The last thing those regretting their decision now want to admit is that rather than being selfish or lucky, those of us who didn't comply, were actually trying to help.
Indeed. And I honestly wanted to be wrong about the jabs. Now I'm sitting, looking at a whole bunch of people that I care deeply about, wondering where it's going to strike next, and I didn't want that.
I was really struck by how completely inappropriate his framing was. Instead of the pandemic being about life-and-death, and mass murder, he treated it as a game. Win-loss are completely inappropriate to the context. It seems like he's refusing to acknowledge the reality of the hellscape that the pandemic planners put us all in.
I know he is a hypnotist. I remember reading something he wrote about Trump and NLP.
I'm not yet convinced he's hypnotizing us. I think he himself is in a hypnopompic state, half-woke. As he sees it, he was following the most reliable scientific proclamations. He thinks that we were just blind skeptics and nihilists, naysayers who happened to be lucky this time because the Authorities we distrusted were wrong this time. He does not yet acknowledge that we were looking at their data and could see that they were lying to us. He'll come around when he's fully awake.
SA is very worried, and unhappy; unhappy, because he is very worried. He admits the damage caused to himself tacitly, while going public he needs to fall back on the obfuscation of win/lose dichotomy, just as a sporting man would. He is not yet ready to upgrade to the high ground of flat-out right/wrong. It will come.
However I'd add that I see additional stealth layer of his response that is intentionally 'red of tooth and claw.' I think he's projecting onto us a vile negative image, and tweeting his response to that image.
He's indirectly implying that we who warned against the 'vaccine' in order to spare suffering/life are in reality the ones who played it like a game in which we jockeyed to triumph over those 'guessing wrong,' knowing it could mean some people would suffer or even die.
His response implies we are so ego driven that we will fan what he calls random guesswork into a commendation of our superior cognitive prowess, and that we are eager to proudly celebrate in the faces of others now at risk for vaccine harm.
I recoil from his smirking "you won." It's as if he's saying, "I know that's what you're really in it for, what you want to hear. Your efforts were never about sincere concern for others; if it were you wouldn't waiting for me to concede to you."
We weren't waiting to hear 'you won'; he insults our humanity by implying we were.
I've never been more crushed to be correct in my life. I begged people not to get the vax. There was never a moment I hoped to 'WIN' and see others 'defeated.' This was about safety and survival, 'let's all get through this together,' and not an opportunity for us to 'crush your opponents and glory over them.'
It's like that old cartoon from decades ago wherein a man opens the hatch to a bomb shelter, looks up and out on the ruins of a nuclear wasteland and celebrates 'We're alive! We made it!'
I don't feel like celebrating and I didn't 'win' anything. I lost tremendously, watching all this take place and being unable to stop it. But there's Scott, crassly implying that winning a coin toss was all I cared about.
Yes, I think Scott is skilled at cognitive warfare, and that he stoops to conquer.
Before covid, Adams angle was that he understood the art of persuasion. He was actually very good at pointing out persuasion techniques and how they were effective. Then covid came and he, himself, got bamboozled by the persuaders and failed to see it.
I see his 'you won' comment as being that we were able to recognize and repel the persuaders, while he himself did not. I used to like Scott Adams. I stopped watching him 3 years ago.
Based on his assumption that those who didn't get vaccinated made their decision based on distrust of the "authorities," not necessarily on facts, and his statement,
"Your position is going from the weakest to the strongest," he still believes that we were lucky; we couldn't have known that we would end up in the better position.
Yet the VRBPAC documents were available before the shots were rolled out. I don't think my position was ever the weakest. It wasn't ever "analytics vs heuristics".
The following benefits and risks were unknown at the time the COVID-19 vaccines from both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech were first given Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA in December 2020.
They can be found on pages 48-51 of the Moderna VRBPAC document, and pages 46-49 of the Pfizer VRBPAC document.
(VRBPAC= Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee)
My jumping off point was observing everything about the plandemic going against all prior best practices, and the incredible lack of seriousness in collecting and analyzing data. One after another impossible error was made, justified and promoted, all leading to catastrophizing the disease, and creating nonsensical strategies that served only to increase fear and isolation. Once I realized that sensible treatments were being suppressed, and people were literally killed in the hospital with zero recourse, the fix was in...
Once I saw the complete disregard due human life and the total inability for the medical community to break away from it, I was 100% done, never going back. And all the history I had ignored on vaccination and public health in general, just taking it all on faith.... It's a very deep rabbit hole
Although I have to say the vaccines exceeded even my catastrophic expectations, God knows what the outcome of that will be in the end.
I'm with you 100%, but your story ends in mid-summer, 2020. Our thinking did not require VRBPAC or any other statistical data. We all saw Tiffany Dover's collapse. The government spent millions on PR to get African-Americans to take the jab, but not a penny on promoting vitamin D to that same demographic, which is typically lower in D than whites. The deaths of Hank Aaron and Marvelous Marvin Hagler were quite visible even in mainstream media, and it didn't take much alt media exposure to learn of the thrombocytopenia death of Dr. Gregory Michael. Still, the most plausible explanation for people ignoring what they saw was the panic instilled in the early stages of the plandemic.
