principiascientificinternational--2020-09-21--Belgian Doctors Call for Free & Open Debate on COVID19

We , Belgian doctors and health professionals , wish to express our serious concern about the evolution of the situation in the recent months surrounding the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus .
We call on politicians to be independently and critically informed in the decision-making process and in the compulsory implementation of corona-measures .
We ask for an open debate , where all experts are represented without any form of censorship .
After the initial panic surrounding covid-19 , the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good .
We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties .
‘ A cure must not be worse than the problem ’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation .
We note , however , that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people now being safeguarded from corona .
In our opinion , the current corona measures and the strict penalties for non-compliance with them are contrary to the values formulated by the Belgian Supreme Health Council , which , until recently , as the health authority , has always ensured quality medicine in our country : We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based , unilaterally directed , and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures , whether well-founded or not .
Moreover , the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government ’ s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention , strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle , optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.2 In 1948 , the WHO defined health as follows : ‘ Health is a state of complete physical , mental and social well-being and not merely the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ .3 Health , therefore , is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual .
Belgium also has a duty , from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights , to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health .
4 The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights .
Measures include compulsory wearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air and during sporting activities , and in some municipalities even when there are no other people in the vicinity ) , physical distancing , social isolation , compulsory quarantine for some groups and hygiene measures .
The predicted pandemic with millions of deaths At the beginning of the pandemic , the measures were understandable and widely supported , even if there were differences in implementation in the countries around us .
The WHO originally predicted a pandemic that would claim 3.4 % victims , in other words millions of deaths , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment or vaccine was available .
This would put unprecedented pressure on the intensive care units ( ICUs ) of our hospitals .
This led to a global alarm situation , never seen in the history of mankind : “ flatten the curve ” was represented by a lockdown that shut down the entire society and economy and quarantined healthy people .
Social distancing became the new normal in anticipation of a rescue vaccine .
Gradually , the alarm bell was sounded from many sources : the objective facts showed a completely different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season .
As every year , we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve : first the rhinoviruses , then the influenza A and B viruses , followed by the coronaviruses .
There is nothing different from what we normally see .
The use of the non-specific PCR test , which produces many false positives , showed an exponential picture .
This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested .
The creator expressly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research and not for diagnostics.7 The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of genome is amplified each time .
Any contamination ( e.g .
other viruses , debris from old virus genomes ) can possibly result in false positives.8 The test does not measure how many viruses are present in the sample .
A real viral infection means a massive presence of viruses , the so-called virus load .
If someone tests positive , this does not mean that that person is actually clinically infected , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ill. Koch ’ s postulate was not fulfilled ( “ The pure agent found in a patient with complaints can provoke the same complaints in a healthy person ” ) .
Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity , this does not justify the social measures taken , which are based solely on these tests .
9 10 If we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns ( Sweden , Iceland … ) , we see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection .
Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate .
If we look at the date of application of the imposed lockdowns we see that the lockdowns were set after the peak was already over and the number of cases decreasing .
The drop was therefore not the result of the taken measures .
11 As every year , it seems that climatic conditions ( weather , temperature and humidity ) and growing immunity are more likely to reduce the wave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the human body has been exposed daily to moisture and droplets containing infectious microorganisms ( viruses , bacteria and fungi ) .
The penetration of these microorganisms is prevented by an advanced defence mechanism – the immune system .
A strong immune system relies on normal daily exposure to these microbial influences .
Overly hygienic measures have a detrimental effect on our immunity .
12 13 Only people with a weak or faulty immune system should be protected by extensive hygiene or social distancing .
Influenza will re-emerge in the autumn ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible decrease in natural resilience may lead to further casualties .
Our immune system consists of two parts : a congenital , non-specific immune system and an adaptive immune system .
forms a first barrier : skin , saliva , gastric juice , intestinal mucus , vibratory hair cells , commensal flora , … and prevents the attachment of micro-organisms to tissue .
If they do attach , macrophages can cause the microorganisms to be encapsulated and destroyed .
consists of mucosal immunity ( IgA antibodies , mainly produced by cells in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immunity ( T-cell activation ) , which can be generated in contact with foreign substances or microorganisms , and humoral immunity ( IgM and IgG antibodies produced by the B cells ) .
Recent research shows that both systems are highly entangled .
It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g .
influenza and other viruses .
This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess , which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19 .
Most of the passengers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation of transmission on the ship .
However , 75 % did not appear to be infected .
So even in this high-risk group , the majority are resistant to the virus .
A study in the journal Cell shows that most people neutralise the coronavirus by mucosal ( IgA ) and cellular immunity ( T-cells ) , while experiencing few or no symptoms 14 .
Researchers found up to 60 % SARS-Cov-2 reactivity with CD4+T cells in a non-infected population , suggesting cross-reactivity with other cold ( corona ) viruses.15 Most people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus .
The antibody formation ( IgM and IgG ) by B-cells only occupies a relatively small part of our immune system .
This may explain why , with an antibody percentage of 5-10 % , there may be a group immunity anyway .
The efficacy of vaccines is assessed precisely on the basis of whether or not we have these antibodies .
This is a misrepresentation .
Most people who test positive ( PCR ) have no complaints .
Their immune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immunity is a much more logical approach .
Prevention is an important , insufficiently highlighted pillar : healthy , full-fledged nutrition , exercise in fresh air , without a mask , stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts .
Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression , anxiety , suicides , intra-family violence and child abuse.16 Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have , the more resistant they are to viruses .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have fatal consequences .
17 The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors .
However , sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning , reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health , energy levels , well-being and , in general , quality of life.18 Fear , persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health .
19 A highly contagious virus with millions of deaths without any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many times lower than expected and close to that of a normal seasonal flu ( 0.2 % ) .
20 The number of registered corona deaths therefore still seems to be overestimated .
There is a difference between death by corona and death with corona .
Humans are often carriers of multiple viruses and potentially pathogenic bacteria at the same time .
Taking into account the fact that most people who developed serious symptoms suffered from additional pathology , one can not simply conclude that the corona-infection was the cause of death .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the statistics .
The most vulnerable groups can be clearly identified .
The vast majority of deceased patients were 80 years of age or older .
The majority ( 70 % ) of the deceased , younger than 70 years , had an underlying disorder , such as cardiovascular suffering , diabetes mellitus , chronic lung disease or obesity .
The vast majority of infected persons ( > 98 % ) did not or hardly became ill or recovered spontaneously .
Meanwhile , there is an affordable , safe and efficient therapy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms of disease in the form of HCQ ( hydroxychloroquine ) , zinc and AZT ( azithromycin ) .
Rapidly applied this therapy leads to recovery and often prevents hospitalisation .
Hardly anyone has to die now .
This effective therapy has been confirmed by the clinical experience of colleagues in the field with impressive results .
This contrasts sharply with the theoretical criticism ( insufficient substantiation by double-blind studies ) which in some countries ( e.g .
the Netherlands ) has even led to a ban on this therapy .
A meta-analysis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrate an effect of HCQ , was withdrawn .
The primary data sources used proved to be unreliable and 2 out of 3 authors were in conflict of interest .
However , most of the guidelines based on this study remained unchanged … 48 49 We have serious questions about this state of affairs .
In the US , a group of doctors in the field , who see patients on a daily basis , united in “ America ’ s Frontline Doctors ” and gave a press conference which has been watched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Raoult of the Institut d ’ Infectiologie de Marseille ( IHU ) also presented this promising combination therapy as early as April .
Dutch GP Rob Elens , who cured many patients in his practice with HCQ and zinc , called on colleagues in a petition for freedom of therapy.22 The definitive evidence comes from the epidemiological follow-up in Switzerland : mortality rates compared with and without this therapy.23 From the distressing media images of ARDS ( acute respiratory distress syndrome ) where people were suffocating and given artificial respiration in agony , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by an exaggerated immune response with intravascular coagulation in the pulmonary blood vessels .
The administration of blood thinners and dexamethasone and the avoidance of artificial ventilation , which was found to cause additional damage to lung tissue , means that this dreaded complication , too , is virtually not fatal anymore .
47 It is therefore not a killer virus , but a well-treatable condition .
Spreading occurs by drip infection ( only for patients who cough or sneeze ) and aerosols in closed , unventilated rooms .
