The pioneering work of Dr Tom Cowan and Dr Andy Kaufman has stimulated debate. However, in order to move the issue forward productively a challenge has been made to the virology community to prove their claims. Given the massive implications riding on this claim it is very reasonable to ask for it to be proven. The freedom of the western world rests on it as does the advancement of the science of medicine into a post germ theory era. The challenge is summarised on a two page document that can be found on the website of Dr Sam Bailey, here. I invite you to read it and share it. This is arguably the most important issue of our time. They are calling for the settling of the virus debate by objective scientific experimentation.

In this Episode of “Living outside the Matrix” I am joined by Dr Kevin Corbett, one of the signatories of the document, to discuss the historical context from the the alleged AIDS epidemic of the 1980s. Kevin Corbett MSc PhD is a health scientist and qualified general nurse who has worked in family planning and sexual health.

Neither Dr Corbett nor his associates are saying that people were not sick during the alleged Coronavirus pandemic. What they are saying is that there is no proof for the existence of any corona virus (or any virus for that matter, including HIV) and there is no proof that any supposed pathogen is the causative agent of any disease.

In the interview Dr Corbett recounts his background with involvement in the Perth Group, who were key players in challenging the dogma around AIDS and the alleged HIV virus in the 1980s. He also cites the publication “Continuum” from that era, and informs us that back issues are still available on line, even though the publication is no longer in print. It remain a treasure trove of information that is highly relevant to the medical issues of today. The key difference being that today our political freedom is at stake with lock downs, quarantines and governments taking complete control of society in the name of public health.

Continuum was a dissident AIDS journal based in London in the 1990s – all editions available here: https://www.immunity.org.uk/continuum/

In Continuum’s January/February 1996 edition, the magazine began offering £1,000 to the first person who could find a scientific study that proved the isolation of HIV – see small box advert (top right) on page 4 here: https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v3n5.pdf

Peter Duesberg tried to claim the prize and wrote an article for the magazine in its July/August 1996 issue but his claim was rejected because it did not meet the conditions. Here is Duesberg’s claim on pages 8-9 of this PDF: https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v4n2.pdf source: Continuun 4 (2), July/August 1996.

In the following edition of Continuum, The Perth Group responded, see Special Supplement (Virus Isolation Special) beginning on page 17 https://www.immunity.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/v4n3.pdf source: Continuum 4(3), September/October 1996.

Back in 2000, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa brought together mainstream and non-mainstream scientists to discuss the isolation of HIV and the causation of AIDS at two meetings called the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel. Dr Corbett attended the first one of these with Joan Shenton.

The experiments that The Perth Group stipulated should have been undertaken to prove the isolation and the pathogen...

In order to best understand the world we live in it is crucial to think in terms of fundamentals and to be philosophically aware. One must have a basic knowledge of philosophy and preferably of Ayn Rand’s philosophy Objectivism. When the full context is held in mind its clear that there is no great awakening happening, and the claim that such is the case is a counter-productive call to inaction.

As little as a century ago the average person had far more common sense than people today and they were less gullible because they were more anchored in the real world than we are today. Of course, the context was different and they did not have the technological ability to access information and therefore uncover the truth had they been inclined to investigate. And unlike us they had no track record of broken promises and obvious false claims to stimulate suspicion.

3 contextual points:

The first contextual idea to bear in mind is that men have been controlling other men since the very beginning of human interactions. Let’s remind ourselves of the concept of slavery and that until the mid 1800s it was a ubiquitous fact of human life across the globe.

It is also no secret that there are many voices calling for a New World Order that is essentially one world government as a means of political control. This idea is not championed by ordinary people on the street, it is championed by the super wealthy and their “think tanks” and those calling the shots – the parasite class.

The second point is that central banking – the key means of controlling nations by controlling the money supply – has been around a long time. It was established in England with the charter of the Bank of England in 1694. The model spread across Europe, and has become the means by which wealthy private shareholders of these central banks control the money supply and thereby the economy of their respective countries.