The more important issue that you raise is that the suppression of all other treatments showed that TPTB did not care about treating Covid, they just cared about pushing the injections. Include me out.
Right out of the gate, in February 2020 there was no metric for what would be considered an acceptable death rate from covid. There should have been an analysis of how many expected years of life would be lost and whether that would be acceptable. (eg if only 84 year olds were dying then life years lost would be zero versus is only 16 year olds were dying.) Rather the government/media flooded the field with 'cases' and 'deaths' without context for either. People die; covid gave the masses an excuse to get hysterical about it.
By April 2020, there was enough open-source data to make a quick calculation on the back of an envelope to come up with the rough figure of .25% mortality overall. No pandemic, and no need for any "measures" whatever, let alone an experimental injectable.
I am a political junkie and made my decision based primarily on distrust of the authorities -- a distrust that I can support (unfortunately) with a plethora of facts.
Enough demonstrable lies had been told by the "authorities" in all other aspects of the "pandemic" before December 2020 that assuming they were also lying about the safety and efficacy of the shots was the most logical choice.
I suppose its fair to say that my jumping off point was largely the distrust, but that was based in the firm knowledge by that time (Dec '20) that so much of the Plandemonium was media driven hype and not reality. So much was already a lie, how could it be that the "vaccine" had any veracity? Further, President Select Poopy Pants had just told us in the Oct debate that no vaccine was on the horizon, yet hours after the mules were put away the "vaccines" were 94% effective in phase 3 trials? C'mon man. Heuristics FTW!
That's utterly ridiculous. This was a new type of vaccine with mRNA in it. The fact that a brand new type of vaccine was finished in a year, vs the normal 10 years, was a big red flag. The fact that they were giving them for free, was another big red flag. And the fact they were PAYING people to get the vax yet another big red flag, all within 1 year of the vax rollout. And censoring people who mentioned using HCQ and Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 (which is currently supported by at least 100 studies) was another big red flag. And Michigan banning HCQ for COVID treatment, and Nevada using taxpayer funds to buy up all HCQ they could so people could not use it, more big red flags.
And starting in March 2020 Michigan was in total lockdown, you needed travel papers to travel unless you were getting food or had a medical emergency, just like in Nazi Germany. That was another big red flag.
Yep! I risked going to jail every evening when I went to check on my elderly parents. Fortunately the sheriff up here made it clear that he didn't give a rat's ass about enforcing Retchin' Gretchen's orders. Others were not so lucky.
Yeah, the "retchin' " part probably better describes her AG, who may or may not have puked while drunk off her ass at the Michigan / Michigan State game
c19early.org is a great resource, and proof that everything the government/public health officials are continuing to claim about treatment options is a big lie
I hate to admit it, but I always trusted corporations as well as my government up until COVID-19. I believed that market forces and elections kept them semi-honest. However I recognized the COVID fraud immediately thanks to 1) my training as a methodologist (how can you say with such certainty that it’s safe when you haven’t studied it long term?) 2) previous knowledge of coronaviruses/spike protein toxicity; and 3) my personal history dealing with sociopathic and manipulative people. It was #3 that resonated when my employer progressed from “get the vax, get a free donut!” to incentivizing us with lottery entries for $10,000 and then, finally, to, “get the jab or you’re fired, and by the way, download this tracking app while you’re at it.”
He claims he came from an analytic position vs. a heuristic position but this was never the case. You had this document but even for those who didn't, there was not enough data to state that the vaccines are "safe and effective" for all and sundry. If any position is an heuristic one, it is the position which states that it should be absolutely fine to inject oneself with an EUA "vaccine" when one is at low risk given the sparsity of data. The data for such a position not only didn't but couldn't exist so to state that this was the strongest position or the most analytical one is bonkers.
@Tonya. I knew the pandemic was a scam immediately, because I knew the government, mainstream medicine and mainstream science are all highly corrupt and were all obviously in collusion, since very little debate was allowed. And later, when the vaxes were being planned, I knew that "vaccines" have never been proven to be safe or effective and are actually highly toxic, thanks largely to Neil Z Miller's book from long ago.
The WHO published a Covid-19 Vaccine Surveillance Manual in May of 2020. It was 232 pages long and I read all of it. On about page 111, there was a list of all the potential complications expected and most of them are what we are seeing today unfold around us. That manual has been scrubbed from the internet last I looked. I had saved it. I also read the comments from PhDs in immunology embedded in the comments sections of articles from journals like “Nature” and “Science” and though these were very technical critiques, I looked up every term I did not know and read deeper into immunology texts to gain understanding and what I gleaned did not look good for these products. I made a considered decision not to take these products after many months of research and my background was in nursing and medicine as an NP. So it wasn’t just “distrust” of governmental institutions or even Pharma. I’d seen multiple drugs pulled off the market having caused deaths and injuries over my 30 year career. But it was the many hours of research that led to my decision. Scott Adams could have read all that I had read. But he didn’t, apparently. That makes him an arrogant prick for saying “it was a coin toss” or “luck.” No, it wasn’t. And I agree, that was no apology… thank you Mathew. Stellar post.
