principiascientificinternational--2020-11-09--Remember, remember, the 14th of November (if you’re an astronaut)

Remember , remember , the 14th of November ( if you ’ re an astronaut ) In brief NASA has stuck a pin in 14 November ( 15 Nov for those running on GMT ) for the launch of the first crew rotation mission to the International Space Station ( ISS ) to be launched from US soil .
The four-person crew is also the largest to be loaded into a spacecraft since the Space Shuttle was retired .
The mission had been pushed back due to an investigation following the aborted launch of Falcon 9 carrying a GPS satellite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , managers explained that material blocking a valve in the engine ’ s gas generator was the culprit , which triggered the last-second abort .
The material itself , a lacquer similar to nail polish , should have been removed , but a tiny amount remained : enough to abort the launch .
SpaceX will have an opportunity to launch a couple of Falcon 9s before loading NASA astronauts Michael Hopkins , Victor Glover , and Shannon Walker , along with Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency ( JAXA ) mission specialist Soichi Noguchi into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another crack at launching that GPS satellite on 4 November , followed by Sentinel 6 ( Michael Freilich ) on 10 November from California ’ s Vandenburg Air Force Base .
ESA director general Jan Wörner and NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine have signed off on a deal that will see ESA contributing modules and other components to the Gateway space station , destined for lunar orbit .
The agreement will allow for three spots to be opened up for European astronauts to travel to and work on the Gateway itself in return for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two of the ATV-derived service modules that will keep Orion astronauts alive on their journey to and from the outpost .
More service modules will be needed to meet the lunar ambitions of the agencies involved in the Gateway , meaning there is every chance more European astronauts might get their turn for a spin around the Moon .
The Memorandum of Understanding had to be signed remotely due to the pandemic and marks ESA ’ s years of involvement in NASA ’ s Artemis programme .
Highlighting the impending 20th anniversary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example of international cooperation , Wörner said : “ Sustainable space exploration requires coordinated , international efforts and Europe has proven itself a strong and reliable partner.
” Rocket Lab has successfully launched its 15th Electron mission , bringing ever closer the moment space fans can expect to see parachutes pop out of a descending rocket .
The mission , dubbed “ In Focus ” , was launched from the company ’ s complex at Māhia Peninsula in New Zealand , and left the Earth at 21:21 UTC on 28 October .
Ten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ orbit , including Canon Electronic ’ s CE-SAT-IIB microsatellite .
CE-SAT-IIB had already been scheduled when its predecessor was lost in July ’ s mishap .
A return to flight in September saw the company unveil the “ First Light ” Photon technology demonstrator ( effectively an enhanced version of the company ’ s Kick Stage ) after the commercial portion of the mission was complete .
The 16th Electron launch is scheduled to take place from Launch Complex 1 in the coming weeks .
There and back again with SpaceX SpaceX gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Starlink service was going to cost ( at least initially ) last week , days after it sent another batch of 60 of the sky-trashing satellites into orbit .
The Falcon 9 first stage had previously seen action launching a GPS satellite in June , as well as a September Starlink mission , and took off from Space Launch Complex 40 at Florida ’ s Cape Canaveral Air Force base .
The 100th successful launch of a Falcon 9 took place at 15:31 UTC on 24 October .
The mission had been delayed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to allow additional time for mission assurance work , ” according to SpaceX .
The company ’ s boss , Elon Musk , elaborated that it was “ just a small-seeming issue with loss of upper stage camera.
” Better safe than sorry and , in a manner that should never be regarded as “ routine ” , the booster guided itself to a successful landing on the “ Just Read the Instructions ” drone ship following launch .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Remember, remember, the 14th of November (if you’re an astronaut)
Written by Richard Speed
In brief NASA has stuck a pin in 14 November (15 Nov for those running on GMT) for the launch of the first crew rotation mission to the International Space Station (ISS) to be launched from US soil.
The four-person crew is also the largest to be loaded into a spacecraft since the Space Shuttle was retired.
The mission had been pushed back due to an investigation following the aborted launch of Falcon 9 carrying a GPS satellite earlier this month. In the briefing, managers explained that material blocking a valve in the engine’s gas generator was the culprit, which triggered the last-second abort. The material itself, a lacquer similar to nail polish, should have been removed, but a tiny amount remained: enough to abort the launch.
SpaceX will have an opportunity to launch a couple of Falcon 9s before loading NASA astronauts Michael Hopkins, Victor Glover, and Shannon Walker, along with Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) mission specialist Soichi Noguchi into the Crew Dragon. It will have another crack at launching that GPS satellite on 4 November, followed by Sentinel 6 (Michael Freilich) on 10 November from California’s Vandenburg Air Force Base.
ESA takes aim at the Moon
ESA director general Jan Wörner and NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine have signed off on a deal that will see ESA contributing modules and other components to the Gateway space station, destined for lunar orbit.
The agreement will allow for three spots to be opened up for European astronauts to travel to and work on the Gateway itself in return for the hardware, which includes at least two of the ATV-derived service modules that will keep Orion astronauts alive on their journey to and from the outpost.
More service modules will be needed to meet the lunar ambitions of the agencies involved in the Gateway, meaning there is every chance more European astronauts might get their turn for a spin around the Moon.
The Memorandum of Understanding had to be signed remotely due to the pandemic and marks ESA’s years of involvement in NASA’s Artemis programme. Highlighting the impending 20th anniversary of human occupation of that other great space-based example of international cooperation, Wörner said: “Sustainable space exploration requires coordinated, international efforts and Europe has proven itself a strong and reliable partner.”
Rocket Lab notches up its 15th successful launch
Rocket Lab has successfully launched its 15th Electron mission, bringing ever closer the moment space fans can expect to see parachutes pop out of a descending rocket.
The mission, dubbed “In Focus”, was launched from the company’s complex at Māhia Peninsula in New Zealand, and left the Earth at 21:21 UTC on 28 October. Ten commercial satellites were deployed into 500km circular orbit, including Canon Electronic’s CE-SAT-IIB microsatellite.
CE-SAT-IIB had already been scheduled when its predecessor was lost in July’s mishap. A return to flight in September saw the company unveil the “First Light” Photon technology demonstrator (effectively an enhanced version of the company’s Kick Stage) after the commercial portion of the mission was complete.
The 16th Electron launch is scheduled to take place from Launch Complex 1 in the coming weeks.
There and back again with SpaceX
SpaceX gave the world an idea of what the Starlink service was going to cost (at least initially) last week, days after it sent another batch of 60 of the sky-trashing satellites into orbit.
The Falcon 9 first stage had previously seen action launching a GPS satellite in June, as well as a September Starlink mission, and took off from Space Launch Complex 40 at Florida’s Cape Canaveral Air Force base. The 100th successful launch of a Falcon 9 took place at 15:31 UTC on 24 October.
The mission had been delayed following an abort during the countdown “to allow additional time for mission assurance work,” according to SpaceX. The company’s boss, Elon Musk, elaborated that it was “just a small-seeming issue with loss of upper stage camera.”
Better safe than sorry and, in a manner that should never be regarded as “routine”, the booster guided itself to a successful landing on the “Just Read the Instructions” drone ship following launch.
Read more at www.theregister.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--2020-11-09--Norway’s Faktisk ‘Fact Check’ Site Exposed in Scandalous COVID Lie

As Norway ’ s population wakes up to the biggest scam in medical history , big corporate ‘ fact check ’ operators crash and burn in ham-fisted attempt to discredit claims by leading medical experts that there is NO EVIDENCE of any ‘ gold standard ’ for the COVID19 virus .
www.faktisk.no in cahoots with their partners at Facebook and Dagbladet ( one of Norway ’ s largest newspapers with 1,400,000 daily readers ) came out last week to attempt to discredit Principia Scientific International ( PSI ) .
A PSI post shared among thousands of Facebooking Norwegians showed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ existence of any new and unique ‘ deadly ’ pathogen behind the pandemic .
But censors at FB banned the PSI post because their appointed Scandinavian gatekeepers to truth , Faktisk , couldn ’ t allow this truth to be shared .
Curiously , Faktisk styles itself as a non-profit that seeks to : But they foolishly brought a metaphorical knife to a gun fight when lining up a rebuttal to Principia Scientific ’ s claims…..