The third point I want to make is philosophical.

The renaissance of the 15th and 16th centuries was the rebirth of REASON as man’s guiding principle since the ancient Greece. It was a period when mysticism gave way to a rational approach to human life. The key features of the thinking of this period were that reality was held to be an objective absolute and that it was considered knowable to the human mind. Not everyone held these ideas, but they came to dominate European culture for a brief period. The result was the scientific and industrial revolutions, and massive progress of humanity out of poverty and into an age of technological growth and development.

The two ideas of an objective reality and therefore a knowable reality gave birth to scientific method and a string of key discoveries such as electricity and electric lighting, the internal combustion engine, and many more. But also, these ideas gave birth to the USA, the first free nation on earth. You see, when reason is mans dominant guiding principle, mankind recognises the objective nature of reality and grasps that knowledge is possible to the human mind – that the mind is competent to know reality. These ideas always go together, and they lead to individualism and political freedom.

But in 1781 the publication of a book called “A critique of Pure Reason” by a German Philosopher called Emmanuel Kant, saw the beginning of the reversal of these dominant ideas. Setting himself up a champion of reason (in a typical Trojan horse tactic of the intellectual variety) Kant proceeded to destroy the concept and precipitated a U-turn in the philosophical direction of western culture. It didn’t happen overnight, but the seeds were sown for the key ideas that a) reality is created by consciousness, and b) that reality is unknowable. Kant (and his promoters) reversed the thinking trend of the Renaissance and began the trend to undermine man’s mind by undermining our grasp of reality and our ability to know it.

Dr Andy Kaufman presents himself as one of the foremost rational thinkers of today. In his questioning of the pandemic narrative he went directly to the fundamentals and sought proof of the existence of the virus and the evidence for and against the predominant paradigm of germ theory in medicine. He followed in the footsteps of Nancy Turner Banks and others such as Stephan Lanka and picked up the thread of those questioning the existence of any HIV virus that allegedly causes AIDS. His scrupulous investigation and unceasing demand for evidence, that could not be produced, led him to the inevitable conclusion that there are no viruses. No one has ever shown a virus to exist by isolating it from all other organic matter in the proper dictionary definition of the term – separating from everything else. I commend his ruthlessly logical approach to this issue.

The implications of this are enormous. You have nothing to fear in ‘catching’ a disease from a virus. It means the Pandemic was a hoax, that vaccinations are a waste of time and no means to immunity. It means that wearing masks and locking people down is useless to prevent disease. In short it constitutes proof that we have all been lied to on this crucial medical issue! It highlights the facts that uncovering a lie, or discovering a false claim, has immense value in seeking truth.

Andy points out the necessity of using logic in your thinking process, and the importance of being aware of logical fallacies. These are apparent logical arguments (or reasons to believe something) that on closer inspection, or more considered thinking, turn out to be false and not reasons for anything at all.

I wanted to get philosophical with Andy because one of the core logical fallacies that is responsible for almost all modern illogical thinking is one identified by Ayn Rand. She called it the fallacy of the stolen concept. It is when you use a concept (or an idea) while implicitly contradicting or arguing against it by holding another idea to be true. Usually this fallacy is committed when people argue for or against an idea without knowing that they are implicitly contradicting another more fundamental concept (or idea) that they are already using. Its like inadvertently cutting off the branch you are standing on if you were climbing a tree.

examples of this fallacy include: championing freedom while standing against capitalism, championing freedom while holding that altruism and the code of self-sacrifice is a good thing, Believing that you can create your own reality while searching for truth, claiming to be a truth seeker while believing in a supernatural deity and other mystical ideas.

