Matai

Padawan Learner
Yesterday I had a good reminder about the importance of networking and confiding in trusted loved ones. I celebrated my birthday with close family and was talking to a cousin I grew up with, but see only rarely, as we have become adults and now each have our own busy lives, she having two young Daughters. The lock downs and covid restrictions in New Zealand have meant that we have seen each other less than ever over the past few years.

I am very fortunate in having two siblings who are largely on board with understanding the absurdity of the vaccines and the covid restrictions, yet we have all had the jab due to mandates and the threats meaning possible loss of income and freedom. My parents and many close friends on the other hand, have largely swallowed the mainstream narrative and any conversations with them have lead to indifference or frustration. As I work in the health profession, there are barely any colleagues I can have a legitimate conversation with and I have to apply strategic enclosure when around people in the workplace. This has increased my sense of isolation and mistrust in people I once looked up to, or respected, who have been completely sucked in by the covid hysteria.

The result of this loss of trust and respect for members of my family, friends and colleagues has been a sense of betrayal and disillusionment. Many of these people still want to associate with me and engage with me in other aspects of life, even if they know my position in regards to covid. I continue to engage with them, where appropriate, and attempt to affirm and strengthen the bonds of love and trust that we have developed previously, but the gaping hole of covid is a difficult gap to bridge. I have thus found myself playing a role more and more with people I previously used to have more authentic relationships with.

Prior to the family get together last night I steeled myself to encounter the usual barrage of medical questions which await me from family members and lately, of course, the inevitable questions about covid. My cousin was the first person I talked to, and whilst we exchanged the usual pleasantries, she quickly began asking what I thought about covid vaccination for young children. This is a topic where I refuse to play a role and I told her explicitly that they should not get them as I have previously told other family members when asked about their children. She reacted to this with a show of relief and then confided to me that her and her partner were unvaccinated and that she had only avoided losing her job as she was pregnant and used this to justify working from home and postponing the jab until after she had delivered. She told me she had no intention of getting the vaccine and that she would have left the job after her pregnancy if she had to but that the job had now dropped the mandates and have returned to business as usual. Others were not so lucky and were fired on the spot, although now they would arbitrarily be allowed to remain.

I felt great admiration and love for my cousin and her partner and she was also very happy to hear that I hadn't bought into the narrative and "sold out". She then proceeded to tell me how other cousins of ours overseas were also non-vaccinated and we each marveled at the fact that our family as a whole are markedly anti covid propaganda compared with the average population. We then had a brief video call with some of them and were able to express some of the frustration we were all having.

The fact that it took me years to realize that my cousin was struggling through this with my knowledge saddened me as I had allowed my negative reactions with others to evoke an attitude of avoidance when discussing covid related topics which prevented me from finding people who are co-linear with myself and this forum. I had been convincing myself that I was simply being strategic, but in this case and others, I know I need to be more bold and courageous in order to network and connect with others. The previous betrayals and loss of faith had affected me more that I realized and I need to be stronger in order to not let those affect me as much.

I know the Cs say to "enjoy the show" and that if we love others enough we may be able to pull them with us. Being geographically so far from the rest of the world and the central light house of the Chateau I have long thought there was a reason I am where I am and that part of my role is to pull through some of those beloved ones that I have been blessed to know over my lifetime. The disintegration in the rationality and morality of some of them relating to covid related issues, and their lack of faith and trust in me with the ensuing feelings of betrayal had degraded my resolve in this matter. I was starting to feel as all my friends and family were lost and irredeemable in this lifetime and that I couldn't help any of them other than my two siblings. Last night was a light of hope for me and reminded me that I must keep channels open and not let negative thoughts or feelings being the main drivers of my actions towards others. I hope that other members of the forum can have similar conversations with at least some people they love and trust and take comfort, as I do, that even if this is not the case, we all have this forum to guide us and help us through these dark times. For that Laura and the chateau crew I truly love you and thank you from the bottom of my heart.
 

Tuatha de Danaan

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Yesterday I had a good reminder about the importance of networking and confiding in trusted loved ones
Thank you for that uplifting post and just goes to show the variety of lessons, (which are endless) that we all encounter on a daily basis. I really hope that you are energised by your encounter and many happy returns on your birthday. What a lovely present.!!!!!
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
The Canadian professor, Denis Rancourt, can be seen in this interview below discussing his findings. These findings are based on a recent paper published August 2, 2022. The paper is: COVID-Period Mass Vaccination Campaign and Public Health Disaster in the USA, which Denis breaks it all down in detailed ways. The paper includes two other PhD's and has a focused finding on policies and poverty (in this sense poverty includes being isolated, the loss of work and all that goes with that and more).

Here is the direct website link, and here is his paper in Pdf.