In reply to our honest and reliable quote from the CDC that it had admitted that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus that causes COVID19 our Norwegian gatekeepers to truth gave this ill-mannered rebuke to Dr Saaed Qureshi , the author of the PSI article : “ This is so stupid that I do not know where to start , and a good example of how wrong it can go when people who lack completely fundamental professional insight start reading texts that require just this , Vegard Eldholm writes in an email to Faktisk.no .
He has a doctorate in molecular microbiology and works as a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pure technicality .
An important point with the wording is that it does not say that “ no virus exists ” , but that no “ quantified virus isolate is available ” , Eldholm points out .
Fredrik Müller is professor and head of the department of microbiology at the Department of Laboratory Medicine at Oslo University Hospital .
He explains what the lack of quantified virus isolate entails : – This means that they did not have SARS-CoV-2 virus with a known number of virus copies per milliliter of solution ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus is distributed .
It can be a comprehensive task to make such a virus preparation where the exact number of copies is known , Müller writes in an e-mail to Faktisk.no .
– This in no way means that the virus is not isolated , the professor emphasizes.
” Firstly , the claim that Dr Saeed Qureshi “ lack completely fundamental professional insight ” is a defamatory and scandalous lie .
In fact , Dr Qureshi is an internationally recognised expert in the areas of pharmacokinetics , biopharmaceutics , drug dissolution testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his field in expressing an opinion on the validity or otherwise on the claims about whether ANY laboratory in the world has successfully proven a ‘ gold standard ’ for the SARS-COV-2 virus , the alleged cause of the pandemic .
But for the fact that Norway prides itself for not having libel laws and operates a completely free press we would be seeking a legal claim against Faktisk.no for damages .
After some more pseudoscience waffle the ‘ fact checker ’ then seeks to assure Norwegians that a valid ‘ gold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exist – only that you can ’ t see it !
It is , in fact , much like the veritable climate unicorn aka man-made global warming .
It ‘ does ’ exist , but only on government science computer models .
Nowhere in the real world will you find hard , definitive empirical evidence as per the traditional scientific method ( as per Koch ’ s postulates – the accepted international standard ) .
Acting as apologists for the CDC as to why they can ’ t openly show the public independently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ novel pathogen Faktisk.no proceed to lie further and declare : Did you get that ?
It is “ very laborious ” for the CDC to make the extra effort to provide a ‘ gold standard ’ for COVID19 !
So , they didn ’ t do it .
Faktisk ( and their globalists masters ) want you to believe that the most costly pandemic , resulting in the shut down of 80 percent of the global economy , is not worth the time and expense to thoroughly and scientifically very it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading the fight to find a vaccine to defeat this virus ?
But this story gets even more farcical as these loons then tell Norwegians : Well , even non-scientists can see this pandemic has become farce not science ; real science demands full disclosure and clarity .
Our position , at Principia Scientific International is made very clear , as follows : • These ‘ scientists ’ are testing for an RNA sequence , not the virus • There is NO gold standard • COVID19 has NEVER been purified and visualized • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human cell • The PCR tests in common use were never tested against a gold standard • PCR testing CAN NOT detect virus ( only RNA ) it is useless for diagnosis What crooked ‘ fact checkers ’ are doing is trying to blind a scientifically illiterate public with handwaving appeals to authority and not a shred of robust , hard scientific fact .
Principia Scientific International ’ s 6,500+ members stand with what 30,000 medical experts attest to in the Great Barrington Declaration .
Like them , we back peer-reviewed evidence such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 2020 ) who tell us that : We urge readers to follow the timeline of events in the pandemic as it unfolded .
The point of this timeline is to demonstrate that no laboratory has so far successfully isolated this new virus , purified and visualised it .
We simply have no idea what it looks like despite all those CG1 images abounding online .
So , from the beginning , in December 2019 the first reported cases for the novel coronavirus were reported at Wuhan , China .
Chinese medical teams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cluster of patients with pneumonia of unknown cause were determined to be linked to a seafood market in Wuhan , China .
On December 31 , the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention ( China CDC ) , dispatched a “ rapid response ” team to conduct an investigation .
They stated : Dr Andy Kaufman , who analysed the methods used by the Chinese , has been very critical .
He explained his findings in a March 2020 video interview : Dr Kaufman explains that the Chinese , in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not isolate and purify the virus .
As such , they could not claim to have a verifiable ‘ gold standard.
’ But it gets , worse .
Dr Kaufman goes as far as to state that the ‘ crown-like particles ’ that the Chinese scientists determined to be those of ‘ novel ’ Covid-19 were virtually identical to electron microscope examples of exosomes- particles which are naturally occurring in the body .
As such , standard scientific methodology demands the Chinese samples must be dismissed as verifiable proof of a novel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more scientific detail at COVID-19 : Pandemic : Profit : Fallout M Harrison .
[ 4 ] Interestingly , Zhou and Yang et al .
( 2020 ) even admit that they did not use animal experiments or follow Koch ’ s postulates .
The whole charade gets even more insane when , in December 2019 : Professor Christian Drosten is a Member of the German International Advisory Board on Global Health and has ties to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation .
What will shock readers is that Drosten ’ s team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the genomic sequence and without a virus isolate .
So , Drosten assumed much and went for an approximation rather than the actual pathogen itself .
The whole thing was such a botch job that even the World Health Organisation ( WHO ) admitted : Curiously , the WHO admission was quietly removed from their website on April 14 , 2020 but a permanent copy remains at webarchive.org .
[ 6 ] Critical of this chicanery is Dr Wolfgang Wodarg , a German physician and Health Policy Adviser .
He is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Council of Europe ( PACE ) and a Board Member of Transparency International .
Dr Wodarg was scathing in his criticisms during an interview with Oval Media .
[ 7 ] In January 2020 events in this story moved to Australia .
The Doherty Institute made the claim to be the first in the world to isolate the Covid-19 virus outside of China .
Make sure you remember that SARS-CoV has never been confirmed as a close relative of the novel virus claimed to have been identified in the current pandemic so using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” confirms that this is NOT an exact science , it is mostly guesswork .
The Doherty Institute were relied on by their government to develop the national positive test control , reportedly from a sample of ( a ) one patient and ( b ) reliance on SARSCoV as a positive control !
This falls short of any reasonable determination of a controlled , “ peer reviewed ” or impartial assessment of test accuracy So , the Aussies are no less slipshod than the Germans and Chinese .
[ 8 ] So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Australian Department of Health ’ s website infers that Covid-19 tests can not tell if a person is actually ill or not : “ …it should be noted that PCR tests can not distinguish between “ live ” virus and non- infective RNA.
” ( Emphasis added ) [ 9 ] The hypocrisy of WHO on this matter is utterly appalling because their own Organisation ’ s paper ‘ WHO recommendations on the use of rapid testing for influenza diagnosis ’ , states : So , even WHO ’ s own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has no clothes .
Watch this space – we will be following up the above article with a further robust analysis from Dr Saeed Qureshi .
[ 1 ] Regaining perspective on SARS-CoV-2 molecular tracing and its implications , Carla Mavian , Simone Marini , Costanza Manes , Ilaria Capua , Mattia Prosperi , Marco Salemidoi : https : //doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.16.20034470 Please DONATE below any amount to help fund our fight against the peddlers of the fake pandemic About the author : John O ’ Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder ( with Dr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( PSI ) .
John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert , Michael ‘ hockey stick ’ Mann in the ‘ science trial of the century ‘ .
O ’ Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘ Slayers ’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world ’ s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Norway’s Faktisk ‘Fact Check’ Site Exposed in Scandalous COVID Lie
Written by John O'Sullivan
As Norway’s population wakes up to the biggest scam in medical history, big corporate ‘fact check’ operators crash and burn in ham-fisted attempt to discredit claims by leading medical experts that there is NO EVIDENCE of any ‘gold standard’ for the COVID19 virus.
www.faktisk.no in cahoots with their partners at Facebook and Dagbladet (one of Norway’s largest newspapers with 1,400,000 daily readers) came out last week to attempt to discredit Principia Scientific International(PSI).
A PSI post shared among thousands of Facebooking Norwegians showed that no laboratory anywhere has yet proven the existence of any new and unique ‘deadly’ pathogen behind the pandemic.
