This is a great article. Ideas that are insane, if properly considered from all sides, are accepted in the fashion that you describe.
But they are only accepted because 1) the discussion is stifled and 2) because the public is fed falsehoods.
Yesterday, I caught Santa Clara County of California at basically publishing FAKE graphs of unvaxxed vs "breakthrough" infections. With cell phone photos of graphs, I caught them of modifying these numbers retroactively (for August, now November) and for recent time as well. The changes are huge and they were hoping to be unnoticed.
For Aug 17-18, originally the unvaxxed rate was 34, then months later it changed to 63, and two days later Aug 18 rate was changed to 85 per 100,000 -- making vaccines look great again! They hoped no one would notice.
Thanks. What makes me suspect foul play is the fact that the unvaxxed case rates change dramatically (retroactively), while the vaxxed case rates stay about same. If they discovered a forgotten trove of records -- very unlikely -- it would increase BOTH vaxxed and unvaxxed rates. I do suspect -- but cannot prove -- foul play because of this.
I track Alberta data and have noticed a flurry of similar occurrences. I am convinced their two most effective tools are 1) not adjusting summary statistics by person years lived 2) changing denominators on rate equations (ie. Remove one unvaccinated everytime someone gets vaxxed in a given time period, do not adjust the numerator). Alberta does this with time frames as far as 120 days which gives insane (implausible) rates for the unvaxxed and I've even had people quote me it as proof the vax works.
In any case, there are dozens of examples of manipulated data on Alberta's vaxx website. It is either foul play or gross incompetence. I suspect if you look into Santa Clara further this will be the least of the problems you find.
Your logic there sounds like the people who were suspicious when big vote dumps тАШdiscoveredтАЩ late into the night last Nov were almost 100% Biden votesтАж ЁЯША
This is a great article. Ideas that are insane, if properly considered from all sides, are accepted in the fashion that you describe.
But they are only accepted because 1) the discussion is stifled and 2) because the public is fed falsehoods.
Yesterday, I caught Santa Clara County of California at basically publishing FAKE graphs of unvaxxed vs "breakthrough" infections. With cell phone photos of graphs, I caught them of modifying these numbers retroactively (for August, now November) and for recent time as well. The changes are huge and they were hoping to be unnoticed.
For Aug 17-18, originally the unvaxxed rate was 34, then months later it changed to 63, and two days later Aug 18 rate was changed to 85 per 100,000 -- making vaccines look great again! They hoped no one would notice.
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/is-santa-clara-county-ca-breakthrough
This fake data is then used to normalize insanity, such as vaccination of people who are not threatened with non-working vaccines.
it's possible they are data mining past records.
the CDC has been doing the same.
if you are doing this and then adding to them as date of occurrence rather than date of filing, you can get some massive past boluses.
of course, it's possible they are also just making stuff up.
i have no specific prior on this locality, just putting out a branch of potential explanation to look at.
Thanks. What makes me suspect foul play is the fact that the unvaxxed case rates change dramatically (retroactively), while the vaxxed case rates stay about same. If they discovered a forgotten trove of records -- very unlikely -- it would increase BOTH vaxxed and unvaxxed rates. I do suspect -- but cannot prove -- foul play because of this.
By the way, I hope that you get better soon.
I track Alberta data and have noticed a flurry of similar occurrences. I am convinced their two most effective tools are 1) not adjusting summary statistics by person years lived 2) changing denominators on rate equations (ie. Remove one unvaccinated everytime someone gets vaxxed in a given time period, do not adjust the numerator). Alberta does this with time frames as far as 120 days which gives insane (implausible) rates for the unvaxxed and I've even had people quote me it as proof the vax works.
What adjusting for person years lived does:
https://jestre.substack.com/p/against-the-spread
In any case, there are dozens of examples of manipulated data on Alberta's vaxx website. It is either foul play or gross incompetence. I suspect if you look into Santa Clara further this will be the least of the problems you find.
I am hoping that my writing would prompt someone who is smarter, to look into Santa Clara. I mean, it is as ridiculous as it gets.
Your logic there sounds like the people who were suspicious when big vote dumps тАШdiscoveredтАЩ late into the night last Nov were almost 100% Biden votesтАж ЁЯША
Only ignorant or racist people question midnight vote dumps 100% in favor of Biden