275 Comments

"I have often thought everything we have seen is part of one giant game of Hegelian pinball meant to keep us confused, divided, and off-balance." Exactly!

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023·edited Aug 15, 2023Pinned

"after quickly rejecting the corrupt culture that tried to pull me in at the age of 18 (after a successful summer internship solving one hard stats problem for the Human Genome Project, I was offered easy money to fake research papers)" - can you educate the trusting public on this? didn't know this was a thing.

Expand full comment
author

Paper mills are organized for the creation of fake research papers. If you find some honest academics, some of them know and will talk about this, but I suspect there is little public conversation because of cancel culture.

Expand full comment

Is a fake research paper a paper that presents results and conclusions from experiments that were never done?

Expand full comment
author

I am sure that describes a subset of them.

Expand full comment

Not sure if it’s the same thing but when you complete a higher degree you get approached by many “journals” to submit your paper to them which they will publish. They’re clearly 2nd rate journals (not that there are any that are not) but the chance of earning anything from such submissions is pretty small.

Expand full comment

The exact point I picked up on - fake research papers - ghostwriters.

Dr Kory and Marik are highlighting this in their interviews - they discovered this for themselves through their ivermectin journey. Prof Ioannidis has been calling out fake papers for years.

https://totalityofevidence.com/resources/experts/

The "peer reviewed" "research" journals control "Evidence-based medicine". EBM should not be confused with medicine based on evidence through observation, data and experience aka the "art of medicine". The more I have looked at this huge topic - I keep coming back to "technocracy" the new economic system under the religion of "scientism" which Patrick Wood explains.

https://totalityofevidence.com/patrick-wood/

Expand full comment

I have despised "Evidence Based Medicine" since it became a "thing."

It felt like a club used to make us (me) conform, which somehow goes against my nature. It followed the trajectory of "Political Correctness" (which evolved into "Woke") which also offended me as a card -carrying WASP right-wing deplorable misanthropist (and somewhat independent critical thinker.)

The past three years have confirmed some of my prejudices (I thought I was somewhat immune to Drug Reps' promotions, notwithstanding how attractive many of them were!) I did my best to resist RRR (Relative Risk Reduction) and still was tricked by Pfizer'$ "95% effectiveness".

Since declining the "ClotShot"(TM) thus rendering myself disemployed I have had much more scope for reading and learning. "The Real Anthony Fauci" last year and Dr. Kory's "The War on Ivermectin" this summer have either straightened my thinking or permanently corrupted my training and indoctrination.

Dr. Malone has an interesting background. I remain undecided if he should be taken as Judas Iscariot or Saul after his conversion. Keep in mind Dr. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's reminder that the dog did not bark in the night.

Expand full comment

Patrick Wood in one of his talks menioned a paper by Twila Brase on EBM and Technocracy... I managed to find it an found it very enlightening on the topic

Here is the pdf link just FYI

How Technocrats are Taking Over the Practice of Medicine by Twila Brase 2005

https://www.cchfreedom.org/pdfreport/

Expand full comment

Thanks. -R

Expand full comment

Well worded by Mathew. My comment is off-topic regarding Robert Malone but some might appreciate the following ...

> "peer reviewed" "research" journals

Yep. Can anyone find a study on Google Scholar with peer review comments at the end of the paper by named individuals open for all to see? That's how it used to be in actual science. (Now those are often being excluded even in old papers). For example, in the ground-breaking 1896 CO2 study, this peer review is in one PDF but even it too is cut off and others removed. No need to read all of this but just to make the point concrete and then I have one more thing to add ...

Prof. J. G. MACGREGOI~ .Dalhouse College, Halifax, N.S. ~

ARRHENIUS has deduced, as one of the consequences of the dissociation theory of electrolytic conduction, that the condition which must be fulfilled in order that two

aqueous solutions of single electrolytes, which have one ion in common and which undergo no change of volume on being mixed, may be isohydric, i. e. may on being mixed undergo no change in their state of dissociation or ionisation, is that the concentration of ions, i.e. the number of dissociated gramme-molecules per unit of volume, shall be the same for both solutions. He obtained this result by combining the equations of kinetic equilibrium for the constituent electrolytes before and after mixture. According to the above theory, the specific conductivity

of a mixture of two solutions of electrolytes 1 and 2, whose

[ENDS THERE ABRUPTLY]

My point: As you all know, everything is a lie, we are drowning in deceptions. Mathew's article isn't about climate but this serves as an example of the strategy employed against the masses similar to covid. Climate alarmists pretend that Svante Arrhenius was warning about CO2, the reverse is true, he considered CO2 a fantastic blessing. He wrote:

“By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid [CO2] in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equitable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind.”

Expand full comment

Thanks for this Gary,

I already had this data point in my climate timeline, but not the full picture, so thanks for helping me flesh it out.

https://totalityofevidence.com/climate-change/

It took a bit but I found the archived paper. I can't find your last quote in it though. Where did your Arrhenius quote come from?

https://archive.org/details/londonedinburgh5411896lon/page/236/mode/2up

Where did Arrhenius make that quote?

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023·edited Aug 14, 2023

I would also like to hear this story. I've seen shenannigans and watched people knowingly publish things they knew to be false in the scientific community, no doubt, but organized (paid) efforts to falsify them is something new to my eyes.

Expand full comment

I’m drawing attention to a few cogent observations made by other commenters here, and will then make my own.

First, an excerpt from GLK, above:

“Malone appears to echo the standard Phd narcissist model that pervades nowadays…”

Second, from The Science Analyst:

“Malone still believes that politics, companies and media can be steered into the good direction. Which is a weakness….”

