I'm a Scientist, and I Don't Believe in Facts
The benefits of a post-truth society
blogs.scientificamerican.com
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
I'm a Scientist, and I Don't Believe in Facts
The benefits of a post-truth societyblogs.scientificamerican.com
On the far left, I recognize Shill Nye.
To justify gaslighting.Good artile goes back a few years now. She mentions memory. 3 times this week I’ve heard false memory discussed on main stream media. I’m listening carefully and trying to figure out why.
They are currently working on "factifying" the safety trial. If enough vaxxed people die in 5 years, there may be a large divide between "fact" and observed reality.The only sensible takeaway from that is that today's truths can become tommorow's fabrications.
e.g. "The COVID vaccines are safe" may be an accepeted "truth" right now, but may be notorious bull**** in 5 years.
Good artile goes back a few years now. She mentions memory. 3 times this week I’ve heard false memory discussed on main stream media. I’m listening carefully and trying to figure out why.
+1Hello Effin' scientists journal- What a load of Codswallop. "Science" is not science anymore because of a failure to follow protocol, and make experiments based on observations that are repeatable. The entire process has become so twisted and infiltrated by greed and favouritism. This article also illustrates how language and definitions have become watered down in the last 50 years. "1984" anyone?
The article was weird for sure. I think the woman has a poor grasp of what a fact is, or at least she confuses facts with theories/narratives.This article is codified wokism, the problem with science is the clinging to dogma for financial reasons, it actually has a lot in common with wokism like following a magic dogma not based in reality but you get paid for it and can maintain a monopoly by canceling more coherent opinions.
"False Memory" was one of the things used to discredit the victims of the various pedophilia and SRA scandals in the US, like the McMartin Preschool and Presidio cases. They claimed all the children just "made it up." Even if that dubious answer were true, it still doesn't explain why so many young children (ages 5-10) were diagnosed with STDs that also had these accounts. Cathy O'Brien mentions this in "Transformation of America" (warning, a tough and explicit read), and with the high level names mentioned by her and in The Franklin Coverup, it would make sense they would want to distribute their "defense" through the MSM and Social Media.
As for timing, remember, the Ghislane Maxwell trial is just days away from starting. Jeffrey Epstein still didn't kill himself. A lot of these matters are about to become very public and maybe widely discussed, so they probably want to try and discredit them (or silence people) any way they can.
One thing Yusef El points out is that all the Covid nonsense came out right when people were talking a lot about Epstein and Adrenochrome and such. Some people knew about these issues for a long time (Trance was published in 1995, The Franklin Coverup in 1996, and Patrick Bryne says Zero Hedge was publishing news about Epstein Island in 2007), but too many people were finding out. It was like part of the reason for the "shut downs" was to shut down discussion (Youtube apparently even sent out notices at this time that they would take down entire channels with no appeal if videos about these subjects were up), and it was almost like they brought in the masks to remind people to "shut up."
I don't understand how your feelings has much to do with this. Or can you care to elaborate?But do they care about my feelings?