Real Fake News: Science Used as Propaganda


TheDailyBell

By Joe Jarvis

Did you know that doctors and scientists can be corrupt or simply wrong?

People seem to give doctors and scientists the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their findings and opinions on things like global warming, genetically modified organisms, pesticides, chemicals, and how unhealthy certain foods and habits are.

But like any other humans, scientists and doctors are, well, human. They can be misguided, confused, corrupt, and stubbornly opinionated.

According to Natural News, as many as 20,000 doctors once recommended smoking cigarettes to aid digestion. In 1940’s Camel ran an ad campaign that claimed “More Doctors Smoke Camels.” They even handed out packs of Camels to doctors at a medical convention and then polled the doctors on their way out the door, asking what their favorite cigarette brand was, or what kind they had in their pocket at that moment.

Unfortunately, money has corrupted industries like big pharma who pay doctors and scientists to take a position and prescribe particular drugs and treatment. Many peer-reviewed studies have predetermined outcomes which basically find the facts to fit their narrative. It is more a marketing ploy to publish in scientific and medical journals than proof of the actual findings.

Sugar was long considered fine to dump down children’s throats because in the 1960’s a handful of scientists were paid off.

The documents show that a trade group called the Sugar Research Foundation, known today as the Sugar Association, paid three Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in today’s dollars to publish a 1967 review of research on sugar, fat and heart disease. The studies used in the review were handpicked by the sugar group, and the article, which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, minimized the link between sugar and heart health and cast aspersions on the role of saturated fat.

But even absent actual corruption, basic mistakes are being made in scientific conclusions.

Correlation is not causation. This is a basic foundational tenet of science. Two things may be very strongly correlated, but that does not prove that one causes the other.

According to Reason Magazine:

When it comes to separating the wheat from the chaff of studies that are mediocre or just plain bad, Albert Einstein College of Medicine epidemiologist Geoffrey Kabat is a national treasure. “Most research findings are false or exaggerated, and the more dramatic the result, the less likely it is to be true,” he declares in his excellent new book Getting Risk Right.

Kabat discusses how “the dose makes the poison,” in that saying something doubles your risk of a disease could actually be statistically irrelevant.

For example, you may have heard that eating bacon increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Technically, this is true. If you eat two slices of bacon every day of your life the risk of colorectal cancer increases from 5 to 6 percent. That is not exactly the same risk as smoking cigarettes, which increases the risk of lung cancer by 20 to 50 times over.

And then, of course, you must consider the editorial bias. You’re Risking Your Life Eating Bacon is more likely to get a click than Everyday Bacon Eating Increases Cancer Risk by 1%.

Kabat suggests that the precautionary principle–“better safe than sorry”–is largely an ideological ploy to alarm the public into supporting advocates’ policy preferences. He also decries “the simplistic notion that ‘consensus among scientists’ is always correct.” He notes that scientific consensus once held that ulcers were caused by spicy foods and stress instead of bacteria…

Available on Amazon.

Here’s the thing, I like to be healthy, and I personally often follow the better safe than sorry principle. But it is a huge miscarriage of authority to push this view on others through fear. It is the idea of I know better than these silly peasants that unfortunately seems to permeate the scientific and medical communities.

Are GMOs, pesticides, and chemicals like BPA really as bad as they say? I personally avoid them, but I honestly haven’t done enough of my own research to know for sure.Salt and fat have gone back and forth as being considered healthy

Salt and fat have gone back and forth as being considered healthy then unhealthy, then healthy again by experts.

People look to doctors and scientists for guidance and too often are brainwashed with those individuals’ own biases and unsubstantiated opinions.

If an expert cannot or will not answer questions about their work, that is a red flag. When people talk about consensus among experts instead of the actual facts, that is another red flag.

There have been too many times in recent history when the experts, the scientists, and the doctors were willfully or mistakenly wrong.

Sometimes, yes, we must defer to experts, since it is simply impossible to research it all on your own. But that doesn’t mean we should forgo the due diligence in critical thinking that goes along with it.