Yes to both of those comments. A thousand times, yes.

Over time the plandemic was easier for me to see through due to:

1. the unscientific use of masks for an airborne pathogen

2. the suppression of off-label use of approved medications

3. pushing a brand new medical technology as safe within such a short time period

Of course, pHarma has always skewed the regulatory approval process in their favor but the sheer recklessness here shocked even me.

Malone’s inability to see the last bit surprised me, but I think it might boil down to ego and belief in institutions.

Malone seems to require a lot of praise and attention as many PhD narcissist types do, and he’s highly invested in the idea of mRNA, but I could never understand how any biologist who claims to understand evolution could be so stupid as to take a mRNA vaccine.

It occurred to me in 2020 that one should not override the body’s natural defenses against mRNA. This is a HIGHLY conserved defense among almost all organisms, including bacteria. A biologist called Joomi? with a Substack has written some pieces on this. It’s a basic idea from biology textbooks. I remember pointing it out on Facebook in late 2020 but it was generally ignored by conventionally “smart” people, i.e. normies.

I then saw unconventionally smart people who I’d been very close with personally — but who were at the same time, very fearful of covid — dismiss me and publicly mock me.

If a biological defense is that highly conserved, it is very important to survival. To override it is a VERY bad idea. Basic logic of the precautionary principle in combo with risk/cost benefit analysis told me mRNA vaccines were a no-go territory except for a terminal disease. Indeed, that was the conventional wisdom in regulatory approval prior to the covid plandemonium. (Not that I agree with the concept of regulatory approval, but I digress...)

In January 2021 I then read Dr. Vanessa Schmidt-Kruger’s assessment of the vaccines and how they might affect cardiac health. This was presented to Fuellmich crew. Whatever one might think of that crew, I knew at this point the vaccines would be a disaster because there were so many other mechanisms for how they could harm that I’d not considered. (Shortly thereafter I learned of Yeadon’s statements warning about fertility concerns and GVB’s warnings about non-sterilizing vaccines, which also made theoretical sense to me).

One could call into question the motives of all of these people, of course, but for me it boiled down to this:

Can smart people really be this stupid?

I think the answer is "yes." And the reason for that lies in independence, and what one feels the need to defend (materially, intellectually, etc.).

Some people refuse to grow out of their beliefs in institutional solutions. These include a lot of well-meaning people in the MFM who refuse to question the validity of the authority of the state.

Are these people “controlled opposition”?

Are these people “controlled” by anything other than their own beliefs in limiting systems of the last 10.000 years?

Isn’t that control over the mind sufficient to keep them reigned in by the powers that be?

The Malones, Weinsteins, and RFJ Jrs of the world will only push more statism as a ‘solution.’ I prefer to think that they mean well (since they talk about decentralization), but I definitely believe they’re hamstrung by ego and confidence in governments, corporations, and institutions -- generally speaking.

There’s plenty of credulity to go around, apparently. Or it may simply be that such types have a lot to defend (materially, psychologically, intellectually, etc.). Humility isn’t their strong suit.

Expand full comment

Off label medicines have no impact on a pharmaceutical/government/religious authorities fraud.

But they are handy for income for some in this here community.

Expand full comment
author

Can you give me a sense as to why you don't believe off label medicines have an effect? If pneumonia was the driver for hospitalization, wouldn't you expect antibiotics to help, at the least?

Three months ago I had the worst respiratory illness of my life. Throat hurt in a way that make it hard to swallow. I took steroids, which helped with inflammation. I also felt immediate relief in the pressure in my ears from ivermectin.

Hydroxychloroquine also has antibiotic properties.

Expand full comment

My recent experience of pharmaceuticals is that they made things worse and one that I was taking recently for a skin issue (now gone) was in that category. Some work nevertheless, an ointment I took for a small cancer on my leg a few years ago did its job very well. But from what I understand Ivermectin is somewhat destructive of the cell and (like metformin) attacks the mitochondria so although I purchased a stash of it from India a few years ago (the NZ Govt took another delivery at the border) I'm not in a hurry to trial it. And I too had a bad respiratory illness two months ago but it just took a little time to fix. Another throat issue that I have had in the last few years (difficulty swallowing) looks to be a wheat intolerance and removal of wheat in the last 3/4 weeks seems to have dealt to that.

Expand full comment
author

No. What I experienced was not at all the same illness as anything I experienced before. And I've talked to gar too many people who had similar experiences to mine. There is a new illness, and we need to figure out if it came from a regular form of virus, a clone or some other pathogen.

Expand full comment
Dec 3, 2023Liked by Mathew Crawford

I agree completely, I had "Covid" at the end of 2021, ended up in hospital for 1 week and on an oxygen machine for a month at home (I needed it, I can confirm). The day I was discharged from hospital I had the weirdest taste in my mouth and during the early morning of that day, the feeling that something evil was trying to get into me! My wife and son caught it from me, she had a thumping headache and lost taste and smell which has only partially returned. My son (25) had no real problems. This was not a FLU! My oldest son caught it a few months later but I fed him Ivermectin (36mg\day) for 4 days, he recovered completely in 5 days. I caught it in Sept 2022 again (O2 blood saturation 88%). Took Ivermectin right away (36mg\day) and was OK within 1 week, no experience such as during the first infection, mostly flu like symptons, aches and pains etc. and ok in 1 week

Expand full comment

Forgot to mention NON VAXXED FAMILY!

Expand full comment

Did you take the injections on offer a year or two ago?

Expand full comment
author

Dear lord, no. Anyone who says they didn't notice the shenanigans in 2020 either wasn't paying attention, is lying, or has poor judgment.

