Our Recent Posts

Tags

No tags yet.

Conspiracy theory


What follows is a real, unedited, email exchange, a sort of "novel" that writes itself. Only the names (except mine) have been changed. (On my French you can read a "novel" about my adventures in money laundering; no names have been changed.)


I have written about confirmation bias before. Conspiracy theory is confirmation bias on steroids. While this conversation is perhaps an extreme example of a “dialogue de sourds,” I think it illustrates well the difficulty of bridging ideological differences and reaching a common ground even under normal circumstances. The desperate need for certainty in these troubling times leads people to cling to answers rather than bask in questions like a philosopher. While basic income does not face such stiff opposition, commonly held views and prejudice do contribute to the resistance against this innovative policy. Please email me your questions and comments. Should I have treated Charlotte differently?


From Charlotte

To Pierre Madden

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

Subject: time to end the lockdown

14 May 2020, 00:40

The data is now in. There was never a justifiable reason or science to justify the lockdown, social distancing, face masks, etc. The lockdown will destroy many businesses and parts of the economy. The lockdown will significantly add to the national debt of all countries. In Canada, there is already talk of implementing austerity measures. This was a plan-demic, not a pandemic. It was never about health care or protecting the public. The official narrative should always be questioned as misleading and false until proven otherwise. Let me leave you with the latest video of an interview with Professor Dolores Cahill, assuming YouTube does not censure it as it has been censuring so many other videos the show the official narrative is false.


I am outraged, seething, at how easily we allowed our civil liberties to be violated... If this is how easily we, the public, can be herded like cattle over a fake pandemic then forget about any hopes you have about being able to impose solutions on climate change, eco-justice and other supposedly meaningful causes.


Charlotte

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Pierre Madden

To Charlotte

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

14 May 2020 at 07:02

Hi Charlotte,

What is a plan-demic? If not “about health care or protecting the public” then what?

Pierre

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Charlotte

To Pierre Madden

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

Subject: time to end the lockdown

14 May 2020 at 17:15

Hello Pierre,

I will answer your questions after you answer a few my questions to you.


What is happening with the Organization? I have sent you quite a few emails and received no response. I have asked a few people and they too have not received any information. Why have we not heard anything from the Organization and you? There are so many pressing issues today and yet the Organization, for all intents, is dormant. Why?


I am requesting to be a member of the Organization steering committee. Please let me know when/how the steering committee is meeting next so that I can attend and participate in that meeting.


What did you take from the fact sheet on covid-19 I sent you? This fact sheet is quite comprehensive and long. It makes very clear statements. For example, it states there is little science behind the decision to impose/force social distancing, face masks and travel restrictions. Tell me, what is your response to this fact sheet? Do you agree or disagree with it? If so, why or why not?


Similarly, what is your response to the interview with Dolores Cahill? Cahill clearly has the full credentials to speak as an authority on covid19. She makes clear claims that refute the official narrative. For example, between 00:51:39-00:54:36, Cahill talks about “Gain of Function.” One extremely important claim is that covid-19 is NOT A NATURALLY OCCURRING VIRUS. She is not the only scientist to make this claim. When credible scientists make this claim then we must give this point serious consideration because it brings into question the essence of this crisis which is, who can we trust? This interview is a gold mine of information that is completely consistent with what many other doctors and scientists, who are experts on the subject, have been stating throughout the lockdown. So again, do you agree with what Cahill or do you disagree? Why or why not?


We have just been subjected to a lockdown that appears to have had little to do with science and where it is more plausible and readily argued to be more about social engineering. The public must now critically reflect on the covid-19 lockdown and understand how readily we acquiesced to having our civil liberties violated. Sit back and let the full enormity of this point sink in! Education was suspended, jobs were suspended, restaurants and businesses are closed – many to be forced into bankruptcy, collective gatherings were suspended, social distancing is teaching people to be fearful and wary of others, people are afraid as they question how they can pay for rent, food, mortgages and other loans they have! For this first time, we actually locked down the HEALTHY population, not just those with compromised immune systems. This is unprecedented! The list goes on. This is social engineering - and we acquiesced to it without a murmur, let alone a fight! What is your opinion on all of this?


It is entirely predictable that the after effect of the ‘financial response’ to this alleged pandemic will be austerity measures. But austerity measures are exactly the wrong response to remedy the economic chaos to the lockdown. We need government stimulus spending to get us through this chaos. But government stimulus spending forces us into deeper national debt which foreign central banks then used to leverage austerity measures and the privatization of public resources – all against the public’s interest. Our financial system is a debt trap which transfers control of government policy to non-elected foreign central banks. Why is this and how do we break out of this trap? This is the question you should be asking. What is your answer?


