persons.

On July 25, infection and hospitalization rates among unvaccinated persons were 4.9 and 29.2 times, respectively, those in fully vaccinated persons. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e5.htm

 Is CDC considered peer reviewed?

All research and scientific programs conducted or funded by CDC are subject to periodic external peer review as described below. All extramural research applications submitted to CDC are required to go through external peer review by a Federal Advisory Committee, except in justified emergency situations..

 Why is the NIH a credible source?

From enhancing rigor and reproducibility, to encouraging sharing of data and protocols, to promoting pre-prints, and to requiring timely registration and reporting of clinical trial results, NIH establishes policies to make our funded research as credible, transparent, rigorous, and full of impact as possible.

 Peter McCullough

INACCURATE  Peter McCullough makes multiple false, misleading, and unsupported claims about COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy in viral podcast

FLAWD REASONING Higher myocarditis risk after COVID-19 than mRNA vaccination; contrary to Peter McCullough’s claim, young persons decrease their risk by getting vaccinated

INACCURATE Contrary to Peter McCullough’s claim, getting vaccinated is safer than getting COVID-19, in spite of rare cases of myocarditis

INACCURATE  Vaccines are a safer alternative for acquiring immunity compared to natural infection and COVID-19 survivors benefit from getting vaccinated, contrary to claims by Peter McCullough

https://healthfeedback.org/authors/peter-mccullough/   

Hydroxychloroquine for COVID19: The curtains close on a comedy of errors . Ultimately, hydroxychloroquine did not have clinical benefit for COVID-19. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanam/article/
PIIS2667-193X(22)00085-0/fulltext  

findings from 30 trials with more than 10,000 COVID patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not reduce mortality, the need for or duration of mechanical ventilation.

Taking hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID may increase the risk of heart rhythm problems, blood and lymph disorders, kidney injury, liver problems and failure.
https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/
coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-hydroxychloroquine  

Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for COVID: the WHO declared that clinical trials on these drugs are halted after the devastating findings of the study published in the medical journal called The Lancet. Against this fact, there are several rumors about the irresponsible use of these drugs in Africa for the treatment of COVID-19
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7505701/  

double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial including 1,206 US adults with COVID-19 during February 2022 to July 2022, the median time to sustained recovery was 11 days in the Ivermectin group and 11 days in the placebo group.

These findings do not support the use of ivermectin among outpatients.
 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2801827  

A twisting tale of misinformation: should Ivermectin be approved for COVID?

  Several randomized controlled trials have recently been published that reinforce the ineffectiveness of ivermectin in treating COVID-19 patients (e.g., the results of COVID-OUT and ACTIV-6 groups) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10005062/  

https://www.google.com/search?q=
how+effective+is+the+flu+vaccine&oq=
how+effective+is+the+flu+vaccine&aqs=
chrome..69i57j0i512l3j0i22i30l6.8647j0j4&
sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The CDC conducts Flu studies each flu season to determine how well the vaccine is working.

In the 2022-2023 season, the vaccine's effectiveness in preventing A(H3N2) infection ranged from 2.0% to 44.0%.

However, the vaccine's effectiveness was higher for children, ranging from 62.0% to 70.0%.  

Getting a flu shot will often protect you from a serious case of the flu. And although the flu shot doesn't always provide total protection, it's worth getting.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/
flu/in-depth/flu-shots/art-20048000  

The inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) is safe and effective for both children and adults.

It protects 99–100% of people who get all the recommended doses. Two doses of IPV are 90% effective or more against paralytic polio. Three doses are 99% to 100% effective.
 https://www.google.com/search?q=
effective+polio+vaccine+%3F&oq=effective+polio+vaccine
+%3F&aqs=chrome..
69i57j0i15i22i30l2j0i22i30l3j0i15i22i30j0i390i650
.8720j1j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8  

The polio vaccine is remarkably effective.
 https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/
polio-what-parents-need-to-know-now-202208102798  

After three doses of the standard four-dose series of the inactivated polio vaccine, efficacy stands at 99% to 100%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526039/  

https://www.google.com/search?q=Robert+Malone+mrna&oq=
Robert+Malone+mrna&aqs=chrome..69i57.
13483j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

·       Robert Malone Spreads Falsehoods About Vaccines

·       Robert Malone Misleads on COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness

SOURCE: Robert Malone, Substack, 12 Dec. 2021
CONSPIRACY:
mRNA vaccines force “your child’s body to make toxic spike proteins. These proteins often cause permanent damage in children’s critical organs”;
“there is no benefit for your children or your family to be vaccinating your children”

VERDICT
Incorrect: Robert Malone’s claims are inconsistent with the safety data of the mRNA vaccines and are also the opposite of what is known about COVID-19 in children and the benefits of vaccination for children and their community.
Heart problems like myocarditis are more common after COVID-19 itself than after COVID-19 vaccination.
Unsupported: There is no evidence that the spike protein generated by the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines causes permanent damage to organs and the immune system.

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/benefits-of-mrna-covid-19-vaccines-for-children-outweigh-the-risks-unlike-robert-malone-claim/

·       in Washington Times, by Robert Malone and Peter Navarro. “This article has inaccuracies throughout with a clear view to push an anti-vaccine agenda 

While Kennedy Jr. tried to claim he is not against vaccines, pointing out he is vaccinated for everything except Covid-19, ...... he has baselessly called Covid vaccines unsafe and falsely linked vaccines to all kinds of diseases and health issues that actually have nothing to do with vaccines. 

Kennedy: “Covid-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese,” 

RFK Jr. has made so many false and wild claims about any number of vital topics – most dangerously about childhood vaccines, ...... he mangles the facts and wildly misrepresents what actually happened.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/22/politics/
robert-f-kennedy-jr-vaccines/index.html

 2018: How Common Are Fabricated, False, Biased, and Irreproducible Findings?

Scientific misconduct and questionable research practices (QRP) occur at frequencies that, while non-negligible, are relatively small and therefore unlikely to have a major impact on the literature.

....

Random laboratory audits in cancer clinical trials, for example, found that only 0.28% contained “scientific improprieties”

  ... and those conducted among Food and Drug Administration clinical trials between 1977 and 1988 found problems sufficient to initiate “for cause” investigations only in 4% of cases

  ...Visual inspections of microbiology papers suggested that between 1% and 2% of papers had been manipulated in ways that suggested intentional fabrication

The new “science is in crisis” narrative is not only empirically unsupported, but also quite obviously counterproductive.

Instead of inspiring younger generations to do more and better science, it might foster in them cynicism and indifference.

 Instead of inviting greater respect for and investment in research, it risks discrediting the value of evidence and
feeding antiscientific agendas. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1708272114#:~:text=
Efforts%20to%20improve%20the%20reproducibility,
with%20research%20and%20publication%20practices.  

The word “birth” occurs nowhere on https://hillmd.substack.com/p/vaccine-injuries-and-deaths-are-causing 

Masks are effective but here's how a study from a supposedly “respected” group was misinterpreted to say they weren't

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/
masks-effective-study-respected-group-misinterpreted/story?id=97846561  

It seems everyone I know with full “booster” ……..  this may be the most scientific answer I’ve heard ! 

And a lot  of history from some African country ! With “I think Burkina Faisal” , “I cannot find the MMR study” , “my memory was not clear”.