Expand full comment

With "Covid" those who have had colds or flu in the past should just keep doing what they were comfortable with doing before. The whole Covid thing was a fraud so no repurposed medicines should be any more effective for it than for influenza (which "disappeared" during the Covid years).

Expand full comment

1) The suppression of Off-Label treatments was a necessity for the current fraud. Agreed there was no direct payment, but they had to be "cancelled" to permit the vaxx crime.

2) There was an interesting study (which I didn't save) wherein those with identified influenza showed no benefit from IVM, while those with "Covid" did somewhat better.

I have occasionally used this (non-approved) diagnosis-through-treatment technique- "If this makes you better I have likely guessed the right diagnosis."

After decades of "it's just a virus" there are still some diagnostic clues - adenovirus associated with conjunctivitis, herpesvirus behaves differently than varicella, etc.- and some useful treatments.

Expand full comment

I feel like Dr Meryl Nass' thoughts on Malone / Malone - Breggin, should be considered ~ https://merylnass.substack.com/p/breggin-and-malone-analysis-and-suggested

https://merylnass.substack.com/p/the-deep-state-attack-on-robert-malone

Malone's responses in his article make sense. It is low how he calls you "Mat", conflates you with Liam, and groups everyone together. You're not someone who would run with an assassination theory upon reading its headline.

The shots-render-people-technologically-capable-of-receiving-signals theory just got a little harder to believe, after this from Karen Kingston.

Expand full comment
author
Aug 15, 2023·edited Aug 15, 2023Author

I like the first of these articles more. The second seems naive. If I were working with psychological warfare operation specialists as Malone has (he has worked with Erin Olszewski who was a POG operative, and invited me to meet with intelligence at his ranch last year), I'd probably have fake attacks brought against me to further the Streissand effect that blossomed from a Twitter ban two days before a Rogan appearance.

Expand full comment

Thanks for pinning this comment. If Malone is really that evil and his whole thing is an act, I guess it would be possible, more than possible, it would make strategic sense, that he orchestrated those fake tweets, and / or his own Twitter ban.  

Maybe I'm too naive. And I don't know him personally as you do (and Dr. Nass does). But I don't see Malone orchestrating that much deception. He comes from deeper within the ranks of the powerful than the doctors who worked in offices and hospitals and became covid dissidents. So him having worked with people like Michael Callahan doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Here he says that after catching Callahan in a number of lies, he stopped dealing with him. (If this is not true and they are still working together, that would be something to note and show proof of).   (https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/puppet-masters-of-the-pandemic-part - search 'Callahan' and also 'Michael'). 

(And in that transcribed interview, Malone says "I was a small subcontractor with a DoD secret clearance. There's no way that a subcontractor would be given a programmatic authority over major biodefense programs such as DOMANE."

- Is there proof that he's lying here?  

Erin Olszweski (undercover nurse who exposed how covid patients were treated in an NYC hospital), has a book with a preface by JB Handley. Handley is a beloved father of an autistic son, author of books on autism, close friend of The Highwire, one of the main parents in The Spellers, and respected by the awesome Toby Rogers. If everything is guilt by association, is Handley controlled ops too?  That would be Twilight Zone upon Twilight Zone.  

Well, OK .. we are living in times where the creepiest parts of movie plots are coming to life all at the same time. So maybe there are double agents all over the place ...

Malone can speak, and be received, like no one else about the entire mRNA platform. (Especially by people who would consider injecting themselves with the stuff). I think those fake tweets are more likely to come from the direction of those who want the future of all life to be dependent on mRNA shots. If not them, then from the not-solid-info-dissidents who can never forgive him for his creations, career, and connections.

I listened to most of that interview, and the end (54:58) where he agrees with Mappin that Elon Musk deserves credit for what he changed when he bought Twitter, and at 59:26 where Malone says "the case can be made he has saved western democracy as we know it." They both make clear they're referring *Only* to Musk's actions with Twitter, not to Neuralink or his other projects.

Even the partial way only some people were let back on, and only some information was allowed to flow when it had been stifled, was huge. Mappin is grateful that being back on Twitter helped people meet each other and information flow, and Malone brings up what it helped expose of the big tech / gov't / social media collusion - which is helping lawsuits - and the outcomes of those lawsuits may end up saving western democracy as we know it.

Sure, those are limited hangouts, Musk hired a WEF connected CEO and is not living up to what he said about free speech, and those who did not see him as an all good hero figure were right. But even the moments when enough was revealed to fuel those lawsuits to victory, justifies Malone's statement. Doesn't mean it's correct, but it's not crazy or assuming that Musk is a great, trustworthy guy, and all his projects are harmless and awesome. (I do not trust Elon Musk, I'm not surprised about Twitter's CEO choice, and I think Neuralink is invasive, creepy and dangerous.

But I'm glad the info Musk helped expose is bringing more closer attention and accountability on gov't influence in the info - sphere.

You and Dr. Nass are my most trusted sources of information. I don't feel qualified to disagree with you on most things, but I'll disagree with you on Malone. And respectful disagreement is OK.

Expand full comment
author

My impressions are not based on guilt by association. They are based on despicable behaviors such as the group effort to black out my research into the DMED amd Unissant, first and foremost. When I had caught Kirsch in enough lies, it became increasingly hard for me to ignore the avalanche of other circumstantial details and start documenting them.

Understand that I have yet to lay put bit a fraction of the stories I've collected. Hold your judgment.

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023Liked by Mathew Crawford

Stopped following M when he began his wining about the Breggins. Truth will out all lies eventually.

Expand full comment

So did I. So I understand very little of this post. One thing shines through - Dr. Malone's narcissism. I regret that Matthew had to spend valuable time responding to Marine's unfounded accusations.

