Great summary, Mike! it seems to me that the most powerful argument that can be made against Virology is the lack of a control group. That is, if we keep all the variables the same but now proceed to contrast the fluid samples taken from healthy host. if the DV results in the same conclusion, the case is closed. The null hypothesis is accepted!
Thanks Vince! It's pretty amazing how many times virologists refute themselves when controls are performed. It's no wonder why they avoid them like the plague. 😉
I think this was one of your best Substacks yet!! Everything was laid out very well 💜 I couldn’t help but laugh at some of that deep indoctrination and was reminded of our bout with my buddy Kevin.
Are ya sure you don’t want to get bitten by a rabid dog? 😉
Thanks Kristen! As tempting as it is to get bitten by another animal (I've been bitten by many, including a squirrel and a penguin), i think I will just wait for Kevin to share some actual scientific evidence first. 😉
Another great post. Your articles have shown there's no scientific proof of the existence of viruses. (Even if infectious viruses do exist, then it's obvious the purported virus genomes are fake.) However, the vast majority won't reject virology unless there's another paradigm to replace it.
COVID, AIDS, polio and the Spanish "Flu" had non-viral causes. But finding the causes of regular flu/colds and measles, etc. has been more elusive. If ALL “infectious viruses” turn out to be a hoax, then “infectious diseases” might still exist via a TBD non-viral mechanism. Even Cowan has to invoke "resonance", which is unproven and very speculative, to explain why measles is "infectious".
Dr. Suzanne Humphries, who is very anti-vax, is still on team-virus because she says measles is definitely infectious and detox can't explain why someone doesn't get it repeatedly.
It is unfortunate that people require an alternative explanation. They are not comfortable with not having all of the answers. There are just some things we don't know. Sadly, the continued pursuit of fictional "viruses" takes us further away from ever being able to discover how things truly work.
Cowan loves the idea of a non physical energy explanation of natural processes.
He thinks the heart is not a pump, but somehow the blood flows via an energy vortex? WTF! It is a pump, otherwise what's the point of it beating? Oh yes it might suck blood. Yeah that's also called a pump! He should read basic physics to understand a pump moves fluid based on a pressure differential. But whatever, maybe he needs to drink more structured water to increase his reality powers, lol.
People getting sick together is easily explained. They share the same environment.
There's also phenomena where people's bodies mimic each other, like menstruation etc.
Dr Humphries sounds like she was hypnotized in her doctor days, seeing kids get sick, ignoring that measles could very well be a detox from the jabs she is against.
Some people cannot put two and two together because they were emotionally invested before.
It's aggravating that these people who applied the scientific principle on virology and germ theory only to jump into speculative ideas that reinforce their beliefs.
They cry about post modernism, but themselves repeat subjective crap.
"And then there is the psychological effect of the Big Lie which is axiomatic in gaslighting. The paradox here is that the bigger the lie, the harder it is for the mind to bridge the gulf between perceived reality and the lie that authority figures are painting as truth. I believe that the prospect of being deceived evinces a primitive emotional response on a par with staring death in the face. We are hard-wired to fear deception because we have evolved to interpret it as an existential threat. That’s why deception can elicit the same emotional response as the miscalculation of a serious physical threat. Lies told to us don’t always bear the same cost as a misjudged red light, but the primitive part of the brain can’t make this distinction and we rely on cerebral mediation for a more appropriate but delayed response. And in the long run, the lie is often just as dangerous as the physical threat. Many government whoppers – ‘safe and effective’ – do cost lives.
To avoid the death-like experience of being deceived, a mental defence is erected to deny that the lie is happening."
A good video on how to determine the truth vs faith.
I'm just an ordinary man from the UK who has been trying to get his head around the last few years. I don't blindly trust anything which appears to be instantly making millions in profit. Reading this confirms what I have always felt. Sadly, I dont have many around me who feel the same. I guess the average person just can't be bothered to look. Anyway, a great read, thank you!