Any possibility of your sending that as an attachment to any who request it.. such as myself, at stirling78@centurylink.net ??? Thanks, if you can do so.
Would if I didn’t have to share my email, so I apologize. You could look online or on the WHO website to see if they put the entire 232 page manual back up. All I could find about a year ago was an 18 page version.
I’m not on Twitter and never knew of Adams before the “apology” went viral this weekend. Annoying to watch-a typical “you were right, BUT” speech which is not an apology or a mea culpa at all. It was a passive aggressive dig, “you’re the dumb folks and you ended up on top” because from dumb luck you “picked the right side of the coin.” He’s not angry he fell for it- he’s angry people dumber than him fared better. No science involved. No math, no data, no stats. Because even though he chose poorly, the math, science and data were on his side the entire time. He’s sticking with that false story. He’s one of the good guys after all. The bad guys won and he’ll concede that but nothing more. It’s not like we did the right thing by questioning Science.
And just like that, the anti-vaxxers who ended up on top are vilified again for their callous and unscientific victory. The framing is everything. You won, we lost. We’re nothing but evil “winners.” Because it’s all about, and only about, being right and the stupid anti-vaxxers got lucky.
No, and thanks Matthew for not mailing this one in. There are at least two possibilities that come to mind when reading your attempts to get Adams to engage/listen/STFU.
1) He got paid to nudge/knows all about the psy op and was part of it being paid for it.
2) He is an incredibly sociopathic "intellectual" narcissist .
And I loved you threw in the wife. The minute he announced that, I knew he wasn't right in the head.
I thought to myself, how incredibly stupid to think that an attractive woman would marry him for anything other than
money.........
Like I said, I flunked statistics TWICE...but the probability she loved his "intelligence" or anything else about him other than his wallet or that she got paid to do so...??? Less than one in 5 million.
Oh and PS. When they dissed HCQ in March 2020 after Didier Raoult said it worked in combo....and particularly when they said it could be harmful...I KNEW it was a LIE. Was on it for years for Lyme...safer than aspirin. MUCH safer than Tylenol. All the studies, etc. that came out after were flawed and designed to fail. Even me, an idiot with numbers, could see that.
Early indications were Ben Swann's exposure of the conflation of Covid CFR with the IFR of seasonal flu and the Stanford study showing Covid-19 was little more dangerous than flu for those under 65. A Pepe Escobar interview with Dr. Raoult and the fraudulent studies were key. Big Pharma insists on double blind RCTs because they're expensive and therfor controllable. Here's the result of the interview: https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-france-is-hiding-a-cheap-and-tested-virus-cure/
Matthew, right as rain, as always. If I can add my one opinion to your analysis: Scott Adams' was doing the bidding of his masters in the intelligence community to lead the public to the "lucky coin toss" theory, and clearly hated doing the monologue (hence the dissonance between the words and the delivery in what was obviously a "hostage" video) because by doing so he had to publicly eat crow and diminish himself in the public eye, which to a guy like Adams, who served his bosses faithfully for 3 years, is anathema. ESPECIALLY, since he never believed the bullshit misdirection he was tweeting for 3 years, he was just doing it for his paycheck, and the added bonus of increasing his followers and readership. So.
I don’t consider my decision luck. I have a liberal arts degree in literature, sold pharmaceuticals early in my career and I am in software tech. In 2020 something in my gut said that the numbers were off. The cruise ship was the first red flag. When I heard they were using MRNA technology for vaccines I knew that it was a terrible idea. How? Back in 2014 I was casually following cancer research on various “cures”. Back then the MRNA “cures” we’re killing people in exactly the way they are now....suddenly and unexpectedly after treatment. They had to stop everything because it was a complete failure. I am nothing but curious. To this day I can’t believe I knew this most basic stuff and doctors and people like Malone didn’t. It was out there that the technology was a disaster. I made the right decision because I listened to my gut, paid attention to things I had read in the past, researched every single term and REFUSED to be bullied by every single family member, friend and colleague because “what could you possibly know.” It wasn’t a game. It was a nightmare being so positive and everyone around me treating me like I was idiot. I get how Mathew feels and it must be so much worse because he IS the smartest person in the room and he sacrificed everything and did all the work. Scott Adams concession speech offends me. Jerk.
Scott Adams and others who try to play the "You were just lucky" card are just trying to rationalize and justify their own cult crazed, jab junkie mindset that allowed them to be manipulated into taking the shots.
For someone who fancies himself a "persuasion specialist" he really missed the boat badly.
If I was lucky it was that I learned a great strategy about 15 years ago when I heard an interview with Colonel Robert Bowman (a fascinating fellow in his own right). His position for dealing with authorities was to “Look for and PROVE the lies”. Once you can prove a lie you have all the information you need to make a decision. Why would you do what liars are telling you to do? If you have a spine YOU DON’T.
Like he said “You can speculate all day and it’s kind of fun but once you can prove a lie you have all the information you need to make an accurate decision”.