The global covid-19 body count alone confirms the official narrative has been false from the very beginning. The models pushed by the WHO were so grossly inaccurate as to raise the question what exactly was the purpose behind these models, that is, what were they really intended to do? Why are those who presented these fraudulent models now not held accountable? There are so many inconsistencies and questions about this alleged pandemic that we need answers for. What is your opinion on this?


To summarize, what is happening with the Organization? The steering committee has been together for 4 months. What are its plans for the Organization? Second, do you agree that the fact sheet and interview with Cahill are starting points on which we can focus our discussion, if indeed, you are actually interested in having a discussion? The public needs to have this discussion in the open, without fear of being belittled as being ignorant or disparaged as being poorly qualified to understand events as they have and will transpire.


Charlotte

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From Charlotte

To Pierre Madden

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

14 May 2020 at 19:02

Now, to offer a partial answer your question, “…then what.”


For starters, here is Naomi Klein. A more thorough review and understanding can be had by reading through Allison Hawver McDowell’s blog. And here is something for you to watch.


If you think all of this is fiction, then reconsider again after reading Carroll Quigley’s “Tragedy and Hope” or, for a shorter review, read the condensed version by Joe Plummer.



Charlotte

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From Pierre Madden

To Charlotte

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

14 May 2020 at 22:28


Hello Charlotte,

Thank you for your questions. I will do my best.

  • What is happening with the Organization? I have sent you quite a few emails and received no response. I have asked a few people and they too have not received any information. Why have we not heard anything from the Organization and you? There are so many pressing issues today and yet the Organization, for all intents, is dormant. Why?

Our plans to revitalize the chapter were nipped in the bud by the pandemic.

  • I am requesting to be a member of the Organization steering committee. Please let me know when/how the steering committee is meeting next so that I can attend and participate in that meeting.

You were offered a spot and you declined.

  • What did you take from the fact sheet on covid-19 I sent you? This fact sheet is quite comprehensive and long. It makes very clear statements. For example, it states there is little science behind the decision to impose/force social distancing, face masks and travel restrictions. Tell me, what is your response to this fact sheet? Do you agree or disagree with it? If so, why or why not?

The information you sent me contains statements that are not supported by a consensus of the scientific community. As a chemist, I support the process by which such a consensus is achieved. Mainstream or far-fetched, a false theory will eventually be rejected.

  • Similarly, what is your response to the interview with Dolores Cahill? Cahill clearly has the full credentials to speak as an authority on covid19. She makes clear claims that refute the official narrative. For example, between 00:51:39-00:54:36, Cahill talks about “Gain of Function.” One extremely important claim is that covid-19 is NOT A NATURALLY OCCURRING VIRUS. She is not the only scientist to make this claim. When credible scientists make this claim then we must give this point serious consideration because it brings into question the essence of this crisis which is, who can we trust? This interview is a gold mine of information that is completely consistent with what many other doctors and scientists, who are experts on the subject, have been stating throughout the lockdown. So again, do you agree with what Cahill or do you disagree? Why or why not?

You are implying that covid-19 was fabricated on purpose (by the insertion of 12 nucleotides) in a Chinese lab funded by the US government. What is your point? It still killed 300,000 people so far. That would seem liking larger issue than “who can we trust?” I know whom you trust: No one.

  • We have just been subjected to a lockdown that appears to have had little to do with science and where it is more plausible and readily argued to be more about social engineering. The public must now critically reflect on the covid-19 lockdown and understand how readily we acquiesced to having our civil liberties violated. Sit back and let the full enormity of this point sink in! Education was suspended, jobs were suspended, restaurants and businesses are closed – many to be forced into bankruptcy, collective gatherings were suspended, social distancing is teaching people to be fearful and wary of others, people are afraid as they question how they can pay for rent, food, mortgages and other loans they have! For this first time, we actually locked down the HEALTHY population, not just those with compromised immune systems. This is unprecedented! The list goes on. This is social engineering - and we acquiesced to it without a murmur, let alone a fight! What is your opinion on all of this?

The lockdown is a trade-off between saving lives and collateral damage. The choices can’t be judged in the light of hindsight.

  • It is entirely predictable that the after effect of the ‘financial response’ to this alleged pandemic will be austerity measures. But austerity measures are exactly the wrong response to remedy the economic chaos to the lockdown. We need government stimulus spending to get us through this chaos. But government stimulus spending forces us into deeper national debt which foreign central banks then used to leverage austerity measures and the privatization of public resources – all against the public’s interest. Our financial system is a debt trap which transfers control of government policy to non-elected foreign central banks. Why is this and how do we break out of this trap? This is the question you should be asking. What is your answer?