Not very convincing! 

I can’t help but interpret “I did the research myself.” as
“I don’t have evidence other than my memory” . 

Inoculation with the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine did not impair children's overall immunity, the researchers found.
The results align with decades of research. Oct 31, 2019

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/10/
how-measles-wipes-out-the-bodys-immune-memory/#:~:text=Inoculation%20with%20the%20
MMR%20(measles,overall%20immunity%2C%20the%20
researchers%20found  

It baffles me that someone like you , who is otherwise very intelligent , can be so passionate about issues
( – a lot of which I have debunked with reputable evidence – )
can continue to ignore this evidence.

4 years ago I had no trust issues with the CDC/NIH, etc. I did not understand how they operate. I did know Fauci was the man who killed thousands during Aids, stole the AIDs HIV discovery, and had destroyed the reputation of Judith Mikovitz. But did not think much about it.

I assumed the CDC was a good organization, although I was suspect of the “Flu vaccine” push, as it was clearly not effective, but thought maybe it did something. I had no idea that vaccines were so suspect, I assumed that the autism stuff was wacko. I also assumed that vaccines were tested thoroughly and although I had doubts why infants were getting shots like Hepatitis, concerns were a long way away.

I had done some research on statins and the bad science. I had read Ben Goldacre’s books on Bad Pharma and Bad Science. I also had read up on the fraud in medicine and how 85% of studies were non reproducible. Also how much bad science there was in peer review, which had become a sham and the the hundreds or thousands of papers that had been withdrawn, yet were still highly cited, my thinking was more along the lines of “why are we wasting 80% of medical research money”? Many other medical scientists had published papers with the same approach. 

Especially with cancer research, how nearly all research in the past 40 years was done with corrupted cell lines. Shocking, but perhaps getting fixed. Chinese publications were endemic with fraud, no one seemed to care, until about 2018 when scientists started paying attention.

So I knew there were issues, but it seemed like medicine was getting its act together.

I also read parts of Dueselbergs book on HIV and Aids, I was not sure what to make of it, that HIV was not proven to cause Aids. Interesting, but a controversy I did not wade into.

I also went to an early Covid rally and thought the people claiming most vaccines were essentially a fraud, including Polio. Again, I disregarded them.

When I learned about Ivermectin early on, I bought a kilo, just before the government shut down importation. I watched the debate on Hydoxychloroquine, both sides, how long term use can potentially adversely affect the liver, but also how millions in Africa took it once a week (along with Ivermectin) to prevent many diseases, from Malaria to River blindness.

I had also read several books on genetic manipulation, from glowing works on the benefits to scary tomes on the Frankenstein nature of some of the research.

I have been a economic conservative since
I did the research myself. I may not be good at articulating it, but its obvious what a free market economy can do for a society.

As opposed to either “socialism” (progressivism), and “crony capitalism”, (fascism) where corporations use regulations to capture agencies and protect their monopolies.

We no longer have a free market in the west, the massive interference by government distorts the economy, making everyone poorer.

So when I heard the changes in scientific statements about Covid, from lab leak to “natural”, I started paying attention. And it was a hell of a rabbit hole.

So you know I have the ability to change my mind in light of skeptical science. I have turned a 180 on the medical industry ini the past 2+years. I have actually read and tried to understand actual experts who were brave for standing against orthodoxy, and being punished for simply speaking out.

And I started listening to crazies like Alex Jones, who makes mistakes, some wild claims, but brings the goods more than not. He talked about the World Economic forum, how it was founded by a student of Kissinger and the Trilaterals, and all this conspiracy stuff. Found most of it to be accurate. How did Jimmy Carter really become president, just 3 years after being a founding member of the Trilateral commission? A nobody. I started learning how. 

So sources that used to be authoritarian to me, no longer are. I know how scientific papers have been withdrawn for “political pressure”, how people like scientist Andrew Wakefield, where corrupted by Money and Fauci to do a 180 on the claim that Covid was “natural”, after some private calls. The scam was on early.

The problem is NIH and CDC are not reliable sources for anything. They are “captured”. Same with FDA. They are taking royalties from this vaccine and other technologies.

You have to read skeptical analysis of papers, not trust anything. You need to find out what the paper actually says, not the headlines, which can be two things. You need someone who knows how to analyze how the study was put together, as you can get any result you want in a paper/study by manipulating the cohorts ,etc.
 Ben Goldacre described this process well, a fabulous set of books I read in 2014.

Remember the FDA/CDC/HIH saying Ivermectin is “horse medicine”? 

There is a clear explanation why they took a safe, Nobel Prize winning medication, named by The Who as a miracle drug that have saved millions of lives and tried to destroy its reputation.

Now the FDA walked back, and say doctors can prescribe it for Covid.

The reason for this scan was clear. Ivermectin is near free. Its generic and one can buy a kilo for $100. However, if ANY drug, medicine or treatment can treat a disease, that means there can be no “emergency Use authorization” for any vaccine. Its the law. So they went all out to kill Ivermectin, going to the extent of buying all available stock in the US for Ivermectin adn Hydroxychoriquine and taking it off the market, making them scarce.

Now that they have their vaccine on the childhood schedule, they do not care.

However, they are still persecuting doctors who had the audacity to promote/prescribe Ivermectin. My own doctor told me he was threatened if he prescribed ivermectin. He would give some away to patients. That is why I found a source and bought it direct. What is worth a million dollars “on the street (at pharmacies) for just $100, plus air freight.

Its an insane world now. I trust nothing about medicine, until I read some skeptical analysis and can make my own mind up. Google, et all are NOT my friend, they are enemies. What is at the top of the search results on any such subject, I know has been scrubbed, and “forbidden views banished.

Especially not only Covid, but autism, vaccine issues, medications, finance, politics, etc. I guess you can say I took the red pill in the matrix. I offer you the same opportunity, take the red pill, look at all this with understanding that forces (bad actors) are blinding all of us of what is really going on.

Its disgusting how corrupt medicine is. Its bad enough that nearly every published paper cannot be reproduced (its fake/fraud/badly designed intentionally), now they are rubbing it in the nose of any intelligent person by claiming “its science”.

Its disgusting. Now they want to mandate the “new” vaccine, which is totally not effective against any new variant (it was designed to hit “omicron”, so millions more can die.

You do know that the Covid vaccine never worked (could not work) for another reason? It targeted an extinct variant! Its like taking last years Flu shot, except worse.  

In short, the Covid shot teaches your body to deal with the spike protein with antibodies, not T-cells. Antibodies are the “all hands on deck” last defense of the body’s immune system. Its very destructive. That is why an antibody approach is dangerous. T-cells are the surgeons, fighting infections constantly, to keep them under control. Only if an infection becomes endemic to the system are antibodies called in.  That is my layman’s understanding of what doctors discussed on podcasts. It is eye opening to start understanding how the immune system actually works.

There can never be a vaccine against a respiratory virus. It evades the “vaccine” too quickly. 

Did you know Corona virus was identified in 1960 as a genetically manipulatable virus? And the US government first bioweapons test was ini 1961 with Corona viruses?

They have been performing gain fo function for 60 years on it. Sars 1 was an earlier version of Sars 2. And guess what? The government KNEW Ivermectin wa effective against corona viruses, as Ivermectin was the treatment for SARS 1. Coincidence?

