principiascientificinternational--2020-03-17--‘Greenhouse Gases’ Not Behind The End Of The Warming Pause

‘ Greenhouse Gases ’ Not Behind The End Of The Warming Pause During the years 2000-2014 , the global temperature hardly increased , and that period has been called the temperature pause or hiatus .
The debate among the climate community has resulted in more than 200 research studies in some cases with opposite results about the reasons .
This amount of papers can be compared to the research studies of Earth ’ s energy balance and the greenhouse effect .
I have found about 10 publications for both subjects .
During the years 2000-2014 , the emissions of carbon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) being 31 % of the total emission after 1750 , but the greenhouse ( GH ) gases were not able to increase the temperature .
According to the IPCC , the temperature increase should have been 0.4°C from 2000 to 2014 ( Ref .
1 ) .
It looks like that the pause ended to the super El Nino 2015-2016 because the temperature has been thereafter about 0.2 °C above-the-pause average .
Research study about the pause and the ENSO The impulse for my research study came from a story figure on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ radiation variations during the pause .
A curve showed increased values around El Nino 2015-16 and thereafter .
I decided to find out what could be the impact of this finding on the temperatures .
In Fig .
1 , I have depicted the total solar irradiance ( TSI ) , SW radiation and LW radiation from 2000 onward .
This data is available from the CERES databank maintained by NASA .
Fig.1 .
TSI , SW radiation and LW radiation trends normalized to the altitude of 20 kilometers .
TSI has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is surprising that SW radiation has an increasing trend with a maximum during El Nino 2015-16 .
I decided to carry out a research study about the factors which should explain the temperature variations during the pause including ENSO events .
I have used two dynamic models with the same structure naming them as the Ollila model and the IPCC model .
In my own model , I have used the results of my earlier research studies .
This newest study has been published , Ref.2 .
Both models include the same terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , dTSW is the temperature impact of SW radiation , dTENSOis the temperature impact of ENSO event , dTANTR is the temperature impact of greenhouse ( GH ) gases and other anthropogenic factors , and dTCLOUD the temperature impact of cloudiness changes .
The term dTCLOUD has not been used in the IPCC model because this effect has been integrated into the term dTANTR .
The temperature effects of SW radiation and anthropogenic factors have been calculated using the equation applied both in the IPCC model and my model where λ is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0.5 K/ ( W/m2 ) in the IPCC model and in my model 0.27 K/ ( W/m2 ) and RF means radiative forcing ( W/m2 ) .
The IPCC has normalized the anthropogenic factors to correspond to SW radiation changes at the top of the atmosphere .
Therefore , SW radiation changes and anthropogenic factors per the IPCC can be applied directly in Eq .
( 2 ) .
I have used the total RF values of the IPCC reports .
In my own model , I have used only the carbon dioxide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other GH gas changes are below 0.001°C during the pause , Ref .
3. where C is the concentration of carbon dioxide ( ppm ) .
The temperature effects of ENSO events I have calculated in both models using Eq .
( 4 ) where ONI is the Oceanic El Nino Index used for reporting and assessing the magnitude of ENSO effects .
ONI is the three months running-average value of the seawater temperature in the area of Nino3.4 .
The coefficient value of 0.1 is based on the empirical data between global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Ref .
1 ) have used the same method and the same value .
By using the correlation analysis , I found out that there was a delay of 6 months between the ONI index and the global temperature .
The temperature effects of cloudiness change I have calculated using the relationship from my earlier research study ( Ref .
4 ) where CL- % is the change of cloudiness in percentages .
The equations above do not include any dynamic factors , which means that they do not describe in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temperature effects during shorter time intervals when all-climate drivers variate continuously .
I have used the climate drivers – i.e .
the input data – in monthly steps .
The residence time of the mixing layer of the oceans is 2.74 months and the same of the land is 1.04 months ( Ref .
4 ) .
The accurate simulation method for stepwise changes of inputs can be found in my research study ( Ref .
2 ) .
The results of the study The results showed some surprises and new findings .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ my model and the observed satellite temperature of the UAH in Fig .
2 .
Fig .
2 .
The results of the Ollila model .
In Fig.2 we can see that the model calculated temperature ( a black curve ) follows well the observed global temperature .
The ENSO effects and the SW radiation changes are the main reasons for temperature changes .
During the super El Nino 2015-16 , the temperature impact is slightly more than 50 % about the total temperature change .
This kind of observation has not been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that La Nina 2017 was very weak , but the temperature remained at about 0.2°C higher level in comparison to the average pause temperature of 2000-2014 .
The reason can be identified directly , and it is the SW radiation .
The overall effect of cloudiness is small , but its impact is in the right direction .
Fig .
3 .
The results of the IPCC model .
The curve ” Forcing by all anthropogenic factors per IPCC ” includes other factors than GH gases , and therefore its temperature impact is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only .
I have depicted the results of the IPCC model in Fig .
3 .
The black curve is the model calculated temperature and the red one is the GISTEMP .
The IPCC model has a rather great error during the El Nino 2015-16 and thereafter .
I have calculated the Mean Absolute Error ( MAE ) in four different cases for the period of 2000-2018 : The error of my model is relatively small with respect to both temperature curves and it is about 100 % smaller than the same as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The reason for the IPCC model greater errors is pretty clear and it is the positive water feedback duplicating the impacts of anthropogenic ( GH gases ) changes and the SW radiation changes .
The increase in temperature from the beginning of 2001 to the average of 2018 was according to UAH 0.29 °C and according to Gistemp 0.50 °C .
Respectively the increase per the Ollila model was 0.23 °C and per the IPCC model 0.73 °C .
The error of my own model was thus +0.06 °C with respect to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respect to the Gistemp .
The IPCC model error was +23 °C with respect to the Gistemp and 0.44 °C with respect to the UAH .
The conclusion is that the IPCC model runs too hot due to the too great radiative forcing of carbon dioxide and the positive water feedback .
Thinking these errors for 20 years only , we can imagine how great errors might be to the end of 2100 .
We have a new climate change factor in the form of an SW radiation increase since 2014 .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shall take this matter into account .
By knowing the practices of the IPCC , I would not be surprised if this change will be assessed to be anthropogenic by nature .
It would be interesting to see , what are the pieces of evidence .
One may also observe in Fig .
3 a great difference between the impacts of GH gases and the total anthropogenic factors about 0.2°C in 2011 .
In order to concretize this issue , I use the numbers of the year 2011 in AR5 for the change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ term includes the impacts of aerosols ( -0.27 W/m2 ) , the albedo changes due to land use ( -0.15 W/m2 ) and the cloud adjustment ( -0.55 W/m2 ) ; totally -0.97 W/m2 corresponding to the temperature impact of -0.5 °C .
The RF of GH gases in 2011 per the IPCC was 3.18 W/m2 corresponding to the temperature impact of 1.6°C .
A question is that what is the scientific method and data that the IPCC knows the radiative forcings of aerosols , land-use , and the cloud adjustments of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not know these figures even today .
For me , these factors are really pure adjustments to tamper down the over-all temperature impacts and to cover up the sky-high impacts of GH gases .
The observational data between the temperature and the absolute amount of the atmospheric water do not show this mechanism , Fig .
4 .
Fig .
4 .
Short- and long-term effects of water vapor on a global scale .
It can be noticed that for 1982–2003 , the global temperature anomaly has been increasing but long-term water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory of positive water feedback .
This figure illustrates very well that the global temperature effects of ENSO events happen about 50 % through the absolute humidity changes in the atmosphere .
It means that the positive water feedback works in short-term events like ENSO but in the long-term trends , this effect disappears .
Water is about 12 times stronger GH gas than carbon dioxide .
The great impact of SW radiation in the El Nino 2015-16 came as a big surprise .
Therefore , I looked for the radiative information during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The CERES data started in 2001 but the ERBE data was available and the results are depicted in Fig .
5 .
Fig .
4 shows that also during super El Nino 1997-98 the temperature impact of SW radiation has been slightly over 50 % .
The retrospective analysis reveals that the pause ended by 2014 .
The most important factor has been the abnormal positive SW radiation anomaly .
I sent this paper to six different journals in category 2 .
I did not expect positive publication decisions , but I gathered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The collection of rejection comments would be another story .
It is a well-known fact among the contrarian researchers that they do not get papers through in the categories 1 ( Science and Nature ) and in category 2 ( more than 100 journals ) if the content is clearly against the IPCC science .
In the final phase of this process , I received a useful comment from a reviewer that there is a research study of Loeb et al .
published in 2018 ( Ref .
5 ) .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a responsible person for the CERES data in NASA and he surely follows the observational data trends .
There is a comprehensive analysis of the CERES data in this study .
The researchers showed that the SW radiation change was due to the end of hiatus and it is also the dominant reason for the “ increased temperature tendency during the post-hiatus period ” as they have formulated this matter .
As an example , about the rejection comments , there was a comment that a reviewer did not accept the SW radiation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nino temperatures or thereafter .
Maybe this reviewer would have rejected also the paper of Loeb et al .
– do you think so ?