I agree that stimulus is required now and in the future. As for debt, I think it is a myth that it has to be repaid, ever.

  • The global covid-19 body count alone confirms the official narrative has been false from the very beginning. The models pushed by the WHO were so grossly inaccurate as to raise the question what exactly was the purpose behind these models, that is, what were they really intended to do? Why are those who presented these fraudulent models now not held accountable? There are so many inconsistencies and questions about this alleged pandemic that we need answers for. What is your opinion on this?

How do 300,000 deaths confirm a fake narrative? Models are constantly evolving as new information comes in. They improve with additional data. Accountability is for politicians. Scientists require only the legitimacy of rigour and transparency.

  • To summarize, what is happening with the Organization? The steering committee has been together for 4 months. What are its plans for the Organization? Second, do you agree that the fact sheet and interview with Cahill are starting points on which we can focus our discussion, if indeed, you are actually interested in having a discussion? The public needs to have this discussion in the open, without fear of being belittled as being ignorant or disparaged as being poorly qualified to understand events as they have and will transpire.

No, I don’t think Cahill is a good starting point. She is looking for someone to blame rather than a solution. I don’t think you are ignorant or unqualified. I do think you are a misguided conspiracy theorist with whom discussion is pointless. If you find that disparaging, consider that freedom of speech is the right to offend.

  • Now, to offer a partial answer your question, “…then what.” For starters, here is Naomi Klein. A more thorough review and understanding can be had by reading through Allison Hawver McDowell’s blog. And here is something for you to watch.

So, there are evil people in the world who take advantage of tragedies to line their pockets. Sounds about right.

  • If you think all of this is fiction, then reconsider again after reading Carroll Quigley’s “Tragedy and Hope” or, for a shorter review, read the condensed version by Joe Plummer.

Quigley claims that a “Secret Network” is out to sabotage his work. Of course, even the paranoid have real enemies...


Best regards,

Pierre

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Charlotte

To Pierre Madden

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

15 May 2020 at 03:13

Hello Pierre,


If you want to shoot something, shoot the message and not the messenger. Your fixation on and attempt to discredit me is trite and irrelevant to this exchange.


I am on the mailing list of quite few groups and have received weekly information and updates from them throughout the lockdown. The Other Organization, for example, has continued having monthly meetings via web conferencing and also is active on Facebook. The Organization has been silent. Aside from offering talks by selected speakers, what other Organization plans have been “nipped in the bud by the pandemic?” This is such a simple question that it begs the question, that after 4 months of waiting, why you are being evasive.


You do not have the authority to dictate who can and cannot be on the steering committee. So once again, please let me know when/how the steering committee is meeting next so that I can attend and participate in that meeting.


I was trained as a researcher in experimental psychology and have a doctorate from the University of Ottawa. I am very familiar with experimental paradigms and methodologies by which hypotheses are tested, accepted and refuted. So too are the experts you so have casually discounted that are listed in the fact sheet. As for the issue of trust, had you actually watched the video then you would be aware this is Cahill’s point, not mine.


You made a false and unsubstantiated statement by stating, “You are implying that covid-19 was fabricated on purpose (by the insertion of 12 nucleotides) in a Chinese lab funded by the US government.” I did no such thing.


You wrote, “Scientists require only the legitimacy of rigour and transparency”. This is a fallacious argument, particularly given UK scientist Neil Ferguson’s grossly inflated doomsday models predicted over 2 million US deaths and half a million UK deaths and on which UK policy was implemented. There was nothing rigorous or transparent about his models and the same can be said for the scientists cited by WHO, and to claim otherwise is a farce. By the way, Ferguson resigned after ignoring lockdown rules and getting caught with his mistress (who is married with children). It has been demonstrated there was very little scientific rigour and transparency employed at any stage, before and during, the lockdown. This point was clearly made in the fact sheet. Moreover, I specifically made reference to it. Yet it seems you did not take the time to read the fact sheet, watch the Cahill interview or actually read my email. So I got a chuckle from the irony of you stating it is pointless trying to have a discussion with me. Finally, you have yet to offer anything of substance to substantiate your claim I am a conspiracy theorist. This is not the first time and I doubt it will be the last time. But hey, give it a go. I have the data to prove my points. Where is your data?

The common flu kills about 700,000 people each year. Covid-19 mortality rates have been demonstrated to be about the same. Yet a lockdown has never been imposed as a result of the annual flu mortality rate or other diseases which have substantially higher annual mortality rates. Many world-leading scientists have raised the question of “trust”. I go where the data leads and, while it seems unnecessary to make this point, they are the ones who provide the data – not me. So please focus on their data instead of me.


