A personal Q and A around COVID and the vaccines.

Image: (c) solarseven http://www.fotosearch.com

After a couple years of reading and listening to the information being put forward by the media and by many doctors and other highly qualified scientists and researchers, I decided to do a Q and A type format to share what I have learned so far regarding COVID and the mRNA vaccines. These answers may seem vague. They are not intended to be definitive. For the average person on the street, trying to find definitive answers around COVID and the vaccines can be a little like trying to grab an eel. There is no shortage of “true believers” on either side of the vaccine issue looking to proselytize you. It behooves all of us to look into this subject from both the pro and con perspectives. Possibly this Q and A can help you begin to formulate a viable risk/benefit analysis for your own decisions.

Q. Does COVID exist? A. Yes. There seems to be little dispute among qualified doctors and scientists that the COVID virus exists.

Q. Are some people dying from COVID? A. Yes.

Q. Do some people survive COVID without having been vaccinated? A. Yes.

Q. Does having been vaccinated reduce the severity of symptoms if contracting COVID? A. For some, not for all.

Q. Are there some lasting adverse health effects from having had COVID? A. For some.

Q. Are there risks associated with taking the vaccines? A. Yes. For some more than others.

Q. Are some people dying from the vaccines? A. Yes.

Q. Are some people experiencing severe, but non-fatal, adverse effects from the vaccines? A. Yes.

Q. Do all people who receive the vaccines experience lasting, adverse side effects? A. No.

Q. Does being vaccinated mean that you cannot transmit COVID to others? A. No.

Q. Do the vaccine manufacturers, or the governments which mandate vaccines, stand behind them by paying for losses due to adverse side effects? A. No. This was something which was definitively determined before the vaccines were released.

Q. Is it more dangerous for a school aged child to be vaccinated than to contract COVID? A. It depends upon the child. For some children, taking the vaccine has definitely produced tragic results.

Q. Are there effective treatments, other than vaccines, which are being used to protect people from COVID? A. Yes.

Q. Are these “other than vaccine” treatments safe and effective? A. Some are definitely safer and more effective than others.

Q. Can my doctor tell me if I am someone at a greater or lesser risk for adverse side effects if I am trying to decide whether or not to be vaccinated? A. With the amount of time that vaccinations have been taking place, and with the tens of thousands of cases of those who have experienced adverse side effects available for review, one might tend to think so. However, ask your doctor.

Q. If, due to pre-existing conditions, I believe I am at higher risk for an adverse reaction to the vaccines, will my doctor prescribe one or more of the medications which are showing efficacy in treating COVID? A. Ask your doctor. Good luck with that.

Q. Is the blanket statement that the vaccines are safe and effective true? A. No. Results in both areas, safety and effectiveness, can and do vary, sometimes greatly, from individual to individual.

Q. Especially with relatively safe and effective alternative treatments available, why isn’t the highly regarded practice of individual treatment plans, which take an individual’s existing health issues and personal lifestyle choices into account, being used when prescribing, or administering, mRNA vaccines? A. Good question.

Q. Is it true the sale of vaccines is producing extravagant profits for some? A. Yes.

Again, this Q and A presentation is not meant to be a definitive review of the topics presented. In fact, it may well produce more questions for you than answers. If so, that can be a good thing if you follow through and research the information, both pro and con, on the questions you have.

Egalitarianism vs. Socialism (vs. Capitalism)

This is a brief examination of the essence of the concepts of egalitarianism and socialism. While capitalism is mentioned, I think most people are all too aware of what capitalism is and how it is playing out in our world. I am very confident that, in the world today, there are many people who claim to want a socialist society when, in reality, the concept they have in their mind is of a more egalitarian society. In 20/20 hindsight, I know I have made that semantic error. Words are powerful. Using the correct term to accurately express the concept we have in our mind is important. I think we often fall into the error of the misuse of a term, especially when that misuse is common around us.

According to Merriam-Webster, “egalitarian” is defined as:

“: asserting, promoting, or marked by egalitarianism“.