Thanks fir the comment! I'm just an ordinary man from Iowa, and I agree that, unfortunately, many people just do not care to take the time to do their own research to get an informed opinion. They blindly trust authority and assume that the science is being done right. I understand as I was like that for a long time. Fortunately, people like us are now taking the time to become informed and we can help the others to do the same. 🙂
Hi, thanks for the recommendation Mike! interesting that you posted the IVM double cross before the animal ag double cross (which I'm blocked from commenting on)! It's not really a war on birds is it? It's a proxy war (just like the one in Ukraine) on those wanting to eat their dead bodies. It means the industry can post pictures of mountains of carcasses, because they can't do that with humans, hyping up the flu and contagion fears, and also increase the price and demand for dead flesh at the same time. The animal ag industry is flourishing and set to get bigger and also happens to be the biggest user of pharma products; free range hens now getting even more vaccines than battery cos of bird flus scams https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/increasing-the-price-and-demand-for
Thank you for the kind words, support, and for the link! That looks like a very interesting interview. 😉
I appreciate the work you are doing as well. We need all of us as we are all in this together. The more we spread the truth, the faster we can bring about change. Keep up the excellent work as well. 🙂
Thank you for your brilliant explanation of the scientific method and why virology is an example of its opposite, namely pseudoscience, anti-science. Your point that virology has no independent variable from which to set up experiments is telling and powerful.
I have one small criticism, tangential not essential. You wrote, "As can be seen from these definitions, science is the systemized acquisition of knowledge about the physical, social, and natural world that is based upon the evidence gained through observation and experimentation. '
The "social world" cannot be understood by means of the scientific method, which is proper to investigating physical reality only. In any social event, one can posit a cause, but it is not possible to prove by an experiment in which all variables except for the independent variable are controlled. Social events must be understood by reference to rational philosophy, meaning philosophical insights that have been proven deductively from self-evident axiom (such as, "existence exists"). Proven philosophical insights can then be used to properly explain social events.
For example, economic theory is a branch of the philosophy of ethics that explains and proves the optimal political policy for achieving material well-being which is economic freedom. Pretenses to "science" and mathematical measurement of outcomes and causes are pseudo-science. And in fact, in "scientific economic theory", no independent variable can be proven, meaning that the posited independent variable is a misconception. This is a subject for another day.
The destruction of philosophy, as in for example post modernism, and the destruction of science as in virology are consequences of the abandonment and rejection of reason, now far advanced in our culture.
I definitely agree with you on "social world." I was just putting the many definitions together into one but I see now it could be confusing so I will take that part out. Thanks for the comment and feedback Rider! 🙂
We already discussed your complete lack of understanding of the independent variable on Twitter. You began to get angry and engage in ad hominem attacks, appeals to credentials, and circular reasoning. I will not engage with someone who is intellectually dishonest and resorts to insults. There is no need to continue this exchange here.
I have always been on the dissenting side of the Hiv debate but then 3 years ago I tested positive. My diagnosis has been particularly challenging for me to believe from the same people promoting Covid lies.
I want to live without antiretrovirals but when I go off them my viral increases, my cd4 count declines, and I look and feel generally unwell and get frequent staph and candida infections…. I’ve gone on and off my meds 6 times, never taking them for more than a few weeks.
I don’t do drugs and I have generally avoided doctors and modern medicine for my whole life. I didn’t get a Covid vaccine. I eat Whole Foods, I don’t drink alcohol, I’m active and don’t have a stressful life. So I’m not looking to debate or troll your posts…I actually believe what you are saying but it’s not matching up with my experience.
If I could find a way to feel healthy and test negative for Hiv again I would dedicate my life to speaking out against big pharma but it seems like all of the opposing views against hiv are just ideas. To still be blaming it all on poppers and azt just doesn’t add up.
Do you or anyone in your circle have any actionable advice for someone like me?
I am sorry you are having to deal with the stress of the HIV label. Are you familiar with terrain theory? Have you looked into detoxification and intermittent fasting? If you are on Facebook, I have groups that you can join to speak to like-minded people. Let me know if you want those resources. The best thing to do is to allow your body to heal itself by making the necessary lifestyle changes that can lead to a healthy terrain physically and mentally.