Contamination is therefore not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people ( or positively tested asymptomatic carriers ) are virtually unable to transmit the virus .
Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk .
24 25 Transfer via objects ( e.g .
money , shopping or shopping trolleys ) has not been scientifically proven.26 27 28 All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this .
Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complaints take place , and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting .
They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing .
Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections .
29 30 31 Wearing a mask is not without side effects .
32 33 Oxygen deficiency ( headache , nausea , fatigue , loss of concentration ) occurs fairly quickly , an effect similar to altitude sickness .
Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches , sinus problems , respiratory problems and hyperventilation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity .
Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.34 Our Labour Code ( Codex 6 ) refers to a CO2 content ( ventilation in workplaces ) of 900 ppm , maximum 1200 ppm in special circumstances .
After wearing a mask for one minute , this toxic limit is considerably exceeded to values that are three to four times higher than these maximum values .
Anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an extreme poorly ventilated room .
35 Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognised safety specialists for workers .
Hospitals have a sterile environment in their operating rooms where staff wear masks and there is precise regulation of humidity / temperature with appropriately monitored oxygen flow to compensate for this , thus meeting strict safety standards .
36 A second wave is now being discussed in Belgium , with a further tightening of the measures as a result .
However , closer examination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , although there has been an increase in the number of infections since mid-July , there was no increase in hospital admissions or deaths at that time .
It is therefore not a second wave of corona , but a so-called “ case chemistry ” due to an increased number of tests .
50 The number of hospital admissions or deaths showed a shortlasting minimal increase in recent weeks , but in interpreting it , we must take into account the recent heatwave .
In addition , the vast majority of the victims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 75 years .
This indicates that the proportion of the measures taken in relation to the working population and young people is disproportionate to the intended objectives .
The vast majority of the positively tested “ infected ” persons are in the age group of the active population , which does not develop any or merely limited symptoms , due to a well-functioning immune system .
So nothing has changed – the peak is over .
The corona measures form a striking contrast to the minimal policy pursued by the government until now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with proven health benefits such as the sugar tax , the ban on ( e- ) cigarettes and making healthy food , exercise and social support networks financially attractive and widely accessible .
It is a missed opportunity for a better prevention policy that could have brought about a change in mentality in all sections of the population with clear results in terms of public health .
At present , only 3 % of the health care budget goes to prevention .
2 As a doctor , we took the Hippocratic Oath : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my patients , promote their health and alleviate their suffering ” .
“ Even under pressure , I will not use my medical knowledge for practices that are against humanity.
” The current measures force us to act against this oath .
Other health professionals have a similar code .
The ‘ primum non nocere ’ , which every doctor and health professional assumes , is also undermined by the current measures and by the prospect of the possible introduction of a generalised vaccine , which is not subject to extensive prior testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50 % .
Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient .
Over 75 years of age , the efficacy is almost non-existent.38 Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses , as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus , a vaccine is at most a temporary solution , which requires new vaccines each time afterwards .
An untested vaccine , which is implemented by emergency procedure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obtained legal immunity from possible harm , raises serious questions .
39 40 We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs .
On a global scale , 700 000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine.41 If 95 % of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free , the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible .
The role of the media and the official communication plan Over the past few months , newspaper , radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , there , where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication .
This has led to a public communication in our news media , that was more like propaganda than objective reporting .
In our opinion , it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible , aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power , with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves .
This view is supported by the journalistic codes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown was necessary , that this was the only possible solution , and that everyone stood behind this lockdown , made it difficult for people with a different view , as well as experts , to express a different opinion .
Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed .
We have not seen open debates in the media , where different views could be expressed .
We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities , which were and are still being removed from social media .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in with a free , democratic constitutional state , all the more so as it leads to tunnel vision .
This policy also has a paralysing effect and feeds fear and concern in society .
In this context , we reject the intention of censorship of dissidents in the European Union !
43 The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either .
War terms were popular and warlike language was not lacking .
There has often been mention of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enemy ’ who has to be ‘ defeated ’ .
The use in the media of phrases such as ‘ care heroes in the front line ’ and ‘ corona victims ’ has further fuelled fear , as has the idea that we are globally dealing with a ‘ killer virus ’ .
The relentless bombardment with figures , that were unleashed on the population day after day , hour after hour , without interpreting those figures , without comparing them to flu deaths in other years , without comparing them to deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real psychosis of fear in the population .
This is not information , this is manipulation .
We deplore the role of the WHO in this , which has called for the infodemic ( i.e .
all divergent opinions from the official discourse , including by experts with different views ) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship.43 44 We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here !
We demand an open debate in which all experts are heard .
The general principle of good governance calls for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up in the light of the Higher Legal Standards : any interference by government must comply with the fundamental rights as protected in the European Convention on Human Rights ( ECHR ) .
Interference by public authorities is only permitted in crisis situations .
In other words , discretionary decisions must be proportionate to an absolute necessity .
The measures currently taken concern interference in the exercise of , among other things , the right to respect of private and family life , freedom of thought , conscience and religion , freedom of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the right to education , etc.
, and must therefore comply with fundamental rights as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights ( ECHR ) .
For example , in accordance with Article 8 ( 2 ) of the ECHR , interference with the right to private and family life is permissible only if the measures are necessary in the interests of national security , public safety , the economic well-being of the country , the protection of public order and the prevention of criminal offences , the protection of health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedoms of others , the regulatory text on which the interference is based must be sufficiently clear , foreseeable and proportionate to the objectives pursued.45 The predicted pandemic of millions of deaths seemed to respond to these crisis conditions , leading to the establishment of an emergency government .
Now that the objective facts show something completely different , the condition of inability to act otherwise ( no time to evaluate thoroughly if there is an emergency ) is no longer in place .
Covid-19 is not a cold virus , but a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comparable to the seasonal flu .
In other words , there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health .
There is no state of emergency .
An open discussion on corona measures means that , in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients , we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population .
These include damage in the psychosocial domain ( increase in depression , anxiety , suicides , intra-family violence and child abuse ) 16 and economic damage .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the current policy is out of all proportion , the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut .
We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law .
As doctors and health professionals , in the face of a virus which , in terms of its harmfulness , mortality and transmissibility , approaches the seasonal influenza , we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures .
• We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures .
• We are questioning the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who meet behind closed doors .
• Following on from ACU 2020 46 https : //acu2020.org/nederlandse-versie/ we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organisation .
It was also at the heart of the fight against the “ infodemic ” , i.e .
the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media .
This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.43 We would like to make a public appeal to our professional associations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the current measures .
We draw attention to and call for an open discussion in which carers can and dare to speak out .
With this open letter , we send out the signal that progress on the same footing does more harm than good , and call on politicians to inform themselves independently and critically about the available evidence – including that from experts with different views , as long as it is based on sound science – when rolling out a policy , with the aim of promoting optimum health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a personal capacity .
• President John Magufuli of Tanzania : “ Even Papaya and Goats are Corona positive ” https : //www.youtube.com/watch ?
v=207HuOxltvI • Open letter by biochemist Drs Mario Ortiz Martinez to the Dutch chamber https : //www.gentechvrij.nl/2020/08/15/foute-interpretatie/ • Lambrecht , B. , Hammad , H. The immunology of the allergy epidemic and the hygiene hypothesis .
Nat Immunol 18 , 1076–1083 ( 2017 ) .
https : //www.nature.com/articles/ni.3829 • Sharvan Sehrawat , Barry T. Rouse , Does the hygiene hypothesis apply to COVID-19 susceptibility ?
, Microbes and Infection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : //doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.07.002 • Feys , F. , Brokken , S. , & De Peuter , S. ( 2020 , May 22 ) .
Risk-benefit and cost-utility analysis for COVID-19 lockdown in Belgium : the impact on mental health and wellbeing .
https : //psyarxiv.com/xczb3/ • Haralambieva , I.H .
et al.
, 2015 .
The impact of immunosenescence on humoral immune response variation after influenza A/H1N1 vaccination in older subjects .
https : //pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26044074/ • Disinformation related to COVID-19 approaches European Commission EurLex , juni 2020 ( this file will not damage your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic , but a so-called casedemic due to more testing .
https : //www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/crucial-viewing-understanding-covid-19-casedemic1

September 5th 2020
We, Belgian doctors and health professionals, wish to express our serious concern about the evolution of the situation in the recent months surrounding the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We call on politicians to be independently and critically informed in the decision-making process and in the compulsory implementation of corona-measures.