Egalitarianism is defined as:

1: a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs

2: a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people”

I think, when a lot of people use the word “socialism”, the above qualities are actually what they have in their mind. One other notable aspect which I think often accompanies the use of the word “socialism”, is that when thinking of increased equality, it is common for a person to be thinking only in terms of the rewards, the benefits, available within a society. True equality also means sharing in the work involved in developing and maintaining a society. There is much needed, in many different areas, to maintain a healthy society. Everything from picking up the trash on the side of the road, to brain surgery. It all matters. There cannot be viable equality in a society in which some only receive, or in which some only give. The imbalance will cause the society to topple. It’s such a simple principle, yet one that is so often overlooked: imbalance engenders instability which can, and will, result in a toppling.

All that being said, Merriam-Webster’s definition of socialism is as follows:

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done”

I do not believe that this is what most people today who are using the term “socialist” or “socialistic” have in mind. I have a great deal of confidence that most people in the United States who use this term do not have “no private property” in mind. I know I don’t. I want to be able to leave my home in the morning and return to find it is still my home. The same with my car, tools, and essential personal property. On the other hand, sometimes working and contributing together to see that essential goods and services are available to all is a very good thing. Such a method is used widely to provide schools, police, fire fighter, and emergency response services. There are more essential goods and services which using a similar societal/cooperative approach in the provision of, could stand to benefit humanity greatly. That is another topic, not for this article.

It seems to me that the common use of the term “socialism” in the United States is a reaction to the extreme economic imbalance which is only increasing under the current capitalistic economic system. In every city, I venture every town, in the United States today we see people being marginalized. People are experiencing their needs going unmet, often not for a lack of actively contributing to the wellbeing of their community. We are seeing the end result of allowing the predatory reality, which is a purely capitalist system, to determine our economic reality. However, in contrast to egalitarianism, socialism opens the door just as wide as capitalism does to an extreme imbalance in economic reality and political power. I recommend those using the term “socialism”, as an alternative to “capitalism”, more closely examine it’s definition. Then examine the definition of “egalitarian”. Words matter. What term more accurately describes the reality you want to see emerge in the world?


I just looked up “socialism” in a copy of Webster’s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1991. It does not have the same definition as what I have above which came from the online version of Merriam-Webster. Most significantly, it does not include the idea of no private ownership. It does include the phrase “…in which the private ownership of the means of production and distribution has been eliminated.” I cannot help but wonder if the more extreme version has something to do with weaponizing the word? We live in a world in which we are seeing our language altered, definitions changed, sometimes clearly to benefit one group or another. We need to have greater reverence for our language, which is a significant part of our cultural, intellectual, environment.

It is time to remember our humanity.

Image (c) AlexMax http://www.fotosearch.com

Over the past 6+ decades “our” Federal Government has lied to us about the JFK and RFK assassinations. Also, the Vietnam war, the Oklahoma City Bombing, the first WTC bombing, MK Ultra, UFO’s, 9/11, WMD’s in Iraq, and more. Why are so many people so willing to blindly accept that we are getting the truth about COVID and the “vaccines”?To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a time, nor a set of issues, when so many qualified, independent, professionals have felt compelled to speak out against what the Government and media are presenting to us. Professionals from various medical, biological, other scientific and legal disciplines. They are putting their professional credibility, their livelihoods, on the line to speak out.

What is the reason for the “tunnel vision” that has gripped so many educated, caring people? The “masses” have blindly followed the directives to destroy livelihoods, to impose isolation, to deprive youth of educational opportunities, to witness dramatic increases in poverty, depression and suicides. To be complicit in coercing neighbors to be injected with a known hazardous substance which those people did not want inside their bodies. All this based in fear of a disease, which, if left totally untreated, has a 99.9% + survival rate. If the WHO had not unilaterally redefined the term “pandemic”, from it’s traditional meaning, during the time of the Swine Flu, what is going on would not be a “pandemic”.

It is time to remember our humanity, our individuality. It’s time to stop trying to force our own health care decisions upon everyone. The value and necessity of individualized care has been a standard within the medical field for some time. Right now, are people which the data shows to be highly susceptible to adverse reactions to the vaccines being truly given the benefit of informed consent? Again, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a time when those at the top of the pyramid of the medical, political and media establishment in the United States have so diligently kept accurate information about a disease, and about treatments, away from the general public. And there has never been a time when the American public has been so amenable to such censorship.