But censors at FB banned the PSI post because their appointed Scandinavian gatekeepers to truth, Faktisk, couldn’t allow this truth to be shared. Curiously, Faktisk styles itself as a non-profit that seeks to:
“contribute to an open, inclusive and fact-based public conversation. By reviewing the basis for current statements that affect our perception of reality, we work for a fact-based exchange of words and a constructive public debate.”
But they foolishly brought a metaphorical knife to a gun fight when lining up a rebuttal to Principia Scientific’s claims…..
In reply to our honest and reliable quote from the CDC that it had admitted that is has NOT isolated, reproduced and verified the virus that causes COVID19 our Norwegian gatekeepers to truth gave this ill-mannered rebuke to Dr Saaed Qureshi, the author of the PSI article:
“This is so stupid that I do not know where to start, and a good example of how wrong it can go when people who lack completely fundamental professional insight start reading texts that require just this, Vegard Eldholm writes in an email to Faktisk.no. He has a doctorate in molecular microbiology and works as a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. – This is about a pure technicality. An important point with the wording is that it does not say that “no virus exists”, but that no “quantified virus isolate is available”, Eldholm points out. Fredrik Müller is professor and head of the department of microbiology at the Department of Laboratory Medicine at Oslo University Hospital. He explains what the lack of quantified virus isolate entails: – This means that they did not have SARS-CoV-2 virus with a known number of virus copies per milliliter of solution (“diluent”) in which the virus is distributed. It can be a comprehensive task to make such a virus preparation where the exact number of copies is known , Müller writes in an e-mail to Faktisk.no. – This in no way means that the virus is not isolated, the professor emphasizes.”
Firstly, the claim that Dr Saeed Qureshi “lack completely fundamental professional insight” is a defamatory and scandalous lie.
In fact, Dr Qureshi is an internationally recognised expert in the areas of pharmacokinetics, biopharmaceutics, drug dissolution testing, analytical chemistry and at the top of his field in expressing an opinion on the validity or otherwise on the claims about whether ANY laboratory in the world has successfully proven a ‘gold standard’ for the SARS-COV-2 virus, the alleged cause of the pandemic.
But for the fact that Norway prides itself for not having libel laws and operates a completely free press we would be seeking a legal claim against Faktisk.no for damages.
After some more pseudoscience waffle the ‘fact checker’ then seeks to assure Norwegians that a valid ‘gold standard’ for the novel coronavirus does exist – only that you can’t see it!
It is, in fact, much like the veritable climate unicorn aka man-made global warming. It ‘does’ exist, but only on government science computer models. Nowhere in the real world will you find hard, definitive empirical evidence as per the traditional scientific method (as per Koch’s postulates – the accepted international standard).
Acting as apologists for the CDC as to why they can’t openly show the public independently verifiable proof of the existence of this novel pathogen Faktisk.no proceed to lie further and declare:
“Vegard Eldholm explains that it is very laborious to estimate the exact number of virus particles in a patient sample using methods other than those described in the CDC document.”
Did you get that? It is “very laborious” for the CDC to make the extra effort to provide a ‘gold standard’ for COVID19!
So, they didn’t do it.
Faktisk (and their globalists masters) want you to believe that the most costly pandemic, resulting in the shut down of 80 percent of the global economy, is not worth the time and expense to thoroughly and scientifically very it’s existence!
And these are the people leading the fight to find a vaccine to defeat this virus?
But this story gets even more farcical as these loons then tell Norwegians:
“According to Professor Fredrik Müller, there is absolutely no doubt that SARS-CoV-2 exists: – The virus from many people in many countries in the world has been examined in laboratories, and it has been imaged in human cells by electron microscopy. The virus has also been shown to be present by detecting “bits” of it, such as viral proteins and viral genetic material (RNA), he writes to Faktisk.no.”
“Bits of it”??
Well, even non-scientists can see this pandemic has become farce not science; real science demands full disclosure and clarity.
Our position, at Principia Scientific International is made very clear, as follows:
These ‘scientists’ are testing for an RNA sequence, not the virus
There is NO gold standard
COVID19 has NEVER been purified and visualized
Only visualized from ONE patient inside a human cell
The PCR tests in common use were never tested against a gold standard
PCR testing CANNOT detect virus (only RNA) it is useless for diagnosis
What crooked ‘fact checkers’ are doing is trying to blind a scientifically illiterate public with handwaving appeals to authority and not a shred of robust, hard scientific fact.
Principia Scientific International’s 6,500+ members stand with what 30,000 medical experts attest to in the Great Barrington Declaration.
Like them, we back peer-reviewed evidence such as that below from Mavian et al (2020) who tell us that:
“a plethora of analyses based on viral sequences has already been published, in scientific journals as well as through non-peer reviewed channels, to investigate SARS-CoV-2 genetic heterogeneity and spatiotemporal dissemination.” [Genetic mutations and distance/time spread] “We examined all full genome sequences currently available to assess the presence of sufficient information for reliable phylogenetic and phylogeographic studies. Our analysis clearly shows severe limitations in the present data, in light of which any finding should be considered, at the very best, preliminary and hypothesisgenerating.” [1]
TIMELINE OF COVID19 FRAUD
We urge readers to follow the timeline of events in the pandemic as it unfolded. The point of this timeline is to demonstrate that no laboratory has so far successfully isolated this new virus, purified and visualised it. We simply have no idea what it looks like despite all those CG1 images abounding online.
So, from the beginning, in December 2019 the first reported cases for the novel coronavirus were reported at Wuhan, China. Chinese medical teams then worked to identify the pathogen; a cluster of patients with pneumonia of unknown cause were determined to be linked to a seafood market in Wuhan, China.
On December 31, the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC), dispatched a “rapid response” team to conduct an investigation. They stated:
“Evidence for the presence of this virus includes identification in bronchoalveolar-lavage (BALF) fluid in three patients by whole-genome sequencing, direct PCR, and culture… The illness likely to have been caused by this CoV was named “novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia” (NCIP).” [2]
Dr Andy Kaufman, who analysed the methods used by the Chinese, has been very critical. He explained his findings in a March 2020 video interview:
“When they took this lung fluid out, they did not first try to find a virus in there and separate it out and purify it. But the first thing they did was find and separate some kind of genetic material. Quite an interesting strategy. And what they found was some RNA. But I’ll tell you that in our bodies at any given time, there is some free genetic material circulating around our blood and body fluids…. There are quite a number of different sources of different genetic material.” (Emphasis added) [3]
Dr Kaufman explains that the Chinese, in their explanation of their methodology, admit they did not isolate and purify the virus. As such, they could not claim to have a verifiable ‘gold standard.’
But it gets, worse. Dr Kaufman goes as far as to state that the ‘crown-like particles’ that the Chinese scientists determined to be those of ‘novel’ Covid-19 were virtually identical to electron microscope examples of exosomes- particles which are naturally occurring in the body. As such, standard scientific methodology demands the Chinese samples must be dismissed as verifiable proof of a novel coronavirus.
The above is explained in more scientific detail at COVID-19: Pandemic: Profit: Fallout M Harrison. [4]
Interestingly, Zhou and Yang et al. (2020) even admit that they did not use animal experiments or follow Koch’s postulates.
The whole charade gets even more insane when, in December 2019:
“Professor Christian Drosten created the first diagnostic PCR test for detection of Covid-19 using nose, sputum or throat swabs. Drosten et al’s paper states the PCR test was designed “before release of the first [genetic] sequence of the Wuhan virus.”[5]
Professor Christian Drosten is a Member of the German International Advisory Board on Global Health and has ties to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
What will shock readers is that Drosten’s team designed their PCR test BEFORE the publication of the genomic sequence and without a virus isolate.
As the journal Nature reported:
“Because they did not have access to samples of the virus, Drosten’s team worked from their knowledge of SARS-CoV-2’s close relative, the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV).”
So, Drosten assumed much and went for an approximation rather than the actual pathogen itself.
The whole thing was such a botch job that even the World Health Organisation (WHO) admitted:
“Several assays that detect the 2019-nCoV have been and are currently under development, both in-house and commercially. Some assays may detect only the novel virus and some may also detect other strains (e.g. SARS-CoV) that are genetically similar”. (Emphasis added)
Curiously, the WHO admission was quietly removed from their website on April 14, 2020 but a permanent copy remains at webarchive.org. [6]
Critical of this chicanery is Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, a German physician and Health Policy Adviser. He is an Honorary Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) and a Board Member of Transparency International. Dr Wodarg was scathing in his criticisms during an interview with Oval Media. [7]
In January 2020 events in this story moved to Australia. The Doherty Institute made the claim to be the first in the world to isolate the Covid-19 virus outside of China.