The only interview found so far is from Edmonton's Rebel News (click on the link for the video and story):


Here is the paper Abstract:

Abstract

All-cause mortality by time is the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events causing death, and for gauging the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause. Such data is not susceptible to reporting bias or to any bias in attributing causes of death. We compare USA all-cause mortality by time (month, week), by age group and by state to number of vaccinated individuals by time (week), by injection sequence, by age group and by state, using consolidated data up to week-5 of 2022 (week ending on February 5, 2022), in order to detect temporal associations, which would imply beneficial or deleterious effects from the vaccination campaign. We also quantify total excess all-cause mortality (relative to historic trends) for the entire covid period (WHO 11 March 2020 announcement of a pandemic through week-5 of 2022, corresponding to a total of 100 weeks), for the covid period prior to the bulk of vaccine delivery (first 50 weeks of the defined 100-week covid period), and for the covid period when the bulk of vaccine delivery is accomplished (last 50 weeks of the defined 100-week covid period); by age group and by state.

We find that the COVID-19 vaccination campaign did not reduce all-cause mortality during the covid period. No deaths, within the resolution of all cause mortality, can be said to have been averted due to vaccination in the USA. The mass vaccination campaign was not justified in terms of reducing excess all-cause mortality. The large excess mortality of the covid period, far above the historic trend, was maintained throughout the entire covid period irrespective of the unprecedented vaccination campaign, and is very strongly correlated (r = +0.86) to poverty, by state; in fact, proportional to poverty. It is also correlated to several other socio-economic and health factors, by state, but not correlated to population fractions (65+, 75+, 85+ years) of elderly state residents.

The excess all-cause mortality by age group (also expressed as percentage of pre-covid-period all-cause mortality for the age group) for the whole USA for the entire covid period through week-5 of 2022 is:

all ages 1.27M 23%
0-24 13K 12%
25-44 109K 41%
45-64 274K 27%
65-74 319K 30%
75-84 316K 24%
85+ 240K 14%


The corresponding fatality risk ratios are relatively uniform with age (non-exponential and non-near-exponential with age; and even skewed towards young adults), which holds essentially for all states, and for all examined periods within the covid period. This fundamental result implies that a dominant cause of excess mortality could not have been assigned COVID 19, which consistently has been measured to have a strong near-exponential infection fatality ratio with age. The implication is further corroborated by the absence of correlation between all-age-group-integrated excess mortality and age, by state. COVID-19 was not a dominant cause of excess mortality during the covid period in the USA.

All of our observations can be coherently understood if we interpret that the covid-period socio-economic, regulatory and institutional conditions induced chronic stress and social isolation among members of large vulnerable groups (individuals afflicted and co-afflicted by poverty, obesity, diabetes, high susceptibility to bacterial respiratory infection [inferred from pre-covid-period antibiotic prescription rates], old age, societal exclusion, unemployment, drug and substance abuse, and mental disability or serious mental illness), which in turn caused many of these individuals to be more and fatally immunocompromised, allowing them to succumb to bacterial pneumonia, at a time when a documented national pneumonia epidemic raged and antibiotic prescriptions were systemically reduced; in addition to possible comorbidity from COVID-19 vaccine challenge against individuals thus made immunocompromised, under broad and hastily implemented “vaccine equity” programs.

Edit: deleted an attached photo.
 

Alana

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member

Not sure if this has been mentioned before but I haven't seen it. Very interesting and eye opening. Apologies if it is already on the thread.

Thanks for posting. It is extremely well done, and so much real science and data is presented in it. I finally got around to watching it, and I just feel extremely sad and angry after witnessing the life of humanity for the past 2 years in these 2 hours.

I still can't believe it, any of it. By 2022 the results of this evil experiment are so many, so obvious, so unmistakable, and so horrific, that it is unfathomable that the perpetrators (whose names and faces everybody knows) continue to be secure in their positions with their coffers fuller than ever.

It's one of the reasons I have been avoiding this thread and other covid-related discussions recently. It's just crazy-making to contemplate how we got here.
 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Thanks for posting. It is extremely well done, and so much real science and data is presented in it. I finally got around to watching it, and I just feel extremely sad and angry after witnessing the life of humanity for the past 2 years in these 2 hours.

I still can't believe it, any of it. By 2022 the results of this evil experiment are so many, so obvious, so unmistakable, and so horrific, that it is unfathomable that the perpetrators (whose names and faces everybody knows) continue to be secure in their positions with their coffers fuller than ever.

It's one of the reasons I have been avoiding this thread and other covid-related discussions recently. It's just crazy-making to contemplate how we got here.

Haven't watched it, but I share your sentiment. I'm increasingly frustrated lately by the incredible madness we're living through.

I'm also beginning to realize just how thoroughly we've been had. It's not just that certain things have gone "too far", like the safety mindset, public health, or what have you. It's that it was COMPLETELY wrong from its very inception, all these ideas that sprang up mostly during the Enlightenment and the following centuries.

