principiascientificinternational--2020-10-09--The Secretive Funding Behind The Global Warming Movement–Pt 2

The Secretive Funding Behind The Global Warming Movement–Pt 2 In our last article , we detailed how a wealthy family established an offshore trust and funneled tens of millions of dollars from that trust to a 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) called The Sea Change Foundation.This “ charitable entity ” is a major hub of funding for the climate-change alarmists .
In this article , we ’ ll trace where the Sea Change Foundation directs these “ charitable funds ” , and what each of its recipients does with the money .
We shall quickly discover that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leftist organizations all dedicated the climate alarmism in various forms .
Sea Change ’ s Form 990-PF for the year ending July 2011 describes its activities with inappropriately vague terms : “ Private foundation dedicated to achieving meaningful social impact through leveraged philanthropy that address the most pressing problems facing the world today.
” Could this be any less specific ?
Fortunately , the next four pages make it very clear what “ meaningful social impact ” on “ the most pressing problems ” means : anti-fossil fuel and clean energy propaganda , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An entity known as “ The Energy Foundation ” located in – where else ?
– San Francisco is a favored recipient of funds from Sea Change .
There were 16 separate grants made to The Energy Foundation totaling over $ 17 million .
The “ purpose of funds ” is sometimes described as to “ promote energy efficiency , ” sometimes as “ educate public about climate and clean energy , ” and other times as “ reduce reliance on high carbon energy.
” For the period ending July 2015 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Energy Foundation ( out of 79 total ) , for more than $ 16 million .
At least this year , the disclosure was much more transparent .
Every single grant ’ s purpose was listed as “ mitigate climate change.
” Every year it ’ s pretty much the same pattern .
Sea Change isn ’ t the only benefactor of The Energy Foundation .
The entity receives hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars from other organizations .
The ClimateWorks Foundation , itself the recipient of over $ 870 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent $ 165 million to The Energy Foundation between 2010 and 2012 .
So what is The Energy Foundation ?
Sure enough , those diligent Senators that issued a 2014 minority report on these climate change shenanigans figured it out .
It is a pass-through public “ charity , ” which aggregates hundreds of millions of dollars from Sea Change and other organizations , and then passes much of that money on to other climate activists .
In doing so , the report says : Indeed , The Energy Foundation made nearly 500 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s a lot of passing through of funds , and those funds often aren ’ t used for charitable purposes but for political activities – and that ’ s forbidden under federal law .
The IRS strictly prohibits 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) entities from “ directly or indirectly participating in , or intervening in a political campaign for or against a candidate for political office.
” So instead , the 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) tries to skirt the law by contributing funds to a 501 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which is permitted to engage in political activities .
There is an oversight issue here , however .
The donation made to the 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) must be restricted to a charitable purpose that aligns with the organization ’ s mission and does not violate the 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) nonprofit ’ s eligibility .
Who is watching to make sure these laws are being followed ?
Nobody , really .
The IRS should do it , but given the complexity of how money is moving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we haven ’ t even scratched the surface ) , actual oversight appears non-existent .
It should come as no surprise that the 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) entities that are the recipients of such generosity from 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) entities are often closely aligned .
The Senate report describes one such example : Yet unless one went hunting for this information , the tangled web of funding would never be exposed .
A visit to The Energy Foundation ’ s website reveals an optimistic website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great clean energy is , bringing solar power to consumers all over America , providing thousands of jobs in the sector , and to “ modernize the power grid.
” Yet behind all the pretty pictures and generalized terminology , there is nothing of substance .
It ’ s all sizzle designed to target the ignorant , feel-good nonsense that doesn ’ t offer specifics .
Take a look at the mission and vision statements of The Energy Foundation : Nothing on the website discusses the downsides of “ clean energy , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil-fuel energy is necessary to create solar panels and wind turbines .
Few of the stories listing the foundation ’ s successes go into specifics about a given grant ’ s success or the costs incurred by harming the fossil fuel sector .
It also delivers falsehoods about nuclear , coal , and natural gas .
The website touts the Southern Environmental Law Center , which “ successfully push [ es ] regulatory commissions to scrutinize utilities ’ operations and long-term planning , and to promote alternatives to proposals for more coal , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rather than address the truths about nuclear plants , which produce more energy with the greatest possible existing efficiency , it dismisses its very existence as being “ too expensive.
” One becomes dizzy very quickly trying to track all the different recipients of The Energy Foundation ’ s grants , but the sheer number of happy stories it touts on its websites demonstrates that the climate-change activists have tons of money to spread around and seem keen on hiding how it all gets distributed .
Read more at The Pipeline PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

The Secretive Funding Behind The Global Warming Movement–Pt 2
Written by Robert Morton
In our last article, we detailed how a wealthy family established an offshore trust and funneled tens of millions of dollars from that trust to a 501(c)(3) called The Sea Change Foundation.This “charitable entity” is a major hub of funding for the climate-change alarmists.
In this article, we’ll trace where the Sea Change Foundation directs these “charitable funds”, and what each of its recipients does with the money.
We shall quickly discover that the money trail becomes a tangled web of Leftist organizations all dedicated the climate alarmism in various forms.
Sea Change’s Form 990-PF for the year ending July 2011 describes its activities with inappropriately vague terms: “Private foundation dedicated to achieving meaningful social impact through leveraged philanthropy that address the most pressing problems facing the world today.”
Could this be any less specific?
Fortunately, the next four pages make it very clear what “meaningful social impact” on “the most pressing problems” means: anti-fossil fuel and clean energy propaganda, along with and “education” initiatives.
An entity known as “The Energy Foundation” located in – where else? – San Francisco is a favored recipient of funds from Sea Change. There were 16 separate grants made to The Energy Foundation totaling over $17 million.
The “purpose of funds” is sometimes described as to “promote energy efficiency,” sometimes as “educate public about climate and clean energy,” and other times as “reduce reliance on high carbon energy.”
For the period ending July 2015, some 33 separate grants were made to The Energy Foundation (out of 79 total), for more than $16 million. At least this year, the disclosure was much more transparent.
Every single grant’s purpose was listed as “mitigate climate change.” Every year it’s pretty much the same pattern.
Sea Change isn’t the only benefactor of The Energy Foundation. The entity receives hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars from other organizations.
The ClimateWorks Foundation, itself the recipient of over $870 million in contributions between 2010 and 2018, sent $165 million to The Energy Foundation between 2010 and 2012.
So what is The Energy Foundation? Sure enough, those diligent Senators that issued a 2014 minority report on these climate change shenanigans figured it out.
It is a pass-through public “charity,” which aggregates hundreds of millions of dollars from Sea Change and other organizations, and then passes much of that money on to other climate activists. In doing so, the report says:
… they are providing two services: distance between the donor and the activist, and enhancing the clout of the donors as their individual influence is maximized by pooling resources….[and is] utilized by the most powerful EGA members to create the appearance of a more diversified base of support, to shield them from accountability, and to leverage limited resources by hiring dedicated energy/environment staff to handle strategic giving.
Indeed, The Energy Foundation made nearly 500 grants between 2015 and 2017 alone. That’s a lot of passing through of funds, and those funds often aren’t used for charitable purposes but for political activities – and that’s forbidden under federal law.
The IRS strictly prohibits 501(c)(3) entities from “directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in a political campaign for or against a candidate for political office.”
So instead, the 501(c)(3) tries to skirt the law by contributing funds to a 501(c)(4), which is permitted to engage in political activities.
There is an oversight issue here, however. The donation made to the 501(c)(4) must be restricted to a charitable purpose that aligns with the organization’s mission and does not violate the 501(c)(3) nonprofit’s eligibility.