As concernedlawyersnetwork.net ([page 32) tells us:
“On the 23rd of January 2020, the Australian government’s Department of Health published national guidelines for diagnosis and management of the ‘Novel Coronavirus 2019’. This document states that Covid-19 virus was not yet internationally available as a test positive control. ‘Synthetic positive control material’ (genome sequencing) was becoming available through WHO’s viral archive. The guidelines stated that SARS-CoV could be used as an ‘interim positive control’ for testing.” [emphasis added]
Make sure you remember that SARS-CoV has never been confirmed as a close relative of the novel virus claimed to have been identified in the current pandemic so using it as an “interim positive control” confirms that this is NOT an exact science, it is mostly guesswork.
The Doherty Institute were relied on by their government to develop the national positive test control, reportedly from a sample of (a) one patient and (b) reliance on SARSCoV as a positive control!
This falls short of any reasonable determination of a controlled, “peer reviewed” or impartial assessment of test accuracy So, the Aussies are no less slipshod than the Germans and Chinese. [8]
So woolly is the science in this area that the Australian Department of Health’s website infers that Covid-19 tests cannot tell if a person is actually ill or not: “…it should be noted that PCR tests cannot distinguish between “live” virus and non- infective RNA.” (Emphasis added) [9]
The hypocrisy of WHO on this matter is utterly appalling because their own Organisation’s paper ‘WHO recommendations on the use of rapid testing for influenza diagnosis’, states:
“The accuracy of an influenza diagnostic test is determined by the sensitivity and specificity of the test to detect an influenza virus infection compared with a “gold” standard …” [10]
So, even WHO’s own words prove this pandemic ’emperor’ has no clothes. Watch this space – we will be following up the above article with a further robust analysis from Dr Saeed Qureshi.
References:
[1] Regaining perspective on SARS-CoV-2 molecular tracing and its implications, Carla Mavian, Simone Marini, Costanza Manes, Ilaria Capua, Mattia Prosperi, Marco Salemidoi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.16.20034470
[2] Zhu et al. (2020) https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
[3] https://www.bitchute.com/video/YKqu3TLnANNX/ (view from 5:00)
[4] https://concernedlawyersnetwork.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Harrison-research-report-on-covid19-original.pdf (at page 25)
[5] https://concernedlawyersnetwork.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Harrison-research-report-on-covid19-original.pdf (at page 27)
[6]https://web.archive.org/web/20200328000948/https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance/laboratory-guidance
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_AyuhbnPOI
[8] https://www.mja.com.au/sites/default/files/issues/212_10/mja250569-sup-0001-Supinfo.pdf
[9] https://concernedlawyersnetwork.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Harrison-research-report-on-covid19-original.pdf (page 36)
[10]https://www.who.int/influenza/resources/documents/RapidTestInfluenza_WebVersion.pdf
Please DONATE below any amount to help fund our fight against the peddlers of the fake pandemic
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
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--2020-11-09--Election Controversy: New USPS Patented Blockchain Encryption MAY Solve Puzzle

Worried about voter fraud in the US Presidential Election ?
Were ballots secretly encrypted with secure blockchain technology in a sting operation ?
Well , it turns out that the United States Postal Services ALREADY patented this very technology earlier this year , which may bolster a claim made by a Trump campaign insider .
Donald Trump ’ s bid to win re-election may yet happen despite alleged voter fraud , according to Steve Pieczenik , MD , PhD , a former US government insider and adviser to Henry Kissinger .
He ( and now an insider from the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been a ‘ sting operation ’ at work all along using encrypted ballot paper to smoke out corrupt Democrats .
Earlier last week Pieczenik claimed : “ This is really a sting operation , contrary to what everybody else said .
Trump knew this was happening .
Eric knew this was happening and warned the public .
I knew this was happening however I could not say anything about it .
What happened was , we watermarked every ballot with what ’ s called QFS ( Quantum Financial System ) -Blockchain Encryption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know pretty well where every ballot is , where it went , and who has it .
So this is not a stolen election.
” Pieczenik was widely ignored by everyone outside of alternative media circles .
But last Friday his tantalizing suppositions were repeated by Tony Shaffer , a credible source from within Trump ’ s re-election Advisory Board .
Shaffer is a retired Intelligence Operative and current President of the London Center for Policy Research .
Next Shaffer made some comments and asked another question : A third tweet from Shaffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mark documents without the markings clearly identifiable : A little digging in the archives and lo and behold Shaffer ’ s claims are borne out by a little-reported event earlier this year .
“ The United States Postal Service ( USPS ) has filed a patent for a mail-in voting system that utilizes blockchain technology .
The patent , which was filed in February and published on Thursday , follows President Donald Trump ’ s conclusion that mail-in voting would turn into “ ballots all over the place ” and fraudulent ballots possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
“ A voting system can use the security of blockchain and the mail to provide a reliable voting system….The system separates voter identification and votes to ensure vote anonymity , and stores votes on a distributed ledger in a blockchain.
” Principia Scientific International has obtained a copy of the patent ( selected screenshots below ) : The 47-page public patent application features 31 pages of diagrams showing the different components of the proposed voting system , including each stage of the electronic process .
Further confirmation of the above USPS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2020 ) which tells us : Forbes then go on to speculate : Really ?
Whether or not the USPS patented technology was secretly used to detect fraud in the current election remains to be seen .
A careful reading of the document suggests it has the capability to detect the precise movements of each ballot and can help locate any and all smart phones that came within their proximity ( thus showing a chain of handlers ) .
As of yet no official declaration has been made either way .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this astonishing new USPS patent – which may have just changed the course of history – can be accessed at appft.uspto.gov About the author : John O ’ Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder ( with Dr Tim Ball ) of Principia Scientific International ( PSI ) .
John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert , Michael ‘ hockey stick ’ Mann in the ‘ science trial of the century ‘ .
O ’ Sullivan is credited as the visionary who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world ’ s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book .
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 .

Election Controversy: New USPS Patented Blockchain Encryption MAY Solve Puzzle
Written by John O'Sullivan
Worried about voter fraud in the US Presidential Election? Were ballots secretly encrypted with secure blockchain technology in a sting operation? Well, it turns out that the United States Postal Services ALREADY patented this very technology earlier this year, which may bolster a claim made by a Trump campaign insider.
Donald Trump’s bid to win re-election may yet happen despite alleged voter fraud, according to Steve Pieczenik, MD, PhD, a former US government insider and adviser to Henry Kissinger. He (and now an insider from the Trump campaign itself) have suggested that there had been a ‘sting operation’ at work all along using encrypted ballot paper to smoke out corrupt Democrats. Earlier last week Pieczenik claimed:
“This is really a sting operation, contrary to what everybody else said. Trump knew this was happening. Eric knew this was happening and warned the public. I knew this was happening however I could not say anything about it. What happened was, we watermarked every ballot with what’s called QFS (Quantum Financial System) -Blockchain Encryption Code. In other words, we know pretty well where every ballot is, where it went, and who has it. So this is not a stolen election.”
Pieczenik was widely ignored by everyone outside of alternative media circles. But last Friday his tantalizing suppositions were repeated by Tony Shaffer, a credible source from within Trump’s re-election Advisory Board. Shaffer is a retired Intelligence Operative and current President of the London Center for Policy Research.
On Twitter Shaffer posted:
“A hypothetical question for all the Democrat trolls following my feed…
What if DHS anticipated DNC counting fraud.
What if they “tagged” each legitimate ballot.
What would happen if DHS does an audit of all counted ballots and find ballots without the tag – what happens then?”
Next Shaffer made some comments and asked another question:
“It’s done in known contracted sights…you do understand law enforcement asks for cooperation all the time from companies, right?”
A third tweet from Shaffer indicated that there are numerous ways to mark documents without the markings clearly identifiable:
“Oh, there is more than that now…People don’t understand how light works…and what they don’t see can be seen in infrared and ultraviolet…we had a whole block of instruction at “the Farm” on secret writing…it is amazing…”
A little digging in the archives and lo and behold Shaffer’s claims are borne out by a little-reported event earlier this year.
