gonational

A noble discovery...

However, even if this was an economically viable solution to the perceived problem of CO2 in the atmosphere, this doesn't help with the goal of setting up a global government and global tax, so it would be ignored.

Anthropogenic global warming, as a studied issue, is not about solving the world's problems; it's about setting up a global government with a global tax. It always has been; it hasn't even pretended to be anything else. The motivations have always been ostensibly about solving global warming, but the plans have always been very public; set up a global tax and a global government to implement this tax. That could not be more clear.

Ask yourself, if you were planning on taxing the entire planet, even if it was only .1% of their GDP (~80 billion), would you rather have that money or have some random scientist discover the solution to the problem that leads to you getting 80 billion dollars?

How about the 30 or so that I listed in my original comment above… read much?

Oh, that is interesting. There are some interesting historical name stories; such as "World War", which wasn't really in use until decades after the first world war.

Except that theories rooted in facts, with evidence, and a track record of successful predictions, has nothing to do with mythology.

    - US government poisoning alcohol during prohibition
    - US government using dead baby body parts for radiation testing without consent of the parents
    - US government giving Black people syphilis on purpose
    - Operation paperclip
    - US intel's heart attack gun
    - Operation Mockingbird (CIA infiltrating media)
    - US Air Force experimenting with pheromones as a weapon
    - CIA funded Dalai Lama and related guerrilla forces
    - polio vaccine spread a cancer-causing virus
    - Operation Northwoods (US intelligence planned to stage a false flag operation in the USA and blame Cuban terrorists)
    - Tobacco companies knew cigarette smoke was deadly
    - FBI spying on John Lennon, Martin Luther King Junior, et al
    - The entire US/Vietnam war, predicated on a golf of Tonkin "incident", which never happened
    - Iran-Contras
    - MK ULTRA
    - PRISM (Snowden)
    - weapons of mass destruction
    - 9/11 having nothing to do with Iraq invasion
    - Panama papers
    - Vaccine passports
    - Agenda 21/2030

Honestly, the list goes on for so long that you would fill your disk with text before you exhausted it.

With this knowledge, you have to be woefully illogical to come to the blanket conclusion that "conspiracy theories" are just some form of ridiculous religion.

There are people who believe things that are totally ridiculous and unrealistic. There are idiots in all walks of life, but using those idiots to attempt to dismiss everything that you deem to be a "conspiracy theory" is as ridiculous as dismissing all comedians as "misogynistic racists" just because one comedian tells racist and misogynist jokes.

This situation began with a market gap in the late 2000s: the need for "web scale" apps capable of handling tens of millions of requests per day.

This gap spurred the creation of tools with a lot of bad practices (e.g., Mongo, etc., which sacrificed ACID). Relational databases, like Postgres, were just not ready for the kind of scale we would see with popular web apps.

These new "do anything however" tools (like Mongo) lower the barrier of entry into app creation, because you could just turn them on and start loading data into them; even basically just JavaScript objects could be dumped into the database. As a result, a whole new cohort of developers joined in the creation of full web apps.

Now, developers, accustomed to styling drop down menus and creating picture slideshows, were directly engaged in things like data modeling, business logic, and security. As you might imagine, all of those things were tossed out the window. As such, many of the JavaScript frameworks didn't even bother with many of these... niceties.

"NoSQL" as a concept has since lost relevance, because all of the RDBMS have solved the scaling issues. And for folks who got used to using unstructured data, RDBMS like Postgres added support for unstructured data, and in a manner that even outperforms purpose-built "NoSQL" tools like Mongo.

In other words, the gap that created all this bad stuff has long been filled by the existing tools, but the new tools and bad practices that come with them will persist for a generation; just as PHP is still used for new projects today.

I am absolutely OK with any platform censoring any content for any reason, as long as they are not treated like a public square by the government.

It's interesting to see people labeled as "anti-vaxxers" or "vaccine hesitant" or "unvaccinated".

If I was not looking to purchase a medication because I had no ailment, and then a medical professional came up and showed me the following chart and told me "Vaccines have cured most of the calamitous diseases of yesteryear, and here is a new one that you should take.", I would not then decide to get a vaccine. Would you? Look at the chart.

https://learntherisk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/diseases...

