“One of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history”

A must-read on the Covid pandemic if you are already sceptical about what has been taking place or even if you are not: COVID UPDATE: What is the truth? Here are the opening paras:

The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream led by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media, and international agencies. We have witnessed a long list of unprecedented intrusions into medical practice, including attacks on medical experts, destruction of medical careers among doctors refusing to participate in killing their patients and a massive regimentation of health care, led by non-qualified individuals with enormous wealth, power and influence.

For the first time in American history a president, governors, mayors, hospital administrators and federal bureaucrats are determining medical treatments based not on accurate scientifically based or even experience based information, but rather to force the acceptance of special forms of care and “prevention”—including remdesivir, use of respirators and ultimately a series of essentially untested messenger RNA vaccines. For the first time in history medical treatment, protocols are not being formulated based on the experience of the physicians treating the largest number of patients successfully, but rather individuals and bureaucracies that have never treated a single patient—including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, EcoHealth Alliance, the CDC, WHO, state public health officers and hospital administrators.

The media (TV, newspapers, magazines, etc), medical societies, state medical boards and the owners of social media have appointed themselves to be the sole source of information concerning this so-called “pandemic”. Websites have been removed, highly credentialed and experienced clinical doctors and scientific experts in the field of infectious diseases have been demonized, careers have been destroyed and all dissenting information has been labeled “misinformation” and “dangerous lies”, even when sourced from top experts in the fields of virology, infectious diseases, pulmonary critical care, and epidemiology. These blackouts of truth occur even when this information is backed by extensive scientific citations from some of the most qualified medical specialists in the world. Incredibly, even individuals, such as Dr. Michael Yeadon, a retired ex-Chief Scientist, and vice-president for the science division of Pfizer Pharmaceutical company in the UK, who charged the company with making an extremely dangerous vaccine, is ignored and demonized. Further, he, along with other highly qualified scientists have stated that no one should take this vaccine.

For the rest go to the link. A long and detailed article that never lets up. This is the final para:

Upon release of the vaccines, women were told the vaccines were safe during all states of pregnancy, only to find out no studies had been done on safety during pregnancy during the “safety tests” prior to release of the vaccine. We were told that careful testing on volunteers before the EUA approval for public use demonstrated extreme safety of the vaccines, only to learn that these unfortunate subjects were not followed, medical complications caused by the vaccines were not paid for and the media covered this all up. We also learned that the pharmaceutical makers of the vaccines were told by the FDA that further animal testing was unnecessary (the general public would be the Guinea pigs.) Incredibly, we were told that the Pfizer’s new mRNA vaccines had been approved by the FDA, which was a clever deception, in that another vaccine had approval (comirnaty) and not the one being used, the BioNTech vaccine. The approved comirnaty vaccine was not available in the United States. The national media told the public that the Pfizer vaccine had been approved and was no longer classed as experimental, a blatant lie. These deadly lies continue. It is time to stop this insanity and bring these people to justice.

It’s about the US but discusses what is a world-wide phenomenon.

“Nothing matters very much and most things don’t matter at all”

It’s a quote from Arthur Balfour which always comes to mind at moments when the direction of politics changes in directions I happen not to be fond of at the time. He apparently also said these, which really do need to be kept in mind.

I never forgive, but I always forget.

He has only half learned the art of reading who has not added to it the more refined art of skipping and skimming.

And this is his version of what George Polites, my old boss at CAI, always used to say. His version was, “It will all be the same in a thousand years”. This is Balfour’s version:

“We survey the past, and see that its history is of blood and tears, of helpless blundering, of wild revolt, of stupid acquiescence, of empty aspirations. We sound the future, and learn that after a period, long compared with the individual life, but short indeed compared with the divisions of time open to our investigation, the energies of our system will decay, the glory of the sun will be dimmed, and the earth, tideless and inert, will no longer tolerate the race which has for a moment disturbed its solitude. Man will go down into the pit, and all his thoughts will perish. The uneasy consciousness, which in this obscure corner has for a brief space broken the contented silence of the universe, will be at rest. Matter will know itself no longer. ‘Imperishable monuments’ and ‘immortal deeds,’ death itself, and love stronger than death, will be as though they had never been. Nor will anything that is be better or be worse for all that the labour, genius, devotion, and suffering of man have striven through countless generations to effect.”

All very nice, but the reality is that whilst we are still living, we care a very great deal about the events that surround us. No point looking forward to how I might look at things when I finally depart this life.

Intelligent design-it’s not just all an accident

This was published at Instapundit:

IS THERE A POSITIVE CASE FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN? Geologist Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute insists there is and he has a new book out that makes the case. HillFaith is pleased to begin re-publishing a series of pieces by Luskin based on the book. It is offered here for informational purposes, not as a claimed last word. 459

The “459” at the end of the post will take you to the comments which you might also find of interest.

Gaudeamus Igitur and mindfulness

Having put up this post the other day – Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum – it brought me back to the phrase in which the Latin word “igitur” is most famously found – Gaudeamus igitur – which is the title of a mediaeval song that has been sung by students since the thirteenth century. I heard it first in Latin class in Grade XI sung by our Latin teacher, Mr Ireton. Here are the words, Latin first and then in English translation, the opening verse only.

