rattlesnake

Sorry to hear your brother is not on the same page as you, that must have been tough. My siblings are "crazy conspiracy theorists" too, we could count on each other at the height of the crisis and it helpled a lot.

Gaslighting rarely works on a "conspiracy theorist", though. Those who are prone to believing the doxa are much more susceptible to it, as has been repeatedly observable these past three years: "Your deteriorating health can't be due to the vaccine, that's impossible. You have Long Covid and it would have been worse if you were unvaccinated" is a classic. Or a cancer or auto-immune disease can be attributed to bad luck… or (and this one is quintessentially evil) bad genes, i.e. it's your fault. But vaccines? Are you out of your mind? Plenty of testimonies mention actual admonishing by doctors for simply suggesting there could be a link.

There was an eerie, quasi-morbid vibe to those displays, especially in the eyes of those partaking.

At 1:40 to be precise. I had missed that one, thanks.

The "dancing nurses" were one of the creepiest, most bizarre events to take place in recent history.

I didn't use ivermectin prophylactically, I followed the Zelenko protocol, which was remarkably effective.

False equivalence fallacy: though vaccines and antibiotics are indeed both produced by pharmaceutical companies, their similarity ends there, the latter being a treatment. Of course I will take the required treatment for a given ailment, and that includes ivermectin, though my stash has been left untouched for several years as so far I have never caught Covid.

In my first year in Thailand, back in 2009, I remember watching an execution by firing squad on TV. Drug traffickers, if my memory serves me correctly. I remember thinking "wow, now that's an effective deterrent". I wonder if they still do it, I don't recall ever seeing that again.

Always this deeply rooted idea that nature made us incomplete and the pharmaceutical companies are here to enhance us… I really hope the incoming Trump administration will contribute to invalidating this deleterious notion.

Is that the same Lancet which published a fake paper in order to eliminate HCQ and allow the Emergency Use Authorisation of the mRNA shots? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/covid-19-lancet-retracts-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials

Conspiracy? Yes. Theory? No. Klaus Schwab lays it all out in his book The Great Reset. Covid was a "Tremedous opportunity", he claimed at the time, to basically implement a New World Order which had been planned for decades. Here is one of the many times he informed the plebs of what was decided for them: 🚨🌎 Klaus Schwab - The Great Reset“The word Reset.mp4 “The word Reset I think is appropriate” “We can’t go back to the old normal” “We will face ‘Black Swan’ events & different kinds of viruses” “All energy into decarbonisation of the planet” And let's not forget mini-Schwab, his daughter Nicole explaining Climate Lockdowns are coming, whether we like it or not: https://rumble.com/v32qao8-daughter-of-klaus-schwab-admits-covid-tyranny-was-a-precursor-to-coming-cli.html

It seemed to be one of those rare moments when truth slips out… As is often the case, Albert is a public-facing figure tasked with doing the dirty work against his will. Another quote from this interview: "So they convinced me. I followed my instinct that they know what they are saying. They are very good, and we made this very difficult decision at that time." I doubt he was in a position to say "no way, guys" and cancel the coordinated rollout. This interview is very interesting as he is essentially saying "I didn't want to do it, but I was forced to, whether I liked it or not"

Yes, we all know the sales pitch, but I found it notable that Bourla claimed not to.

This is a fitting opportunity to share my favourite Bourla quote: “mRNA was a technology, but we had less experience, only two years working on this, and actually, mRNA was a technology that never delivered a single product until that day, not vaccine, not any other medicine. So it was very counterintuitive, and I was surprised when they suggested to me that this is the way to go, and I questioned it. And I asked them to justify how can you say something like that, but they came, and they were very, very convinced that this is the right way to go." https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2022/03/10/transcript-wp-subscriber-exclusive-albert-bourla-author-moonshot-inside-pfizers-nine-month-race-make-impossible-possible/

You have just summarised the Big Pharma business model. A business needs long-term clients. Healthy people, from a strict balance sheet perspective, are the last thing a pharmaceutical company wants.

I am open to all sources of information. Some Flat Earth sources I think are good, others not. Call them "grifters" (a somewhat overused term these days) or whatever you want, ultimately what matters to me is whether what they say is relevant or not. My answer to your question yesterday was "For the purpose of this conversation, Im going to answer yes". Make of that what you will.

Yes I have, dinsdale (though at this point, although it is notable, I do not consider the Final Experiment footage as evidence per se).