As far as covid goes in order of appearance that I was able to prove even with limited resources that I have access to:
1) Mar-May 2020: Embellishing the death counts. If it was real they wouldn’t need to do that.
2) Mar 2020 onward: Claiming that the PCR test was valid at cycle thresholds up to 45.
3) May 2020: The CDC admitted the IFR was 0.3%. After that no interventions were justified.
4) Apr 2020 onward: HCQ, Ivermectin and other early treatments blocked under false pretenses.
5) Oct 2020: 90% to 95% effective but they refuse to release the raw data without which we can’t confirm their claims.
6) May 2021: Pfizer’s own bio-distribution study was released by court order FOIA request in Japan and it clearly showed the lipid nano-particles did not stay at the injection site but went through your body and lodged in your organs including your brain. That is OMFG bad news.
When I first saw Adams' mea culpa I took it a face value. Reading this, it appears that a mea maxima culpa was in order. I'm staying tuned.
The issue remains, what next? There is work for statisticians to ferret out the truths about vaccine death, morbidity and effect on fertility. Hope you are in it for the long haul. Need also for modeling how a world mostly populated by sick old farts of the first world, healthy Africans who never heard of Covid, and inbetweens from all over Asia is going to operate.
Thanks a lot, I’ll be laughing about slippery penis shaped jello all day.
I know better than to do impulsive posts, I should have done more homework. I noticed Scott’s weak tea mea culpa but I really want to encourage those who got jabbed to come forward publicly and acknowledge it’s a mistake so we can start the accountability process. Perhaps the lack of authenticity in Scott’s non apology should have been a dead giveaway (ooo, definitely not a morbid pun there), yet I still fell for it.
Interestingly, Scott attributes his interest in hypnosis to his mother giving birth to one of his siblings while hypnotised, claiming she was aware during the process but didn’t feel any pain. Or is that the kind of story one tells?
You have a way of using all your skills and draw from all the nodes to form a bird’s eye view of the bigger picture. And then provide a couple of lenses with which to look through. It’s an invaluable lesson.
I used to listen to Scott until he came out in favor of Covid vax digital passports a year or so ago. That was my line in the sand. Back then Scott bragged all the time about his hypnosis training.
Thanks, Mathew. That video gave me the creeps. What struck me as bizarre was how he framed it, as a contest, a coin flip. Having read Dilbert for decades, I can’t fathom how its creator could say all that stuff for the past two years with a straight face. Just doesn’t make sense. But it is ugly. It is indefensible. All he had to do was pay attention. He most certainly was aware of the issue of vaccine injury before this psy-op began.
Those who agreed with vaccination mandates have also agreed, by implication, to be one day legally euthanised, fair and square, for the benefit of the majority, or if the legislators would decide that this would serve the “greater good”. I hope those who supported the mandates, or looked the other way, understand the deal they took.
Yep we are at that point folks. We unvaxxed didn't fall for the first one so we're not going to fall for this one because it's not targeted at us. Will the vaxxed fall for it? Well they seem prone to fall for stuff. Send the links to Matthew's and Ivor's articles to everyone you know who got vaxxed.
Thank you. TNE hit a different mark than I did. I'd love to have him on RTE to talk it through. I think we're both hitting the target, but there's more than one target.
"You won" is a gesture of resignation and resentment.
Scott -- we were never trying to defeat you -- we were trying to save your life. We were trying to keep your heart intact.
Yes, exactly. The 'won' thing speaks volumes.
The last thing those regretting their decision now want to admit is that rather than being selfish or lucky, those of us who didn't comply, were actually trying to help.
That is also by design. We the purebloods are being punished like Tantalus, and for the same reason: trying to cheat the gods.
I think it behooves us to remember that the perpetrators are wannabe gods, and pretty bad at that.
The truth is they are losing, again.
Indeed. And I honestly wanted to be wrong about the jabs. Now I'm sitting, looking at a whole bunch of people that I care deeply about, wondering where it's going to strike next, and I didn't want that.
This is the one "argument" I will be all too happy to lose.
I would feel much better if the world got a laugh at my expense...
many of us are there with you. Up until now it has been pretty rare to hear of anyone getting past the cognitive dissonance and waking up.
I was really struck by how completely inappropriate his framing was. Instead of the pandemic being about life-and-death, and mass murder, he treated it as a game. Win-loss are completely inappropriate to the context. It seems like he's refusing to acknowledge the reality of the hellscape that the pandemic planners put us all in.
I know he is a hypnotist. I remember reading something he wrote about Trump and NLP.
I'm not yet convinced he's hypnotizing us. I think he himself is in a hypnopompic state, half-woke. As he sees it, he was following the most reliable scientific proclamations. He thinks that we were just blind skeptics and nihilists, naysayers who happened to be lucky this time because the Authorities we distrusted were wrong this time. He does not yet acknowledge that we were looking at their data and could see that they were lying to us. He'll come around when he's fully awake.