Gaudeamus igitur,
Iuvenes dum sumus,
Post jucundam juventutem
Post molestam senectutem
Nos habebit humus.

Let us rejoice
While we are (still) young.
After a pleasant youth
After a troubling old age
The earth will have us.

I may already have worked out by then that life would fly by before I knew it, but that was the song that put that thought firmly into my mind, a thought which has never disappeared. And when I saw the word the other day – and I might note I was taught “igitur” never comes at the start of a sentence which when I saw the phrase quoted I knew I was not dealing with a scholarly use of the word – I thought of that song and its message. The message has been more than reinforced by a book I have just come across and have almost finished – Galileo & the Art of Ageing Mindfully : Wisdom from the Night Skies – which is discussed here.

With meditations on gravity, the turning Earth, and letting go, [its author Adam] Ford offers a personal synthesis of ideas on mindfulness, curiosity, ageing and stargazing. Part of the joy of growing older, he says, is in “letting go of certainties and living without answers”: but it’s a powerful thing to ask questions, and to contemplate those of centuries past.

It is the only book on mindfulness I have been able to resonate with, perhaps because the author and I are almost at the identical point in our lives. Not only was he at exactly the same age I now am when he wrote the book, not only has he also retired from work, but he had also, as I had myself, spent part of his youth in Hammersmith in London (not as odd as it was for me since I am Canadian-born and he is English). He also discusses on a couple of occasions when he had been in Australia.

I will only add that for me I have found dwelling on the brevity of life and living in the moment something I have always done (well, sort of). But if I were to name the philosophers in my reading past that have brought me here, they would include David Hume, as I have just discovered here: Was Hume a Secret Buddhist? The question for me then is this, am I now one as well?

 

Greek philosophy and democracy

Taken from Quora from a post by Spencer McDaniel in answer to this question: Why were most Greek philosophers against democracy?

First of all, it is a grave mistake to say that “most” Greek philosophers were opposed to democracy, because that is not actually true. Most Greek philosophers were either in favor of democracy or had no opinion on it. The philosophers that most people see as having been opposed to democracy are Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, but, as we shall see in a moment, this common perception is actually rather inaccurate.

For one thing, we actually know very little about what the historical Socrates (lived c. 470–399 BC) thought of democracy because everything we know about Socrates’s opinions comes from the writings of his two students Plato and Xenophon. Plato in particular seems to have used the character of Socrates in his dialogues as a sort of “sounding board” for various ideas and opinions, so, in most cases, when Plato attributes an idea to Socrates, it is very difficult to tell if it is really one of Socrates’s ideas, one of Plato’s own, some combination thereof, or just an idea Plato was experimenting with.

Plato (lived c. 423–c. 347 BC) makes it very clear in his Republic that he does not have much liking for the particular form of democracy that was instituted in his native city-state of Athens. Instead, in this dialogue, Plato argues that the ideal, perfect government should be ruled by a “philosopher-king,” a man who is supremely wise, intelligent, and rational and who makes all decisions for the benefit of everyone. This, however, is an idealistic vision and it is unlikely that Plato ever expected anything resembling his ideal republic to actually be implemented.

Plato would probably have much admiration for the government of most modern democratic countries, which operate on a very different form of democracy than the one that existed in Athens during Plato’s time. Athens in the fourth century BC was a direct democracy, meaning citizens voted directly on all the issues. This was a problem because most people did not understand the issues and were unable to make informed decisions on them. Modern representative democracies would probably be more palatable to Plato’s sensibilities.

Aristotle (lived c. 384–322 BC) has sometimes been portrayed as hostile to democracy, but, in fact, this is an egregious misunderstanding of Aristotle’s complex and erudite political theory. In his Politics, Aristotle explains that there are three major forms of ideal government: a monarchy (which he defined as a government ruled by a man very much along the lines of Plato’s “philosopher-king”: one who is supremely qualified and rules for the betterment of everyone), an aristocracy (which he defined as a small group of the best and most qualified people ruling for the betterment of everyone), and a constitutional government (which he defined as a government ruled by all the free citizens on behalf of and for the betterment of everyone).

Aristotle held that, of the three ideal forms, a monarchy is the best because it is the most efficient, but he contended that all three ideal forms of government will inevitably become perverted and corrupted over time. He explains that a monarchy becomes perverted into a tyranny, a government ruled by one man for solely his own benefit. An aristocracy becomes perverted into an oligarchy, a government ruled by a few people for solely their own benefit. Finally, a constitutional government becomes perverted into a democracy, a government ruled by the majority of the population for solely their own benefit.

Aristotle reasoned that a democracy is the least terrible of these three forms of government because it results in the most number of people being happy; whereas a tyranny is the worst form of government because it results in only one man (the tyrant) being happy. Aristotle was therefore in favor of democracy, not because he necessarily liked it in and of itself, but rather because it was the least awful form of government that he could think of.