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023Liked by Mathew Crawford

Thank you Matthew....you are the cooler brain that Malone pretends to have.

Expand full comment
author

I will try to live up to that compliment.

Expand full comment

Malone is a Chaos Agent. Everything he writes and says stinks of limited hangout disinfo nonsense. Sorry, but I call it like I see it.

Expand full comment

Timothy: I suspect you're right. I read that stuff because I'm a voracious reader, and can discern bullshit. Important to know what the chaos agents are saying, in my opinion.

Expand full comment

🐴 ♫ "The Equestrian Statue" ♫ by Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band (1967) 🐴

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNXVC1A-ssk

(3 min)

"♫ There once was a very famous man

On his 🐴 famous horse 🐴 he'd ride through the land ♫

♫ The people used to see him everywhere

When he died, they put a statue in the square ♫

(Hooray!)

~

♫ Here comes 🐴 the Equestrian Statue 🐴

Prancing up and down the square ♫

♫ Little old ladies stop 'n' say

"Well, I declare!" ♫ ... "

For me, the shame of of it is that i actually used to like Malone LOL.

It's become rather obvious to me now that Malone is corralling the sheep down the (limited truth) paths of FDA bad & Pfizer bad, while putting a big "Keep Out" sign on many important topics, including but not limited to:

> who created the remdesivir hospital MURDER protocols which were inserted into the (Doesn't) Cares Act legislation?

> who inserted the lucrative financial incentive$ for HOSPITAL MURDER into the (Doesn't) Cares Act legislation to the benefit of Gilead Sciences (maker of remdesivir) and the hospital$?

> why has "run-death-is-near" not already been DELETED from the hospital murder protocol? And replaced by IVM, HCQ and other things that DO NOT KILL the PATIENTS?!

> Is 🐴 lying about the D.O.M.A.N.E. computer choosing famotidine (but not HCQ, not IVM)? Probably YES imho.

When 🐴 or anybody avoids key questions, that reveals much to me.

IMHO, 🐴 is functioning to shield the D.O.D./the government from blame ... i mean, hasn't he worked with these same people, these same bioweapon agencies, these same intel assets for much of his lengthy career? Yes, yes, yes.

Stock ownership of Gilead Sciences by the political class may partly explain the odd silence of the U.S. Senate and Congress critters about this particular drug ... this modern day version ofZyklon B.

Expand full comment

I had to stop reading his stuff. I have too much other good stuff to read. His is a waste of time.

Expand full comment

Gary, using a ':' to respond to someone is a bit confusing.

Expand full comment

Anyone who has worked for/still works for a 3-letter agency is suspect at this point.

Expand full comment
author

I'd rather say, "vet them" than "suspect", though it's hard not to use "suspect" given that the Obama-era changes to the Whistleblower laws make *more* difficult to blow the whistle if you have security clearance. The government can legally just lock you up immediately and hold you indefinitely without a trial.

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023·edited Aug 14, 2023

Or give them a fake trial under the espionage act that doesn’t allow the person to actually defend themselves. Then have them sentenced with draconian sentences.

One of the worst things that came out of the Obama administration and there are plenty of things to choose from. Sadly I bought his BS and voted for him in 2000 and then immediately regretted it.

Expand full comment

2000 ?

Expand full comment

Seems to have got an 8 mixed up for a 0.

Expand full comment

Matt - my humblest apologies. I should have done this long ago. I just watched your DMED presentation (simplified version) where you conclusively prove the DMED data was completely manipulated. While the DMED manipulation is real, tragic, and grossly immoral, it pales compared to the Global Warming data lies.

As someone who went through the Climate Gate Wars over a decade ago, let me confidentially say "The entire Global Warming Scam is a data manipulation Scam." The same techniques that were used in the Covid Scam were used in Climate Gate; gross data manipulation and non-disclosure, deference to authority, branding skeptics dangerous "deniers" that want children to die (antivaxxers), the Science is settled, censorship, and career destruction. And of course, totally false data. A favorite trick of the Global Warming liars was to lower past temperatures (particularly the hot 1930's), increase current temperatures, use restricted data sets, hide everything, and shut down debate. While the DMED manipulation is terrible, the impacts of the Global Warming lies will destroy civilization, except for the psychopaths that want us all to die. The data manipulation is so great, without it there would be no warming. The Covid scammers want to kill people, the Global warming scammers want to kill society. Good sources for this are Anthony Watt's Watts Up with That. (WUWT) work. Thanks for all you do but we are fighting entrenched evil that got its playbook a decade ago. All the best.

Expand full comment
author

When I started RTE, I thought that I would have time to do a deep dive on Climate debates. It could be a 50 or 100+ article series. I do collect notes on it and have for over 20 years (though I was not always so good at organizing saved information), and I've doubted the narrative since almost the initial emergence of climate modeling. You don't get to hold a conference and have everyone recalibrate their models to the same conclusive endpoint, and then call it science.

Expand full comment

Mathew (sorry about the Matt) a couple of other points. I may be one of the first scientists in the country to prove predicting long term temperatures is not possible. Almost 50 years ago while in grad school, I had a contract from an Army research lab to use a state of the art autoregressive /moving average (ARMA) model to predict long term temperatures. In those ancient times we ran our ARMA programs on an IBM mainframe the size of a large room programmed with punch cards. I quickly realized the goal of the project, to forecasts accurately the temperature long term, was impossible because small errors in data inputs could result in huge forecasts errors. Equally important was that errors compound so quickly causing the error ranges to increase so rapidly, the results were junk. As an example, what good is a temperature forecast with an error range of plus or minus one hundred degrees? These error problems are still true in long term temperature forecasting today. It’s not that the forecasts are just wrong, it’s that they can’t be right. All global warming modelers know this, or they are incredibly stupid. They just lie about it. They know that can’t predict next weeks weather within 2 degrees but they push the lie they can predict the temperature a hundred years from now within two degrees. That literally defies credulity. And yet, we should totally restructure society based on those impossible models. This was probably the greatest lie in history, and people believed it. Selling the lie that even though mRNA vaccines have never worked in thirty years and generally killed all their test subjects are now safe and effective for humans, including babies, after two months of testing is child’s play. Joseph Goebbels, a proponent of the concept of its easier to get people to believe a “Big Lie”, would be proud.

