It's like some hard reset has taken place in the universe every time I discuss anything with you.
I literally posted part one of the "tin-foil hat" meeting up on this forum weeks back. It was ignored as lunacy, I suppose. Shame, because it was hugely informative and gave great insight into how a coming pandemic would be managed and shaped.
--
Pre-decided by corporations. They develop a product and then they use government to develop the market. That's what lobbying is all about. Real science is often thrown to one side, or at least takes the time to develop in a professional and rigorous manner. Which leaves a vacuum into which all manner of manipulation can be used to shape those public trends you seem to think happen by accident. Like, as you mention, the tobacco companies commissioning (successfully I might add) peer reviewed studies disproving the link between cancer and their products. Which, logically, confirms there were scientists willing to conduct such studies and place their names beneath those findings. And then more scientists who reviewed and endorsed such studies. All scientists. They all went to fancy schools and got fancy letters after their names. And those same scientists would have been roundly condemning the under-funded or even zero-funded scientists who held contradictory beliefs. For decades the debate raged on until, eventually, once big tobacco had made more money than it could count, a fraction of the proceeds were chucked back at the cancer patients and the marketers headed off to Asia to teach young kids how cool it was to smoke.
And what did politicians do? Well half of them did what they were told and took the lobbyists' cash, which paid for those pesky election campaigns. Most of the rest washed their hands claiming to be "guided by the science". And a few, who weren't on the teat, championed great victories such as having warnings placed on packaging while millions more died. Because... freedom of choice. They also banned marijuana while they were at it, and allowed booze to go from strength to strength. More science I suppose. Heroic characters like Tony Blair stuck a million quid in his pocket from creatures like Bernie Ecclestone so tobacco could continue to be associated with cool racing cars. That was the last great hurrah for big tobacco in the west but by then the majority of the public had flipped and decided the "tin foil hat" scientists who had fought over decades to expose the dangers were right after all. No harm done.
An interjection here, because you are so literal in your thinking you may be confused into thinking I'm saying people shouldn't have a choice. Which is not what is being said here. The emphasis is on the lies people are prepared to endorse when it is beneficial to them, especially politicians whose campaigns are funded by the very corporations they are supposed to regulate. Anyone who can't see a conflict of interests in this arrangement or who doesn't have the common sense to grasp where such a conflict inevitably leads is probably deliberately avoiding the issue. So yes. To prevent you disappearing off on a tangent, I believe people should be allowed to put whatever shit they want into their own body, but I don't believe corporations and governments should be allowed to lie about what that shit is.
As things stand, mobile phones don't cause cancer, by the way. Peer reviewed science has shown this to be true. Modern vaccines don't harm children either. See the science. And even if they do, well you can go to a secret court and get cash for your dead or disabled kid, provided you don't talk about it. It's all above board. It's the science.
Technocracy is a cancer that has been spreading for decades. Scientists that have sold out the founding principles of science so they can bastardise its language to underpin the marketing plans of corporations. You see it in courts across the planet. My scientist who says the opposite to your scientist. Just rent the right scientist and you can get any outcome required. Don't stop at buying scientists. Buy the media too. Then you can bring this new science to the masses so they can post up responses like yours.
Which is why Gates bought Ferguson and Fauci and Whitty and thousands more men of science. And you're right, Ferguson doesn't have a badge that outranks the PM's badge. The PM is the man. In charge. The decider. Except the head honcho has been saying, from day one, he's being guided by the science. And who commissions and pre-decides what that science should be? Not us. Not the PM. But whichever scientists have the cash and the establishment support to hold sway. In the case of this pandemic, that would be Ferguson, etc, and ultimately Gates, who's not even a scientist but, like big tobacco, he has his marketing plans. Gates also funds the WHO. And GAVI. And all those other agencies I've mentioned in prior posts.
Now it could be, despite decades of history, despite the fact the corporations habitually scoop up big profits while society pays the costs, despite the fact their science turns out to be wrong, over and over and over again, despite all these things, it could just be a grand sequence of coincidences that have landed us here. Combined with the ever present incompetence of the leaders we choose from pre-selected lists. Coincidence and incompetence, endlessly repeating. With one side always benefitting and the other always losing. As I have said before, that's pretty damn unlucky when you are on the losing side. What are the odds, I wonder?
We'll never agree. Your gleeful scorn for the average guy compared with your absolute faith in authority, compared to my basic belief in the decency of mankind and my foundational distrust of anyone who believes they have superior rights that allow them to dictate how I live my life. We are at absolute opposing ends of the spectrum in that respect. Little wonder you can't see any possibility this current crisis has been manipulated and I can't comprehend the far fetched idea it hasn't been.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
In my previous post I literally just said how incompetent those in authority are... I don't necessarily think they're evil though. Some, maybe. Not all.
. I think there's a lot of stupidity out there but I don't think people are generally bad.