Heck, I'm tempted to say that all attempts to "make the world better, safer, whatever" are a complete perversion and that nobody should even think that, and just try to live their immediate lives as best as possible, full stop. Reading about all this eugenicist crap people spouted in the 19th century, for example, makes you realize that they are precisely the same type, using the same arguments, that we see today: "Help the poor", "Make stuff safer", "Help women", yadayada.

There are so many examples of this - ideas that were pathological and crazy and psychopathic from the onset, yet we have all grown up with them and so we didn't see them, partly because it was all less extreme for a long time. But now that everything is so wild, it becomes more obvious. So yeah: you want to "help humanity"? S-T-F-U.

Sorry, but yes, it does get to me lately...
 

syldan

Dagobah Resident
Something that comes to mind a lot lately, is how this 'crisis' has made me more aware of the fact that 'we' - 'I' am not afraid for myself, I feel no pain towards myself except a lot of grief. I suddenly see and feel sharply the pain in other peoples eyes, I can feel it, it is somewhat disquieting. There is nothing we can say that will alleviate this 'pain' (the only word that comes to mind) and yes if we see it, feel it, it must be that our mission is to understand, and help others understand as best we can. Which is not a simple task. Not for me anyhow! It is very helpful to read how you all are coping because it is a very lonely present going forward once we have been nearly ostracised. But hey! Look outside it's a beautiful day, put every atom of yourself into every endeavour, at day's end, there will be coffee in the morning. Big thank you to all, and true Love is our destination. (It is so frigging hard not to judge others...)
 

Eulenspiegel

Jedi Master
Haven't watched it, but I share your sentiment. I'm increasingly frustrated lately by the incredible madness we're living through.

I'm also beginning to realize just how thoroughly we've been had. It's not just that certain things have gone "too far", like the safety mindset, public health, or what have you. It's that it was COMPLETELY wrong from its very inception, all these ideas that sprang up mostly during the Enlightenment and the following centuries.

Heck, I'm tempted to say that all attempts to "make the world better, safer, whatever" are a complete perversion and that nobody should even think that, and just try to live their immediate lives as best as possible, full stop. Reading about all this eugenicist crap people spouted in the 19th century, for example, makes you realize that they are precisely the same type, using the same arguments, that we see today: "Help the poor", "Make stuff safer", "Help women", yadayada.

There are so many examples of this - ideas that were pathological and crazy and psychopathic from the onset, yet we have all grown up with them and so we didn't see them, partly because it was all less extreme for a long time. But now that everything is so wild, it becomes more obvious. So yeah: you want to "help humanity"? S-T-F-U.

Sorry, but yes, it does get to me lately...
Ideas have a life of their own, and spread like mind viruses among populations, sometimes for centuries to come. All it seems to take is a few pathological individuals to "seed" their ideas. Funnily enough, this idea is extremely unpopular among academics in sociology and anthropology, at least where I studied. For them, it's a gross generalization and while they can conceive how ideologies spread, they cannot imagine how underlying philosophies survive and hold their own for disturbingly long periods of time. These undercurrents have a relatively consistent logic of their own and are usually messed up as hell. I've found this to be true in the West, in China/Taiwan and in India. There's a version for everyone, it seems.
 

Alana

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I'm also beginning to realize just how thoroughly we've been had. It's not just that certain things have gone "too far", like the safety mindset, public health, or what have you. It's that it was COMPLETELY wrong from its very inception, all these ideas that sprang up mostly during the Enlightenment and the following centuries.

Heck, I'm tempted to say that all attempts to "make the world better, safer, whatever" are a complete perversion and that nobody should even think that, and just try to live their immediate lives as best as possible, full stop. Reading about all this eugenicist crap people spouted in the 19th century, for example, makes you realize that they are precisely the same type, using the same arguments, that we see today: "Help the poor", "Make stuff safer", "Help women", yadayada.

There are so many examples of this - ideas that were pathological and crazy and psychopathic from the onset, yet we have all grown up with them and so we didn't see them, partly because it was all less extreme for a long time. But now that everything is so wild, it becomes more obvious. So yeah: you want to "help humanity"? S-T-F-U.

This is where I would be going mad trying to understand all these lies and deceptions throughout history if I didn't have the C's cosmology in the background as context. Invaluable!

And most people do want to just focus on their lives and live them the best possible. It is a certain type of individual that always comes up with "grand ideas" on how to save the world. Devoid of any internal moral skeleton or creative spark, they look around, from the higher pedestal of hubris, judge creation inadequate, and set off to "correct" it. To add to your examples: "Let's block the sun to save the earth", "Let's cut your genitals off so that you feel better", "Let's replace trees with wind turbines to protect the environment".... etc.
 

nature

Dagobah Resident
In the meantime, I hope y'all aren't shaking your duvets too hard; that you aren't taking long hot or cold showers; that you aren't moving too fast when swinging flyswatters; that you are not taking too long a toke on a cigarette. Because it's the "science" that those things can KILL you. And the saddest part of what I'm sharing here is: most of humanity still buys into those lies. Because they were never trained to research things themselves.
So true!
I was just reading, just before connecting here, this article from a francophone site. Here is the automatic translation of a passage; it's so well put.