Who is watching to make sure these laws are being followed? Nobody, really. The IRS should do it, but given the complexity of how money is moving around through all these different entities (and we haven’t even scratched the surface), actual oversight appears non-existent.
It should come as no surprise that the 501(c)(4) entities that are the recipients of such generosity from 501(c)(3) entities are often closely aligned. The Senate report describes one such example:
For example, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) is a 501(c)(4) group with an affiliated 501(c)(3) nonprofit almost identically named the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund (LCV Education Fund). In 2012, LCV Education Fund had total assets of just over $8 million and net assets of over $7.3 million. According to LCV, LCV Education Fund is “separate from the League of Conservation Voters, with its own mission, programs, and Board of Directors.” Even so, the two groups are very closely intertwined. Forty percent of LCV Education Fund’s Board of Directors also serve on LCV’s Board of Directors.
Yet unless one went hunting for this information, the tangled web of funding would never be exposed.
A visit to The Energy Foundation’s website reveals an optimistic website that talks in vague terms about how great clean energy is, bringing solar power to consumers all over America, providing thousands of jobs in the sector, and to “modernize the power grid.”
Yet behind all the pretty pictures and generalized terminology, there is nothing of substance. It’s all sizzle designed to target the ignorant, feel-good nonsense that doesn’t offer specifics.
Take a look at the mission and vision statements of The Energy Foundation:
Mission Statement
Securing a clean and equitable energy future to tackle the climate crisis. Vision Statement
A healthy, safe, equitable economy powered by clean energy. We believe a thriving clean energy economy can create sustainable opportunities, spur innovation, and protect our climate—for today and future generations.
Nothing on the website discusses the downsides of “clean energy,” or acknowledges the truth about how much fossil-fuel energy is necessary to create solar panels and wind turbines.
Few of the stories listing the foundation’s successes go into specifics about a given grant’s success or the costs incurred by harming the fossil fuel sector. It also delivers falsehoods about nuclear, coal, and natural gas.
The website touts the Southern Environmental Law Center, which “successfully push[es] regulatory commissions to scrutinize utilities’ operations and long-term planning, and to promote alternatives to proposals for more coal, gas, or costly nuclear plants.”
Rather than address the truths about nuclear plants, which produce more energy with the greatest possible existing efficiency, it dismisses its very existence as being “too expensive.”
One becomes dizzy very quickly trying to track all the different recipients of The Energy Foundation’s grants, but the sheer number of happy stories it touts on its websites demonstrates that the climate-change activists have tons of money to spread around and seem keen on hiding how it all gets distributed.
Why?
Read more at The Pipeline
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--2020-10-09--NPR Claims Heatwaves, Droughts, Fires Increasing; Data Says Otherwise

NPR ’ s “ All Things Considered ” program is claiming climate change is causing an increase in heatwaves , drought , and wildfires .
Utilizing supposition instead of data , NPR presents no scientific evidence to back up its claim that any heatwave , drought , or wildfire must be caused by climate change .
Government climate and weather data , however , prove NPR ’ s assertion to be false .
In the NPR segment , titled “ Scientists Say Disasters Are Teaming Up During Time of Climate Change , ” reporter Loren Sommer interviews the head of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil engineering professor at Boise State University .
While the rancher and the professor are welcome to their views of the state of the climate , they should hardly be considered experts or even knowledgeable on climate science .
An NPR host opens the segment by claiming , “ It ’ s been a record-shattering year for heat in the American West .
… If it seems like heat , drought , and wildfires are all piling together , it ’ s not your imagination .
” Sommer later adds , citing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Droughts and heatwaves feed each other , he says .
When the soil is dry , more of the sun ’ s energy heats up the air .
Then it ’ s hotter , making more water evaporate , causing more drought .
It ’ s a climate change-driven cycle .
Because in a hotter climate , he says , disasters are teaming up.
” Although heatwaves and droughts have occurred this year , they occur somewhere every year .
Objective data show heatwaves and drought have not gotten worse in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heatwave records , Climate at a Glance : U.S. Heatwaves , cites data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ) that shows heatwaves are far less severe in recent decades than was the case during the 1930s – nearly 100 years of global warming ago ( See figure 1 below ) .
Also , data show the majority of each state ’ s all-time high-temperature records were set during the first half of the 20th century .
Also , the most accurate nationwide temperature station network , implemented in 2005 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high temperatures in the United States since at least 2005 .
Also , as reported in Climate at a Glance : Drought , the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) reports with “ high confidence ” that precipitation has increased over mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere ( including the United States ) during the past 70 years .
IPCC also has “ low confidence ” about any negative precipitation trends occurring globally .
Moreover , NOAA reports America is currently is undergoing its longest period in recorded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country experiencing “ very dry ” conditions .
And the United States registered its smallest percentage of land area experiencing drought in recorded history in 2017 and then again in 2019 .
Regardless of what any scientist or non-scientist says , the facts speak for themselves .
Heatwaves and drought – the primary climate factors influencing wildfires – are not getting any more severe as the Earth modestly warms .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

NPR Claims Heatwaves, Droughts, Fires Increasing; Data Says Otherwise
Written by H Sterling Burnett
NPR’s “All Things Considered” program is claiming climate change is causing an increase in heatwaves, drought, and wildfires.
Utilizing supposition instead of data, NPR presents no scientific evidence to back up its claim that any heatwave, drought, or wildfire must be caused by climate change.
Government climate and weather data, however, prove NPR’s assertion to be false.
In the NPR segment, titled “Scientists Say Disasters Are Teaming Up During Time of Climate Change,” reporter Loren Sommer interviews the head of the Arizona Farm Bureau Federation and a civil engineering professor at Boise State University.
While the rancher and the professor are welcome to their views of the state of the climate, they should hardly be considered experts or even knowledgeable on climate science.
An NPR host opens the segment by claiming, “It’s been a record-shattering year for heat in the American West. … If it seems like heat, drought, and wildfires are all piling together, it’s not your imagination. ”
Sommer later adds, citing the Boise State civil engineer, Moji Sadegh, “Droughts and heatwaves feed each other, he says. When the soil is dry, more of the sun’s energy heats up the air. Then it’s hotter, making more water evaporate, causing more drought. It’s a climate change-driven cycle. Because in a hotter climate, he says, disasters are teaming up.”
Although heatwaves and droughts have occurred this year, they occur somewhere every year. Objective data show heatwaves and drought have not gotten worse in recent years.
A recent summary of heatwave records, Climate at a Glance: U.S. Heatwaves, cites data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that shows heatwaves are far less severe in recent decades than was the case during the 1930s – nearly 100 years of global warming ago (See figure 1 below).
Also, data show the majority of each state’s all-time high-temperature records were set during the first half of the 20th century.
Also, the most accurate nationwide temperature station network, implemented in 2005, shows no sustained increase in daily high temperatures in the United States since at least 2005.
Also, as reported in Climate at a Glance: Drought, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports with “high confidence” that precipitation has increased over mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere (including the United States) during the past 70 years. IPCC also has “low confidence” about any negative precipitation trends occurring globally.
Moreover, NOAA reports America is currently is undergoing its longest period in recorded history with less than 40 percent of the country experiencing “very dry” conditions.
And the United States registered its smallest percentage of land area experiencing drought in recorded history in 2017 and then again in 2019.
Regardless of what any scientist or non-scientist says, the facts speak for themselves. Heatwaves and drought – the primary climate factors influencing wildfires – are not getting any more severe as the Earth modestly warms.
Read more at Climate Realism
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--2020-10-09--No Parental Consent? Easy, Vaccinate Their Kids in Secret!

No Parental Consent ?
Easy , Vaccinate Their Kids in Secret !
Have you heard of a new form of child abuse ?
Secret vaccination !
With the amount of claim and counter-claim about vaccines and their safety at the moment , I was rather disturbed to be told about two websites that are actively encouraging children to be vaccinated without telling their parents , and then to lie about it .