So , I can not say that I was the first one who found out the role of SW radiation in the temperature changes after pause even though I did my work independently without knowing the study of Loeb et al .
What I can still say is that I have observed the role of SW radiation as an important part of super El Nino temperature impacts .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mechanism and it may be a pure coincidence .
We can see in Fig .
2 that the El Nino 2010 was in a category “ strong ” .
It could have developed into “ very strong ” super El Nino but the SW radiation anomaly was in the wrong phase .
I also carried out the analysis between “ the anti-IPCC model ” and the IPCC model showing that the IPCC model does not work properly .
Loeb et al .
found that the correlation of SW radiation flux anomalies to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They did not go further to analyze what factors could cause variations to the low-level cloudiness changes .
As we know , Dr. Henrik Svensmark has proposed a theory about the cosmic radiation modulating the cloud formation process and having major impacts on the surface temperature through cloudiness changes .
This is , of course , a forbidden subject to any researcher wanting to belong to the climate establishment , because the IPCC wants to avoid any theories about the cosmic forces having a role in the climate change .
• Trenberth KE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Relationships among top‐of‐atmosphere radiation and atmospheric state variables in observations and CESM .
J. Geophys .
Res .
Atmos .
2015 ; 120:10074–10090 .
https : //doiorg/101002/2015JD023381 • Ollila , Antero .
The Pause End and Major Temperature Impacts During Super El Niños are Due to Shortwave Radiation Anomalies .
Physical Science International Journal , 24 ( 2 ) , 1-20 , 2020. http : //www.journalpsij.com/index.php/PSIJ/article/view/30174/56612 • Ollila , Antero .
The Potency of Carbon Dioxide ( CO2 ) as a Greenhouse Gas , 2014 , URL : https : //www.researchgate.net/publication/274956207_The_potency_of_carbon_dioxide_CO2_as_a_greenhouse_gas • Loeb @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Wang H , Su W. Changes in earth ’ s energy budget during and after the “ pause ” in global warming : an observational perspective .
Climate .
2018 ; 6:62 .
DOI:103390/cli6030062 .
Dr. Antero Ollila is an Adj .
Ass .
Prof. ( Emeritus ) at Aalto University in Finland and runs the website ClimatExam .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientific Method .

‘Greenhouse Gases’ Not Behind The End Of The Warming Pause
Written by Dr. Antero Ollila
During the years 2000-2014, the global temperature hardly increased, and that period has been called the temperature pause or hiatus.
The debate among the climate community has resulted in more than 200 research studies in some cases with opposite results about the reasons.
This amount of papers can be compared to the research studies of Earth’s energy balance and the greenhouse effect. I have found about 10 publications for both subjects.
During the years 2000-2014, the emissions of carbon dioxide were 126 gigatons carbon (GtC) being 31% of the total emission after 1750, but the greenhouse (GH) gases were not able to increase the temperature.
According to the IPCC, the temperature increase should have been 0.4°C from 2000 to 2014 (Ref. 1).
It looks like that the pause ended to the super El Nino 2015-2016 because the temperature has been thereafter about 0.2 °C above-the-pause average.
Research study about the pause and the ENSO
The impulse for my research study came from a story figure on WUWT that showed shortwave (SW) radiation variations during the pause.
A curve showed increased values around El Nino 2015-16 and thereafter. I decided to find out what could be the impact of this finding on the temperatures.
In Fig. 1, I have depicted the total solar irradiance (TSI), SW radiation and LW radiation from 2000 onward. This data is available from the CERES databank maintained by NASA.
Fig.1. TSI, SW radiation and LW radiation trends normalized to the altitude of 20 kilometers.
TSI has been in decreasing mode since 2000 but it is surprising that SW radiation has an increasing trend with a maximum during El Nino 2015-16.
I decided to carry out a research study about the factors which should explain the temperature variations during the pause including ENSO events.
I have used two dynamic models with the same structure naming them as the Ollila model and the IPCC model. In my own model, I have used the results of my earlier research studies. This newest study has been published, Ref.2.
Both models include the same terms
dT = dTSW + dTENSO+ dTANTR + dTCLOUD, (1)
where dT is the total temperature change, dTSW is the temperature impact of SW radiation, dTENSOis the temperature impact of ENSO event, dTANTR is the temperature impact of greenhouse (GH) gases and other anthropogenic factors, and dTCLOUD the temperature impact of cloudiness changes.
The term dTCLOUD has not been used in the IPCC model because this effect has been integrated into the term dTANTR.
The temperature effects of SW radiation and anthropogenic factors have been calculated using the equation applied both in the IPCC model and my model
dT = λ*RF, (2)
where λ is the climate sensitivity parameter having a value of 0.5 K/(W/m2) in the IPCC model and in my model 0.27 K/(W/m2) and RF means radiative forcing (W/m2).
The IPCC has normalized the anthropogenic factors to correspond to SW radiation changes at the top of the atmosphere.
Therefore, SW radiation changes and anthropogenic factors per the IPCC can be applied directly in Eq. (2). I have used the total RF values of the IPCC reports.
In my own model, I have used only the carbon dioxide effects, because of the impacts of other GH gas changes are below 0.001°C during the pause, Ref. 3.
dTANT= 0.27 * 3,12 * ln (C/280), (3)
where C is the concentration of carbon dioxide (ppm). The temperature effects of ENSO events I have calculated in both models using Eq. (4)
dTENSO = 0,1 * ONI, (4)
where ONI is the Oceanic El Nino Index used for reporting and assessing the magnitude of ENSO effects. ONI is the three months running-average value of the seawater temperature in the area of Nino3.4.
The coefficient value of 0.1 is based on the empirical data between global temperature and ONI.
Trenberth et al. (Ref. 1) have used the same method and the same value. By using the correlation analysis, I found out that there was a delay of 6 months between the ONI index and the global temperature.
The temperature effects of cloudiness change I have calculated using the relationship from my earlier research study (Ref. 4)
dT = – 0,11 * CL-%, (5)
where CL-% is the change of cloudiness in percentages.
The equations above do not include any dynamic factors, which means that they do not describe in which way the changes would have their temperature effects during shorter time intervals when all-climate drivers variate continuously.
I have used the climate drivers – i.e. the input data – in monthly steps. The residence time of the mixing layer of the oceans is 2.74 months and the same of the land is 1.04 months (Ref. 4).
The accurate simulation method for stepwise changes of inputs can be found in my research study (Ref. 2).
The results of the study
The results showed some surprises and new findings. I have depicted the essential results of my model and the observed satellite temperature of the UAH in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. The results of the Ollila model.
In Fig.2 we can see that the model calculated temperature (a black curve) follows well the observed global temperature. The ENSO effects and the SW radiation changes are the main reasons for temperature changes.
During the super El Nino 2015-16, the temperature impact is slightly more than 50% about the total temperature change. This kind of observation has not been reported before.
Another important observation is that La Nina 2017 was very weak, but the temperature remained at about 0.2°C higher level in comparison to the average pause temperature of 2000-2014.
The reason can be identified directly, and it is the SW radiation. The overall effect of cloudiness is small, but its impact is in the right direction.
Fig. 3. The results of the IPCC model. The curve ”Forcing by all anthropogenic factors per IPCC” includes other factors than GH gases, and therefore its temperature impact is lower than the impact of GH gases only.
I have depicted the results of the IPCC model in Fig. 3. The black curve is the model calculated temperature and the red one is the GISTEMP. The IPCC model has a rather great error during the El Nino 2015-16 and thereafter.
I have calculated the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) in four different cases for the period of 2000-2018:
The Ollila model versus UAH 0.075°C
The Ollila model versus GISTEMP 0.082°C
The IPCC model versus UAH 0.191°C
The IPCC model versus GISTEMP 0.128°C.
The error of my model is relatively small with respect to both temperature curves and it is about 100 % smaller than the same as the IPCC model the correlation is 0.82.
The reason for the IPCC model greater errors is pretty clear and it is the positive water feedback duplicating the impacts of anthropogenic (GH gases) changes and the SW radiation changes.
The increase in temperature from the beginning of 2001 to the average of 2018 was according to UAH 0.29 °C and according to Gistemp 0.50 °C.
Respectively the increase per the Ollila model was 0.23 °C and per the IPCC model 0.73 °C. The error of my own model was thus +0.06 °C with respect to the UAH temperature and -0.31 °C with respect to the Gistemp.
The IPCC model error was +23 °C with respect to the Gistemp and 0.44 °C with respect to the UAH. The conclusion is that the IPCC model runs too hot due to the too great radiative forcing of carbon dioxide and the positive water feedback. Thinking these errors for 20 years only, we can imagine how great errors might be to the end of 2100.
We have a new climate change factor in the form of an SW radiation increase since 2014. We will see in which way the IPCC shall take this matter into account.
By knowing the practices of the IPCC, I would not be surprised if this change will be assessed to be anthropogenic by nature. It would be interesting to see, what are the pieces of evidence.
One may also observe in Fig. 3 a great difference between the impacts of GH gases and the total anthropogenic factors about 0.2°C in 2011.