La science serait au service de l’homme.

Comment ne pas bondir de sa chaise face à de tels propos ?
L’histoire du monde regorge d’exemples où la science est au service de la destruction, de la souffrance, de la suppression des libertés, du mal, et j’en passe…

Rappelez-moi….

  • C’est bien les scientifiques qui ont inventé des armes de plus en plus létales du lance-pierres à la bombe atomique ?
  • C’est bien les scientifiques qui ont dessiné les plans des chambres à gaz et mis au point le zyklon b dans les camps ou l’agent orange au Vietnam ?

Je pourrais bien évidemment en écrire des pages et des pages.

Aujourd’hui c’est la science, la 5G, la miniaturisation qui permet le contrôle facial, les QR codes et demain la dictature climatique.

Vous auriez beau jeu de me rappeler que sans la science, il n’y aurait pas de scanner ou d’IRM pour diagnostiquer des cancers…
Cancers fabriqués par la science avec la pollution, les additifs chimiques, la suppression des cycles naturels et l’enfermement des fourmis dans des gratte-ciel sans nature ?

Je serais personnellement plus modeste sur l’apport de la science à l’homme.

Oui la science m’apporte un confort matériel, je ne suis pas dans la savane à manger des baies ou chercher à tuer un mammouth.
Mais ce « confort » est-il un apport en termes de liberté et de bien-être ?

Je suis un esclave de la technologie, un esclave d’internet, du téléphone, de la télé, de l’ordinateur, de la voiture, de l’électricité, de l’eau chaude, des normes, des lois, etc.

Les monstres qui dominent ce monde ont bien compris qu’ils nous tenaient par les c… avec le crédit, l’endettement à vie, mais surtout la peur de perdre ce confort uniquement matérialiste et sans âme.

Dieu a été remplacé par Satan !

Selon vous un domaine de la neuroscience serait valide au prétexte que l’U.S. Air Force aurait dépensé un demi-milliard en recherche et développement pour des casques vendus 400 000 dollars l’unité.

En premier lieu, je vous sais gré d’avoir reconnu que si ce casque était efficace pour le pilote il l’était aussi contre les humains qu’il aide à tuer.
De ce fait, j’en reviens encore sur « la science est-elle bonne pour l’homme » ?


En second lieu, vous semblez déduire que ce casque bourré de neuroscience serait « bon » pour le pilote.


Ce raccourci me semble tout du moins audacieux.
Au mieux, il retarde l’insupportable.
Si grâce à celui-ci le pilote peut accomplir des actions ou des missions autrefois impossibles ou tenir deux heures au lieu d’une, je ne vois pas le bénéfice personnel.
En l’occurrence, le pilote n’est qu’une interface (à ce jour encore utile) et rien de plus.
Bref, ce casque est au service du Pentagone, des politiques, des va-t-en-guerre et certainement pas du pilote.

La démonstration affirmant que si l’on dépense des milliards dans un domaine c’est qu’il est efficace me semble fort étrange.

Rappelons une blague racontée par M Attali (cf. mon ouvrage[4]) dans laquelle des juifs achètent puis revendent des pantalons à une jambe. Un catholique fait remarquer le problème en affirmant que ces pantalons sont invendables. Et le juif de répondre que ces pantalons ne sont pas faits pour être portés, mais pour être achetés et vendus.


Plus récemment on pourrait se référer aux injections contre le Covid pour lesquelles les fabricants savaient, avant même de commencer, qu’un vaccin à ARN messager sur un virus qui ne fait que muter, qui plus est avec une vaccination durant l’épidémie, ne pourrait qu’augmenter les mutations et rendre le produit inefficace.
Cela ne les a pas empêchés d’écouler des milliards de doses d’un produit inefficace et dangereux.


Les exemples ne manquent pas comme l’escroquerie freudienne ou pasteurienne.

Je m’étonne donc de cette affirmation :

« Si c’est étudié et vendu, c’est que ça marche ».
  • Le fabricant de casques n’en a que faire, il voit un marché fort juteux.
  • Les militaires qui soutiennent le projet y voient une étoile de plus sur leur uniforme.
  • Les politiques sont des héros pour protéger les Américains.
  • La corruption permet de soudoyer des scientifiques pour affirmer l’efficacité.

Ceci peut durer jusqu’à (concernant ce casque je n’ai pas d’infos) jusqu’à la mise au grand jour du scandale.
Non, le succès d’une méthode n’apporte en rien la preuve de son efficacité, la vérité ne se mesure pas en quantité.

