Aren't people peculiar? Today in the supermarket, I saw a young woman not only wearing a mask, but goggles as well. I managed to get to the end of the aisle before I cracked up laughing. But it's no laughing matter. Living in such fear must be horrendous.
At least she was a tiny bit more rational than the masses. If you believe the virus is deadly, and you're actually trying to protect yourself, you should absolutely wear goggles.
But, if she didn't also have a respirator with at least N99's and a pre-filter, and a face shield, and a hood, and rubber gloves, and a raincoat, and rubber boots, and duct taped them all at the edges, (similar to how you can see Africans geared up when dealing with Ebola victims), and then took a decontamination shower before disrobing, then she was just fooling herself slightly less then the average mind-control victim.
Oh, I see now. It is the usual manipulative leftist trick of elevating oneself to the pinnacle of ersatz virtue by pretending to champion some victim group in order to perpetrate moral blackmail, just like the religious hypocrites of old who would feverishly scour their bibles to rake all the blessings to themselves and shovel all the curses on their neighbors.
Well, I'm glad you survived, but my criticism stands. There is an absolute moral requirement to observe strict hygiene in the immediate vicinity of immune-compromised individuals who are genuinely at risk of death from any infection, but this does not apply to covid masking which is purely cosmetic at best, and downright ridiculous when the masks are worn in personal vehicles or far from any other human being.
I take then you are of the opinion that masks prevent the transmission of viruses?
Having compared the number of viral particles that the very best of masks are able to filter (900,000), against the number of viral particles in an average infected person's sneeze (1,000,000), against the number of viral particles needed for a new infection to take hold (5000), I do not. Give reason a chance.
So in 100 years of experiments nobody has been able to demonstrate the theory of 'contagion' by natural means (coughs, sneezes , physical proximity etc). The most famous was the Rosenau experiments during the Spanish Flu. Test subjects were exposed to the sick in every way possible.... snot rubbed in their eyes, snot sprayed into their mouths, coughs directly into their faces, breathing in while the sick patient breathed out (face to face) ... and yet none of the test subjects got sick.
Contagion by natural means has never been scientifically demonstrated. Anyone who says otherwise is indulging in a superstition (and a very profitable one too).
Ex virologist Dr Stefan Lanka has repeated the standard virology protocols used to prove the existence of SARS COV2. He was able to produce the required proof of SARS COV2 ,namely the cytopathic effect in a cell culture (CPE) and assembly of the genome using the standard computer software. What made his experiments significant is that at no point did he add a sample from a sick person. He only added a sample of pure yeast.
Turns out the experiments performed by virologists to 'prove' viruses exist will ALWAYS be able to provide the proof they are looking for. He has since 'found' many other common viruses using the same technique.
Conclusion: the whole thing is a fraud. Virology is not a science, because it does not use proper controls. When you perform the controls (as he did) you get the same results. Therefore it's all bollocks, which disguises itself behind fancy terms and pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo designed to make it a 'dark art' that most people don't understand.
So the theory of contagion has been disproved for over a century and virology is not a bona fide science. Let's keep going....
If you look at the official data for all the so called 'infectious diseases' that were 'cured' by vaccines (measles, whooping cough etc) you will find the introduction of vaccines played no role in their decline. They were all 90-99% eradicated before vaccine was even introduced. What caused the decline was better drinking water, proper sanitation, better quality food, less toxic factory pollution etc.
Vaccines don't work because 'viruses' are not contagious pathogenic particles (there is no evidence for viral contagion). Viruses are just the breakdown products of cells. When you're sick you are in a state of breakdown (like a dilapidated house falling apart) and so you have a higher 'viral load'. Fevers and colds are just detox programs performed by your body to rid itself of a toxic overload (not unlike a house spring clean). The vaccinated are not 'catching covid', they are trying to purge the poisons in the vaccine by triggering detox mechanisms (fever, diarrhoea, mucous secretion etc). That's all a flu is. Rashes and poxes are also a detox process (comparable to sweating), which is why the vaccinated often exhibit those too.
So the people saying the covid vaccine "doesn't stop transmission of the virus" or "is only beneficial for the elderly with weak immune systems" are just as deluded as the triple mask and goggle wearers.
