Category Archives: Science

How Marxism evolved

Jordan Peterson and James Lindsay discuss

From the video (1 h 50 min) description:

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson and Dr. James Lindsay break down how Marxism evolved from a singular ideology into a genus, spawning many oppressor/oppressed dogmas across modern culture such as equity, critical race theory, and queer theory. They trace these sub-Marxist doctrines back past fundamental narrative into the theological realm, and detail their utility in the acquisition of power. Dr. Peterson and Dr. Lindsay also discuss the Grievance Studies Affair, of which Dr. Lindsay was a co-author and which casts a spotlight on the Marxist capture of our academic and scientific institutions.

An author, mathematician, and political commentator, Dr. James Lindsay has written eight books spanning a range of subjects including education, postmodern theory, and critical race theory. Dr. Lindsay is the founder of New Discourses, an organization dedicated to shining the light of objective truth in subjective darkness. Dr. Lindsay is the co-author of “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody” and the author of “Race Marxism,” as well as, “The Marxification of Education.” Dr. Lindsay has been a featured guest on Fox News, Glenn Beck, Joe Rogan, and NPR, and he has spoken at the Oxford Union and the EU Parliament.

See also Lindsay’s recent talk in the EU parliament.

It really was just the flu, bro

The Occam's razor explanation for "the pandemic."

Article by Jordan Schachtel.

Excerpts:

At the onset of the covid hysteria era, the “experts” took pains to tell us that this was no ordinary viral outbreak, but a “novel” virus situation that required a novel response, through the infamous “measures” that resulted in the destruction of civilization.

Why was this seasonal respiratory infection outbreak different than any other seasonal respiratory infection outbreak?

First, we were told that the novel virus carried unique symptoms for those burdened by the disease.

But there were no unique symptoms for those burdened by the disease.

According to the CDC, flu symptoms include “fever, cough, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, body aches, headache, chills and/or fatigue.”

According to the CDC, covid symptoms include fever, cough, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, body aches, headache, chills and/or fatigue.

The most common “novel” symptom that was promoted was a temporary mitigation of taste and smell. Weird. Must be a bioweapon or something, right?

Wrong. The loss of taste and smell is common for any and all upper respiratory tract infections.

A day later, Schachtel wrote a follow up entry. Excerpt:

If anything, the lesson to be learned is not to put your trust in the hands of the government, which, either through malice or reckless indifference, encouraged widespread iatrogenic [“medical malpractice”] injury as the solution to a nonexistent pandemic. It wasn’t “the pandemic” that devastated the global economy and wrecked civilization, it was the top-down dictates from above that caused millions of excess deaths worldwide, all to supposedly combat a disease that was not out of the ordinary whatsoever.

The UK’s weather in 2022

A publication by “The Global Warming Policy Foundation”, author: Paul Homewood.

Executive summary
According to the Met Office, the UK climate ‘is continuing to change’, whilst weather is becoming more extreme.
But what does the actual evidence tell us? Using official data up to 2022, from the
Met Office and other sources, this paper examines UK climate trends, and assesses the truth of these claims. The results are as follows:

  • Although 2022 was the warmest on record in the UK, there has been no increase in long
    term averages since the early 2000s.
  • The annual temperature in 2022 was well within the bounds of natural variability, and was
    largely due to long spells of sunny weather in spring and summer.
  • The summer of 2022 was only the fourth hottest, according to the Central England Temperature Record, and not as hot as 1976, 1826 and 2018.
  • Annual rainfall last year was only slightly below average.
  • The number of days with extreme temperatures is not increasing, as fewer cold days are
    offsetting more hot ones.
  • Long-term averages in rainfall in England and Wales, which have been rising since the
    1970s, are similar to the 1870s and 1920s.
  • While winters have become slightly wetter, there is little change in the other seasons. In particular, summers are not getting drier, as projections from climate simulations have suggested.
  • Rainfall is not becoming more extreme, whether on an annual, monthly or daily basis.
  • Sea levels have been rising at approximately 1.7mm per year around the UK, after taking
    account of vertical land movement. There has been no acceleration in the rate of rise on multidecadal scales.
  • Wind storms have been declining in frequency and intensity since the 1990s.

In short, although it is slightly warmer than it used to be, the UK climate has changed very little. Long-term trends are dwarfed by the natural variability of weather. Nor is there any evidence that weather has become more extreme, or will become so in future.