Self-assembling nanobots, radio controlled nanoparticles which affect cellular activity, science fiction? No, science fact.

Image: (c) solarseven http://www.fotosearch.com

I have personally witnessed a physician ridicule Dr. Zelenko for his assertion that there are self assembling nanobots. What that reveals to me is how reticent some people, even M.D.’s are to doing their own research. That is a major problem. If physicians were all content to stay regimented to the status quo, we’d still be seeing the use of leeches as a common medical practice. I venture few physicians are spending much time doing research on the incredible success of Ivermectin in India. I know when I mentioned it to one physician, they thought it was Remdesivir which had been the medication used to achieve the success. That is the propaganda physicians are being spoon fed via the established hierarchical information system they seem to rely upon. The problem is, when profiteers are sitting at the apex of the hierarchy, the information flowing through the system is not only vulnerable, but likely to be manipulated to facilitate a profit oriented, not necessarily a health oriented, agenda.

Below is a link to just one more piece of information which a lot of people do not believe is a reality. Radio controlled nanoparticles used to affect cellular activity. The more information which comes to light, the more it is becoming apparent that the most seemingly far-fetched allegations made by researchers into the contents of the COVID “vaccines” do relate to actual technology. There is no question that much has been hidden from the public about the contents of the mRNA injections.

I think we may be witnessing the creation of sequences of unintended consequences the like of which the world has never seen.


Ferritin nanoparticle compositions and methods to modulate cell activity.

Researchers Have Made Self-Assembling DNA Nanobots With Encoded Structural Plans

It’s time we stopped the brutality of the mandates and the widespread suffering they perpetuate.

For over a year we have seen small businesses closed, people isolated, depression on the rise, suicides on the rise, homicides on the rise.  We have seen billions funneled toward Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, and Astra Zeneca.  We have seen the “big box” stores;  Walmart, Costco and others, including the online store Amazon, reaping billions from the shut down of competition.  Now thousands, if not millions, are losing, or will lose, their jobs due to the draconian mandates by President Biden and many State Governors.  There are millions experiencing death and crippling reactions from the so-called “vaccines”.  The most authoritative report on the subject, the “Lazarus Report”, more formally entitled “Electronic Support for Public Health-Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS)” in their study of the adverse event reporting system, data collected from 6/2006 to 10/2009, they found that only 1% of vaccine adverse reactions are reported.  The current VAERS report of deaths from the COVID vaccines is 16,766.  Using the aforementioned Report’s findings, that predicts deaths from COVID vaccines are more in the area of 16 million.  This is not even counting crippling neurological reactions and other adverse reactions. 

There has never been such an egregious case of the “cure” being worse than the disease.  Yet, driven by the media’s fear mongering, millions of Americans, blinded by that fear, continue to support harsher and more pervasive mandates. All being done under the misguided, if not criminal, pretense of protecting the public.  All in response to a virus which has negatively affected far fewer lives than has the brutality of the official responses; shutdowns, mandates.  We are seeing first-hand how fear can drive people to abandon both rationality and civility.

In the midst of all this we should not lose sight of the fact that an elite few are reaping windfall profits from the ongoing events.  And that those few occupy positions of extraordinary influence within the halls of government and industry, including all forms of media. 

Now the profiteers are looking to expand the sales (and it is sales, we do pay for the injections people are receiving “for free”, via our tax dollars) to inject children over the age of 5.  Considering the extremely high probability that most of the damage being done by these “vaccines” is going unreported, being almost entirely ignored by media, this is a move which is heinous in it’s disregard, if not it’s contempt, for the lives of the children being targeted. 

The good news is that we can beat this. The bad news is rather than beating it, we’re committing cultural suicide.

The media’s use of descriptors such as “surge”, “breakout”, “runs rampant”, would lead a person to believe that people are succumbing to COVID in incredibly large numbers.   

Take a breath. 

