Jordan Peterson & Matt Ridley Go Viral

We are still not out of the horrors of the plandemic-inspired spread of global totalitarianism. The absolute destruction of science as a search for truth was far too easy, and possible within a culture that breeds, at the same time, scientific ignorance while it supports scientific beliefs. "Belief in science" is the most unscientific state of mind possible. It is science propaganda spread by thought manipulator to the scifids (science-fideists) in order to facilitate their obedience.

Now, every branch of science has its own very specialised language so that experts can express themselves with precision and clarity. It is not possible to delve into research papers on any branch without first gaining some mastery over such a language. That takes time and motivation.

However, science also relies on logic. Every theory is only as good as its predictions, and those are then tested to create some causal link between inputs and outputs. But so many things during the plandemic defied logic, and not just science, that this was also an assault on any critical thinking.

Just one example shall suffice here. Many months ago, I analysed a report published in Australia that claimed to test the efficacy of the PCR test. However, it didn't include any tests with samples from any humans that were alleged to be infected by the claimed virus. Their justification for this was that they couldn't get enough samples. Every test was done using samples bought from labs that were licensed to sell such things. So the calibration was never tested in the field - it was merely assumed to yield the needed results. Never mind the whole issue of manipulating the results by changing the number of cycles. This was an issue that there were no samples at all from actual people. Spotting that, in my opinion, does not require scientific training but just some pure logic.

The virus of panic and ignorance thus justified the lockdown of opinions that may spread any genuine knowledge of the huge con. Such people do exist, but many were hiding within relatively small forums, like ghettoes of real-information, stigmatised as misinformants.

Now, the obvious holes in the plandemic narrative needed to be filled, as there were (and still are) far too many. This leads us to a number of starting assumptions. One of which is that there really was (and is) a pathogenic virus spreading some disease; another is that no such virus exists and the faked data and the totalitarian prohibitions created the plandemic scenario.

The first assumption seeks to place the blame on either over-zealous politicians or evil scientists, or both, plus some bad science along the way. The second assumption goes even deeper and claims that the whole proof-of-existence of these pathogenic viruses is a carefully crafted scam based on unfounded, yet heavily promoted, fake science.

Again, just one example shall suffice to illustrate the last point. We have seen many governments actually state that they have "no proof" of the existence of such a pathogenic virus - and yet they claim it exists! And again, note this is a glaring logical issue before any science can be employed to resolve it. However, when you look carefully at the requests made, usually under some freedom of information law, they specifically ask about isolating the virus without the manipulations done as standard by medical virologists. That's why the answers come back in the negative. Governments are perfectly happy to accept the medical profession's claim that their method produces an "isolate" that is not just an artefact of the method. There are other methods that medical virologists refuse to use.

As you can see, these two starting assumptions cascade into many rivers of causes and effects - some of which do actually overlap! This method of obfuscation is deeply frustrating, but part of the cover-up in that it also has to cover-up the real story. Getting now to this discussion between Jordan Peterson and Matt Ridley. I have seen Jordan trip over his words a few times - as it is very rare - and always when he was about to say something injudicious about the plandemic. He has pushed the envelope on many topics, but brazenly calling out the con would have, I'm sure, blown away his media presence in a sneeze. As for Ridley, he's just an elite narrator.

So, take this as an articulation of a narrative you may, or may not, believe, but look out for the bits of useful information - and the huge gaping holes in logic.

I'll leave you to decide which is which.