SA is very worried, and unhappy; unhappy, because he is very worried. He admits the damage caused to himself tacitly, while going public he needs to fall back on the obfuscation of win/lose dichotomy, just as a sporting man would. He is not yet ready to upgrade to the high ground of flat-out right/wrong. It will come.
I wish it was only the heart...
True and well said.
However I'd add that I see additional stealth layer of his response that is intentionally 'red of tooth and claw.' I think he's projecting onto us a vile negative image, and tweeting his response to that image.
He's indirectly implying that we who warned against the 'vaccine' in order to spare suffering/life are in reality the ones who played it like a game in which we jockeyed to triumph over those 'guessing wrong,' knowing it could mean some people would suffer or even die.
His response implies we are so ego driven that we will fan what he calls random guesswork into a commendation of our superior cognitive prowess, and that we are eager to proudly celebrate in the faces of others now at risk for vaccine harm.
I recoil from his smirking "you won." It's as if he's saying, "I know that's what you're really in it for, what you want to hear. Your efforts were never about sincere concern for others; if it were you wouldn't waiting for me to concede to you."
We weren't waiting to hear 'you won'; he insults our humanity by implying we were.
I've never been more crushed to be correct in my life. I begged people not to get the vax. There was never a moment I hoped to 'WIN' and see others 'defeated.' This was about safety and survival, 'let's all get through this together,' and not an opportunity for us to 'crush your opponents and glory over them.'
It's like that old cartoon from decades ago wherein a man opens the hatch to a bomb shelter, looks up and out on the ruins of a nuclear wasteland and celebrates 'We're alive! We made it!'
I don't feel like celebrating and I didn't 'win' anything. I lost tremendously, watching all this take place and being unable to stop it. But there's Scott, crassly implying that winning a coin toss was all I cared about.
Yes, I think Scott is skilled at cognitive warfare, and that he stoops to conquer.
Me, I was just trying to keep my job, not be force vaxxed, not be put into concentration camp.
I hope all who coerced vax drop dead.
I don't want them to harm me anymore
Before covid, Adams angle was that he understood the art of persuasion. He was actually very good at pointing out persuasion techniques and how they were effective. Then covid came and he, himself, got bamboozled by the persuaders and failed to see it.
I see his 'you won' comment as being that we were able to recognize and repel the persuaders, while he himself did not. I used to like Scott Adams. I stopped watching him 3 years ago.
they have more games in the pipeline
makes sense
Based on his assumption that those who didn't get vaccinated made their decision based on distrust of the "authorities," not necessarily on facts, and his statement,
"Your position is going from the weakest to the strongest," he still believes that we were lucky; we couldn't have known that we would end up in the better position.
Yet the VRBPAC documents were available before the shots were rolled out. I don't think my position was ever the weakest. It wasn't ever "analytics vs heuristics".
The following benefits and risks were unknown at the time the COVID-19 vaccines from both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech were first given Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA in December 2020.
They can be found on pages 48-51 of the Moderna VRBPAC document, and pages 46-49 of the Pfizer VRBPAC document.
(VRBPAC= Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee)
Moderna document:
https://www.fda.gov/media/144434/download
Pfizer document:
https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download
Unknown Benefits/Data Gaps:
*Duration of protection
*Effectiveness in certain populations at high-risk of severe COVID-19
*Effectiveness in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2
*Effectiveness in pediatric populations
*Future vaccine effectiveness as influenced by characteristics of the pandemic, changes in the virus, and/or potential effects of co-infections
*Vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic infection
*Vaccine effectiveness against long-term effects of COVID-19 disease
*Vaccine effectiveness against mortality
*Vaccine effectiveness against transmission of SARS-CoV-2
Unknown Risks/Data Gaps:
*Safety in certain subpopulations
*Adverse reactions that are very uncommon or that require longer follow-up to be detected
*Vaccine-enhanced disease
My jumping off point was observing everything about the plandemic going against all prior best practices, and the incredible lack of seriousness in collecting and analyzing data. One after another impossible error was made, justified and promoted, all leading to catastrophizing the disease, and creating nonsensical strategies that served only to increase fear and isolation. Once I realized that sensible treatments were being suppressed, and people were literally killed in the hospital with zero recourse, the fix was in...
Once I saw the complete disregard due human life and the total inability for the medical community to break away from it, I was 100% done, never going back. And all the history I had ignored on vaccination and public health in general, just taking it all on faith.... It's a very deep rabbit hole
Although I have to say the vaccines exceeded even my catastrophic expectations, God knows what the outcome of that will be in the end.
I'm with you 100%, but your story ends in mid-summer, 2020. Our thinking did not require VRBPAC or any other statistical data. We all saw Tiffany Dover's collapse. The government spent millions on PR to get African-Americans to take the jab, but not a penny on promoting vitamin D to that same demographic, which is typically lower in D than whites. The deaths of Hank Aaron and Marvelous Marvin Hagler were quite visible even in mainstream media, and it didn't take much alt media exposure to learn of the thrombocytopenia death of Dr. Gregory Michael. Still, the most plausible explanation for people ignoring what they saw was the panic instilled in the early stages of the plandemic.