On August 15, 2020 dailyhodl.com reported that:
“The United States Postal Service (USPS) has filed a patent for a mail-in voting system that utilizes blockchain technology. The patent, which was filed in February and published on Thursday, follows President Donald Trump’s conclusion that mail-in voting would turn into “ballots all over the place” and fraudulent ballots possibly named “after dogs and dead people”. The postal service’s patent application abstract states, “A voting system can use the security of blockchain and the mail to provide a reliable voting system….The system separates voter identification and votes to ensure vote anonymity, and stores votes on a distributed ledger in a blockchain.”
Principia Scientific International has obtained a copy of the patent (selected screenshots below):
The 47-page public patent application features 31 pages of diagrams showing the different components of the proposed voting system, including each stage of the electronic process.
Further confirmation of the above USPS patent comes from Forbes.com (September 20, 2020) which tells us:
“A registered voter receives a QR code by mail…. The votes are stored on a blockchain attested by election officials…..That this patent has been filed by the USPS must surprise a lot of US citizens…. The USPS is not known for innovation, as it is not evident at the local level. “
Forbes then go on to speculate:
“Obviously, this patent is too late to be developed and deployed for this election.”
Really? Whether or not the USPS patented technology was secretly used to detect fraud in the current election remains to be seen. A careful reading of the document suggests it has the capability to detect the precise movements of each ballot and can help locate any and all smart phones that came within their proximity (thus showing a chain of handlers).
As of yet no official declaration has been made either way. But watch this space!
Full details of this astonishing new USPS patent – which may have just changed the course of history – can be accessed at appft.uspto.gov
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
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--2020-11-08--COVID19: ‘They’ Don’t Care About Us

COVID19: ‘They’ Don’t Care About Us

While issues like climate change and economic growth may be difficult to fully grasp and unravel , direct threats to our lives & /or livelihoods are much more concrete and something we can react to and resist .
Such immediate and direct threats are now fully in play and , once again , they ’ re accompanied by narratives that are completely at odds with each other .
I ’ m speaking of Covid and the ways in which our national and global managers are choosing to respond ( or not ) .
It ’ s a truly incoherent mess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasingly irrelevant media are working quite hard to misinform us .
The mainstream narrative about Covid-19 , in the West , is this : • It ’ s a quite deadly and novel disease • There are no effective treatments • Sadly , no double-blind placebo controlled trials exist to support some of the wild claims out there about various off-patent , cheap and widely available supplements and drugs • They care so much , in fact , that along with politicians they ’ ve decided to entirely shut down economies • There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the US and Europe and there ’ s nothing we can do to limit it except shut down businesses and people ’ s ability to travel and gather • You need to fear this virus and its associated disease • All we can do is wait for a vaccine The alternative narrative , one that I ’ ve uncovered after 9 months of almost daily research and reporting , is this : • It ’ s not an especially dangerous disease and it ’ s certainly not novel • There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and widely-available preventatives and treatments including ( but not limited to ) • Use of a combination of these mostly OTC supplements could reasonably be expected to drop the severity of illness and the already low mortality rate by 90 % or ( probably ) more • Western health authorities have shown either zero interest in the results of studies mainly conducted in poorer nations on these combination therapies or… • They have actively run studies designed to fail so that these cheap , effective therapies could be dismissed or… • Set up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have immensely long study periods and most likely won ’ t be done before a vaccine is hastily rushed through development .
By the way – every single one of my assertions and claims is backed by links and supporting documentation from scientific and clinical trials and studies .
I am not conjecturing here ; I am recounting the summary of ten months ’ worth of inquiry .
The conclusion I draw from my narrative ( vs. theirs ) is that we can no longer assume that the public health or saving lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understanding the actions of these health “ managers ” ( I can not bring myself to use the word authorities ) .
After we eliminate the impossible – which is that somehow these massive , well-funded bodies have missed month after month of accumulating evidence in support of ivermectin , hydroxychloroquine , vitamin D , NAC , zinc , selenium and doxycycline/azithromycin – what remains must be the truth .
As improbable as it seems , the only conclusion we ’ re left with is that the machinery of politics , money and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because these managers have other priorities besides public health and saving lives .
This is a terribly difficult conclusion , because it means suspending so much that we hold dear .
Things like the notion that people are basically good .
The idea that the government generally means well .
The thought that somehow when the chips are down and a crisis is afoot , good will emerge and triumph over evil .
I ’ m sorry to say , the exact opposite of all of that has emerged as true .
Medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used toxic doses of hydroxychloroquine far too late in the disease cycle to be of any help simply to ‘ make a point ’ about hydroxychloroquine .
They rather desperately wanted that drug to fail , so they made it fail .
After deliberately setting their trial up for failure , they concluded : “ Hydroxychloroquine doesn ’ t help , and it even makes things worse.
” Note that in order to be able to make this claim , they had to be willing to cause harm — even to let people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does that ?
Not one who actually has compassion , a heart , or functioning level of sympathy .
It ’ s an awful conclusion but it ’ s what remains after we eliminate the impossible .
Science has proven that cheap , safe and significantly protective compounds exist to limit both Covid-related death and disease severity .
Yet all of the main so-called health authorities in the major western countries are nearly completely ignoring , if not outright banning , these safe , cheap and effective compounds .
This is crazy-making for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) because the data is so clear .
It ’ s irrefutable at this point .
These medicines and treatments not only work , but work really , really well .
However most people will be unable to absorb the data , let alone move beyond it to wrestle with the implications .
Why ?
Because such data is belief-shattering .
Absorbing this information is not an intellectual process ; it ’ s an emotional one .
I don ’ t know why human nature decided to invest so much in developing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control our actions and thoughts .
But it has .
I ’ m sure there was some powerful evolutionary advantage .
One that ’ s now being hijacked daily by social media AI programs to nudge us in desired directions .
One that ’ s being leveraged by shabby politicians , hucksters , fake gurus , and con men to steer advantage away from the populace and towards themselves .
The neural wiring of beliefs is what it is .
We have to recognize that and move on .
Some people will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
( Notably , the Peak Prosperity tribe is populated with many fast-adjusters , which is unsurprising given the topics we cover…tough topics tend to attract fast adjusters and repel the rest ) To move past the deeply troubling information laid out before us requires us to be willing to endure a bit of turbulence .
It ’ s the only way .
For you to navigate these troubling times safely and successfully , you ’ ll need to see as clearly as possible the true nature of the game actually being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really are – not what you ’ ve been told they are , or what you wish or hope they are .
The data above strongly supports the conclusion that our national health managers don ’ t actually care about public health generally or your health specifically .
If indeed true , then the beliefs preventing most people from accepting this likely include : • Wanting to believe that people are good ( a biggie for most people ) • Trust and faith in the medical system ( really big ) There are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also list .
But this is sufficient to get the ball rolling .
Picking just one , how hard would it be for someone to let go of , say , trust in the medical system ?
That would be pretty hard in most cases .
First not trusting the medical system might mean having to wonder if a loved one might have died unnecessarily while being treated .
Or realizing that you ’ re now going to have to research the living daylights out of every medical decision before agreeing to it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be more harmful to you over the long haul than helpful ( which is true in many more cases than most appreciate ) .
It might mean having your personal heroes dinged by suspicion — perhaps even your father or mother who worked in the medical profession .
It would definitely require a complete reorientation away from being able to trust anything you read in a newspaper , or see on TV , about new pharmaceutical “ breakthroughs ” .
Trust , which is safe and warm and comforting , then turns into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upon active mental involvement .
But , as always , hard work comes with benefits — with a healthy level of skepticism and involvement , the families of those recruited into the deadly UK RECOVERY trial could have looked at the proposed doses of HCQ ( 2,400 mg on day one !
Toxic ! )
and said , “ Not now , not ever !
” and maybe have saved the life of their loved one .
Look at that tangled mess of undesirables that comes with unpacking that one belief : regret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fallen idols , and vastly more additional effort .
Are all up for grabs when we decide to look carefully at the actions of our national health managers during Covid .
Which is why most people simply choose not to look .
It ’ s too hard .
I get it .
I have a lot of compassion for why people choose not to go down that path .
It can get unpleasant in a hurry .
But , just like choosing to ignore a nagging chest pain , turning away in denial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of SARS-CoV-2 ( the virus ) and Covid-19 ( the associated disease ) has led me to uncover some things that have made me deeply uncomfortable about our global and national ‘ managers ’ .