The first one I was told about is this WikiHow item from August 25th this year .
[ 1 ] It starts with the headline How to Get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by saying : There ’ s a lot of misinformation about vaccines online , and sometimes well-meaning parents fall into rabbit holes of conspiracy theories and made-up “ facts.
” While they often intend to protect their children , not vaccinating has the opposite effect , and leaves kids more vulnerable to dangerous and even deadly diseases .
Please keep in mind that while experts agree that vaccines are safer than the diseases they prevent and that serious side effects are extremely rare , it ’ s usually good for a trustworthy adult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event .
It then has a section called Making Plans , with six steps , the most important of which are : Some areas let you get vaccinated without parental consent if you ’ re a minor , and others don ’ t .
Potential options include : Get vaccinated in secret ( if your local laws allow it ) .
Run the risk of your family finding out .
Try asking for your family to let you be vaccinated .
You may be able to convince them .
Try asking your doctor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsible adult to help convince your family .
Petition the court for emancipation if your parents are really bad .
Wait until you ’ re 18 if you think that your parents would severely punish or abuse you if they learned that you disobeyed them .
Try talking to your parents .
Explain your own worries , and let them voice theirs .
Make sure that it ’ s a two-way conversation , and you show respect for their perspectives ( even when they frustrate you ) .
It takes time , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s minds .
Ask your parents for information on what vaccines you have and haven ’ t received .
This lets you know what you ’ re already vaccinated against .
If your parents really hate vaccines , you could pretend that you want to know if you ’ re at risk for “ vaccine injury , ” or that you think a health problem you have might be caused by vaccines .
You are allowed to lie to your parents if it ’ s the only way you can get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health .
Later , you can say that you researched it and realized you don ’ t have a vaccine injury .
Try visiting different clinics to see if they can help you .
Walk in and ask at a doctor ’ s office , a pharmacy , a reproductive health center , et cetera .
They may tell you that they can vaccinate you , or they may at least be able to give you advice or suggest a different clinic .
Try asking a school counselor , school nurse , parent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctor , or other trusted adult if they can help out .
It follows with a section called Getting the shots , with five steps , the most important of which are : Figure out what ( if anything ) to say to your family .
You can say that you ’ re going out , and not specify where .
You can also tell a white lie , like saying that you are visiting a friend to study or hang out .
You ’ re allowed to tell lies to protect your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is one of those cases .
If you plan to say that you were with a friend , contact that friend and their family .
Explain that you are actually going to get vaccinated , and ask them to cover for you .
You can even decide on a cover story ( like “ we watched the new romantic comedy ” or “ we studied for the upcoming history test ” ) .
If your parents are distrustful , prepare your cover story especially well .
Try actually doing your cover story activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking a selfie doing that thing with your friend .
This way , you ’ ll have “ evidence ” of doing it , and can answer questions if they quiz you .
Talk to the doctor about any concerns .
The doctor is here to help you stay healthy , and that includes removing any barriers to your care… even if those barriers are parental attitudes .
You can ask your doctor for advice about handling anti-vaxxer parents .
They may even have helpful pamphlets .
If you think that your parents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can relate what they said to the doctor , and ask if it ’ s a myth .
It then has a section called Handling any aftermath , in which it says : Remember that you don ’ t have to tell your parents about getting vaccinated , especially if they are controlling or abusive .
You can keep your health choices to yourself , especially if they would be mean to you or make you feel unsafe as a result of your choices .
You ’ re allowed to keep a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promote your health and well-being .
Know what to say if they do find out somehow .
Show respect for their position ( however illogical it may be ) , while emphasizing that this is important to you .
( Emphasis added in all paragraphs ) The second item is a 2014 web article from the World Health Organisation , entitled Considerations regarding consent in vaccinating children and adolescents between 6 and 17 years old [ 2 ] It then defines consent and assent : Consent is the principle wherein individuals must give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or procedure .
According to the laws and regulations in place in most countries , consent is required for a range of medical interventions or procedures , from a simple blood test to organ donation , and including vaccinations .
In only very few , well-described circumstances , such as life-threatening emergencies , may consent be waived .
Consent derives from the principle of autonomy and forms an important part of medical and public-health ethics , as well as international law.2 For consent to be valid , it must be informed , understood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must have the capacity to make the decision .
Assent refers to the process of children ’ s and adolescents ’ participation in the decision-making on vaccination ( or other medical interventions ) .
Assent is not regulated in law like consent , and is sometimes referred to as a moral obligation closely linked to good practice in dealing with patients .
International law provides strong support for children ’ s rights to participate in decisions about their health and health care , and also in the planning and provision of health services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evolving capacity .
It follows with these explanations of how consent is applied .
An implied consent process by which parents are informed of imminent vaccination through social mobilization and communication , sometimes including letters directly addressed to the parents .
Subsequently , the physical presence of the child or adolescent , with or without an accompanying parent at the vaccination session , is considered to imply consent .
This practice is based on the opt-out principle and parents who do not consent to vaccination are expected implicitly to take steps to ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ participate in the vaccination session .
This may include not letting the child or adolescent attend school on a vaccination day , if vaccine delivery occurs through schools .
Based on concepts of vaccines as a public good , or on public-health goals of disease elimination and outbreak control , some countries identify one or more vaccines as mandatory in law , or in their policies .
Vaccination may , for example , be made a condition for entry into preschool or primary school , or to enable access to welfare benefits .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ depends on the legal nature of the regulations .
When mandatory vaccination is established in relevant provisions in law , consent may not be required .
If the mandatory nature of vaccination is based on policy , or other forms of soft law , informed consent needs to be obtained as for any other vaccines .
Some countries allow individuals to express non-consent ( opt-out ) and obtain an exemption for mandatory vaccines .
This may come with certain conditions , like barring unvaccinated children from attending school during disease outbreaks .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encouraging children to get vaccinated without their parents ’ knowledge or consent , and then telling them it is perfectly acceptable to lie about it , is to me totally reprehensible , and in my opinion , this needs to be made as widely known as possible .
The WHO document mentions continuing to receive state benefits may be a condition of being vaccinated , with the implication that if you refuse a vaccination , benefits may be stopped .
It is effectively a sanctions-based policy .
This is already being considered for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not make vaccines mandatory , but if you refuse it , any state benefits you receive may be stopped .
Your children may no longer be welcome at their schools , and you may be prevented from working because employers will probably be told to only employ vaccinated people .
With no job you could not pay your bills , and would have no money to buy food , not that you could get into shops in the first place , because they would probably be instructed to only let vaccinated people in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have made yourself homeless , and within a month you would be dead from starvation or exposure .
This is the reality of the ‘ new normal ’ .
Your choice is likely to be do as the state commands or die .
“ All tyrannies rule through fraud and force , but once fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.
” – George Orwell About the author : Andy Rowlands is a British Principia Scientific International researcher , writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book , ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ 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 .

No Parental Consent? Easy, Vaccinate Their Kids in Secret!
Written by Andy Rowlands
Have you heard of a new form of child abuse? Secret vaccination! With the amount of claim and counter-claim about vaccines and their safety at the moment, I was rather disturbed to be told about two websites that are actively encouraging children to be vaccinated without telling their parents, and then to lie about it.
The first one I was told about is this WikiHow item from August 25th this year. [1] It starts with the headline How to Get Vaccinated Without Parental Consent, then continues by saying:
There’s a lot of misinformation about vaccines online, and sometimes well-meaning parents fall into rabbit holes of conspiracy theories and made-up “facts.” While they often intend to protect their children, not vaccinating has the opposite effect, and leaves kids more vulnerable to dangerous and even deadly diseases. Please keep in mind that while experts agree that vaccines are safer than the diseases they prevent and that serious side effects are extremely rare, it’s usually good for a trustworthy adult to supervise you during and after the event.