In order to concretize this issue, I use the numbers of the year 2011 in AR5 for the change from 1750 to 2011.
The anthropogenic term includes the impacts of aerosols (-0.27 W/m2), the albedo changes due to land use (-0.15 W/m2) and the cloud adjustment (-0.55 W/m2); totally -0.97 W/m2 corresponding to the temperature impact of -0.5 °C. The RF of GH gases in 2011 per the IPCC was 3.18 W/m2 corresponding to the temperature impact of 1.6°C.
A question is that what is the scientific method and data that the IPCC knows the radiative forcings of aerosols, land-use, and the cloud adjustments of the year 1750? I think that they do not know these figures even today.
For me, these factors are really pure adjustments to tamper down the over-all temperature impacts and to cover up the sky-high impacts of GH gases.
The observational data between the temperature and the absolute amount of the atmospheric water do not show this mechanism, Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Short- and long-term effects of water vapor on a global scale.
It can be noticed that for 1982–2003, the global temperature anomaly has been increasing but long-term water vapor amount has been decreasing destroying the theory of positive water feedback.
This figure illustrates very well that the global temperature effects of ENSO events happen about 50 % through the absolute humidity changes in the atmosphere.
It means that the positive water feedback works in short-term events like ENSO but in the long-term trends, this effect disappears.
Water is about 12 times stronger GH gas than carbon dioxide.
The great impact of SW radiation in the El Nino 2015-16 came as a big surprise. Therefore, I looked for the radiative information during the earlier super El Nino 1998-98.
The CERES data started in 2001 but the ERBE data was available and the results are depicted in Fig. 5.
Fig. 4. Super El Ninos of 1997-98 and 2015-16.
Fig. 4 shows that also during super El Nino 1997-98 the temperature impact of SW radiation has been slightly over 50 %.
The retrospective analysis reveals that the pause ended by 2014. The most important factor has been the abnormal positive SW radiation anomaly.
I sent this paper to six different journals in category 2. I did not expect positive publication decisions, but I gathered information about the rejection comments of reviewers.
The collection of rejection comments would be another story. It is a well-known fact among the contrarian researchers that they do not get papers through in the categories 1 (Science and Nature) and in category 2 (more than 100 journals) if the content is clearly against the IPCC science.
In the final phase of this process, I received a useful comment from a reviewer that there is a research study of Loeb et al. published in 2018 (Ref. 5).
Some readers may know that Dr. Loeb is a responsible person for the CERES data in NASA and he surely follows the observational data trends. There is a comprehensive analysis of the CERES data in this study.
The researchers showed that the SW radiation change was due to the end of hiatus and it is also the dominant reason for the “increased temperature tendency during the post-hiatus period” as they have formulated this matter.
As an example, about the rejection comments, there was a comment that a reviewer did not accept the SW radiation changes to have any impact on El Nino temperatures or thereafter. Maybe this reviewer would have rejected also the paper of Loeb et al. – do you think so?
So, I cannot say that I was the first one who found out the role of SW radiation in the temperature changes after pause even though I did my work independently without knowing the study of Loeb et al.
What I can still say is that I have observed the role of SW radiation as an important part of super El Nino temperature impacts. I have not been able to suggest the mechanism and it may be a pure coincidence.
We can see in Fig. 2 that the El Nino 2010 was in a category “strong”. It could have developed into “very strong” super El Nino but the SW radiation anomaly was in the wrong phase.
I also carried out the analysis between “the anti-IPCC model” and the IPCC model showing that the IPCC model does not work properly.
Loeb et al. found that the correlation of SW radiation flux anomalies to the low-level cloud cover was 0.66. They did not go further to analyze what factors could cause variations to the low-level cloudiness changes.
As we know, Dr. Henrik Svensmark has proposed a theory about the cosmic radiation modulating the cloud formation process and having major impacts on the surface temperature through cloudiness changes.
This is, of course, a forbidden subject to any researcher wanting to belong to the climate establishment, because the IPCC wants to avoid any theories about the cosmic forces having a role in the climate change.
References:
Dr. Antero Ollila is an Adj. Ass. Prof. (Emeritus) at Aalto University in Finland and runs the website ClimatExam.
Read more at www.climatexam.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--2020-03-17--Average Age of Italians Who Have Died From Coronavirus is 81

Average Age of Italians Who Have Died From Coronavirus is 81 It appears Coronavirus is a Deadly Senior ’ s disease .
The Italian government released numbers on the coronavirus last week .
There were 1,809 new cases of the deadly disease reported in Italy on Sunday .
The Italian government also recently released the percentage of deaths by age group .
90+ years old : 6 % of deaths 80 – 89 years old : 42 % of deaths 70 – 79 years old : 35 % of deaths 60 – 69 years old : 16 % of deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Organization YouTube page .
99 % of the coronavirus deaths in Italy are people 60-years-old and older .
And according to the BBC the the AVERAGE AGE of those who have died is 81 !
The coronavirus website still shows NO DEATHS in the 0-9 age group and .2 % of deaths in those 10-39 years-old 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 @ @ @ @ @ @

Average Age of Italians Who Have Died From Coronavirus is 81
Written by Jim Holt
It appears Coronavirus is a Deadly Senior’s disease. The Italian government released numbers on the coronavirus last week.
There were 1,809 new cases of the deadly disease reported in Italy on Sunday. The Italian government also recently released the percentage of deaths by age group.
90+ years old: 6% of deaths
80 – 89 years old: 42% of deaths
70 – 79 years old: 35% of deaths
60 – 69 years old: 16% of deaths
These numbers came from the World Health Organization YouTube page.
99% of the coronavirus deaths in Italy are people 60-years-old and older.
And according to the BBC the the AVERAGE AGE of those who have died is 81!
These are stunning numbers.
The coronavirus website still shows NO DEATHS in the 0-9 age group and .2% of deaths in those 10-39 years-old
Read more at www.thegatewaypundit.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--2020-03-18--MIT PhD reveals sinister theory about coronavirus

A biological engineer with four degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology believes the coronavirus pandemic is being used by “ Deep State ” bureaucrats to further their agenda .
Shiva Ayyadurai , a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat from Massachusetts , warned on Twitter that the crisis is being manipulated , the Western Journal reported Ayyadurai doesn ’ t believe the outbreak itself is a hoax , urging citizens to follow the guidelines of federal , state and local governments , and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
Vowing to serve only one term , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ career politicians exist to serve themselves , not America and not YOU.
” “ They spend 80 % of their time after election to get re-elected , and the remaining 20 % on legislation to pay back those who funded their election .
I will serve one-term , 100 % for you , and I will push forward legislation for your long-term interests , not my re-election , ” he says .
Born in India , Shiva came to the United States with his family in 1970 at the age of 7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a video March 13 presenting more of his thoughts about the outbreak .
Shiva said the CDC is “ corrupt , ” focusing mostly on reactions to outbreaks rather than preventative measures such as improving immune health .
“ The real infection here , he said , is the fear and the uncertainty that we need to overcome as an American family , to get strong , to move foward , ” he said .
Shiva said the outbreak provides an opportunity for Americans to improve their immune health , asking , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthy and resilient immune system ?
” 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 .

MIT PhD reveals sinister theory about coronavirus
Written by WND Staff
A biological engineer with four degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology believes the coronavirus pandemic is being used by “Deep State” bureaucrats to further their agenda.
Shiva Ayyadurai, a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat from Massachusetts, warned on Twitter that the crisis is being manipulated, the Western Journal reported
“As an MIT PhD in Biological Engineering who studies & does research nearly every day on the Immune System, the #coronavirus fear mongering by the Deep State will go down in history as one of the biggest fraud to manipulate economies, suppress dissent, & push MANDATED Medicine!” he wrote March 9.
Ayyadurai doesn’t believe the outbreak itself is a hoax, urging citizens to follow the guidelines of federal, state and local governments, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vowing to serve only one term, he says on his campaign site that “career politicians exist to serve themselves, not America and not YOU.”
“They spend 80% of their time after election to get re-elected, and the remaining 20% on legislation to pay back those who funded their election. I will serve one-term, 100% for you, and I will push forward legislation for your long-term interests, not my re-election,” he says.
Born in India, Shiva came to the United States with his family in 1970 at the age of 7.
He followed up his tweet with a video March 13 presenting more of his thoughts about the outbreak.
Shiva said the CDC is “corrupt,” focusing mostly on reactions to outbreaks rather than preventative measures such as improving immune health.
“The real infection here, he said, is the fear and the uncertainty that we need to overcome as an American family, to get strong, to move foward,” he said.
Shiva said the outbreak provides an opportunity for Americans to improve their immune health, asking, “What does it mean to have a healthy and resilient immune system?”
Read more at www.wnd.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--2020-03-18--Coronavirus vs. the Mass Surveillance State

During the 1950s and 60s , the CIA covertly and diabolically directed scientists to dose unsuspecting human guinea pigs with LSD and other drugs .
