August 25, 2019

The Scientism Cult Exposed

People are so easily duped by Gnostic Patriot movement, environ-mentalist movement, pseudo scientism movement, as they trust controlled Masonic opposition movements. Agnostics duped by gnostics is the ultimate in moronic.  Been going on for decades. The false scientific reality paradigm is pushed by group think dynamics. Social engineering and the peer reviewed clergy..

 

Share

The Religion of Pseudo Scientism – Faithful Followers Believe They Are Smart

Science does not normally proceed in an orderly fashion from truth to truth to truth.  Better to say it advances from error to correction to correction and in one such pseudo scientific theory of many the “scientific” case of don’t manage fluffy the wolf more corrections that are needed proving management is required are suppressed… Time to grow up you little scientismists.. Research findings in all fields of scientific study being found to be false are not uncommon in the world of pseudo sciences. You know, science fiction..The environ-mentalist movement thrives on pseudo science.. The movement has become the laughing stock of all movements, even more amusing than half baked conspiracy theorists singing out unproven criminal activity, intentionally of course as the RICO establishment with its constituted authority controls all alternative “truther” sites as it does controlled opposition environmentalist groupies.. Published research findings that turn out to be false are a common occurrence in peer reviewed science publishing, sometimes with serious consequences and resistance to correction.. Imagine that. Worse are the faithful followers of the published pseudo science.. They’ve proven they’re ready to go to war over the lies rather than work to correct them.. Ah, but then the bastardization of “science” by the fools might be serving its own purpose as some, very few mind you, can see they have been duped and are stepping back and reanalyzing their scientific faith. That being said the majority of the pseudo science crowd do have their eyes glazed over, insanity is sanity.. Oblivious Scientific Bliss..  The Dead Heads Society. Where Ph.D means genius..

 

 

Share

What Really Caused the AIDS Epidemic?

“If institutions are able to suppress and control public debate of issues in which they have an interest, then the public will be ill served by placing its full trust in those institutions, even when those institutions cloak themselves in science and good intentions.”

A look into the origin of HIV/AIDS (Epidemic)

Written by:  Robert Dildine  (GreenMedinfo)

Share

The Ultimate Cancer Survival Guide

Your first step into the world of alternative cures to learn the lies the mainstream pushes on us in search of the almighty dollar. And the underground cures they try so hard to keep from you.

Health Sciences Institute:

 

Share

Psyence: The Final Frontier

Evolved from Science, combining the word “psychology” and the word “science”, gives us the new word Psyence.

This new word is drawn from the main stream thoughts of the old science and plays an important role in the new science, now called Psyence.   Much like “new knowledge”, new Psyence plays a major role in today’s new knowledge.

New Knowledge and New Psyence are synonymous, both in meaning and the affect on the psyche. Both New Knowledge and New Psyence require elements of the psyche to accept “new knowledge” and “psyence” as a platform of understanding the (new) world we live in, with no verifiable proof of either “new knowledge” or new science (psyence).

Having accepted “new knowledge” as fact based, it is possible to suppose that an attempt at landing on the moon was actually accomplished or that the “missing link(s)” will eventually appear as final proof of such “knowledge” and “psyence”.  Obviously, landing man on the moon is still a controversial subject and evolution requires as much faith if not more, than men in space – where is the proof – the Science? Certainly, it is not found in composite images from NASA.  Their origins are NAZI Germany.

A number of years ago, researching the HIV/AIDS “disease” the “science”, upheld as proof, was determined by answering just a few questions put together by the World Health Organization. Performed in third world countries and poverty stricken areas, all one needed to do to contract the so called HIV/AIDS virus was to simply answer a few questions.  “You have Aids”….

In other research, some Cancers were attributed to a “nine out of ten false positives” blood test to “acquire” cancer. Currently, this new science and new knowledge is promoting much simpler blood tests to be given during routine examinations.  A yearly physical with routine blood tests would be all that it would take to qualify for drug therapy.

In today’s news, the fight against cancer is likened to be a greater task than landing on the moon.  If men were not put on the moon, then the attempt at the hoax was at least a monumental undertaking.  If men did land on the moon there is no verifiable proof other than some composite images.  Perhaps it is Psyence that put man on the moon.

What is New Knowledge (a phrase vice president Joe Biden used), then?  A hoax.  There is no New Knowledge.  It is merely a term used upon the psyche and no different than Evolution.  Both are impossible.  Knowledge can be increased in the individual but there is no new knowledge.  Even though the individual’s knowledge has increased, he is still learning what he has not heard (or learned) yet.  If there truly is new knowledge, God will send it through His spirit.  Until that happens, guard against “New Knowledge” of men and Sci-Fi-ence.

If HIV/AIDS is a hoax, and if Cancer is a hoax, then, what is behind this medical “phenomena”?  In 2011, about 250 billion tax payer dollars.  $250.000.000.000.000.

