HOT TOPIC The Video That Got Banned From YouTube. David Icke on Covid-19 and 5G

[Matt Sun]

But back to the topic at hand, yea there are some really bizarre Conspiracy theories surrounding this stuff. The British Psychological Association had a really good article about it.

For example, the myth that COVID-19 is less dangerous than the seasonal flu was deployed by US president Donald Trump as justification for delaying mitigation policies.

The recent downgrading of COVID-19 death projections, which reveal the success of social-distancing policies, has been falsely used to justify premature relaxing of social distancing measures. This is the logical equivalent of throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because it’s kept you dry until then.

The new conspiracy theory that blames COVID-19 on the 5G broadband system is one of the most bizarre pieces of misinformation.

Some to the more Bizarre ones:

• 5G causes COVID-19 (or weakens the immune system allowing COVID to flourish)
• The virus is a bioweapon
• After mitigation efforts reduced the death toll a few people thought this was due to "epidemiologists were wrong"
• The US military released COVID into China
• A number of really bizarre ones surrounding Bill Gates

Coronavirus conspiracy theories are dangerous – here's how to stop them spreading

Conspiracy theories and misinformation about coronavirus damage society in a number of ways.

theconversation.com

COVID: Top 10 current conspiracy theories - Alliance for Science

As the COVID-19 crisis worsens, the world also faces a global misinformation pandemic. Conspiracy theories that behave like viruses themselves are spreading just as rapidly online as SARS-CoV-2 does offline. Here are the top 10 conspiracy theories making the rounds. Blaming 5G This conspiracy...

allianceforscience.cornell.edu

Weird Al wrote a really good song about this:

Cris with all due respect,
1) How do them demonstrate that social distancing was successful in a scientific way ? Correlation doesn't mean causation...
2) Epidemiologist were wrong even in the social distancing models...
3) When do we get a "suicides caused by economic colapse " model ?

 

Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum. Subscribe.

[ChrisV]

Cris with all due respect,
1) How do them demonstrate that social distancing was successful in a scientific way ? Correlation doesn't mean causation...

Dude just Google it.

Here, this guy goes through the Data:

Coronavirus: Are the lockdowns actually working? (April 21st update)

I'm not answering questions for people that only accept evidence that conforms to the hypothesis they want to be true.

If you were actually curious you could have just done this:

What's The Evidence for Social Distancing - Google Search

 

[Matt Sun]

Dude just Google it.

Here, this guy goes through the Data:

Coronavirus: Are the lockdowns actually working? (April 21st update)

I'm not answering questions for people that only accept evidence that conforms to the hypothesis they want to be true.

If you were actually curious you could have just done this:

What's The Evidence for Social Distancing - Google Search

Dude just Google it.

Here, this guy goes through the Data:

Coronavirus: Are the lockdowns actually working? (April 21st update)

I'm not answering questions for people that only accept evidence that conforms to the hypothesis they want to be true.

If you were actually curious you could have just done this:

What's The Evidence for Social Distancing - Google Search

You know, even if i wanted something to be true or not. I like hard science. Experimental, empirical, measurable, repeatable, peer reviewd etc.
Seems there is none of that. Sorry.
Even anecdotal evidence, when there is a lot of it, sits well with me. But there isn't even that.

 

[ChrisV]

You know, even if i wanted something to be true or not. I like hard science. Experimental, empirical, measurable, repeatable, peer reviewd etc.
Seems there is none of that. Sorry.
Even anecdotal evidence, when there is a lot of it, sits well with me. But there isn't even that.

okay

 

[Devampre]

Considering the amount of classified information and secret compartmentalized programs that have not yet leaked. I think it is okay for people to speculate and question things. Especially considering the history of various nations and corporations that have been proven to have lied or told half truths. I find blind faith and mob mentality much more dangerous than free thinking individuals.

I believe censorship is harmful to individual sovereignty and is much more dangerous than any misinformation. (Why not take down flat earth videos? )

IMHO if they are truly worried about the dangers of "misinformation." Why not come forward with correct information that solves this in such a way as live/uninterrupted debate?

I know I'd love to see a live debate between some people such as Alex Jones & David Icke vs. Bill Gates & George Soros.

 

[Matt Sun]

Considering the amount of classified information and secret compartmentalized programs that have not yet leaked. I think it is okay for people to speculate and question things. Especially considering the history of various nations and corporations that have been proven to have lied or told half truths. I find blind faith and mob mentality much more dangerous than free thinking individuals.