No need to argue with me; why bother. I didn't create the data used to make the chart. When that feeling starts to come back look at the chart once again. The data doesn't change. Your feelings might change, but facts will stay the same each time you load the chart. Try it out.

Labeling people, because they haven't made a choice to do something that you think they should do, is a strange phenomenon.

For anybody else who stumbles across the above uninformed comment, here is some information for context (wrt "gene therapy", etc.):

https://www.nature.com/gt/journal-information

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gene-based-therape...

A certain degree of ignorance can be forgiven in this day and age, because everything is being constantly re-defined by the television, and most folks get their information from the television.

So don't attack people for not knowing things, but just be aware how many low information people are unintentionally misleading others. You can even see in the parent comment, the primary source of information for most of these people is some form of media company (Miami Herald, in this case). This is, unfortunately, the new normal.

Logging in with different accounts and downvoting this won't change the facts.

What evidence did you have that people were doing this, which presumably affected your opinion on this topic?

I learned about Ivermectin from MedCram circa May 2020.

Everybody I know personally who did not learn about it from me learned about it from Eric Weinstein on the Joe Rogan podcast.

A good friend of mine watches Fox News no less than three hours a day and took both Pfizer doses months ago.

I suspect you might be projecting, and perhaps you learned about Ivermectin from a neoliberal TV show. Most of the people who believe in the safety and efficacy of Ivermectin believe so precisely because they are not consuming television propaganda, and so they are still able to form their own opinions from real information.

> Regardless of what the copy on some obscure CDC website says

Read that, out loud...

All you need to do is set your search parameters to filter out items from the past 24 months.

https://www.nature.com/gt/journal-information

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gene-based-therape...

There are thousands more.

SMH... short memory span is the worst part of the human condition.

The nationwide report that everybody talked about, pertaining to poison control centers receiving endless calls about this was completely fake. It turned out that rather than 70% of calls it was actually 2% of calls and over half of them were simply people asking questions about dosage.

The other nationwide report about the hospitals in Oklahoma being crowded with ivermectin victims to the point where they could not even get gunshot victims in to see a doctor... well, at least one of the hospital systems responded with an open letter stating that this was completely fake and that they had not seen even a single patient. I find it hard to believe that one hospital system would not see a single patient while all the other hospitals in the state would be completely flooded with them.

If the TV tells you something, you do not have to believe it.

Use your brain.

Yeah, because nothing says "recognize the current scientific understanding" like dismissing hundreds of studies because of a couple bunk meta-analysis. Also, nothing says "recognize the current scientific understanding" like injecting an untested medicine into your veins to avoid what amounts to the common cold for younger people; while ignoring the fact that it does not help prevent the spread, and according to the latest study on this from Israel (the highest vaccine rate in the world), actually enhances the spread, so if the argument is "what about the old people that you're going to infect", then I guess you've answered that question already.

It pays nothing to pretend that you are smarter than other people if you're not willing to follow your own advice.

The United States CDC literally changed the definition of "vaccine" this year, so that these products could still be identified as vaccines. You're going to tell me that it's "science illiterate" to consider mRNA therapy as gene therapy, because the genes are not actually changed, but instead only expressed to create the therapeutic effect. But it is "scientifically literate" to call such a therapy a "vaccine"?

I hope more common sense literate proponents of science can appreciate how much it harms their case for a vast majority of science advocates to be loud and wrong.

Would you mind linking me to the evidence that this is incorrect?