It then has a section called Making Plans, with six steps, the most important of which are:
Some areas let you get vaccinated without parental consent if you’re a minor, and others don’t. Potential options include: Get vaccinated in secret (if your local laws allow it). Run the risk of your family finding out. Try asking for your family to let you be vaccinated. You may be able to convince them. Try asking your doctor, your school nurse, or another responsible adult to help convince your family. Petition the court for emancipation if your parents are really bad. Wait until you’re 18 if you think that your parents would severely punish or abuse you if they learned that you disobeyed them. Try talking to your parents. Explain your own worries, and let them voice theirs. Make sure that it’s a two-way conversation, and you show respect for their perspectives (even when they frustrate you). It takes time, and often good listening skills, to change people’s minds. Ask your parents for information on what vaccines you have and haven’t received. This lets you know what you’re already vaccinated against. If your parents really hate vaccines, you could pretend that you want to know if you’re at risk for “vaccine injury,” or that you think a health problem you have might be caused by vaccines. You are allowed to lie to your parents if it’s the only way you can get the information you need to protect your health. Later, you can say that you researched it and realized you don’t have a vaccine injury. Try visiting different clinics to see if they can help you. Walk in and ask at a doctor’s office, a pharmacy, a reproductive health center, et cetera. They may tell you that they can vaccinate you, or they may at least be able to give you advice or suggest a different clinic. Try asking a school counselor, school nurse, parent of a friend, family friend, doctor, or other trusted adult if they can help out.
It follows with a section called Getting the shots, with five steps, the most important of which are:
Figure out what (if anything) to say to your family. You can say that you’re going out, and not specify where. You can also tell a white lie, like saying that you are visiting a friend to study or hang out. You’re allowed to tell lies to protect your health and safety, and getting vaccinated is one of those cases. If you plan to say that you were with a friend, contact that friend and their family. Explain that you are actually going to get vaccinated, and ask them to cover for you. You can even decide on a cover story (like “we watched the new romantic comedy” or “we studied for the upcoming history test”). If your parents are distrustful, prepare your cover story especially well. Try actually doing your cover story activity on a different day, and even taking a selfie doing that thing with your friend. This way, you’ll have “evidence” of doing it, and can answer questions if they quiz you. Talk to the doctor about any concerns. The doctor is here to help you stay healthy, and that includes removing any barriers to your care… even if those barriers are parental attitudes. You can ask your doctor for advice about handling anti-vaxxer parents. They may even have helpful pamphlets. If you think that your parents might have told you something false, you can relate what they said to the doctor, and ask if it’s a myth. It then has a section called Handling any aftermath, in which it says: Remember that you don’t have to tell your parents about getting vaccinated, especially if they are controlling or abusive. You can keep your health choices to yourself, especially if they would be mean to you or make you feel unsafe as a result of your choices. You’re allowed to keep a secret if it’s necessary to promote your health and well-being. Know what to say if they do find out somehow. Show respect for their position (however illogical it may be), while emphasizing that this is important to you. (Emphasis added in all paragraphs)
The second item is a 2014 web article from the World Health Organisation, entitled Considerations regarding consent in vaccinating children and adolescents between 6 and 17 years old [2]
It begins by stating:
The document is all the more important because this population group may present for vaccination without an accompanying parent or legal guardian.
It then defines consent and assent:
Consent is the principle wherein individuals must give their permission before receiving a medical intervention or procedure. According to the laws and regulations in place in most countries, consent is required for a range of medical interventions or procedures, from a simple blood test to organ donation, and including vaccinations. In only very few, well-described circumstances, such as life-threatening emergencies, may consent be waived. Consent derives from the principle of autonomy and forms an important part of medical and public-health ethics, as well as international law.2 For consent to be valid, it must be informed, understood and voluntary, and the person consenting must have the capacity to make the decision. Assent refers to the process of children’s and adolescents’ participation in the decision-making on vaccination (or other medical interventions). Assent is not regulated in law like consent, and is sometimes referred to as a moral obligation closely linked to good practice in dealing with patients. International law provides strong support for children’s rights to participate in decisions about their health and health care, and also in the planning and provision of health services relevant to them and based on their evolving capacity.
It follows with these explanations of how consent is applied.
An implied consent process by which parents are informed of imminent vaccination through social mobilization and communication, sometimes including letters directly addressed to the parents. Subsequently, the physical presence of the child or adolescent, with or without an accompanying parent at the vaccination session, is considered to imply consent. This practice is based on the opt-out principle and parents who do not consent to vaccination are expected implicitly to take steps to ensure that their child or adolescent does not participate in the vaccination session. This may include not letting the child or adolescent attend school on a vaccination day, if vaccine delivery occurs through schools. Based on concepts of vaccines as a public good, or on public-health goals of disease elimination and outbreak control, some countries identify one or more vaccines as mandatory in law, or in their policies. Vaccination may, for example, be made a condition for entry into preschool or primary school, or to enable access to welfare benefits. Whether consent is needed for mandatory vaccination depends on the legal nature of the regulations. When mandatory vaccination is established in relevant provisions in law, consent may not be required. If the mandatory nature of vaccination is based on policy, or other forms of soft law, informed consent needs to be obtained as for any other vaccines. Some countries allow individuals to express non-consent (opt-out) and obtain an exemption for mandatory vaccines. This may come with certain conditions, like barring unvaccinated children from attending school during disease outbreaks. (Emphasis added in all paragraphs)
Actively encouraging children to get vaccinated without their parents’ knowledge or consent, and then telling them it is perfectly acceptable to lie about it, is to me totally reprehensible, and in my opinion, this needs to be made as widely known as possible.
The WHO document mentions continuing to receive state benefits may be a condition of being vaccinated, with the implication that if you refuse a vaccination, benefits may be stopped. It is effectively a sanctions-based policy.
This is already being considered for many countries. Most say they will not make vaccines mandatory, but if you refuse it, any state benefits you receive may be stopped. Your children may no longer be welcome at their schools, and you may be prevented from working because employers will probably be told to only employ vaccinated people.
With no job you could not pay your bills, and would have no money to buy food, not that you could get into shops in the first place, because they would probably be instructed to only let vaccinated people in. You would eventually be deemed to have made yourself homeless, and within a month you would be dead from starvation or exposure.
This is the reality of the ‘new normal’. Your choice is likely to be do as the state commands or die.
“All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.” – George Orwell
[1] https://www.wikihow.com/Get-Vaccinated-Without-Parental-Consent?fbclid=IwAR2SUZiyGqRTsGLL47f83mHj5ywbSSIgtFUMuhTH7_UHmRKdOEigBTPox-w
[2] https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3XG-xN311jg6adoQHRJtny3z8JYyJw-XX6n_EHS11Uz_efB8VWnRFnkpk
About the author: Andy Rowlands is a British Principia Scientific International researcher, writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book, ‘The Sky Dragon Slayers: Victory Lap‘
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--2020-10-09--What could they put in the COVID vaccine?

What could they put in the COVID vaccine ?
Tiny , tiny biosensors ?
From lexico.com : nanotechnology : “ The branch of technology that deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers , especially the manipulation of individual atoms and molecules.
” We begin with excerpts from an important article at Children ’ s Health Defense , “ Microchips , Nanotechnology and Implanted Biosensors : The New Normal ?
” by Pam Long .
[ 1 ] “ U.S .
military personnel will be the first subjects in nanotechnology trials in the pursuit of optimizing health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has research contracts for bio-integrated sensors with the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ( DARPA ) , pending U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in early 2021.
” “ Profusa ’ s promotional video shows how the bio-integrated sensor enables a soldier to be tracked by remote computers using GPS in addition to monitoring real-time biomarkers , such as oxygen levels and heart rate .