Fear sells. We are used to it in the media but don’t usually expect it from doctors and scientists. But they are humans too, and just as likely to push their agenda instead of the truth.

..

Advertisements

British Press Gearing Up to Destroy Britain – #FakeNews Empidemic


ArmstrongEconomics

Redwood John

John Redwood, a prominent and experienced Brexit MP, posted on his blog today (http://johnredwoodsdiary.com) about doing an interview on British Press:

The BBC wants to change the news, not report it

Yesterday I was phoned to be asked onto the BBC Radio 4 Today program this morning. They said they wanted me to answer questions about how the election would change the UK’s ability to negotiate a new, good relationship with the EU. I was happy to do so, and said I could make any time at their studio. It seemed like a good topic, and central to what the PM said about her reason for calling the election.

They then proceeded to ask me a series of questions all designed to get me to disagree with the UK negotiating position and Prime Minister. I explained that I supported the PM, agreed with her Brexit White Paper and stated aims, and suggested if all they wanted to do was to criticize her, they should approach the opposition parties. They continued to try to get me to disagree. They did not seem to have read the White Paper or the PM’s speech on the topic, so I had to tell them what was in them and why I agreed with them.

I explained again that their thesis that the leave supporting MPs were in disagreement with the PM and were “rebels” was simply untrue. We are not in disagreement with the PM and we have been strongly supporting the government’s statements and legislation on Brexit. She said she would get back to me about the invitation to go on, with the details.

She did not of course bother to, as it was clear I was unwilling to feed their view of what the news should be.

I then found that another Leave supporting Conservative MP had been given the same treatment, and he too had thought the BBC were trying to change the  news rather than report the position. When I came to do a live interview on some other BBC program, I was faced with the same stupid thesis and had to explain on air how wrong their idea was.

I do not know who is feeding the BBC this nonsense, but it is frustrating that they do not accept the truth from those whose views they claim to be reporting, and do not bother to get back and openly say they do not want you on because you won’t say what they want you to say.

..

Mainstream Media “War Of Lies” Against President Trump “Outwitted By Truth”


whatdoesitmean

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

An interesting Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) report circulating in the Kremlin today detailing the initial aftermath of Donald Trump’s astounding victory over the international war criminal Hillary Clinton states that the United States mainstream propaganda media’s “war of lies” against America’s new leader are quickly being “outwitted by truth”—a reference to the iconic Russian poet Vladimir Vysotsky who in his famous writing The Parable About The Truth And The Lie most accurately described what these propagandists do by making “no difference at all between the Truth and the Lie…strip them both naked, you’ll never know who is who”. [Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]

Unfortunately for the Hillary Clinton supporting US mainstream media propagandists attempting to destroy President Trump with their “war of lies” against him, however, this report notes, America’s now powerful alternative news media has fought back and “outwitted by truth” these falsehoods nearly as fast as they are made up, and whose examples include:

Important to note about all of these lies against President Trump, MoFA experts in this report say, is that they were reported by the US mainstream propaganda media as being the truth—but when exposed by the American alternative news media as being lies, none of these elite media organizations retracted any of their “war of lies” articles.

Even worse, this report continues, as well as conducting their “war of lies” campaign against President Trump, these same mainstream propaganda media news organizations are, also, openly supporting America’s top fashion designers refusing to make an inauguration gown for his wife Melania, top artists demanding that his daughter Ivanka remove their paintings (which she owns) from the walls of her home, and the unleashing of thousands of “internet trolls” to disparage Ivanka’s products sold on Amazon.

MoFA experts in this report further detail that the main tactic of the US mainstream propaganda media’s “war of lies” campaign against President Trump is to create a communistic-leftist rebellion against him on college campuses—where new courses designed to ferment rebellion include “Black Americans Resisting Donald Trump” at Oregon State and “Problem of Whiteness” at the University of Wisconsin—where the students have been so completely indoctrinated by communistic thought, they’ve begun shutting down everyone who doesn’t believe in their leftist ideology.