I believe censorship is harmful to individual sovereignty and is much more dangerous than any misinformation. (Why not take down flat earth videos? )

IMHO if they are truly worried about the dangers of "misinformation." Why not come forward with correct information that solves this in such a way as live/uninterrupted debate?

I know I'd love to see a live debate between some people such as Alex Jones & David Icke vs. Bill Gates & George Soros.

This. If there is legit science to back things up, why so much censoring of anything against WHO? WHY ?

 

[kelvinfernandezm]

I wanted to post something like this but according to Kelvin I'm a foreigner and should be censored

You're country already censors you so you should be use to it by now. The Constitution only protects the rights of US citizens.

 

[Longinus]

You're country already censors you so you should be use to it by now. The Constitution only protects the rights of US citizens.

Probably the most redneck post of this forum.

Let me be clear, I love America. I just can't stand people who believe their (or should I say they're) country is the center of the universe. Funny enough you find those people all over the planet. They usually never traveled to another country, let alone continent. Quite a perception they own.

 

[ChrisV]

Probably the most redneck post of this forum.

Let me be clear, I love America. I just can't stand people who believe their (or should I say they're) country is the center of the universe. Funny enough you find those people all over the planet. They usually never traveled to another country, let alone continent. Quite a perception they own.

Rural Americans think they live in the best country on earth. Rural Ethiopians think they live in the best country on Earth. Rural Turks think Turkey is the best, and rural Russians think the same.

But if you haven't visited a ton of other countries, how do you know? It's like saying your town has the best pizza, but you've never eaten pizza anywhere else. And even if you have traveled, don't you think you'd still be biased since it's your home country?

I remember being taught in middle School Social studies class that America was objectively the best nation on Earth. Like, how do you even quantify that? It's like saying that ________ is objectively the best band on Earth.

I'll also be clear: American is an amazing country. I completely love it here. But it's certainly not the only amazing country on the map.

American is the wealthiest large nation per capita, but there are other countries (especially the Scandinavian ones) who report much higher life satisfaction. Germany has a lot going on. Italy. Australia. Belgum. Poland. Norway. Canada. Japan. Singapore.

There are things everyone can learn from everyone.

Nationalism is part of scripted thinking.

 

[Timmy C]

Probably the most redneck post of this forum.

Let me be clear, I love America. I just can't stand people who believe their (or should I say they're) country is the center of the universe. Funny enough you find those people all over the planet. They usually never traveled to another country, let alone continent. Quite a perception they own.

Who's he talking to?

Hits show ignored users.

Ahhhh of course!

 

[kelvinfernandezm]

Probably the most redneck post of this forum.

Let me be clear, I love America. I just can't stand people who believe their (or should I say they're) country is the center of the universe. Funny enough you find those people all over the planet. They usually never traveled to another country, let alone continent. Quite a perception they own.

I'm not a redneck and I live in the city. I have actually traveled to other countries. Have you?
Stay long enough in another country and you'll get a feel for how oppressive it is either by the government or its citizens. Can't quite explain it until you stayed longer than 3 months in a country, which I have.

Just saw your location and you're Polish/Belgium. Funny enough it seems the USA is the center of the Universe because on this thread alone its the country most mentioned. Again people like you who have no rights come here and comment on American rights. Pathetic.

 

Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum. Subscribe.

[Bobby_italy]

Jesus christ 5 pages feeding the troll, I didn’t expect it on this forum to be honest...

 

[G-Man]

Rural Americans think they live in the best country on earth. Rural Ethiopians think they live in the best country on Earth. Rural Turks think Turkey is the best, and rural Russians think the same.

Possible you're confusing what people say with what they believe. Give the Ethiopian, the Turk, the Russian, and the West Virginian a pre-approved visa to Malmo and see which of the 4 hesitates to actually take you up on it.

 

[G-Man]

Actually theres this sociological effect where people in better health decide to have less children.

Average health by nation:

View attachment 32737

Children born per woman:

View attachment 32736

It's an evolutionary adaptation. If you child is more likely to die, women have to make more to compensate for the ones who won't make it. Interestingly enough, a woman becomes more fertile her children are les likely to survive.

View attachment 32735

It's really fascinating. That's why poor people have more kids than the wealthy. A decent amount of them end up dead or in jail.

So when Bill Gates talks about solving overpopulation he's talking about improving world health to mitigate those effects.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obRG-2jurz0


But of course when the foil-hats hear Bill Gates talking about the overpopulation problem they think he want's to sterilize people with his evil population control vaccinations.