While this biotechnology is portrayed as potentially lifesaving to a soldier on the battlefield , the implications of GPS tracking individuals is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the general population .
Furthermore , tracking people in stages of sickness can only result in medical tyranny in the hands of any government .
The Profusa influenza study requires patients to wear the wearable version of the reader 24 hours a day , with continuous biomarker information collection into a database , and aims to detect four stages of infection : healthy , infected , asymptomatic and recovery stage .
These unreliable detection stages could become the criteria for different levels of individual participation in society as experienced in the unsustainable COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nano-bio sensors .
Could this be taken a step further ?
Instead of placing the sensors just under the surface of the skin , could they be injected with a vaccine ?
Are researchers interested in marrying nanotechnology and vaccines ?
Here is a quote from Frontiers in Immunology , 24 January , 2019 , “ Nanoparticle-Based Vaccines Against Respiratory Viruses ” [ 2 ] : A new generation of vaccines based on nanoparticles has shown great potential to address most of the limitations of conventional and subunit vaccines .
This is due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engineering , which allow the design of nanoparticles with a precise control over the size , shape , functionality and surface properties , leading to enhanced antigen presentation and strong immunogenicity .
This short review provides an overview of the advantages associated with the use of nanoparticles as vaccine delivery platforms to immunize against respiratory viruses… ” [ such as the purported COVID-19 virus ? ]
Here is another quote , also from Frontiers in Immunology , October 4 , 2018 , “ Nanoparticle Vaccines Against Infectious Diseases ” [ 3 ] : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , indeed , very much involved in cutting-edge vaccine research .
Here are astonishing quotes from the journal Nano Today , from a 2019 paper titled : “ Nanowire probes could drive high-resolution brain-machine interfaces.
” [ 4 ] Its authors are Chinese and American : Aside from research into prosthetics and , perhaps , the reversal of certain paralyses , this avenue of investigation also suggests “ modulation ” of the brain remotely connected to machines , for the purpose of control .
ONE : Nano-sensors , implanted in the body @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data-reports on body/brain functioning to ops centers .
TWO : And from those ops centers , data—including instructions—would be sent back to the nano-sensors , which would impose those instructions on the brain and body .
If this seems impossible , consider nanotech research aimed at improving the use of prosthetics .
In that field , imposing instructions on the body/brain appears to be the whole point .
The question is : how far along the road of development is this technology ?
I can only say we are seeing the public published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , in secret research , is a matter for estimation and speculation .
I offer one speculation : the “ promotion ” of the social agenda of collectivist thought , through nanotech .
Utilizing the Internet of Things , an attempt would be made to hook up and “ harmonize ” many , many brains with one another .
Same basic feelings , same impulses—shared .
Who would be interested in such a program ?
Think Chinese government , DARPA ( the technology arm of the Pentagon ) , and numerous other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Think technocracy and Brave New World .
But wait .
Suppose untold numbers of nanoparticles are ALREADY in traditional vaccines ?
And suppose we have no idea how they got there ?
Or whether they are “ only ” dangerous contaminants that could affect human health in many damaging ways…or are some of them ALSO nanosensors that can receive and transmit information ?
Do these contaminating nanoparticles represent an earlier stage of research in implantation of vaccine-nanos into humans ?
A 2017 study of 44 types of 15 traditional vaccines , manufactured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very troubling and previously unreported fact : • The vaccines are heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles .
• Many of the particles are metals .
• We ’ re talking about traditional vaccines , such as HPV , flu , Swine Flu , Hepatitis B , MMR , DPT , tetanus , etc .
To begin to understand some of the destructive effects of contaminating nanoparticles in vaccines , here is the groundbreaking 2017 study : [ 5 ] International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination Volume 4 Issue 1 January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Micro- and Nanocontamination Antonietta M Gatti and Stefano Montanari Are the study authors leaving the door open to the possibility that the contamination is intentional ?
“ The quantity of foreign bodies detected and , in some cases , their unusual chemical compositions baffled us .
The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable , that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration .
It is important to remember that particles ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign to the organism and they behave as such .
More in particular , their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them , adding to that toxicity…they induce an inflammatory reaction.
” “ After being injected , those microparticles , nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas…But they can also be carried by the blood circulation , escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…As happens with all foreign bodies , particularly that small , they induce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most of those particles can not be degraded .
Furthermore , the protein-corona effect…due to a nano-bio-interaction…can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way…It is impossible not to add that particles the size often observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA… ” “ In some cases , e.g .
as occurs with Iron and some Iron alloys , they can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues… ” “ Given the contaminations we observed in all samples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the injection of those vaccines are possible and credible and have the character of randomness , since they depend on where the contaminants are carried by the blood circulation .
It is only obvious that similar quantities of these foreign bodies can have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children .
Their presence in the muscles…could heavily impair the muscle functionality… ” “ We come across particles with chemical compositions , similar to those found in the vaccines we analyzed , when we study cases of environmental contamination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most circumstances , the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use , can not be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring , for example , when waste is burnt .
In any case , whatever their origin , they should not be present in any injectable medicament , let alone in vaccines , more in particular those meant for infants.
” This 2017 study opens up a whole new field : the investigation of nanoparticles in vaccines where none were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any sense of the word .
Many legal and scientific “ experts ” assert the State has a right to mandate vaccines and force them on the population .
But these contaminating nanoparticles are not vaccines or medicines .
Only a lunatic would defend the right of the State to inject them .
Here is another section from the 2017 study .
Trade names of vaccines , and compositions of the nanoparticle contaminants are indicated .
“ …further presence of micro- , sub-micro- and nanosized , inorganic , foreign bodies ( ranging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was identified in all cases [ all 44 vaccines ] , whose presence was not declared in the leaflets delivered in the package of the product… ” “ …single particles , cluster of micro- and nanoparticles ( < 100nm ) and aggregates…debris of Aluminum , Silicon , Magnesium and Titanium ; of Iron , Chromium , Silicon and Calcium particles…arranged in a cluster , and Aluminum-Copper debris…in an aggregate.
” “ …the particles are surrounded and embedded in a biological substrate .
In all the samples analyzed , we identified particles containing : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ S1 , Meningitec , Gardasil ) or stainless steel ( Mencevax , Infarix Hexa , Cervarix .
Anatetall , Focetria , Agrippal S1 , Menveo , Prevenar 13 , Meningitec , Vaxigrip , Stamaril Pasteur , Repevax and MMRvaxPro ) .
” “ …particles of Tungsten identified in drops of Prevenar and Infarix ( Aluminum , Tungsten , Calcium chloride ) .
” “ Some metallic particles made of Tungsten or stainless steel were also identified .
Other particles containing Zirconium , Hafnium , Strontium and Aluminum ( Vivotif , Meningetec ) ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Meningetec ) ; Antimony ( Menjugate kit ) ; Chromium ( Meningetec ) ; Gold or Gold , Zinc ( Infarix Hexa , Repevax ) , or Platinum , Silver , Bismuth , Iron , Chromium ( MMRvaxPro ) or Lead , Bismuth ( Gardasil ) or Cerium ( Agrippal S1 ) were also found .
The only Tungsten appears in 8/44 vaccines , while Chromium ( alone or in alloy with Iron and Nickel ) in 25/44 .
The investigations revealed that some particles are embedded in a biological substrate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bacteria .
As soon as a particle comes in contact with proteic fluids , a nano-bio-interaction…occurs and a ‘ protein corona ’ is formed…The nano-bio-interaction generates a bigger-sized compound that is not biodegradable and can induce adverse effects , since it is not recognized as self by the body.
” “ …examples of these nano-bio-interactions .