This is exactly why charlatans like Mike are dangerous. You're right, what he's saying DOESN'T add up, because it's based on ignorance. I hope you're well and I'm sorry for the confusion and stress you're feeling 😕
I wish I had known the dangers of rabies shots. My cat died a violent death less than 72 hours after her rabies shot summer of 2021…I was just beginning my journey as a proud “antivaxxer” because of my violent reaction to Pfizer’s 2nd dose (coerced by employer). I’m kicking myself for not being skeptical of all vaccines…but I certainly am now. My cat seemed to have a stroke and while driving her to the pet emergency she began screaming and projectile vomiting and writhing around in torture. I was beside myself. I’m a nurse but seriously can’t handle seeing animals and children suffering. That experience sealed the deal of never vaxxing myself or others again. And I speak my mind constantly!
Hi Christine. I'm so sorry to hear about what happened to your cat. I ompletely understand what you mean as far as regrets. There are so many things I wish I could do over with my bulldog as well as with my family that could have improved their health and outcomes. If only I knew then what I know now. All we can do is learn from these experiences and do everything we can to ensure that the pharmaceutical toxins never harm our loved ones ever again.
Thank you! I’m taking my cat to a vet far away tomorrow to be spayed they claim they don’t force vaccinations but they strongly encourage so I’m very nervous they will do it behind my back plus I’m nervous that there’s something awful in the anesthesia. I feel I have to get her spayed though. She’s a feral I rescued at 4weeks old and she’s socialized to me but no one else. And she’s extremely skittish and will claw me to death if startled. So I’m nervous about her reaction to tomorrows highly stressful event. Ugh! ❤️
I've only scanned it so far (only Jeremy Hammond writes longer tomes!), but I want to carefully review it.
Well I would agree that the scientific method is a very high standard for determining scientific truth.
However I do want to point out that there are many limitations with science in general, and with the domain of applicability for the scientific method.
There are many MANY cases of phenomena which are not subject to experimentation, thus can never get past the hypothesis stage.
For example:
Science can only perform experiments on phenomena which are repeatable.
What about one time only events? Can such a thing exist? Are these completely outside of the realm of possibility? (I'll bet you can think of some examples!)
Very long time scales: Crude oil takes 250 million years to create. This is the best estimate science has been able to determine. However this cannot be studied using the scientific method. No scientist, no matter how dull and few friends he has, has 250 million years to perform a experiment. (The longest experiment that I know of is the "pitch drop experiment", which might be close to 100 years, and is ongoing). So there are other methods which must be employed, such as indirect markers of time, inductive logic, "thought experiment".
Very large or very small units of mass or distance. Isolating particles the size of a virus is extremely difficult! It's beyond looking for a needle in a haystack. It's like looking for a needle in a 2,000 car train of hopper cars 20 miles long loaded with haystacks. It's really not so easy to do experiments with masses the size of planets.
Again, different methods must be employed besides the scientific method in order to get to the truth about these phenomena.
Don't get me wrong! I'm a man of science. I had an entire career in computer engineering.
I've read everyone from Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, Bertrand Russell, Roger Penrose, Douglas Hofstadter, Claude Shannon, Benoit Mandelbrot, Richard Feynman, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Fritjof Capra, and Rupert Sheldrake.
The point is, science is a tool. Tools have specific applications for which they are useful. Eg, If you want to repair your eyeglasses, then a 6 lb sledgehammer may not be your best choice of a tool.
And if you get down to the nitty gritty, what you find at the core of science is pretty frightening!
Science is based on fundamental axioms which cannot be proven and must be taken on faith. Wait, WHAT!?
Science is never really certain of anything. For example the trade-off between knowing a particles position or its momentum. You get a choice! Pick one! That's all you get to know with precision.
In the quantum world we get really strange things like Schrödinger's superposition of states.
Mathematics, which lies at the foundation of our modern practice of science, at its core is fundamentally flawed. Do you know about what Kurt Gödel demonstrated? "All formal systems contain statements which are paradoxical, meaningless, or false." ALL formal systems! He proved this without a doubt! Bertrand Russell spent the last 30 years of his life trying to develop a system of mathematics free of paradox. He called it Principia Mathematica. But with one swift blow, this young punk mathematician from Czechia absolutely DESTROYED Russell's life work, and showed that it was a foolish goal.