If you actually studied how the MRNA vaccine is supposed to work, you may open your mind to its dangers.

The inventor of the technology, whom the cabals have been trying to destroy, Robert Malone, early on posted the dangers of this technology. He has 17 patents on the MRNA technology and  is considered its inventor (before he opened his mouth, now it is said he “falsely claims to have been involved with the creation of MRNA technology)

Ask yourself another honest question. If the vaccine is “saving lives”, why are “all cause mortality” death rates rising?

This is according to both government data from countries will to publish data, Even better, insurance companies, who are taking on devastating losses from payouts.

https://hillmd.substack.com/p/
excess-mortality-up-84-in-millennials

Doctors in the Army discovered the side effects and when a whistle blower came forward, the army destroyed the DMED database to hide the evidence.

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/02/09/vaers-data-supports-dod-whistleblowers-despite-pentagon-data-glitch/

You may not find any of this in your google searches unless you go to like page 100. Maybe not even then. But I have spent a couple years listening to real people, people who’re among the most cited Cardiologists, ER doctors, etc in the country and the world. I take their evidence over the corrupt CDC, etc.

when properly fitted, they stop large particles, and bacteria. Masks have never been known to stop viruses. Fauci even said so in early 2021, before he backtracked. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-work.html

I challenge you to read for example RFK’s book, the real Anthony Fauci. Or Pierre Kory’s book, the War on Ivermectin. 

I have the Fauci book as ebook if you want it. RFK has over 1000 footnotes/citations for everything he claims. Kooks do not use citations.

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Anthony-Fauci-Democracy-Childrens-ebook/dp/B08XQYGC68

These vaccines have no place in society. They are the end of humanity, especially if they continue.

Birth rates are down, proportionally to vaccine uptake

https://hillmd.substack.com/p/vaccine-injuries-and-deaths-are-causing

And they did not test whether they prevented transmission. Here is a clip, under oath, of Pfizer VP’s in the EU, under examination, acknowledging they NEVER tested this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnxlxzxoZx0

CDC walking back Walensky’s claim:

https://nypost.com/2021/04/02/cdc-walks-back-claim-that-vaccinated-people-cant-carry-covid/

If you want an education on my perspective, watch this interview:

https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/
mccullough-vanden-bossche
-titans-of-the-covid-conversation/

Ignore the “fact checkers” first, but watch this interesting discussion. I learned to respect the HighWire episodes, as every episode, they give full references for all the science quoted on the show. If you want skip the first 7 minutes, which is a montage of young athletes dropping dead suddenly. Then the interviews start.
Peter McCullough is one of the highest cited physicians in the world, especially in his field, with I believe over 600 published citations. He is good at explaining things.

Death rates of healthy (worked class) people are also up, in direct proportion to vaccine rates. 

There has only been one long term vaccine followup, (Pharma does not do any), where they took a country,
 I think Burkina Faisal, which happened to have 50% take the MMR vaccine some years ago. It turned out to be a perfect random study, as there were equal amounts of villages and cities that did and did not take the MMR.

(I cannot find the MMR study, but here is a NIH publication discussing adverse events with MMR, including Asthma, and other diseases “vaccinated children showed higher odds of being diagnosed with pneumonia, otitis media, allergies and neurodevelopmental disorders.”  The side effects are downplayed, but the fact anything is discussed is interesting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC7268563/) 

What was revealed was astounding. Among the vaccinated, yes Measles, Mumps and Rubella rates were way down among the vaccinated. However, “all cause Mortality” was greatly reduced. I.e, taking the MMR may have reduced incidence of the 3 diseases, but damaged the recipients immune systems whereby they literally died younger. I think this was a 20 year followup, but my memory was not clear, I listed to the doctor talking about this on a podcast.

Google all you want. Did you play with the Excel? To me, that is incredibly damning, as a simple maths trick replicate both the efficacy rate claimed, but also, the exact curve of lowered efficacy over time, where “boosters” are required.

Have a laugh… here is Dana Carvey talking about Fauci’s boosters:

https://rumble.com/v2wz3av-american-actors-dana-carvey-and-david-wayne-spade-mocking-on-fauci-and-covi.html

One last anecdotal thought:

It seems everyone I know with full “booster” cover shots has had Covid multiple times. It seems non vaccinated people caught it one time and rarely, if ever, catch it a second time.

The second is irrevant. However if the vaccines “work”, why do people catch it so many times? 

Don’t say it prevents hospitalization. The media/government blasted us with “get vaccinated so you do not spread Covid.”. Once it was obvious, the Covid shots were useless, the claims changed to “prevents hospitalization”. You cannot fight a moving target easily.

Del Bigtree’s MO   --- from watching ”The Highwire with Del Bigtree”. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7648494/  

Bigtree’s vaccine conspiracy theories https://www.factcheck.org/person/del-bigtree/

 https://healthfeedback.org/authors/del-bigtree/

The messages Del Bigtree delivers are rife with misinformation, fabrications, and outright lies.

For instance, Bigtree claims that no placebo-controlled trials of vaccines have ever been conducted, which he says is proof vaccines are not safe.

However, this is false. The reason vaccines are not typically tested against a placebo is that it is unethical to knowingly expose a control group to the risks of a vaccine-preventable illness. No such trial would be ethically approved.

This is just one example of an artificial, manufactured controversy employed by anti-vaccination advocates to manipulate, influence, and persuade.

Anti-vaccine activists are dedicated to growing audiences on social media and figuring out how to maximize the total number of clicks, likes, and shares.

Rising rates of measles outbreaks in unvaccinated populations of developing countries shows that these messages are having an impact.

https://med.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Nursing/Book%3
A_Vaccine_Practice_for_Health_Professionals_(St-Amant_Lapum_Dubey_Beckermann_Huang_Weeks_Leslie_and_English)/06%3A_
Misinformation_Associated_with_Immunizations/6.06%3A_Case_Study-_Del_Bigtree  

Bigtree, one of debunked and struck-off Wakefield's biggest defenders, shows an incredible ability to ignore the truth … it shows an incredible ability to allow harm to continue despite what the science says.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/marketplace-
anti-vaccination-hidden-camera-washington-1.5429805  

Geert Bossche’s idea that the coronavirus will simply continue moving from person to person and that vaccines will only prevent severe disease  ---  is contradicted by the data that is accumulating.

But even if the COVID-19 vaccines were “leaky,” meaning they still allowed some vaccinated people to transmit the virus to others, there is evidence that the vaccine could still efficiently contain the spread of the disease. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/
covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/doomsday-prophecy-dr-geert-vanden-bossche  

Are you going to add McGill U to your list NASA, CDC, NIH, FDA….. ? 

Myocarditis is a rare inflammation of the heart muscle and surrounding tissue.

 It can cause scar tissue to form as part of the healing process.

 However, it doesn't always cause permanent damage to the heart.

Only in rare cases, if the inflammation is severe, myocarditis can scar the heart muscle.

https://www.myocarditisfoundation.org/
will-cardiomyopathy-follow-your-myocarditis/#:~:text=
Myocarditis%20is%20generally%20an%20
acute,part%20of%20the%20healing%20process.  

Jay Battacharya  senior fellow (courtesy) at the Hoover Institution. “Great Barrington Declaration,”  was denounced by top health officials and thousands of researchers and scientists around the world, who called the approach unethical and nearly impossible.