To the larger issue, though, of what is now occurring with America’s mainstream media propagandists “war of lies” against President Trump, this report notes, are that they are pathetic attempts meant to undo Trump’s victory, and are signs of desperation, not strength, as this nations Deep State disintegrates—and as evidenced by Brexit, Trump, other populist and nationalist movements, all around the world, catching fire—and that the rise of the alternative news media can be likened to wrecking balls aimed at an already structurally unsound and teetering building of these leftist elites that would eventually collapse on its own.

And in one of their last, and equally pathetic, moves to counter the truth telling alternative news media, this report concludes, Facebook, one of America’s largest mainstream propaganda media “war of lies” perpetrators, has now contracted with the leftist communistic “fact checking” site Snopes to remove all articles supporting Trump and others telling the truth—and whose co-founder, David Mikkelson, embezzled $98,000 spending it all on prostitutes before divorcing his wife for “being to fat, and whose main “fact checker’ is Kimberly LaCapria, whose blog ‘ViceVixen’ says she is in touch with her “domme side” and has posted on Snopes.com while smoking pot.

Though this report doesn’t speculate on how the American people will react to their news now being censored on Facebook by an embezzling wife abuser and cheater, and a sexual dominatrix pot smoking prostitute, one surely can’t miss the irony that these morally deficient human beings actually fit right in with the US mainstream propaganda media as both of them care nothing for the soul of this once great country—and will most certainly cheer if it’s destroyed in the pit of demonic lust and greed it’s headed towards.


December 23, 2016 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.

 

..

#Facebook Is #FakeNews


TheDailyBell

fake

Since Facebook is fake, shouldn’t it disseminate fake news? What are they so worried about? Fake news distributed by a fake company: It seems like a good match. And a historical one as well. It’s not as if Fakebook fell into fakeness all of a sudden. It’s been fake since the very beginning.

Large initial investments into Facebook were made by the CIA via their favorite fake libertarian Peter Thiel. And going back even farther, Mark Zuckerberg seems to have stolen the idea from Harvard’s Winklevoss twins before he dropped out.

With around $12 million in his account, Zuckerberg was able to up his level of fakery and here no doubt the CIA helped him a great deal, once again. We remember how ads for Fakebook were everywhere on the ‘net for a while. No doubt the CIA twisted a few corporate arms. We even doubt Fakebook paid for any of those ads. The CIA “took care” of it.

We also remember when Facebook was trying to offer Disqus-like services. That didn’t work because most websites probably didn’t want Facebook involved in their business. But Facebook kept growing anyway – probably because the CIA kept twisting arms and funding  the company when necessary.

And when the company went public, you can be sure the word was out that the US government was firmly entrenched in Facebook. The Facebook IPO was huge – so huge that many initial buyers lost money because the IPO price went down, down, down.

Still Fakebook kept growing and Wall Street, no doubt encouraged by the CIA, kept throwing money at the company.

At various times Facebook had to make announcements about its fake customer policies. One fake policy was that Facebook was primarily a social-sharing facility. It’s not. It’s biggest purpose is probably to collect data for the CIA and that’s why  customers go online every now and then to express surprise that Fakebook has a new way of invading their privacy.

Eventually, it turned out Facebook was tracking users’ ‘net actions even when they weren’t on Facebook. And users are probably still surprised to find that when they stop using Fakebook their information lingers online.

Facebook  (like Google) is supposed to be a great place to work but these days as employees leave they often bear tales of deeply embedded corporate paranoia. Of course, you’d be paranoid too if you were trying to project the façade of an independent company when in fact you’re in many ways a  façade for US intelligence.

Zuckerberg’s recently announced desire to reduce the amount of “fake news” circulating on Fakebook is surely just another CIA promotion.He’s announced that Facebook will fact-check and label its “news” and downgrade and then “bury” news it considers fake.

Facebook supposedly got a lot of criticism for disseminating news criticizing Hillary and boosting Trump. Funny, we don’t remember any of that. We remember that the entire US mainstream media was howling like a dog in heat about how great Hillary was and how terrible Trump was.