We covered a few logical fallacies but unfortunately I didn’t bring this one up. I was saddened to hear Andy say that it was logic that caused him to move away from atheism, since this is another logical fallacy. If one cannot find a rational (logical) explanation for any event or phenomena it is not rational (or logical) to reach for a non-logical one out of apparent ‘necessity’ of finding (or inventing) any kind of explanation. I went on to press him in my next interview — Episode 162 — and found that his thinking is inconsistent. He advocates one way of thinking for discerning the truth about viruses, and another (that contradicts the concept of truth) in so-called spiritual matters. This is very disappointing since he is currently placed at the forefront of a health/freedom movement. It is crucial to note that with this kind of mixed up thinking freedom cannot be achieved!

The key point that is absolutely crucial is that

Understanding your world is a big task and it takes time, but one thing is very important as you embark on this journey. It’s essential to question ALL areas of so-called science, and not leave any one of them exempt from scrutiny. Don’t investigate only medical science (pandemics and viruses), and maybe political science (global collectivist agendas) and perhaps economic science (central banking and a debt-based fractional reserve global fiat currency system) etc, etc. If you are seeking truth you must be consistent and not hold astronomy and quantum physics as beyond suspicion. Especially since the implications of both and the ‘conclusions’ of quantum physics specifically support otherwise irrational and mystical ideas, such as “we create our own reality”, the primacy of consciousness, and thus destroy the concept of truth.

The Big Bang Theory is officially proposed as the rational and ‘scientific’ alternative to creationism, but the two are presented as a false dichotomy. There are more things to consider than just these two options! Rational people do not entertain the idea that a supreme being created the Universe any more than they do Santa Claus. There is no mystical need to accommodate religion and suppose a ‘moment of creation’, and in fact it is illogical/irrational to do so.

In Episode 155 of Living outside the Matrix, Nigel Howitt discusses the Big Bang theory with Patrik Holmqvist and Simon Shack (author of the Tychos – Our Geoaxial Binary Solar System). All the points below and many others are raised that call to question this universally accepted explanation for the origin of existence.

Logically speaking, it is crucial to recognise that when we talk about the Universe we are talking about existence. Meaning, everything that exists. This is not controversial, yet it needs to be clarified in order to think logically about whether or not it could possibly have ‘begun’ at any one point. When you hear people talking about the creation of the Universe, substitute the word ‘existence’ and you will get a better idea of the sense of what they are saying

What is the Big Bang Theory?

The Universe is said to have begun at a single point physically and temporally, and it is said to be continually expanding.  It allegedly offers “offers a comprehensive explanation for a broad range of observed phenomena, such as redshift, cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), black holes, dark matter, event horizons and much more. In should be noted that the big bang as a concept resembles the  fingerprint of a creator’s initial act. And thus fits nicely with a religious view of existence being created by god.

But the Big Bang theory is deeply questionable on closer scrutiny. First and foremost is it logically unsupportable and therefore inadmissible into rational discourse. Here’s why.

Nothing cannot be the cause of something. Understand that ‘nothing’ isn’t a different kind of something, it is no thing. Nothing is zero, the blank, the void, an absence of any existent thing or matter of any kind. Nothing is an absence of any existent thing, and as such it cannot be the cause of some other existent thing. Only something that exists can participate in causality. If something caused the existence of the universe, of all the galaxies and stars,

This is BIG news. An astronomy researcher in Italy, Simon Shack, has found the missing link in a model of the Solar System created by the most famous astronomer you have never heard of – Tycho Brahe. The Tychos model completely disproves the heliocentric (or Copernican) model that we have all been brought up with.

Most people do not know abut the numerous ‘anomalies’ with the heliocentric model. They are the evidence that the heliocentric model simply doesn’t explain the empirical evidence – what we see when we look up at the stars. Astronomers know about these anomalies and they are widely acknowledged. Yet even so, mainstream astronomy remains deaf to this exciting news. But don’t be put off by those classic logical fallacies, just because everyone else doesn’t yet accept this, and just because it is not the official explanation does NOT undermine its logical credentials. Suspend judgement until you have looked at the facts. THEN decide for yourself.