Expand full comment
author

This sounds like what James Gleick wrote about in Chaos.

Expand full comment

Great book and fascinating subject. Chaos theory says very small changes in inputs can have totally different outcomes. It very counterintuitive for most people. We intrinsically think if you're a little off at the beginning you should be a little off at the end. Try that on a mountain trail next to a cliff. I have written some other posts on my experience trying to forecast the temperature and what you quickly realize, if you're honest and not a paid stooge of the Climate Establishment (CE), is that error ranges very quickly build up to the point that forecasting is useless. What relevance is a temperature forecast with an error range of plus or minus 100 degrees? Since the concept of an "average temperature" of the Earth is impossible to create because the input data is so flawed (as is the concept - try figuring out the average temperature of your house as a thought experiment), any model at all, particularly of a Chaotic system that is total dependent on accurate inputs, is worthless. Since the CE scum know this but still want money and power, they create a completely bogus forecasting approach where they take about a dozen different models (that can't be right), average them, and say voila we have a prediction. You would puke statistically if you see how they get around the error problem. They then say the standard deviation of the bogus models represents the error range. The way I visualize it is, if you take a dozen test results that get every answer wrong, then average their answers to the first question, that is the right answer. Then you use that answer as the input to the second question and so on. It is such garbage top to bottom, they have to censor any alternative viewpoints. It's like you get the people to believe that not only is the Emperor not Naked, he's beautiful. Impossible pseudo-science based on pseudo-statistics. It is good you didn't waste your time on the Global Warming Scam, we need you doing what you're doing.

Expand full comment

The Arctic is clearly melting, one year ice instead of the multiple year ice of a few decades ago, summer ice extent almost drops to non-existent, ships increasingly use it for freight which was impossible in the 1970s for example.

Away from your claims on temperature prediction If there is no warming then how do you explain the current state of the Arctic?

Expand full comment

Modelling is a great way to bamboozle a sleeping populace. It makes using our eyes and common sense about anything seem naive. No one wants to appear dumb. Part of the Scooby Doo is to convince us that we are solving mysteries out of simplified binaries put to us. As JJ Couey says "bat-cave or lab-infected shoelace?"

Expand full comment

you seem quite knowledgeable; what do you think of Dane Wigington's work?

Expand full comment

thanks again for the link. great video. I have followed this for some time and one thing I was surprised about was the lack of reference to the short term impact of 911 on airplane travel. Since all flights were shutdown, it created a great opportunity to test a zero deposition environment

for a few days. Again, long ago out a faulty memory, but some of those results were very supportive of the main video story line. Since the goal is human population control, this all fits right in. My understanding, again from ancient memory holes, is that the heavy metals really impact fertility. You may want to check out https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com for very interesting information on nanoparticles. Thanks again.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the comment. I was unfamiliar with him but I have followed the subject area for awhile and am very concerned about it. Will watch his videos and get back if I have additional thoughts. Thx again

Expand full comment

Or if the science is “settled” (so well defined everyone knows it) you need to average a dozen models that don’t match. Then you use that to destroy society. In the technical parts through the first five or so IPCC reports they would say you can’t forecast non-linear, coupled chaotic systems. They later disappeared that. They knew it was a scam from the beginning.

Expand full comment

Al Gore makes me want to BARF! Fraud from the Get-Go!!!

Expand full comment

My god, you really need to take your meds. I don’t know enough about the DMED data being manipulated, but to equate it to mass manipulation of data applicable to Global Warming is quite the stretch.

If you don’t believe the data, then use your eyes. I guess the temperature changes, droughts, floods, wildfires, polar icecaps melting at alarming rates, and the heating of the oceans, are all figments of our imaginations. I guess when the Gulf Stream disappears in another five years and the earth slowly dies, you can blame it on all the scientists crying wolf.

The only people invested in global warming denial are the same entities that said cigarettes don’t cause cancer. They’re referred to as the Merchants of Death, and they aren’t being funded by government entities; try fossil fuels!and all the hired guns, that will gladly sell their souls for a few Pennie’s more.

Expand full comment

When you say use your eyes, what you mean is what you see on TV or reported in the main stream press. While sensational news gets reported, it was generally much hotter and dryer in the US in the 1930 (Dust Bowl days) than now. Since censoring non-narrative Climate News was freely admitted in the Twitter files, if the only news you see is MSM sourced, even they freely admit it is totally biased. Even the completely crooked UN IPCC says there are no long term trends in most of what you're talking about, but that doesn't get reported. As an example of the MSM bias, by far the most important Green House gas is water vapor. In all the recent sensational stories about the "Earth Boiling" with record temperatures, how many times have you heard about the impact of the Tonga volcano last year that added as much as 10% to the upper atmosphere's water vapor levels? This one volcano could have had more impact on the earth's atmosphere than all of the human inputs combined. And it's not reported, because it isn't part of the narrative. Ironically because no matter how you rig the CO2 levels, it is 400 parts per million for God's sake, it has such a small impact on global temperatures, 2/3 of the forecast in heating in the Global Temperature models is due to increased water vapor. So a slight water vapor increase in a hundred years is a big deal, but a massive instantaneous water vapor increase from a singly volcano is not mentioned. It is literally, all a scam.