Aggregates can be seen ( stable composite entities ) containing particles of Lead in Meningitec… of stainless steel ( Iron , Chromium and Nickel… ) and of Copper , Zinc and Lead in Cervarix…Similar aggregates , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leukemia or cryoglobulinemia ) , have already been described in literature.
” I ’ m sure you ’ ve read official assurances that vaccine-manufacturing problems are “ rare.
” You can file those pronouncements along with other medical lies .
“ I ’ d like the heavy metal sandwich on rye , please .
And instead of serving it on a plate , can you inject it ?
” —It ’ s obvious from what I ’ ve written so far in this article that research and development of nanoparticles as vaccine components @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what is already in the vaccines may be nano-contamination , there has also been a very strong push to refine the research—INSERT NANO SENSORS IN THE BODY AND BRAIN THAT WOULD RECEIVE AND TRANSMIT INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS .
Just to give you an idea of how important nanoparticles-in-vaccines is to the pharmaceutical establishment , here is what happened to the two Italian researchers who uncovered the presence of nanos in traditional vaccines , the authors of the study I quoted from above : James Grundvig , at GreenMedInfo.com and the World Mercury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ 6 ] “ Last week , the Italian police raided the home and science laboratory of Drs .
Antonietta Gatti and Stefano Montanari .
The police snatched all of the digital assets owned by the husband and wife team of nanopathologists , grabbing laptops , computers , and flash-drives—and with it , years of work and research.
” “ Because Gatti and Montanari had taken their research of nanodust and nanoparticles…to what unseen contamination might reside in vaccines in 2016 , they came under the microscope of the United States , European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touched the third rail of medicine .
They had crossed the no-go zone with the purported crime being scientific research and discovery .
By finding nano-contamination in random vaccines , Gatti and Montanari revealed , for the first time , what no one knew : Vaccines had more than aluminum salts adjuvants , Polysorbate-80 , and other inorganic chemicals in them , they also harbored stainless steel , tungsten , copper , and other metals and rare elements that don ’ t belong in shots given to fetuses , pregnant women , newborns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , immune and nervous systems.
” “ When the scientists published their findings in January 2017 , “ New Quality‐Control Investigations on Vaccines : Micro‐ and Nanocontamination , ” the logical next step for the World Health Organization ( WHO ) and the Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) should have been to open an investigation into their claims , hire independent scientists to run their own lab tests to confirm or refute the findings .
If confirmed , then the healthcare agencies would enact new policies on safety of the vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control and quality assurance programs.
” “ But none of that happened .
A year went by .
It was cheaper for the authorities to attack the Italian scientists than upset the vaccine gravy train that supports the politicians.
” Now , it appears we are on the cusp of an approval for one vaccine , the COVID shot , to be certified for injection into every person in the world .
What better opportunity for implanting nanotech particles in humans ?
Here is just one example : New England Journal of Medicine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Phase 1–2 Trial of a SARS-CoV-2 Recombinant Spike Protein Nanoparticle Vaccine.
” [ 7 ] What is on the horizon ?
Through the use of implanted nanosenors that can receive instructions , the enactment of an agenda of collectivist thought .
An attempt would be made to hook up and “ harmonize ” many , many brains with one another .
Same basic feelings , same impulses—shared… Who would be interested in such a program ?
Think Chinese government , DARPA ( the technology arm of the Pentagon ) , and numerous other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Think technocracy and Brave New World .
About the author : Jon Rappaport has written three explosive collections , THE MATRIX REVEALED , EXIT FROM THE MATRIX , and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX , Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California .
He maintains a consulting practice for private clients , the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power .
Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize , he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years , writing articles on politics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Healthwatch , LA Weekly , Spin Magazine , Stern , and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe .
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 .

What could they put in the COVID vaccine?
Written by Jon Rappoport
Tiny, tiny biosensors? From lexico.com: nanotechnology: “The branch of technology that deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers, especially the manipulation of individual atoms and molecules.”
We begin with excerpts from an important article at Children’s Health Defense, “Microchips, Nanotechnology and Implanted Biosensors: The New Normal?” by Pam Long. [1]
Buckle up.
“U.S. military personnel will be the first subjects in nanotechnology trials in the pursuit of optimizing health and early detection of disease outbreaks. Profusa has research contracts for bio-integrated sensors with the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), pending U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in early 2021.”
“Profusa’s promotional video shows how the bio-integrated sensor enables a soldier to be tracked by remote computers using GPS in addition to monitoring real-time biomarkers, such as oxygen levels and heart rate. While this biotechnology is portrayed as potentially lifesaving to a soldier on the battlefield, the implications of GPS tracking individuals is a terrifying step towards a surveillance state in the general population.
Furthermore, tracking people in stages of sickness can only result in medical tyranny in the hands of any government. The Profusa influenza study requires patients to wear the wearable version of the reader 24 hours a day, with continuous biomarker information collection into a database, and aims to detect four stages of infection: healthy, infected, asymptomatic and recovery stage.
These unreliable detection stages could become the criteria for different levels of individual participation in society as experienced in the unsustainable COVID-19 state-level lockdowns for the masses.”
“This Profusa nanotechnology has three components: an inserted [implanted] sensor called hydrogel, a light-emitting fluorescent sensor reader on the surface of the skin and an electronic software component that transmits to an online database…and there is no information on how the technology could be removed, if at all. ‘Tiny biosensors that become one with the body’ could imply a lifetime commitment.”
So…implanted nano-bio sensors. Could this be taken a step further? Instead of placing the sensors just under the surface of the skin, could they be injected with a vaccine?
Are researchers interested in marrying nanotechnology and vaccines?
Here is a quote from Frontiers in Immunology, 24 January, 2019, “Nanoparticle-Based Vaccines Against Respiratory Viruses” [2]: A new generation of vaccines based on nanoparticles has shown great potential to address most of the limitations of conventional and subunit vaccines.
This is due to recent advances in chemical and biological engineering, which allow the design of nanoparticles with a precise control over the size, shape, functionality and surface properties, leading to enhanced antigen presentation and strong immunogenicity. This short review provides an overview of the advantages associated with the use of nanoparticles as vaccine delivery platforms to immunize against respiratory viruses…” [such as the purported COVID-19 virus?]
Here is another quote, also from Frontiers in Immunology, October 4, 2018, “Nanoparticle Vaccines Against Infectious Diseases” [3]:
In the last several years, the use of nanoparticle-based vaccines has received a great attention to improve vaccine efficacy, immunization strategies, and targeted delivery to achieve desired immune responses at the cellular level…Nanocarriers composed of lipids, proteins, metals or polymers have already been used…This review article focuses on the applications of nanocarrier-based vaccine formulations and the strategies used for the functionalization of nanoparticles to accomplish efficient delivery of vaccines in order to induce desired host immunity against infectious diseases.”
There can be no doubt that nanotechnology is, indeed, very much involved in cutting-edge vaccine research.
Here are astonishing quotes from the journal Nano Today, from a 2019 paper titled: “Nanowire probes could drive high-resolution brain-machine interfaces.” [4] Its authors are Chinese and American:
“…advances can enable investigations of dynamics in the brain [through nano-sensor-implants] and drive the development of new brain-machine interfaces with unprecedented resolution and precision.” “…output electrical signals of brain activity or input electrical stimuli to modulate brain activity in concert with external machines, including computer processors and prosthetics, for human enhancement…”
Aside from research into prosthetics and, perhaps, the reversal of certain paralyses, this avenue of investigation also suggests “modulation” of the brain remotely connected to machines, for the purpose of control.
Modulation…such as control of basic thought-impulses, sensations, emotions?
ONE: Nano-sensors, implanted in the body and brain, would issue real time data-reports on body/brain functioning to ops centers.
TWO: And from those ops centers, data—including instructions—would be sent back to the nano-sensors, which would impose those instructions on the brain and body.