Aside from being the BIGGEST breakthrough in hundreds of years  in the understanding of our solar system and our Universe, I also like to consider this issue as the perfect test for one’s ability to think logically. Because when you take a dispassionate look at all the facts, when you grasp that all of the observed data (from centuries of painstaking collection by hundreds of renowned astronomers) fits into (and is accommodated by) this model, without any contradictions, inventive theorizing or fudging, it is difficult not to accept this as the most likely model of the way our solar system actually moves around us.

The Tychos Model

Tycho Brahe was a celebrated Danish nobleman and astronomer who developed what was the most widely accepted model of the solar system for at least a century. His assistant, Johannes Kepler, came up with the idea of elliptical orbits to fudge Brahe’s data to ‘fit’ the Copernican/heliocentric model shortly after Tycho Brahe untimely death in suspicious circumstances in 1601. There is a lot of evidence in the historical record that undermines Kepler’s character and raises serious suspicion over his motives and his commitment to scientific method.

Simon Shack’s achievement has been  to fit the final piece into the puzzle. He has integrated many of the anomalous observations of the heliocentric model and inferred the Earths own orbit which takes 25344 years.  In doing so, all of the anomalies of the heliocentric model disappear and a perfect model that explains everything we actually see emerges. This is massive news!

If you think about it, its possible to deduce one’s own motion by observing the relative motion of things around us – the parallax. We do this all the time from car, train and plane windows. In the same way astronomers can observe the various and numerous instances of parallax between Earth and all the other celestial bodies, as well as a host of other observational data, and then infer Earth’s motion. The problem is that when we try to reconcile the vast body of collected observed data it doesn’t fit with the heliocentric model, in spite of all the assertions that it has been incontrovertibly proven. All sorts of ludicrous inventions have had to be invoked to ‘explain away’ the many things that don’t fit. But daring to think outside the box, Simon Shack hypothesised that the earth itself is moving around its own orbit. By making some basic calculations and then integrating this idea into Tycho Brahe’s geocentric binary model of the solar system, Simon was able to refine his calculations to the point where everything fits! The earths (PVP) orbit takes 25,344 years to complete and explains the precession of the equinoxes and host of other observed phenomena. It is the missing piece of the puzzle that has eluded astronomers for centuries!

Questions are great because they get us thinking. Questions encourage thinking, rules encourage compliance. In this Episode of “Living outside the Matrix” I present you with 12 fundamental questions for life, questions to ask yourself. Your answers will provide insight into some of your most fundamental assumptions and a key to understanding your motivations.

Some of the questions have a right answer, some do not. Most of them seek an either/or answer, but not all. What you will notice is that there is often an answer that you will be able to pluck out of your surrounding mainstream culture. The answer that everyone knows, the one that most people subscribe to because they hear everyone else say it. But the question remains, what is your answer? What is your position on these fundamental and hugely significant questions?

Ask yourself this…

1. Am I a sovereign consciousness.

Am I a separate entity in the drivers seat of my life? Can I (potentially) exert at least some control over my experience, or must I obey some external authority? Am I the author of my life, or is something or someone else?

Am I the author of my life, or must I conform to the script dictated by another or the group, or a supreme being?

Examine this question in relation to its opposite. Are you part of a collective or group? Do you consider yourself a cog in the machine, or a part of something bigger than you? Are you a worker bee? Or are you a sovereign being?

Where does the buck stop? Does it stop with you, or do you pass it on to something or someone else?

2. Do I have the right to live for my own sake?

This is a question that asks if you are free to live as you choose independent of the needs or requirements of others. It asks do I really own my own life? Do I own my body and my productive effort, or am I bound by duty to provide for the needs of others. Can I leave the group and do my own thing? Or am I under some kind of obligation to the tribe/society/the collective?

This question is at the root of all politics, yet never gets asked. It essentially asks can I opt out and not be coerced into your group? Can I be left alone? Can I avoid being governed? Can I be free?

Our current culture does not grant us this right, but it should. In Episode 64 I covered this idea in detail.