You could draw the same map and come to the conclusion that higher education levels lead to lower birth rates, couldn't you?

And doesn't the education system in most countries, especially western, encourage a value set that leads to lower birth rates?

In a typical US school you're taught that having a baby will ruin your life, does the same go in India, for example? I'm not opposed to the idea that better health leads to lower birth rates, but I'm opposed to reducing different outcomes in vastly divergent societies to single variables.

 

[pranaman]

umm... Perhaps because they own 95%+ of the marketshare in the video sharing industry, and virtually all content creators upload to Youtube exclusively?

have you heard of bitchute, lbry.tv, or banned.video?

 

[pranaman]

enjoying this thread, good to find others who can/want to discuss this. Another person I recently found, Dr Rashid Buttar. Have you seen any of his info?

 

[Xeon]

American is an amazing country. I completely love it here. But it's certainly not the only amazing country on the map.

American is the wealthiest large nation per capita, but there are other countries (especially the Scandinavian ones) who report much higher life satisfaction. Germany has a lot going on. Italy. Australia. Belgum. Poland. Norway. Canada. Japan. Singapore.

There are things everyone can learn from everyone.

Nationalism is part of scripted thinking.

 

[kelvinfernandezm]

I remember being taught in middle School Social studies class that America was objectively the best nation on Earth. Like, how do you even quantify that? It's like saying that ________ is objectively the best band on Earth.

You quantify it through polls and official government numbers. The USA is the country where most people in the world immigrate to. It's also the country where most people wish to immigrate to. Pic related there's your quantified data.

 

[Xeon]

You quantify it through polls and official government numbers. The USA is the country where most people in the world immigrate to. It's also the country where most people wish to immigrate to. Pic related there's your quantified data.

That's due to them being sold on the American Dream and American branding.
That's the one thing the US has outperformed every other nation.

 

[ChrisV]

Possible you're confusing what people say with what they believe. Give the Ethiopian, the Turk, the Russian, and the West Virginian a pre-approved visa to Malmo and see which of the 4 hesitates to actually take you up on it.

You quantify it through polls and official government numbers. The USA is the country where most people in the world immigrate to. It's also the country where most people wish to immigrate to. Pic related there's your quantified data.

Yes, that is true that the USA is the top choice for immigrants.

But that doesn't 100% suggest that it's the "Best Country" - it could mean that people from the US are more accepting toward immigrants than the European nations, which is likely – especially given the US's reputation for being a racial melting pot.

Many of those countries (such as Scandinavia) are very racially homogeneous and non-accepting toward outsiders.

America is a great place, but again, it depends on how you define "Best." I think personally the top measure is "Life Satisfaction," but you can definitely make a case that the US is the best place for immigrants.

 

[ChrisV]

You quantify it through polls and official government numbers.

I also wanted to respectfully point out that when @paulmp cited the Human Freedom Index, your reply was:

Oh please who even takes those websites seriously or "organizations" for the matter. According to some of those website Finland is the country with the most freedom.

I wonder if there are any patterns to how you choose which studies to cite and which to discredit.

Human Freedom Index

www.cato.org

 

Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum. Subscribe.

[kelvinfernandezm]

I also wanted to respectfully point out that when @paulmp cited the Human Freedom Index, your reply was:



I wonder if there are any patterns to how you choose which studies to cite and which to discredit.

Human Freedom Index

www.cato.org

I never said the USA was the "best" I said the USA had the most freedoms granted to its citizens. The studies about countries with most freedoms is flawed because the top countries all have "hate speech" laws. If the government can regulate the words that come out of your mouth or write you're not free at all. Go back and read what I posted you're missing a lot of it.

 

[G-Man]

Yes, that is true that the USA is the top choice for immigrants.

But that doesn't 100% suggest that it's the "Best Country" - it could mean that people from the US are more accepting toward immigrants than the European nations, which is likely – especially given the US's reputation for being a racial melting pot.

Many of those countries (such as Scandinavia) are very racially homogeneous and non-accepting toward outsiders.

America is a great place, but again, it depends on how you define "Best." I think personally the top measure is "Life Satisfaction," but you can definitely make a case that the US is the best place for immigrants.

I agree with you there, I don't think there is such a thing as a "best" country. What's best depends entirely on what you want in life. I meant more about the statement of who believes they live in the best country. Do I think America is the best country? Maybe. Like everybody else, there's a lot I would change about it. Do I think people in certain parts of America are more likely than any other people on earth to genuinely believe they live in the "best" country? Yes.

 

[PapaGang]

Or maybe we can call it: development.