The eminent journalist and historian Stephen Kinzer has recently written a meticulously detailed book on this issue entitled , Poisoner in Chief : Sidney Gottlieb and the CIA Search for Mind Control .
[ 1 ] One of those individuals who was dosed by the CIA was none other than the late Boston mobster Whitey Bulger .
Bulger was dosed over 50 times !
As the leader of the Winter Hill Gang , Bulger would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Boston area .
In other words , the CIA essentially created the Winter Hill Gang .
The LSD program which the CIA set in motion was known as MK-Ultra , and the scientist behind of all this was a Jewish chemist by the name of Sidney Gottlieb , who , according to Kinzer , had “ a license to kill.
” This “ license to kill ” allowed Gottlieb to run dangerous experiments with LSD on unsuspecting Americans .
The goal of Gottlieb ’ s entire project ?
Manipulation , mind control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary .
In Gottlieb ’ s world , nothing was forbidden , and every crime you could possibly imagine was a fair game .
Morality to him was simply a relic of the past .
Timothy Leary , the Harvard psychologist who eventually became the drug guru of the 60s , was a product of MK-Ultra ; Ken Kesey , the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo ’ s Nest , was also a victim of MK-Ultra ; the poet Allen Ginsberg , Robert Hunter of the Grateful Dead , all had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CIA had surreptitiously provided .
John Lennon , the founder of the Beatles , was a vehicle for the CIA and indeed MK-Ultra .
Lennon once said : “ We must always remember to thank the CIA and the Army for LSD .
That ’ s what people forget… [ The CIA ] invented LSD to control people , and what they did was give us freedom.
” [ 2 ] Well , only dope heads like Lennon actually thought that LSD was equivalent to freedom .
The seven blacks who were given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seventy-seven days at the federal prison in Lexington , Kentucky , under the supervision of Gottlieb himself , would certainly disagree with Lennon .
LSD doesn ’ t and can never bring freedom .
LSD has always been a form of political control .
That was why the CIA promoted it .
[ 3 ] As we all know , this LSD program turned America upside down , and largely brought about the sexual revolution , which in itself is a form of political control [ 4 ] and which deliberately excluded morality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reich , one of the fathers of the sexual revolution , put it way back in 1971 : “ The first prerequisite for healthier human and sexual relationships is the elimination of those moral concepts which base their demands on allegedly supernatural commands , on arbitrary human regulations , or simply on tradition…We do not want to see natural sexual attraction stamped as ‘ sin , ’ ‘ sensuality ’ fought as something low and beastly , and the ‘ conquering of the flesh ’ made the guiding principle of morality !
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty straightforward : the CIA and the US government have been involved in covert activities since the beginning of time .
We did not know about MK-Ultra until years later .
But the US government is just the tip of the iceberg .
As George Orwell puts it in 1984 , we are living in a time where the government of any country wants to control and manipulate its citizens via covert means .
Aldous Huxley , another dope head , was very cognizant of this as well .
He wrote in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Impersonal forces over which we have almost no control seem to be pushing us all in the direction of the Brave New Worldian nightmare ; and this impersonal pushing is being consciously accelerated by representatives of commercial and political organizations who have developed a number of new techniques for manipulating , in the interest of some minority , the thoughts and feelings of the masses.
” James Dacre of the Guardian writes that Huxley wrote his dystopian novel “ in the shadow of the first world war , the Wall Street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had claimed millions of lives.
” [ 6 ] We are currently in the middle of another devastating virus .
Francis Boyle , a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law , has said that the coronavirus is biological warfare .
[ 7 ] He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention .
Former CIA intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi and others have also argued the same thing .
Giraldi wrote in a recent article : “ There has been some speculation that as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue of growing Chinese global competitiveness as a direct threat to American national security and economic dominance , it might be possible that Washington has created and unleashed the virus in a bid to bring Beijing ’ s growing economy and military might down a few notches .
It is , to be sure , hard to believe that even the Trump White House would do something so reckless , but there are precedents for that type of behavior .
“ In 2005-9 the American and Israeli governments secretly developed a computer virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage the control and operating systems of Iranian computers being used in that country ’ s nuclear research program .
Admittedly Stuxnet was intended to damage computers , not to infect or kill human beings , but concerns that it would propagate and move to infect computers outside Iran proved to be accurate as it spread to thousands of PCs outside Iran , in countries as far flung as China , Germany , Kazakhstan and Indonesia .
“ Inevitably there is an Israeli story that just might shed some light on what has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Israel ’ s Galilee Research Institute are now claiming that they will have a vaccine against coronavirus in a few weeks which will be ready for distribution and use within 90 days .
The institute is claiming that it has been engaged in four years of research on avian coronavirus funded by Israel ’ s Ministries of Science & Technology and Agriculture .
“ They are claiming that the virus is similar to the version that has infected humans , which has led to breakthroughs in development through genetic manipulation , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine could be produced so quickly to prevent a virus that existed only recently .
They also have warned that even if a vaccine is developed it would normally have to be tested for side effects , a process that normally takes over a year and includes using it on infected humans .
“ If one even considers it possible that the United States had a hand in creating the coronavirus at what remains of its once extensive biological weapons research center in Ft Detrick Maryland , it is very likely that Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Helping to develop the virus would also explain how Israeli scientists have been able to claim success at creating a vaccine so quickly , possibly because the virus and a treatment for it were developed simultaneously.
” Is this theory entirely farfetched ?
I don ’ t know .
Perhaps we won ’ t know all that is to know about the virus until ten to twenty years later .
But the media has almost certainly hyped up the coronavirus outbreak .
My oldest brother , Chris , has raised a point which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the twenty-first century , and not one son or daughter has gone online or on YouTube to explain that one of his/her family members , even himself/herself has contracted the virus to explain what it feels like and maybe express concerns that this might be it .
We ’ re living in an age where people voluntarily share information for the sakes of others .
Has anyone met anyone or heard from anyone ?
So many deaths being reported everywhere in the news , I would think there would be first-hand and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a genuine concern , and the inquiring mind would like to know the answers .
We are certainly not saying that the entire coronavirus incident is all bunk .
We are also not saying that people ought not to take precautions in order to prevent deadly contagions .
What we are saying is that there is a bigger picture that people have to see : perhaps , just perhaps , much of this coronavirus stuff is another suggestion that we are living in a brave new world—a world in which the population is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government has jammed down their throat .
If you down this statement , then listen to this : “ Mark Dubowitz , Executive Director of the Washington-based but Israeli government connected Foundation for Defense of Democracies ( FDD ) boasted on twitter Tuesday that ‘ Coronavirus has done what American economic sanctions could not : shut down non-oil exports.
’ ” One last point is simply this .
Which is a bigger threat : Coronavirus or perpetual wars in the Middle East ?
Keep in mind that the world hasn ’ t done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who brought one disaster after another upon the world .
As the late Vincent Bugliosi convincingly argued , George W. Bush should certainly be put on trial for destroying Iraq .
[ 8 ] As we have said elsewhere , the war in Iraq will cost Americans at least 6 trillion dollars .
[ 9 ] How many people died in the Iraq war ?
In 2018 , the Washington Post itself reported that nearly 5,000 servicemen died [ 10 ] in a war that was based on colossal hoaxes , complete fabrications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 11 ] That doesn ’ t even count the Iraqi civilians who were literally obliterated by the disaster .
The estimate of lives lost in the war in Iraq alone is between 100,000 to 600,000 , including thousands of civilians .
In 2003 , at least 12,000 civilians lost their lives .
[ 12 ] The first three years of the war produced between 104,000 and 223,000 civilian deaths .
When it was over , 2.3 million Iraqis had been forced to flee their homes and towns ; by 2008 , another 2.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half a million civilians ended up losing their lives .
[ 13 ] Thousands upon thousands of other people went missing by 2008 .
[ 14 ] This is out of a total Iraqi population of about 30 million people !
[ 15 ] The Iraq war , says Kukis , shook the entire nation and created havoc even by 2006 .
[ 16 ] Factions of society that once coexisted were dismantled .
In a nutshell , Iraq was in exponential decay .
Buildings and farmlands were destroyed .
[ 17 ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Between 300,000 and 360,000 veterans returned home with brain injuries , [ 18 ] some of which went untreated .
[ 19 ] Listen to USA Today : “ Pentagon officials estimated…that up to 360,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans may have suffered brain injuries .
Among them are 45,000 to 90,000 veterans whose symptoms persist and warrant specialized care.
” [ 20 ] In 2005 , more than 6,000 suicides took place among our soldiers serving in Iraq .
[ 21 ] By 2012 , more soldiers committed suicide than died in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the year with the highest suicide rate since 2001 .
[ 23 ] Homelessness among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans has more than doubled over the past two years , and by the fall of 2012 , it was reported that at least “ 26,531 were living on the streets , at risk of losing their homes , staying in temporary housing or receiving federal vouchers to pay rent.
” In addition , about 307,000 soldiers want to leave the military .
[ 24 ] Once again , why haven ’ t we prosecuted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cheney , Rice , and the very people who lied about the war end up writing New York Times best-selling books ?
Why are they still enjoying their lavish lifestyle ?
If coronavirus is dangerous—and I ’ m taking the position here that it is—then the US government and the Deep State are poisonous with respect to foreign policy .
John W. Whitehead : Emboldened by the citizenry ’ s inattention and willingness to tolerate its abuses , the government has weaponized one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war on drugs , the war on illegal immigration , asset forfeiture schemes , road safety schemes , school safety schemes , eminent domain : all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state ’ s hands .
It doesn ’ t even matter what the nature of the crisis might be—civil unrest , the national emergencies , “ unforeseen economic collapse , loss of functioning political and legal order , purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural and human disasters ” —as long as it allows the government to justify all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security .
Now we find ourselves on the brink of a possible coronavirus contagion .
I ’ ll leave the media and the medical community to speculate about the impact the coronavirus will have on the nation ’ s health , but how will the government ’ s War on the Coronavirus impact our freedoms ?
For a hint of what ’ s in store , you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things dystopian—where the contagion started .
In an attempt to fight the epidemic , the government has given its surveillance state apparatus—which boasts the most expansive and sophisticated surveillance system in the world—free rein .
Thermal scanners using artificial intelligence ( AI ) have been installed at train stations in major cities to assess body temperatures and identify anyone with a fever .
Facial recognition cameras and cell phone carriers track people ’ s movements constantly , reporting in real time to data centers that can be accessed by government agents and employers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ red , yellow and green ) sort people into health categories that correspond to the amount of freedom of movement they ’ re allowed : “ Green code , travel freely .
Red or yellow , report immediately.
” Mind you , prior to the coronavirus outbreak , the Chinese surveillance state had already been hard at work tracking its citizens through the use of some 200 million security cameras installed nationwide .
Equipped with facial recognition technology , the cameras allow authorities to track so-called criminal acts , such as jaywalking , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social credit score .
Social media credit scores assigned to Chinese individuals and businesses categorize them on whether or not they are “ good ” citizens .
A real-name system—which requires people to use government-issued ID cards to buy mobile sims , obtain social media accounts , take a train , board a plane , or even buy groceries—coupled with social media credit scores ensures that those blacklisted as “ unworthy ” are banned from accessing financial markets , buying real estate or travelling by air or train .
Among the activities that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reserved seats on trains or causing trouble in hospitals .
That same social credit score technology used to identify , track and segregate citizens is now one of China ’ s chief weapons in its fight to contain the coronavirus from spreading .
However , it is far from infallible and a prime example of the difficulties involved in navigating an autonomous system where disembodied AI systems call the shots .
For instance , one woman , who has no symptoms of the virus but was assigned a red code based on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blocked from returning to her home and job until her color code changes .
She has been stuck in this state of limbo for weeks with no means of challenging the color code or knowing exactly why she ’ s been assigned a red code .
Fighting the coronavirus epidemic has given China the perfect excuse for unleashing the full force of its surveillance and data collection powers .
The problem , as Eamon Barrett acknowledges in Fortune magazine , is what happens after : “ Once the outbreak is controlled , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retract its new powers.
” The lesson for the ages : once any government is allowed to expand its powers , it ’ s almost impossible to pull back .
Meanwhile , here in the U.S. , the government thus far has limited its coronavirus preparations to missives advising the public to stay calm , wash their hands , and cover their mouths when they cough and sneeze .
Don ’ t go underestimating the government ’ s ability to lock the nation down if the coronavirus turns into a pandemic , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been planning and preparing for such a crisis for years now .
The building blocks are already in place for such an eventuality : the surveillance networks , fusion centers and government contractors that already share information in real time ; the government ’ s massive biometric databases that can identify individuals based on genetic and biological markers ; the militarized police , working in conjunction with federal agencies , ready and able to coordinate with the federal government when it ’ s time to round up the targeted individuals ; the courts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ methods , no matter how unlawful , as long as it ’ s done in the name of national security ; and the detention facilities , whether private prisons or FEMA internment camps , that have been built and are waiting to be filled .
Now all of this may sound far-fetched to you now , but we ’ ve already arrived at the dystopian futures prophesied by George Orwell ’ s 1984 , Aldous Huxley ’ s Brave New World , and Philip K. Dick ’ s Minority Report .
It won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us over the edge into Neill Blomkamp ’ s Elysium , in which the majority of humanity is relegated to an overpopulated , diseased , warring planet where the government employs technologies such as drones , tasers and biometric scanners to track , target and control the populace .
Mind you , while these technologies are already in use today and being hailed for their potentially life-saving , cost-saving , time-saving benefits , it won ’ t be long before the drawbacks to having a government equipped with technology that makes it all-seeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the citizenry—far outdistance the benefits .
On a daily basis , Americans are relinquishing ( in many cases , voluntarily ) the most intimate details of who we are—their biological makeup , our genetic blueprints , and our biometrics ( facial characteristics and structure , fingerprints , iris scans , etc . )
—in order to navigate an increasingly technologically-enabled world .
Consider all the ways you continue to be tracked , hunted , hounded , and stalked by the government and its dubious agents : By tapping into your phone lines and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what you say .
By uploading all of your emails , opening your mail , and reading your Facebook posts and text messages , the government knows what you write .
By monitoring your movements with the use of license plate readers , surveillance cameras and other tracking devices , the government knows where you go .
By churning through all of the detritus of your life—what you read , where you go , what you say—the government can predict what you will do .
By mapping the synapses in your brain , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know what you remember .
By mapping your biometrics—your “ face-print ” —and storing the information in a massive , shared government database available to bureaucratic agencies , police and the military , the government ’ s goal is to use facial recognition software to identify you ( and every other person in the country ) and track your movements , wherever you go .
And by accessing your DNA , the government will soon know everything else about you that they don ’ t already know : your family chart , your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your health history , your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course , etc .
Of course , none of these technologies are foolproof .
Nor are they immune from tampering , hacking or user bias .
Nevertheless , they have become a convenient tool in the hands of government agents to render null and void the Constitution ’ s requirements of privacy and its prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures .
The ramifications of a government—any government—having this much unregulated , unaccountable power to target , track , round up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Imagine what a totalitarian regime such as Nazi Germany could have done with this kind of unadulterated power .
Imagine what the next police state to follow in Germany ’ s footsteps will do with this kind of power .
Society is rapidly moving in that direction .
We ’ ve made it so easy for the government to watch us .
Government eyes see your every move : what you read , how much you spend , where you go , with whom you interact , when you wake up in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching on television and reading on the internet .
Every move you make is being monitored , mined for data , crunched , and tabulated in order to form a picture of who you are , what makes you tick , and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line .
Chances are , as the Washington Post has reported , you have already been assigned a color-coded threat assessment score—green , yellow or red—so police are forewarned about your potential inclination to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had a career in the military , posted a comment perceived as threatening on Facebook , suffer from a particular medical condition , or know someone who knows someone who might have committed a crime .
In other words , you ’ re most likely already flagged in a government database somewhere .
The government has the know-how .
Indeed , for years now , the FBI and Justice Department have conspired to acquire near-limitless power and control over biometric information collected on law-abiding individuals , millions of whom have never been accused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scope of those with criminal backgrounds , the FBI ’ s Next Generation Identification database ( NGID ) , a billion dollar boondoggle that is aimed at dramatically expanding the government ’ s ID database from a fingerprint system to a vast data storehouse of iris scans , photos searchable with face recognition technology , palm prints , and measures of gait and voice recordings alongside records of fingerprints , scars , and tattoos .
Launched in 2008 , the NGID is a massive biometric database that contains more than 100 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a variety of sources ranging from criminal suspects and convicts to daycare workers and visa applicants , including millions of people who have never committed or even been accused of a crime .
In other words , innocent American citizens are now automatically placed in a suspect database .
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 .

Coronavirus vs. the Mass Surveillance State
Written by Jonas E. Alexis and John W. Whitehead
During the 1950s and 60s, the CIA covertly and diabolically directed scientists to dose unsuspecting human guinea pigs with LSD and other drugs. The eminent journalist and historian Stephen Kinzer has recently written a meticulously detailed book on this issue entitled, Poisoner in Chief: Sidney Gottlieb and the CIA Search for Mind Control.[1]
One of those individuals who was dosed by the CIA was none other than the late Boston mobster Whitey Bulger. Bulger was dosed over 50 times! As the leader of the Winter Hill Gang, Bulger would go on to antagonize much of the South Boston area. In other words, the CIA essentially created the Winter Hill Gang.
The LSD program which the CIA set in motion was known as MK-Ultra, and the scientist behind of all this was a Jewish chemist by the name of Sidney Gottlieb, who, according to Kinzer, had “a license to kill.” This “license to kill” allowed Gottlieb to run dangerous experiments with LSD on unsuspecting Americans. The goal of Gottlieb’s entire project? Manipulation, mind control, assassination plots, and murder if necessary.