It was denounced by top health officials and thousands of researchers and scientists around the world, who called the approach unethical and nearly impossible.

Not practicable — not when

If we let this virus continue unchecked, the loss of life would be simply too great to contemplate.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/27/
facebook-posts/great-barrington-herd-immunity-
document-widely-dis/  

False post:- Pfizer vaccine and pregnancy:

The flawed calculation misrepresents data from a Pfizer database of adverse events recorded during the first two months of the vaccine rollout.

 “The main context that is missing is the tens of thousands of people who had received the vaccine during pregnancy but did not make a report,”
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-950821598874  

 Why are you letting yourself get fooled ? 

I still await a response to:-

·       each of -- All the studies showing the ineffectiveness of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine!

·       Peter McCullough 1x FLAWD REASONING and 3x INACCURACIEs 

·       Flu vaccine's effectiveness for children, 62.0% to 70.0%

·       Polio vaccine is remarkably effective.

·       Robert Malone Spreads Falsehoods About Vaccines

·       RFK Jr. false and wild claims

·       Trials  how common are Fabricated, False, Biased, and Irreproducible Findings:-

·       unvaccinated people are 29 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID

·       There is more Myocarditis risk from NOT getting the vaccine

Watch this video.

Peter McCullough is a cardiologist. He also happens to be the most cited (in peer reviewed papers) in the history of Cardiology.  

Geert Vanden Boscche is a brilliant immunologist. One of his experiences was in the ebola trials.

https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/mccullough-vanden-bossche-titans-of-the-covid-conversation/

It does not matter if you think Del Bigtree is a fraud, or Mccullough and Geert Vanden Boscche are “discredited”. They talk science in a way that is very educational. You can skip the intro video about all the athletes who have died in the past 8 months, I am sure you think it is coincidence, but Bigtree was a producer at ABC news and a documentary producer (award winning before he went over to the dark side of questioning the Pharma industry.

Its long. But highly valuable information. 

If you can listen or watch, you will have additional background on the virus.

And perhaps consider one point made by 
Geert Vanden Boscche, which is forget about whether the virus was created with gain of function research, that is the past. By vaccinating repeatedly billions of people with a “leaky” vaccine (it does not strop transmission),  we are forcing gain of function, in a experiment on all of humanity. 

Pfizer corrupted the data. They falsified data in the trials, then destroyed the control group.

They disallowed pregnant women from the trial, then started dosing them (maternity mortality rates are through the roof)

They knew myocarditis is a side effect of MRNA from years of prior research (Robert Malone, inventor of the technology

This is a military operation in part, in part by the WEF/WHO/NAID, etc. 

Money is a huge motivator

It really only takes a few hundred. People are sheep. 

The evidence is there, but you won’t see it on Rachel Maddow, who lied to your face saying get the shot, you won’t get the virus. 

Most everyone I know who has gotten to the booster stages, has had Covid multiple times. 

How many times does someone need to catch Covid before they figure out the shot does NOT WORK?

Myocarditis can never go away. Here is why, every cardiologist knows this. If an organ gets damaged, there is scar tissue. It never goes away. Ever get hurt when younger and get a scar? You still have it, right? They never go away.

When you have myocarditis, that at minimum creates a small scar in the heat tissue. Its permanent.

Now, for non athletes, who never exert themselves, you may never experience symptoms. That is why the main “suddenly died” are among athletes.

I can loan you the book Suddenly died. It was written by Edward Dowd, a data analyst from Blackrock capital. He has research the insurance end of this primarily, he is not an MD, but a data scientist.

Life insurance from publicly traded companies is public data. They are notifying shareholders that working class mortality rates are at multi sigma levels. Why?

Did you know that Deborah Birx was a Military officer? Not a random choice at all to drive the pandemic response. I think she was a colonel, its easy to check, at National intelligence. Why is an National intelligence officer running the response for Covid?

You need to be willing to look at the evidence to even see there is a red pill.

I can point you to doctors or books that point out the obvious.

Kennedy’s book is very well referenced and is clear on Fauci’s role in all of this, but despite the fact he gets royalties from this crap, I do not think he is the leader.

Did you know Moderna never had a product before Covid? Did you know Modena is a CIA financed operation? Probably not.

There is so much info available, you need to be willing to investigate only one small area of all this. If that has a different conclusion than you expected, maybe you will consider some of the other data is false.

I am sure the media told you:

Pick any small subset subject that you are confident on. It has to be small enough we can focus on only that claim and that if demonstrated to be “narrative, it will shake you r confidence in all the Covid claims.

I will try to pry open the rabbit hole on that one subject. Make it one that if I can show what is to you, compelling evidence on that one small medical area, that your world view might shift a bit on Pharma. It does not have to be one of these above, I just rattled off some common false narratives. If it is something I agree to focus on as a “false narrative”, lets try that subject.

But you cannot “naysay” every researcher, just because Big Pharma says so. I will use as much as possible people who were highly credible before Covid. If the Media or Pharma discredits them because they speak out, that does not mean they are wrong, it might mean they are over the target.

McCullough is an example, top of the class, until he strayed from the narrative, Jay Battacharya (https://en.wikipedia.org) was demonized for the “Great Barrington Declaration" at Stanford is another, etc.

SEARCH miscarriage  vaccinated while pregnant –covid

 Live Vaccines during Pregnancy. Overall risks appear to be small and have to be balanced against potential benefits for the mother-infant pair.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7157743/

Multiple studies have shown that people who have received flu shots during pregnancy have not had a higher risk of spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) https://www.cdc.gov/flu/highrisk/qa_vacpregnant.htm
#:~:text=on%20this%20topic.-,Can%20flu%20vaccination%20result%20in%20
miscarriage
%3F,of%20spontaneous%20abortion%20(miscarriage).

 HPV vaccination: the results of this study showed that vaccination during or around pregnancy does not increase the risk of miscarriage

 Women who inadvertently receive smallpox vaccine while pregnant may be reassured that current data support historic data, and do not suggest that they are at higher risk for pregnancy loss or giving birth to a child with a birth defect.
https://www.med.navy.mil/Portals/62/Documents/
NMFP/NMRC/NHRC/BIHR/
SmallpoxVax_Pregnancy
%20Info_26OCT2022.pdf?ver=H51o1GW-BRdFcwfH5-I7fw%3D%3D

 SEARCH miscarriage  vaccinated while pregnant covid

Scientific studies to date have shown no safety concerns for babies born to people who were vaccinated against COVID-19 during pregnancy.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/
pregnancy.html#:~:text=
Scientific%20studies%20to%20date%20have,against%20
COVID%2D19%20during%20pregnancy
.&text=Based%20on%20how%20these%20vaccines,
for%20long%2Dterm%20health%20effects.

Do you know what the miscarriage rate is with woman who are vaccinated while pregnant?

Its shocking.

