Special to L. Neil Smith’s The Libertarian Enterprise

I bet you'd be surprised to discover the overwhelming true scientific consensus is that the official COVID-19 narrative is, shall we say to be polite, "flawed." If we weren't being polite, words like "bogus," "dishonest," "fake," "malarkey," " nonsense," "B.S." might show up.

The evidence for that true scientific consensus—as opposed to the "flawed" one you hear incessantly from Main Stream Media (MSM)—comes from but is not limited to these 13,986 medical and public health scientists and these 42,587 medical practitioners. As of April 11, 2021, that's 56,573 scientists in all and growing. This doesn't include the additional three-quarters-of-a-million+ concerned citizens, who, along with the scientists, all signed The Great Barrington Declaration, dissing the flawed official COVID-19 narrative.

And there are also other groups such as the 1,500+ members of the World Doctor's Alliance who are telling us to "STOP the biggest health scam of the 21st century."

That's more than 58,000 scientists, doctors, and an additional 3/4 million concerned citizens, but forget the concerned citizens for now.

So why haven't you heard from the 58,000+ dissenting doctors and scientists? In fact, since we're supposed to "follow the science," why haven't you heard from them every day?

Either by design or by opportunism—"Never let an emergency go to waste,"—the folks who want to control everyone either created or grabbed COVID-19 as a golden opportunity.

Using the deep-state use-and-control-media techniques exposed by left icon, Prof. Noam Chomsky in his aptly named classic, "Manufacturing Consent," the flawed pseudo-scientific narrative we're exposed to hourly was fertilized and nurtured into existence by what appears to be a handful of well-connected refugees from the Club of Rome.

This was done in hopes of, well, manufacturing our consent—to unconstitutional government measures such as "lock-downs," appropriate for prisons maybe, but not for a free people under legitimate governments.

Once that pseudo-scientific seed took root, it was passed on to the P.R. disinformation workers and megaphoned into the culture, just as Prof. Chomsky outlined, by a complicit MSM. These days, that includes a complicit facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and I probably missed a few.

And so we begin to ass-u-me the manufactured pseudo-scientific narrative and the consensus it implies are real, and then confirmation bias takes over.

Pseudo-scientific?

You bet! The Scientific Method absolutely requires opposing opinions in order to function. If there aren't any or they're suppressed for any reason, you can be just about certain it isn't real science.

So the pseudo-scientific "tell" is that we don't hear from those 58,000 doctors and scientists daily. They're the tip of the true consensus iceberg.

Now, just as it's supposed to, especially through confirmation bias and because so many now have their reputations and committed skin in that game—and so it's in their self-interest to keep it going—the "flawed" and bogus pseudo-scientific Narrative Pandemic has taken on a life of its own.

But if the official manufactured consensus is flawed and bogus, why do so many people seem to accept it?

Do they?

Just as Prof. Chomsky nailed, because of all that manufactured one-sided media hype, everyone ass-u-mes everyone else believes and so most are afraid to speak out.

But not everybody—

OK, now would be a good time to remember those 3/4 million+ Great Barrington concerned citizens—

But among those who are afraid to speak out, it works like this—

Apparently unaware that the cameras were rolling, [Ontario, Canada, Premier Doug] Ford delivers the following blunt comment:

"I'm gonna be very frank. There's no politician in this country who's gonna disagree with their chief medical officer. They just aren't gonna do it. They might as well throw a rope around their neck and jump off a bridge. They're done. I'm telling you the facts. It's very simple." —Premier Ford: Fire Your Chief Medical Officer and Reopen the Province!

And there's another problem: medical folks, focusing on their specialty as experts usually do, don't have time to be well-rounded and so are often functionally illiterate when it comes to economics and the Big Picture. They grossly underestimate—or are more likely ignorant of—the much more severe damage done by their myopic untested extra-medical advice, especially the unconstitutional lockdowns—especially when followed by fooled, duped and cowardly politicians, worried about re-election.

With those 13,986 medical and public health scientists, 42,587 medical practitioners and the 1,500+ members of the World Doctor's Alliance etc, how hard would it be for Ontario's Gov. Ford to follow the headline advice and replace his "Chief Medical Officer" with someone from the true documented scientific consensus—and/or ignore his Chief Medical Officer—as 23 U.S. governors with cajones are now doing?

So when was the last time you heard an MSM report from the over 800,000 folks who signed The Great Barrington Declaration—or the 1,500+ members of the World Doctor's Alliance??

They're censoring well over 800,000 folks, at least 58,000 of them doctors and scientists for chrissake!