Shameful things , really .
Scary things in their implications for what we might reasonably expect ( or not expect , more accurately ) from the future .
Once we get past the shock of seeing just how patently corrupt they ’ ve been , we have to ask both What ’ s next ?
and What should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ live in a system whose managers either are too dumb to understand the Vitamin D data ( very unlikely ) or have decided that they ’ d rather not promote it to the general populace for some reason .
It ’ s a ridiculously safe vitamin with almost zero downside and virtually unlimited upside .
Either they ’ re colossally dumb , or this is a calculated decision .
They ’ re not dumb .
So we have to ask : What ’ s the calculation being performed here ?
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not your personal health .
So… What is it ?
This is our line of questioning and observation .
It ’ s like the short story by Arthur Conan Doyle in Silver Blaze that many of us informally know as “ the case of the dog that didn ’ t bark ” .
As the story goes , because of a missing clue – a dog who remained silent as a murder was committed – this conclusion could be drawn : the dog was already familiar with the killer !
The silence around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is the pharmacological dog that did not bark .
One true inference suggests others .
Here , too , we can deduce from the near total silence around Vitamin D that the health managers would prefer not to talk about it .
They don ’ t want people to know .
That much is painfully clear .
Such lack of promotion ( let alone appropriate study ) of safe , effective treatments is a thread that , if tugged , can unravel the whole rug .
The silence tells us everything we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to suffer and die ?
I don ’ t know .
My belief systems certainly hope not .
Perhaps the death and suffering are merely collateral damage as they pursue a different goal — money , power , politics ?
Simply the depressing result of a contentious election year ?
More than that ?
We ’ ve now reached the jumping off point where we may well find out just how far down the rabbit hole goes .
A massive grab for tighter control over the global populace is now being fast-tracked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard of the Great Reset yet ?
If not , you soon will .
In Part 2 : The Coming ‘ Great Reset ’ we lay out everything we know so far about the multinational proposal to transform nearly every aspect of global industry , commerce , trade , and social structure .
If you read on , be ready and willing to let go of cherished beliefs and to suspend what you know to be true .
Because none of us has that in hand .
It ’ s going to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very big is afoot and I suspect that Covid-19 is merely an excuse providing cover for a much bigger power grab over the world ’ s wealth and peoples .
Click here to read Part 2 of this report .
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19 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 @ @ @ @

COVID19: ‘They’ Don’t Care About Us
Written by Chris Martenson
While issues like climate change and economic growth may be difficult to fully grasp and unravel, direct threats to our lives &/or livelihoods are much more concrete and something we can react to and resist.
Such immediate and direct threats are now fully in play and, once again, they’re accompanied by narratives that are completely at odds with each other. I’m speaking of Covid and the ways in which our national and global managers are choosing to respond (or not).
It’s a truly incoherent mess about which both social media and the increasingly irrelevant media are working quite hard to misinform us.
The mainstream narrative about Covid-19, in the West, is this:
It’s a quite deadly and novel disease
There are no effective treatments
Sadly, no double-blind placebo controlled trials exist to support some of the wild claims out there about various off-patent, cheap and widely available supplements and drugs
Health authorities care about saving lives
They care so much, in fact, that along with politicians they’ve decided to entirely shut down economies
There’s a huge second wave rampaging across the US and Europe and there’s nothing we can do to limit it except shut down businesses and people’s ability to travel and gather
You need to fear this virus and its associated disease
All we can do is wait for a vaccine
The alternative narrative, one that I’ve uncovered after 9 months of almost daily research and reporting, is this:
It’s not an especially dangerous disease and it’s certainly not novel
There is a huge assortment of very effective, cheap and widely-available preventatives and treatments including (but not limited to) Vitamin D Ivermectin Hydroxychloroquine Zinc Selenium Famotidine (Pepcid) Melatonin
Use of a combination of these mostly OTC supplements could reasonably be expected to drop the severity of illness and the already low mortality rate by 90% or (probably) more
Western health authorities have shown either zero interest in the results of studies mainly conducted in poorer nations on these combination therapies or…
They have actively run studies designed to fail so that these cheap, effective therapies could be dismissed or…
Set up proper studies but which started late, have immensely long study periods and most likely won’t be done before a vaccine is hastily rushed through development.
By the way – every single one of my assertions and claims is backed by links and supporting documentation from scientific and clinical trials and studies. I am not conjecturing here; I am recounting the summary of ten months’ worth of inquiry.
The conclusion I draw from my narrative (vs. theirs) is that we can no longer assume that the public health or saving lives has anything to do with explaining or understanding the actions of these health “managers” (I cannot bring myself to use the word authorities).
After we eliminate the impossible – which is that somehow these massive, well-funded bodies have missed month after month of accumulating evidence in support of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D, NAC, zinc, selenium and doxycycline/azithromycin – what remains must be the truth.
As improbable as it seems, the only conclusion we’re left with is that the machinery of politics, money and corporate psychopathy is suppressing life saving treatments because these managers have other priorities besides public health and saving lives.
This is a terribly difficult conclusion, because it means suspending so much that we hold dear. Things like the notion that people are basically good. The idea that the government generally means well. The thought that somehow when the chips are down and a crisis is afoot, good will emerge and triumph over evil.
I’m sorry to say, the exact opposite of all of that has emerged as true.
Medical doctors in the UK NHS system purposely used toxic doses of hydroxychloroquine far too late in the disease cycle to be of any help simply to ‘make a point’ about hydroxychloroquine. They rather desperately wanted that drug to fail, so they made it fail.
After deliberately setting their trial up for failure, they concluded: “Hydroxychloroquine doesn’t help, and it even makes things worse.”
Note that in order to be able to make this claim, they had to be willing to cause harm — even to let people die. What kind of health official does that?
Not one who actually has compassion, a heart, or functioning level of sympathy. It’s an awful conclusion but it’s what remains after we eliminate the impossible.
Getting Past The Emotional Toll
Science has proven that cheap, safe and significantly protective compounds exist to limit both Covid-related death and disease severity.
Yet all of the main so-called health authorities in the major western countries are nearly completely ignoring, if not outright banning, these safe, cheap and effective compounds.
This is crazy-making for independent observers like me (and you) because the data is so clear. It’s irrefutable at this point. These medicines and treatments not only work, but work really, really well.
However most people will be unable to absorb the data, let alone move beyond it to wrestle with the implications. Why? Because such data is belief-shattering. Absorbing this information is not an intellectual process; it’s an emotional one.
I don’t know why human nature decided to invest so much in developing a tight wall around the belief systems that control our actions and thoughts. But it has.
I’m sure there was some powerful evolutionary advantage. One that’s now being hijacked daily by social media AI programs to nudge us in desired directions. One that’s being leveraged by shabby politicians, hucksters, fake gurus, and con men to steer advantage away from the populace and towards themselves.
The neural wiring of beliefs is what it is. We have to recognize that and move on.
Some people will be much faster in their adjustment process than others. (Notably, the Peak Prosperity tribe is populated with many fast-adjusters, which is unsurprising given the topics we cover…tough topics tend to attract fast adjusters and repel the rest)
To move past the deeply troubling information laid out before us requires us to be willing to endure a bit of turbulence. It’s the only way.
For you to navigate these troubling times safely and successfully, you’ll need to see as clearly as possible the true nature of the game actually being played. To see what the rules really are – not what you’ve been told they are, or what you wish or hope they are.
The Manipulation Underway
The data above strongly supports the conclusion that our national health managers don’t actually care about public health generally or your health specifically.
If indeed true, then the beliefs preventing most people from accepting this likely include:
Wanting to believe that people are good (a biggie for most people)
Trust and faith in the medical system (really big)
Faith in authority (ginormous)
There are many other operative belief systems I could also list. But this is sufficient to get the ball rolling.
Picking just one, how hard would it be for someone to let go of, say, trust in the medical system?
That would be pretty hard in most cases.
First not trusting the medical system might mean having to wonder if a loved one might have died unnecessarily while being treated. Or realizing that you’re now going to have to research the living daylights out of every medical decision before agreeing to it. Or worrying that your medications might be more harmful to you over the long haul than helpful (which is true in many more cases than most appreciate). It might mean having your personal heroes dinged by suspicion — perhaps even your father or mother who worked in the medical profession. It would definitely require a complete reorientation away from being able to trust anything you read in a newspaper, or see on TV, about new pharmaceutical “breakthroughs”.