The one that got to me was the death of Joel Kallman, who was almost exactly my age. He trusted the science. Still the most ironic vaccine death. https://newsrescue.com/oracle-vp-joel-kallman-dies-of-covid-after-receiving-second-vaccine-injection/
The more important issue that you raise is that the suppression of all other treatments showed that TPTB did not care about treating Covid, they just cared about pushing the injections. Include me out.
Right out of the gate, in February 2020 there was no metric for what would be considered an acceptable death rate from covid. There should have been an analysis of how many expected years of life would be lost and whether that would be acceptable. (eg if only 84 year olds were dying then life years lost would be zero versus is only 16 year olds were dying.) Rather the government/media flooded the field with 'cases' and 'deaths' without context for either. People die; covid gave the masses an excuse to get hysterical about it.
By April 2020, there was enough open-source data to make a quick calculation on the back of an envelope to come up with the rough figure of .25% mortality overall. No pandemic, and no need for any "measures" whatever, let alone an experimental injectable.
Yes. Reference the Diamond Princess and the Stanford study by Dr. John Ioannidis.
Exactly. It has been painful to watch.
I am a political junkie and made my decision based primarily on distrust of the authorities -- a distrust that I can support (unfortunately) with a plethora of facts.
Enough demonstrable lies had been told by the "authorities" in all other aspects of the "pandemic" before December 2020 that assuming they were also lying about the safety and efficacy of the shots was the most logical choice.
"Enough demonstrable lies had been told by the "authorities" in all other aspects".
Fixed it!
Quite true
That's also where Bret Weinstein slammed on the brakes.
I suppose its fair to say that my jumping off point was largely the distrust, but that was based in the firm knowledge by that time (Dec '20) that so much of the Plandemonium was media driven hype and not reality. So much was already a lie, how could it be that the "vaccine" had any veracity? Further, President Select Poopy Pants had just told us in the Oct debate that no vaccine was on the horizon, yet hours after the mules were put away the "vaccines" were 94% effective in phase 3 trials? C'mon man. Heuristics FTW!
> he (Adams) still believes that we were lucky;
That's utterly ridiculous. This was a new type of vaccine with mRNA in it. The fact that a brand new type of vaccine was finished in a year, vs the normal 10 years, was a big red flag. The fact that they were giving them for free, was another big red flag. And the fact they were PAYING people to get the vax yet another big red flag, all within 1 year of the vax rollout. And censoring people who mentioned using HCQ and Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 (which is currently supported by at least 100 studies) was another big red flag. And Michigan banning HCQ for COVID treatment, and Nevada using taxpayer funds to buy up all HCQ they could so people could not use it, more big red flags.
See https://c19early.org for studies on treatments for C-19.
And starting in March 2020 Michigan was in total lockdown, you needed travel papers to travel unless you were getting food or had a medical emergency, just like in Nazi Germany. That was another big red flag.
Yep! I risked going to jail every evening when I went to check on my elderly parents. Fortunately the sheriff up here made it clear that he didn't give a rat's ass about enforcing Retchin' Gretchen's orders. Others were not so lucky.
Now Retchin Gretchin is new to me. We call her Gov Witchmer, not because she's an actual witch, but because she makes bad decisions.
"not because she's an actual witch" -- I'd say the jury is still out on that one.
Yeah, the "retchin' " part probably better describes her AG, who may or may not have puked while drunk off her ass at the Michigan / Michigan State game
c19early.org is a great resource, and proof that everything the government/public health officials are continuing to claim about treatment options is a big lie
He "says" he believes we were lucky
I hate to admit it, but I always trusted corporations as well as my government up until COVID-19. I believed that market forces and elections kept them semi-honest. However I recognized the COVID fraud immediately thanks to 1) my training as a methodologist (how can you say with such certainty that it’s safe when you haven’t studied it long term?) 2) previous knowledge of coronaviruses/spike protein toxicity; and 3) my personal history dealing with sociopathic and manipulative people. It was #3 that resonated when my employer progressed from “get the vax, get a free donut!” to incentivizing us with lottery entries for $10,000 and then, finally, to, “get the jab or you’re fired, and by the way, download this tracking app while you’re at it.”
how did you acquire #2 before covid?
He claims he came from an analytic position vs. a heuristic position but this was never the case. You had this document but even for those who didn't, there was not enough data to state that the vaccines are "safe and effective" for all and sundry. If any position is an heuristic one, it is the position which states that it should be absolutely fine to inject oneself with an EUA "vaccine" when one is at low risk given the sparsity of data. The data for such a position not only didn't but couldn't exist so to state that this was the strongest position or the most analytical one is bonkers.
@Tonya. I knew the pandemic was a scam immediately, because I knew the government, mainstream medicine and mainstream science are all highly corrupt and were all obviously in collusion, since very little debate was allowed. And later, when the vaxes were being planned, I knew that "vaccines" have never been proven to be safe or effective and are actually highly toxic, thanks largely to Neil Z Miller's book from long ago.
