Coronavirus

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

On 11/15/2021 at 8:48 PM, Ellen Stuttle said:

You've completely lost me.  I have no idea what you're talking about.

Ellen,

That generally happens when I discuss persuasion mixed with science.

Here's an example where science does not have to be exact and, in fact, cannot be precise, but the persuasion has to be spot on. I don't believe you would ever see the persuasion part at first, though. I know you haven't in many cases in the past where you have come out guns blazing at me. (But after a long discussion, we generally work things out.  )

For those of us who have looked, we all know that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine, but it is called that by the bad guys.

Well... try using that argument as persuasion on people who have not looked and don't want to. In fact, I know you have tried many times right here on OL. I read your posts. You have tried to sway specific people that way. And it always falls on deaf ears. Right? That's how that argument works with the general public.

Or try this. Tell people that bad guys are putting poison into the vaccines. And they want you to vaccine that poison into your kids. And that Celebrities A and B and Traditional Authorities X and Y are coming to that conclusion, too. 

Do you think correcting the second message--explaining that these vaccines are not really vaccines at all--will make any difference persuasion-wise to the general public?

If you think it will, you will be right. It will make a difference. It will make one hell of a difference. It will make the message less persuasive to them. In other words, more kids (a lot more) will get the poison with the corrected message than with the non-corrected one.

 

We can tell the general public that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine until we are blue in the face, but they are still going to go out and get the jab and call it a vaccine. And many will allow Big Brother to put that shit into their kids. Why? Because the correction sounds like normal bickering between experts to them.

Or we can tell the general public that the vaccines are contaminated with crap that will damage their kids (and damage them) and so-and-so thinks this too. And we can say it in as scary a tone and frame relevant to them as we can manage. That will at least get many to stop and think and look a bit deeper before they act.

ONLY AFTER people are stopping and looking can the idea that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine get through to them. Before that, they don't care enough to listen.

People who know persuasion techniques know this stuff and know why. 

 

When you get offended out of the gate by words like gobbledygook and ideas like science papers putting the general public into a coma, I get it that you are trying to defend science (and scientists) against an attack by the angry unwashed hoi polloi. But by refusing to look a bit deeper, you totally miss the persuasion angle.

And in doing so, you miss when persuaders are actually getting people riled up against the bad guys.

But no. Science must be respected in all cases and all contexts. Right? And it starts with precision no matter who wants to hear it. Right?

Well, think of this. When you defend science in that manner, especially to the general public, you not only defend the good science and scientists. You also defend the shit dressed up as science and the charlatans.

Each person in the general public votes (or can vote). And I assure you, there are a lot more of them than there are of scientists and academics. What's more, they do not speak your language. If you want to get through to them, you must learn to speak in a manner where they will listen.

If someone does not listen to you, it doesn't matter how right or precise you are. They will not be persuaded by your message. Hell, most of the time they won't even know what your message is.

Believe me, the bad guys know this and they use that knowledge well. That's one of the reasons the world is in the mess it is in. Ignoring this fact will not make it go away.

 

The good news for science-minded people is that there is a huge body of scientific material on persuasion, human behavior, behavior engineering, cognitive biases, etc., etc., etc. All you have to do is look. Then notice when it is happening out in the world. Then you can do something about it that works.

Often I speak in colorful terms rather than cite chapter and verse. I'm addressing the reader at large when I do that (and having some fun  ). And you often like to bash the colorful terms at face value and get all offended and shit.  But believe me, I know the chapters and verses--a whole slew of them--behind the colorful language.

I almost fear it if you ever take an interest and learn this stuff. I have a feeling you would become one badass force of nature to be reckoned with by the bad guys. You've got the spunk and you are fearless.

 

Michael

[Ellen Stuttle]

17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Ellen,

Michael.

I started reading your latest lengthy lecture AT me.  I've gotten about halfway through and I'm simply laughing.

I suspect you're not going to get near explaining whatever it was you meant.

And, honestly, "guns blazing" at you?  Bizarre.

Ah, well.

Ellen

[Ellen Stuttle]

On 11/15/2021 at 12:51 PM, william.scherk said:

I will add some [white space] in, thank you for the suggestion.

Thanks, it's easier for me to read now.

Ellen

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

5 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

I've gotten about halfway through and I'm simply laughing.

I suspect you're not going to get near explaining whatever it was you meant.

Ellen,

If I can't get through, at least I can entertain.

I'm one multi-talented dude.

Glad to be of service.