Les neurosciences pourraient soulager au quotidien.
Personnellement quand j’entends neuroscience, coaching, développement personnel, j’entends aussi manipulation des pensées et des cerveaux.

Le terme de « développement personnel » est fort étrange… pourquoi faudrait-il que les humains bénéficient d’un enseignement de développement personnel induit par autrui ?

Pourquoi faudrait-il que nous soyons plus « performants » ?

Vous avez cité un exemple concret (si j’ai bien compris) d’une personne ayant des difficultés à se lever le matin et se motiver pour aller au travail.
Personnellement si quelqu’un me dit ça j’en déduis qu’il n’est pas heureux, pas rempli dans sa vie et que ce travail factuellement nourricier ne nourrit pas son âme.

Mes propos suivants illustrent peut-être mon ignorance, mon incompréhension totale des neurosciences, mais je pense que nombreux sont ceux qui pourraient être dans mon cas.

J’ai compris, déduit, que les neurosciences pouvaient aider cette brave personne à trouver une motivation et peut-être même un plaisir à se lever le matin pour aller au travail.

Dans ce cas de figure, la neuroscience ne serait pas une forme de « guérison », mais un « antidouleur »…
« Tu as mal à la tête ? Prends une aspirine ! »


Pire encore si cette personne malheureuse au travail devenait heureuse alors la neuroscience serait vraiment de la manipulation mentale.

La douleur de cette personne au quotidien n’est-elle pas bonne pour lui ?
N’est-elle pas un signal émotionnel envoyé par son cerveau pour lui dire qu’il ne peut pas rester ainsi ?
A-t-il besoin d’un coaching pour accepter l’inacceptable ou d’une thérapie (qui relève aussi des neurosciences) pour se trouver lui-même et enfin partir faire bûcheron au Canada ?
Encore faut-il que ce désir de devenir bûcheron et de passage à l’acte ne soit pas induit par le thérapeute.

Attention, je ne nie pas l’existence de souffrances et de biais cognitifs. Une personne en relation avec un manipulateur sera moins encline à en être victime si elle a connaissance de leur existence, la capacité de les détecter et un amour propre/narcissisme suffisamment développé pour s’en protéger.

La société ne veut pas d’hommes libres, mais uniquement des esclaves dociles.
De fait, elle ne peut que valoriser des méthodes de manipulation mentale visant à les maintenir à l’état de moutons dociles et certainement pas de développement personnel.

D’autre part, a-t-on le droit moral de modifier le cerveau d’un individu quand bien même cette modification se traduirait par une diminution ou une suppression de ses souffrances ?

La neuroscience serait-elle l’héritage high-tech des électrochocs barbares du 20e siècle ?

Ici encore il est légitime de se reposer la question quant à savoir si la science est bonne pour l’homme ou pas.

C’est bien les neurosciences qui ont converti en mouton la population au point qu’elle demande à porter un masque, à être confinée, à réclamer un passeport pour aller au restaurant ou s’injecter une substance expérimentale douteuse y compris aux enfants et aux femmes enceintes !

Il est intéressant de voir à quel point la science a été enterrée, anéantie durant cette crise au profit de « neurosciences » et d’outils toujours plus performants de manipulation mentale des individus.

Cette destruction de l’humain n’eut pas été possible sans le concours de « scientifiques » délirants, mégalomanes ou corrompus.

Celui qui pense, qui doute, qui se pose des questions est devenu le « complotiste », le « fou », le « dangereux » et même « l’antisémite » que l’on sort de son chapeau comme le véhicule prioritaire au Mille-Bornes.

On est arrivé à faire croire au peuple en semaine n qu’il ne fallait surtout pas s’asseoir sur une plage au risque de répandre la mort et en semaine n+1 qu’il ne fallait surtout pas bouger sur une plage et rester statique.
Le drame est que des forces de l’ordre sont là pour obéir comme les soldats qui faisaient monter des juifs dans des trains.
Aujourd’hui encore les soignants sont suspendus sous prétexte qu’ils n’ont pas fait de faux pass comme leurs collègues alors même que preuve est faite depuis longtemps que l’injection vaccinale n’empêche pas les contaminations.

Le peuple est-il debout pour dire « non » alors même que l’on ferme des services faute de soignants ?
Les collègues prétendument vaccinés sont-ils debout pour réclamer leur réintégration ?
Bien sûr que non !

Peut-on oser parler de progrès de l’humanité grâce à la science ?

Ah, il est toujours possible de sortir le couplet sur « ce n’est pas l’outil qui est bon ou mauvais, mais son usage ».

Je suis bien d’accord qu’une puce RFID (ou mieux) implantée sur chaque humain pourrait rendre l’enlèvement d’enfants impossible et nous permettrait de ne plus perdre nos clefs.