It's ALL a fraud from top to bottom. Mortality rates for 2020 were normal overall (apart from a few localised spikes due to Midazolam, ventilators, DNR's lockdowns etc). There was no pandemic. There is no virus. Contagion is not a thing. It's all a mental construct.
The monsters in our heads are the hardest ones to slay. In that sense 'the virus' is more real than real... and highly contagious now that everyone is all on social media and glued to their smartphones.
BONUS FACT: the modelling for contagion that was used to justify lockdowns came from an experiment conducted in 2018 by the BBC's Hannah Fry (they made a documentary about it) using people's smartphones and a special app (essentially track and trace).
Contagion between people has never been proven and so it cannot be modelled. That's why they used smartphones instead. The whole 'pandemic' narrative was based on smartphone apps, not biology. Covid is an entirely digital construct. Even as the hospitals lay half empty and nobody could SEE any evidence of a health crisis around them, they obediently stayed locked indoors when their smartphones or the TV told them to self isolate.
Even most 'covid skeptics' still believe in the 'the virus', despite having zero evidence to support such a concept. They use the ridiculous behaviour of people wandering about the supermarket wearing snorkels and raincoats to make their own irrational and unscientific position feel somehow more valid, and less absurd.
Another example is the belief that everyone has a right to freedom over their own body, hence the Pro Choice movement, but simultaneously forcing all to be vaccinated.
Believing everyone has the right to freedom over their own body, yet murdering someone in the womb with completely separate DNA just because they cannot speak for themselves yet. Or, desperately wanting freedom yet voting for "slavery." A constitutional representative Republic that is so dumbed down by public institutions and media that it votes for democracy that ultimately devolves into totalitarianism. So many contradictions in today's world.
Spouting contradictory beliefs & thinking both are true seem symptomatic of a hive mind of people w/ no independent / critical / rational thought, common sense, morality, etc.
Most people like to think what other people think, believe what other people believe, wear what they wear, eat what they eat and so on. Independent thought can make life hard. Once a person has agreed to follow the mainstream narrative on anything it is easier to just stick with it and not ask questions. Even if, somewhere deep inside them, they know it's rubbish. Just put that knowledge in a box and hide it so that nobody knows. Life is easier if you're "one of the crowd". (At least, it seems that way to me - standing on the outside looking in. I have found all my life I have to just do the opposite, think the opposite to the crowd. Never been able to go along with the majority - makes life quite lonely!)
Whereas the ability to consider two contradictory ideas as both being true, being consciously aware of their contradiction, is a mark of developed reasoning and higher cognitive ability. Niels Bohr said that the opposite of an ordinary truth is a falsehood, but the opposite of a great truth is often another great truth. Weird and ironic somehow, as if doublethink is the toxic mimic, or carnival mirror distortion, of the source of greatest wisdom. Great article by the way.
Bohr had absorbed the philosophy of Kant whose solution to the perennial problem of induction was to posit that reality, which he called 'noumenal' was entirely disconnected from our apprehension of reality, the 'phenomenal' world, even to the point that all regularities and laws of nature were purely impositions of the mind, and not even the connection between reality and its appearance was amenable to the understanding. Thus, it was entirely possible and and compatible with reason that two contradictory phenomenal 'views' of reality could both be 'true.'
Normally, if mutually contradictory statements were found out to be simultaneously 'true' we would conclude that the theory from which they were derived was at best incomplete, and most likely false. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics deliberately embraces such contradictions! Despite this apparent embrace of anti-rationality, quantum mechanics has been corroborated by experiment to extreme precision, and it is an incredibly effective means of exploring nature, but, for example, it provides no explanation of how a crucial concept, the collapse of the wave function, occurs, or even what it means.
Doublethink, by contrast, deliberately stultifies the intellect, bypasses all moral restraints in order to permit and justify atrocities, even on an unimaginable scale, and removes all defenses against the most absolute tyranny.
