it would seem that we are now moving from the "denial" to the "anger" stage of the grieving process.
pretty much no one is celebrating this dylan, especially the many of us who were being relentlessly attacked, vilified, and censored for trying to warn you.
this bell cannot be un-rung, but we can at least secure the clapper and prevent it from doing more harm, identify/address the real causes of current problems, and perhaps most importantly:
take the steps to be sure this does not happen again
most of "the experts" turned out to be a nasty combination of inexpert and untrustworthy.
those that spoke didn't know and those that knew often said the opposite for fear of reprisal or to gain status/power.
because that's what technocrats do.
dissent and debate was silenced.
those who trusted "experts" and were fooled deserve and have my sympathy
it was a confusing and frightening time
but let's not forget just how savage a lot of hectoring was
it is perhaps understandable that its targets are raw/angry over what was said about and done to them
i think it pays for both sides to keep their eyes on what is important here and just where their anger should be focused:
those who were tricked should not be fighting with those who tried to reveal the trick
both should be seeking to hold to account those who did the tricking
i have no quarrel with anyone who was fooled into self-harm. i'm on your side. always was.
but those who lied, cheated, cut corners, and pushed bad product and practice then tried to hide it?
this is on you
holding you to full account is one of the great issues of our time
and those who fawningly carried water for these malefactors to force the lies upon the rest of us?
you share culpability.
you turned on your fellows perhaps from fear, perhaps from desire to weild the whip hand as ersatz hall monitor, but neither absolves blame.
anger here is justified.
desire and demand for deep systemic change here is justified.
such change is vital to the restoration of civilization and the the flourishing of free people.
because they WILL try this again.
the next batch of cookies are already in oven.
so let's keep our eyes on the prize, yes?
this has been a calamity. we cannot change that now.
but we can determine that those who did this are unworthy of our trust, our respect, or our allegiance
and we can hold them to account and dismantle the systems they used to do this
they want us to fight ourselves and forget about them.
that is their bet, their plan.
they wager they can induce us to war upon one another and thereby divert us from ending their rule.
let's make sure they lose.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
people love to trot out the old chestnut of "we did the best we could with the information we had" around covid vaccines.
the more extreme examples claim "you could not have known, you just got lucky!"
both are risibly false.
people ask: "how did you know not to take or trust the covid jab?"
here's how: (and how to spot similar in the future)
1. you could tell from the pfizer trial design that the "covid vaccine" was not assessed as a vaccine. it was never tested on spread, infection, transmission, or sterilizing immunity. at best, the trials could have shown it to be a therapeutic. even that was deeply /sus and the sudden enrollment in sites in argentina run by a doctor with a history of fraud did not reassure. neither did the all cause deaths data in the study.
2. the messaging about the covid vaccine "this will be a dead end for the virus! if you get the vaccine, you will not get covid, you will not spread covid" was obviously not supported by any clinical data.
it was a made up claim to make getting the shot look like a moral duty. it was marketing, not science.
3. this marketing was NEVER plausible. vaccines are not magic, they simply train your immune system to recognize a pathogen. if you do not develop durable immunity from exposure to live disease, a vaccine is not going to impart it either.
it's amazing that people are still out peddling this obviously inaccurate data. rig your studies all you like, covid vaccines did not reduce cases, deaths, or hospitalization. they made them worse.
all these slanted studies fly in the face of the overall data. for this to be correct, covid vaccines would need to reduce hospitalization risk by ~92%. that's incredibly high efficacy. efficacy like that would create a massive, unmistakable signal in the data with populations that were 70-99% vaccinated. the curves would bend so hard that anyone could eyeball it. it would be air horn during vatican vespers unmissable.
but it's not there. not only is this signal absent, it's inverted.
let's take some obvious examples in the high risk high vaxxed populations:
i chose the top states in the US by vaxx rate and looked at 65+, the high risk high vaxx group.
95% vaxxed. hospitalizations and all cause mortality both rose post vaccine despite a less dangerous covid variant. if this were 92% effective, the 5% unvaxxed would have had to see their hospitalization rates rise 18 fold just to stay flat. and we KNOW that did not happen.
this signal is not isolated. we see the same thing in maine, rhode island, massachusetts, connecticut. this is obviously the modal outcome.
more here:
in fact, the highest vaxxed states in the US saw the worst rises in hospitalization rates while the lowest saw far less. vaxx is, at a societal level, associated with more, not less hospitalization and death.
one could, i suppose, try to argue causality, but the timing is highly provocative and again, if efficacy is 90% signal should be strongly opposite to that which is observed.
this same was true of all search engines i tried. it's not just google.
i suspect this is an artifact of something deeper like "media refusing to use these words" or some more generalized manipulation.
literally in the time i was doing the analysis, luxxle caught up perhaps because this issue is going viral on X.
but the others had not as of this writing.
i suspect this may have more to do with this than with something google specific:
even once this avalanche of absurdist headlines was replaced by ones that bore at least marginally more resemblance to reality, the words “assassination attempt on” appear basically nowhere.