Et encore, je suis bien naïf, les plus grands pédophiles de notre planète auront la possibilité de débrancher les liaisons vers les serveurs grâce à d’autres complices pédophiles et dans un silence assourdissant des médias.

Nos « bons » médias comme l’Express sont là pour nous rappeler que l’ennemi est le Covid, la variole du singe, Poutine ou le fameux réchauffement climatique causé par le méchant CO2 !
La suppression définitive de nos droits nous sauvera de l’apocalypse, amen !

Tout le reste n’est que délire, il ne faut surtout pas réveiller les moutons qui ne demandent qu’une chose, ne pas avaler la pilule rouge[6]!

Mais dans les faits, cette puce a pour unique vocation de nous espionner, nous tracer, nous contrôler et réduire encore plus nos libertés.
Il en est de même de la suppression de l’argent liquide si pratique au quotidien et si pratique pour nous contrôler.
Le scientifique ne peut pas se réfugier derrière « je ne suis pas responsable de l’usage liberticide de mon invention » de même que l’enseignant en neurosciences ne peut se dédouaner de l’usage qu’en fera un psychopathe qu’il aura formé.


Le narcissisme, la soif de pouvoir, la corruption mènent le monde et les scientifiques seront toujours les pions des forces du mal.
Il y aura toujours un scientifique corrompu, narcissique ou naïf pour concevoir le plus immonde et un enculé pour l’utiliser.


Les progrès de la science rendent l’homme de plus en plus « inutile » et les pourritures en sont bien conscientes.
Qu’elles sont les inventions qui auraient été créées si chaque scientifique s’était posé la question
« Est-ce bon pour l’humanité ou cette invention peut-elle (et donc va-t-elle) être utilisée contre l’homme ? »


Je crains qu’il ne fût pas resté grand-chose…

Demain l’intelligence artificielle sonnera-t-elle la fin de l’humanité ?
C’est plus que probable si elle n’est pas purement et simplement interdite et condamnée.

Je vous rappelle que les lois de la robotique d’Asimov qui devaient nous protéger ont été bafouées depuis bien longtemps par les militaires qui utilisent des robots avec une composante décisionnelle autonome pour tuer des humains !

Alors personnellement je veux croire en l’humain plus qu’en la science qui doit être sévèrement contrôlée et limitée.
La science est froide, logique, elle n’a pas d’états d’âme, pas d’émotions, ni conscience.
Si l’empathie était de ce monde, s’ils avaient accès à l’ensemble des émotions humaines, alors le monde serait moins pourri.

Alain Tortosa - 7 août 2022

Science would be at the service of man.

How not to jump out of one's chair when faced with such statements?
The history of the world is full of examples where science is at the service of destruction, suffering, suppression of freedom, evil, and so on...

Remind me.... It is the scientists who invented more and more lethal weapons from the slingshot to the atomic bomb?
Are they the scientists who drew the plans of the gas chambers and developed zyklon b in the camps or agent orange in Vietnam?

I could of course write pages and pages about it.

Today it is science, 5G, miniaturization that allows facial control, QR codes and tomorrow the climate dictatorship.

It would be nice if you could remind me that without science, there would be no CT or MRI scanners to diagnose cancers...
Cancers manufactured by science with pollution, chemical additives, the suppression of natural cycles and the confinement of ants in skyscrapers without nature?

I would personally be more modest about the contribution of science to man.

Yes, science brings me material comfort, I am not in the savannah eating berries or trying to kill a mammoth.
But is this "comfort" a contribution in terms of freedom and well-being?

I am a slave of technology, a slave of the internet, the telephone, the TV, the computer, the car, the electricity, the hot water, the standards, the laws, etc.

The monsters who dominate this world have understood that they have us by the balls with credit, life-long debt, but above all the fear of losing this solely materialistic and soulless comfort.

God has been replaced by Satan!

According to you, a field of neuroscience would be valid because the U.S. Air Force would have spent half a billion dollars in research and development for helmets sold for 400 000 dollars each.

First of all, I am grateful to you for recognizing that if this helmet was effective for the pilot, it was also effective against the humans it helped to kill.
So I'm back to "is science good for humans"?

Secondly, you seem to deduce that this helmet full of neuroscience would be "good" for the pilot.

This shortcut seems to me at least audacious.
At best, it delays the unbearable.
If thanks to it the pilot can accomplish actions or missions that were previously impossible, or hold on for two hours instead of one, I don't see the personal benefit.
In this case, the pilot is only an interface (still useful to this day) and nothing more.
In short, this helmet is at the service of the Pentagon, the politicians, the war-mongers and certainly not the pilot.

The demonstration that if we spend billions in a field it is because it is efficient seems to me very strange.

Let us recall a joke told by M Attali (cf. my book [4]) in which Jews buy and then resell one-legged pants. A Catholic points out the problem and says that these pants are unsaleable. The Jew replies that the pants are not meant to be worn, but to be bought and sold.

