My article on "What is real, what is not, and how can we tell?" https://thescienceanalyst.substack.com/p/welcome-post

It provides a basis for a logical approach to a discussion. And I hope people will expand it further. In short, it is: (1) logical consistency, (2) Scientific evidence (3) Crime and frauds (4) Bias (5) Trust (6) Unknowns (7) Work towards solutions

Logical consistency comes before scientific evidence. Many scientists use logical inconsistent models because they believe they work and no alternatives are considered. Like "vaccines are always safe". It is a problem in every field of science. The problem of "model lock-in". https://thescienceanalyst.substack.com/p/the-problem-of-model-lock-in

I have been on many internet forums. And people tend to push their belief, whatever the evidence really tells us. And then there are people pushing extreme ideas. And they think they are right, because they get so much resistance. Additionally there are bad people spreading false ideas and fake evidence to make the opposition look bad. They become active whenever there is good evidence.

The mainstream media is mainly pushing a certain narrative. Which seems to come from above. Simply stated: "Vaccines good, masks good, freedom bad". This narrative is what they work with, and they fake their own evidence like a movie production team.

With discussions on forums they have teams to promote nazi-stuff, child-porn, racism, violence. And they do mass reporting, to confuse the algorithms. Or attack the internet servers. This is to block the opposition from spreading information. This is the majority of attacks that I have seen.

Then there is the "limited hangout" (partially true information) and seeding of made-up news. Or spreading of fake stuff, even after it was clearly faked. Usually mixed with extremist ideas to make the opposition look bad. Trolls like to spread them too, because they want to stir emotions. But some think it is justified, because the mainstream media is doing the same thing.

That is why I started to work towards a solution. And I developed the above method to work towards the truth.

Expand full comment

What/where are the DMED links? Thank you

Expand full comment
Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

Thank you, Mathew, for your much needed and much appreciated work. You are spot on with your words, "Whatever pushes with friction against your mental models, ask first before getting emotional." It reminds me of a phrase that I've found useful when such friction occurs in my own mind - "Get curious, not furious". It is often easier said than done, but I agree with you, "I think there is wisdom in that."

Expand full comment

I don't trust Stew Peters...he came out of nowhere and suddenly built up a mini-media empire. As for the rest, I'm still of the opinion that if people are squirming away from the DMED story, they may have been warned away or outright threatened.

On a related note, I've noticed some potentially organized pushback against vaccine victims that is obsessive and stalky, involving anonymous people literally going and searching past social media posts to try to claim the vaccine-injured person is crazy, while at the same time claiming they (said "investigators") are trying to "protect" the Medical Freedom Movement from "grifters" claiming an allegedly false vaccine injury.

When I ask these so-called Medical Freedom Movement "defenders," though, why they don't put those considerable investigative energies into DMED or Blotgate, they ignore that and go on bizarre personal attacks or claim that I'm the one "gaslighting" them!

See this post and some of the strange comments underneath: https://wholistic.substack.com/p/stop-medical-gaslighting-a-response

Also this post on "Vaccine Injury Gatekeepers": https://wholistic.substack.com/p/we-dont-need-self-appointed-vaccine

Expand full comment

Two thoughts, perhaps.

Firstly, everybody in teh MFM is a hunted minority, a role virtually none expected. Having attended multiple MFM Health conferences, they are great exchanges of highly censored, cutting-edge information. They are also soulful religious revivals. A small gathering of the True Tribe. Shelter, however brief, from the storm of global ignorance. To think fellow tribe members may be the enemy, may be too much right now.

Secondly, we are the side of free and fair debate and transparency, so let it rip.

That said, I doubt that the idea of who in the MFM is controlled or who is not is going to matter much. The Covid Crisis created collapse of The Human Immune is coming no matter how much "Division" there is in the MFM.

The only question for the MFM right now is how do they stop The WHO from getting Emergency Powers over the US Healthcare system? If The WHO gets control expect pardoning of all the Covid Criminals and burying of all the Covid data, all while mandating injecting any mRNA Frankenshots (Professor Francis Boyle) they want into everybody?

Great quote but remember we are dealing with the greatest Health Crisis in Human History, not some punk murdering sicko take over of a bunch of peasants. Communism's Tragedies will pale in Comparison to the Covid Crisis.

Expand full comment
Jan 20·edited Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

Thanks for including my post, which was thrilling to see. However. I am a bit confused - and worried - about its context here? I can assure you it has nothing to do with your fight at all. It is about controlling and abusive relationships, especially in the context of those of suffering from chronic illness and trauma, and how it scales up to totalitarian states [to be honest it was a subtle in introduction to the post I actually I wanted to write - about the WEF - which I did in a follow up post]. I am sorry if you read this as a part of an attack on you and your fight. It is not, and I support what you are doing. ps I am absolutely no-one - a non-entity- in the MFM, I don't know anyone nor had any contact in the movement, apart from a brief exchange of emails with Norman Fenton, and via comments on substack. I doubt very much Kirsch know me from Adam!