Oliver, a “silent war” by generations of politicians to take “total control of the people” and impose a “one-world government”. The idea seemingly echoes a noted conspiracy theory document called Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars, supposedly a secret manual for world government found by chance in 1986. This has a long section on the role of the Rothschild banking dynasty, a common antisemitic trope.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/feb/08/
jewish-groups-urge-gb-news-to-
stop-indulging-conspiracy-theories

“Neil Oliver has lost it, totally lost it. Over the last two years or so the former TV historian has buried himself deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories”. “echoed some of the most poisonous anti-semitic mythologies  “ https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/
viewpoint/23594881.scotlands-national-academy-cancel-neil-oliver  

Oliver…, arguing that the fact that Pfizer’s Covid vaccine was not tested to assess whether it reduced transmission showed “the whole psy-ops, nudge unit campaign to shame people into taking the jabs and force them on the kids as well in the spirit of protecting others was a lie”.  -----  Oliver claimed the government’s cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO) in combating future pandemics amounted to letting “unelected, unaccountable non-entities living tax-free in Switzerland and protected by diplomatic immunity shut us in our homes”. For good measure, he also described net zero – cutting greenhouse gas emissions to nothing – as “a suicide note”. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/may/24/
conspiracy-theories-moggologues-and-
zombie-stats-all-in-a-weeks-work-for-gb-news

Subject: Neil Oliver

Do you ever watch his commentaries?

I found his vocal tempo hard, but this is a good overview of the world.

https://rumble.com/v3a6g02-neil-oliver-all-the-worlds-a-stage.html

Several large studies have not shown that saw palmetto reduces the size of the prostate or eases urinary symptoms.

Two large, high-quality studies funded by the
National Institutes of Health (NIH), each using a different preparation of saw palmetto, found it was no more effective than a placebo for  Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) symptoms.

https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/saw-palmetto 

Many of Mercola’s articles make unsubstantiated claims and clash with those of leading medical and public health organizations. https://quackwatch.org/11Ind/mercola/

For example, he opposes

 He has also given silly advice, such as minimizing exposure to electromagnetic fields by avoiding electric razors, microwaving of foods, watches with batteries [18].  

In 2005, the FDA ordered Mercola and his Optimal Wellness Center to stop making illegal claims for products sold through his Web site [26].

The claims to which the FDA objected involved three products:

·       Living Fuel Rx, claimed to offer an “exceptional countermeasure” against cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, etc.

·       Tropical Traditions Virgin Coconut Oil, claimed to reduce the risk of heart disease and has beneficial effects against Crohn’s disease, irritable bowel syndrome, and many infectious agents

·       Chlorella, claimed to fight cancer and normalize blood pressure.

 In 2006, the FDA sent Mercola and his center a second warning that was based on product labels collected during an inspection at his facility and on claims made on the Optimum Wellness Center Web site [27].

This time the claims to which the FDA objected involve four products:

1. 1.    Vibrant Health Research Chlorella XP, claimed to “help to virtually eliminate your risk of developing cancer in the future.”

2. 2.    Fresh Shores Extra Virgin Coconut Oil, claimed to reduce the risk of heart disease, cancer, and degenerative diseases.

3. 3.    Momentum Health Products Vitamin K2, possibly useful in treating certain kinds of cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

4. 4.    Momentum Health Products Cardio Essentials Nattokinase NSK-SD, claimed to be “a much safer and effective option than aspirin and other pharmaceutical agents to treating heart disease.”

 The warning letters explained that the use of such claims in the marketing of these products

violates the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act 

In 2011, the FDA ordered Mercola to stop making claims for thermography….. to diagnose or screen for:

Breast cancer, Inflammation, Cancer , inflammatory processes, neurological and vascular dysfunction, musculoskeletal injury, Arthritis, Immune Dysfunction, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue, Irritable bowel syndrome, diverticulitis, Crohn’s, bursitis, herniated discs, ligament or muscle tear, lupus, nerve problems, whiplash, stroke . 

In 2016, Mercola, Mercola.com, LLC and Mercola.com Health Resources, settled a FTC complaint by agreeing to stop selling tanning beds and to pay to $5,334,067.

The defendants were charged with falsely claiming that their indoor tanning devices would enable consumers to slash their risk of cancer. 

In August 2020, the Center for Science in the Public Interest and other nonprofit legal groups urged the FDA and FTC to stop Mercola from marketing at least 23 products with false claims that they can prevent or treat the COVID.

It also offers “medical” advice, including the extraordinarily dangerous and unsubstantiated recommendation that individuals actually try to contract COVID-19 after using the supplements it sells to ameliorate the symptoms. 

In February 2021, the FDA ordered Mercola to stop suggesting on his website that “Liposomal Vitamin C,” “Liposomal Vitamin D3,” and “Quercetin and Pterostilbene Advanced” sold through his site are effective in preventing or treating COVID . 

In March 2021, the Center for Countering Digital Hate placed Mercola first on its list of

“The Disinformation Dozen”

who “do not have relevant medical expertise and have their own pockets to line,

who are abusing social media platforms to misrepresent the threat of Covid and spread misinformation about the safety of vaccines.” 

Dr. Mercola has been deplatformed, threatened and his web site threatened for talking about healthy alternatives to drugs.

If not for Mercola, most vitamins and herbs would have been banned by the FDA, starting in the 70’s. Mercola was the leader of the fight against the FDA, who, at Pharma’s beckoning, wanted to prohibit most herbs, and restrict vitamins and the “allowed” doses.

It was an incredible power play by Pharma that thankfully, they lost, but keep trying. Its been a tireless fight by Many others besides Mercola now, but we need to credit him for being able to purchase herbs like Saw Palmetto for Prostate (that was one of the early targets of the FDA).

So you can hate the new Mercola, but he has been in this field for a long time. His entire web site had to be taken off the web (he will post for 24 hours, then articles are removed) because of threats, etc. (a legal threat is a threat, these are not “I will kill you” threats, but “I will destroy your finances” kinds of threats.)

Anyway, just to give this summary some credibility… Mercola is a natural foods/supplement “good guy”

https://thelibertydaily.com/ivermectin-worked-new-peer-reviewed-study-proves-it/

Read the Kennedy book (Or Pierre Kory’s new book, “The War Against Ivermectin” to understand why Big Pharma, Fauci etc, had to destroy Ivermectin so they could release the Covid shots)

Ivermectin is truly a wonder drug. Nearly free in most of the world, it has saved millions of lives and not only works against parasites, but many viruses.

Some research indicates Ivermectin helps your body fight cancers.

I have an anecdote on Ivermectin. I have had a “mole” growing on my thigh for years and years. Slow growing, so I never seriously worried about it. But it had gotten fairly large, about an inch across.

When I started taking Ivermectin, in 2 weeks it started looking different. In a month, it fell off. In another month you can not tell I ever had this infection at all. To this day, it is gone.

Pretty amazing.

The story behind it is amazing. It is produced by bacteria and discovered on a golf course in Japan by a researcher sampling odd places for new bacterial medicines. Purely accidental discovery.

FLUORIDE

 While the studies the Harvard team reviewed
(Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity)
IQs among schoolchildren,
the data is not applicable here because it came from foreign (Chinese) sources where
fluoride levels are multiple times higher than they are in American tap water.
Studies didn't screen for other toxins.

Data on fluoride, IQ not applicable in U.S. ( IQ is a propaganda article written by the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc)

US fluoridation does NOT reduce IQ - Snopes
the claim that there are scientific studies that support the notion that water fluoridation can cause developmental problems in children that result in lower IQs is false.
No studies that actually investigate that specific question have reached that conclusion.

=

 Several social media posts question the safety and effectiveness of a mammogram. We found various posts which state that mammograms are harmful and ineffective.
We fact-checked and found this claim to be Mostly False.