More recently, one could refer to the Covid injections, where the manufacturers knew, before they even started, that a messenger RNA vaccine on a virus that only mutates, and moreover with vaccination during the epidemic, could only increase the mutations and make the product ineffective.
This did not prevent them from selling billions of doses of an ineffective and dangerous product.

There is no shortage of examples, such as the Freudian and Pasteurian scams.

I am therefore surprised by this statement:

"If it is studied and sold, it means that it works".

The helmet manufacturer doesn't care, he sees a very juicy market.
The military who support the project see it as another star on their uniform.
Politicians are heroes for protecting Americans.
Bribes are used to bribe scientists to claim effectiveness.

This can go on until (I have no information about this helmet) the scandal is exposed.
No, the success of a method does not prove its effectiveness, the truth is not measured in quantity.

Neuroscience could provide relief on a daily basis.

Personally, when I hear neuroscience, coaching, personal development, I also hear manipulation of thoughts and brains.

The term "personal development" is very strange... why should humans be taught personal development by others?

Why should we have to be more "successful"?

You cited a concrete example (if I understood correctly) of a person having difficulties getting up in the morning and motivating himself to go to work.
Personally, if someone says that to me, I deduce that they are not happy, not fulfilled in their life and that this factually nourishing work does not feed their soul.

My following remarks may illustrate my ignorance, my total lack of understanding of neuroscience, but I think that many people could be in my case.

I understood, I deduced, that neuroscience could help this good person to find motivation and perhaps even pleasure in getting up in the morning to go to work.

In this case, neuroscience would not be a form of "healing", but a "painkiller"...
"You have a headache? Take an aspirin!"

Even worse if this person unhappy at work became happy then neuroscience would really be mental manipulation.

Isn't this person's pain on a daily basis good for him?
Isn't it an emotional signal sent by his brain that he can't stay that way?
Does he need coaching to accept the unacceptable or therapy (which is also a matter of neuroscience) to find himself and finally leave to become a lumberjack in Canada?
Again, this desire to become a lumberjack and to act on it must not be induced by the therapist.

Attention, I do not deny the existence of suffering and cognitive biases. A person in a relationship with a manipulator will be less inclined to be a victim if he/she has knowledge of their existence, the ability to detect them and a sufficiently developed self-esteem/narcissism to protect him/herself from them.

Society does not want free men, but only docile slaves.
In fact, it can only value methods of mental manipulation aiming at keeping them in the state of docile sheep and certainly not of personal development.

On the other hand, do we have the moral right to modify the brain of an individual even if this modification would result in a reduction or an elimination of his suffering?

Is neuroscience the high-tech legacy of the barbaric electroshock therapy of the 20th century?

Here again, it is legitimate to ask whether science is good for man or not.

It is indeed neurosciences that have converted the population into sheep to the point that they ask to wear a mask, to be confined, to ask for a passport to go to a restaurant or to inject themselves with a dubious experimental substance, including children and pregnant women!

It is interesting to see to what extent science has been buried, annihilated during this crisis to the benefit of "neurosciences" and of ever more powerful tools of mental manipulation of individuals.

This destruction of the human being would not have been possible without the help of delirious, megalomaniac or corrupt "scientists".

The one who thinks, who doubts, who asks questions has become the "conspiracy theorist", the "madman", the "dangerous" and even the "anti-Semite" who is pulled out of his hat like the priority vehicle at the Mille-Bornes. [it's a board game]

We have managed to make people believe that in week n they should not sit on a beach at the risk of spreading death and in week n+1 that they should not move on a beach and remain static.
The tragedy is that the forces of law and order are there to obey like the soldiers who put Jews on trains.
Even today, health care workers are suspended under the pretext that they did not make false passports like their colleagues, even though it has been proven for a long time that vaccinations do not prevent contamination.

Are the people on their feet to say "no" even though services are being closed due to a lack of caregivers?
Are the allegedly vaccinated colleagues standing up to demand their reinstatement?
Of course not!

Can we dare to speak of the progress of humanity thanks to science?

Ah, it is always possible to bring out the verse about "it is not the tool that is good or bad, but its use".

I agree that an RFID chip (or better) implanted on each human could make child abduction impossible and would allow us not to lose our keys anymore.

And again, I am quite naive, the biggest pedophiles of our planet will have the possibility to disconnect the links to the servers thanks to other pedophile accomplices and in a deafening silence of the media.

Our "good" media like the Express are there to remind us that the enemy is the Covid, the monkey pox, Putin or the famous global warming caused by the evil CO2!
The definitive suppression of our rights will save us from the apocalypse, amen!
All the rest is just delirium, we mustn't wake up the sheep who only want one thing, not to swallow the red pill[6]!

