You can't actually expect him to read any of the sources posted. That was established long ago with dead links and resources linking to peoples blogs with a monthly sign up fee.Ohhhhh it took me a minute to catch on to wtf “new Smurf” was supposed to mean. It was an April Fool’s joke, bud
A bunch of posters got pink belts and a bunch of us got “modded,” but it was all in fun. I didn’t have any actual mod powers, you can breathe easy
I think it’s instructive though:
You accepted that shit at face value though, didn’t you? No critical thought used, you were fooled right away. Isn’t that something?
If you had better powers of observation, and better critical thinking skills, you might have been able to notice something else:
The retracted paper that Jessica Rose is discussing in your link, is a different paper altogether than the one we were discussing. We were discussing a paper on myocarditis from 2021; your link is about a 2024 paper on lessons learned from the vaccination campaign.
Which I think, raises the question:
How many retracted papers does this absolute quack have?!?
I mean…holy shit.
Yet another thing I feel like I shouldn’t have to point out to a grown adult is: discussing the who and why of something is not a “changing narrative,” but they are in fact two different questions (*who* retracted the paper, and *why*). So if you read on, I think you’ll be pleased to find out that I found something that I think we can agree on. How exciting!
See, one thing that I stress is the importance of is being flexible in one’s hypothesis in light of new data. For example, you mention studies (that most of us are familiar with, I think) about Ivermectin’s role as an anti-viral agent. One of your links mentions positive initial results with dengue fever, and your link mentions that “phase 3 human trials are ongoing.”
SPOILER ALERT: they didn’t turn out well: “Interestingly, the study reported faster NS1 antigenemia clearance upon ivermectin treatment, with no difference in viremia, viral clearance, or any beneficial clinical outcomes.”
—Re: COVID, they tested it at higher doses, they tested it when used early, they tested it in a boat, they tested it with a goat, they tested it here and there, they tested it everywhere!—-the shit doesn’t seem to work.
—It is at this point all of you CTers should do a thing scientists call, “Get the fuck over it already.” Seriously. I’m not anti-ivermectin, I am anti-“shit that doesn’t seem to work,” and this doesn’t seem to work. So get the fuck over it already.
I think I made a logical hypothesis re: Jessica Rose; namely, that since VAERS data is widely known to be unreliable, and other papers were retracted for basing findings on that data (one of which I showed you already), that she saw the writing on the wall for her paper and retracted it voluntarily.
Oh, how naive of me. Two things have lead me to change my hypothesis.
One, despite the fact that VAERS data is known to be unreliable, despite the fact that her colleague Steve Kirsch has been eviscerated for using it, despite the fact that other papers were retracted because of it, guess what?? I did some digging, and Rose finally published her myocarditis article, just a couple of months ago. Here it is, and wouldn’t you know it—it’s still based on the fucking VAERS data! This wackjob hasn’t learned a goddamn thing about her shoddy work in the past 3-4 years. It’s remarkable.
Based on that, and based on your link in which she prattles on about “the elites who own everything and control the narrative of our lives” (fucking lmao), and threatens to have her discredited colleague Steve Kirsch “sue big time,” I will alter my hypothesis and agree that it is far more likely that the editor withdrew that 2021 article. Withdrawing it herself once she found out the data was unreliable is what any good, reputable scientist would have done, and Jessica Rose sure as fuck isn’t that.
I did get a kick out of her username: “Unacceptable Jessica.” She ought to change it to “Unscientific Jessica”
The only quacks here are the doctors you keep citing, and the only honks are the ones coming from your clown nose.
Oh I know he’s not gonna read shit. Part of me hopes that some other person who isn’t totally far gone will see these sources and realize how dumb these CTs are. But you know how it is: no matter how many failed peer reviews or retracted studies I point out, they’ll just say that “they” are suppressing “the truth” lol.
Nah bro, $9.99 for the truth from accountant/enrolled nurse turned investigative journalist/youtuber. They just happen to be able to read through all the data and find the truth that is being hidden by referencing some random CTers Twitter post as a legit source.