We ask for an open debate, where all experts are represented without any form of censorship. After the initial panic surrounding covid-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore.
The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good. We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.
‘A cure must not be worse than the problem’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation. We note, however, that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all sections of the population than the number of people now being safeguarded from corona.
In our opinion, the current corona measures and the strict penalties for non-compliance with them are contrary to the values formulated by the Belgian Supreme Health Council, which, until recently, as the health authority, has always ensured quality medicine in our country:
“Science – Expertise – Quality – Impartiality – Independence – Transparency”. 1
We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.
Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.2
The concept of health
In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment’.3
Health, therefore, is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual. Belgium also has a duty, from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights, to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health. 4
The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights. Measures include compulsory wearing of a mask (also in open air and during sporting activities, and in some municipalities even when there are no other people in the vicinity), physical distancing, social isolation, compulsory quarantine for some groups and hygiene measures.
The predicted pandemic with millions of deaths
At the beginning of the pandemic, the measures were understandable and widely supported, even if there were differences in implementation in the countries around us. The WHO originally predicted a pandemic that would claim 3.4% victims, in other words millions of deaths, and a highly contagious virus for which no treatment or vaccine was available. This would put unprecedented pressure on the intensive care units (ICUs) of our hospitals.
This led to a global alarm situation, never seen in the history of mankind: “flatten the curve” was represented by a lockdown that shut down the entire society and economy and quarantined healthy people. Social distancing became the new normal in anticipation of a rescue vaccine.
The facts about covid-19
Gradually, the alarm bell was sounded from many sources: the objective facts showed a completely different reality. 5 6
The course of covid-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season. As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.
The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture. This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.7
The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of genome is amplified each time. Any contamination (e.g. other viruses, debris from old virus genomes) can possibly result in false positives.8
The test does not measure how many viruses are present in the sample. A real viral infection means a massive presence of viruses, the so-called virus load. If someone tests positive, this does not mean that that person is actually clinically infected, is ill or is going to become ill. Koch’s postulate was not fulfilled (“The pure agent found in a patient with complaints can provoke the same complaints in a healthy person”).
Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity, this does not justify the social measures taken, which are based solely on these tests. 9 10
Lockdown.
If we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns (Sweden, Iceland …), we see similar curves. So there is no link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection. Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate.
If we look at the date of application of the imposed lockdowns we see that the lockdowns were set after the peak was already over and the number of cases decreasing. The drop was therefore not the result of the taken measures. 11
As every year, it seems that climatic conditions (weather, temperature and humidity) and growing immunity are more likely to reduce the wave of infection.
Our immune system
For thousands of years, the human body has been exposed daily to moisture and droplets containing infectious microorganisms (viruses, bacteria and fungi).
The penetration of these microorganisms is prevented by an advanced defence mechanism – the immune system. A strong immune system relies on normal daily exposure to these microbial influences. Overly hygienic measures have a detrimental effect on our immunity. 12 13 Only people with a weak or faulty immune system should be protected by extensive hygiene or social distancing.
Influenza will re-emerge in the autumn (in combination with covid-19) and a possible decrease in natural resilience may lead to further casualties.
Our immune system consists of two parts: a congenital, non-specific immune system and an adaptive immune system.
The non-specific immune system forms a first barrier: skin, saliva, gastric juice, intestinal mucus, vibratory hair cells, commensal flora, … and prevents the attachment of micro-organisms to tissue.
If they do attach, macrophages can cause the microorganisms to be encapsulated and destroyed.
The adaptive immune system consists of mucosal immunity (IgA antibodies, mainly produced by cells in the intestines and lung epithelium), cellular immunity (T-cell activation), which can be generated in contact with foreign substances or microorganisms, and humoral immunity (IgM and IgG antibodies produced by the B cells).
Recent research shows that both systems are highly entangled.
It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g. influenza and other viruses. This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19. Most of the passengers were elderly and were in an ideal situation of transmission on the ship. However, 75% did not appear to be infected. So even in this high-risk group, the majority are resistant to the virus.
A study in the journal Cell shows that most people neutralise the coronavirus by mucosal (IgA) and cellular immunity (T-cells), while experiencing few or no symptoms 14.
Researchers found up to 60% SARS-Cov-2 reactivity with CD4+T cells in a non-infected population, suggesting cross-reactivity with other cold (corona) viruses.15
Most people therefore already have a congenital or cross-immunity because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus.
The antibody formation (IgM and IgG) by B-cells only occupies a relatively small part of our immune system. This may explain why, with an antibody percentage of 5-10%, there may be a group immunity anyway. The efficacy of vaccines is assessed precisely on the basis of whether or not we have these antibodies. This is a misrepresentation.
Most people who test positive (PCR) have no complaints. Their immune system is strong enough. Strengthening natural immunity is a much more logical approach. Prevention is an important, insufficiently highlighted pillar: healthy, full-fledged nutrition, exercise in fresh air, without a mask, stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts.
Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health
Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse.16
Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences. 17
The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors. However, sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning, reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health, energy levels, well-being and, in general, quality of life.18
Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health. 19
A highly contagious virus with millions of deaths without any treatment?
Mortality turned out to be many times lower than expected and close to that of a normal seasonal flu (0.2%). 20
The number of registered corona deaths therefore still seems to be overestimated.
There is a difference between death by corona and death with corona. Humans are often carriers of multiple viruses and potentially pathogenic bacteria at the same time. Taking into account the fact that most people who developed serious symptoms suffered from additional pathology, one cannot simply conclude that the corona-infection was the cause of death. This was mostly not taken into account in the statistics.
The most vulnerable groups can be clearly identified. The vast majority of deceased patients were 80 years of age or older. The majority (70%) of the deceased, younger than 70 years, had an underlying disorder, such as cardiovascular suffering, diabetes mellitus, chronic lung disease or obesity. The vast majority of infected persons (>98%) did not or hardly became ill or recovered spontaneously.
Meanwhile, there is an affordable, safe and efficient therapy available for those who do show severe symptoms of disease in the form of HCQ (hydroxychloroquine), zinc and AZT (azithromycin). Rapidly applied this therapy leads to recovery and often prevents hospitalisation. Hardly anyone has to die now.
This effective therapy has been confirmed by the clinical experience of colleagues in the field with impressive results. This contrasts sharply with the theoretical criticism (insufficient substantiation by double-blind studies) which in some countries (e.g. the Netherlands) has even led to a ban on this therapy. A meta-analysis in The Lancet, which could not demonstrate an effect of HCQ, was withdrawn. The primary data sources used proved to be unreliable and 2 out of 3 authors were in conflict of interest. However, most of the guidelines based on this study remained unchanged … 48 49
We have serious questions about this state of affairs.
In the US, a group of doctors in the field, who see patients on a daily basis, united in “America’s Frontline Doctors” and gave a press conference which has been watched millions of times.21 51
French Prof Didier Raoult of the Institut d’Infectiologie de Marseille (IHU) also presented this promising combination therapy as early as April. Dutch GP Rob Elens, who cured many patients in his practice with HCQ and zinc, called on colleagues in a petition for freedom of therapy.22
The definitive evidence comes from the epidemiological follow-up in Switzerland: mortality rates compared with and without this therapy.23
From the distressing media images of ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) where people were suffocating and given artificial respiration in agony, we now know that this was caused by an exaggerated immune response with intravascular coagulation in the pulmonary blood vessels. The administration of blood thinners and dexamethasone and the avoidance of artificial ventilation, which was found to cause additional damage to lung tissue, means that this dreaded complication, too, is virtually not fatal anymore. 47
It is therefore not a killer virus, but a well-treatable condition.
Propagation
Spreading occurs by drip infection (only for patients who cough or sneeze) and aerosols in closed, unventilated rooms. Contamination is therefore not possible in the open air. Contact tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people (or positively tested asymptomatic carriers) are virtually unable to transmit the virus. Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk. 24 25
Transfer via objects (e.g. money, shopping or shopping trolleys) has not been scientifically proven.26 27 28
All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.