If this seems impossible, consider nanotech research aimed at improving the use of prosthetics. In that field, imposing instructions on the body/brain appears to be the whole point.
The question is: how far along the road of development is this technology? I can only say we are seeing the public published face of nanotech. What lies behind it, in secret research, is a matter for estimation and speculation.
I offer one speculation: the “promotion” of the social agenda of collectivist thought, through nanotech. Utilizing the Internet of Things, an attempt would be made to hook up and “harmonize” many, many brains with one another. Same basic feelings, same impulses—shared.
Who would be interested in such a program? Think Chinese government, DARPA (the technology arm of the Pentagon), and numerous other international actors. Think Rockefeller medical researchers. Think technocracy and Brave New World.
But wait. Suppose untold numbers of nanoparticles are ALREADY in traditional vaccines? And suppose we have no idea how they got there? Or whether they are “only” dangerous contaminants that could affect human health in many damaging ways…or are some of them ALSO nanosensors that can receive and transmit information? Do these contaminating nanoparticles represent an earlier stage of research in implantation of vaccine-nanos into humans?
A 2017 study of 44 types of 15 traditional vaccines, manufactured by leading global companies, has uncovered a very troubling and previously unreported fact:
The vaccines are heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles.
Many of the particles are metals.
We’re talking about traditional vaccines, such as HPV, flu, Swine Flu, Hepatitis B, MMR, DPT, tetanus, etc.
To begin to understand some of the destructive effects of contaminating nanoparticles in vaccines, here is the groundbreaking 2017 study: [5]
International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination
Volume 4 Issue 1
January 23 2017
New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines:
Micro- and Nanocontamination
Antonietta M Gatti and Stefano Montanari
“The analyses carried out show that in all samples checked vaccines contain non biocompatible and bio-persistent foreign bodies which are not declared by the Producers, against which the body reacts in any case. This new investigation represents a new quality control that can be adopted to assess the safety of a vaccine. Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines…”
Are the study authors leaving the door open to the possibility that the contamination is intentional?
“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity…they induce an inflammatory reaction.” “After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas…But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect…due to a nano-bio-interaction…can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way…It is impossible not to add that particles the size often observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA…” “In some cases, e.g. as occurs with Iron and some Iron alloys, they can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues…” “Given the contaminations we observed in all samples of human-use vaccines, adverse effects after the injection of those vaccines are possible and credible and have the character of randomness, since they depend on where the contaminants are carried by the blood circulation. It is only obvious that similar quantities of these foreign bodies can have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children. Their presence in the muscles…could heavily impair the muscle functionality…” “We come across particles with chemical compositions, similar to those found in the vaccines we analyzed, when we study cases of environmental contamination caused by different pollution sources. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants.”
This 2017 study opens up a whole new field: the investigation of nanoparticles in vaccines where none were expected.
Such particles are not medicine in any sense of the word.
Many legal and scientific “experts” assert the State has a right to mandate vaccines and force them on the population. But these contaminating nanoparticles are not vaccines or medicines. Only a lunatic would defend the right of the State to inject them.
Here is another section from the 2017 study. Trade names of vaccines, and compositions of the nanoparticle contaminants are indicated.
“…further presence of micro-, sub-micro- and nanosized, inorganic, foreign bodies (ranging from 100nm to about ten microns) was identified in all cases [all 44 vaccines], whose presence was not declared in the leaflets delivered in the package of the product…” “…single particles, cluster of micro- and nanoparticles (<100nm) and aggregates…debris of Aluminum, Silicon, Magnesium and Titanium; of Iron, Chromium, Silicon and Calcium particles…arranged in a cluster, and Aluminum-Copper debris…in an aggregate.” “…the particles are surrounded and embedded in a biological substrate. In all the samples analyzed, we identified particles containing: Lead (Typhym, Cervarix, Agrippal S1, Meningitec, Gardasil) or stainless steel (Mencevax, Infarix Hexa, Cervarix. Anatetall, Focetria, Agrippal S1, Menveo, Prevenar 13, Meningitec, Vaxigrip, Stamaril Pasteur, Repevax and MMRvaxPro).” “…particles of Tungsten identified in drops of Prevenar and Infarix (Aluminum, Tungsten, Calcium chloride).” “…singular debris found in Repevax (Silicon, Gold, Silver) and Gardasil (Zirconium).” “Some metallic particles made of Tungsten or stainless steel were also identified. Other particles containing Zirconium, Hafnium, Strontium and Aluminum (Vivotif, Meningetec); Tungsten, Nickel, Iron (Priorix, Meningetec); Antimony (Menjugate kit); Chromium (Meningetec); Gold or Gold, Zinc (Infarix Hexa, Repevax), or Platinum, Silver, Bismuth, Iron, Chromium (MMRvaxPro) or Lead,Bismuth (Gardasil) or Cerium (Agrippal S1) were also found. The only Tungsten appears in 8/44 vaccines, while Chromium (alone or in alloy with Iron and Nickel) in 25/44. The investigations revealed that some particles are embedded in a biological substrate, probably proteins, endo-toxins and residues of bacteria. As soon as a particle comes in contact with proteic fluids, a nano-bio-interaction…occurs and a ‘protein corona’ is formed…The nano-bio-interaction generates a bigger-sized compound that is not biodegradable and can induce adverse effects, since it is not recognized as self by the body.” “…examples of these nano-bio-interactions. Aggregates can be seen (stable composite entities) containing particles of Lead in Meningitec… of stainless steel (Iron, Chromium and Nickel…) and of Copper, Zinc and Lead in Cervarix…Similar aggregates, though in different situations (patients suffering from leukemia or cryoglobulinemia), have already been described in literature.”
I’m sure you’ve read official assurances that vaccine-manufacturing problems are “rare.” You can file those pronouncements along with other medical lies.
“I’d like the heavy metal sandwich on rye, please. And instead of serving it on a plate, can you inject it?”
—It’s obvious from what I’ve written so far in this article that research and development of nanoparticles as vaccine components is far along. And while much of what is already in the vaccines may be nano-contamination, there has also been a very strong push to refine the research—INSERT NANO SENSORS IN THE BODY AND BRAIN THAT WOULD RECEIVE AND TRANSMIT INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS.
Just to give you an idea of how important nanoparticles-in-vaccines is to the pharmaceutical establishment, here is what happened to the two Italian researchers who uncovered the presence of nanos in traditional vaccines, the authors of the study I quoted from above:
James Grundvig, at GreenMedInfo.com and the World Mercury Project, reported (3/7/18): [6]
“Last week, the Italian police raided the home and science laboratory of Drs. Antonietta Gatti and Stefano Montanari. The police snatched all of the digital assets owned by the husband and wife team of nanopathologists, grabbing laptops, computers, and flash-drives—and with it, years of work and research.” “Because Gatti and Montanari had taken their research of nanodust and nanoparticles…to what unseen contamination might reside in vaccines in 2016, they came under the microscope of the United States, European, and Italian authorities. They had touched the third rail of medicine. They had crossed the no-go zone with the purported crime being scientific research and discovery. By finding nano-contamination in random vaccines, Gatti and Montanari revealed, for the first time, what no one knew: Vaccines had more than aluminum salts adjuvants, Polysorbate-80, and other inorganic chemicals in them, they also harbored stainless steel, tungsten, copper, and other metals and rare elements that don’t belong in shots given to fetuses, pregnant women, newborns, babies and toddlers developing their lungs, immune and nervous systems.” “When the scientists published their findings in January 2017, “New Quality‐Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro‐ and Nanocontamination,” the logical next step for the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) should have been to open an investigation into their claims, hire independent scientists to run their own lab tests to confirm or refute the findings. If confirmed, then the healthcare agencies would enact new policies on safety of the vaccine supply chain, and enforce strict quality control and quality assurance programs.” “But none of that happened. A year went by. It was cheaper for the authorities to attack the Italian scientists than upset the vaccine gravy train that supports the politicians.”