Posts like mine are being censored across-the-board on the Internet because of "interests". I mean, how much more evidence could you possibly linked to then 119 studies, yet my comment was flagged out of existence. We are literally living in a George Orwell novel and the people with jackboots are just ordinary citizens, putting the boots on their own necks. We are under the spell of like a self-prescribed global brainwashing campaign. Nobody cares about science anymore, nobody cares about the scientific method, nobody cares about actual data anymore, only propaganda. 119 studies show evidence of one thing. That's not enough though. But then the media says another thing and everybody believes it, despite the fact that there are dozens of studies with conflicting data showing various counter arguments (such as the Israeli pre-print from three weeks ago showing that The gene therapy is less effective than natural immunity by a factor of 13 to 27 times). This was practically completely ignored by the media and everybody on this site. In the past everybody here would've been on that shit immediately, trying to figure out if it was correct, I mean don't we want out of this mess? Does anybody want out of this or does everybody feel good about having a boot on their neck for the rest of their lives? Let go of your ego for a minute and ask yourself that question for real. If you're one of the people who will down vote this comment, there is no help for you in the long run. But if you want to be honest with yourself, and you want this bullshit situation to end, then you need to look at the real science in the real data and ask real questions and be open to the answers. Even if it means you made a terrible mistake somewhere along the way.

Given that MV Ever Given drew a penis and balls outside the canal[1] before entering, I suspect there is a chance the jam was not an accident.

1. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_605c2e44c5b67ad3871c9afe

The coronavirus will never end until people turn off their TV and MSM in general and start looking elsewhere for information.

First, the elephant in the room... Ivermectin. Ivermectin, which has been on the market globally for like half a century, is 86% effective as a prophylactic against COVID-19 (aka a better vaccine than the "vaccines" themselves), is 72% effective in early treatment, and is 40% effective in late treatment[1]. Side effects most experience? Kills parasites, including scabies, and reduces systemic inflammation, including TNF. Because of the fear and hype surrounding COVID-19, there are thousands of folks out there who have been taking what is generally considered to be an annual dose... every week... for almost a year. I mean, we can basically just stop right there; right? We've got a safe and effective drug that reduces the risk of serious illness and death to almost zero, collectively demonstrated by the studies in the first reference (bottom). For real, just stop and consider this, and then consider whether it's even worth considering ANY other information. There is a literal cure that is also a prophylactic, and which is completely safe. What else can be said?

But, I'll continue. So then, in the US, we've got recommendations, from the world's preeminent purveyor of disease information, to wear paper masks OUTSIDE IN THE SUN, masks that are known to cause cancer, and which reduce oxygen[2] and increase resting heart rate, and which are about as effective as using a chain link fence to stop mosquitoes (less, even).

Then, the mRNA "vaccines", which are an experimental form of gene therapy, with less than 1 year's worth of data. A normal vaccine would undergo about 12x the study duration, and that's when we're using existing and proven technology; but for some reason, we're ok with 1/12 of the study period for a "vaccine" that is of an entirely new category.

Then, we trap people in their houses, where disease is shown to thrive, without sunlight and without exercise.

The only way this ever ends is for a majority of people to turn their TVs off for good, and to start using common sense.

Disclaimer: I am not a doctor and none of this is medical advice.

1. https://c19ivermectin.com/#prep

2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9610792/ OR (bacterial disease enhancement) https://cancerdiscovery.aacrjournals.org/content/11/2/293

3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18500410/

> Turning vaccines into a political wedge issue is one of the stupidest things I've seen in my life.

Sadly, there is one thing worse: health "authorities" and "experts" completely disregarding therapeutics, e.g., Ivermectin, which is as safe and as cheap as Aspirin, and which reduces the risk of serious illness and death by up to 86% [1] (which brings the death risk to about 1/4 of the flu... aka a low enough level to not even warrant a news story), all because a politician said it works.

I recommend listening to episode #1671 of the Joe Rogan podcast, in which he interviews Pierre Kory and Bret Weinstein. Once you listen to this, if you are not absolutely astounded by what you learn, please let me know (unless the reason is because you already knew this stuff).

Edit: imagine being so ignorant and deranged as to down vote these well studied and cited (see below) facts.

1. https://c19ivermectin.com

I wonder if they've considered just allowing people to say what they want. Maybe they could create some form of legal provision, perhaps even an amendment to our constitution, which would allow for freedom of speech. Thoughts on this idea?

Plato's Five Regimes - we're basically skipping straight to the end.

There is no going back once we are there, so I hope you have all your ducks in a row and have enjoyed everything you wanted to before we arrive. Once were there, it's over; for everyone.

If their concerns are validated, are they still "conspiracy theorists"?

I mean, this reads a bit like "don't kill rabbits or else those people who say you kill rabbits will be further validated with their conspiracy theories!"