Ohhhhh it took me a minute to catch on to wtf “new Smurf” was supposed to mean. It was an April Fool’s joke, bud
A bunch of posters got pink belts and a bunch of us got “modded,” but it was all in fun. I didn’t have any actual mod powers, you can breathe easy
I think it’s instructive though:
You accepted that shit at face value though, didn’t you? No critical thought used, you were fooled right away. Isn’t that something?
If you had better powers of observation, and better critical thinking skills, you might have been able to notice something else:
The retracted paper that Jessica Rose is discussing in your link, is a different paper altogether than the one we were discussing. We were discussing a paper on myocarditis from 2021; your link is about a 2024 paper on lessons learned from the vaccination campaign.
Which I think, raises the question:
How many retracted papers does this absolute quack have?!?
I mean…holy shit.
Yet another thing I feel like I shouldn’t have to point out to a grown adult is: discussing the who and why of something is not a “changing narrative,” but they are in fact two different questions (*who* retracted the paper, and *why*). So if you read on, I think you’ll be pleased to find out that I found something that I think we can agree on. How exciting!
See, one thing that I stress is the importance of is being flexible in one’s hypothesis in light of new data. For example, you mention studies (that most of us are familiar with, I think) about Ivermectin’s role as an anti-viral agent. One of your links mentions positive initial results with dengue fever, and your link mentions that “phase 3 human trials are ongoing.”
SPOILER ALERT: they didn’t turn out well: “Interestingly, the study reported faster NS1 antigenemia clearance upon ivermectin treatment, with no difference in viremia, viral clearance, or any beneficial clinical outcomes.”
—Re: COVID, they tested it at higher doses, they tested it when used early, they tested it in a boat, they tested it with a goat, they tested it here and there, they tested it everywhere!—-the shit doesn’t seem to work.
—It is at this point all of you CTers should do a thing scientists call, “Get the fuck over it already.” Seriously. I’m not anti-ivermectin, I am anti-“shit that doesn’t seem to work,” and this doesn’t seem to work. So get the fuck over it already.
I think I made a logical hypothesis re: Jessica Rose; namely, that since VAERS data is widely known to be unreliable, and other papers were retracted for basing findings on that data (one of which I showed you already), that she saw the writing on the wall for her paper and retracted it voluntarily.
Oh, how naive of me. Two things have lead me to change my hypothesis.
One, despite the fact that VAERS data is known to be unreliable, despite the fact that her colleague Steve Kirsch has been eviscerated for using it, despite the fact that other papers were retracted because of it, guess what?? I did some digging, and Rose finally published her myocarditis article, just a couple of months ago. Here it is, and wouldn’t you know it—it’s still based on the fucking VAERS data! This wackjob hasn’t learned a goddamn thing about her shoddy work in the past 3-4 years. It’s remarkable.
Based on that, and based on your link in which she prattles on about “the elites who own everything and control the narrative of our lives” (fucking lmao), and threatens to have her discredited colleague Steve Kirsch “sue big time,” I will alter my hypothesis and agree that it is far more likely that the editor withdrew that 2021 article. Withdrawing it herself once she found out the data was unreliable is what any good, reputable scientist would have done, and Jessica Rose sure as fuck isn’t that.
I did get a kick out of her username: “Unacceptable Jessica.” She ought to change it to “Unscientific Jessica”
The only quacks here are the doctors you keep citing, and the only honks are the ones coming from your clown nose.
drtesslawrie.substack.com
Don't waste your time. The key ivermectin trial that was altered due to whats obvious.
My Letter to Dr Andrew Hill Video
To address the many requests I get about where to locate this video, I'm posting it here for ease of sharing
Coincidently Gates gave 42 million pound (iirc) donation to the university and by the pos's word they had said input into the changed summary.
There is that much evidence and proof of censorship and antiscience in the universities and journals we're wasting time rehashing.
I don't believe its more then and altered flu but also believe for a very select few it can be difficult. Ivermectin may have helped some or all of them.