Do your own research.
Relying on fact checkers is for the uneducated.
You are better than that. 

Most of what Mercola claims, I support. Not all, but there is probably no one I can 100% support, I question everything after I have had time to contemplate and if motivated, research

I read all your scientific theory and would not dream of trying to provide any scientific details myself. But I googled some of it.

I like to think I know what I don’t know and thus rely on experts most of the time to make my conclusions.

Climate is warming from man-made change.

I'd be very silly not to believe 99% of scientists.

Seven Answers to Climate Contrarian Nonsense

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/seven-answers-to-climate-contrarian-nonsense/

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

CO2  SEARCH: climate studies      does a larger amount of co2 get progressively less effective ?

As CO2 concentrations increase, the absorption at the centre of the strong band is already so intense that it plays little role in causing additional warming.

However, more energy is absorbed in the weaker bands and in the wings of the strong band, causing the surface and lower atmosphere to warm further.
 https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/
climate-change-evidence-causes/question-8/#:~:text=As%20the%20atmospheric%20concentrations
%20of,surface%20temperature%20will%20still%20rise.

SEARCH: do climate models include water/clouds

There is a NOAA article “Clouds are not well represented” in climate models

and

2021: The authors note that the newest generation of global climate models –

the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) – 49 different modelling groups   --- predicts faster future warming than its predecessors. This is largely because the new models simulate a smaller cooling effect from clouds. https://www.carbonbrief.org/cooling-effect-of-clouds-underestimated-by-climate-models-says-new-study/

So, sure, it appears that the CLOUD EFFECT is not completely represented in these models, --  but that wouldn’t lead me to conclude that the consensus prediction from all these models, of the earth’s warming trajectory, is wrong.

And certainly there is plenty scientific evidence laid out in the links above ( not “minimal evidence” nor “not science”)

 sun is a “constant”  SEARCH: do climate models say the sun is a constant ?

 Projected warming due to increasing greenhouse gas levels in the coming decades will overpower even a very strong Grand Solar Minimum.

Rising amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide have postponed the next Milankovitch-driven ice age by at least tens of thousands of years. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-incoming-sunlight

 The BOOK ( RESPONDING to the RIGHT) on:

 Michael Shellinberger

These books are insidious because they appear credible and insist they accept the consensus among climate scientists. But a closer look reveals that in order to support their claim, they have to twist the facts in ways that can easily fool non-experts. 

Shellenberger said the fires on the West Coast happened because there are

"more people and more electrical wires that they've failed to maintain because we've focused on other things like building renewables"

……

Carlson and Shellenberger were just lying. 

Marc Morano   in Green Fraud asks "what criteria" will be used to decide when enough is enough.

The criteria are actually laid out quite explicitly:

We are trying to

--- power the U.S. with 100 percent renewable energy and

--- make sure that everyone in the country is paid a living wage and has a high standard of living'

When the country is powered by renewables and its people are taken care of, the need for the GND ceases.

Morano’s Climate fake news Morano’s only evidence to dispute the expert consensus on human-caused global warming is to quote an economist who agrees the consensus is 90–100%, and that the experts are correct that humans are responsible for global warming.

I was hoping you had SOME kind of rebuttal to the

“costs of not committing to major climate spending will be even more expensive”

So many false assumptions, I will try to make some responses.

The problem with progressives is they lie, obfuscate and hide. A simple example is the acclaimed Michael Mann, climatologist from Norwich of all places. Caught with his hand in the cookie jar when his emails were hacked and we discovered all his “science’ was falsified data. So any claims must be taken skeptically, when the promoters of these theories have been caught, in more than one event, lying and falsifying data. Only a fool trusts a lier to stop lying.

I need to assume you want an “honest” debate where science and objective analysis is worth discussion. 

The entire “green new deal” is a scam is my first claim. So my job is to convince you of that, or just point out a few flaws and inconsistencies.

I doubt I can convince you that the entire CO2 premise is a fraud. But if you remember your maths, and logarithmic curves, you can understand why a small amount of CO2 can have a large effect on capturing/remitting heat, but a larger amount is pregoressivly less effective, until you are near zero. It explains why earth had over 3,000 ppm of CO2 in the past, without ‘melting”.

 Above about 300-400PPM there is near zero impact of adding more CO2. If you look at earths history, we are at a global low in terms of atmospheric CO2.

And the “climate models” (which are not science, just speculations) both assume 400PPM is “optimal” and dangerous to go above. As it turns out C02 is helpful for crops, more CO2, more crops, more People can be fed. So an increase in C02, even if “bad” has to be measured in the context of what benefits go along with it. One has to assume none to justify spending trillions on remediation efforts.

 To me science means you have a theory, that can make a prediction. The theory must be provably false. Science attempts to prove any theory false. As long as it is not proven false, it is a valid theory. But it must be “testable”. The first evidence “global warming” is not science, is you cannot prove it false. If eons ago, with far more CO2, earth could enjoy today’s overall climate, it is up to the claimants to prove why that was different, not butter it over. If I claim “god exists” as a scientific theory, I must be able to prove god does not exist, for this to be a scientific theory. 

 So understand that while I can prove “global warming” is not science, and I also believe it is a scam, the claims are clearly a problem. Especially since we have a sun, and we have H₂0 in the atmosphere, which is a far bigger influencer in the climate than C02, which is at 400 parts per million.

 Climate fear mongers need to demonstrate that the sun is a “constant”, which is provably false. They also need to account for water/clouds, which their computer models do not account for. 

 So it is up to the climatistas to demonstrate/prove that H₂0, a far stronger “green house gas” than CO2, and which the atmosphere has quadrillions of tons, has no impact on climate?

 Extraordinary claims require solid evidence. There is minimal or zero evidence, let alone proof.

 In order for climate change to be even considered, the warming of the 30’s has to be “adjusted” out of the temperature records. The medieval warming has to be ignored. The fossil records have to be distorted. Rather than just say the climate varies a lot.

 We are in a glacial interstitial. Meaning an ice age, where the ice is temporarily melted.

 The real question to ask whenever someone wants money to “fix” something, is Who gains? Who loses? Follow the money. Its much simpler that way.

 https://factualnews.org/politics/
We_Don%27t_Need_a_Green_New_Deal.htm

I’m sorry but up till now I have picked all the arguments you’ve made and replied with proper rebuttals and always with links corroborating them. 

But I’m not getting that from you ! And your replies are turning more into a Rant ! Let’s stick to facts? 

Where are the responses ( with corroboration) to :-

·       Contrarian Nonsense to  --- Climate is warming from man-made change.

·       CO2: However, more energy is absorbed in the weaker bands and in the wings of the strong band, causing the surface and lower atmosphere to warm further.

·       2021: The authors note that the newest generation of global climate models – the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) – 49 different modeling groups

·       And certainly there is plenty scientific evidence laid out in the links above ( not “minimal evidence” nor “not science”)

·       CLOUD EFFECT ….  but that wouldn’t lead me to conclude that the consensus prediction from all these models, of the earth’s warming trajectory, is wrong. ( more so now that I’ve debunked the CO2 “theory”).

·       Projected warming due to increasing greenhouse gas levels in the coming decades will overpower even a very strong Grand Solar Minimum.

·       Rising amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide have postponed the next Milankovitch-driven ice age by at least tens of thousands of years.  