Of course even the concept of "long term" temperature data is a joke. Humans have been around in their current form for many tens of thousands of years. To say the weather of the last 150 years or so is representative of anything from a statistical perspective is a joke. More importantly, to think we have a clue of what the average "global" temperature was a hundred or two hundred years is ridiculous. With oceans and ice caps covering about 80+% of the world, we have virtually no data on any of that, other than the last few decades. Even then, you are talking about dozens of measuring devises in all the oceans. How about the temperature trends in deserts, on mountains, in the middle of Africa, South America, Siberia? No real or reliable long term data. The Warming scammers like to use a garbage temperature history, and garbage it must be if you miss 80+% of the earth's surface, that starts about 1850. The data is so bad in all of the Southern Hemisphere, half the globe, there is one even close to reliable long term temperature record in the 1850's. The Scammers like to say that increased temperatures since 1850, just coincidentally at the end of a three hundred year cooling cycle, represents the rise of the industrial pollution age. In 1850, and even in 1950, only a small percentage of world's population could even be considered to be industrialized. Look at India, Africa, and China then, almost medieval energy use patterns until really recently. Selective data manipulation (like ignoring the fact that about a thousand years ago people farmed areas of Greenland that are now under ice) is the point I was making. Let me offer a thought experiment. What is the average temperature of the place you live? How many sensors with what degree of accuracy reading the temperature how often would you need to know the average temperature within one degree? One sensor won't do it. Would ten sensors (a hundred?)be needed to cover the ceiling, the floor, near the doors, the windows, measuring the temperature every hour, minute, second for a period of years to get an average temperature within one degree? If we can't even figure out the long term average temperature of one building, it is complete hubris to think we can create accurate enough Global temperature inputs to predict 100 years out. Using faulty data to predict the future creates faulty forecasts. Garbage In, Garbage Out. You know they can't predict the weather next week within one degree. Why would you possibly believe they could predicted it a hundred years from now. More importantly, say you had perfect data and a perfect model, how could we possibly know what impact that will have? Another thought experiment. How much will temperature vary where you live today? 20 degrees? 30 degrees? How much does it vary in a year? For most of the US that number might be 50 degrees, a 100 degrees? So plants and animals have adapted to 100 hundred degree temperature changes in a year but somehow a 1 or 2 degree temperature change in a hundred years is going to take them out? That's ridiculous. Finally, when somebody offers me a forecast, my first question is how right have been your other forecasts? We are now in the third or fourth ten year period of the last forty years when the world is going to end in ten years. That tells you all you need to know about global warming forecasting. Forget what your eyes see on biased TV or media. Use your mind. Thanks for the comment.

Expand full comment

Indeed, a very good post. Thanks for taking the time to make it.

Expand full comment

great post!! thanks!

Expand full comment

There is some concern that weather is being manipulated and has been so for many years.

Expand full comment

Manipulate by whom? And by manipulating, do you mean we have a weather machine that is being programmed to destroy humanity? Or that the global warming crowd is manipulating the weather data to make it seem that the climate is heating, when it’s not?

Either way, provide evidence, not speculation and your personal opinion.

Expand full comment

It's a bit of a stretch to say that I am voicing an opinion or speculating, because I did not provide links.

I didn't realize three and half years ago that as I traversed my own personal 'shit show' and the global one as well, that I should be keeping lists/bibliographies.

I will also add that none of this has to do with me, nor do I believe or disbelieve what I read.

You might check out Dane Wigington's work:

https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

Also the Lioness of Judah pulls pieces together from different sources:

https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/end-times-headline-news-56f?

Expand full comment

Everyone can see the changes in global weather patterns that seem to have become more erratic/extreme over time, the question is what's causing it, which is still up for debate.

It is interesting to note how those like yourself who say it's all man made CO2 ignore things like this: https://www.businessinsider.com/china-sets-aside-millions-to-control-the-rain-2016-7?op=1

(And that's what's publicly being reported on. We can only guess what's NOT being publicized.)

I also don't see open debates with guys like Randall Carlson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaTd99DkJFg

Why is that? Is it because the CO2 scam doesn't hold up to any scrutiny?

Expand full comment

When I use my eyes, I see chemtrails - is there a pill for that? Polar icecaps melting, you say? You may have a point there: "... Antarctic ice has just very recently started melting quickly, and a lot, it is during a record cold winter in Antarctica right now,"

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/overheated-friday-july-28-2023-c

Expand full comment
Aug 14, 2023Liked by Mathew Crawford

Thanks, Mathew. I am a free subscriber to Dr. Malone’s Substack, so I read that piece. I found it odd. Grownups don’t, or shouldn’t whine, and they owe everyone the minimal respect to spell a their name correctly. It was a bruised ego talking. One of the things the plandemonium has taught me is that credentials don’t necessarily mean anything absent performance.

Expand full comment

I am listening, and would like to understand your concerns about his authenticity, and I agree, lumping you in with all the others is highly unfortunate, but I can hardly begrudge him the brused Ego. Have you folks observed the HELL that they have put Dr. Paul Marik, Pierre Kory, Ryan Cole, and so many countless others through, Dr. M Nass? This business is DIRTY and it’s a ‘take no prisoners’ mentality. After three years, I could see where each of us might tend to be, shall we say, a bit worn about the edges..... I can’t imagine being on the receiving end of all of that vitriol. But as I said, please direct me to what has caused you concern in his profile/history. Thank you, me

Expand full comment

You might care to go through George Webb´s articles; I believe he is suing Malone, for a change.