Scientific statements of Truth must be interpreted with human wisdom always.
Maybe I'll try my hand at writing a Substack on this topic.
Do you think you are able to have a conversation about this in a rational, adult manner, without the vitriol? (I've held back after your previous attack, out of concern for our common friend who was in trouble at the time.)
I'm happy that you admit to certain limitations to the scientific method. I would argue that there are many such cases. I'm having this conversation with certain Flat Earthers right now. They attempt to use the scientific method to prove that the Earth is flat, but that isn't really possible. However we don't have to just throw up our hands and say "I don't know, and we'll never know". We can still build a model for the phenomena, which can be shown to be predictive, or not. In fact, the Globe Earth/Heliocentric model is quite predictive of (as far as I know) all observable phenomena which relate to the size, shape, and mass of the earth, movement of planets, etc.
If you have a working model for a phenomena which is outside the scope of applicability of the scientific method, but still predictive of future events, this is almost as good as proof using the scientific method.
Peak oil is not nonsense. It is a simple model (Occam's Razor). It is a rational model. It is consistent with all observations.
I guarantee that I know more about oil and gas production that you. I have studied this subject intensively since about 2009, and I've been studying Peak Oil since about 2000.
You cannot say it is nonsense, unless you have seen all of the data, and heard the arguments. I'm surprised that you have apparently no curiosity to learn what I know, to see my data, or to hear my arguments. You just want to shout me down and say I'm an idiot spouting nonsense.
I'd like to see you go to a convention of geologists and mention abiotic / abiogenic / "deep oil", and see how they react. Please video record the interaction. I would love to see them running you out of the place and throwing their catered fruit bowls and cabbage at you! haha. No geologist I've ever met takes this stuff seriously, because IT CANNOT BE OBSERVED in any practice way. In fact, there are a DOZEN different observations which tend to DISPROVE "Deep Oil hypothesis".
In fact, individual oil and gas wells DEPLETE over time, and so do entire fields. Have you ever seen a Pumpjack in an oil field? Drive around W. Texas, Okalahoma, Colorado, or California, and the landscape is littered with them.
Tell me Mr. Monky... since you know so much... What is the function of a Oil Well Pumpjack? Why are they used? And and how does it relate to the present conversation?
PS: in a gas field, instead of a Pumpjack they use a "field compressor". It has the exact same function. What is it?
So I ask if you are capable of having a civil conversation without the vitriol, and you threaten to publish private emails?
Again, no respect for me? as an older person with gray hair? No curiosity as to what I know, to maybe learn from me, engage in a civil conversation? Just threats and bullying?
And this from an ALLY!?
You've got issues, Mr. Monky. And no, I don't wish to engage with you if you can't offer me common courtesy, and no special courtesy afforded me due to our common friend?
Dude, I don't know what your goal in life is, I don't know what motivates you. Maybe you want to show others how smart you are? By being a big bully?
Excellent and easy to understand article. Thank you!
You are very welcome Astrid! 🙂
Great summary, Mike! it seems to me that the most powerful argument that can be made against Virology is the lack of a control group. That is, if we keep all the variables the same but now proceed to contrast the fluid samples taken from healthy host. if the DV results in the same conclusion, the case is closed. The null hypothesis is accepted!
Thanks Vince! It's pretty amazing how many times virologists refute themselves when controls are performed. It's no wonder why they avoid them like the plague. 😉
I think this was one of your best Substacks yet!! Everything was laid out very well 💜 I couldn’t help but laugh at some of that deep indoctrination and was reminded of our bout with my buddy Kevin.
Are ya sure you don’t want to get bitten by a rabid dog? 😉
Thanks Kristen! As tempting as it is to get bitten by another animal (I've been bitten by many, including a squirrel and a penguin), i think I will just wait for Kevin to share some actual scientific evidence first. 😉
Another great post. Your articles have shown there's no scientific proof of the existence of viruses. (Even if infectious viruses do exist, then it's obvious the purported virus genomes are fake.) However, the vast majority won't reject virology unless there's another paradigm to replace it.