But in fact, the only purpose of this chip is to spy on us, to trace us, to control us and to reduce our freedom even more.
The same applies to the suppression of cash, so practical in everyday life and so useful to control us.
The scientist cannot take refuge behind "I am not responsible for the liberticidal use of my invention", just as the teacher in neuroscience cannot clear himself of the use that a psychopath he has trained will make of it.

Narcissism, thirst for power, corruption lead the world and scientists will always be the pawns of the forces of evil.
There will always be a corrupt, narcissistic, or naive scientist to design the foulest of the foul and an asshole to use it.

The progress of science makes man more and more "useless" and the scum are well aware of this.
What inventions would have been created if every scientist had asked himself the question
"Is this good for mankind or can (and therefore will) this invention be used against man?"

I fear that not much would have been left...

Tomorrow, will artificial intelligence sound the end of humanity?
It is more than probable if it is not purely and simply forbidden and condemned.

I remind you that Asimov's laws of robotics, which were supposed to protect us, have been flouted for a long time by the military who use robots with an autonomous decision-making component to kill humans!

So personally I want to believe in humans more than in science which must be severely controlled and limited.
Science is cold, logical, it has no moods, no emotions, no conscience.

If empathy was of this world, if they had access to all human emotions, then the world would be less rotten.

Alain Tortosa - august 2022, 7

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 

Anthony

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
This is where I would be going mad trying to understand all these lies and deceptions throughout history if I didn't have the C's cosmology in the background as context. Invaluable!

And most people do want to just focus on their lives and live them the best possible. It is a certain type of individual that always comes up with "grand ideas" on how to save the world. Devoid of any internal moral skeleton or creative spark, they look around, from the higher pedestal of hubris, judge creation inadequate, and set off to "correct" it. To add to your examples: "Let's block the sun to save the earth", "Let's cut your genitals off so that you feel better", "Let's replace trees with wind turbines to protect the environment".... etc.

And that is psychopathology in action. Instead of observing reality and what is, and then moving on from there to come up with a basis for understanding and action, as a sane person would, their internal faulty wiring makes them instead come up with bizarre theories or models and then attempt to bend reality to their models and wishes. It's like that myth of Procrustes:

According to Greek mythology, Procrustes was a robber who killed his victims in a most cruel and unusual way. He made them lie on an iron bed and would force them to fit the bed by cutting off the parts that hung off the ends or by stretching those people who were too short.

We know that these pathological individuals hide their true goals and wishes behind a mask of sanity, ideologies. So we hear about saving the environment or saving lives or bringing about equality, but underneath it all is just an attempt to accrue power and control.
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I still can't believe it, any of it. By 2022 the results of this evil experiment are so many, so obvious, so unmistakable, and so horrific, that it is unfathomable that the perpetrators (whose names and faces everybody knows) continue to be secure in their positions with their coffers fuller than ever.

Yes, like a bad dream it suddenly became a global reality, long in the making.

Shock therapy.

"Emergency Use Authorization"

(Screenshots from the documentary)
1659980196454.png

Have now watched the documentary and it near capsulizes these posts page #1 through (at this point) post page #1817, in all their horror.

There are many physician, nurses and professionals in the documentary (and so many outside the documentary) - Women and men who paid a price, like Dr. Charles Hoffe (thank you Dr. Hoffe) who was attacked relentlessly by the Chief Medical Officer of BC - see her words here:

Bonnie comments on Hoffe, she said:
"Talk to him fist and then let us know whether this is something we should bring up with the Collage" {the Collage is the CMA}.

And bring it up people like Bonnie did, brought it up to their in-their-pocket CMA, lining up Hoffe while utilizing their paid for press to double down, all for stating his professional observations under his Hippocratic Oath to the citizens and patients he cares for. Pick another country and professional target, the same.

So, yeah, "sociopathic people" as said in the film, how else to you explain their actions other than their link to 4dSTS meddlers?

Indeed, we are food.

1659983045862.png

1659983165380.png

1659983476933.png

As the C's said of bloodlines, regulators too became "parasitically infected" and then wrote the most egregious policies and authorizations. And you don't write policies without lawyers and drafters and a head honcho signature to make it effective. Deep mind penetratingly PR follows to help roll it out, and the lower managerial class take over and run with it. People made a choice, and there was mass coercion (as the one gentlemen said on loosing his wife (nurse) to covid-vaccination): "she was tortured, badgered and she was bullied, until she could not take it anymore."

1659985705954.png

1659985201003.png

Many people on the forum or readers herein (you know who you are), have paid a steep price; your work, relationships - family; spouse, children, parents, grandparents and friends, this is what they have done. They have begun to create a hell on earth - in the body, around the body and mind, and have put a manufactured wedge between all our social relationships, and it ain't over, as they say.

"There are days when I feel ashamed to be a doctor"
- Dr. Hoffe

How can hearts not weep, it is so bloody sad.

1659987110512.png


1659985580617.png.....
 
Top Bottom