Expand full comment

Two companies, same name, different continents. Malone maintains that the worked for a European company named "Reliance" (I might be wrong on the name) but not the American one. Webb said he worked for the American one.

Easy to check and why doesn't George Webb just say "I was wrong on that one". Nobody's right on everything so I'll cut him some slack but ONLY if he admits when he's wrong.

Just one example.

Expand full comment

Austin-Fitts was, unfortunately, right on with the facts in the spring of 2020. I kind of hope she’s wrong about some of the things she has discussed recently but I very seriously doubt that she is. She saw the future then, clearly, and there is no reason to doubt her.

Expand full comment

Please educate us, what facts was KAF correct on in 2020? I am not being belligerent, honest inquiry here.

Expand full comment

She predicted that the USG would force multiple injections of a “vaccine” that had components of connectivity prior to the roll out, at the very beginning of warp speed. Before it was actually announced in fact. We had just entered the lockdown phase. She said the intent was to build an operating system. In reality, we saw that happen. There were multiple boosters, and several examinations of the vaxx serum showed nano technology that looked like components for some sort of circuitry. She linked the plandemic to the digital dollar in the same interview. She linked Antifa activity to the Federal Reserve bank locations, and wouldn’t you know, that checks out. Have a look at the recent anti-police activity in Atlanta, and the location of the bank there. Just down the street. The idea was to run the prices for real estate down in those areas so that the people who are running this psy-op can buy it up to be close to the banks once the CBDC rolls out. To steal the money. This was on a YT video. It got pulled down. Around the same time there was a part time college professor who pronounced the image of the COVID virus to be an exosome. Later on the NIH’s own documentation showed that they had used an exosome from a monkey liver to provide the image. That guy got pulled down also.

This is like JFK. Control the media, control the narrative, control reality. Have a look at her Solari Report, and check her old interviews. It’s disturbing.

Expand full comment

I have read some of her stuff, and agree with it. For instance, the riots in areas where the rich want to buy the property cheap so that they can make a killing on the redevelopment. With her background in HUD, it would stand to reason that she could see that coming a mile away. I read conjecture last night that that very reason may have been why they didn’t work harder to protect that historic town in Maui.

Expand full comment

Interesting take. It would certainly explain the bizarrely permissive attitude local governments have taken with Antifa rioting, and the homeless issues etc.

Expand full comment

I remember that and her line "It looks like a redevelopment plan". That made me laugh because it did.

Expand full comment

I read Malone’s Substack and for the most part find him helpful and entertaining (Friday Funnies). However, his article in response to Karen Kingston clearly showed her as questionable. Malone’s comments attacking others, especially you, were unfounded and not necessary to address Karen’s accusations. I was a bit put off by it and was glad to read your response. Thank you. I appreciate how you don’t attack, only clarify.

Expand full comment

I think the cartoons are suspiciously partisan — like they've been chosen to crank up the culture war and increase division.

Expand full comment

Perfectly put.

Expand full comment

Nice summary and agree often what folks omit from discussion tells as much as what they say.

Expand full comment

I'm done with this fucking in-fighting. Anyone that posts like you just did, no matter who or what. I will refuse to follow or support. Are you clowns too stupid to understand the first rule of battle is to divide? To confuse? Don't start with why Malone is evil or anyone else you have your eyes on to destroy or defame. Do you guys not understand who the fucking real enemy is? Do you not understand the massive powers behind this nonsense? Do you not understand that evil Neocons are dragging us into a war where nukes fly? Do you not understand the rise of a cashless society will lead to extreme tyranny? Do you not know that the climate change hoax will be used for massive lockdowns when we revolt over Imperial Credits forced upon us to track every action we do and confiscate our assets, just as they did with Russia? THE RULE OF LAW HAS CEASED OPERATING! Do you understand what is happening right now and the tremendous loss of freedom? Yet, you fight over stupidity. You act like dolts fresh out of dumb school.

I swear some in this medical freedom movement still have their eyes glued shut and argue over kindergarten issues. It's pathetic!!! Grow up!

STOP this nonsense. I'm done!

Expand full comment
author

"I am done with people checking up on the background of others. I'm going to focus on that and not the part where the other party makes clearly false statements."

Okay then.

Expand full comment

If you want to do this correctly, take a page from Steve Kirsch's playbook. He, too, is a victim of petty snobbery from Substack writers engaging in sandbox diatribes. He ignores it all and refuses to engage in any bickering. He's on a mission, stays on target with that mission, and will not let any distraction that is a waste of his time. He is also generous with his time and attention and will spend time in private messaging if you want further information. Everyone here should be and needs to be on the same page. There are much greater issues we are facing. One example is from this natural doctor who you may already be familiar with. Her message is critical for humanities survival, the un-vaxed are at risk now too.. https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/

Expand full comment

I understand your point of view. On the other hand there is a real problem.

There are chaos agents, and what they do works.

I've been involved in a very low profile, limited effort way in three separate "movements" now: "the tea party" movement / "Ron Paul revolution", the US trucker convoy, and the "medical freedom movement". The first two were ruined/redirected/destroyed via infiltration and sabotage. The MFM will go the same way if the saboteurs are left unchallenged.

So the question is - how does one defend against these people? I think one must identify them and call them out.

Expand full comment

One of the issues with calling the MFM a movement, is that there are a lot of different thoughts as to what that means.

I suppose if you frame it as a right to choose, it's simple enough.

But it does seem to be more and more divisive and there are many messages of fear being pushed forward from many directions with in the 'movement'.

It is also being twisted up in other 'movements' which clouds the main issues.

