Blindly trusted as the professional go-to for all things Covid, there are multiple red flags that raise serious concerns. Here's why Dr. Fauci should be both fired and criminally investigated.
I was talking with a friend from the UK the other day, who is moving to Kenya, and he was asking me how it was in Tanzania, which to date, is on a completely different track of reality than every other country, though that is now changing some. When the conversation came along to Corona, as all conversations inevitably do nowadays, we went back and forth with our disgust. You know, the obvious 'none of this makes any sense' and 'this is just nuts' type of conclusions were reached by two minds that see through the bs. So he asked me a question.
What is the logical conclusion you come to when you look at everything that is happening?
Logical? Meaning rational. Taking the past indicators of what we can derive. I answered, well, it seems obvious that there is a coordinated effort to deny mobility, as they want people in silos and not seeing what is going on in other places of the world. Even inside the country, to make everyone a silo and dependent on media and information that is filtered. And, I added, I believe a goal is longevity, hence the testing of mRNA on willing subjects to see what works and what doesn't.
Yes, he replied, those are means and goals, plausible, but what is the logical conclusion you arrive at when you look at what has happened to date, what does it point toward?
As you point out, none of what Fauci says makes sense, it is all over the place. There is nothing logical about this whole thing. Or is there?
Our problem is that we are starting from an inductive point of reason. Or rather, we accept their inductive goal as the basis for what we argue. So we wind up looking vaccine efficacy, for example. And Phizer, or whoever, gets a 97% rating and that's an A+ in our world! (nevermind that efficacy is the percentage reduction of disease in a vaccinated group of people compared to an unvaccinated group, and that latter group starts at 99.997% among children, for example-- of course it doesn't make sense). Or does it?
If you work from a deductive perspective instead, where does the conclusion work toward? Put aside all the lies and the bs narratives that flip-flop and the nonsensical rational, just look at what is being done, step by step, and what can we infer this leads toward?
I was talking with a friend from the UK the other day, who is moving to Kenya, and he was asking me how it was in Tanzania, which to date, is on a completely different track of reality than every other country, though that is now changing some. When the conversation came along to Corona, as all conversations inevitably do nowadays, we went back and forth with our disgust. You know, the obvious 'none of this makes any sense' and 'this is just nuts' type of conclusions were reached by two minds that see through the bs. So he asked me a question.
What is the logical conclusion you come to when you look at everything that is happening?
Logical? Meaning rational. Taking the past indicators of what we can derive. I answered, well, it seems obvious that there is a coordinated effort to deny mobility, as they want people in silos and not seeing what is going on in other places of the world. Even inside the country, to make everyone a silo and dependent on media and information that is filtered. And, I added, I believe a goal is longevity, hence the testing of mRNA on willing subjects to see what works and what doesn't.
Yes, he replied, those are means and goals, plausible, but what is the logical conclusion you arrive at when you look at what has happened to date, what does it point toward?
As you point out, none of what Fauci says makes sense, it is all over the place. There is nothing logical about this whole thing. Or is there?
Our problem is that we are starting from an inductive point of reason. Or rather, we accept their inductive goal as the basis for what we argue. So we wind up looking vaccine efficacy, for example. And Phizer, or whoever, gets a 97% rating and that's an A+ in our world! (nevermind that efficacy is the percentage reduction of disease in a vaccinated group of people compared to an unvaccinated group, and that latter group starts at 99.997% among children, for example-- of course it doesn't make sense). Or does it?
If you work from a deductive perspective instead, where does the conclusion work toward? Put aside all the lies and the bs narratives that flip-flop and the nonsensical rational, just look at what is being done, step by step, and what can we infer this leads toward?