I can’t believe I now have to provide evidence that the world is in fact warming let alone that its man-made !

And that the argument against ANY warming is based on data from a NY Tower ! 

Roy Spencer believes in the pseudoscience of intelligent design ( Wikipedia)

Dr. Spencer suggests that global warming is mostly due to natural internal variability, and that the climate system is quite insensitive to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Spencer's model is too simple, excluding important factors like ocean dynamics and treats cloud feedbacks as forcings.

"It's cooling"

                   All the indicators show that global warming is still happening.

"It's a natural cycle"        

                   No known natural forcing fits the fingerprints of observed warming except anthropogenic greenhouse gases.

"IPCC is alarmist"   

                   Numerous papers have documented how IPCC predictions are more likely to underestimate the climate response.

"Ocean acidification isn't serious"

Ocean acidification threatens entire marine food chains.

https://skepticalscience.com/Roy_Spencer_arg.htm 

Roy Spencer's latest deceit and deception https://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/02/roy-spencers-latest-deceit-and-deception.html  

This person, Roy Spencer, has theories that are TOO SIMPLE and plain wrong. But all dressed up in scientific terminology that appear to be making the case but in fact are misleading or wrong. 

That boils it down to just about every argument(opinion) I’m hearing !

Sources that have been debunked for their simplicity, misleading or plain wrong. 

All this pseudo-science about “black body radiation increasing its diameter. CO2 spectral absorption”:

when, my rebut shows clear scientific evidence that the more CO2  --- the warmer it gets. There is no leveling off. I hope u followed the link ? 

Thinking that Spencer knows more than 100’s of doctorate scientists who have studied this for years  ? 

But it goes beyond that. When I’m offered a webpage with outlandish predictions ( that of course didn’t come true) and use that as an argument to prove Climate Models are the same (and will not work)  ! That’s politics !

Denying Global Warming so that politicians can get more funding from the Corporations that are solely responsible for Republican’s presence in Congress ( all with the money spent misinforming the ignorant masses to get them, through Wedge Issues, to vote against their own interest ! ) - IT’S DANGEROUS REPUBLICAN POLITICS .

With total disregard for the damaged world they will leave their children !  

I suggest sleeping on it. Re-read the rebuttals and the links corroborating them. Take a week. 

You’re a backgammon player.

What is the probability that those 100’s of top scientists are ALL using wrongly adjusted data? Or are in concert deliberately falsifying data? And that only one person knows the right answer ?

There is 'No doubt left' about scientific consensus on global warming, say experts.

The scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming is likely to have passed 99% https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99  

Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s climate.

This is based on over a century of scientific evidence forming the structural backbone of today's civilization.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/  

Are you adding NASA to the list ( CDC, NIH ……… ) ?  

I have rebutted most of the , (no more than), opinions ( and all of the dubious theories ) that have been presented --- with reputable sources. Reputable sources that I hear being called corrupt or ignorant – but no proof of THAT is offered. Just more opinions.

I really don’ have the time it would take to refute these silly claims. I will try, but it is time consuming and I have a job.  ;-)

I included some easier to find sourcing. People like Dr. Roy Spenser have blogs, but do not try to refute point by point.

https://www.drroyspencer.com

He made a great point in a post a couple weeks ago. Maybe you saw once the math question, where you can prove 1+1 = 3? I can show you if you never saw it. The trick was, once you enter a division by zero, even using variables, you can get any answer you want.

Same thing with climate modeling. Once you ignore the laws of physics, like the “conservation of energy", you can model any climate you want.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2023/08/sitys-climate-models-do-not-conserve-mass-or-energy/

Pretty basic, right?

I think Spenser was the scientist who created the XL I referenced a couple posts back, where he added cloud cover to an Excel to resolve climate models. (I am starting to remember, the problem is the “forcing” is all wrong in climate modeling, so he adapted a simple excel, adding cloud cover and normalized the equations. In physics, the lack of understanding of how to calculate quantum effects is called “renormalization”. Its short for "we have no idea what happens in reality, but by cancelling out the divisions by zero in an arbitrary, we can make these equations work out”. Every physicists knows renormalizations is nonsense, but they do it anyway, or solving quantum equations is literally impossible. And over time, renormalization has been accepted as “thats the way it is” and younger physicists think nothing of it. But its still cheating, because no one to this day understands quantum mechanics.

I think QED is slightly more complex than climate modeling. But the same principal is used, we do not know how to model, so lets make all kinds of assumptions, ignore physics, ignore clouds, ignore C02 natural cycles, ignore the sun, volcanoes, and all that messy stuff, lets make a “simplified” model to prove what we already know. The climate is about to go out of control.

Which means, if you think about it, if we were paying climatologists “grants” to prove the opposite with their models, they could do so, easily. That is because modeling is not science. Its out of control excel spreadsheets!

And Dr. Spenser proclaims the climate is warming! (Which I don’t even go that far)

This is a power summary of where we stand, in his PhD view:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

The Intro paragraph in particular:

….. This website describes evidence from my group’s government-funded research that suggests global warming is mostly natural, and that the climate system is quite insensitive to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions and aerosol pollution.

Believe it or not, very little research has ever been funded to search for natural mechanisms of warming…it has simply been assumed that global warming is manmade. This assumption is rather easy for scientists since we do not have enough accurate global data for a long enough period of time to see whether there are natural warming mechanisms at work.

He has a page of citations on climate in peer reviewed papers he has written or co written. More than 30. Give him some credibility. He is smarter than either of us.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/about/

Here is something he wrote as a primer on “global warming” from a PhD perspective, written in straightforward, understandable English. You can disagree with some of his points, but they are evidentiary based, rooted in “mechanics” and (in my opinion) objectively written as a scientist should write, to educate the reader.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-101/

His bottom line point, which is hard to refute:

I am not against modeling;
models are necessary to understand complex processes in the climate system. But, while the models are useful and necessary tools for studying climate change, I do not think they can yet be relied upon for major changes in energy policy.

Lets starve all the poor around the world, so we can reduce global population, so use Americans can use the Chinese and African/Indian populations as economic slaves, and live in our solas powered cars and houses. Very practical. Who suffers from our policies? Congolese peasants who manually dig up coal? Slave labor Uighers digging up Lithium and other metals?

Certainly the needs of the few, outweigh the needs of the many.

The main problem is normal sources are fraudulent. And you have me at a disadvantage, I remember a bit, but have not been saving sources for discussion. Pro arguments are boosted by search engines, anti arguments heavily suppressed. So I cannot easily, with out major effort post source data. Its hard. 

But I have common sense. Claiming something as incredible as “man is warming the earth and we can prove it” is like saying “I proved Moses parted the Red Sea” 

The emperor has no clothes. You think he is wearing a suit that only you cannot see. It took a little boy to expose the fraud then.

Now we have respected physicists, who have studied this, and found it wanting. The result is they are defunded, hounded, called names and tenure removed. The only people left are the :
climate terrorists”.

So I do not need to accept the premise, as it makes no scientific sense, even if the laughable 99% believe it (which is a cherry picked fraudulent number, of course, discredited immediately. However, google disappeared the refutations, by freezing our their blogs. Convenient….)

The left has no problem making up facts, then calling anyone who disagrees a “denier” or worse.

Even when leftists get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, it is ignored.

