In this information war which we are all experiencing right now, there's never been a more important time to use your own intellect to read through the biases of every piece of information that you are absorbing. Even mine.
No source is free from bias – this is the lens we see the world through and how we filter the information we are faced with on a daily basis. With this in mind, I personally feel it's important for us to look inside our own biases in order to effectively communicate with others. Some of our friends may have a similar bias based on our shared experiences, whereas others may be starkly different.
We are in a time when trust is a very important commodity but can we even trust so-called “fact-checking” websites? After all
who has established these sites and do they deserve our trust? What is their bias?
Lately, I've been posting some rather controversial information (that's nothing new), and what I've noticed that is different in this “information war” battlefield we are in right now is that some people want more proof. I understand this completely and this is a logical position but I believe that it's also important to accept that not every bit of information that you run across that may be truthful will have concrete proof behind it. Some of this information you will have to use your logic and intellect to evaluate whether in the context of the big picture that you are assembling – that it makes sense.
The full truth only comes out in history, and sometimes that even gets convoluted.
But I personally believe that it's rather important in this “information war” to advance the understanding of the big picture that you may be assembling with some information which may be somewhat speculative.
The point here is that while I may not believe everything that Dr. Judy Mikovits' says (after all I'm not a biologist or a biochemist) I believe that her conclusion is sound and logical so I've been sharing her videos regardless of what the various fact-checking websites say about her.
And in case you think these fact-checking websites are purely philanthropic organizations that serve no purpose other than delivering the truth and striking down lies being perpetrated on an unknowing public consider their funding sources. I found something interesting when looking into Politifact. This post from capitalresearch.org reveals my point:
Major philanthropies funding Poynter include the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation ($7,535,000 since 2003); Ford Foundation ($2,415,000 since 2000); Robert R. McCormick Tribune Foundation ($2,190,000 since 2009); Peter and Carmen Lucia Buck Foundation Inc. ($300,000 since 2013); Tides Foundation and Tides Center ($275,053 since 2008); Omidyar Network Fund Inc. ($150,000 since 2013); Carnegie Corp. of New York ($150,000 since 2009); and Annie E. Casey Foundation ($140,000 since 2006). Though FactCheck.org is the granddaddy of such websites, it has been eclipsed recently by PolitiFact in attention from mainstream media outlets, which use the two sites to supplement their reporting.
If you dig deeper you'll find that these same foundations are major supporters of NPR (National Public Radio) which I believe used to be a much less biased organization and are the subject of another line of research I'm investigating for a future post. Personally I find the fear-based reporting that is broadcasting non-stop on NPR right now disgusting.
So if you are relying on fact-check websites to determine what you believe, what you trust, and what you follow it might be a good time to question their biases and reevaluate your big picture view.
Personally, my big picture view of this current situation is that there is a major push to take away our civil rights which includes a drive towards a completely unnecessary and likely very harmful mandatory adult vaccine. I don't believe that anyone needs a vaccine for coronavirus and from what I've read none of the attempts to create one for many years have been successful. This is my opinion, and you can't fact-check an opinion.
Any scientist out there, Judy Mikovitz included, has their right to share their opinion just the same. That being said we are all human (plus the AI's reading this) and we all have our human flaws including memory inconsistencies, etc. So maybe some of what she shares isn't completely accurate or maybe other scientists would disagree with some or all of her conclusions and they have every right to their scientific opinion. Again this likely ties back into their personal bias just as Dr. Mikovits has her own personal bias.
Anyway, with the big picture in mind, one of my favorite people reporting lately that seems to really get a great perspective on all this stuff is Del Bigtree with his show The Highwire so check out his recent show here:
In this show, he did a great interview with the diversely talented Dr. Zack Bush who had some great insight into the current situation so if you'd like to just jump right to that (it's quite an extensive interview) you can watch that here:
Now that I've got all that out of the way since I always like to push the envelope – here's the stuff that you won't find on youtube. The video I'll post below has more of that stuff that you won't find fact-checked and you may not believe everything stated in it. I probably don't but I thought they did a pretty decent job with it.
Some of it I think you'll find is a bit repetitive with some of the other videos you may have already seen but there is enough original in this that I'm sharing it anyway regardless of the backlash.
Don't say I didn't warn you – this is NOT fact-checked:
Please share your feedback about all of this below in the comments regardless of your opinion but I'm most interested in your comments about what I've written as the introduction on this post. What is your truth?
Also, of course, if you've found this post to be helpful go ahead and share it around to your friends on all the social media channels and see if they censor it.
Image & Photo By leighblackall
Image courtesy of: Matt From London