Trust, which is safe and warm and comforting, then turns into skepticism; which is lonelier and insists upon active mental involvement.
But, as always, hard work comes with benefits — with a healthy level of skepticism and involvement, the families of those recruited into the deadly UK RECOVERY trial could have looked at the proposed doses of HCQ (2,400 mg on day one! Toxic!) and said, “Not now, not ever!” and maybe have saved the life of their loved one.
Look at that tangled mess of undesirables that comes with unpacking that one belief: regret, uncertainty, shame, doubt, fallen idols, and vastly more additional effort. Are all up for grabs when we decide to look carefully at the actions of our national health managers during Covid.
Which is why most people simply choose not to look. It’s too hard.
I get it. I have a lot of compassion for why people choose not to go down that path. It can get unpleasant in a hurry.
But, just like choosing to ignore a nagging chest pain, turning away in denial has its own consequences.
The Coming ‘Great Reset’
My coverage of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus) and Covid-19 (the associated disease) has led me to uncover some things that have made me deeply uncomfortable about our global and national ‘managers’. Shameful things, really. Scary things in their implications for what we might reasonably expect (or not expect, more accurately) from the future.
Once we get past the shock of seeing just how patently corrupt they’ve been, we have to ask both What’s next? and What should I do?
After all, you live in a system whose managers either are too dumb to understand the Vitamin D data (very unlikely) or have decided that they’d rather not promote it to the general populace for some reason. It’s a ridiculously safe vitamin with almost zero downside and virtually unlimited upside.
Either they’re colossally dumb, or this is a calculated decision. They’re not dumb. So we have to ask: What’s the calculation being performed here? It’s not public safety. It’s not your personal health. So… What is it?
This is our line of questioning and observation. It’s like the short story by Arthur Conan Doyle in Silver Blaze that many of us informally know as “the case of the dog that didn’t bark”. As the story goes, because of a missing clue – a dog who remained silent as a murder was committed – this conclusion could be drawn: the dog was already familiar with the killer!
The silence around Vitamin D alone is extremely telling. It is the pharmacological dog that did not bark.
One true inference suggests others. Here, too, we can deduce from the near total silence around Vitamin D that the health managers would prefer not to talk about it. They don’t want people to know. That much is painfully clear.
Such lack of promotion (let alone appropriate study) of safe, effective treatments is a thread that, if tugged, can unravel the whole rug. The silence tells us everything we need to know.
Do they want people to suffer and die? I don’t know. My belief systems certainly hope not. Perhaps the death and suffering are merely collateral damage as they pursue a different goal — money, power, politics? Simply the depressing result of a contentious election year? More than that?
We’ve now reached the jumping off point where we may well find out just how far down the rabbit hole goes.
A massive grab for tighter control over the global populace is now being fast-tracked at the highest levels. Have you heard of the Great Reset yet?
If not, you soon will.
In Part 2: The Coming ‘Great Reset’ we lay out everything we know so far about the multinational proposal to transform nearly every aspect of global industry, commerce, trade, and social structure.
If you read on, be ready and willing to let go of cherished beliefs and to suspend what you know to be true. Because none of us has that in hand. It’s going to be a wild ride from here.
Something very big is afoot and I suspect that Covid-19 is merely an excuse providing cover for a much bigger power grab over the world’s wealth and peoples.
Click here to read Part 2 of this report.
More at www.peakprosperity.
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
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--2020-11-08--How Blockchain Encrypted Voting Can Save Democracy-based Systems

In the furore of the hotly contested US Presidential Election a new solution to ensure fair and transparent voting may be coming into its own behind the scenes .
This article explains the possibilities and benefits of using a blockchain based voting system to end the rancour and claims of unlawfulness .
Rahul A R , a technologist and specialist developer in Blockchain technologies and Cryptocurrencies at blog.accubits.com offers his expert insight : “ In one suggested implementation , the voter would receive a paper ballot on which would be printed an individualized , computer-readable code .
The voter could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ device , verify his or her identification , and then cast the ballot digitally .
This system would separate the voter ID from the actual vote to maintain anonymity , with the votes stored on the blockchain .
But with so many arguments against online voting , can it really be superior to traditional voting systems ?
Using the traditional voting systems during a pandemic could lead to more wide spread of the pandemic as voters are requested to cast votes from a voting booth , which are mostly crowded .
With the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online voting in 2007 , most nations still stick to the traditional mode of voting , i.e.
, paper ballots .
It requires the citizens to be physically present at a location to cast their vote which may not make much sense considering how connected we are today .
People shy away from digitizing the process because of security risks associated with putting everything online .
However , there are many problems with the traditional mode of voting as well .
For example , the Turkish general election of 2015 was fraught with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party ( AKP ) smack in the middle of it .
The AKP allegedly used state resources like state funds , media , and vehicles for the campaign .
The Supreme Electoral Council of Turkey also came under investigation for printing an excess of over 20 million ballot papers for a population of 50 million raising questions about how the surplus papers would be used .
This isn ’ t an isolated incident .
Election fraud is a reality for many countries albeit to varying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appointed to monitor elections .
But they aren ’ t foolproof either .
The monitors aren ’ t usually familiar with the lay of the land and they don ’ t collaborate with the locals to remain neutral which hampers their ability to effectively evaluate the votes .
Also , in the case of IGOs , which are made of a group of countries , the monitors at times have to verify or risk destabilizing that region .
Adding to that , since IGOs are made up of multiple countries , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be unwittingly influenced to serve those nations ’ interests .
With so many issues surrounding the traditional mode of voting , it is safe to say that we need a safer option that could promote the transparency of the process .
Can we rely on blockchain technology for voting systems ?
Simply put , Blockchain is a digital ledger .
This technology is highly secure while affording an unparalleled level of transparency among authorized users .
This is because all transactions are recorded on a “ chain ” maintained across millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cryptographically secure ; you can not edit or remove a single detail without the other parties verifying it .
This makes it essentially immutable .
Let ’ s see how we can integrate these features of blockchain into the voting system .
If you ’ d like to learn more about the technology , check out this article explaining what is blockchain technology ?
The Estonian government , when they introduced online voting , assigned a national ID card with encrypted files that identified the owner .
A blockchain enabled identity management system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ledger .
Relevant authorities could be given access to this blockchain and the citizen ’ s information can be verified by government miner through local government administration offices in the district , government utility services like water and electricity .
Once the individual ’ s information is verified to be accurate , they can be assigned a vote .
This essentially eliminates fake voter data which is the main cause for allegations like dead people voting .
This was something that came up during the Turkish elections .
While a majority of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to cast their votes , there are still a number of people who don ’ t show up at all .
This indifference results in lost votes and lack of participation in the democratic process of the country .
It ’ s usually because of the inconvenience ; people would rather be in the comfort of their homes rather than out in a long queue , waiting for their turn to vote .
If the voting can be done by phone or computer , then more people would join in the democratic process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to secure online voting .
Such an application wouldn ’ t have to worry about hackers because the processing power required to affect every single node on the blockchain is monumental .
Blockchain offers a number of options with which the actual voting can be made more secure .
Tokens as votes : In this case , each token would be a vote for a citizen .
They can cast their votes from an electronic device linked to the blockchain and by virtue of being on a blockchain , no one would question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time-stamped and in case changes are made , a trail of the same would be present .
Demanding recounts is something that many losing candidates resort to and it is a very costly process .
By putting the votes as tokens on a Blockchain , we can discourage such demands .
Voting through smart contracts : In this case , the citizen can be assigned a smart contract vote which is valid for one execution on the election day .
While the vote will be valid and secure , it won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in such a case is by linking the public key of the voter to an alias that only the voter can access .
A number of approaches can be taken in order to successfully use blockchain technology for electronic voting .
On hearing the term ‘ blockchain voting system ’ , it is natural to wonder how such a system can be implemented .
We have outlined a potential solution to this problem below .
There are a few major points that are associated with the functioning of such a blockchain voting system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , distributed , and decentralized .
It can record votes from voters across many mobile devices and computers .
It should allow the voters to audit and verify the votes in an inexpensive manner .
The database of votes should be managed autonomously using a distributed server of timestamp on a peer-to-peer network .
The voting blockchain is represented as a growing series of voting blocks chained to each other in a sequential manner .