Here are some figures from the mainstream sources who claim to be tracking COVID.  Let’s start with getting some perspective, the population of the U.S. is officially, as of today, August 31, 2021, is 328,240,000.  That is three hundred twenty-eight million, two hundred and forty thousand people.  That is us, the residents of the United States of America.  Among us, cumulatively from the beginning of COVID hitting our shores, 39,343,501 of us are confirmed as having, at some point, contracted COVID.  That is 0.1198% of us as a whole.  In reality, a very small percentage of us.  Further, this isn’t the number of people who got so sick that hospitalization was needed, this is just confirmed cases.  Of this small percentage of us who did contract a confirmed case of COVID, just slightly more than one/tenth of one percent, 1.647%, or 648,051 of us, officially died of COVID.  That means that out of the entire population of us, 0.00197% of us have died of COVID. Or less than two one-thousandths of a percent.  When it comes to the media’s sensationalism of COVID, we are being sold a tempest in a teapot. 

Are around six hundred and fifty thousand deaths from COVID a good thing?  No.  But is it a catastrophe that warrants closing small businesses, does it warrant millions of people losing jobs, incomes, housing, educational opportunities?  Does it warrant the rise in depression, addiction and suicides which are taking place in the nation?  Does it warrant the loss of individual rights which is taking place throughout the U.S.?  I don’t think there’s any question that countless more lives have been hit with tragedy due to the mandates which President Biden, Anthony Fauci and numerous Governors have waged than have been tragically affected by COVID. 

Time to get some perspective and restore the freedoms, of livelihood, of education, even of the ability to choose the medications we, as individuals, would like to use if we face infection.  Right now the U.S. has the highest mortality rate, small as it is, from COVID from than most, if not all, other countries in the world.  Many other countries, India for one, have benefited greatly from the use of Ivermectin, others are reporting positive results with Hydroxychloroquine.  In the U.S. it seems these effective medications are being withheld. Recently I calculated the mortality rate within ten countries using the official figures. I see very little difference in the rate whether a country has vaccinated a lot, or a little, of their population. As mentioned above, the U.S. has the worst rate of those I checked. I invite you to check a few more. Post your results in the comments to this post.

So here we are, the good news is we’re facing a very beatable challenge.  The bad news is we’re being misled into believing it’s much more virulent than it is and that it is an all but unbeatable challenge. The draconian measures being put forward by those in positions of political power like being (figuratively) asked to cut off our limbs as a precaution, and we’re doing it.  This is much more related to the power of the press than the reality of COVID.

The Noble Failure

The Noble Failure is a character in American politics which has been showing up with increasing frequency. The Noble Failure knows what people want. When campaigning for office, the Noble Failure speaks to the needs and wants of the people, and does so convincingly. The Noble Failure will emote, inspire, speak of noble aspirations and a better, fairer, more equitable world. People will be led to believe if only they can get the Noble Failure elected, things will improve. The thing is, that is all just part of the show, the main attraction. It is intended to draw voters, and the reality of Presidential elections last few decades show it works. Why wouldn’t it? People aren’t going to vote for what they don’t want to hear.

However, the promises are never, not from day one, meant to actually be fulfilled once the Noble Failure is elected. Once in office the excuses are pulled out of the closet. “The Legislature won’t get on board.” “The projects can’t be funded.” “We need to first increase the military budget.” “It’s not a good idea to increase the national debt.” “We need to infuse cash into our big corporations to compete internationally.” “It’s the damn ________________ (Democrats/Republicans, liberals/conservatives).” “We need focus our energies on attacking _______________ (fill in the blank).” Or, maybe, the new standard: “It would be a socialist program.”

So, the Noble Failure puts forward the face of grief, of sorrow, maybe even of having been betrayed. They bemoan the inability of others in power to appreciate the vision they sold to the American public. They may villainize those identified as obstacles to their stated campaign goals. This is the 21st century American Presidential/political reality. It didn’t begin in the 21st century, but it’s the only one we’ve had since the turn of the century. It’s the contemporary script: align your stated goals with what the people want and need. Make a few gestures toward fulfillment, then blame someone else for the failure to produce. Repeat in the next election cycle. The only people who don’t get excuses after the election are the 1/10th of 1%’ers who always come out ahead. Sometimes more than others, but the national wealth, the wealth resulting from the work of millions of people, just keeps flowing into their bank accounts. Policies keep coming which support their goals.