Excess deaths not caused by Covid

Otherwise they'd be in respiratory diseases, but they're not

They are in heart and cardiovascular diseases, and strokes etc., also liver diseases, says Dr. John Campbell is this video, which is specifically about excess deaths in the UK. Not in cancers.

They are also, as Campbell emphasises, in ALL age groups.

Numerous studies that show the vaccine does not stop Covid

And has caused injury and death to many

There are numerous studies that show the vaccine does not stop Covid and has caused injury and death to many.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 The president said that the vaccinated will not get Covid and won’t give it to others. Since then, the president has tested positive for Covid twice (same with Anthony Fauci). Later, it was said that people who took the jab may have a greater chance of contracting Covid. In a Texas prison, 70 percent of fully vaccinated prisoners caught Covid.

Found the above in an article by Fr. Irby C. Nichols under the title: “Pope Francis and the Covid Vaccine”, where he writes the intro:

The Covid vaccine was forced upon us based on false data and propagandistic lies. Sadly, one of the people who pushed it was Pope Francis.

He writes further:

Of all those who pushed the vaccine, the pope should have known better. He has advisors and physicians with access to libraries, the internet, and the media. 

So does the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who also pushed the vaccine using his clerical authority.

Public apologies should follow one of the Alcoholics Anonymous examples. The offender publicly states their offense, asks for forgiveness, and asks how they might set the matter straight. Nothing should be mentioned about who told what to whom or what the CDC said or what some doctor thinks. If you pushed a dangerous medical treatment, then you have some responsibility to those who suffered from following your advice. Pope Francis misused his position, gravitas, and moral authority to sell a false “act of love.” And as such, it is incumbent on the pope to set an example for all the powerful. Better stop, I have something in my eye! 

WHO launches new “digital health initiative”

Chalk up another “I told you so” for the Conspiracy Theorists.

Writes Kit Knightly:

On Monday, the World Health Organization and European Union announced the launch of their new “partnership”, building on the EU’s “highly successful” digital certification network, which was introduced during the “pandemic”.

From the WHO’s website [emphasis added]:

WHO will take up the European Union (EU) system of digital COVID-19 certification to establish a global system that will help facilitate global mobility…

This would be those digital health passports that “conspiracy theorists” warned about, but which we were all told weren’t ever going to be a thing.

Continue reading here.

Can we finally tell the truth about lockdown?

This inhuman experiment must never be repeated.

Writes Fraser Myers:

There have been a number of different attempts to estimate excess deaths during the pandemic period, but whatever methodology is used, the data always show two significant things. Firstly, there is no obvious correlation between the length or stringency of a nation’s lockdowns and the level of excess deaths. Secondly, Sweden, which infamously shunned hard lockdowns, has ended up with some of the lowest excess deaths from the pandemic in Europe. Whichever calculation of excess deaths you use, whether it’s from the Lancet, The Economist, the Spectator or the World Health Organisation, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that lockdown brought little gain for a lot of pain.

Proponents of lockdown see things differently, of course. As early as June 2020, an Imperial College London study declared the UK’s first national lockdown a stunning success, claiming that it had saved a whopping 470,000 lives. This figure relied on a model Imperial had produced, which predicted that 500,000 people would die from Covid unless severe restrictions were imposed. The actual number of deaths (around 30,000 at the time) was then subtracted from the projection. The trouble is, when applied to Sweden, the same modelling assumptions predicted 96,000 deaths by summer 2020. The actual death toll by that point, despite there being no lockdown in Sweden, was 6,000. Nevertheless, these highly questionable models were used to justify new lockdown measures throughout the pandemic. And they have since been held up as ‘proof’ that lockdowns saved countless lives.

Reade the rest here.

Jordan Peterson interviews Robert F. Kennedy jr.

The "rogue" Democratic candidate

Video here. (1 h 35 min)

>>>>>>

Update (24/06/2023): I heard a day or so ago that Youtube has taken the video down. Indeed it has been. No problem, see it here instead.

<<<<<<

Noteworthy points from Kennedy’s statements in the interview:

In the US, 70% of all newsshow adverts are from the pharmaceutical industry.