Cognitive dissonance is the learning mechanism to a higher thought process. Yet it seems in a world of corporate and government double think and intentional obfuscation of language into a meta world of meta meanings and definitions. We are at the precipice of the least solvable crisis that will get labelled as a mental illness.... yes and I just know that corporations will have a pill for that.
anyone with critical thinking will know that you. just go to a library or pick up a book
Cognitive dissonance poems are inspired by Plato, James Bond Movie titles, Jean Michel Basquiat, Zen Koans and Yogi Berra’s quotable sayings
These short hard boiled poems, koans, sayings, whatever you want to define it as. Their intention is to surreptitiously discuss every kind of philosophical idea in the least amount of words possible.
Oh here is a great quote about cognitive dissonance drawn from a UnHerd article
In Gitta Sereny’s biography of Albert Speer, the Dutch Protestant theologian W.A. Visser ‘t Hooft is quoted saying of the Holocaust that “people could find no place in their consciousness for such an unimaginable horror and that they did not have the imagination, together with the courage, to face it. It is possible to live in a twilight between knowing and not knowing.”
(Why we need genocide cinema - Tom Shone - 9/3/2024)
Once again you demonstrate your ignorance. But thanks for this communication. Your comments provide an excellent insight into the minds of those unable to think critically or to distinguish between data and opinions. It will be useful in the analysis.
The author's intro does not matter. What the authors say in the intro is irrelevant as long as it is not the subject of their research. It is clear that you are unable to read and understand scientific studies.
Aren't people peculiar? Today in the supermarket, I saw a young woman not only wearing a mask, but goggles as well. I managed to get to the end of the aisle before I cracked up laughing. But it's no laughing matter. Living in such fear must be horrendous.
At least she was a tiny bit more rational than the masses. If you believe the virus is deadly, and you're actually trying to protect yourself, you should absolutely wear goggles.
But, if she didn't also have a respirator with at least N99's and a pre-filter, and a face shield, and a hood, and rubber gloves, and a raincoat, and rubber boots, and duct taped them all at the edges, (similar to how you can see Africans geared up when dealing with Ebola victims), and then took a decontamination shower before disrobing, then she was just fooling herself slightly less then the average mind-control victim.
It is not fear but a display of religious virtue.
Oh, I see now. It is the usual manipulative leftist trick of elevating oneself to the pinnacle of ersatz virtue by pretending to champion some victim group in order to perpetrate moral blackmail, just like the religious hypocrites of old who would feverishly scour their bibles to rake all the blessings to themselves and shovel all the curses on their neighbors.
How can you live with yourself?
Well, I'm glad you survived, but my criticism stands. There is an absolute moral requirement to observe strict hygiene in the immediate vicinity of immune-compromised individuals who are genuinely at risk of death from any infection, but this does not apply to covid masking which is purely cosmetic at best, and downright ridiculous when the masks are worn in personal vehicles or far from any other human being.
You don't wear googles? ;-) Xray proof corset? Garters?
No, they make my bum look big.
So they're reserved for twerking only?
Maybe she thought she was in the swimming baths! That is very funny... I've not seen that before!
You know the so-called vaccines do not limit transmission but rather enhance it, don't you?
Yes Enhance it.
I know people who received the vax more than once and have gotten Covid more than once, months after they received the vax.
I’m wondering if it also speeds up any lurking illness or cancer that would not show up in body for many years but now does because of the vax.
I replied to you already 4 hours ago.
I take then you are of the opinion that masks prevent the transmission of viruses?
Having compared the number of viral particles that the very best of masks are able to filter (900,000), against the number of viral particles in an average infected person's sneeze (1,000,000), against the number of viral particles needed for a new infection to take hold (5000), I do not. Give reason a chance.
So in 100 years of experiments nobody has been able to demonstrate the theory of 'contagion' by natural means (coughs, sneezes , physical proximity etc). The most famous was the Rosenau experiments during the Spanish Flu. Test subjects were exposed to the sick in every way possible.... snot rubbed in their eyes, snot sprayed into their mouths, coughs directly into their faces, breathing in while the sick patient breathed out (face to face) ... and yet none of the test subjects got sick.
Contagion by natural means has never been scientifically demonstrated. Anyone who says otherwise is indulging in a superstition (and a very profitable one too).
