I've been paid to work on building a quantum computer for 20 years. The pay was steady. It is impossible. Our lab probably laundered 1 billion dollars. It was a perfect scam. The lab management would say it isn't working but it might work when the researchers knew it would never work. When the scamdemic cam down the line I was very ready to see through the lies after about a month. When the lab director mandated vaccines, I retired. I have first hand experience on the lies of modern science, some of which I learned recently. First I learn beyond any doubt that the Apollo missions were faked. The big one, for me as a physicist, was learning, beyond a doubt, that nuclear bombs are a hoax. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fire bombed. The WTC came down with explosives (good scientific papers written on this(and some giant lies)) on Sept 11,2001.
Apr 7, 2023·edited Apr 7, 2023Liked by Mike Donio, MS
Mike, the problem is far more serious;; Alll journals are rigged, including Lancet. All will suppress the best research that runs against the official conspiracy/narrative. All nerds know that journals are funded by big corporations and governments through NGO/Foundations/Trilateral, CFR, that is why peer review fails, not because the evaluators fail to understand your solid points, but because everyone knows the system is rigged by outsiders.
"Conclusions: Conflicts of interest (e.g., financial) that abound between health regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical industry impact what is ultimately reckoned as medical consensus. Outcome reporting bias that is inherent to all researchers to some degree, obscures medical and scientific truth. Advancement of public health requires that researchers have integrity and an openness and willingness to collaborate to resolve contradictory findings. In fact, it is usually through meticulous, rigorous, scientific investigation of contradictory findings that medical science has advanced and contributed to improvements in public health – since medical consensus and orthodoxy can be incorrect."
Another way to evaluate science is to ask "what's it for?" What does it accomplish? What fruit does it bear? If you examine the answers that we are usually fed, they are mostly false. What good are the health and lifestyle improvements that science offers, when the underlying technologies make us sick and destroy the planet? And oh, after accounting for lies, is all this R&D actually being done for OUR benefit? If not, whose?
And what underlies the industries behind science and technology? Well, I've peeked, and it is almost unimaginable corruption.
Totally nailed it. Particularly true in soft “sciences.” An p-values are widely misunderstood and abused. If you haven’t taken a peek at William Briggs’s web site, you should. http://www.wmbriggs.com He frequently deconstructs bad research and statistical design.
Very important article thank you. Glad I worked in an honest , no nonsense research lab in the early 80’s . Also glad it was in Dallas / Fort Worth area and not San Diego. Better yet , I’m glad it wasn’t In Chapel Hill.
When you think about it, the one area in which conflict of interest is not only rampant, but actually required, is clinical trials of vaccines and other pharma drugs. It's required that the very entities that stand to gain huge profits when their product is authorized or approved, are the ones that oversee the design, implementation and final analysis of the clinical trials. No independent third parties involved at all.
Non-experts are shaping scientific discussion with little to no experience in the field says new study by John Ioannidis
Be wary of the “science” you trust! “Of 25 massively prolific authors…only 3 had a PhD degree in any subject matter. Only 2 of the 25 disclosed potential conflicts with some specificity.”
Prolific non-research authors in high impact scientific journals: meta-research study
This Easter I have decided to combat my addiction to curse words. Instead of my usual lexicon of interjections and expletives, I will start saying substitutive words like "Pasteur", "Koch" or "Dulbecco," and their corresponding gerunds when applicable.
It's probably a bad tactic to substitute one addiction for another, but at least it will be fun, and fun is always healthy for the the capillaries.
I've been paid to work on building a quantum computer for 20 years. The pay was steady. It is impossible. Our lab probably laundered 1 billion dollars. It was a perfect scam. The lab management would say it isn't working but it might work when the researchers knew it would never work. When the scamdemic cam down the line I was very ready to see through the lies after about a month. When the lab director mandated vaccines, I retired. I have first hand experience on the lies of modern science, some of which I learned recently. First I learn beyond any doubt that the Apollo missions were faked. The big one, for me as a physicist, was learning, beyond a doubt, that nuclear bombs are a hoax. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fire bombed. The WTC came down with explosives (good scientific papers written on this(and some giant lies)) on Sept 11,2001.