At the end of the day, the key players attend their private clubs, extravagant parties, concerts, events, have a few drinks and pat each other on the back. Maybe arrange to give each other official accolades and medals. Or, quite possibly engage in some dark rituals or forms of entertainment. A troupe of Machiavellian actors showing up for the after show reception.

It was the script from the beginning of the campaign, as it has been for several decades. It’s one reason why control of the White House, and the Legislature, cannot be allowed to slip from the control of a small circle of people. A pervasive control that has been jealously guarded since 1963.

What does the general population get from all this? Frustration, disenfranchisement, increasing debt and poverty. One thing we can see from all this is that when the majority are not able to see the issues that are negatively affecting their lives addressed at the source, people will turn on each other. Like an animal caught in a trap. The animal can’t open the trap, so in order to escape, it chews it’s own leg off. “We the People” turn on each other, divide and be conquered. And those who occupy the seats of power and control the monopolized media are all too ready to throw some fuel onto those fires.

The difference between us and an animal caught in a steel trap is we that have minds capable of finding better solutions. We need to stop inadvertently, or as “wannabes”, cooperating with corruption, the disease, that is destroying the dream of a society that can work for all. Quit turning on each other. Quit buying into the incessant fear mongering dispensed to keep us distracted and paralyzed. Treat each other right; personally, economically, and in every way. Not just within the United States, also internationally. Create a culture that doesn’t have to kill and conquer in a misguided attempt at creating international “cooperation”. Create a culture that others want to emulate because it works and works well. A culture with the organizing principles of human wellbeing, reflecting our mutuality rather than fear and greed. Stop blindly following, believing in, the proclamations of those whose goal it is to keep us distracted, disorganized, fearful, and subservient.

The Essential Nature of Circulation

Circulation. Everything that keeps humanity alive circulates. From what we know at this time, it seems that everything that supports life in the entire universe, circulates. What happens when circulation is hampered? Stagnation, toxicity, starvation, illness, death. Without the proper circulation of the blood within our bodies, our cells will begin dying from starvation of oxygen and life supporting nutrients. Then our body as a whole will die. Without the circulation of the air and water upon our planet, our planet will lose it’s ability to sustain life. Within our cells, if the processes of life, of replenishment of nutrients and the disposal of waste were to stop, the circulation of the materials which sustain our bodies, the cell will die. On every level, from the microcosm to the macrocosm, circulation is an absolutely essential feature of the maintenance of life. Quite possibly of the existence of the universe itself.

Turn on the circulation of electricity through a light bulb and the light comes alive. Turn off that circulation and the light goes dark, dead. That same principle applies for the circulation of every life giving, life sustaining substance that there is and the existence of human life on Earth.

The awareness of this inescapable truth within the natural world leads one to ask whether this same principle applies to the realm of human creations? For those versed in metaphysics, it calls to question whether the axiom “As above so below; as below so above.” applies to the essential nature of the circulation of life sustaining resources. First, we must define what is a human, rather than a nature, created resource which is essential to the sustaining of life in the world? To the very best of my knowledge, there is only one: money.

This may be argued by some. Some may present that a person living simply off the land (first you must have land) which is blessed with the resources of water and temperate climate suitable for agriculture, can live quite nicely. In fact, there still are a few primitive tribes which live in such a fashion. Of course that means doing without all the conveniences and the assistance which modern technology and medicine offer. While I tend toward the simplification of life as a general proposition, there are limits beyond which I find myself reticent to venture. I like a number of the medical and technical benefits we receive from our collective human ingenuity. In fact, without some of those, it is a salient question whether or not I would still be alive in my current incarnation. Certainly I would not be writing this essay on a computer.