Them 2021- you're going to die, you shouldn't be allowed resources.
Us 2021- lol, sure. I'll be allowed to stop paying tax than?
Us 2024- I'm still alive posting worsening data and information.
Them 2024- That was years ago why are we still talking about it.
Amazing isn't it.
Mega billionaire, Saint William Gates openly "donates" millions (pocket change) to NBC and other DNC run propaganda outlets plus he has no open allegiances to the evil Trump. Computer nerd/criminal turned fake af science wizard and giant whale investor in Pfizer/Moderna/MRNA was a welcome guest on every other mainstream news show during the heart of pandemic and is good friends with other pandemic savior, Dr Fauci. Big tech censors virtually any search linking Gates to Epstein, information that Gates openly tried to hide for many years, but the useful idiots will still give him a pass and happily assume the Gates Foundation science advisor, Boris Nikolic, being named as one of three executors to Epsteins will is just a right wing conspiracy theory, just a coincidence, nothing to see here. insert TrumpdancingwithEpstein.gif and all conspiracies are vanquished. Saint Gates loves us all
It was mild. I took some heart medication and was back training less than 72 hours later. It was just an adverse reaction sorted by taking some medication and my general health. I have no long term effects from it at all. I spent a few hours in hospital and had a few tests. At the time they believed I may have had covid and had a reaction to the vaccine or effectively a severe dose of covid, which also caused myocarditis like symptoms at the time. Most likely just vaccinated myself whilst I had covid. Not a big deal really and easily sorted with the rapid antigen tests that were later available.
www.aussie17.com
It was mild. I took some heart medication and was back training less than 72 hours later. It was just an adverse reaction sorted by taking some medication and my general health. I have no long term effects from it at all. I spent a few hours in hospital and had a few tests. At the time they believed I may have had covid and had a reaction to the vaccine or effectively a severe dose of covid, which also caused myocarditis like symptoms at the time. Most likely just vaccinated myself whilst I had covid. Not a big deal really and easily sorted with the rapid antigen tests that were later available.
He died from a heart attack whilst being scared to have a heart attack from the covid vaccine... What facts was he right about?
Say what you want. It doesn't bother me. I know who he was and what he did. Nobodys perfect and I can separate a person from their poor uninformed choices and falling for social media hysteria and thinking that these people are any different to the fear porn news media on other channels.
Magistrate Rob Stary discharged the case on Friday morning, finding a jury could not possibly conclude Barrett had criminal intent and acted unlawfully when he tackled Peterson-English on September 22, 2021.
RELATED ARTICLE
Courts
Man hurt in sling tackle arrest berated police beforehand, court told
Stary said Peterson-English had acted in a menacing and abusive manner towards police, disregarding repeated requests from the officers to leave the station and keep his distance, and Barrett had acted on a perceived threat.
“Mr Peterson-English acts in a manner that is entirely provocative,” Stary told the court.
“It may be that the arrest was executed in a way that is not in strict accordance with the manual, but whether it could be said to be unlawful and whether it could be said to be done without any regard to the probable consequences and criminal intent, in my view a jury properly instructed could not convict Mr Barrett of those offences.”
Case against sling-tackle police officer thrown out
Footage of Beau Barrett tackling Daniel Peterson-English at Flinders Street Station went viral on social media following the incident, leading to Barrett’s suspension from the force.www.theage.com.au
Loading…
www.news.com.au
The "victim" was walking up to police officers and talking absolute shit for over an hour with it all captured on the coppers cameras and by multiple witnesses. As I said IQ test. Old matey was happy to mouth off and talk shit until he faced the consequences. he didn't even rock up to the protest he went off on his own to a train station to mouth off instead.
Then he wanted to use the court system to sue, when he had no interest in being a respectable person himself. Then he wanted a safe space and a payout from the Government. I see why you might like him and support him. He had his day in court and his own team pulled it after seeing all the evidence against him and the court threw it out.