COVID, AIDS, polio and the Spanish "Flu" had non-viral causes. But finding the causes of regular flu/colds and measles, etc. has been more elusive. If ALL “infectious viruses” turn out to be a hoax, then “infectious diseases” might still exist via a TBD non-viral mechanism. Even Cowan has to invoke "resonance", which is unproven and very speculative, to explain why measles is "infectious".
Dr. Suzanne Humphries, who is very anti-vax, is still on team-virus because she says measles is definitely infectious and detox can't explain why someone doesn't get it repeatedly.
It is unfortunate that people require an alternative explanation. They are not comfortable with not having all of the answers. There are just some things we don't know. Sadly, the continued pursuit of fictional "viruses" takes us further away from ever being able to discover how things truly work.
I can't stand when people jump on other bs.
Cowan loves the idea of a non physical energy explanation of natural processes.
He thinks the heart is not a pump, but somehow the blood flows via an energy vortex? WTF! It is a pump, otherwise what's the point of it beating? Oh yes it might suck blood. Yeah that's also called a pump! He should read basic physics to understand a pump moves fluid based on a pressure differential. But whatever, maybe he needs to drink more structured water to increase his reality powers, lol.
People getting sick together is easily explained. They share the same environment.
There's also phenomena where people's bodies mimic each other, like menstruation etc.
Dr Humphries sounds like she was hypnotized in her doctor days, seeing kids get sick, ignoring that measles could very well be a detox from the jabs she is against.
Some people cannot put two and two together because they were emotionally invested before.
It's aggravating that these people who applied the scientific principle on virology and germ theory only to jump into speculative ideas that reinforce their beliefs.
They cry about post modernism, but themselves repeat subjective crap.
(From https://leftlockdownsceptics.com/alleged-cia-involvement-in-jfk-assassination-goes-mainstream-so-now-what/ )
"And then there is the psychological effect of the Big Lie which is axiomatic in gaslighting. The paradox here is that the bigger the lie, the harder it is for the mind to bridge the gulf between perceived reality and the lie that authority figures are painting as truth. I believe that the prospect of being deceived evinces a primitive emotional response on a par with staring death in the face. We are hard-wired to fear deception because we have evolved to interpret it as an existential threat. That’s why deception can elicit the same emotional response as the miscalculation of a serious physical threat. Lies told to us don’t always bear the same cost as a misjudged red light, but the primitive part of the brain can’t make this distinction and we rely on cerebral mediation for a more appropriate but delayed response. And in the long run, the lie is often just as dangerous as the physical threat. Many government whoppers – ‘safe and effective’ – do cost lives.
To avoid the death-like experience of being deceived, a mental defence is erected to deny that the lie is happening."
A good video on how to determine the truth vs faith.
https://youtu.be/5EMl5YQxZvM
Hi,
I'm just an ordinary man from the UK who has been trying to get his head around the last few years. I don't blindly trust anything which appears to be instantly making millions in profit. Reading this confirms what I have always felt. Sadly, I dont have many around me who feel the same. I guess the average person just can't be bothered to look. Anyway, a great read, thank you!
Hi Paul,
Thanks fir the comment! I'm just an ordinary man from Iowa, and I agree that, unfortunately, many people just do not care to take the time to do their own research to get an informed opinion. They blindly trust authority and assume that the science is being done right. I understand as I was like that for a long time. Fortunately, people like us are now taking the time to become informed and we can help the others to do the same. 🙂
"Trust the pseudoscience!" (*Translated)
Hi, thanks for the recommendation Mike! interesting that you posted the IVM double cross before the animal ag double cross (which I'm blocked from commenting on)! It's not really a war on birds is it? It's a proxy war (just like the one in Ukraine) on those wanting to eat their dead bodies. It means the industry can post pictures of mountains of carcasses, because they can't do that with humans, hyping up the flu and contagion fears, and also increase the price and demand for dead flesh at the same time. The animal ag industry is flourishing and set to get bigger and also happens to be the biggest user of pharma products; free range hens now getting even more vaccines than battery cos of bird flus scams https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/increasing-the-price-and-demand-for
Jo
xx
Great article, Mike!