Each block contains voter ’ s ID , vote , voter ’ s signature , timestamp , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key infrastructure is a set of procedures that manage public-key encryption .
Vote database changes according to the statistics of votes that are updated by the voting office and miners are responsible to deal with accepted votes and adding them to the public voting blockchain .
The voter ’ s voting interface creates a hash value of the voter ID , vote and timestamp .
The program then uses the voter ’ s unique private key to generate a signature of the hash value .
This signature and hash value is send to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in random from the miner block and a miner obtains the public key of the voter from the PKI using the voter ’ s ID .
Using the public key , a miner creates a new hash based on the data available from PKI and compares it with the hash sent by the voter .
If both hashes match , the signature is verified successfully .
Otherwise the signature is discarded .
The miner then sends queries and verifies that voter has the right to vote and after verification , the miner generates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s hash value and the information of vote and adds it to the blockchain .
Each vote is stored as a transaction on the blockchain and each voter receives the transaction ID for their vote for verifying purposes .
Each vote is appended onto the blockchain by its corresponding ballot smart contract .
The network is appended only if all corresponding district nodes agree on the verification of the vote data .
When a voter casts his vote , the weight of their wallet is decreased by 1 , therefore not enabling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
Evidently , there are several advantages that can be experienced upon the implementation of blockchain voting systems .
Some of the major benefits are : • Reduces the security vulnerabilities associated with normal e-voting .
• Increases the trust of the people in the government since it is more transparent than traditional voting systems • Secure and anonymous votes , which can be verified at any moment • Impossibility to vote twice or to commit electoral fraud • It is much more convenient for voters • It will make it very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• Increases the number of voters , since the process isn ’ t nearly as time consuming • It is much better for the environment as it eliminates the need for paper voting and the carbon emitted by the logistics of voting ballots .
“

Written by Rahul A R
In the furore of the hotly contested US Presidential Election a new solution to ensure fair and transparent voting may be coming into its own behind the scenes. This article explains the possibilities and benefits of using a blockchain based voting system to end the rancour and claims of unlawfulness.
Rahul A R, a technologist and specialist developer in Blockchain technologies and Cryptocurrencies at blog.accubits.com offers his expert insight:
“In one suggested implementation, the voter would receive a paper ballot on which would be printed an individualized, computer-readable code. The voter could then scan the code with a mobile device, verify his or her identification, and then cast the ballot digitally. This system would separate the voter ID from the actual vote to maintain anonymity, with the votes stored on the blockchain.
But with so many arguments against online voting, can it really be superior to traditional voting systems?
Traditional voting systems
Using the traditional voting systems during a pandemic could lead to more wide spread of the pandemic as voters are requested to cast votes from a voting booth, which are mostly crowded. With the exception of Estonia, that successfully implemented online voting in 2007, most nations still stick to the traditional mode of voting, i.e., paper ballots. It requires the citizens to be physically present at a location to cast their vote which may not make much sense considering how connected we are today. People shy away from digitizing the process because of security risks associated with putting everything online. However, there are many problems with the traditional mode of voting as well.
For example, the Turkish general election of 2015 was fraught with controversies and allegations of electoral fraud with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) smack in the middle of it. The AKP allegedly used state resources like state funds, media, and vehicles for the campaign. The Supreme Electoral Council of Turkey also came under investigation for printing an excess of over 20 million ballot papers for a population of 50 million raising questions about how the surplus papers would be used.
This isn’t an isolated incident. Election fraud is a reality for many countries albeit to varying degrees. NGOs and IGOs are sometimes appointed to monitor elections. But they aren’t foolproof either. The monitors aren’t usually familiar with the lay of the land and they don’t collaborate with the locals to remain neutral which hampers their ability to effectively evaluate the votes. Also, in the case of IGOs, which are made of a group of countries, the monitors at times have to verify or risk destabilizing that region. Adding to that, since IGOs are made up of multiple countries, it’s always a possibility that the monitoring would be unwittingly influenced to serve those nations’ interests.
Using blockchain based voting systems for safer elections
With so many issues surrounding the traditional mode of voting, it is safe to say that we need a safer option that could promote the transparency of the process.
Can we rely on blockchain technology for voting systems?
Simply put, Blockchain is a digital ledger. This technology is highly secure while affording an unparalleled level of transparency among authorized users. This is because all transactions are recorded on a “chain” maintained across millions of nodes on a network. It is cryptographically secure; you cannot edit or remove a single detail without the other parties verifying it. This makes it essentially immutable. Let’s see how we can integrate these features of blockchain into the voting system. If you’d like to learn more about the technology, check out this article explaining what is blockchain technology?
Voter Registration
The Estonian government, when they introduced online voting, assigned a national ID card with encrypted files that identified the owner. A blockchain enabled identity management system could record this information in an immutable ledger. Relevant authorities could be given access to this blockchain and the citizen’s information can be verified by government miner through local government administration offices in the district, government utility services like water and electricity. Once the individual’s information is verified to be accurate, they can be assigned a vote. This essentially eliminates fake voter data which is the main cause for allegations like dead people voting. This was something that came up during the Turkish elections.
Secure Online Voting
While a majority of the voting population shows up at polling stations to cast their votes, there are still a number of people who don’t show up at all. This indifference results in lost votes and lack of participation in the democratic process of the country. It’s usually because of the inconvenience; people would rather be in the comfort of their homes rather than out in a long queue, waiting for their turn to vote. If the voting can be done by phone or computer, then more people would join in the democratic process. We could use blockchain voting systems to secure online voting. Such an application wouldn’t have to worry about hackers because the processing power required to affect every single node on the blockchain is monumental.
Voting Options
Blockchain offers a number of options with which the actual voting can be made more secure.
Tokens as votes: In this case, each token would be a vote for a citizen. They can cast their votes from an electronic device linked to the blockchain and by virtue of being on a blockchain, no one would question the final count as every transaction is time-stamped and in case changes are made, a trail of the same would be present. Demanding recounts is something that many losing candidates resort to and it is a very costly process. By putting the votes as tokens on a Blockchain, we can discourage such demands.
Voting through smart contracts: In this case, the citizen can be assigned a smart contract vote which is valid for one execution on the election day. While the vote will be valid and secure, it won’t be anonymous. What can be done in such a case is by linking the public key of the voter to an alias that only the voter can access.
A potential approach for implementing a blockchain based voting system
A number of approaches can be taken in order to successfully use blockchain technology for electronic voting. On hearing the term ‘blockchain voting system’, it is natural to wonder how such a system can be implemented. We have outlined a potential solution to this problem below. There are a few major points that are associated with the functioning of such a blockchain voting system.
The blockchain-based e-voting scheme is public, distributed, and decentralized. It can record votes from voters across many mobile devices and computers. It should allow the voters to audit and verify the votes in an inexpensive manner. The database of votes should be managed autonomously using a distributed server of timestamp on a peer-to-peer network.
The voting blockchain is represented as a growing series of voting blocks chained to each other in a sequential manner. Each block contains voter’s ID, vote, voter’s signature, timestamp, and hash of the previous block. Public key infrastructure is a set of procedures that manage public-key encryption. Vote database changes according to the statistics of votes that are updated by the voting office and miners are responsible to deal with accepted votes and adding them to the public voting blockchain.
The voter’s voting interface creates a hash value of the voter ID, vote and timestamp. The program then uses the voter’s unique private key to generate a signature of the hash value. This signature and hash value is send to the miner block.
Miners are elected in random from the miner block and a miner obtains the public key of the voter from the PKI using the voter’s ID. Using the public key, a miner creates a new hash based on the data available from PKI and compares it with the hash sent by the voter. If both hashes match, the signature is verified successfully. Otherwise the signature is discarded.
The miner then sends queries and verifies that voter has the right to vote and after verification, the miner generates a new block with the previous block’s hash value and the information of vote and adds it to the blockchain.
Each vote is stored as a transaction on the blockchain and each voter receives the transaction ID for their vote for verifying purposes. Each vote is appended onto the blockchain by its corresponding ballot smart contract. The network is appended only if all corresponding district nodes agree on the verification of the vote data. When a voter casts his vote, the weight of their wallet is decreased by 1, therefore not enabling them to vote more than once per election.
Benefits of blockchain voting systems
Evidently, there are several advantages that can be experienced upon the implementation of blockchain voting systems. Some of the major benefits are: