Fun
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Billy Gates III, Saviour of Human Health

Source: a thinking person

At the beginning of the COVID lockdowns, I watched several TED talks by Gates who makes the claim of growing pandemics. He announces it like it is gospel and incontrovertible. Nowhere does he actually explain his evidence. He just reasserts constantly that our travels, mixing, hyper-industrializing, and generalized global chaos are surely going to unleash something awful from an angry Mother Nature.

Incidentally, in the course of watching these videos it also became obvious to me that Gates knows absolutely nothing about viruses and how they work, much less anything about epidemiology. He has very obviously never read a dummy’s guidebook much less a first-year medical text. Everything that he thinks he knows comes from his experience with computer viruses, if you can believe it. To him, a vaccine operates like Norton Antivirus.

No exaggeration.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Disease pathogens have no passports. know no national boundaries, and while he may or may not be out of depth with human biology, surely Bill Gates does have a point about the health hazards of massive amount of mixing and international travel?

I've often thought it myself and though I don't know, I would not be surprised if Covid was not already well on its own world tour before anyone realised it, Also that the same could probably be said of past pandemics like the infamous "Spanish 'Flu" that did not come from Spain at all.

Yes, we all know you despise Mr. Gates but at least he is trying to campaign for positive action, not just say lie back, close the WHO because we think its Chairman was a communist, and let Mother Nature have her wicked way as long as it's not with us.

......

My radio is on in the background, and among the brief notes in a short News summary as I typed the above, we learnt that the WHO has reported a huge, world-wide increase in Measles. But since it was the WHO analysts who'd established that, presumably it doesn't matter.....
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Fairydust Commercially-owned stations? It may depend where you live. In the UK all the broadcasters including ITV (commercial) have to be as neutral as possible in their reporting, and it is clear when what is said is an opinion. If that were not so we would only ever hear from one side of anything, and not know when what is said is a fact or an opinion.

Politicians of course are adept at evasion and pure rubbish, but if you know who they are what they represent you can allow for it - but you need know what their opponents say, too.

The newspapers can be politically biased and some of the national ones certainly are, but their bias is usually pretty obvious and easy to allow for. They do not lie - well, not usually - but use selective editing to slant their stories.


What is a headache for professional journalists trying to show both sides of something is when one side, usually the "defendant" will not co-operate. Invitations to put their case are rebuffed with "no-one was available for comment", outright refusals to comment and other evasions, sometimes accompanied by bland "issued statements" that do not answer the question and as pointless as those "mission statements" fashionable among big companies in the 1990s.


The real danger to democracy though is [anti?-]social-media.

It allows all sorts of campaigns based on distortions and lies from anonymous, unknown sources. It allows meddling by one country in another's internal politics. These encourage users to dive into so-called "silos" or "echo-chambers" that reinforce their members' beliefs and exclude all questioning, opposing views or even straight facts. It also encourages thoroughly evil antisocial "ists" and bullying - including "death threats" to flourish.
Qanon was a prime example, festering on a nasty little forum for mysogynists and racists until put onto Facebook in the USA by a party-political campaigner called Tracey Diaz (screen-name 'Beans').

Now we are seeing a new threat to democracy: the use of AI (Intelligence or Idiocy?) to create malevolent hoaxes. We have already heard of musicians worried about forgeries. We have now seen in the USA a call not to vote, pretending to be from the President; and in the UK a hoax "quote" from the Prime Minister. It's the digital equivalent of posting a photograph of someone captioned with a fictitious "quote" designed purely to denigrate the victim.

The "soclal"[?]-media companies bleat lamely about "taking down" offensive, dangerous or illegal posts but I don't think that's enough; and it is a huge operation thanks to the sheer volume of material. I think they should bar permanently the perpetrators - I know the company only really knows the sending instrument rather than the user who could therefore use another instrument, but block that too. Senders are traceable....
WalterF · 70-79, M
@ArishMell Do you seriously believe that the BBC is impartial? It used to be, maybe, reasonably so, but it can no longer be trusted to give both sides and let the viewer / listener draw his own conclusions. Its woke attitudes (for example, going full-on on climate change as suddenly being a danger to humanity) are causing the departure of licence-payers by the tens of thousands. It is often rebuked for biased reporting. Consider the scandal of the Diana interview. How many citizens agree with its pandering to Lineker and his whims while paying him such astronomical wages?

I fear your picture of impartial media corresponds to what it should be, rather than what it is.

And you fall in line with the official position, on seeing people like me as terrorists, threats to democracy! This is because we offer alternate theories? Really? Where do you stand on freedom of speech?
Fairydust · F
@ArishMell

Our media here in the uk are owned by 3 billionaires, you should do more homework.

It’s all controlled and corrupt. 🙄

How come they don’t show the Germany farmers protest, big news but choose to ignore it, like many big news stories.
therighttothink50 · 56-60, M
@HoraceGreenley freaks Hollywood squares game show or the new brady bunch show?
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@therighttothink50
I'm going with Freaky Washington Squares
Fairydust · F
Bill Gates funded population control, why would a man who wants to keep the population down, then want to save everyone with his vaccines.

💉☠️

It’s not rocket science lol 🙄

1997 🗞️

[image/video deleted]

[image/video deleted]
[image/video deleted]
lets ask india how they feel about gates .. or if hes allowed to jab anymore ppl there...
Zeusdelight · 61-69, M
You don't listen to many epidemiologists.

 
Post Comment