Michael

[william.scherk]

On 11/14/2021 at 1:21 PM, william.scherk said:

Which means without paying, we can't really figure out how the tables in Kirsh's article were derived, or at least not exactly.

 

I paid for a subscription to the paywalled analysis at Steve Kirsch's Substack. Unfortunately, the Benevides tables do not include unique VAERS IDs.

However, Benevides's spreadsheets are available in Excel format, and I was able to import the data in this table pictured below to Google Sheets ...

 

On 11/14/2021 at 1:21 PM, william.scherk said:

 

 

Here is a link to the Google Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qlNMMiprBsPZ9s21arUOpyaZgz2o3urcNAVzhdi02NY/edit?usp=sharing ... If anyone is interested in exploring the datasets ...

 

X-Factor Analysis November 17 2021 - Google Sheets

DOCS.GOOGLE.COM

---

match Symptoms,C19 Count,Baseline count,X factor Heavy menstrual bleeding,3,528,2,8820 Heart rate,3,189,2,7973 Magnetic resonance imaging head,1,512,2,3780 Angiogram pulmonary...

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by william.scherk
Space, spelling, added link

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Good news.

OSHA is out mandate-wise.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

On 11/16/2021 at 3:15 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Ellen,

That generally happens when I discuss persuasion mixed with science.

Here's an example where science does not have to be exact and, in fact, cannot be precise, but the persuasion has to be spot on. I don't believe you would ever see the persuasion part at first, though. I know you haven't in many cases in the past where you have come out guns blazing at me. (But after a long discussion, we generally work things out.  )

For those of us who have looked, we all know that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine, but it is called that by the bad guys.

Well... try using that argument as persuasion on people who have not looked and don't want to. In fact, I know you have tried many times right here on OL. I read your posts. You have tried to sway specific people that way. And it always falls on deaf ears. Right? That's how that argument works with the general public.

Or try this. Tell people that bad guys are putting poison into the vaccines. And they want you to vaccine that poison into your kids. And that Celebrities A and B and Traditional Authorities X and Y are coming to that conclusion, too. 

Do you think correcting the second message--explaining that these vaccines are not really vaccines at all--will make any difference persuasion-wise to the general public?

If you think it will, you will be right. It will make a difference. It will make one hell of a difference. It will make the message less persuasive to them. In other words, more kids (a lot more) will get the poison with the corrected message than with the non-corrected one.

 

We can tell the general public that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine until we are blue in the face, but they are still going to go out and get the jab and call it a vaccine. And many will allow Big Brother to put that shit into their kids. Why? Because the correction sounds like normal bickering between experts to them.

Or we can tell the general public that the vaccines are contaminated with crap that will damage their kids (and damage them) and so-and-so thinks this too. And we can say it in as scary a tone and frame relevant to them as we can manage. That will at least get many to stop and think and look a bit deeper before they act.

ONLY AFTER people are stopping and looking can the idea that the mRNA vaccine is not really a vaccine get through to them. Before that, they don't care enough to listen.

People who know persuasion techniques know this stuff and know why. 

 

When you get offended out of the gate by words like gobbledygook and ideas like science papers putting the general public into a coma, I get it that you are trying to defend science (and scientists) against an attack by the angry unwashed hoi polloi. But by refusing to look a bit deeper, you totally miss the persuasion angle.

And in doing so, you miss when persuaders are actually getting people riled up against the bad guys.

But no. Science must be respected in all cases and all contexts. Right? And it starts with precision no matter who wants to hear it. Right?

Well, think of this. When you defend science in that manner, especially to the general public, you not only defend the good science and scientists. You also defend the shit dressed up as science and the charlatans.

Each person in the general public votes (or can vote). And I assure you, there are a lot more of them than there are of scientists and academics. What's more, they do not speak your language. If you want to get through to them, you must learn to speak in a manner where they will listen.

If someone does not listen to you, it doesn't matter how right or precise you are. They will not be persuaded by your message. Hell, most of the time they won't even know what your message is.

Believe me, the bad guys know this and they use that knowledge well. That's one of the reasons the world is in the mess it is in. Ignoring this fact will not make it go away.

 

The good news for science-minded people is that there is a huge body of scientific material on persuasion, human behavior, behavior engineering, cognitive biases, etc., etc., etc. All you have to do is look. Then notice when it is happening out in the world. Then you can do something about it that works.