Shoot. Has uBlock Origin been neutered in Firefox?

I've been using it since the beginning and never bothered to check whether or not support has been reduced in some form.

If fear is the poison, then courage is the antidote.

You're right, 100%, but it's easy to lose sight of the fact that bullies, especially in this modern era, are the weak ones, and when you stand up for yourself you'll be surprised at how many of them cower in fear.

You'll also be surprised to see how many more you inspire to stand up next to you. Everybody is waiting for somebody else to stand up. Be that person and you'll soon be addicted to the results. One example, and of course this is controversial these days and itself, is that once we reached the point in the "pandemic" where it was obvious that the virus wasn't the real threat, I decided to go grocery shopping with no mask. I expected to be screamed at, but not one person said anything in a gigantic store filled with dozens of people. Not only that, but by the time I got to the front of the store there were two other people whom I encountered in the isles, who also had no mask on, but who did have a mask on while in the isles. I know this sounds made up. It's the honest to God truth. So I did it again in Home Depot, and it had the exact same affect. For those who disagree with my mindset about masks (which have been clinically proven to be ineffective), this sounds like an asshole move, but regardless of whether or not you agree with the principle behind the move, the methodology was effective. It's the same thing that triggers riots; people see others doing what they want to do and they are inspired to do it themselves. Why not use the same principle to inspire things that are not distractive?

I see a lot of outrage in here and I truly love that.

Honest question: would you express the same level of outrage, if the service in question was primarily a purveyor of political content that you disagreed with, or "hate speech"?

I see a lot of libertarian-minded comments whenever the service in question is some form of file sharing/hacker related service, but I don't really see much outrage when the same culprits use their weight to censor political content, and / or wrong think. PayPal, Visa, YouTube, Amazon, all of these big companies have been engaging in censorship.

Too many seem to be OK with others' rights being taken away, as long as they disagree with those who are losing their rights. How is that any different than what happened to this Tor supporter?

Something like 30 million Russians were killed by socialism in the last century... I imagine that has an effect on your culture.

Should I have preceded my comment with "trigger warning: real information ahead"? I mean, it's now considered "flame be" to state your opinion? Not everybody gets their science from CNN, so not everybody is going to have the same opinion as you. People with different opinions are not trying to troll you by stating their opinions.

Military protection, as well as streets, side walks, fire and schools, are all free service given to non-taxpayers. And everybody is subject to the draft, yet only taxpayers actually pay for the military and its weapons.

I think that's a fair trade.

I agree with your first paragraph.

I don't think the solution is to use ranked choices though.

I think the solution is to make voting rights contingent on full time work or taxes paid (whether through work or capital gains). As long as you work full time or pay an equivalent in federal taxes of a full-time minimum wage employee (before deductions, because I realize minimum wage employees pay almost no taxes to begin with), you get to vote.

You might think this is draconian, but without using any emotion and trying to be purely logical, can you think of one reason why somebody who doesn't pay any taxes or work full-time should have a vote on the government that is funded by tax dollars from other working people? It doesn't mean people who don't work or worthless or should be marginalized in anyway; it means that they don't have a place in the political world, because politics is for government and government is designed to manage people and is paid for by the people who build the society that is being governed. Those who don't want to participate in this society by working have choices, they can stay at home and play video games or they might be a stay at home husband or wife or whatever, or they might just be somebody who wants to sleep in the park, whatever the case, it doesn't mean that they are a worthless human, but they are not really an active participant in the economy being governed. If I'm a stay at home husband and my wife works, my wife gets a vote and I can hopefully attempt to persuade her if I have an opinion, but if I'm not participating in the economy, I don't expect that I should have the ability to make choices about with my wife's taxes are spent on.

Of course the exception would be those in retirement who did previously work.

[deleted]

Timeline of Stupidity

    A: "we should give everyone free money!"
    B: "no, that'll make everyone lazy..."
    A: "no, people will work on things they love instead!"
    [everyone gets free money]
    [nobody works, everyone plays video games all day]
    A: "see, this proves that everyone was being exploited!"
    B: [smh]

Plato's Five Regimes. We're entering the fourth regime.