 

 

 

 

Share

Warning: Cigarette Smoking Causes – Longevity.

Warning:  The Surgeon General Has Determined That Cigarette Smoking Causes Smokers….( to Resist Cancers and Radiation).

Share

Vaccines and Retroviruses: A Whistleblower Reveals What the Government is Hiding

*Editor’s Note* – This article begins by stating: “These non-HIV retroviruses were unintentionally introduced into humans over the past 75 years.” I would have to disagree with that statement. It would be more accurate to state it this way: These non-HIV retroviruses (and other human-killing agents) were INTENTIONALLY introduced into humans over the past 75 years.

Retrovirus exposure intensified in the 1970s as new vaccines and pharmaceutical products were developed. These retroviruses and related infectious agents are now associated with dozens of modern chronic illnesses – perhaps nearly all of them. In these diseases, infection leads to inflammation — and unresolved inflammation can lead to chronic disease.

The list of diseases stretches from autism to cancer and from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome to Alzheimer’s. The diseases cripple the development of the young, steal the productivity and enjoyment of life for adults, and provide a slow and withering death to the elderly.

Source: Vaccines and Retroviruses: A Whistleblower Reveals What the Government is Hiding

Share

Classical Values

Propitious timing, as NOAA and environmental activists are desperately trying to avoid complying with Congressional oversight into whether politics is driving ever-higher surface data adjustments. This particular farce has gone beyond mere confirmation bias and entered the realm of Lysenkoism. Do they really not understand that billions of tax dollars come with certain legal strings attached? “Shut up and go away” is not an acceptable response to a Congressional subpoena.  The taxpayers paid for the scientists as well as the nonscientists whose government records they deigned to release. No oversight? Fine, no funding. Shut NOAA down until they comply.  Good luck in the private sector, folks.  One further hopes these savages either fully comply or end up in jail for obstruction, as their behavior is horribly corrosive to scientific integrity, the spirit of free inquiry, the principles of objectivity and reproducibility, and the rule of law.

Source: Classical Values » Site, Cite, and Oversight

Share

Carnivore Protection Policy Does Not Always Align With Science Say Researchers

wolfutah“Science:” – “Science is a systematic enterprise that creates, builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe wolves.” This, with the exception of the lined-out word “universe,” and the added word “wolves,” is found on Wikipedia – that information website that Truth Seekers despise. It amazes me how such a word has been manipulated to mean just about everything except provide for a viable explanation of the real scientific process, which hopefully yields truth in the end. In essence, few people know the difference between scientific process and “science.” The bastardization of science is the result of some who understand this concept and exploit if for personal, political and financial gain.

An example of this might be when someone reads a “study” or a “theory” or a “proposal,” in their mind such becomes “science,” even when the real scientific process is unused, because they have been taught to react in this manner. It’s a dangerous proposition and has yielded great success for those seeking to promote personal agendas. At the same time it is destroying real, normal scientific processes.

I manipulated the title of an article I was reading that was sent to me via email, called “Carnivore Hunting Policy Does Not Always Align with Science, Say Researchers“. My title therefore reads, “Carnivore Protection Policy Does Not Always Align with Science, Say Researchers.”

In reading the article we find statements like: “policies regulating the hunting of large carnivores do not always align with basic scientific data;” “current harvest levels for…population of gray wolves…have led to decreased survival and reproduction, smaller packs, social disruption and a reversal from population growth to decline.”

This, of course, is concluded because the hand-picked “researchers” – birds of a feather flock together – all agree that there should be many wild carnivores in everyone’s back yard, with some to spare. Never mentioned in the article is anything to do with what each region, i.e. state regulators, wildlife managers, agricultural officials, private land owners, etc. desires for populations of wolves. Because these “researchers” want more wolves and have participated in “creating new science” about wolves and large carnivores, while ignoring all other facts and historic data about them, they call it “Science” and wield their generic terminology as though it was their bill of rights for themselves and their large carnivores. They pick the “science” and then demand management of all wildlife to fit into the new paradigm of large carnivore protection, i.e. scarcity of game hunting animals.

Take as an example the historic data that can be gleaned from stacks of books and journals from explorers and trappers. Any truthful researcher worth anything, knows that wolves in the Northern Rockies during the period when it was first opened, were quite scarce. “Quite scarce” is a comparative term, loaded to the hilt with personal, perspective value, that should be used when measured against what the large carnivore “researchers” and animal protectionists propagandize to the world about protecting large carnivores. THEIR “science” can be clearly determined by reading this one article alone, provided you understand that the measuring stick for predator populations was devised in their own factory.

This collective group is attempting to convince readers that all carnivore – wolf included – management schemes should be designed for population GROWTH. Decline, to them is a nasty word.

