Watching @RWMaloneMD & @GVDBossche yesterday, I saw scientific process at work. Outspoken experts opposing the establishment, converging to concrete predictions. We'll soon know who's right and who's wrong.
First, I've noticed this convergence a bit more than 2 months ago, with a number of controversial experts brought together by @BretWeinstein on the DarkHorse podcast. Since then, their views have been inching closer.
Here's why this matters: Scientific consensus doesn't happen in weeks. This is the easiest way to know that the mainstream anti lab-leak consensus was false. Also, religious heretics tend to disagree with each other. Convergence lends credibility to their claim to seek truth.
The heretical consensus sees these ideas as credible & wrongly opposed:
The heretical consensus articulates concerns about widely-applied policies, proposing deep changes (though mostly not total suspension):
- Outdoor masking
- Child vaccination, Vaccine booster
- Mass vaccination campaign in a pandemic
- Poor data collection poicies.
- Lockdowns
The heretical consensus tends to champion a number of related ethical positions:
- Open and transparent debate
- Autonomy of doctors to make decisions
- Informed consent for patients
- Opposition to vaccine mandates (under current parameters)
- Opposition to the "Noble lie"
The above list is my reading of the heretical consensus, and I may well have missed some elements and/or stated some of them badly. Feel free to send me more candidates, and I will integrate in potential future revisions.
Many of the ideas coming out of this consensus have gradually made their way into the mainstream, though certainly not all, and some are the inverse of the predominant policies being applied in many parts of the world.
Important to note (though this kind of disclaimer is often mocked) that the heretical consensus is not against vaccination in general. Many proponents are highly vaccinated & have worked in vaccine development for many years. The disagreement focuses on strategy in this pandemic.
🤣 @fiddleBits donated to the FLCCC in honor of @hang_a_shore's constructive comment below, and now I have no choice: I have to follow through with a "donate and block" fundraiser. The people have spoken!
Holy shit, I just noticed the subtitle of this image. OK folks, we have to get to the bottom of the whole "variants emerged due to vaccine trials" claim. Has anyone chased this down, other than the original correlation GISAID images?
2. "Hospital admission and emergency care attendance risk for SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) compared with alpha (B.1.1.7) variants of concern: a cohort study" (h/t @JoomiKim1)
Come to think of it, I do seem to have gathered myself an illustrious set of blockings... Forgive the indulgent threadlet, nothing to take too seriously, just some harmless fun(?).