The pharma industry is a “criminal enterprise”. The 4 principal companies (he mentioned Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck and another one I didn’t catch) have collectively paid $35 bn dollars in criminal damages and penalties over the past decade. For lying to doctors, defrauding regulators, falsifying science and killing hundreds of thousands of people.

Pharmaceutical drugs are the 3rd largest cause of death in the US after cancer and heart failure.

Medical journals have become vessels of the pharma industry. The Cochrane charitable organisation has been an important counter-balance to this situation. [They recently debunked the myth that masks help prevent covid.] However, Bill Gates has recently started funnelling money into them, so he’s probably going to undermine them.

Kennedy thinks he has a chance as a Democratic candidate for presidency because polls show he would fare better against Trump than Biden would. However, the trick is to get this information out to the public, because the elite that control the legacy media certainly don’t want Kennedy to win (nor do they want Trump to win).

Biden won’t want to debate. Neither will Trump on the Republican side. So Podcasts and other alternative media are the way forward.

JP has this question: The Right knows where its “pathological” limits on the fringe are, and that is e.g. Holocaust-denial, racism etc. The Left does not seem to know an equivalent limit. Where does Kennedy see the limit of politics that can be countenanced?

Kennedy side-steps the answer (a bit of a red flag for me), he says he’d rather think about building bridges than disassociating himself.

JP clarifies that he thinks the left-wing idea of “equity” (equality of outcome) is pathological.

On the subject of climate warming, Kennedy says he definitely believes its happening and that man-made CO2 and methane are significant culprits. However, he is strictly against fearmongering and top-down, tyrannical solutions. He would remove all subsidies for energy and “use the free market”.

He exudes some naivete when he says that once the wind and solar farms are set up they will deliver free energy, all that is missing is a proper grid. I think he’s surprisingly wrong here. Solar panels will have to be replaced from time to time, as will wind turbines (and both will become hazardous waste).

However, interestingly he says that he is an environmentalist not out of fear for the future but out of love for nature (that chimes with me a lot).

Regarding Ukraine he says we have trapped the Ukrainians in a supposedly humanitarian mission. All we are doing is extending the war, therefore shovelling money into the US military-industrial complex.

On Broken Science

"More research is needed."

Paper published by Net Zero Watch (PDF).

Introduction:

A fascinating experiment was conducted not too long ago. An experiment about experiments. About how scientists came to conclusions in their own experiments. What happened was this: social scientist Nate Breznau and others handed out identical data to a large number of researchers and asked each group to answer the same question. The question was: Would immigration reduce or increase ‘public support for government provision of social policies’?

That can be difficult to remember, so let’s reframe this question in a way more memorable, and more widely applicable to our other examples. Does X affect Y? Does X, more immigration, affect Y, public support for certain policies?

That’s causal language, isn’t it? X affects Y? These are words about cause, about what causes what. Cause, and knowledge of cause, is of paramount importance in science. So much so that I claim – and I hope to defend the idea – that the goal of science is to
discover the cause of measurable things. We’ll get back to that later.

Just over 1200 models were handed in by researchers, all to answer whether X affected Y. I cannot stress enough that each researcher was given identical data and asked to solve the same question.

Breznau required each scientist to answer the question with a ‘No’, ‘Yes’, or ‘Cannot tell’. Only one group of researchers said they could not tell. Every other group produced a definite answer. About one quarter – a fraction we should all remember –answered ‘Yes’, that X affected Y – negatively. That is, more X, less Y.

Now researchers were also allowed to give some idea of the strength of the relationship, along with whether or not the relationship existed. And that one-quarter who said the relationship between X and Y was negative ranged anywhere from a strongly negative, to something weaker, but still ‘significant’. Significant. That
word we’ll also come back to.

You can see it coming…about another quarter of the models said ‘Yes’, X affects Y, but that the relation was positive! More X, more Y, not less! Again, the strength was anywhere from very strong to weak, but still ‘significant’.

The remaining half or so of the models couldn’t quite bring themselves to say ‘No’: they all still gave a tentative ‘Yes’, but said the relationship was not ‘significant’.

You see the problem. There is, in reality, only one right answer, and only one strength of association, if it exists. That a relationship does not exist may even be the right answer. I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do know only one can be. Yet the answers – the very confident, scientifically derived, expert-investigated answers –
were all over the place and in wild disagreement with each other.

Every one of the models was science. We are told we cannot deny science. We are commanded to Follow The Science.

But whose science?