Mike, the problem is far more serious;; Alll journals are rigged, including Lancet. All will suppress the best research that runs against the official conspiracy/narrative. All nerds know that journals are funded by big corporations and governments through NGO/Foundations/Trilateral, CFR, that is why peer review fails, not because the evaluators fail to understand your solid points, but because everyone knows the system is rigged by outsiders.
It's hilarious that every time there's an honest view of something in science, it gets ignored.
Same thing happened in physics, where dark matter based on a concept which is based on solving an issue with the current model.
It was touted as a great discovery, but it really isn't helping physics lol.
We are due for a paradigm change!
Here's a good one on particle physics and quantum theory.
https://youtu.be/lu4mH3Hmw2o
Meyer from 2004 reported a survey of scientists that said
- 15% knew of data that was falsified
- 27% knew of data altered to conform to a certain theory or to increase statistical significance
- 69% knew that contrary data was not reported
- 7% knew of an original study database that was immediately destroyed to prevent reconstruction of findings
Welcome to science!
https://howdovaccinescauseautism.org/2022/09/21/examples-of-outcome-reporting-bias-in-vaccine-studies-illustrating-how-perpetuating-medical-consensus-can-impede-progress-in-public-health/
"Conclusions: Conflicts of interest (e.g., financial) that abound between health regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical industry impact what is ultimately reckoned as medical consensus. Outcome reporting bias that is inherent to all researchers to some degree, obscures medical and scientific truth. Advancement of public health requires that researchers have integrity and an openness and willingness to collaborate to resolve contradictory findings. In fact, it is usually through meticulous, rigorous, scientific investigation of contradictory findings that medical science has advanced and contributed to improvements in public health – since medical consensus and orthodoxy can be incorrect."
We Christians know it is all about "The love of money"
Another way to evaluate science is to ask "what's it for?" What does it accomplish? What fruit does it bear? If you examine the answers that we are usually fed, they are mostly false. What good are the health and lifestyle improvements that science offers, when the underlying technologies make us sick and destroy the planet? And oh, after accounting for lies, is all this R&D actually being done for OUR benefit? If not, whose?
And what underlies the industries behind science and technology? Well, I've peeked, and it is almost unimaginable corruption.
I've hardly scratched the surface.
Totally nailed it. Particularly true in soft “sciences.” An p-values are widely misunderstood and abused. If you haven’t taken a peek at William Briggs’s web site, you should. http://www.wmbriggs.com He frequently deconstructs bad research and statistical design.
Very important article thank you. Glad I worked in an honest , no nonsense research lab in the early 80’s . Also glad it was in Dallas / Fort Worth area and not San Diego. Better yet , I’m glad it wasn’t In Chapel Hill.
When you think about it, the one area in which conflict of interest is not only rampant, but actually required, is clinical trials of vaccines and other pharma drugs. It's required that the very entities that stand to gain huge profits when their product is authorized or approved, are the ones that oversee the design, implementation and final analysis of the clinical trials. No independent third parties involved at all.
Brilliant
James Corbett has also done some excellent work on the bogus nature of published "findings."
John P Ioannidis
Non-experts are shaping scientific discussion with little to no experience in the field says new study by John Ioannidis
Be wary of the “science” you trust! “Of 25 massively prolific authors…only 3 had a PhD degree in any subject matter. Only 2 of the 25 disclosed potential conflicts with some specificity.”
Prolific non-research authors in high impact scientific journals: meta-research study
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.19.517227v1
PDF ⬇️
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.19.517227v1.full.pdf
Link to the research please. Don't make me go search for it. I am super lazy.
This Easter I have decided to combat my addiction to curse words. Instead of my usual lexicon of interjections and expletives, I will start saying substitutive words like "Pasteur", "Koch" or "Dulbecco," and their corresponding gerunds when applicable.
It's probably a bad tactic to substitute one addiction for another, but at least it will be fun, and fun is always healthy for the the capillaries.
AI is rewriting history and it can rewrite and change anything now