In Gottlieb’s world, nothing was forbidden, and every crime you could possibly imagine was a fair game. Morality to him was simply a relic of the past. Timothy Leary, the Harvard psychologist who eventually became the drug guru of the 60s, was a product of MK-Ultra; Ken Kesey, the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, was also a victim of MK-Ultra; the poet Allen Ginsberg, Robert Hunter of the Grateful Dead, all had mystical experiences after taking LSD which the CIA had surreptitiously provided. John Lennon, the founder of the Beatles, was a vehicle for the CIA and indeed MK-Ultra. Lennon once said: “We must always remember to thank the CIA and the Army for LSD. That’s what people forget…[The CIA] invented LSD to control people, and what they did was give us freedom.”[2]
Well, only dope heads like Lennon actually thought that LSD was equivalent to freedom. The seven blacks who were given triple doses of LSD every day for seventy-seven days at the federal prison in Lexington, Kentucky, under the supervision of Gottlieb himself, would certainly disagree with Lennon.
LSD doesn’t and can never bring freedom. LSD has always been a form of political control. That was why the CIA promoted it.[3] As we all know, this LSD program turned America upside down, and largely brought about the sexual revolution, which in itself is a form of political control[4] and which deliberately excluded morality as a guiding principle. As Wilhelm Reich, one of the fathers of the sexual revolution, put it way back in 1971:
“The first prerequisite for healthier human and sexual relationships is the elimination of those moral concepts which base their demands on allegedly supernatural commands, on arbitrary human regulations, or simply on tradition…We do not want to see natural sexual attraction stamped as ‘sin,’ ‘sensuality’ fought as something low and beastly, and the ‘conquering of the flesh’ made the guiding principle of morality!”[5]
The logic here is pretty straightforward: the CIA and the US government have been involved in covert activities since the beginning of time. We did not know about MK-Ultra until years later. But the US government is just the tip of the iceberg. As George Orwell puts it in 1984, we are living in a time where the government of any country wants to control and manipulate its citizens via covert means. Aldous Huxley, another dope head, was very cognizant of this as well. He wrote in the 1958 preface of A Brave New World:
“Impersonal forces over which we have almost no control seem to be pushing us all in the direction of the Brave New Worldian nightmare; and this impersonal pushing is being consciously accelerated by representatives of commercial and political organizations who have developed a number of new techniques for manipulating, in the interest of some minority, the thoughts and feelings of the masses.”
James Dacre of the Guardian writes that Huxley wrote his dystopian novel “in the shadow of the first world war, the Wall Street Crash and a devastating flu virus that had claimed millions of lives.”[6] We are currently in the middle of another devastating virus.
Francis Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, has said that the coronavirus is biological warfare.[7] He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention. Former CIA intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi and others have also argued the same thing. Giraldi wrote in a recent article:
“There has been some speculation that as the Trump Administration has been constantly raising the issue of growing Chinese global competitiveness as a direct threat to American national security and economic dominance, it might be possible that Washington has created and unleashed the virus in a bid to bring Beijing’s growing economy and military might down a few notches. It is, to be sure, hard to believe that even the Trump White House would do something so reckless, but there are precedents for that type of behavior.
“In 2005-9 the American and Israeli governments secretly developed a computer virus called Stuxnet, which was intended to damage the control and operating systems of Iranian computers being used in that country’s nuclear research program. Admittedly Stuxnet was intended to damage computers, not to infect or kill human beings, but concerns that it would propagate and move to infect computers outside Iran proved to be accurate as it spread to thousands of PCs outside Iran, in countries as far flung as China, Germany, Kazakhstan and Indonesia.
“Inevitably there is an Israeli story that just might shed some light on what has been going on in China. Scientists at Israel’s Galilee Research Institute are now claiming that they will have a vaccine against coronavirus in a few weeks which will be ready for distribution and use within 90 days. The institute is claiming that it has been engaged in four years of research on avian coronavirus funded by Israel’s Ministries of Science & Technology and Agriculture.
“They are claiming that the virus is similar to the version that has infected humans, which has led to breakthroughs in development through genetic manipulation, but some scientists are skeptical that a new vaccine could be produced so quickly to prevent a virus that existed only recently. They also have warned that even if a vaccine is developed it would normally have to be tested for side effects, a process that normally takes over a year and includes using it on infected humans.
“If one even considers it possible that the United States had a hand in creating the coronavirus at what remains of its once extensive biological weapons research center in Ft Detrick Maryland, it is very likely that Israel was a partner in the project. Helping to develop the virus would also explain how Israeli scientists have been able to claim success at creating a vaccine so quickly, possibly because the virus and a treatment for it were developed simultaneously.”
Is this theory entirely farfetched? I don’t know. Perhaps we won’t know all that is to know about the virus until ten to twenty years later. But the media has almost certainly hyped up the coronavirus outbreak. My oldest brother, Chris, has raised a point which deserves a fair hearing:
“This is the twenty-first century, and not one son or daughter has gone online or on YouTube to explain that one of his/her family members, even himself/herself has contracted the virus to explain what it feels like and maybe express concerns that this might be it. We’re living in an age where people voluntarily share information for the sakes of others. Has anyone met anyone or heard from anyone? So many deaths being reported everywhere in the news, I would think there would be first-hand and second-hand accounts?”
This is certainly a genuine concern, and the inquiring mind would like to know the answers. We are certainly not saying that the entire coronavirus incident is all bunk. We are also not saying that people ought not to take precautions in order to prevent deadly contagions. What we are saying is that there is a bigger picture that people have to see: perhaps, just perhaps, much of this coronavirus stuff is another suggestion that we are living in a brave new world—a world in which the population is forced to accept virtually everything that the government has jammed down their throat. If you down this statement, then listen to this:
“Mark Dubowitz, Executive Director of the Washington-based but Israeli government connected Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) boasted on twitter Tuesday that ‘Coronavirus has done what American economic sanctions could not: shut down non-oil exports.’”
One last point is simply this. Which is a bigger threat: Coronavirus or perpetual wars in the Middle East? Keep in mind that the world hasn’t done a damn thing about the very people who brought one disaster after another upon the world. As the late Vincent Bugliosi convincingly argued, George W. Bush should certainly be put on trial for destroying Iraq.[8]
As we have said elsewhere, the war in Iraq will cost Americans at least 6 trillion dollars.[9] How many people died in the Iraq war? In 2018, the Washington Post itself reported that nearly 5,000 servicemen died[10] in a war that was based on colossal hoaxes, complete fabrications, and just plain lies.[11] That doesn’t even count the Iraqi civilians who were literally obliterated by the disaster.
The estimate of lives lost in the war in Iraq alone is between 100,000 to 600,000, including thousands of civilians. In 2003, at least 12,000 civilians lost their lives.[12] The first three years of the war produced between 104,000 and 223,000 civilian deaths.
When it was over, 2.3 million Iraqis had been forced to flee their homes and towns; by 2008, another 2.7 million Iraqis were displaced, and nearly half a million civilians ended up losing their lives.[13] Thousands upon thousands of other people went missing by 2008.[14]
This is out of a total Iraqi population of about 30 million people![15] The Iraq war, says Kukis, shook the entire nation and created havoc even by 2006.[16] Factions of society that once coexisted were dismantled.
In a nutshell, Iraq was in exponential decay. Buildings and farmlands were destroyed.[17] And the fringe benefits of the war? Between 300,000 and 360,000 veterans returned home with brain injuries,[18] some of which went untreated.[19] Listen to USA Today:
“Pentagon officials estimated…that up to 360,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans may have suffered brain injuries. Among them are 45,000 to 90,000 veterans whose symptoms persist and warrant specialized care.”[20]
In 2005, more than 6,000 suicides took place among our soldiers serving in Iraq.[21] By 2012, more soldiers committed suicide than died in combat,[22] making it the year with the highest suicide rate since 2001.[23]
Homelessness among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans has more than doubled over the past two years, and by the fall of 2012, it was reported that at least “26,531 were living on the streets, at risk of losing their homes, staying in temporary housing or receiving federal vouchers to pay rent.” In addition, about 307,000 soldiers want to leave the military.[24]
Once again, why haven’t we prosecuted the perpetrators? Why did Bush, Cheney, Rice, and the very people who lied about the war end up writing New York Times best-selling books? Why are they still enjoying their lavish lifestyle? If coronavirus is dangerous—and I’m taking the position here that it is—then the US government and the Deep State are poisonous with respect to foreign policy.
John W. Whitehead: Emboldened by the citizenry’s inattention and willingness to tolerate its abuses, the government has weaponized one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers.
The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.
It doesn’t even matter what the nature of the crisis might be—civil unrest, the national emergencies, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters”—as long as it allows the government to justify all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.
Now we find ourselves on the brink of a possible coronavirus contagion.
I’ll leave the media and the medical community to speculate about the impact the coronavirus will have on the nation’s health, but how will the government’s War on the Coronavirus impact our freedoms?
For a hint of what’s in store, you can look to China—our role model for all things dystopian—where the contagion started.