Let me share something directly from the person who represents the science, that we wrote yesterday:
https://gamzuletova.substack.com/p/i-represent-science-and-i-said
Keep up your excellent work! We need you.
God bless you.
Misha
Thank you for the kind words, support, and for the link! That looks like a very interesting interview. 😉
I appreciate the work you are doing as well. We need all of us as we are all in this together. The more we spread the truth, the faster we can bring about change. Keep up the excellent work as well. 🙂
Thank you for your brilliant explanation of the scientific method and why virology is an example of its opposite, namely pseudoscience, anti-science. Your point that virology has no independent variable from which to set up experiments is telling and powerful.
I have one small criticism, tangential not essential. You wrote, "As can be seen from these definitions, science is the systemized acquisition of knowledge about the physical, social, and natural world that is based upon the evidence gained through observation and experimentation. '
The "social world" cannot be understood by means of the scientific method, which is proper to investigating physical reality only. In any social event, one can posit a cause, but it is not possible to prove by an experiment in which all variables except for the independent variable are controlled. Social events must be understood by reference to rational philosophy, meaning philosophical insights that have been proven deductively from self-evident axiom (such as, "existence exists"). Proven philosophical insights can then be used to properly explain social events.
For example, economic theory is a branch of the philosophy of ethics that explains and proves the optimal political policy for achieving material well-being which is economic freedom. Pretenses to "science" and mathematical measurement of outcomes and causes are pseudo-science. And in fact, in "scientific economic theory", no independent variable can be proven, meaning that the posited independent variable is a misconception. This is a subject for another day.
The destruction of philosophy, as in for example post modernism, and the destruction of science as in virology are consequences of the abandonment and rejection of reason, now far advanced in our culture.
I definitely agree with you on "social world." I was just putting the many definitions together into one but I see now it could be confusing so I will take that part out. Thanks for the comment and feedback Rider! 🙂
Yes! Simplified for the lay person - thank you!
You are very welcome Michael! 🙂
A song about the fraud of Virology. Listen to THE DISH. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-dish. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-dish
More songs to help you cope with all the gaslighting.
New Substack Release. TYRANNY TRAIN. Hop on board! Destination: Slavery! https://turfseer.substack.com/p/tyranny-train
A pop idol disgraces herself when she bans the unvaccinated from her concerts. Listen to Turfseer’s GAGA’S GONE. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/gagas-gone
JUST TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE.. “Straight shooter” advice on vaccination for the brainwashed
https://turfseer.substack.com/p/just-too-good-to-be-true
Fight the Globalist’s plan for world domination. Listen to Turfseer’s THE GREAT RESET. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-great-reset
BONUS: Free Download. THE ALTERNATIVE COVID-19 NARRATIVE HANDBOOK. A Collection of useful links. Get it here: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-alternative-covid-narrative-handbook
Subscribe to Turfseer's Newsletter. Songs, music videos and much more.
This is extremely stupid. You don't appear to have any understanding of how variables are used or basic terminology
We already discussed your complete lack of understanding of the independent variable on Twitter. You began to get angry and engage in ad hominem attacks, appeals to credentials, and circular reasoning. I will not engage with someone who is intellectually dishonest and resorts to insults. There is no need to continue this exchange here.
I have always been on the dissenting side of the Hiv debate but then 3 years ago I tested positive. My diagnosis has been particularly challenging for me to believe from the same people promoting Covid lies.
I want to live without antiretrovirals but when I go off them my viral increases, my cd4 count declines, and I look and feel generally unwell and get frequent staph and candida infections…. I’ve gone on and off my meds 6 times, never taking them for more than a few weeks.
I don’t do drugs and I have generally avoided doctors and modern medicine for my whole life. I didn’t get a Covid vaccine. I eat Whole Foods, I don’t drink alcohol, I’m active and don’t have a stressful life. So I’m not looking to debate or troll your posts…I actually believe what you are saying but it’s not matching up with my experience.