So the reason that Facebook is so worried about fake news is as fake as its concern.

The real reason Facebook wants to “bury” fake news is because the news Facebook is worried about is probably news that the CIA doesn’t want to see distributed. Such fake news includes information about US aggression overseas, CIA drug dealing and all kinds of political corruption.

Facebook will get rid of its REAL news (which it calls fake) by teaming up with groups that have a mistaken reputation for accuracy. These include Snopes and ABC News and something called Poynter, a nonprofit school for journalism in St. Petersburg, Florida that has just been revealed determines fake news. George Soros is a committed globalist and anything that doesn’t suit his agenda will be labeled as “fake.”

Bill Gates is funding the Institute as well, despite distributing vaccines in Africa that are reportedly killing small children. How many articles exposing Gates’s vaccines will escape being labelled fake? That’s the whole point after all. The idea is to demonize “real” news by calling it fake.

Conclusion: Snopes is another outfit that prends to be impartial but is not. It often tries to debunk stories that are accurate if they criticize government actions or leftist trends or individuals. The larger intention of those spreading the idea of “fake news” is to justify removing truthful news from circulation under the pretense that it is manipulative and incorrect.

..

#Facebook Plans To Bury Alternative News


ActivistPost

facebook-zucks-blue

Facebook has decided to make it easier for Snopes, Factcheck.org, ABC News, the Associated Press, and PolitiFact to flag “fake news.”

What this means is alternative news stories the establishment decides are fake will be pushed down in the Facebook newsfeed.

“Facebook is giving fact-checking organizations a kind of power they’ve never had before: the power to publicly brand other websites’ stories as ‘disputed’ and push them down in Facebook users’ newsfeeds,” reports Vox.

PolitiFact has been accused of bias and serious errors in judgment by critics on the right and left.

The Knight Foundation, one of PolitiFact’s largest donors, gave $200,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Knight also funds the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, a journalism school owned by The Tampa Bay Times newspaper.

It was also reported the International Fact-Checking Network financed by George Soros will be involved with the Facebook effort. It is hosted by the Poynter Institute and also funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, and the National Endowment for Democracy. NED’s founder said the organization does what the CIA did in the old days, namely take down disfavored governments and produce propaganda.

Poynter also gets money from the Omidyar Network run by the billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.

The Omidyar Network has teamed up with Soros’ Open Society on projects and given grants to third parties using the Soros-funded Tides Foundation. Tides underwrites numerous progressive causes.

Facebook will soon begin relegating alternative news stories to the bottom of the newsfeed where they are less likely to be viewed on the recommendations of these biased and establishment-linked organizations.

This will be a significant development for many alternative media websites. For instance, my website receives a large share of referred traffic from Facebook. If Facebook users do not see my stories in their newsfeed, a lot less traffic will be driven to my website and this is exactly what Soros and the establishment want.


Kurt Nimmo is the editor of Another Day in the Empire, where this article first appeared. He is the former lead editor and writer of Infowars.com. Donate to ADE Here.


Related

#FakeNews Is The New “Weapons of Mass Destruction”

Read here

..

Only one way to take down the corporate media


ATS

The ultimate thing that the corporate media controllers fear is information. That is why there is a war being declared on “fake news” (which there are, yes, but the code word here is that they want alternative news silenced – the news that gives accurate information).

So if information is so dangerous to the elite maybe we need to take up the call. Let’s call this “coffee table journalism.” Do people realize how many people have become aware of what is going on through watching YouTube documentaries and regular-people-produced videos? Think of the impact if a few thousand more people picked up a cheap cam corder, set up a YouTube channel, and started spreading truth. Even if you only get 50 views per video that is 50 people exposed to your speech. How many times do you get the opportunity to speak to 50 people at once, from all over the world?

The media is down, but not out. Remember the scene in Jurassic Park where the small dinosaurs by the stream went after the guy? We may be small, but if thousands of us get activated we can do wonders.

..