★ WELCOME ★

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.

====== Bret Weinstein's take on Scientific Consensus ======

 --- //[[noemail@thomasclark.us|Tom Clark]] 2021/11/12 07:06//

{{youtube>JMqrhIC93tY?t=332medium}}
**“Destruction of dissent”, Inverse of Manufacture of Consent (from Livestream #100)\\
by [[articles:politics:personalities:darkhorse-podcast|Darkhorse Podcast]] via Youtube**

There's actually a better discussion on scientific consensus that Bret brought up in a different podcast but I'm having trouble finding it. But the topic is very important. You keep hearing from the CNNs, NPRs, ABCs, and CBSs about scientific consensus on a whole bunch of issues. However, if the government is ignoring dissenting studies and scientists, defunding dissenting science, and social media is censoring dissenting scientific opinions -- Bret's question is this -- if you have all those coercive processes going on, is there actual consensus or do you simply have what amounts to is the appearance of conformity through oppression? The whole idea of consensus is -- I think in most people's mind -- is that consensus is arrived at by independent sober minds that have came to the same conclusion without being threatened. Well, that's not happening when it comes to issues surrounding Covid (i.e. lockdowns, mask mandates, therapeutic treatments, vaccines).

I would argue that the appearance of a so-called consensus regarding climate emergencies is also only achieved through a myriad of coercive processes being brought to bear against the scientific community. I'm sure you can think of a bunch of things where there is so-called consensus and it's just not true. If the way you get to the consensus is to have the media lie, the politicians lie, and the ultra-wealthy pulling the strings to get these lies told, then is that "consensus" or is that something else?

Remember the mainstream media's consensus that Robert Muller was going to uncover Trump colluding with the Russians? Remember the intelligence community consensus of the same? This consensus was that Trump was dirty and there was only one problem with that consensus. It was wasn't true. Rather it was a lie perpetrated around the world by elite interests. A lie that we now know the media knew was a lie for years, yet they continued to push the so-called consensus.

If someone starts to pretend that everyone agrees with them, yet you can clearly see that other people on the other side of the political aisle are not agreeing with them, you should know your talking to a damn liar and they are not worthy of your trust.

Trace: • 20121202-the-failure-to-prosecute-the-insurrectionists • 20121203-what-is-critical-race-theory • 20211119-is-the-f-35-lightning-ii-a-dumpster-fire

★ WELCOME ★

Search

Navigation

Print/export

Helpers