3. Am I a being of volitional consciousness?

This means do I have free will? Do I possess the power to choose? Am I able to take own path in preference to another? Am I an independent entity with the capability of taking responsibility or am I not?

Is my life experience somehow predetermined for me? Is it mapped out? Are all my apparent choices simply the result of all the prior causal factors in my upbringing, or genetic inheritance, or in my social conditioning? Am I a product of multiple causal factors outside my control, or I am free to choose?

4. Is reality an objective absolute?

This means does the external world exist independent of me and my conscious, and of any other consciousness, human or divine? Is reality what it is, or is it somehow shaped by consciousness? Was it here before I got here, or am I creating it? Is it fixed, stable and consistent, or is it subject to consciousness? Is it an unchangeable given, or a malleable field of pure potential?

You can examine this question more in Episode 151.

5. Can I know reality?

Is reality knowable to my mind, or, by its nature and by the nature of my mind, is it impossible to really know anything? Am I at the mercy of unknowable spirits and demons, or am I competent to understand and take appropriate action? Am I a potentially powerful creative force that can exercise my ability to rearrange matter to suit my ...

It’s never been more important to know the truth than in the context of today! Freedom is on the line! But how good are the methods used to discern truth? Are they effective? Are they reliable? In this podcast we discuss 2 easy mistakes that many truth seekers fall into. They are super important because they affect our ability to achieve certainty and to pass on knowledge to others.

We must be able to scrutinise government policies, pandemics, climate emergency, terrorism, etc, and if we find them to be flawed or making false claims we must be able to explain why. We must rise to the challenge of being savvy and astute thinkers who can see through the propaganda! We need to know which ideas are false and which are true and we need to be certain of our conclusions.

 The Traps – Mysticism and Emotions

All truth seekers face two potential traps. They can easily be tempted into considering faith and/or emotions as a means to knowing truth. Faith is what people are appealing to when they talk about “just knowing”. But reason is your ONLY guide to truth.

It is crucial for us truth seekers to understand the consequences of believing that faith and emotions can be guides in discerning truth.

* You can be hoodwinked or conned if you habitually believe on faith.

* You can be controlled by fear if you habitually believe according to how you feel.

* You will never achieve certainty beyond a reasonable doubt in what you know.

* You will be unable to demonstrate with any certainty what is true.

* YOU CANNOT DEFEND FREEDOM FROM THIS BASIS.

BEWARE OF FAITH

What is faith? It is belief in ideas when no reasons can be offered to substantiate them. It is the belief that reasons are unnecessary. Faith is the antithesis of reason.

If you accept something on faith you cannot possibly know why it is true. You cannot explain to others why it is true, you can only tell them its true. You can pass on ready made conclusions but you cannot pass on knowledge and understanding. This is no basis for any movement, never mind a truth movement!

If you accept ideas on faith you cannot achieve certainty. Certainty is a measure of how much evidence supports a claim or proposition. By definition you will have none.

If you accept ideas on faith you are relegated to the position of a child – of simply accepting what you are told, and doing what you are told.

BEWARE OF EMOTIONS

It is similar with emotions. Because ultimately faith is belief based on how you feel as well. When reason and logic are renounced all you left is your emotions.

When you accept that emotions are a means to know reality you avail yourself to emotional control. You can be manipulated into behaving a certain way through fear. Only when you hold reason as your sole means to gain knowledge can you know if a threat is genuine before you act on it.

Accepting ideas as true on the basis of faith or emotions leaves you without knowledge, only hearsay. You cannot rally troops and truth seeking foot soldiers without reasons. You cannot win against the globalists by holding up ideas you have no clue how to validate.

Reason – your only guide to knowledge

For a detailed explanation of why reason is your only guide to truth check out this post.

Freedom and truth have no chance until and unless people grasp that reason is their ONLY means to knowledge because adopting ideas without reasons – even if they are true – cannot be considered knowledge. You cannot pass on understanding without reasons. You cannot launch a crusade for freedom without truth on your side along with the reasons why. How will you persuade anyone to join your revolution if you have no reasons?

To find out more about emotions check out this ...

In this Episode of Living outside the Matrix, Nigel Howitt discusses the importance of holding a world view based on the Primacy of existence. But he points out that currently our culture is dominated by the opposite idea called the primacy of consciousness. The former leads to human flourishment, the latter to tyranny and human suffering!

Ideas are powerful, they motivate us and affect our choice of values as well as morality and behaviour. The more fundamental ideas are the more influence they exert. And the most fundamental ones exert the most influence. These days our culture dis-values truth by implication. Where ever we look, whatever the issue, it seems that assertions and unfounded claims are taken as truth. Tyranny is on the horizon and marching towards us – few seem to notice the signs.

The Primacy of Existence

In this weeks Podcast I discuss this most fundamental and most important idea, and look at the its implications. Its the idea that reality is an objective absolute, existing independently of any consciousness, human, divine, or both. This idea is contrasted with its opposite – that reality is created by consciousness. These two ideas are known in philosophy as the primacy of existence and the primacy of consciousness. All philosophical schools of thought fall on one side or the other of this issue, and there are only two positions that can be taken. Unfortunately, our current western culture is dominated by the wrong one!

Primacy of Consciousness

When we hold a world view dominated by the primacy of existence all goes well and human flourishment is possible. When we hold a world view dominated by the opposite idea it always leads to human suffering. Nigel sets out a clear explanation of  the fact that the wrong one of these two options dominates our present culture!

In the podcast I delve into…

* Assumptions and assumed premises

* Implicit and explicit premises

* The primacy of existence

* The positive implications of the primacy of existence

* The standard of truth

* The primacy of consciousness

* The destruction of truth

* The many negative implications of the primacy of consciousness

* Religions subscribe to the primacy of consciousness by implication

* Integrating or dis-integrating our minds and our thinking

There is a lot packed into this Episode. I sincerely hope you get value from it, and as always please feel free to join the debate and comment below. I am always interested in your views.

I can also be emailed at [email protected]

Nigel Howitt, January 2022

As an additional resource this video presentation by Dr David Kelley may provide some extra helpful insights

To know how best to act, we must gather all the information and have as big a picture as possible. Only then can we be in a position to best judge what to do. If we apply this principle to looking back over the past two years of pandemic narrative, we must take a honest look at the state of affairs.

Based on my observations and full contextual knowledge I have concluded that beyond any reasonable doubt a political reality of Communism (Statism or in essence, collectivism) is now the de-facto power structure in Britain. The precedent has been set with complete economic and social control already assumed. Because the reason is justified in the minds of the public, all is considered OK. Nothing to worry about. The alarming loss of political freedoms should arouse suspicion in any thinking mind, but when you search for the non-existent virus and learn about how viruses are “isolated” you can see that the picture is far more sinister than it appears on the surface.

Key Premises

There are key premises that I base my conclusions on that are supported by a huge amount of evidence.

First it’s not all about the money

Many conclude early on in their investigations that because BIG money is being made it’s all about money. Money is being made but it is not the root cause. [Read “The Creature From Jekyll Island” by G Edward Griffin] However, if we understand the nature of the Federal Reserve, the concept of central banking and how essential it is to centralised political control, we can observe that the money has been in the bag for a long time. Arguably, since the Bank of England was created in 1694.

The controllers of the agenda have long been in control of the money as shareholders of private central banks. Riches are not the motive for these people. They are parasites who seek to perpetuate their control over their host – us.

Second the agenda is political

The much publicized and championed agenda for global governance. Whether in the form of Agenda 21, or agenda 2030, or the Great RESET championed by the World Economic Forum, whether in the guise of the Rockefeller Foundations philanthropic agenda to make the world a better place, or The Eugenics movement and the allegation that the world is over-populated, we must be conscious of the macro political agenda.

Its not denied and its not a secret, its what’s happening all around us. You cannot possibly understand your world in any meaningful way if you have not grasped the political reality of the world you live in.