Ex virologist Dr Stefan Lanka has repeated the standard virology protocols used to prove the existence of SARS COV2. He was able to produce the required proof of SARS COV2 ,namely the cytopathic effect in a cell culture (CPE) and assembly of the genome using the standard computer software. What made his experiments significant is that at no point did he add a sample from a sick person. He only added a sample of pure yeast.
Turns out the experiments performed by virologists to 'prove' viruses exist will ALWAYS be able to provide the proof they are looking for. He has since 'found' many other common viruses using the same technique.
Conclusion: the whole thing is a fraud. Virology is not a science, because it does not use proper controls. When you perform the controls (as he did) you get the same results. Therefore it's all bollocks, which disguises itself behind fancy terms and pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo designed to make it a 'dark art' that most people don't understand.
So the theory of contagion has been disproved for over a century and virology is not a bona fide science. Let's keep going....
If you look at the official data for all the so called 'infectious diseases' that were 'cured' by vaccines (measles, whooping cough etc) you will find the introduction of vaccines played no role in their decline. They were all 90-99% eradicated before vaccine was even introduced. What caused the decline was better drinking water, proper sanitation, better quality food, less toxic factory pollution etc.
Vaccines don't work because 'viruses' are not contagious pathogenic particles (there is no evidence for viral contagion). Viruses are just the breakdown products of cells. When you're sick you are in a state of breakdown (like a dilapidated house falling apart) and so you have a higher 'viral load'. Fevers and colds are just detox programs performed by your body to rid itself of a toxic overload (not unlike a house spring clean). The vaccinated are not 'catching covid', they are trying to purge the poisons in the vaccine by triggering detox mechanisms (fever, diarrhoea, mucous secretion etc). That's all a flu is. Rashes and poxes are also a detox process (comparable to sweating), which is why the vaccinated often exhibit those too.
So the people saying the covid vaccine "doesn't stop transmission of the virus" or "is only beneficial for the elderly with weak immune systems" are just as deluded as the triple mask and goggle wearers.
It's ALL a fraud from top to bottom. Mortality rates for 2020 were normal overall (apart from a few localised spikes due to Midazolam, ventilators, DNR's lockdowns etc). There was no pandemic. There is no virus. Contagion is not a thing. It's all a mental construct.
The monsters in our heads are the hardest ones to slay. In that sense 'the virus' is more real than real... and highly contagious now that everyone is all on social media and glued to their smartphones.
BONUS FACT: the modelling for contagion that was used to justify lockdowns came from an experiment conducted in 2018 by the BBC's Hannah Fry (they made a documentary about it) using people's smartphones and a special app (essentially track and trace).
Contagion between people has never been proven and so it cannot be modelled. That's why they used smartphones instead. The whole 'pandemic' narrative was based on smartphone apps, not biology. Covid is an entirely digital construct. Even as the hospitals lay half empty and nobody could SEE any evidence of a health crisis around them, they obediently stayed locked indoors when their smartphones or the TV told them to self isolate.
Even most 'covid skeptics' still believe in the 'the virus', despite having zero evidence to support such a concept. They use the ridiculous behaviour of people wandering about the supermarket wearing snorkels and raincoats to make their own irrational and unscientific position feel somehow more valid, and less absurd.
Another example is the belief that everyone has a right to freedom over their own body, hence the Pro Choice movement, but simultaneously forcing all to be vaccinated.
Great example!
Believing everyone has the right to freedom over their own body, yet murdering someone in the womb with completely separate DNA just because they cannot speak for themselves yet. Or, desperately wanting freedom yet voting for "slavery." A constitutional representative Republic that is so dumbed down by public institutions and media that it votes for democracy that ultimately devolves into totalitarianism. So many contradictions in today's world.
Spouting contradictory beliefs & thinking both are true seem symptomatic of a hive mind of people w/ no independent / critical / rational thought, common sense, morality, etc.
Most people like to think what other people think, believe what other people believe, wear what they wear, eat what they eat and so on. Independent thought can make life hard. Once a person has agreed to follow the mainstream narrative on anything it is easier to just stick with it and not ask questions. Even if, somewhere deep inside them, they know it's rubbish. Just put that knowledge in a box and hide it so that nobody knows. Life is easier if you're "one of the crowd". (At least, it seems that way to me - standing on the outside looking in. I have found all my life I have to just do the opposite, think the opposite to the crowd. Never been able to go along with the majority - makes life quite lonely!)