Masks
Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven at-risk groups or people with upper respiratory complaints take place, and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting. They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing. Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections. 29 30 31
Wearing a mask is not without side effects. 32 33 Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.34
Our Labour Code (Codex 6) refers to a CO2 content (ventilation in workplaces) of 900 ppm, maximum 1200 ppm in special circumstances. After wearing a mask for one minute, this toxic limit is considerably exceeded to values that are three to four times higher than these maximum values. Anyone who wears a mask is therefore in an extreme poorly ventilated room. 35
Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognised safety specialists for workers.
Hospitals have a sterile environment in their operating rooms where staff wear masks and there is precise regulation of humidity / temperature with appropriately monitored oxygen flow to compensate for this, thus meeting strict safety standards. 36
A second corona wave?
A second wave is now being discussed in Belgium, with a further tightening of the measures as a result. However, closer examination of Sciensano’s figures37 shows that, although there has been an increase in the number of infections since mid-July, there was no increase in hospital admissions or deaths at that time. It is therefore not a second wave of corona, but a so-called “case chemistry” due to an increased number of tests. 50
The number of hospital admissions or deaths showed a shortlasting minimal increase in recent weeks, but in interpreting it, we must take into account the recent heatwave. In addition, the vast majority of the victims are still in the population group >75 years.
This indicates that the proportion of the measures taken in relation to the working population and young people is disproportionate to the intended objectives.
The vast majority of the positively tested “infected” persons are in the age group of the active population, which does not develop any or merely limited symptoms, due to a well-functioning immune system.
So nothing has changed – the peak is over.
Strengthening a prevention policy
The corona measures form a striking contrast to the minimal policy pursued by the government until now, when it comes to well-founded measures with proven health benefits such as the sugar tax, the ban on (e-)cigarettes and making healthy food, exercise and social support networks financially attractive and widely accessible. It is a missed opportunity for a better prevention policy that could have brought about a change in mentality in all sections of the population with clear results in terms of public health. At present, only 3% of the health care budget goes to prevention. 2
The Hippocratic Oath
As a doctor, we took the Hippocratic Oath:
“I will above all care for my patients, promote their health and alleviate their suffering”.
“I will inform my patients correctly.”
“Even under pressure, I will not use my medical knowledge for practices that are against humanity.”
The current measures force us to act against this oath.
Other health professionals have a similar code.
The ‘primum non nocere’, which every doctor and health professional assumes, is also undermined by the current measures and by the prospect of the possible introduction of a generalised vaccine, which is not subject to extensive prior testing.
Vaccine
Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.38
Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. 39 40 We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.
On a global scale, 700 000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine.41
If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.
The role of the media and the official communication plan
Over the past few months, newspaper, radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically behind the panel of experts and the government, there, where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication. This has led to a public communication in our news media, that was more like propaganda than objective reporting.
In our opinion, it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible, aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power, with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves.
This view is supported by the journalistic codes of ethics.42
The official story that a lockdown was necessary, that this was the only possible solution, and that everyone stood behind this lockdown, made it difficult for people with a different view, as well as experts, to express a different opinion.
Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed. We have not seen open debates in the media, where different views could be expressed.
We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities, which were and are still being removed from social media. We feel that this does not fit in with a free, democratic constitutional state, all the more so as it leads to tunnel vision. This policy also has a paralysing effect and feeds fear and concern in society. In this context, we reject the intention of censorship of dissidents in the European Union! 43
The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either. War terms were popular and warlike language was not lacking. There has often been mention of a ‘war’ with an ‘invisible enemy’ who has to be ‘defeated’. The use in the media of phrases such as ‘care heroes in the front line’ and ‘corona victims’ has further fuelled fear, as has the idea that we are globally dealing with a ‘killer virus’.
The relentless bombardment with figures, that were unleashed on the population day after day, hour after hour, without interpreting those figures, without comparing them to flu deaths in other years, without comparing them to deaths from other causes, has induced a real psychosis of fear in the population. This is not information, this is manipulation.
We deplore the role of the WHO in this, which has called for the infodemic (i.e. all divergent opinions from the official discourse, including by experts with different views) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship.43 44
We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here!
We demand an open debate in which all experts are heard.
Emergency law versus Human Rights
The general principle of good governance calls for the proportionality of government decisions to be weighed up in the light of the Higher Legal Standards: any interference by government must comply with the fundamental rights as protected in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Interference by public authorities is only permitted in crisis situations. In other words, discretionary decisions must be proportionate to an absolute necessity.
The measures currently taken concern interference in the exercise of, among other things, the right to respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, the right to education, etc., and must therefore comply with fundamental rights as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
For example, in accordance with Article 8(2) of the ECHR, interference with the right to private and family life is permissible only if the measures are necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, the economic well-being of the country, the protection of public order and the prevention of criminal offences, the protection of health or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, the regulatory text on which the interference is based must be sufficiently clear, foreseeable and proportionate to the objectives pursued.45
The predicted pandemic of millions of deaths seemed to respond to these crisis conditions, leading to the establishment of an emergency government. Now that the objective facts show something completely different, the condition of inability to act otherwise (no time to evaluate thoroughly if there is an emergency) is no longer in place. Covid-19 is not a cold virus, but a well treatable condition with a mortality rate comparable to the seasonal flu. In other words, there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health.
There is no state of emergency.
Immense damage caused by the current policies
An open discussion on corona measures means that, in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients, we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population. These include damage in the psychosocial domain (increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse)16 and economic damage.
If we take this collateral damage into account, the current policy is out of all proportion, the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law.
As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.
We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures.
We are questioning the legitimacy of the current advisory experts, who meet behind closed doors.
Following on from ACU 2020 46 https://acu2020.org/nederlandse-versie/ we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organisation. It was also at the heart of the fight against the “infodemic”, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media. This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.43
Distribution of this letter
We would like to make a public appeal to our professional associations and fellow carers to give their opinion on the current measures.
We draw attention to and call for an open discussion in which carers can and dare to speak out.
With this open letter, we send out the signal that progress on the same footing does more harm than good, and call on politicians to inform themselves independently and critically about the available evidence – including that from experts with different views, as long as it is based on sound science – when rolling out a policy, with the aim of promoting optimum health.
With concern, hope and in a personal capacity.


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-21--Yet Another UK COVID Vaccine Volunteer Suffers Brain Damage

Two people have fallen ill during the trials of AstraZeneca ’ s coronavirus vaccine in the UK , the company ’ s internal papers revealed , and a source said they had both suffered from the same serious neurological disorder .
The company published details of the trials on Saturday , after facing criticism over the lack of transparency surrounding the testing of the much-anticipated vaccine against the virus , which has so far infected more than 30.8 million people and caused over 958,000 fatalities worldwide .
The first participant of the British trials – which are being conducted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after receiving one dose of the experimental vaccine in July .
The female volunteer was later diagnosed with transverse myelitis , a rare inflammatory disease that affects the spinal cord , causing weakness , sensory alterations , and autonomic nervous-system dysfunction .
The company ’ s spokeswoman later told the media the volunteer had undiagnosed multiple sclerosis , and the trials resumed .
The second female recipient of the vaccine suffered complications after the follow-up dose in September .
AstraZeneca didn ’ t confirm her diagnosis , but a source told the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On September 6 , trials of the drug were paused again , after the second woman felt ill , but they resumed in Britain , Brazil , India , and South Africa less than a week later .
The US hasn ’ t yet green-lighted the continuation of the test , however .
AstraZeneca , which has administered its vaccine to some 18,000 people worldwide , said in internal documents that the two cases of the illness were “ unlikely to be associated with the vaccine , or there was insufficient evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were or were not related to the vaccine.
” Transverse myelitis is a serious and rare disease , and its repeated cases among the participants of the trials may well see AstraZeneca losing its vaccine bid all together .
AstraZeneca ’ s vaccine uses a monkey adenovirus that shares a gene with the Covid-19 coronavirus .
It ’ s an untested method of vaccine development , according to Kirill Dmitriev , CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund that bankrolled the Russian vaccine development .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Written by rt.com
Two people have fallen ill during the trials of AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine in the UK, the company’s internal papers revealed, and a source said they had both suffered from the same serious neurological disorder.
The company published details of the trials on Saturday, after facing criticism over the lack of transparency surrounding the testing of the much-anticipated vaccine against the virus, which has so far infected more than 30.8 million people and caused over 958,000 fatalities worldwide.
The first participant of the British trials – which are being conducted in conjunction with Oxford University – fell ill after receiving one dose of the experimental vaccine in July.