Third a pandemic is the dream ticket to impose political control

If you cant see how a pandemic is the ultimate “God-send” good fortune for anyone advancing a political agenda towards more centralized global governance, then you must have your head in the sand! It is the perfect vehicle for the imposition of  political and economic controls with perfect alleged justification. This fact cannot be denied what ever one’s conclusions about what is going on.

Most importantly, this should be all the incentive you need to investigate its legitimacy. Given that there voices shouting out alarms that are actively being silenced, this should add further cause for suspicion. This is before you begin your investigation and find the facts do not support the claims!

Fourth Propaganda and manipulation of the narrative are part of the terrain

The mainstream media outlets are all bought and paid for. The assurance of a message in alignment with the agenda is guaranteed. The mechanisms for the control of ideas have been in place for many decades, and not just the mechanisms of dissemination. Thinkers with ideas in line with the agenda have been promoted and vice versa so as to further the agenda. Books, publishing, and the subtle steering of mainstream western culture has been underway for many decades.

The loss of genuine scientific method in the mainstream narrative is a cultural reflection of western thinking. The genuine process of seeking knowledge and identifying truth has given way to a new religion some call Scientism. Its a form of pseudo-science that serves a a mock justification for a political agenda. But is the fakery just for the purposes of manipulation or is there genuine error? Or perhaps is there a mixture of the two – where the deceivers actually believe some of their own delusions?

In this weeks Podcast Patrik Holmqvist and Nigel Howitt discuss the many manifestation of the loss of scientific method in the mainstream narrative, offering numerous examples. They also shed some light on the reasons why this is happening.

Some likely causes of the loss of genuine scientific method

A Failure to think logically

Today we see a widespread inability to think logically among both lay-people and the so-called scientists! For example, epidemiological studies are considered sufficient to claim knowledge with no need to isolate variables in rigorous scientific studies that isolate variables. This is particularly true among those who advocate for veganism or vegetarianism. The China Study being one example. We also see the mainstream virologists conducting their experiments to “isolate” viruses without proper controls that would reveal that it is the process itself of growing the cell culture that produces the so-called cytopathic effect blamed on the alleged virus.

The most obvious sign that logical thinking is no longer practiced among the general population is the fact that the majority fall so easily for logical fallacies. Most people will believe the narrative for 2 main reasons that have nothing to do with logic. Firstly, because everyone else believes it. And  secondly, because the message is championed by authority figures. Appeals to majority and appeals to authority are not logically valid arguments.

* Contradictions don’t exist in reality.

The fact that contradiction cannot exist out there in reality is the basic principle of all logical thinking and rational thought. Contradictions only exist in the minds of men who do not resolve their mental contradictions. Whenever a contradiction is found in a reasoning process or in opposing claims it should be investigated because it shows there is an error. A contradiction is a warning flag showing that reasoning is incorrect. The contradiction must be resolved by identifying which of the contradictory claims is false. Two opposing claims cannot both be right.

If you knew nothing else this principle would guide you to uncovering an enormous amount of nonsense that passes for knowledge in our current cultural context.

* Unquestioned Assumptions

Assuming things are true is very necessary, and we all do it all the time. But when contradictory evidence is found it should rightly be investigated to resolve the contradiction. Genuine scientific method will always seek to disprove a challenging claim. The truth loves to be questioned because it refines certainty. Only the lie is afraid of questions.

Today we see censorship being exercised where legitimate questions are raised. This is the refusal to allow the questioning of assumptions. This is clear proof that genuine scientific method has been abandoned and that manipulation is being practiced.

* Not thinking in fundamentals

We see the advocates of the virus story refuse to question the fundamental assumption of Germ Theory. This is a theory that has been contradicted by many facts many times. yet still the theory is clung to like dogma. The fundamentals of rocket propulsion theory are held sacrosanct and are not allowed to be questioned, yet they logically show that leaving the earths atmosphere is impossible using this technology because a gas expanding freely in a vac...