If I could find a way to feel healthy and test negative for Hiv again I would dedicate my life to speaking out against big pharma but it seems like all of the opposing views against hiv are just ideas. To still be blaming it all on poppers and azt just doesn’t add up.
Do you or anyone in your circle have any actionable advice for someone like me?
Hi Evan,
I am sorry you are having to deal with the stress of the HIV label. Are you familiar with terrain theory? Have you looked into detoxification and intermittent fasting? If you are on Facebook, I have groups that you can join to speak to like-minded people. Let me know if you want those resources. The best thing to do is to allow your body to heal itself by making the necessary lifestyle changes that can lead to a healthy terrain physically and mentally.
This is exactly why charlatans like Mike are dangerous. You're right, what he's saying DOESN'T add up, because it's based on ignorance. I hope you're well and I'm sorry for the confusion and stress you're feeling 😕
I wish I had known the dangers of rabies shots. My cat died a violent death less than 72 hours after her rabies shot summer of 2021…I was just beginning my journey as a proud “antivaxxer” because of my violent reaction to Pfizer’s 2nd dose (coerced by employer). I’m kicking myself for not being skeptical of all vaccines…but I certainly am now. My cat seemed to have a stroke and while driving her to the pet emergency she began screaming and projectile vomiting and writhing around in torture. I was beside myself. I’m a nurse but seriously can’t handle seeing animals and children suffering. That experience sealed the deal of never vaxxing myself or others again. And I speak my mind constantly!
Hi Christine. I'm so sorry to hear about what happened to your cat. I ompletely understand what you mean as far as regrets. There are so many things I wish I could do over with my bulldog as well as with my family that could have improved their health and outcomes. If only I knew then what I know now. All we can do is learn from these experiences and do everything we can to ensure that the pharmaceutical toxins never harm our loved ones ever again.
Thank you! I’m taking my cat to a vet far away tomorrow to be spayed they claim they don’t force vaccinations but they strongly encourage so I’m very nervous they will do it behind my back plus I’m nervous that there’s something awful in the anesthesia. I feel I have to get her spayed though. She’s a feral I rescued at 4weeks old and she’s socialized to me but no one else. And she’s extremely skittish and will claw me to death if startled. So I’m nervous about her reaction to tomorrows highly stressful event. Ugh! ❤️
Awesome article, as always, Mike!
I've only scanned it so far (only Jeremy Hammond writes longer tomes!), but I want to carefully review it.
Well I would agree that the scientific method is a very high standard for determining scientific truth.
However I do want to point out that there are many limitations with science in general, and with the domain of applicability for the scientific method.
There are many MANY cases of phenomena which are not subject to experimentation, thus can never get past the hypothesis stage.
For example:
Science can only perform experiments on phenomena which are repeatable.
What about one time only events? Can such a thing exist? Are these completely outside of the realm of possibility? (I'll bet you can think of some examples!)
Very long time scales: Crude oil takes 250 million years to create. This is the best estimate science has been able to determine. However this cannot be studied using the scientific method. No scientist, no matter how dull and few friends he has, has 250 million years to perform a experiment. (The longest experiment that I know of is the "pitch drop experiment", which might be close to 100 years, and is ongoing). So there are other methods which must be employed, such as indirect markers of time, inductive logic, "thought experiment".
Very large or very small units of mass or distance. Isolating particles the size of a virus is extremely difficult! It's beyond looking for a needle in a haystack. It's like looking for a needle in a 2,000 car train of hopper cars 20 miles long loaded with haystacks. It's really not so easy to do experiments with masses the size of planets.
Again, different methods must be employed besides the scientific method in order to get to the truth about these phenomena.
Don't get me wrong! I'm a man of science. I had an entire career in computer engineering.
I've read everyone from Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, Bertrand Russell, Roger Penrose, Douglas Hofstadter, Claude Shannon, Benoit Mandelbrot, Richard Feynman, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Fritjof Capra, and Rupert Sheldrake.