The female volunteer was later diagnosed with transverse myelitis, a rare inflammatory disease that affects the spinal cord, causing weakness, sensory alterations, and autonomic nervous-system dysfunction. The company’s spokeswoman later told the media the volunteer had undiagnosed multiple sclerosis, and the trials resumed.
The second female recipient of the vaccine suffered complications after the follow-up dose in September. AstraZeneca didn’t confirm her diagnosis, but a source told the New York Times it was also transverse myelitis.
On September 6, trials of the drug were paused again, after the second woman felt ill, but they resumed in Britain, Brazil, India, and South Africa less than a week later. The US hasn’t yet green-lighted the continuation of the test, however.
AstraZeneca, which has administered its vaccine to some 18,000 people worldwide, said in internal documents that the two cases of the illness were “unlikely to be associated with the vaccine, or there was insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.”
Transverse myelitis is a serious and rare disease, and its repeated cases among the participants of the trials may well see AstraZeneca losing its vaccine bid all together.
AstraZeneca’s vaccine uses a monkey adenovirus that shares a gene with the Covid-19 coronavirus. It’s an untested method of vaccine development, according to Kirill Dmitriev, CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund that bankrolled the Russian vaccine development.
Read more at www.rt.com
****
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-21--COVID Protests: Speech at Trafalgar Square London: Sept 19, 2020

Above , photo from the COVID Protest , Trafalgar Square London , Sept 19 , 2020 .
Below , Dr Carrie Nadej ’ s Speech at the event : Coming together in Unity and Freedom .
A resounding NO , we should not accept it .
London , you know that there ’ s something not right in the World .
You know that there have been lots of lies and deceit and manipulation and misinformation going on .
You know that we can not continue to live in this manner , it is not healthy for us , our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our spiritual state , our financial state .
Just some of the crazy and insane things we have been going through .
Well , let ’ s start with social-distancing .
There ’ s a virus that can ’ t go past six feet so we have a social-distancing rule , of six feet that ’ s been going on for six months in most places , that ’ s I don ’ t see any scientific data to back that up and why we are doing that , but I do know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disunity , blockage of human contact , it affects us , affects our heart .
Also , let ’ s go with those cloth and paper masks that we ’ ve been forced to wear many times .
Where is the scientific evidence that irrefutably proves that this works ?
In fact , all of our good scientific evidence proves otherwise .
Why , is this going on , it goes against all of my medical It ’ s not the way you use masks you don ’ t put them on healthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to wear them .
Walk to the restroom but not at the table .
Why are we saying A-symptomatic carriers , healthy people are a risk to society ?
Why are we putting those people in quarantine , why are we putting those people in containment camps now Why are we ruining our food supply , why are we ruining our finances , why are we doing this ?
So , we don ’ t know what ’ s going on in the World , questioning things we want answers , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go to International organizations , we asked them and they ’ ve answered us .
They have given us an answer to when this could end , they ’ ve said that when everyone on this planet gets vaccinated with the new Covid19 vaccine , well , then , we can go back to some sort of normalcy .
Well , I ’ m here to tell you with a resounding “ No ” , that we should not accept that , because Ladies and Gentlemen , this Vaccine is completely new on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experimental , has never been unveiled on us before .
There are many things you must know .
First of all , this Vaccine is using something called Modified RNA or Modified DNA .
This is not like the regular vaccines , they use different processes but overall , it ’ s called transfection to be able to insert a genetic code inside of our cells ; inside of our DNA .
Once that happens , it can be taken-up permanently in our bodies .
When they tell you it can not , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re lying .
Because by all scientific definition , yes it can !
Because when they use transfections , that is the same process they use to make a genetically modified organism like Monsanto seeds , which are sterile and not as healthy .
So absolutely , it can affect our geno , absolutely , it can affect our health , even our fertility , absolutely .
And why are they lying ?
Other things we can expect from this , more longer-term ; increased cancers , increased mutagenesis , increased autoimmune disorders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of these vaccines , let ’ s take Moderno for instance , they only had 45 patients in one study .
They did a high dose study , and a low dose study .
The high dose group , 100 % of them got systemic side-effects , the low-dose group got 80 % .
Already we are seeing immediate side-effects , what about the long-term ?
And , you must know that they have skipped the animal trials , in almost all of these vaccine studies , very interesting !
Why is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because they don ’ t have time and they ’ re doing it Let ’ s go back in time , a few years back because they have been trying to do this vaccine on animals before ; modified RNA .
And in the animal trials , the animals initially looked as if they had a robust immune system but when the animals were then challenged with the virus in the future , the animals got sicker or they died .
They were bad , they were worse .
Is that what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because this could potentially kill and make us sicker when we are introduced to this virus again , or similar virus , it ’ s very possible .
But Ladies and Gentlemen it ’ s not the worst of what I am about to say , about what they want to introduce on us .
Here ’ s the kicker , they plan on using a unique identifier in the Vaccine .
One of the patents is called “ Luciferaze**race or raze ” .
These are nano-crystals , bio-luminous , they light up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to see it nor feel it on your skin but with the special application it can pass over and it would say whether or not you were vaccinated .
But it would hold your vaccination record as well as your medical record .
But guys , this is giving you a barcode , a number , a digital ID , for how long ?
We are not products on the shelf in a store , we are human beings .
We are sovereign human beings .
We deserve better than that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used for ?
And , when they do that this is using nano technology .
What ’ s nano technology ?
Microscopic little robots !
These can actually put bio-senses into our body .
A bio How your breathing , your blood sugar , oxygen , your sleeping habits , your sexual habits , your menstrual cycle , the medicines that are in your body .
If you are taking medicines , if you are taking illicit drugs , your emotions , everything .
We ’ ll never be private again .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would go and accumulate all this data go to your smart phone go to another smart device , go to the cloud .
Whose using that , whose marketing off that ?
Whose profiting off that ?
Why is someone else getting that information ?
That ’ s been proposed to use in these vaccines , we have to know this , because once this is in our body there ’ s no guarantee we can get it out , and there ’ s no guarantee it would ever end .
Do or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can ’ t get it out , and think about that !
Overnight , using our autonomy , our privacy , our freedom .
We need to tell everyone around the World what is about to happen .
What could be another motivation for this ?
Well , by chance on March 26 , 2020 , an international patent , was published .
Microsoft was one of the applicants , xxxxxx Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation we should always remember those names .
This international patent , is the number 060606 it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ currency , what does that mean ?
Those biosensors I told you about that could be injected inside of you that accumulate the data , they would link us to artificial intelligence , the cloud .
Well , that would be used as crypto currency , our bodies would be turned into a monetary commodity .
The ultimate of enslavement .
Why aren ’ t they talking about this why are they lying , why are they being deceitful ?
Why aren ’ t they bringing this out in the open ?
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We need to know who .
So Ladies and Gentleman , look at the big players behind this , you are always going to see the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation .
CEPI that is part of their organization .
Microsoft associated with them .
United States the Department of Defence Darpa Military agency .
This is being mirrored throughout the World .
Why , do they , get to say what happens to our health ?
Why do they patent things , profit off our bodies ?
Why do they control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what we hear ?
But , I am not here just to tell you some bad news , I am here to give you very good news , because my heart is full of hope , love and faith .
Because , Ladies and Gentlemen , today is the day , today is the day that we will all remember , because today , I can hear the roar , song of your freedom , can see the light , shining , from your heart , breaking through the darkness of fear , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knowledge we have power , with the truth on our side , it will set us free .
So be a beacon of hope to the World and show them how it is done , how we stand up with each other because I am here to tell you the good news , there are so many more of us , than there are of them trying to control us .
So , let us hear your roar of Freedom London .
I am with you !
Thank you for having me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know , stop this madness .
God More from Dr Nadej at www.youtube.com PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

COVID Protests: Speech at Trafalgar Square London: Sept 19, 2020
Written by Dr Carrie Nadej
Above, photo from the COVID Protest, Trafalgar Square London, Sept 19, 2020. Below, Dr Carrie Nadej’s Speech at the event:
Coming together in Unity and Freedom. A resounding NO, we should not accept it. London, you
know that there’s something not right in the World. You know that there have been lots of lies
and deceit and manipulation and misinformation going on.
You know that we cannot continue to live in this manner, it is not healthy for us, our emotional state, our physical state, our spiritual state, our financial state. Just some of the crazy and insane things we have been going through.