In an attempt to fight the epidemic, the government has given its surveillance state apparatus—which boasts the most expansive and sophisticated surveillance system in the world—free rein. Thermal scanners using artificial intelligence (AI) have been installed at train stations in major cities to assess body temperatures and identify anyone with a fever. Facial recognition cameras and cell phone carriers track people’s movements constantly, reporting in real time to data centers that can be accessed by government agents and employers alike. And coded color alerts (red, yellow and green) sort people into health categories that correspond to the amount of freedom of movement they’re allowed: “Green code, travel freely. Red or yellow, report immediately.”
Mind you, prior to the coronavirus outbreak, the Chinese surveillance state had already been hard at work tracking its citizens through the use of some 200 million security cameras installed nationwide. Equipped with facial recognition technology, the cameras allow authorities to track so-called criminal acts, such as jaywalking, which factor into a person’s social credit score.
Social media credit scores assigned to Chinese individuals and businesses categorize them on whether or not they are “good” citizens. A real-name system—which requires people to use government-issued ID cards to buy mobile sims, obtain social media accounts, take a train, board a plane, or even buy groceries—coupled with social media credit scores ensures that those blacklisted as “unworthy” are banned from accessing financial markets, buying real estate or travelling by air or train. Among the activities that can get you labeled unworthy are taking reserved seats on trains or causing trouble in hospitals.
That same social credit score technology used to identify, track and segregate citizens is now one of China’s chief weapons in its fight to contain the coronavirus from spreading. However, it is far from infallible and a prime example of the difficulties involved in navigating an autonomous system where disembodied AI systems call the shots. For instance, one woman, who has no symptoms of the virus but was assigned a red code based on a visit to her hometown, has been blocked from returning to her home and job until her color code changes. She has been stuck in this state of limbo for weeks with no means of challenging the color code or knowing exactly why she’s been assigned a red code.
Fighting the coronavirus epidemic has given China the perfect excuse for unleashing the full force of its surveillance and data collection powers. The problem, as Eamon Barrett acknowledges in Fortune magazine, is what happens after: “Once the outbreak is controlled, it’s unclear whether the government will retract its new powers.”
The lesson for the ages: once any government is allowed to expand its powers, it’s almost impossible to pull back.
Meanwhile, here in the U.S., the government thus far has limited its coronavirus preparations to missives advising the public to stay calm, wash their hands, and cover their mouths when they cough and sneeze.
Don’t go underestimating the government’s ability to lock the nation down if the coronavirus turns into a pandemic, however. After all, the government has been planning and preparing for such a crisis for years now.
The building blocks are already in place for such an eventuality: the surveillance networks, fusion centers and government contractors that already share information in real time; the government’s massive biometric databases that can identify individuals based on genetic and biological markers; the militarized police, working in conjunction with federal agencies, ready and able to coordinate with the federal government when it’s time to round up the targeted individuals; the courts that will sanction the government’s methods, no matter how unlawful, as long as it’s done in the name of national security; and the detention facilities, whether private prisons or FEMA internment camps, that have been built and are waiting to be filled.
Now all of this may sound far-fetched to you now, but we’ve already arrived at the dystopian futures prophesied by George Orwell’s 1984, Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, and Philip K. Dick’s Minority Report.
It won’t take much more to push us over the edge into Neill Blomkamp’s Elysium, in which the majority of humanity is relegated to an overpopulated, diseased, warring planet where the government employs technologies such as drones, tasers and biometric scanners to track, target and control the populace.
Mind you, while these technologies are already in use today and being hailed for their potentially life-saving, cost-saving, time-saving benefits, it won’t be long before the drawbacks to having a government equipped with technology that makes it all-seeing, all-knowing, and all-powerful——helped along by the citizenry—far outdistance the benefits.
On a daily basis, Americans are relinquishing (in many cases, voluntarily) the most intimate details of who we are—their biological makeup, our genetic blueprints, and our biometrics (facial characteristics and structure, fingerprints, iris scans, etc.)—in order to navigate an increasingly technologically-enabled world.
Consider all the ways you continue to be tracked, hunted, hounded, and stalked by the government and its dubious agents:
By tapping into your phone lines and cell phone communications, the government knows what you say. By uploading all of your emails, opening your mail, and reading your Facebook posts and text messages, the government knows what you write. By monitoring your movements with the use of license plate readers, surveillance cameras and other tracking devices, the government knows where you go. By churning through all of the detritus of your life—what you read, where you go, what you say—the government can predict what you will do.
By mapping the synapses in your brain, scientists—and in turn, the government—will soon know what you remember. By mapping your biometrics—your “face-print”—and storing the information in a massive, shared government database available to bureaucratic agencies, police and the military, the government’s goal is to use facial recognition software to identify you (and every other person in the country) and track your movements, wherever you go. And by accessing your DNA, the government will soon know everything else about you that they don’t already know: your family chart, your ancestry, what you look like, your health history, your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course, etc.
Of course, none of these technologies are foolproof.
Nor are they immune from tampering, hacking or user bias.
Nevertheless, they have become a convenient tool in the hands of government agents to render null and void the Constitution’s requirements of privacy and its prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The ramifications of a government—any government—having this much unregulated, unaccountable power to target, track, round up and detain its citizens is beyond chilling.
Imagine what a totalitarian regime such as Nazi Germany could have done with this kind of unadulterated power.
Imagine what the next police state to follow in Germany’s footsteps will do with this kind of power. Society is rapidly moving in that direction.
We’ve made it so easy for the government to watch us.
Government eyes see your every move: what you read, how much you spend, where you go, with whom you interact, when you wake up in the morning, what you’re watching on television and reading on the internet.
Every move you make is being monitored, mined for data, crunched, and tabulated in order to form a picture of who you are, what makes you tick, and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line.
Chances are, as the Washington Post has reported, you have already been assigned a color-coded threat assessment score—green, yellow or red—so police are forewarned about your potential inclination to be a troublemaker depending on whether you’ve had a career in the military, posted a comment perceived as threatening on Facebook, suffer from a particular medical condition, or know someone who knows someone who might have committed a crime.
In other words, you’re most likely already flagged in a government database somewhere.
The government has the know-how.
Indeed, for years now, the FBI and Justice Department have conspired to acquire near-limitless power and control over biometric information collected on law-abiding individuals, millions of whom have never been accused of a crime.
Going far beyond the scope of those with criminal backgrounds, the FBI’s Next Generation Identification database (NGID), a billion dollar boondoggle that is aimed at dramatically expanding the government’s ID database from a fingerprint system to a vast data storehouse of iris scans, photos searchable with face recognition technology, palm prints, and measures of gait and voice recordings alongside records of fingerprints, scars, and tattoos.
Launched in 2008, the NGID is a massive biometric database that contains more than 100 million fingerprints and 45 million facial photos gathered from a variety of sources ranging from criminal suspects and convicts to daycare workers and visa applicants, including millions of people who have never committed or even been accused of a crime.
In other words, innocent American citizens are now automatically placed in a suspect database.
Read the rest here.
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--2020-03-18--First anniversary of Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened

First anniversary of Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened On this first anniversary of the publication of The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened , it ’ s a day of celebration for me .
The book has informed thousands about how and why the scary stories about the imminent demise of polar bears due to human-caused global warming failed so miserably .
It is a story of the triumph of facts over assumptions and a perfect example of why scientific observations trump model predictions .
It is also a study of science at its worst : how a close-knit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senior researchers was able to cast out an insider who refused to tow the line on their climate change agenda – and mobilized mobs to attack outsiders who questioned their authority .
If you haven ’ t read it , now may be the perfect time .
Many of you will be forced or encouraged to stay at home because of Covid-19 concerns , so here is one way to put the time to good use .
Ebooks are perfect for this situation .
If you don ’ t like Amazon , Smashwords @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also has an ebook version of my novel , EATEN .
This polar bear attack thriller is a timely read for a number of reasons but primarily because it ’ s the story of an animal epidemic with horrific consequences quite different from the one we are facing at the moment .
My polar bear science book for kids , Polar Bear Facts and Myths in ebook form might be the perfect diversion for kids at home who need interesting educational material .
You ’ ll find links to all of my books @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at my personal website here .
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 .

First anniversary of Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened
Written by Susan J Crockford PhD
On this first anniversary of the publication of The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened, it’s a day of celebration for me.
The book has informed thousands about how and why the scary stories about the imminent demise of polar bears due to human-caused global warming failed so miserably.
It is a story of the triumph of facts over assumptions and a perfect example of why scientific observations trump model predictions. It is also a study of science at its worst: how a close-knit community of scientists groomed by a few senior researchers was able to cast out an insider who refused to tow the line on their climate change agenda – and mobilized mobs to attack outsiders who questioned their authority.
If you haven’t read it, now may be the perfect time. Many of you will be forced or encouraged to stay at home because of Covid-19 concerns, so here is one way to put the time to good use. Ebooks are perfect for this situation. If you don’t like Amazon, Smashwords has an ebook version here.
Smashwords also has an ebook version of my novel, EATEN. This polar bear attack thriller is a timely read for a number of reasons but primarily because it’s the story of an animal epidemic with horrific consequences quite different from the one we are facing at the moment.