Science by its nature is skeptical. If you cannot show skeptical arguments balanced against your pro arguments, you have nothing to say. So quoting “google” to justify your beliefs is not adequate to make an argument. You need to show me the other side of your argument. And an honest discussion / evaluation on the theory, attempting to prove it wrong, in an attempt to justify the theory.

Global warming was a ‘proclamation”, not a theory. That is not science.

SOURCE: https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/31/1067444/
we-have-enough-materials-
to-power-world-with-renewables/

Yes, we have enough materials to power the world with renewable energy  

The core issue here for a green energy future is not whether there are enough elements in the earth’s crust to meet demand; there are.

However, as the World Bank cautions, the materials implications of a “clean tech” future creates “a new suite of challenges for the sustainable development of minerals and resources.”[17]

Some minerals are difficult to obtain for technical reasons inherent in the geophysics.

It is in the underlying physics of extraction and physical chemistry of refinement that we find the realities of unsustainable green energy at the scales that many propose.

https://manhattan.institute/article/
mines-minerals-and-green-energy-a-reality-check  

Researchers have found that recycling electric vehicle batteries can reduce the need for new mining by 25–55% by 2040. 

the current discoveries by the MIT team highlight the fact that the precuring capacity of concrete to sequester carbon dioxide has been largely underestimated and underutilized. 

"Our new discovery could further be combined with other recent innovations in the development of lower carbon footprint concrete admixtures to provide much greener, and even carbon-negative construction materials for the built environment, turning concrete from being a problem to a part of a solution," Masic says. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases
/2023/03/230328145545.htm  

100% renewable energy could save Americans billions – study. Households could save as much as $321bn in energy costs, the report finds, or up to $2,500 a household a year https://www.theguardian.com/
environment/2020/oct/22/us-renewable-energy-costs-savings-study-report 

There is no doubt that acquiring the necessary metals is a huge challenge and its not totally clear what the path is to that goal.

But what history has taught us is that technical innovation usually finds a way when the necessity is great.

Other more common elements might replace some of these metals, recycling might become more doable, processes get improved…. 

I look forward to the responses to Global Warming issues as requested above. The only argument left is the CLOUD EFFECT uncertainty which alone is not enough to discredited all the hundreds of scientist who have acknowledged and tried to include  this uncertainty in their models.  

====================

PS DETAILS:

1.

5. Conclusion https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aca4ea

The systems of mineral cycle, energy transition, and climate change are strongly interlinked.

This study aimed to explore such a nexus with three-fold efforts:

1.    Firstly, a novel MEC nexus framework was proposed with the introduction of various quantitative approaches such as IAMs and the stock-driven model.

2.    Secondly, for the holistic analysis of critical mineral constraints in achieving global 1.5 °C targets, six state-of-the-art IAM models were applied to obtain future development of wind and solar power and its corresponding annual requirement of six types of minerals (i.e. Nd, Dy, Cd, Te, Se, In).

3.    Thirdly, different settings of factors in material system, and technology energy were combined under different SSPs for such analysis.

We find more stringent climate targets and more sustainable SSP call for higher mineral demand which are within the physical mineral storage luckily.

However,

may derail humanity from a more sustainable trajectory towards 1.5 °C target.  

This study proposes to incorporate the mineral sector to IAM models, taking the availability of mineral to energy transition and the offset effect to carbon emissions into account, as well as factors like

2.

Yes, we have enough materials to power the world with renewable energy

Production of dysprosium and neodymium, rare-earth metals used in the magnets in wind turbines, will need to quadruple over the next several decades.

Solar-grade polysilicon will be another hot commodity, with the global market predicted to grow by 150% between now and 2050.  

But for every scenario the team examined, the materials needed to keep the world under 1.5 °C of warming account for “only a fraction” of the world’s geologic reserves, . 

The researchers found that emissions impacts from mining and processing these crucial materials could reach a total of up to 29 gigatons of carbon dioxide between now and 2050. Most of those emissions are attributed to polysilicon, steel, and cement. 

The total emissions from mining and processing those materials are significant, but over the next 30 years they add up to less than a year’s worth of global emissions from fossil fuels.

That up-front emissions cost will be more than offset by savings from clean energy technologies replacing fossil fuels, Wang says.

Progress on cutting emissions from heavy industry, like steel(7-11%) and cement(8%), could also help reduce the climate impact of setting up renewable energy infrastructure. 

This study only focused on technologies that generate electricity.

It didn’t include all the materials that would be needed to store and use that electricity, like the batteries in electric vehicles or grid storage.  

Demand for battery materials is expected to explode between now and 2050. Annual production of graphite, lithium, and cobalt will all need to be ramped up by more than 450% from 2018 levels to meet expected demand for electric cars and grid storage, according to a 2020 study from the World Bank. 

OK, no global warming, but that is the justification for this total nonsense.

 There is no debating this, its arguing about religion. You cannot change the minds of fanatics.

 On Aug 28, 2023, you wrote:

 We are trying to

--- power the U.S. with 100 percent renewable energy

 Physically impossible. There is not enough cobalt, neodymium and other rare earth metals to achieve just California, let alone “the world”

Or maybe Elon Musk will capture an asteroid and make all the solar panels from it.

 Fossil fuels are compact energy, low in pollution, now that we know how to get them out cleanly and destroy less land and the environment than any other fuel, outside of nuclear.

Micro nuclear plants hold better promise, but will never be allowed, they are too efficient. If the “green new deal” talked about mass producing micronuclear power plants, I might believe they did not have an agenda.

 All this goal does is enslave more children slaves, in places like Africa and Ughurs in China, toxic pollution around the world, while dilettantes in the US and Western Europe enjoy the benefits and sump the poisons on the children of poorer countries.

 Makes everything more expensive, so poor people suffer. Like our “ethanol” subsidies. All it accomplishes is causing more poverty in South America, where Maize is their main crop. But who cares about them?

 If they were serious, they would be pushing for more nuclear and more fossil fuels being developed in the USA (and the west), where environmental concerns are better met.

They want to displace their toxic waste to Africa and China. Very noble. 

 I blow my nose at the “green new deal”, very 1984 of them.

 --- make sure that everyone in the country is paid a living wage and has a high standard of living’

 LOL

Socialism never works. Lets just do it “right” next time.

 The minimum wage is zero. That is what happens when businesses cannot afford to pay government mandated wages, employment goes down among minorities, jobs are mechanized, and more jobs are part time. And the low skilled are totally left behind.

While the geniuses behind this drink their $8 cappuccinos.

 If you believe this bunk I can legitimately describe you as a socialist or fascist (corporate control of government). ISorry, if I insult, but I have to call out nonsense. 

Think it through.

 When the country is powered by renewables and its people are taken care of, the need for the GND ceases.

 What a gas. Its absurd on its face.

 How do we recycle solar panels and wind turbines?

 How do we get China to stop making coal plants? 

 This is an absurd argument by people living in clouds, ignoring the impact of their goals on all of humanity.

These are the same people who want to reduce the worlds population by 70 to 90% so they can live happy.

 Enslave the masses, so the privileged can be happy. Please, this guy and those like him, are total idiots.

 We have major problems in the world, and getting government to try to “fix” them will only make it worse. As usual.

 Why do you think we are about to start a war in Niger? That’s the green new deal in action, in my opinion.

 You will own nothing, and be happy.