Now, it appears we are on the cusp of an approval for one vaccine, the COVID shot, to be certified for injection into every person in the world.
What better opportunity for implanting nanotech particles in humans?
Here is just one example:
New England Journal of Medicine, September 2, 2020; “Phase 1–2 Trial of a SARS-CoV-2 Recombinant Spike Protein Nanoparticle Vaccine.” [7]
“rSARS-CoV-2, developed by Novavax and manufactured at Emergent Biosolutions, is a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine constructed from the full-length (i.e., including the transmembrane domain), wild-type SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein…” “We initiated a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 1–2 trial to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the rSARS-CoV-2 vaccine (in 5-μg and 25-μg doses, with or without Matrix-M1 adjuvant, and with observers unaware of trial-group assignments) in 131 healthy adults. In phase 1, vaccination comprised two intramuscular injections, 21 days apart…”
It’s happening. It’s in progress.
What is on the horizon? Through the use of implanted nanosenors that can receive instructions, the enactment of an agenda of collectivist thought. An attempt would be made to hook up and “harmonize” many, many brains with one another. Same basic feelings, same impulses—shared…
Who would be interested in such a program? Think Chinese government, DARPA (the technology arm of the Pentagon), and numerous other international actors. Think Rockefeller medical researchers. Think technocracy and Brave New World.
SOURCES:
[1] https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/military-vaccines/microchips-nanotechnology-and-implanted-biosensors-the-new-normal/
[2] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2019.00022/full
[3] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2018.02224/full
[4] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1748013219306929
[5] https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/new-quality-control-investigations-on-vaccines-micro–and-nanocontamination.html
[6] https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/the-third-digital-revolution-to-unleash-the-power-of-anti-censorship/
[7] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2026920
Read more at blog.nomorefakenews.com
About the author: Jon Rappaport has written three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe.
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


principiascientificinternational--2020-10-09--LinkedIn Bans Principia Scientific International Without Warning

Popular social media business platform LinkedIn bans without warning registered UK science body , Principia Scientific International ( PSI ) as it ramps up censorship of users dissenting against scientifically-unproven pandemic ‘ lockdown ’ measures .
As a fully incorporated and regulated non-profit based in London , England PSI is a 6,500+ member organisation which has been dutifully reporting on the scientific evidence , including that which is contrary to the official pandemic narrative .
After fairly reporting the news yesterday that no fewer than 7,000 medics worldwide , signed the Great Barrington Declaration urging a new , softer strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LinkedIn swiftly removed our account ( screenshot below ) .
This apparent act of bias and contempt for free speech on a matter of the most urgent public policy concern exposes not only LinkedIn but other social media giants who are systematically conspiring ( and profiting ) against lawful use of social media when it conflicts with the agenda of the richest one percent of society .
As a London-based organisation our offices are not far from Parliament where Prime Minister Boris Johnson was quick to denounce the Great Barrington Declaration .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capitalist politicians are on .
As we have previously highlighted , in the UK there have already been up to 10,000 excess deaths as a result of seriously ill people avoiding hospitals due to COVID-19 or not having their hospital treatments cancelled .
Professor Richard Sullivan also warned that there will be more excess cancer deaths in the UK than total coronavirus deaths due to people ’ s access to screenings and treatment being restricted as a result of the lockdown .
As we reported earlier this week , the lockdown policies enacted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and losers .
Among the losers are our civil rights , small business , jobs , normal social and family interactions and our general health and well being .
Among the winners are the billionaire class ( including the owners of the social media giants ) who have seen their wealth skyrocket 27 percent since the start of the lockdown measures in March 2020 .
The Declaration is fast gaining support because it applies common sense , including traditional medical protocols that have worked during similar such pandemics .
As the Declaration ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and mask mandates are causing ‘ damaging physical and mental health impacts.
’ ” What is clear is that the corrupt politicians are focused only on their fraudulent PCR testing scam and ignoring any and all non-Covid related deaths , suffering and related social and economic consequences .
We have now reached a crisis point where our political masters are committing crimes against humanity and should face the consequences .
We appeal to all our readers who are also users of LinkedIn to contact LinkedIn and please register your complaint on our behalf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ silenced simply for seeking the truth about COVID19 .
To contact LinkedIn please do the following : Note : You must be signed in to your LinkedIn account in order to contact them .
Ask ‘ Please remove immediately the Account Restriction on John O ’ Sullivan and Principia Scientific International.
’ • • Click Contact us at the bottom of the page .
• Select Get help from us from the available options .
You can also click : • • Find out how to do something – to get the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an improvement – to tell us how we can make your experience better Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

LinkedIn Bans Principia Scientific International Without Warning
Written by John O'Sullivan
Popular social media business platform LinkedIn bans without warning registered UK science body, Principia Scientific International (PSI) as it ramps up censorship of users dissenting against scientifically-unproven pandemic ‘lockdown’ measures.
As a fully incorporated and regulated non-profit based in London, England PSI is a 6,500+ member organisation which has been dutifully reporting on the scientific evidence, including that which is contrary to the official pandemic narrative.
After fairly reporting the news yesterday that no fewer than 7,000 medics worldwide, signed the Great Barrington Declaration urging a new, softer strategy by governments to combat the pandemic, LinkedIn swiftly removed our account (screenshot below).
This apparent act of bias and contempt for free speech on a matter of the most urgent public policy concern exposes not only LinkedIn but other social media giants who are systematically conspiring (and profiting) against lawful use of social media when it conflicts with the agenda of the richest one percent of society.
As a London-based organisation our offices are not far from Parliament where Prime Minister Boris Johnson was quick to denounce the Great Barrington Declaration. So we know whose side the corrupt crony capitalist politicians are on.
As we have previously highlighted, in the UK there have already been up to 10,000 excess deaths as a result of seriously ill people avoiding hospitals due to COVID-19 or not having their hospital treatments cancelled.
Professor Richard Sullivan also warned that there will be more excess cancer deaths in the UK than total coronavirus deaths due to people’s access to screenings and treatment being restricted as a result of the lockdown.
Billionaires and Political Classes Love Lockdown
As we reported earlier this week, the lockdown policies enacted globally have cast extremes among the winners and losers. Among the losers are our civil rights, small business, jobs, normal social and family interactions and our general health and well being.
Among the winners are the billionaire class (including the owners of the social media giants) who have seen their wealth skyrocket 27 percent since the start of the lockdown measures in March 2020.
The Declaration is fast gaining support because it applies common sense, including traditional medical protocols that have worked during similar such pandemics. As the Declaration’s medical experts agree ” social distancing and mask mandates are causing ‘damaging physical and mental health impacts.’”
What is clear is that the corrupt politicians are focused only on their fraudulent PCR testing scam and ignoring any and all non-Covid related deaths, suffering and related social and economic consequences. We have now reached a crisis point where our political masters are committing crimes against humanity and should face the consequences.
We appeal to all our readers who are also users of LinkedIn to contact LinkedIn and please register your complaint on our behalf and all others who have been unfairly silenced simply for seeking the truth about COVID19.
To contact LinkedIn please do the following:
Note: You must be signed in to your LinkedIn account in order to contact them.
Ask ‘Please remove immediately the Account Restriction on John O’Sullivan and Principia Scientific International.’
To submit a support case:
Click Contact us at the bottom of the page. Select Get help from us from the available options. You can also click:
Find an answer in Help Forum – to take advantage of community knowledge
Find out how to do something – to get the answer you need, right now
Suggest an improvement – to tell us how we can make your experience better
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.
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