Expand full comment

The other insidious problem with controlled oppo is that it destroys trust within the movement. Every time there is a disagreement, or a mistake, then each side yells "controlled opposition" at each other. It is difficult, if not impossible, to tell whether a leader is controlled oppo except often in retrospect years after the case. We can't read minds, we're not there in their private meetings. What does anybody really know about others motivations.

I just take it as fact that everybody is flawed. Nobody is perfect. Some people are liars. I try not to get too attached to "leadership." They may be right, they may be wrong. As a matter of fact, everybody is wrong at least some of the time, and that includes the leadership of any movement. So feel free to criticize and question anything about them.

Now is a leader wrong because he is controlled oppo, or just because he doesn't understand something, wants to focus on other things, or is too busy to follow through on a particular project. Leaders, and anybody in a movement for that matter, will always disappoint. Failure is a constant part of life and therefore, in any movement. Is it due to controlled opps? Maybe. Maybe not. Sometimes we can sniff out controlled opps, but sometimes it is more difficult.

We should clearly state when we find someone is wrong or has disappointed us in some way. We should say this person is wrong, and here is why and leave it at that rather than always pointing a finger and yelling 'controlled opp!'

I've been a part of many movements in my life and controlled opposition is certainly a fact. We have to try to find a way of dealing with it, but also with the destruction of trust that it causes, which is probably its most damaging aspect.

Expand full comment

I think some chaos agents are just big egos that revel in stirring pots! They aren't necessarily moored to any core beliefs or principles. Therefore, they're not really on any team but their own. Ironically, that makes then easy to manipulate by stroking their egos and celebrating the chaos with them. And, there are people very skilled at manipulation.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your valuable research on the DMED data. The corruption of data in government and institutional custody (VAERS, economic statistics, financial transactions, electronic voting) is a threat to our freedoms. The solution is not to give authority to large organizations with agendas other than honesty. That's what I take home from this.

Thanks to you and many for making us aware of controlled opposition, limited hangouts and the like. I am properly suspicious.

Expand full comment
Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

I believe in you Mathew. I've followed you and know what you have done. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that many of the prominent people in the Health Freedom movement and alternative media are controlled opposition/disinformation agents. I still follow some of these people if they provide mostly truth. But some of them I now avoid like the plague if they promote mostly disinfo. Sadly, we cling to anyone who tells us what we want to hear and then fall easily for their lies. We're too easily brainwashed to escape from the matrix.

Expand full comment
Jan 21Liked by Mathew Crawford

Mathew, this is one of your best posts. It's important to evaluate each idea or argument on its own merits without judging the person who put the idea forth. Not everyone we disagree with is controlled opposition, and not every "limited hangout" is intentional, though controlled opposition and intentional "limited hangouts" do indeed exist. We must be skeptical, but not judgemental.

Expand full comment
Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

"Movements should be decentralized as much as possible in order to make the economic cost of containing them higher" - And there in lies the secret. Making the cost high.

People always want one voice speaking for the movement and I disagree. I'd rather have a dozen, or more, independent groups all working towards the same goals in different ways. That is a true 10 headed hydra for them to deal.

We've achieved a lot in 3 years because it was dozens of independent groups.

Expand full comment
Jan 20Liked by Mathew Crawford

Very good point about Decentralization and Anti Fragility

Expand full comment
Jan 22·edited Jan 22Liked by Mathew Crawford

If we start with the premise that a virus was released intentionally as a bioweapon, then we have to believe the spooks are in full gear, implementing all their old tricks, which includes trying to control the opposition. Would also include trying to sway people via blackmail, bribery or threats.

I'm much very hesitant to throw that accusation at any individual without a lot of evidence though.

However, just speculating here: there are two people that make me raise an eyebrow.

1. Andrew Huff: for one he puts out a salesman vibe. His theory is that the pandemic was caused by an accidental lab leak. As JJ Couey has pointed out, this is precisely the cover store that would be put out to cover up for an intentionally started pandemic. And who better to blow this whistle on this than someone who actually worked at EcoHealth?

To me, so many things suggest this was not an accident, and that makes me suspicious of Andrew.

2. Stew Peters: dude gives me the creeps. The doc he put out was rubbish. He seems like the type that is trying to make a name for himself. And I believe this is one who MC was referring to when he says he thinks some are trying to push MFM violent.

The establishment has been priming the public to view anti-vaxxers as domestic terrorists. You better believe it would be their wet dream if someone did something violent at this point.

Expand full comment

Love you, Mathew. Fabian method is at play here I believe. Explains some of the wrenches we've seen thrown into the MFM gears by high-profile individuals and groups. An example is the Nuremberg panel/Reiner Fuellmich ordeal. It was a morale blow to see the handling of that situation.

Below is an article, a bit dated, but gives a peek at the men behind the curtains shaping the digital agora.


Expand full comment