Well, let’s start with social-distancing. There’s a virus that can’t go past six feet so we have a
social-distancing rule, of six feet that’s been going on for six months in most places, that’s
unbelievable.
I don’t see any scientific data to back that up and why we are doing that, but I do know, that it causes a lot of disunity, blockage of human contact, it affects us, affects our heart.
Also, let’s go with those cloth and paper masks that we’ve been forced to wear many times.
Where is the scientific evidence that irrefutably proves that this works? In fact, all of our good
scientific evidence proves otherwise. Why, is this going on, it goes against all of my medical
training and my colleagues medical training.
It’s not the way you use masks you don’t put them on healthy people, you don’t force people to wear them. Walk to the restroom but not at the table.
Why are we saying A-symptomatic carriers, healthy people are a risk to society? Why are we
putting those people in quarantine, why are we putting those people in containment camps now
in certain countries? Doesn’t make sense!
Why are we ruining our food supply, why are we ruining our finances, why are we doing this? So, we don’t know what’s going on in the World,questioning things we want answers, we go to our World leaders, we go to International organizations, we asked them and they’ve answered us.
They have given us an answer to when this could end, they’ve said that when everyone on this planet gets vaccinated with the new Covid19 vaccine, well, then, we can go back to some sort of normalcy.
Well, I’m here to tell you with a resounding “No”, that we should not accept that, because Ladies and Gentlemen, this Vaccine is completely new on the human race. It is completely experimental, has never been unveiled on us before.
There are many things you must know. First of all, this Vaccine is using something called Modified RNA or Modified DNA. This is not like the regular vaccines, they use different processes but overall, it’s called transfection to be able to insert a genetic code inside of our cells; inside of our DNA.
Once that happens, it can be taken-up permanently in our bodies. When they tell you it cannot,
they’re lying, they’re lying. Because by all scientific definition, yes it can! Because when they
use transfections, that is the same process they use to make a genetically modified organism like
Monsanto seeds, which are sterile and not as healthy.
So absolutely, it can affect our geno, absolutely, it can affect our health, even our fertility, absolutely. And why are they lying?
Other things we can expect from this, more longer-term; increased cancers, increased mutagenesis,
increased autoimmune disorders. Also, the initial studies of some of these vaccines, let’s take
Moderno for instance, they only had 45 patients in one study.
They did a high dose study, and a low dose study. The high dose group, 100% of them got systemic side-effects, the low-dose group got 80%. Already we are seeing immediate side-effects, what about the long-term?
And, you must know that they have skipped the animal trials, in almost all of these vaccine studies,
very interesting! Why is that, well, they tell us because they don’t have time and they’re doing it
for the public good. “No”!
Let’s go back in time, a few years back because they have been trying to do this vaccine on animals before; modified RNA. And in the animal trials, the animals initially looked as if they had a robust immune system but when the animals were then challenged with the virus in the future, the animals got sicker or they died.
They were bad, they were worse. Is that what they are trying to hide from us?
Because this could potentially kill and make us sicker when we are introduced to this virus again, or similar virus, it’s very possible. But Ladies and Gentlemen it’s not the worst of what I am about to say, about what they want to introduce on us.
Here’s the kicker, they plan on using a unique identifier in the Vaccine. One of the patents is
called “Luciferaze**race or raze”. These are nano-crystals, bio-luminous, they light up under
certain conditions. You would not be able to see it nor feel it on your skin but with the special
application it can pass over and it would say whether or not you were vaccinated.
But it would hold your vaccination record as well as your medical record. But guys, this is giving you a barcode, a number, a digital ID, for how long? We are not products on the shelf in a store, we
are human beings. We are sovereign human beings. We deserve better than that, what is this
going to be used for? And, when they do that this is using nano technology. What’s nano
technology? Microscopic little robots! These can actually put bio-senses into our body. A bio
sensor immediately starts gathering information from your body.
How your breathing, your blood sugar, oxygen, your sleeping habits, your sexual habits, your menstrual cycle, the medicines that are in your body. If you are taking medicines, if you are taking illicit drugs, your emotions, everything.
We’ll never be private again. What is this being used for, it would go and accumulate
all this data go to your smart phone go to another smart device, go to the cloud. Whose using
that, whose marketing off that? Whose profiting off that?
Why is someone else getting that information? That’s been proposed to use in these vaccines, we have to know this, because once this is in our body there’s no guarantee we can get it out, and there’s no guarantee it would ever end.
Do or die, once you get it, you can’t get it out, and think about that! Overnight, using our autonomy, our privacy, our freedom.
I say, “No”!
We need to tell everyone around the World what is about to happen. What could be another motivation for this? Well, by chance on March 26, 2020, an international patent, was published. Microsoft was one of the applicants, xxxxxx Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation we should always remember those names.
This international patent, is the number 060606 it would connect our biometric data with crypto currency, what does that mean? Those biosensors I told you about that could be injected inside of you that accumulate the data, they would link us to artificial intelligence, the cloud. Well, that would be used as crypto currency, our bodies would be turned into a monetary commodity.
The ultimate of enslavement. Why aren’t they talking about this why are they lying, why are they being deceitful? Why aren’t they bringing this out in the open? We certainly won’t benefit from that. We need to know who.
So Ladies and Gentleman, look at the big players behind this, you are always going to see the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. CEPI that is part of their organization. Microsoft associated
with them. United States the Department of Defence Darpa Military agency. This is being mirrored
throughout the World. Why, do they, get to say what happens to our health? Why do they patent
things, profit off our bodies? Why do they control what we do, what we think what we hear? But,
I am not here just to tell you some bad news, I am here to give you very good news, because my
heart is full of hope, love and faith. Because, Ladies and Gentlemen, today is the day, today is
the day that we will all remember, because today, I can hear the roar, song of your freedom, can
see the light, shining, from your heart, breaking through the darkness of fear, because together
united we have power with knowledge we have power, with the truth on our side, it will set us free.
So be a beacon of hope to the World and show them how it is done, how we stand up with each
other because I am here to tell you the good news, there are so many more of us, than there are
of them trying to control us. So, let us hear your roar of Freedom London. I am with you! Thank
you for having me. Go forward educate as many people as you know, stop this madness. God
Bless Us All.
More from Dr Nadej at www.youtube.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-22--Do blankets warm you?

Do blankets warm you?

Believers of the Greenhouse Effect all use the same analogy to get you to believe in their junk science .
The site Skeptical Science sets the standard in this article : You got that ?
Blankets warm you !
Their logic is so sound that they couldn ’ t possibly be wrong , could they ?
What empirical evidence do they provide for such an assertion ?
None !
Do they even attempt to predict what temperature a blanket could force ?
No !
Any such attempt would be very embarrassing for them , so instead they just leave it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ First a note : there is no doubt that a blanket can make you warmer by blocking convection .
The issue at hand is whether there is a warming due to radiative heat transfer , as is claimed for the greenhouse effect by analogy .
Let ’ s consider the case of a typical cotton blanket , whose emissivity ranges from 0.81 to 0.88 [ Bellivieu 2019 ] , depending on humidity .
I will choose 0.85 for an average humidity condition ; The exactness hardly matters .
According to the verified program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Theory Ever , a blanket with an emissivity of 0.85 placed on a human being whose normal temperature is at 37°C , should produce a final skin temperature of … Note that I set the albedo to zero .
This is because I figure any scattering of photons between human and blanket will find its path back to the human ( and thus “ should ” cause warming ) , with very little leakage at the edges of the blanket .
But let us be as generous as possible to climate alarmists and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0.22 ( The highest value found for cotton in scientific literature : Source 1 , Source 2 ) .
What then ?
OK , I ’ m now going to be extremely generous , and use an emissivity value of 0.5 , which is not even scientifically justifiable , but let ’ s give the alarmists a huge advantage .
What then ?
Now we get only 39.8°C , for a total warm up of 2.8°C – by a blanket that can only be heated by the human , and starts off colder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So is there any evidence to support the heating of human skin by a passively heated blanket via backradiation ?
This scientist rightfully does not acknowledge warming by radiative effect .
The blanket must be theoretically warmed to 90°C to achieve a rise of about 1°C .
A table of empirical results is also provided in [ House 2011 ] : Though there is obviously a tiny amount of warming due to blocking convection , we don ’ t see any warming as predicted by GH effect radiative heat transfer theory .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ generous 2.8°C warming as predicted by such a theory in the column Unheated Blankets .