To repeat, when is the next Organization steering committee meeting?


Charlotte

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Pierre Madden

To Charlotte

CC: Nikki, Betty, Dan

16 May 2020 at 12:00


Hi Charlotte,

Whereas most sensible people would probably have abandoned this exchange (“un dialogue de sourds”), I find it fascinating to explore the underlying causes of disagreements. For instance, in a previous email you mentioned your concern about the trampling of our civil liberties; perhaps this article from Slate can provide food for thought.

  • If you want to shoot something, shoot the message and not the messenger. Your fixation on and attempt to discredit me is trite and irrelevant to this exchange.

I think your bias as a messenger so strongly colours the message as to render it unusable. Uncritical acceptance of sources renders all your information suspect and untrustworthy.

  • I am on the mailing list of quite few groups and have received weekly information and updates from them throughout the lockdown. The other Organization, for example, has continued having monthly meetings via web conferencing and also is active on Facebook. The Organization has been silent. Aside from offering talks by selected speakers, what other the Organization plans have been “nipped in the bud by the pandemic?” This is such a simple question that it begs the question, that after 4 months of waiting, why you are being evasive.

Seems to me that you are more interested in receiving a service than making a contribution.

  • You do not have the authority to dictate who can and cannot be on the steering committee. So once again, please let me know when/how the steering committee is meeting next so that I can attend and participate in that meeting.

While no meeting is scheduled for the moment, I will keep you informed.

  • I was trained as a researcher in experimental psychology and have a doctorate from the University of Ottawa. I am very familiar with experimental paradigms and methodologies by which hypotheses are tested, accepted and refuted. So too are the experts you so have casually discounted that are listed in the fact sheet. As for the issue of trust, had you actually watched the video then you would be aware this is Cahill’s point, not mine.

If you disavow Cahill’s point, why present the video and refer to a specific section?

  • You made a false and unsubstantiated statement by stating, “You are implying that covid-19 was fabricated on purpose (by the insertion of 12 nucleotides) in a Chinese lab funded by the US government.” I did no such thing.

“One extremely important claim is that covid-19 is NOT A NATURALLY OCCURRING VIRUS.” What is your point? What you quote from me is certainly what I understood from the video interview.

  • You wrote, “Scientists require only the legitimacy of rigour and transparency”. This is a fallacious argument, particularly given UK scientist Neil Ferguson’s grossly inflated doomsday models predicted over 2 million US deaths and half a million UK deaths and on which UK policy was implemented. There was nothing rigorous or transparent about his models and the same can be said for the scientists cited by WHO, and to claim otherwise is a farce. By the way, Ferguson resigned after ignoring lockdown rules and getting caught with his mistress (who is married with children). It has been demonstrated there was very little scientific rigour and transparency employed at any stage, before and during, the lockdown. This point was clearly made in the fact sheet. Moreover, I specifically made reference to it. Yet it seems you did not take the time to read the fact sheet, watch the Cahill interview or actually read my email. So I got a chuckle from the irony of you stating it is pointless trying to have a discussion with me. Finally, you have yet to offer anything of substance to substantiate your claim I am a conspiracy theorist. This is not the first time and I doubt it will be the last time. But hey, give it a go. I have the data to prove my points. Where is your data?

You are a conspiracy theorist in that you uncritically accept any data that supports your theories and reject all other information. Ferguson’s model was based on information available at the time and made public. It was open to falsification. That’s rigour and transparency. You keep repeating that “this is not so,” “it’s a farce,” “the point is clearly made in the fact sheet.” Facts are not arguments just as correlation is not causation. Your use of innuendo in bringing up Ferguson’s escapade is not the rational argument of a reasonable mind. Seething anger trumps honest inquiry. On any subject, I doubt that there is anything I could say that would make you change your mind. You live in your own world of certainty. I don’t trust people who have all the answers.

  • The common flu kills about 700,000 people each year. Covid-19 mortality rates have been demonstrated to be about the same. Yet a lockdown has never been imposed as a result of the annual flu mortality rate or other diseases which have substantially higher annual mortality rates. Many world-leading scientists have raised the question of “trust”. I go where the data leads and, while it seems unnecessary to make this point, they are the ones who provide the data – not me. So please focus on their data instead of me.

In Canada, 83,000 people die of cancer each year whereas only 1,900 die in traffic accidents (down from 3,300 in 1995). Obviously, we should equip cancer patients with seat belts. Seriously, on March 5th, when US covid deaths stood at 11, the LA Times published “The flu has killed far more people than coronavirus. So why all the frenzy about COVID-19?