The reality for the vast majority of people alive on Earth today, is that money is an essential resource for the sustaining of life. Of course this is made a truth by the systems of commerce we have constructed within our societies. We have made money an intermediary, a regulating agent, between us and the, more or less, natural resources we inescapably require. Resources such as food, shelter, fuel and even water. I am quite sure that there are people, at this very moment, trying to figure out how to make us pay for air. While, in our modern world, there is often human effort required in the manufacture of what in earlier times were more purely naturally occurring resources, the fact is, ALL material substance comes to us via the beneficence of the creative forces of the universe. Humankind can manipulate these naturally provided resources to better suit the needs, or wants, of any or all of us, but the raw materials, the substances required, are all provided, free of charge, by the creative forces, the creative intelligence, underlying and within everything we see and are.

All the resources, all the life sustaining substances we rely upon are in circulation within the universe we exist within. All of them. From the most fleeting to what we perceive as the most stable, the most solid. Everything, including planets, stars and galaxies, is in circulation. Everything material comes into being, exists for however long it exists, and then ultimately is recycled back into the primordial stuff from which it emerged.

The rate of circulation conducive to the healthfulness of various substances under different conditions can vary. “Healthfulness” being relative to human life. Why would we measure it in any other terms? For instance, water, when frozen for centuries, can still retain the healthful qualities necessary and conducive to human life. However, if water sits for much less time, relatively motionless, within a pond or a puddle, it is most likely going to be stagnant. Stagnant, anaerobic, and possibly/probably containing substances toxic to human life. For us humans, the value of natural resources exists primarily in the value of that resource in sustaining our own lives.

That being said, how we manage that resource can depend a great deal upon how well we understand the interrelatedness of the world, the universe around us. For instance, to primitive humans the value of trees may have been exclusively their usefulness in building structures and making fires. Later we came to understand that trees and other plants are responsible for producing the oxygen we require for life. Now, a living tree has value where previously it’s value was realized only after it was chopped down. The value we place upon the resources, the “things” that exist around us, is dependent upon how well we understand the function of those things in relation to the interdependent web of existence, of which we are a part. This reality of how we place value extends to every person being born on Earth. We have no idea, no matter how inauspicious the circumstances of their birth may be, what contributions a person, newborn or elderly, may make to our communities and to our lives. It is a fault which surfaces frequently with us humans that we tend to judge the value of a thing, or a person, using the particular criteria the society we live within espouses. Often, if not always, in the greater scheme of things, that criteria is liable to be narrowly defined and hampered by lack of awareness of the interconnected realities a particular society does not yet recognize.

Which brings us back to essential circulation, resources, and the essential human-conceived resource; money. While the concept and reality of money is a human thing, the fact that money, in it’s practical application, has to do with the acquisition of the natural resources one needs to live, makes money, by extension, a critical aspect of life on Earth. The excessive withholding, hoarding, of money from circulation within communities, among citizens, has every bit the stagnating and/or deleterious effect upon life as would the withholding of the air or water from circulation upon the Earth. This is a lesson we must learn from our own bodies. We need enough. Too little, or too much, leads to unhealthful conditions within the body.

The viable management of all resources, including money, is a task which is all too easily sabotaged by the human ego. The challenge we all face is the cultivation of true humility, to recognize one’s genuine place, and role, within community. None of us are “all that”. And none of us are nothing. We exist as components within a spiritual/organic system. We are all dependent upon that system. For any of us to think we can co-opt the balance, the viability of the system for our own purposes is a symptom of a spiritual/mental illness within that individual. When we learn to act within a spirit of love, in our contributing to and taking from the collective wealth which has been developed by collective effort, we will find ourselves facing a present, and a future, wondrous enough to meet, and exceed, our most cherished expectations.

Believe in the science! What exactly does that mean?

Image: (c) solarseven http://www.fotosearch.com. Caption: Author

We are hearing and reading a lot about “the science” these days. When it comes to the Covid-19 phenomenon, we are constantly being urged to trust the science. There seem to be many who believe that trusting the science is a knee-jerk type of thing. If it’s science, trust it, enough said. Without belaboring the point, that same unquestioning trust used to be expected by religion. Those who refused to offer up a show of obedience (trust) frequently found themselves facing harsh consequences, possibly death. But we’ve outgrown that type of thinking, right? Have we?