We don ’ t even see such a high number with blankets externally heated to 65.6°C !
Now we move onto [ Kabbara 2002 ] .
In this paper we see how expensive equipment can be used to maintain a patient ’ s temperature .
Figure 6 shows how externally heated air prevents a patient ’ s temperature from falling .
But one may ask : What is the purpose of this expensive equipment when climate “ scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blanket should raise skin temperature by at least the very generous 2.8°C ?
Would you trust these climate “ scientists ” with your health ?
Do you think they really believe what they claim ?
And now we move onto : US Patent – US6078026A An external power source to raise T to 38°C ?
Why need external power or even a patent when a simple blanket ought to do the trick ?
Please do not object to this article because I based this off a normal temperature of 37°C .
Even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 2.72°C , IF the GH effect blanket analogy held any merit .
A search on google scholar for “ hospital blankets temperature ” should convince anyone with integrity that blankets don ’ t raise your skin temperature in accordance to radiative transfer theory .
For if they did , most of the discussion and science in that search would be moot : human-only heated blankets would solve the problems and special technology would not be necessary .
I ’ ll translate that for you : If you believe their sophistry , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ license it is alright to say that blankets warm you , but using actual science , it is not correct .
The best a blanket can do is keep you warm , but never make you warmer .
Blanket ( s ) can suppress your perspiration and make you sick from your own urea , thus causing your temperature to go up .
However , this could never be a proper analogy for the greenhouse effect .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Do blankets warm you?
Written by Zoe Phin
Believers of the Greenhouse Effect all use the same analogy to get you to believe in their junk science. The site Skeptical Science sets the standard in this article:
So have climate scientists made an elementary mistake? Of course not! The skeptic is ignoring the fact that the Earth is being warmed by the sun, which makes all the difference.
To see why, consider that blanket that keeps you warm. If your skin feels cold, wrapping yourself in a blanket can make you warmer. Why? Because your body is generating heat, and that heat is escaping from your body into the environment. When you wrap yourself in a blanket, the loss of heat is reduced, some is retained at the surface of your body, and you warm up. You get warmer because the heat that your body is generating cannot escape as fast as before.
— Link
And more:
To summarise: Heat from the sun warms the Earth, as heat from your body keeps you warm. The Earth loses heat to space, and your body loses heat to the environment. Greenhouse gases slow down the rate of heat-loss from the surface of the Earth, like a blanket that slows down the rate at which your body loses heat. The result is the same in both cases, the surface of the Earth, or of your body, gets warmer. — Link
NASA reminds us that:
The greenhouse effect is the way in which heat is trapped close to the surface of the Earth by “greenhouse gases.” These heat-trapping gases can be thought of as a blanket wrapped around the Earth, which keeps it toastier than it would be without them. — Link
You got that? Blankets warm you! Their logic is so sound that they couldn’t possibly be wrong, could they?
What empirical evidence do they provide for such an assertion? None!
Do they even attempt to predict what temperature a blanket could force? No!
Any such attempt would be very embarrassing for them, so instead they just leave it to the reader’s imagination.
First a note: there is no doubt that a blanket can make you warmer by blocking convection. The issue at hand is whether there is a warming due to radiative heat transfer, as is claimed for the greenhouse effect by analogy.
Let’s consider the case of a typical cotton blanket, whose emissivity ranges from 0.81 to 0.88 [Bellivieu 2019], depending on humidity. I will choose 0.85 for an average humidity condition; The exactness hardly matters. According to the verified program provided in my article The Dumbest Math Theory Ever, a blanket with an emissivity of 0.85 placed on a human being whose normal temperature is at 37°C, should produce a final skin temperature of …
$ ALB=0 TSI=2090.8 bash gheffect 0.85 Sec | Upwelling | Temp | GH Effect | Trapped | To Space 1 | 522.700 W | 36.701 C | 444.295 W | 222.148 W | 300.553 W 2 | 744.848 W | 65.389 C | 410.973 W | 94.413 W | 428.287 W 3 | 839.260 W | 75.642 C | 396.811 W | 40.125 W | 482.575 W 4 | 879.386 W | 79.738 C | 390.792 W | 17.053 W | 505.647 W 5 | 896.439 W | 81.436 C | 388.234 W | 7.248 W | 515.452 W 6 | 903.687 W | 82.151 C | 387.147 W | 3.080 W | 519.620 W 7 | 906.767 W | 82.453 C | 386.685 W | 1.309 W | 521.391 W 8 | 908.076 W | 82.582 C | 386.489 W | 0.556 W | 522.144 W 9 | 908.632 W | 82.636 C | 386.405 W | 0.236 W | 522.464 W 10 | 908.869 W | 82.659 C | 386.370 W | 0.100 W | 522.600 W 11 | 908.969 W | 82.669 C | 386.355 W | 0.043 W | 522.657 W 12 | 909.012 W | 82.673 C | 386.348 W | 0.018 W | 522.682 W 13 | 909.030 W | 82.675 C | 386.345 W | 0.008 W | 522.692 W 14 | 909.038 W | 82.676 C | 386.344 W | 0.003 W | 522.697 W 15 | 909.041 W | 82.676 C | 386.344 W | 0.001 W | 522.699 W 16 | 909.042 W | 82.676 C | 386.344 W | 0.001 W | 522.699 W 17 | 909.043 W | 82.676 C | 386.344 W | 0.000 W | 522.700 W
82.6°C ! Really hot!
Note that I set the albedo to zero. This is because I figure any scattering of photons between human and blanket will find its path back to the human (and thus “should” cause warming), with very little leakage at the edges of the blanket. But let us be as generous as possible to climate alarmists and say the blanket has an albedo of 0.22 (The highest value found for cotton in scientific literature: Source 1, Source 2). What then?
$ ALB=0.22 TSI=2090.8 bash gheffect 0.85 Sec | Upwelling | Temp | GH Effect | Trapped | To Space 1 | 407.706 W | 18.040 C | 346.550 W | 173.275 W | 234.431 W 2 | 580.981 W | 44.999 C | 320.559 W | 73.642 W | 334.064 W 3 | 654.623 W | 54.635 C | 309.513 W | 31.298 W | 376.408 W 4 | 685.921 W | 58.484 C | 304.818 W | 13.302 W | 394.404 W 5 | 699.222 W | 60.081 C | 302.823 W | 5.653 W | 402.053 W 6 | 704.875 W | 60.752 C | 301.975 W | 2.403 W | 405.303 W 7 | 707.278 W | 61.036 C | 301.614 W | 1.021 W | 406.685 W 8 | 708.299 W | 61.157 C | 301.461 W | 0.434 W | 407.272 W 9 | 708.733 W | 61.208 C | 301.396 W | 0.184 W | 407.522 W 10 | 708.918 W | 61.230 C | 301.368 W | 0.078 W | 407.628 W 11 | 708.996 W | 61.239 C | 301.357 W | 0.033 W | 407.673 W 12 | 709.029 W | 61.243 C | 301.352 W | 0.014 W | 407.692 W 13 | 709.043 W | 61.245 C | 301.349 W | 0.006 W | 407.700 W 14 | 709.049 W | 61.245 C | 301.349 W | 0.003 W | 407.703 W 15 | 709.052 W | 61.246 C | 301.348 W | 0.001 W | 407.705 W 16 | 709.053 W | 61.246 C | 301.348 W | 0.000 W | 407.706 W 17 | 709.054 W | 61.246 C | 301.348 W | 0.000 W | 407.706 W
61.2°C ! Still very hot.
OK, I’m now going to be extremely generous, and use an emissivity value of 0.5, which is not even scientifically justifiable, but let’s give the alarmists a huge advantage. What then?