Simply because, for whatever the reasons, their “science” is conveniently telling them the populations of wolves in some areas are dropping, this is a bad thing. Is it a bad thing? Whether it’s good, bad or doesn’t matter, is based upon someone’s or a group of someone’s idealistic notion of their conjured up science. It is weighed heavily in personal value and romance biology. This is not hard, scientific truth. It’s all about idealism, which has no place at all in the real scientific process.

So, it becomes quite easy to toss around the term science as though it is the holy grail. Science is a general term that is most always misused. “Science suggests,” and “Science tells us,” as well as “Best Available Science,” are all used conveniently for one purpose and one purpose only – manipulation of public opinion. Upon examination of the truthful, scientific process, science is what the truthful, scientific process tells us it is, and nothing more. Who would dare question, “An international group of carnivore biologists,” when they say hunting of large carnivores doesn’t line up with science? But we should all question this statement once we understand their suggestive science is a tool of political and public opinion manipulation.

One of the “researchers” had this to say: “The North American model of wildlife management works very well for species like ducks or elk, but becomes much more complex for species like wolves that compete with hunters. The management agencies involved have a difficult task, but current data suggest that more attention to the consequences of hunting large carnivores is warranted.”

To understand this completely, a reader has to know that this is opinion based on the idea that man is supposed to “co-exist” with large carnivores, while large carnivore populations are grown everywhere, even if the diet of the large carnivores happens to be human flesh or livestock. These “researchers” have taken it upon themselves to be the knights of the round table pertaining to everything carnivore, and it seems to now have spread over to attempting to exert their self-ordained authority on the rest of the world and how they manage wildlife. In their minds, and with their “science,” a reduction of any amount, for any large carnivore species, is bad, regardless. To hell with the presence of man.

The North American model of wildlife management works because of one simple and yet very powerful element that exists and has always been recognized within the model – MAN. Yup, shocking isn’t it. Man is the dominant species, the real apex predator. You can’t change that without the destruction and/or the elimination of human populations. When man realized uncontrolled hunting, trapping and fishing, with a growing population of people, was not sustainable, the Model was developed, not so that large carnivores could be protected, that would dominate the landscape, putting people at risk and contributing to scarcity among many other negative things. No, it was crafted FOR MAN as a means of perpetuating wildlife, including game species, as a resource for man…PERIOD. Get over it.

Because New Science scientists want to change the way wildlife management is discussed and carried out to suit their personal and political agendas, they first had to make up their “science” that suggests, hunting and utilizing a natural resource is unnecessary and runs contrary to “modern science.” With that firmly in their grasp, then they can go about writing articles like this one, attempting to convince people that hunting causes the eradication of species, when in fact, it does just the opposite. While perhaps not a perfect model, it certainly has sustained hunting, trapping and fishing for millions of people, for many decades, while at the same time, has grown and provided wildlife species to numbers never before seen in this country. Wildlife Watching was never a business until recently. Don’t be fooled into thinking watchable wildlife comes from predator protection.

The word “science” may be tossed around as a way to deceive people but historic fact is difficult to refute. The article in reference states that the North American Model, “becomes much more complex for species like wolves that compete with hunters.” The only ones who find complexity in this long-proven model of wildlife management are those that want to protect all large carnivores, even at the expense of man predators. To hunters, there’s nothing complex about it at all. Man is a predator that cannot and should not be removed from the scientific process of wildlife management. Man doesn’t want other predators robbing them of a valuable resource. It’s insanity to think otherwise. That’s why we walk upright and animals don’t.

Share

Ecosystem services or services to ecosystems? Valuing cultivation and reciprocal relationships between humans and ecosystems

Abstract

The concept of Ecosystem Services (ES), widely understood as the “benefits that humans receive from the natural functioning of healthy ecosystems” (Jeffers et al., 2015), depicts a one-way flow of services from ecosystems to people. We argue that this conceptualisation is overly simplistic and largely inaccurate, neglecting the reality that humans often contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of ecosystems, as often evidenced (but not exclusively) in many traditional and Indigenous societies. Management interventions arising from Ecosystem Services research are thus potentially damaging to both ecosystems and indigenous rights. We present the concept of ‘Services to Ecosystems’ (S2E) to address this, closing the loop of the reciprocal relationship between humans and ecosystems. Case studies from the biocultural ecosystems of Amazonia and the Pacific Northwest of North America (Cascadia) are used to illustrate the concept and provide examples of Services to Ecosystems in past and current societies. Finally, an alternative framework is presented, advancing the existing framework for Ecosystem Services by incorporating this reconceptualization and the loop of reciprocity. The framework aims to facilitate the inclusion of Services to Ecosystems in management strategies based upon Ecosystem Services, and highlights the need for ethnographic research in Ecosystem Service-based interventions.<<<Read More>>>

Share