Clot Adams! LOL
The WHO published a Covid-19 Vaccine Surveillance Manual in May of 2020. It was 232 pages long and I read all of it. On about page 111, there was a list of all the potential complications expected and most of them are what we are seeing today unfold around us. That manual has been scrubbed from the internet last I looked. I had saved it. I also read the comments from PhDs in immunology embedded in the comments sections of articles from journals like “Nature” and “Science” and though these were very technical critiques, I looked up every term I did not know and read deeper into immunology texts to gain understanding and what I gleaned did not look good for these products. I made a considered decision not to take these products after many months of research and my background was in nursing and medicine as an NP. So it wasn’t just “distrust” of governmental institutions or even Pharma. I’d seen multiple drugs pulled off the market having caused deaths and injuries over my 30 year career. But it was the many hours of research that led to my decision. Scott Adams could have read all that I had read. But he didn’t, apparently. That makes him an arrogant prick for saying “it was a coin toss” or “luck.” No, it wasn’t. And I agree, that was no apology… thank you Mathew. Stellar post.
Any possibility of your sending that as an attachment to any who request it.. such as myself, at stirling78@centurylink.net ??? Thanks, if you can do so.
Would if I didn’t have to share my email, so I apologize. You could look online or on the WHO website to see if they put the entire 232 page manual back up. All I could find about a year ago was an 18 page version.
Emailing is a bad idea, indeed; why not upload the stuff to, say, Mega.nz, and post a link?
Please, if at all possible!
I’m not on Twitter and never knew of Adams before the “apology” went viral this weekend. Annoying to watch-a typical “you were right, BUT” speech which is not an apology or a mea culpa at all. It was a passive aggressive dig, “you’re the dumb folks and you ended up on top” because from dumb luck you “picked the right side of the coin.” He’s not angry he fell for it- he’s angry people dumber than him fared better. No science involved. No math, no data, no stats. Because even though he chose poorly, the math, science and data were on his side the entire time. He’s sticking with that false story. He’s one of the good guys after all. The bad guys won and he’ll concede that but nothing more. It’s not like we did the right thing by questioning Science.
And just like that, the anti-vaxxers who ended up on top are vilified again for their callous and unscientific victory. The framing is everything. You won, we lost. We’re nothing but evil “winners.” Because it’s all about, and only about, being right and the stupid anti-vaxxers got lucky.
👍
No, and thanks Matthew for not mailing this one in. There are at least two possibilities that come to mind when reading your attempts to get Adams to engage/listen/STFU.
1) He got paid to nudge/knows all about the psy op and was part of it being paid for it.
2) He is an incredibly sociopathic "intellectual" narcissist .
And I loved you threw in the wife. The minute he announced that, I knew he wasn't right in the head.
I thought to myself, how incredibly stupid to think that an attractive woman would marry him for anything other than
money.........
Like I said, I flunked statistics TWICE...but the probability she loved his "intelligence" or anything else about him other than his wallet or that she got paid to do so...??? Less than one in 5 million.
Oh and PS. When they dissed HCQ in March 2020 after Didier Raoult said it worked in combo....and particularly when they said it could be harmful...I KNEW it was a LIE. Was on it for years for Lyme...safer than aspirin. MUCH safer than Tylenol. All the studies, etc. that came out after were flawed and designed to fail. Even me, an idiot with numbers, could see that.
Early indications were Ben Swann's exposure of the conflation of Covid CFR with the IFR of seasonal flu and the Stanford study showing Covid-19 was little more dangerous than flu for those under 65. A Pepe Escobar interview with Dr. Raoult and the fraudulent studies were key. Big Pharma insists on double blind RCTs because they're expensive and therfor controllable. Here's the result of the interview: https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-france-is-hiding-a-cheap-and-tested-virus-cure/
I've known Didier RAoult for 30 years. One of the few I'd trust with my life.
Matthew, right as rain, as always. If I can add my one opinion to your analysis: Scott Adams' was doing the bidding of his masters in the intelligence community to lead the public to the "lucky coin toss" theory, and clearly hated doing the monologue (hence the dissonance between the words and the delivery in what was obviously a "hostage" video) because by doing so he had to publicly eat crow and diminish himself in the public eye, which to a guy like Adams, who served his bosses faithfully for 3 years, is anathema. ESPECIALLY, since he never believed the bullshit misdirection he was tweeting for 3 years, he was just doing it for his paycheck, and the added bonus of increasing his followers and readership. So.
I don’t consider my decision luck. I have a liberal arts degree in literature, sold pharmaceuticals early in my career and I am in software tech. In 2020 something in my gut said that the numbers were off. The cruise ship was the first red flag. When I heard they were using MRNA technology for vaccines I knew that it was a terrible idea. How? Back in 2014 I was casually following cancer research on various “cures”. Back then the MRNA “cures” we’re killing people in exactly the way they are now....suddenly and unexpectedly after treatment. They had to stop everything because it was a complete failure. I am nothing but curious. To this day I can’t believe I knew this most basic stuff and doctors and people like Malone didn’t. It was out there that the technology was a disaster. I made the right decision because I listened to my gut, paid attention to things I had read in the past, researched every single term and REFUSED to be bullied by every single family member, friend and colleague because “what could you possibly know.” It wasn’t a game. It was a nightmare being so positive and everyone around me treating me like I was idiot. I get how Mathew feels and it must be so much worse because he IS the smartest person in the room and he sacrificed everything and did all the work. Scott Adams concession speech offends me. Jerk.