My polar bear science book for kids, Polar Bear Facts and Myths in ebook form might be the perfect diversion for kids at home who need interesting educational material.
You’ll find links to all of my books, in all countries and all outlets, at my personal website here.
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--2020-03-18--Facts Exposing the Hysteria over the COVID-19 Coronavirus

Facts Exposing the Hysteria over the COVID-19 Coronavirus Compared to what ?
That should be the question that every fear-mongering news story on the coronavirus has to start with .
Much has been made of the “ exponential ” rate of infection in European and Asian countries—as if the spread of all transmittable diseases did not develop along geometric , as opposed to arithmetic , growth patterns .
What actually matters is whether or not the growing “ pandemic ” overwhelms our ability to ensure the well-being of residents with efficiency and precision .
But fear of the disease , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already spoiled that for us .
Even if my odds of dying from coronavirus should suddenly jump ten-thousand-fold , from the current rate of 0.000012 percent across the population all the way up to 0 .12 percent , I ’ d happily take those odds over the destruction being wrought on the and global economy from this unbridled panic .
By comparison , there were 38,800 traffic fatalities in the United States in 2019 , the National Safety Council estimates .
That represents an average of over one hundred traffic deaths every day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as much painstaking detail as they have deaths from coronavirus , highways nationwide would be as empty as New York subways are now .
Even assuming that coronavirus deaths in the United States increase by a factor of one thousand over the year , the resulting deaths would only outnumber annual traffic deaths by 2,200 .
Shutting down highways would have a much more positive effect on the mortality rate than shutting down the economy to try to prevent the spread of the virus .
There have been 5,123 deaths worldwide so far—also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And unlike coronavirus , driving kills indiscriminately , mowing down the young and the old , the sick and the healthy .
The coronavirus , by comparison , is targeted in its lethality , overwhelmingly striking the elderly or the already severely sick .
As of last Monday ( March 16 , 2020 ) , approximately 89 percent of Italy ’ s coronavirus deaths had been over the age of seventy , according to The Wall Street Journal .
Sad to say , those victims were already nearing the end of their lifespans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another illness .
No child under the age of nine has died from the illness worldwide .
In China , only one individual in the ten-to-nineteen age group has succumbed .
Comparing the relative value of lives makes for grisly calculus , but one is forced to ask : are we missing the forest for the trees ?
If the measures we undertake to protect a vulnerable few end up exposing them , along with the rest of society , to even more damaging risks—was it worth the cost ?
An example : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States during the 2018–19 influenza season , estimates the cdc .
We did not shut down public events and institutions to try to slow the spread of the flu .
Yet we have already destroyed $ 5 trillion in stock market wealth over the last few weeks in the growing coronavirus panic , reports The New York Times , wiping out retirement savings for many .
The number of cases in most afflicted countries is paltry .
As of today , 127 countries had reported some cases , but forty-eight of those countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Worldometer .
At this point , more people have recovered from the virus than are still sick .
But the damage to people ’ s livelihoods through the resulting economic contraction is real and widespread .
Its health consequences will be more severe than those of the coronavirus , as Steve Malanga shows in City Journal .
The people who can least afford to lose jobs will be the hardest hit by the assault on tourism .
Small entrepreneurs , whether in manufacturing or the service sector , will struggle to stay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ havoc undermines government legitimacy .
President Trump has been criticized for not being apocalyptic enough in his press conferences .
In fact , he should be even more skeptical of the panic than he has been .
He should relentlessly put the coronavirus risk into context with opioid deaths , homicide deaths—about sixteen thousand a year in the United States—flu deaths , and traffic deaths .
One might have thought New York governor Andrew Cuomo a voice of reason when , a few days ago , he tried to tamp down the hysteria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ This is not Ebola , this is not sars , this is not some science fiction movie come to life .
The hysteria here is way out of line with the actuality and the facts.
” And yet since then he called a state of emergency in New York , and he and Mayor Bill de Blasio have all but shut down the New York City economy .
They , like most all politicians nowadays , have shown an overwhelming impulse to be irrationally risk-averse .
Rather than indiscriminately shutting down public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevention where it is most needed : in nursing homes and hospitals .
It is hard to imagine that the panicked leaders and populace of today would have been able to triumph in the last century ’ s World Wars .
America ’ s colleges sent off thousands of their young men to fight and die in those wars ; those students went off with conviction and courage .
Currently , colleges and universities are shutting down with no hint of the virus in their vicinity .
Would today ’ s panicked leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the face of a World War , or some other legitimately comparable threat ?
Let ’ s hope that we do not have to find out .

Facts Exposing the Hysteria over the COVID-19 Coronavirus
Written by Heather Mac Donald
Compared to what? That should be the question that every fear-mongering news story on the coronavirus has to start with.
Much has been made of the “exponential” rate of infection in European and Asian countries—as if the spread of all transmittable diseases did not develop along geometric, as opposed to arithmetic, growth patterns.
What actually matters is whether or not the growing “pandemic” overwhelms our ability to ensure the well-being of U.S. residents with efficiency and precision. But fear of the disease, and not the disease itself, has already spoiled that for us.
Even if my odds of dying from coronavirus should suddenly jump ten-thousand-fold, from the current rate of 0.000012 percent across the U.S. population all the way up to 0 .12 percent, I’d happily take those odds over the destruction being wrought on the U.S. and global economy from this unbridled panic.
By comparison, there were 38,800 traffic fatalities in the United States in 2019, the National Safety Council estimates. That represents an average of over one hundred traffic deaths every day; if the press catalogued these in as much painstaking detail as they have deaths from coronavirus, highways nationwide would be as empty as New York subways are now.
Even assuming that coronavirus deaths in the United States increase by a factor of one thousand over the year, the resulting deaths would only outnumber annual traffic deaths by 2,200. Shutting down highways would have a much more positive effect on the U.S. mortality rate than shutting down the U.S. economy to try to prevent the spread of the virus.
There have been 5,123 deaths worldwide so far—also a fraction of traffic deaths worldwide. And unlike coronavirus, driving kills indiscriminately, mowing down the young and the old, the sick and the healthy. The coronavirus, by comparison, is targeted in its lethality, overwhelmingly striking the elderly or the already severely sick.
As of last Monday (March 16, 2020), approximately 89 percent of Italy’s coronavirus deaths had been over the age of seventy, according to The Wall Street Journal. Sad to say, those victims were already nearing the end of their lifespans. They might have soon died from another illness.
No child under the age of nine has died from the illness worldwide.
In China, only one individual in the ten-to-nineteen age group has succumbed.
Comparing the relative value of lives makes for grisly calculus, but one is forced to ask: are we missing the forest for the trees? If the measures we undertake to protect a vulnerable few end up exposing them, along with the rest of society, to even more damaging risks—was it worth the cost?
An example: there were 34,200 deaths in the United States during the 2018–19 influenza season, estimates the cdc. We did not shut down public events and institutions to try to slow the spread of the flu. Yet we have already destroyed $5 trillion in stock market wealth over the last few weeks in the growing coronavirus panic, reports The New York Times, wiping out retirement savings for many.
The number of cases in most afflicted countries is paltry. As of today, 127 countries had reported some cases, but forty-eight of those countries had fewer than ten cases, according to Worldometer. At this point, more people have recovered from the virus than are still sick. But the damage to people’s livelihoods through the resulting economic contraction is real and widespread.
Its health consequences will be more severe than those of the coronavirus, as Steve Malanga shows in City Journal. The people who can least afford to lose jobs will be the hardest hit by the assault on tourism. Small entrepreneurs, whether in manufacturing or the service sector, will struggle to stay afloat. Such unjustified, unpredicted economic havoc undermines government legitimacy.
President Trump has been criticized for not being apocalyptic enough in his press conferences. In fact, he should be even more skeptical of the panic than he has been.
He should relentlessly put the coronavirus risk into context with opioid deaths, homicide deaths—about sixteen thousand a year in the United States—flu deaths, and traffic deaths.
One might have thought New York governor Andrew Cuomo a voice of reason when, a few days ago, he tried to tamp down the hysteria in a press conference, saying: “This is not Ebola, this is not sars, this is not some science fiction movie come to life. The hysteria here is way out of line with the actuality and the facts.” And yet since then he called a state of emergency in New York, and he and Mayor Bill de Blasio have all but shut down the New York City economy. They, like most all U.S. politicians nowadays, have shown an overwhelming impulse to be irrationally risk-averse.
Rather than indiscriminately shutting down public events and travel, we should target prevention where it is most needed: in nursing homes and hospitals.
It is hard to imagine that the panicked leaders and populace of today would have been able to triumph in the last century’s World Wars. America’s colleges sent off thousands of their young men to fight and die in those wars; those students went off with conviction and courage. Currently, colleges and universities are shutting down with no hint of the virus in their vicinity. Would today’s panicked leaders and populace be able to triumph in the face of a World War, or some other legitimately comparable threat? Let’s hope that we do not have to find out.
Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Diversity Delusion (St. Martin’s Press) and The War on Cops (Encounter). Read more at newcriterion.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