"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.
Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period."
A plug for a new book by Drs for covid ethics: "mRNA Vaccine Toxicity" by Palmer, Bhakdi, Hooker, Holland, Debois, Rasnick and Austin-Fitts. Readable by the educated general public. Indispensable for the ignorant physician.
Yeah, we pretty much understood when we were seven years old in the early 50’s that one’s genes were one’s genes and anything that alters them are malignancies destined to metastasize. Then, as America moved further from the unity of WWII the government was hijacked using the rebellious Boomer youth set on taking America to utopia by academic science, the S.T.E.M.’s and the race between notoriety in media and financial gain took precedence. In the void, the 80’s to 2000, not to be outdone, the psychiatric community saw its opportunity to enhance its own appeal on professional appeal and assume power. Nearly every medical practice at ground level in one form or another was headed by a doctor of psychiatric medicine as corporate American medicine looked for methods to blame the patient for the malpractice. With corporations being one notch below the suppressive methods of Communism, and that of bloated Socialist government mandated medicine with a “happy face” sticker right there with them collaborating you have a perfect storm of go along to get along or suffer the consequences.
And another science thought inspired by this talk… creative // consensus science has been taught at universities not basic good science fundamentals… good on you Dr. James (Jack) Lyons Weiler, PhD (founder of the Institute of Pure and Applied Knowledge)!!
Michael Crichton said it best -
"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.
Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period."
Perfectly said… science is not about fashionable ideas or where the money is.. good science screens out this rubbish!!
Exactly! "consensus science" == Bonoheffer Stupidity:
https://southsidemessenger.com/bonhoeffer-on-stupidity-entire-quote/
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/on-stupidity
consensus = groupthink = bad news.
Peace.
Wow… as science should be taught… back to first principles. A good science grounding helps with most problem solving
a wonderful idea - education. Thank you so much :)
A plug for a new book by Drs for covid ethics: "mRNA Vaccine Toxicity" by Palmer, Bhakdi, Hooker, Holland, Debois, Rasnick and Austin-Fitts. Readable by the educated general public. Indispensable for the ignorant physician.
Yeah, we pretty much understood when we were seven years old in the early 50’s that one’s genes were one’s genes and anything that alters them are malignancies destined to metastasize. Then, as America moved further from the unity of WWII the government was hijacked using the rebellious Boomer youth set on taking America to utopia by academic science, the S.T.E.M.’s and the race between notoriety in media and financial gain took precedence. In the void, the 80’s to 2000, not to be outdone, the psychiatric community saw its opportunity to enhance its own appeal on professional appeal and assume power. Nearly every medical practice at ground level in one form or another was headed by a doctor of psychiatric medicine as corporate American medicine looked for methods to blame the patient for the malpractice. With corporations being one notch below the suppressive methods of Communism, and that of bloated Socialist government mandated medicine with a “happy face” sticker right there with them collaborating you have a perfect storm of go along to get along or suffer the consequences.
And another science thought inspired by this talk… creative // consensus science has been taught at universities not basic good science fundamentals… good on you Dr. James (Jack) Lyons Weiler, PhD (founder of the Institute of Pure and Applied Knowledge)!!
Another benefit of Courageous Discourse is becoming aware of people and organizations like the Institute of Pure and Applied Knowledge
(IPAK).
For sure…Courageous Discourse and all the other well researched, well presented podcasts, dialogue etc are my sanity… Telegram is great for me
Excellent!
Are current PCR tests still employing high cycling?
The protocol has not been corrected. They would have to require in-test negative controls and that would end everything.