Scott Adams and others who try to play the "You were just lucky" card are just trying to rationalize and justify their own cult crazed, jab junkie mindset that allowed them to be manipulated into taking the shots.
For someone who fancies himself a "persuasion specialist" he really missed the boat badly.
If I was lucky it was that I learned a great strategy about 15 years ago when I heard an interview with Colonel Robert Bowman (a fascinating fellow in his own right). His position for dealing with authorities was to “Look for and PROVE the lies”. Once you can prove a lie you have all the information you need to make a decision. Why would you do what liars are telling you to do? If you have a spine YOU DON’T.
Like he said “You can speculate all day and it’s kind of fun but once you can prove a lie you have all the information you need to make an accurate decision”.
As far as covid goes in order of appearance that I was able to prove even with limited resources that I have access to:
1) Mar-May 2020: Embellishing the death counts. If it was real they wouldn’t need to do that.
2) Mar 2020 onward: Claiming that the PCR test was valid at cycle thresholds up to 45.
3) May 2020: The CDC admitted the IFR was 0.3%. After that no interventions were justified.
4) Apr 2020 onward: HCQ, Ivermectin and other early treatments blocked under false pretenses.
5) Oct 2020: 90% to 95% effective but they refuse to release the raw data without which we can’t confirm their claims.
6) May 2021: Pfizer’s own bio-distribution study was released by court order FOIA request in Japan and it clearly showed the lipid nano-particles did not stay at the injection site but went through your body and lodged in your organs including your brain. That is OMFG bad news.
Perhaps he is persuading us not to stop watching him while he slinks away from his controlled role as an influencer? Out of sight, out of mind.
“Does this feel like a stage managed game to you? ” Yes.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/controlling-the-mark-after-a-con
they 'wargamed' pandemics in tabletop exercises going back more than a decade, they have always had a main feature of controlling the message
When I first saw Adams' mea culpa I took it a face value. Reading this, it appears that a mea maxima culpa was in order. I'm staying tuned.
The issue remains, what next? There is work for statisticians to ferret out the truths about vaccine death, morbidity and effect on fertility. Hope you are in it for the long haul. Need also for modeling how a world mostly populated by sick old farts of the first world, healthy Africans who never heard of Covid, and inbetweens from all over Asia is going to operate.
Glad to get a like from Matthew. You inspired my blog post of today.
https://grahamseibert.substack.com/p/mea-culpas-celebrities-aggravation
Thanks a lot, I’ll be laughing about slippery penis shaped jello all day.
I know better than to do impulsive posts, I should have done more homework. I noticed Scott’s weak tea mea culpa but I really want to encourage those who got jabbed to come forward publicly and acknowledge it’s a mistake so we can start the accountability process. Perhaps the lack of authenticity in Scott’s non apology should have been a dead giveaway (ooo, definitely not a morbid pun there), yet I still fell for it.
Interestingly, Scott attributes his interest in hypnosis to his mother giving birth to one of his siblings while hypnotised, claiming she was aware during the process but didn’t feel any pain. Or is that the kind of story one tells?
You have a way of using all your skills and draw from all the nodes to form a bird’s eye view of the bigger picture. And then provide a couple of lenses with which to look through. It’s an invaluable lesson.
Your sheer dedication to respond (almost) with a cool head over years-long-and-ongoing BS leaves me in awe. Keep going. The persistence tears me up.
I used to listen to Scott until he came out in favor of Covid vax digital passports a year or so ago. That was my line in the sand. Back then Scott bragged all the time about his hypnosis training.
Thanks, Mathew. That video gave me the creeps. What struck me as bizarre was how he framed it, as a contest, a coin flip. Having read Dilbert for decades, I can’t fathom how its creator could say all that stuff for the past two years with a straight face. Just doesn’t make sense. But it is ugly. It is indefensible. All he had to do was pay attention. He most certainly was aware of the issue of vaccine injury before this psy-op began.
Those who agreed with vaccination mandates have also agreed, by implication, to be one day legally euthanised, fair and square, for the benefit of the majority, or if the legislators would decide that this would serve the “greater good”. I hope those who supported the mandates, or looked the other way, understand the deal they took.
In my opinion Scott Adams & Elon Musk are being used to defuse the situation. Great write up about the general process here:
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/controlling-the-mark-after-a-con
Yep we are at that point folks. We unvaxxed didn't fall for the first one so we're not going to fall for this one because it's not targeted at us. Will the vaxxed fall for it? Well they seem prone to fall for stuff. Send the links to Matthew's and Ivor's articles to everyone you know who got vaxxed.
Thank you. TNE hit a different mark than I did. I'd love to have him on RTE to talk it through. I think we're both hitting the target, but there's more than one target.