About the whole conspiracy fantasia:

Mark Manson pretty much nailed it in this article.

Go talk to a couple of government officials and spend a few months in a corporate hierarchy. You will quickly see that they could hardly organize a children’s parade, much less build network towers that beam viruses into people around the globe simultaneously.

This is exactly right. Also, there is this: Occam's razor - Wikipedia

 

[VTK]

It would be cool if Youtube had a debunk feature where the algorithm would suggest the best debunking video to follow every theory video in the suggested list. It might prevent people going down these rabbit holes and effectively brainwashing themselves, plus create a better level of political discourse. At the very least it would hopefully force people to apply some more thinking and research skills before they could hold a strong opinion on a topic.

 

[PapaGang]

It would be cool if Youtube had a debunk feature where the algorithm would suggest the best debunking video to follow every theory video in the suggested list. It might prevent people going down these rabbit holes and effectively brainwashing themselves, plus create a better level of political discourse. At the very least it would hopefully force people to apply some more thinking and research skills before they could hold a strong opinion on a topic.

Back in the day the FCC had a law that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the FCC's view—honest, equitable, and balanced.
The law died in 1987.

 

[VTK]

Back in the day the FCC had a law that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the FCC's view—honest, equitable, and balanced.
The law died in 1987.

I guess to counter my own point you can run into the Law of Unintended Consequences with this stuff. The BBC a while back pushed really hard for "balance" and "neutrality" and in doing so screwed the quality of its reporting with some pretty toxic results. Classic example being a climate change debate where you have consensus of something like 95% (or more) of scientists being represented by one person and then climate change denial being represented by one person (often not even a scientist) in a 1:1 ratio.

 

[PapaGang]

I guess to counter my own point you can run into the Law of Unintended Consequences with this stuff. The BBC a while back pushed really hard for "balance" and "neutrality" and in doing so screwed the quality of its reporting with some pretty toxic results. Classic example being a climate change debate where you have consensus of something like 95% (or more) of scientists being represented by one person and then climate change denial being represented by one person (often not even a scientist) in a 1:1 ratio.

Right. Well I would posit a guess—and it's really only a guess—that having a point/counterpoint with fair representation to both sides is more conducive to discourse than the current YouTube "recommended" algorithm, which seems from a number of studies to indicate that people become actually more entrenched in their beliefs, irrational or not, by engaging in the feedback loop of bias confirmation.

Again, only a guess. To be honest, I'd rather have my kid be presented with both sides of an argument, and be trusted to make a rational decision, than be blasted with the latest salvo of whatever ridiculous hysteria that is represented in broadcast journalism at large right now.

As far as the BBC example is concerned, maybe networks in 1980 wouldn't even give a voice to the climate denier since they also probably wouldn't have aired a rapist who claims that raping is beneficial to society. If it seems too preposterous to be true, why waste public airwaves?

Remember, the law stated "controversial issues of public importance." Global warming is of great public importance, but there should be no controversy about it. And if the controversy seems highly manufactured and synthesized, then maybe there isn't a legitimate controversy, at least not to the facts. Maybe they should air both sides of the global warming controversy controversy. That's a good subject for argument.

 

[Kevin88660]

I guess to counter my own point you can run into the Law of Unintended Consequences with this stuff. The BBC a while back pushed really hard for "balance" and "neutrality" and in doing so screwed the quality of its reporting with some pretty toxic results. Classic example being a climate change debate where you have consensus of something like 95% (or more) of scientists being represented by one person and then climate change denial being represented by one person (often not even a scientist) in a 1:1 ratio.

Good to hear from both sides even from the underdogs I believe. The pro climate change camp can always cite the 95 percent as an evidence in their favor in the debate..

I do not believe the denialist of the corona..that you can have so many countries to staging it and hiding it..when the countries dont even like each and trying to blame each other.

But I think youtube and facebook political censorship have been getting more and more serious these days.

 

[ChrisV]

People don't realize how utterly dangerous these conspiracy theorists are.

Wired reports that there have been 77 arson attack on mobile phone masts across the United Kingdom and 180 incidents of abuse. Openreach, the company that provides the upkeep of the British broadband infrastructure reported 63 incidents of abuse against its staff over the last five weeks. The Guardian reports that engineer Naveed Q had to flee a group of 15 people shouting abuse at him.

The 5G Conspiracy Theory Just Got Even More Dangerous

One of the drawbacks of social media is that it allows conspiracy theories to flourish and spread like wildfire. And while many of these remain harmless in

www.iflscience.com