I put "science" in quotation marks for a reason, "science" and science are not the same thing. As for the rest, my experience of debates has led me to learn that virtually anything can be refuted, questioned, given a twist… especially in written form, so I try to keep it (relatively) short. I could say lots more, give more examples, add more quotes (as you could), but you have already made your point, as I have made mine. The vast majority of those reading this thread will not change their minds either way, but I believe some nuance has been added to the discussion, which is always a good thing. In my view, Stephen Hawking did not make this observation on the place of Earth in the universe for no reason, this prominent scientist said this because, ultimately, he was aware that nothing is ever set in stone. I encourage you to reflect on that and thank you for an interesting exchange.

no proof required no censorship…

The husband was sentenced to 20 years and the other guys between 3 and 15 years.

She testified in court that she had urological issues for years, but that neither she nor her doctors could really pinpoint it. She also frequently had "absences" due to the heavy drugging by her husband, which led her to believe she had some serious neurological issue. At no point, she claims, did she suspect her beloved husband could be doing this… and she apparently only found out about it when the police told her and showed her the footage of her being abused by all these guys while the husband was overseeing. The husband was arrested after being caught filming under a woman's skirt in a supermarket. Then the cops seized his PC and found loads of footage of his wife being abused by other guys in a folder called "À son insu" (which translates as "Without her knowledge").

I am French and I have been distantly following this case as it showed up regularly in my news feeds. It's the story of a bunch of severely twisted people, as there always have been and always will be. But the French media and politicians are trying to turn it into some kind of feminist, societal and civilisational cause by implying it happened because of "patriarchy" and all that BS (which basically implies that any guy in France could have ended up doing that twisted stuff because society allows it… when it really was just 50 deranged guys meeting on obscure forums to do deranged stuff).

This is a cleverly worded interpretation of phenomena to fit your desired model.

I can assure you there is a political and philosophical component in the so-called “science”. I consider myself to be Socratic, in that I follow evidence and then I decide what makes sense. French sage and physicist Pierre Duhem explained in To Save the Phenomena how modern “science” interprets data to fit into pre-existing models and concepts to explain and “save” the observable phenomena. In other words, observational data is twisted to fit the models. When data showed that the Earth did not move, the science industry strived to “save the phenomena”. This is where Einstein came into play as the theory of relativity actually kept Copernicus’ theory alive, saving centuries of “science”. Ref: Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein. The fact is, nobody in history has ever proven that the Earth moves in space (don’t take my word for it, I have added a few relevant quotes to conclude this text). From Aristarchus to Galileo, no actual proof of heliocentrism exists, only theories. And stories are told repeatedly to impose those theories as facts in the collective mind. For example, contrary to popular belief, Galileo was never actually persecuted during the 17th century for his dissemination of the heliocentric model. In fact, serious study shows he was funded by the Church, celebrated and given 2 days of public honor in Rome… His views were philosophical, not scientific, and they were used because they suited a particular endeavour at a given time. Plenty of experiments were made during the 18th and 19th century, such as by François Arago, which disproved the heliocentric model, but they were memory-holed. A few quotes: “… nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion.” Lincoln Barnett (in The Universe and Dr. Einstein, 2nd rev. edition, 1957, p. 73) “Thus, even now, three and a half centuries after Galileo… it is still remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the earth moves, and, if so, in what precise sense.” Julian B. Barbour (in Absolute or Relative Motion, Cambridge University Press, 1989, p. 226) “So, which is real, the Ptolemaic or the Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true… One can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest.” The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, 2010, pp. 41-42

The semantics are clever, and the “facts” decided for us. Light years, trillions of miles… Unverifiable numbers so stupendoulsy huge that the human mind can’t comprehend them… and will ultimately delegate their appreciation and interpretation to the “experts”. This treacherous (and very effective) process leads us to negate our own eyes and common sense (a constellation observable from the same spot for 3,000 years can mean only one thing). What you are pinpointing here is a normal phenomenon. Every camera lens has a degree of distortion, especially around the edges. While some specialised concave lenses can be used to straighten curvatures in photography, it is not possible to do it consistently in video. There is plenty of amateur footage showing a level plane, however one will often see slight upwards curves around the edges. Flat Horizon.mp4 The same thing can be observed through airplane windows, but inverted, they are often convex and therefore it is frequent to hear passengers claim that they saw the curvature during their flight.