Whereas the ability to consider two contradictory ideas as both being true, being consciously aware of their contradiction, is a mark of developed reasoning and higher cognitive ability. Niels Bohr said that the opposite of an ordinary truth is a falsehood, but the opposite of a great truth is often another great truth. Weird and ironic somehow, as if doublethink is the toxic mimic, or carnival mirror distortion, of the source of greatest wisdom. Great article by the way.
Bohr had absorbed the philosophy of Kant whose solution to the perennial problem of induction was to posit that reality, which he called 'noumenal' was entirely disconnected from our apprehension of reality, the 'phenomenal' world, even to the point that all regularities and laws of nature were purely impositions of the mind, and not even the connection between reality and its appearance was amenable to the understanding. Thus, it was entirely possible and and compatible with reason that two contradictory phenomenal 'views' of reality could both be 'true.'
Normally, if mutually contradictory statements were found out to be simultaneously 'true' we would conclude that the theory from which they were derived was at best incomplete, and most likely false. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics deliberately embraces such contradictions! Despite this apparent embrace of anti-rationality, quantum mechanics has been corroborated by experiment to extreme precision, and it is an incredibly effective means of exploring nature, but, for example, it provides no explanation of how a crucial concept, the collapse of the wave function, occurs, or even what it means.
Doublethink, by contrast, deliberately stultifies the intellect, bypasses all moral restraints in order to permit and justify atrocities, even on an unimaginable scale, and removes all defenses against the most absolute tyranny.
The devil is a pro at doublethink deceptions but we should not be downhearted as the Immaculata has already crushed his head
Cognitive dissonance is the learning mechanism to a higher thought process. Yet it seems in a world of corporate and government double think and intentional obfuscation of language into a meta world of meta meanings and definitions. We are at the precipice of the least solvable crisis that will get labelled as a mental illness.... yes and I just know that corporations will have a pill for that.
anyone with critical thinking will know that you. just go to a library or pick up a book
https://open.substack.com/pub/saxxon/p/cognitive-dissonance-101-cog-dis?r=1u8tu3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Excerpt from a old old book that needs resurrection!
"Men think in herds. They go mad in herds and only regain their sanity slowly one by one."
Maybe never, as buying into a cult belief has to be lived to remain sane?
Book: "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds"
Mackay 1841, 440 pages. He led off with the Tulip bulb mania!
Thank you Thorsteinn. I think your writing is beautiful, especially: Certum est, quia impossibile
"Belief has the word LIE in it."
https://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Dissonance-101-poems-explanations-ebook/dp/B085NKV1ZZ
Cognitive dissonance poems are inspired by Plato, James Bond Movie titles, Jean Michel Basquiat, Zen Koans and Yogi Berra’s quotable sayings
These short hard boiled poems, koans, sayings, whatever you want to define it as. Their intention is to surreptitiously discuss every kind of philosophical idea in the least amount of words possible.
Thank you for your lexical precision. A lot of great evils could be avoided if there were more of this.
well my book creates cognitive dissonance while reading...
Ironical or what?
https://saxxon.substack.com/p/cognitive-dissonance-101-cog-dis
Oh here is a great quote about cognitive dissonance drawn from a UnHerd article
In Gitta Sereny’s biography of Albert Speer, the Dutch Protestant theologian W.A. Visser ‘t Hooft is quoted saying of the Holocaust that “people could find no place in their consciousness for such an unimaginable horror and that they did not have the imagination, together with the courage, to face it. It is possible to live in a twilight between knowing and not knowing.”
(Why we need genocide cinema - Tom Shone - 9/3/2024)
https://unherd.com/2024/03/why-we-need-genocide-cinema/
A great article to stimulate some thinking!
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/ai-computers/ai-self-awareness/?
Once again you demonstrate your ignorance. But thanks for this communication. Your comments provide an excellent insight into the minds of those unable to think critically or to distinguish between data and opinions. It will be useful in the analysis.
The author's intro does not matter. What the authors say in the intro is irrelevant as long as it is not the subject of their research. It is clear that you are unable to read and understand scientific studies.