$ ALB=0.22 TSI=2090.8 bash gheffect 0.5 Sec | Upwelling | Temp | GH Effect | Trapped | To Space 1 | 407.706 W | 18.040 C | 203.853 W | 101.927 W | 305.780 W 2 | 509.633 W | 34.746 C | 152.890 W | 25.482 W | 382.224 W 3 | 535.114 W | 38.525 C | 140.149 W | 6.370 W | 401.336 W 4 | 541.485 W | 39.448 C | 136.964 W | 1.593 W | 406.113 W 5 | 543.077 W | 39.678 C | 136.167 W | 0.398 W | 407.308 W 6 | 543.475 W | 39.735 C | 135.968 W | 0.100 W | 407.606 W 7 | 543.575 W | 39.750 C | 135.919 W | 0.025 W | 407.681 W 8 | 543.600 W | 39.753 C | 135.906 W | 0.006 W | 407.700 W 9 | 543.606 W | 39.754 C | 135.903 W | 0.002 W | 407.704 W 10 | 543.607 W | 39.754 C | 135.902 W | 0.000 W | 407.706 W 11 | 543.608 W | 39.754 C | 135.902 W | 0.000 W | 407.706 W
Now we get only 39.8°C, for a total warm up of 2.8°C – by a blanket that can only be heated by the human, and starts off colder (or same) as the human.
So is there any evidence to support the heating of human skin by a passively heated blanket via backradiation ?
However, if a cotton blanket heated to 90°C is in contact with skin the patient does not experience the same tissue injuries, because the blanket has less than one third the specific heat of skin. In addition, the blanket has less than 1/1000 the density of skin (the density of a blanket is about 1 kg/m³ because it is roughly half cotton and half air.) The blanket can give up all of its heat to the skin yet raise the temperature no more than 1/80th of the 70°C temperature difference, or about 1°C. — [ House 2011 ]
This scientist rightfully does not acknowledge warming by radiative effect. The blanket must be theoretically warmed to 90°C to achieve a rise of about 1°C. A table of empirical results is also provided in [House 2011]:
Body Part Unheated Blankets Blankets Warmed to 43.3°C Blankets Warmed to 65.6°C Abdomen 0.17°C 1.11°C 2.39°C Lower Legs 0.33°C 0.89°C 1.11°C [ House 2011], Table 2, Converted to Celcius
Though there is obviously a tiny amount of warming due to blocking convection, we don’t see any warming as predicted by GH effect radiative heat transfer theory. We should’ve seen a very generous 2.8°C warming as predicted by such a theory in the column Unheated Blankets. We don’t even see such a high number with blankets externally heated to 65.6°C !
Now we move onto [Kabbara 2002]. In this paper we see how expensive equipment can be used to maintain a patient’s temperature. Figure 6 shows how externally heated air prevents a patient’s temperature from falling. But one may ask: What is the purpose of this expensive equipment when climate “scientists” already know that a non-externally heated blanket should raise skin temperature by at least the very generous 2.8°C?
Would you trust these climate “scientists” with your health? Do you think they really believe what they claim?
And now we move onto: US Patent – US6078026A
The blanket A has a maximum power draw of 6.5 amps. With fully charged batteries, the blanket will reach its target temperature (i.e. 100 degrees Fahrenheit or 38 degrees Celsius) approximately 5 minutes and will remain heated for five to eight hours. — Patent US6078026A
An external power source to raise T to 38°C?
Why need external power or even a patent when a simple blanket ought to do the trick?
Please do not object to this article because I based this off a normal temperature of 37°C. Even a hypothermic temperature of 33°C should be raised by 2.72°C, IF the GH effect blanket analogy held any merit.
A search on google scholar for “hospital blankets temperature” should convince anyone with integrity that blankets don’t raise your skin temperature in accordance to radiative transfer theory. For if they did, most of the discussion and science in that search would be moot: human-only heated blankets would solve the problems and special technology would not be necessary.
Skeptical Science finishes off their article:
So global warming does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. And if someone tells you otherwise, just remember that you’re a warm human being, and certainly nobody’s dummy. — Link
I’ll translate that for you: If you believe their sophistry, you are a dummy!
While using poetic license it is alright to say that blankets warm you, but using actual science, it is not correct. The best a blanket can do is keep you warm, but never make you warmer.
Enjoy 🙂 -Zoe
Addendum
Blanket(s) can suppress your perspiration and make you sick from your own urea, thus causing your temperature to go up. However, this could never be a proper analogy for the greenhouse effect.
Read more at phzoe.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-22--Equating Perpendicular Planes is Plain Nonsense

Many people believe you can compare the Geothermal Heat Flux to Insolation , see that it ’ s pitiful and then exclude Geothermal from the energy budget .
I have touched on this subject several times : here , here , and here .
Today I will again show that this idea is plain nonsense .
Let ’ s start with the basics of radiation : The radiation emerging out of a plane in the ( x , y ) dimension is proportional to the fourth power of its temperature .
The choice of variable names x , y is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Geothermal Heat Flux has been globally measured to be ~ 91.6 mW/m² ; a very small number .
Many people claim that you can convert this figure into a value that tells you what the surface temperature would be in the absence of the sun .
What they do is equate the radiation emerging out of a plane with the internal conductive heat flux .
In the language of my previous articles , they equate Cold Side Radiation to Conductive Heat Flux : CSR = CHF .
Then they solve for T_cold .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though we have proof that geothermal will deliver ~273 K , they still think geothermal can only deliver ~36 K. They believe their argument is reasonable because both CSR and CHF are in units W/m² , and therefore they can be equated to one another .
What they don ’ t understand is that the meters squared ( m² ) are in completely different dimensions .
In radiative flux , the m² comes from the surface plane .
But in conductive flux , the m² comes from multiplying thermal conductivity constant ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
The depth is orthogonal ( perpendicular ) to the surface plane !
How much sense does it make to compare emergent radiation to something based on a 90 degree angle to it ?
None at all .
I derived the proper relationship between CSR and CHF in my previous articles : Yes , their idea doesn ’ t make any sense at all , but it does make for great rhetorical pseudoscience .
Now for some satire … Question : How much rain falls on a flat roof top ?
Answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and height of the building .
This is the best analogy I could come up with what their idea represents .
Maybe someone else could come up with a better one .
Main point : they ’ re 90 degrees wrong .
I hope to repeat this for the last time : the Geothermal Heat Flux is NOT enough information to say what radiation emerges out of the surface .
There are many possibilities with the same heat flux value , as shown here .
CHF divided by k ( thermal conductivity ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measure tells you nothing about what ’ s at the top .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Equating Perpendicular Planes is Plain Nonsense
Written by Zoe Phin
Many people believe you can compare the Geothermal Heat Flux to Insolation, see that it’s pitiful and then exclude Geothermal from the energy budget. I have touched on this subject several times: here, here, and here. Today I will again show that this idea is plain nonsense.
Let’s start with the basics of radiation:
Stefan-Boltzmann’s Law
The radiation emerging out of a plane in the (x,y) dimension is proportional to the fourth power of its temperature. The choice of variable names x,y is arbitrary. Now what about conduction?
Conduction through matter
Geothermal Heat Flux has been globally measured to be ~ 91.6 mW/m²; a very small number. Many people claim that you can convert this figure into a value that tells you what the surface temperature would be in the absence of the sun.
What they do is equate the radiation emerging out of a plane with the internal conductive heat flux. In the language of my previous articles, they equate Cold Side Radiation to Conductive Heat Flux: CSR = CHF. Then they solve for T_cold.
This is kind of funny, because even though we have proof that geothermal will deliver ~273 K, they still think geothermal can only deliver ~36 K.
They believe their argument is reasonable because both CSR and CHF are in units W/m², and therefore they can be equated to one another.
What they don’t understand is that the meters squared (m²) are in completely different dimensions.
In radiative flux, the m² comes from the surface plane. But in conductive flux, the m² comes from multiplying thermal conductivity constant (k) by the depth (L).
The depth is orthogonal (perpendicular) to the surface plane!
How much sense does it make to compare emergent radiation to something based on a 90 degree angle to it? None at all.
I derived the proper relationship between CSR and CHF in my previous articles:
Proper relationship between CSR and CHF
Now I do proper dimensional analysis:
Dimensional Analysis
Yes, their idea doesn’t make any sense at all, but it does make for great rhetorical pseudoscience.
Now for some satire …
Question: How much rain falls on a flat roof top?
Answer: It depends on the building material and height of the building.
Normal Person: Say what?
This is the best analogy I could come up with what their idea represents. Maybe someone else could come up with a better one. Main point: they’re 90 degrees wrong.
I hope to repeat this for the last time: the Geothermal Heat Flux is NOT enough information to say what radiation emerges out of the surface. There are many possibilities with the same heat flux value, as shown here. CHF divided by k (thermal conductivity) yields a temperature gradient. A gradient measure tells you nothing about what’s at the top.
Read more at phzoe.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related