Like this for example—

YouTube Purges Ron DeSantis Video Over Claims Children Don't Need to Wear Masks—thewrap.com

When I first saw that headline, I ass-u-me_d it was Florida Gov. DeSantis who'd suggested "Children Don't Need to Wear Masks."

I was wrong—

DeSantis was joined by Oxford epidemiologist Dr. Sunetra Gupta, Harvard professor Dr. Martin Kulldorff, and Dr. Scott Atlas and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford University. ... a transcript of the discussion can be found on the group's website by clicking here.

A YouTube rep confirmed to TheWrap on Thursday the video was removed due to multiple instances where the doctors said children didn't need to wear masks. This position, a YouTube rep said, violated the Google-owned video site's "COVID-19 medical misinformation" policies, which you can find here.... "We removed AIER's video because it included content that contradicts the consensus of local and global health authorities ... " —TheWrap, [ bolding emphasis added]

Which medical consensus do you suppose Oxford epidemiologist Dr. Sunetra Gupta, Harvard professor Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Dr. Scott Atlas and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford University were censored by YouTube for "contradicting ," the ass-u-med and manufactured one or the 58,000+-strong documented tip-of-the-iceberg scientific one?

If you have the slightest doubt, the headline from that Google/YouTube AIER article they censored will remove it:

Great Barrington Declaration Scientists with Gov. DeSantis in Florida—AIER

So the really really big deep-state "tell" is the bogus claim that Alphabet/Google/YouTube censors and disinformation workers are defending "the consensus of local and global health authorities." Clearly what they're defending is the manufactured consensus they're being paid to make you believe.

About now you may be thinking something like, "But people are dying!" True but what are they dying of?

This is where the manufactured consensus is exposed as not only "flawed" and "bogus," but also "dishonest," " fake," "malarkey," "nonsense," and "B.S." If you know where to look—

Every once in awhile the more honest and careful newsies will call them "COVID related deaths." Although it sounds subtle, that's seriously different than "COVID caused deaths."

In fact, "COVID caused deaths" are only about 10% of the always officially reported "COVID related deaths." That's right, violating over 120 years of established medical science, epidemiology, and the C.D.C.s own handbook the official COVID-19 death figures are exaggerated by a factor of ten!

And likewise, despite its inventor warning against it, by using the PCR test—which is almost always what's used—to identify infections in the general public and then incorrectly reporting them as "cases," the reported so-called COVID-19 "cases" are also exaggerated into the stratosphere, again violating 120 year-old science. This 120 year-old science—

"In [epidemiology]— founded by Robert Koch himself—a traditional distinction is made between infection and disease. An illness requires a clinical manifestation. [1] Therefore, only patients with symptoms such as fever or cough should be included in the statistics as new cases. In other words, a new infection—as measured by the COVID-19 test—does not necessarily mean that we are dealing with a newly ill patient who needs a hospital bed." —epidemiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi

Bottom Line: A case requires an infection but an infection is not a case—and neither are the huge numbers of false positives they report as cases.

And there's much deeper misinformation involved too—

With any disease—colds, flu, etc.—there are always infected folks who remain unknown to the state because folks with mild or no symptoms don't normally seek medical attention or testing.

Now with all the wide-area geographical blind testing—and a cough or sniffle sending the frightened to a medical facility—they're finding huge numbers of these folks even though they don't even need an asprin let alone medical attention. This has never happened before.

This and misuse of the PCR test is the main reason why over 40% of the hugely increased number of infections—usually misleadingly reported as "cases" remember—are "asymptomatic," that is, don't have symptoms. And because of PCR over-cycling, many are false positives anyway.

And then there's the obvious but rarely mentioned fact that the more tests you perform, the more infections you find. So when they report a jump in "cases" that's almost always because there's been a jump in the number of PCR tests which, at best, find previously undiscovered folks with mild or no symptoms.

So if you want to scare everyone, just increase the number of PCR tests you're giving and report the results—or easier, just jigger the computer simulation you're using. Simulations are now almost always where the numbers come from because of the difficulty of an honest hard count.

So on even cursory inspection—if you know where to look and it hasn't been censored—the manufactured consensus simply can't stand the light of day.

Every once in awhile I have to bitche-slap myself because, given the propaganda full-court-press, I sometimes start believing the malarkey too.

So which consensus do you believe, the scientific one or the manufactured one?

HERE For updates, additions, comments, and corrections.

AND, "Like," "Tweet," and otherwise, pass this along!

 

L. Reichard White [send him mail] taught physics, designed and built a house, ran for Nevada State Senate, served two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, managed a theater company, etc. For the next few decades, he supported his writing habit by beating casinos at their own games. His hobby, though, is explaining things he wishes someone had explained to him. You can find a few of his other explanations listed here.