There seems to be a mind-set in the world the carriers of which truly want (need?) there to be an ultimate authority. A worldly parent (god?) figure, or institution, which can answer all the most difficult questions and protect us from that which we don’t understand. This mind-set is to be found within people of all ages, races, genders, ethnic groups and political persuasions. If you spend much time among people who want to dig for their own answers, those of this aforementioned mind-set are frequently called by derogatory names: sheep, cattle, or other such terms. I think using such terms just serves to muddy the water between us as human beings. Beyond a shadow of a doubt there are people scattered around the world who are more developed, in various areas of knowledge, than others. I tend to think we humans are spiritual beings, in search of a harmonious physical existence, and some of us have been around longer than others of us. We all most likely fit somewhere in the middle of an infinite spectrum of knowledge and development. So let’s be a little kinder with each other, okay?

Getting back to the original topic, in order to “believe in the science”, don’t we first have to know what science is? If you’re expecting a long, technical, complex explanation, don’t, it doesn’t take all that to define “science”. Science is just a methodical, systemized way of looking at things, or working with things. Good scientific methods can give us answers to our questions about the world which can be relied upon to be provable and consistent. And when they do that, it’s great. They don’t always do that however, sometimes the answers we find mostly give us more questions. But that’s okay too, because it means we’re in the process of understanding whatever it is we’re studying. When we’re using scientific methods in our efforts to produce a thing, those methods help us track and understand our efforts, and insure that if we are successful once, we can, most likely repeat the process and be successful again.

One of the great things about science, is that when we’re using it to understand things, or to create things, it almost always is an evolving process. Just think about all the things we humans were sure we knew at some point in our history, only to learn we missed something. Then, after a sometimes long and violent process of change, we again became sure we knew it for sure. Only to again find we needed to refine our thinking. I think it’s a safe generalization that the more complex the question being studied is, or the thing we’re attempting to produce is, the more likely it is that we are going to find ourselves facing many revisions over time. And that’s okay, because, again, science is a process and being involved with it is better than not.

It’s when we start thinking we have the ultimate answer, that we know it all, that we setting ourselves up for a fall. And that is a big problem when we have concurrently developed a culture that expects perfection. As with religion in medieval times, today people expect “science” to be infallible. It isn’t, and it never has been. It is a dangerous proposition to pressure scientists to be infallible. What that is likely to mean in a significant number of cases is that there will be a lot of effort put into defending the indefensible.

Which isn’t to say that scientists don’t ever get it right. The point is, it is often (always?) in our best interests to be circumspect when it comes to the “facts” and products brought to us by those professing to be utilizing science in their methods. The ethical position of “first do no harm” (meaning “…your actions should not cause injury or injustice to people) is a position we should expect, if not require, from those developing new ideas and new products.

Science, scientific methodology, has no inherent ethic or morality. The positive motives and practices within scientific endeavors are there because the people involved brought them. There is nothing in our natural world, nothing in the human mind, that prevents those who may wish to do so from using scientific methodology (science) to produce things, even products which they may market as medicines, which are harmful to us. Some of the malignant things brought into the world by intelligent, highly trained, scientists include: DDT, water fluoridation, Zyklon B, the atomic bomb, microwave weapons, and many other devious means of incapacitating, enslaving, and killing our fellow human beings. Science is a method, not a product. The quality of the products produced by scientists is dependent upon the goals, the ethics, those scientists bring with them. Science is a tool, that is all. As with other tools, it’s utility is only as benevolent as the methods and goals of those applying it.

“Must See” video in understanding the fraud that is being perpetrated on the world.

Image (c) AlexMax http://www.fotosearch.com

I’m not going to try to introduce Dr. Delores Cahill, she does a much better job of it in the video and whatever I might say would just be redundant. I hope you’ll take the 70 minutes it takes to view this video.

Dr. Dolores Cahill on Immunology, Antibodies, CVD19 – Interviewed by Computing Forever’s Dave Cullen.

That we may see through the illusion and regain our lives.