The point is, science is a tool. Tools have specific applications for which they are useful. Eg, If you want to repair your eyeglasses, then a 6 lb sledgehammer may not be your best choice of a tool.
And if you get down to the nitty gritty, what you find at the core of science is pretty frightening!
Science is based on fundamental axioms which cannot be proven and must be taken on faith. Wait, WHAT!?
Science is never really certain of anything. For example the trade-off between knowing a particles position or its momentum. You get a choice! Pick one! That's all you get to know with precision.
In the quantum world we get really strange things like Schrödinger's superposition of states.
Mathematics, which lies at the foundation of our modern practice of science, at its core is fundamentally flawed. Do you know about what Kurt Gödel demonstrated? "All formal systems contain statements which are paradoxical, meaningless, or false." ALL formal systems! He proved this without a doubt! Bertrand Russell spent the last 30 years of his life trying to develop a system of mathematics free of paradox. He called it Principia Mathematica. But with one swift blow, this young punk mathematician from Czechia absolutely DESTROYED Russell's life work, and showed that it was a foolish goal.
Scientific statements of Truth must be interpreted with human wisdom always.
Maybe I'll try my hand at writing a Substack on this topic.
Do you think you are able to have a conversation about this in a rational, adult manner, without the vitriol? (I've held back after your previous attack, out of concern for our common friend who was in trouble at the time.)
I'm happy that you admit to certain limitations to the scientific method. I would argue that there are many such cases. I'm having this conversation with certain Flat Earthers right now. They attempt to use the scientific method to prove that the Earth is flat, but that isn't really possible. However we don't have to just throw up our hands and say "I don't know, and we'll never know". We can still build a model for the phenomena, which can be shown to be predictive, or not. In fact, the Globe Earth/Heliocentric model is quite predictive of (as far as I know) all observable phenomena which relate to the size, shape, and mass of the earth, movement of planets, etc.
If you have a working model for a phenomena which is outside the scope of applicability of the scientific method, but still predictive of future events, this is almost as good as proof using the scientific method.
Peak oil is not nonsense. It is a simple model (Occam's Razor). It is a rational model. It is consistent with all observations.
I guarantee that I know more about oil and gas production that you. I have studied this subject intensively since about 2009, and I've been studying Peak Oil since about 2000.
You cannot say it is nonsense, unless you have seen all of the data, and heard the arguments. I'm surprised that you have apparently no curiosity to learn what I know, to see my data, or to hear my arguments. You just want to shout me down and say I'm an idiot spouting nonsense.
I'd like to see you go to a convention of geologists and mention abiotic / abiogenic / "deep oil", and see how they react. Please video record the interaction. I would love to see them running you out of the place and throwing their catered fruit bowls and cabbage at you! haha. No geologist I've ever met takes this stuff seriously, because IT CANNOT BE OBSERVED in any practice way. In fact, there are a DOZEN different observations which tend to DISPROVE "Deep Oil hypothesis".
In fact, individual oil and gas wells DEPLETE over time, and so do entire fields. Have you ever seen a Pumpjack in an oil field? Drive around W. Texas, Okalahoma, Colorado, or California, and the landscape is littered with them.
Tell me Mr. Monky... since you know so much... What is the function of a Oil Well Pumpjack? Why are they used? And and how does it relate to the present conversation?
PS: in a gas field, instead of a Pumpjack they use a "field compressor". It has the exact same function. What is it?
So I ask if you are capable of having a civil conversation without the vitriol, and you threaten to publish private emails?
Again, no respect for me? as an older person with gray hair? No curiosity as to what I know, to maybe learn from me, engage in a civil conversation? Just threats and bullying?
And this from an ALLY!?
You've got issues, Mr. Monky. And no, I don't wish to engage with you if you can't offer me common courtesy, and no special courtesy afforded me due to our common friend?
Dude, I don't know what your goal in life is, I don't know what motivates you. Maybe you want to show others how smart you are? By being a big bully?
Nah, I have zero interest in engaging with you.
Which part of the scientific method involves bullying and personal attacks?
I must have missed that lecture.
Time to break out my Kuhn, and Popper books!
Clearly I need a refresher...