Expand full comment

What evidence of foul play? Please explain, I am listening?????????

Expand full comment

Exactly. Let's see the evidence of the indictment. All I hear is innuendo. For people who pride themselves as being smarter than the average citizen, they have displayed a chilling lack of intelligence on Malone. I am open, but there must be verifiable facts; I see the indictment of Malone using charges that are no better than the ones used against Trump. We are supposed to be above that. Right Folks?

Expand full comment

There is plenty of evidence out there, and you are free to reach your own conclusion wrt to Malone or anyone else.

Where I think you are wrong is where you appear to oppose the very idea of attempting to identify infiltrators.

I, for example, am well aware of our enemies' goals. I am also aware that infiltration of opposition movements is one of their favorite, and most effective, tactics. They write books about it and I have seen it with my own eyes. It works. If these infiltrators are left unopposed they will succeed in their goal of rendering any opposition ineffective.

So - my questions to you are

(1) Do you agree that the enemy infiltrates, controls, and renders ineffective opposition movements?

(2) What would you do about this, if you do not think we should attempt to identify and expose the infiltrators?

Expand full comment

What I've seen from the beginning is the use of infiltrator narration as an excuse to spew innuendo and vitriol. I know little about Malone as a man, but whether you realize it or not, the tactics used against Trump are now practiced here, inside this medical freedom group. It's human nature, I suppose, but still pathetic. McCarthyism has never died. It pops up everywhere.

Expand full comment

I think there is a lot about Malone to be leary about in his role in repurposed drugs. I also think that right now as long as he (and his big audience) continues to be vocally anti-shots and particularly, anti-The WHO Medical Tyranny, now is not the time to figure out who the Angels are. We need all the allies we can get. That said, I would caution you on the use of your McCarthyism analogy. He was actually generally right about the US government being infiltrated with Communist agents. Because liberals have written the history of WW2, they have definitely hidden the impact of Communists (inside agents) on America's WW2 policies. Two senior active Communist agents, Harry Dexter White (Treasury) and Alger Hiss (State) were under orders from Moscow to get the US into war with Japan a war we had no justifiable strategic interest (Operation Snow). They were critical in implementing the McCollum Memo that goaded Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor to get us into war. Anti-war opinion changed over night because FDR was willing to sacrifice American's (Stimson diary entries), a major PsyOps. Much of our subsequent war strategy was driven by Harry Hopkins, a fellow traveller, that benefited the Communist take over of Eastern Europe. Hiss was primarily responsible for the US's role in the UN. So when you think of McCarthy what you really need to do is think of how much influence Communist infiltrators had on the US war and post-war policy. Given that we have just been through a major PsyOp that is setting us up for a global tyranny, it is good to remember history correctly. Particularly the role of infiltrators. That said, we need all the allies we can get. But much like we aligned with the Soviets, we can't give anyone (myself included) a free ride and we need to keep our eyes open. While I don't agree with you totally, and I am sure you don't agree with, I love your passion. Thanks for your comments, but we can't forget history or we are doomed to repeat it.

Expand full comment

You haven't really answered my questions.

There is no doubt that infiltrators are very difficult to deal with. Attempting to do so leads to many problems - and their existence sows distrust and division. That's one of the reasons the enemy uses them so widely.

Nevertheless this is the difficult problem with which we are faced and you cannot simply decry the solution Mathew has adopted without proposing an alternative. Ignoring these people and/or "trying to work together" with people who are deliberately working to ensure failure is not a valid way to proceed. I know that because I have seen what happens when we follow that path.

So - if you don't like Mathew's approach which is to attempt to identify and expose infiltrators - then what alternative are you proposing?

Expand full comment

Agents cannot just be ignored, it’s a reality that needs to be acknowledged. The key is to always respond in an unexpected way

Expand full comment

You mean like the charges brought against witches of the past. Because that is precisely what it looks like. Where are the verifiable facts? Others too have been caught up in this travesty by witch hunters in the freedom movement. I have not seen one fact that would come close to standing up in a cross examination in a court of law.

Expand full comment

So which witch is which?

Is Malone the witch or the witch hunter?

AlI I know for sure is :

A 🐴 is a 🐴, of course, of course,

And no one can talk to a 🐴, of course,

Unless, of course, the 🐴, of course,

Is the famous Mr. Ed!

Expand full comment

It’s not the most profitable use of energy on any one’s part except those that want lack of unity

Expand full comment

Phil Davis - THANK YOU!!!!!!!!! That is my concern entirely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

Expand full comment

As it relates the Karen issue, I think it seems strange that Karen says that she hired a security firm who told her that her life is in danger, then she makes the leap to say that she "has a feeling" it is Malone who is the one trying to kill her. Simply having a feeling doesn't seem like good enough evidence to start publicly accusing someone of trying to kill you in my opinion. Nevertheless, I agree that Malone should not be suing people or portraying everyone who disagrees with him as working in some sort of coordinated effort to destroy him as he has done. I don't really trust Malone or Karen.

Expand full comment
author

I have no idea if the Kingston story is entirely fake, partially fake, real with a paranoid leap, a psyop, entirely real, or something else. I cannot say what I don't know anything about. One way or another, it has nothing to do with me and it has nothing to do with other research into Malone's background and activities.

Expand full comment

I am new to your page. Please direct me to the work that you did on Dr.M’s background that has you so dubious of his intentions. Thank you, me

Expand full comment

More like some rogue element of DoD that Karen should be worried about.

Expand full comment

Karen asked Malone to call his contacts and ask them to stop hunting her down.

Expand full comment

We love you Mathew. You're truly one of the best brother.

Expand full comment