We do not deserve the freedoms we have inherited from our ancestors

The editors gave the article the title The Failed Covid Response but the article really is about what a bunch of morons we are who do not deserve the freedoms we have inherited from our ancestors. Let me take to near the end of what is a very long article:

We need an honest discussion about how we proceed from here, and it must be free of the bullying, dogmatism, and bad faith exhibited by many experts over the past two years. The Science™ has held up poorly and will likely crumble further as time goes on, but that will not stop defenders of COVID policies from insisting it was all worthwhile.

That question—was it worthwhile?—cannot be answered by numbers, no matter how they are sliced and diced. We had a social contract before COVID hit. Like all social contracts, it emerged organically over time, and perhaps it needed to be revisited. But there was no such debate in 2020. The contract was simply tossed overboard, along with the values and principles underscoring it. Any suggestion that this was perhaps a bit precipitous was deemed morally reprehensible.

We acted as if we were on the Titanic with only minutes to work out what to do. It was a media-led pandemic for which there was virtually no evidence of anything unusual for virtually everyone. If we don’t learn from this great social disaster about the kinds of political leaders we have somehow put in place, we will all end up serfs subservient to some of the most incompetent people who have ever achieved high office.

Meanwhile, go to the link and read the whole thing.

Kinesin of which you have never before heard a thing

From Meet the Kinesins, Your Body’s On-Time Cellular Supply Chain Trucking Fleet. Specially for those who think Darwinian random chance evolution is the cause of our existence. From the link:

Those billions of cells that make up your body require all kinds of supplies in order to fulfill their respective functions in keeping you alive and well. That’s where the “walking wonder” of the Kinesin family of molecular motors enters the picture.

As the Discovery Institute’s Evolution News & Science Today explains, the Kinesin-II is especially fascinating because of how it moves about supply-chain-like delivering needed supplies where and when required:

“Kinesin-II, one of the extended family of kinesin motors, is involved in a ‘relay race’ on a micro-miniature scale. It demonstrates how different families of molecular motors cooperate.

Kinesin-II “feet” move the molecular motor along its delivery route. (Screenshot from YouTube)

“This one works in synergy with other cargo-carrying motors in the important complex function known as ‘intra-flagellar transport’ (IFT) that builds and maintains cilia and flagella. An important example occurs in the neurons of the eye.”

As the following animated video demonstrates, the Kinesin-II has a couple of “feet” with which it moves itself along a receiving cell, as it unloads whatever supplies it happens to be carrying. Being a molecular motor, the Kinesin-II has distinct parts that require assembly in a specific sequence. It doesn’t happen by chance; it happens by design.

Watch the vid. It only takes 3 and a half minutes but is guaranteed to amaze you.

Alfred Adler

I have had a long-time interest in psychology – even having studied it at university as part of my undergraduate degree. But Freud I have never found made much sense and Jung does seem to go off in odd directions of his own. It is Alfred Adler that I have found the most compatible with my own way of thinking.

I came across this which has only made me appreciate Adler even further: Alfred Adler Quotes That Will Make You Reflect. This is what it says about Adler himself:

Alfred Adler was an Austrian medical doctor, psychotherapist, and founder of the school of individual psychology.

Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Alfred Adler are all giants in the world of psychology.

Adler was one of the original core members of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, which was led by Freud. His ideas were counter to Freud’s, and he split from the group and proposed an “individual psychology” based on his own original theories. His emphasis on the importance of feelings of inferiority, the inferiority complex, is recognized as an isolating element which plays a key role in personality development.

Adlerian psychology enjoys a broad base of support in Europe and the United States, and presents simple and straightforward answers to the philosophical question: How can one be happy?

I must admit, I didn’t even know of Alfred Adler or Adlerian psychology until I came across the book “The Courage To Be Disliked” by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga. It’s an excellent book and a great way to learn about the principles of Adlerian psychology in order to live a happy life.

Anyway, go to the quotes of which this one particularly stood out for me:

“The only normal people are the ones you don’t know very well.”

The other 39 are amazingly insightful as well. Oh well, let me mention one more.

“What is courage? Courage is the willingness to risk failure… There is only one danger I find in life, and that, indeed, is a real one. You may take too many precautions.”

There are now the other 38 for you to investigate yourself.

In case you have been wondering about Novavax


I have been looking everywhere for a medical assessment of Novavax which is the vaxxine that is more traditional and does not rely on mRNA molecules to produce whatever effects it supposedly produces. I have now been sent this for which I am extremely grateful.

This is its title, Novavax – hope or hype? but as a hint of what is to come, this is the sub-head: “Spoiler alert: it’s not what you were sold.” You can read the whole thing at the link. It’s quite detailed, and the writer seems knowledgable, but as with so much you will have to decide for yourself how much any of this can be trusted. This is how the post ends:

Even if adverse reactions to the Novavax vaccine are rarer than to the AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Moderna shots, any risk at all is, in my opinion, a completely unacceptable price to pay for a product that offers no clinically meaningful benefit to individuals nor any social benefit.

So, don’t bother inviting me to join your Novastan cult. I’m staying in the control group.

And if there are other assessments out there that you know of, please note them in the comments.