Come on mate. These are just stupid. I am consistent. I think the covid nutjobs screaming at people with no masks deserve the same treatment as the anti vax losers. This is just you coming out as supporting BLM style riots (remember when that was a thing) provided they suit your agenda. This dude was probably at those same marches, he hasn't worked a day in his life, let alone showered, his instagram is still public. He is just from that generation that likes to talk shit, until someone calls them on it. Even the court concluded that was what effectivley happened to him.
I have never said covid was anything more than the flu, you can go back to my first posts in this thread and whilst my position on me getting vaccinated changed, thinking covid is a nothing burger never did.
Gaslight. I love how the supposed "free thinkers" have adopted the language of the most hardcore victims within our society. All this supposed suppression and gaslighting of the truth, sounds like a university/college campus video.
Clarifying my position on something you make claims I said is gaslighting now? Next you will ask me to leave your echo chamber thread because I challenge your position on something.
#safespace
scientificprogress.substack.com
drdavidjspeicher.substack.com
www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au
petermcculloughmd.substack.com
Another blatant attempt at derailing, interesting it's on such an important link though the lurjers may want to really read the article and what it means.
We don't have law in the country we have the preception of law and that there is no divide between our courts and their political masters.
The argument for stopping this trial has massive ramifications for our legal rights and the corruption blatantly involved.
Tbh it was a copy of something I was sent so the treason part was the original senders.In saying that the following two may well be coming into fruition. Because like the WEF young global leaders program
"- intentionally assists, by any means whatsoever, an enemy, at war with the Commonwealth"
&
"intentionally assists, by 'any means whatever', another country or organisation that is 'engaged in armed hostilities' against the Australian Defence Force (ADF)""
Or
The Criminal Offence of Treason: Definition, Evolution and Political Application
The offence of treason has been used to justify the silencing of dissent, the quelling of uprisings and the political persecution of the oppressed.
"Levied war, or undertook an act preparing for war, against the Commonwealth,
or
Instigated a non-citizen to invade the Commonwealth, or one of its territories."
I believe we are in the process of of the first and if the USA was under the Commonwealth they would be captured in the second.
For the rationally sane/curious non complicit, especially on the government involvement in the crime and censorship
Fraud Revealed in German Covid Response
Minutes of Robert Koch Institute crisis meetings reveal undue influence of "external actor"
"Fraud Revealed in German Covid Response
Minutes of Robert Koch Institute crisis meetings reveal undue influence of "external actor""
.
"As a conspiracy theorist, I am batting .400. Over the last four years, I have examined many official representations of reality and posited the theory that they are the fraudulent misrepresentations of two or more persons in positions of power or undue influence. By definition, two or more persons committing an act of fraud are participating in a criminal conspiracy.
At the risk of sounding boastful, ALL of my conspiracy theories have been confirmed by the subsequent discovery of factual evidence to be actual conspiracies."
I believe it's pretty obvious we have been betrayed by a lot our elected politicians and high level civil servants. These are the nodes of power that enabled this travesty.
"Now comes the news that the German independent magazine, Multipolar, has successfully sued the Robert Koch Institute to release the minutes of its Covid Crisis deliberations in 2020. Though heavily redacted, the documents reveal that pressure was indeed exerted on the Institute’s scientists to go along with public policies not supported by scientific research. For example, the Institute expressed the opinion that masking and lockdowns were of doubtful value."
Slowly slowly the truth shines through and the corrupt ran out of fingers plugging holes a long time ago.
"Of special note was the following revelation:
As Multipolar has already reported based on the previously secret papers, the tightening of the risk assessment from “moderate” to “high” announced by the RKI in March 2020 - based on all lockdown measures and court rulings on them - was, contrary to what has previously been claimed, not based on a professional assessment of the institute, but on the political instructions of an external actor - whose name is blacked out in the minutes."
If we win they're be up on treason trials.
The conclusion from all this: The claim that the RKI made the upgrade - and thus the basis for lockdown and state of emergency - on the basis of scientific advice is no longer tenable. The upgrade occurred abruptly, without a documented discussion and consultation process, at the direction of an unnamed actor.