Often I speak in colorful terms rather than cite chapter and verse. I'm addressing the reader at large when I do that (and having some fun  ). And you often like to bash the colorful terms at face value and get all offended and shit.  But believe me, I know the chapters and verses--a whole slew of them--behind the colorful language.

I almost fear it if you ever take an interest and learn this stuff. I have a feeling you would become one badass force of nature to be reckoned with by the bad guys. You've got the spunk and you are fearless.

 

Michael

Are u getting enough sleep?

--Brant

u r fighting human biology

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

5 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

Are u getting enough sleep?

--Brant

Brant.

Objectivist-leaning people generally don't believe in propaganda, but instead like to complain that the world is going to hell in a handbasket.

They certainly don't know how to get elected--to anything.

There's a premise that needs checking there for those who like to check premises.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

People aren't taught to think so their natural default is to go with the herd. I once thought pre-school would lead to thinking school. Boy! Was I wrong!

The pre-school I went to, founded by my Mother, was to socialize the kids. Tucson Community School was based on the Bank Street School in Manhattan. That's where my parents met IQ William Shockley for his daughter went there. (Late 1930s) My Mom told me his IQ was 130. In those days all the parents knew each other's IQ. 

--Brant

I have a pic of WS paddling a canoe on Lake George with his daughter and my sister up front.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

12 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

People aren't taught to think so their natural default is to go with the herd.

Brant,

Then there are the cognitive biases.

For example, everyone knows they are right all the time. And they consistently flatter their own abilities.

In one study that has been repeated ad nauseum, people were surveyed and asked if they thought their driving ability and safety was in the top 10% of drivers on average. I don't recall the exact numbers off the top of my head, but I remember something like 80% of the people surveyed consistently said they belonged in the top 10%.

And don't forget, each one of those people vote.

And that's just one case. There are gazillions...

Michael

 

EDIT: If it wasn't clear, my underlying message was that persuasion (including propaganda) is the main means to cut through cognitive biases within the context of elections. Reason does not work and never has worked. Not for elections.

Even the fury rising up against the vaccine bullshit is not due to statistics, technical issues, disagreements about treatments, surveys, not even side effects. It is due to people actually getting maimed and killed by bad guys wielding vaccines as their ammunition in addition to increasing bullying by Big Brother.

The storytellers latched onto the emotions caused by this (fear and outrage) and unleashed their own persuasion on the public. Now that is working.

Hell, the rise to power of the Big Pharma crew wasn't even due to reason or science. They scared the shit out of the people, appealed to their cognitive biases, then ascended. Reason and science came after to justify, not to ascend in the first place. 

The storytellers of the backlash are now fighting that with fear and outrage and more cognitive biases, not scientific experiments and measurements. And this approach is effective because they now have bodies, not arguments and science papers, they can point to to back up their accusations--ones that tickle cognitive biases and produce fear and outrage.

Winning technical arguments with dueling science papers is good and has its place, but within this context, it is not essential to move the masses. If this approach is used as the primary persuasion method, it just doesn't work. What's worse, it's a recipe for losing. It brings rocks and spears to a fight against machine guns, grenades, bazookas and tanks.

 

The old marketing adage is useful here: sell with emotion and justify with facts. Those who sell with facts have awfully skinny kids.

 

The place for reason is to deal with buyer's remorse and it works well for that. But it is a poor weapon for moving a crowd in the first place. And it sucks as a remedy when a howling mob appears.

[Mark]

Highlights from Ron Johnson’s roundtable on covid vaccine safety

My abridgement of Sen. Ron Johnson’s press conference of November 2.  (No mainstream press showed up, likewise no vaccine manufacturer or CDC, NIH, FDA. representative.)  

The original video lasts 3 hours 19 minutes, the abridgement goes 2 hours 14 minutes.  It’s shorter and better – verbal disfluencies and irrelevant digressions cut out along with some more or less expendable parts.  Though still long I think it will hold your interest.

You’re welcome to try and post it to YouTube (because of its length you’ll need a “verified account”).

Sen. Johnson at the end of the video:

“Even though these individuals look pretty normal, their injuries are severe. ... [Brianne  Dressen] personally knows seven people who have committed suicide because the inner vibrations ... are so severe they simply could not go on with life. ... The injuries don’t necessarily have to be visible to be real, to be severe, to be life altering.”

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

13 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The place for reason is to deal with buyer's remorse and it works well for that. But it is a poor weapon for moving a crowd in the first place. And it sucks as a remedy when a howling mob appears.

I just had a thought.

People in O-Land are sensitive to what they perceive as "attacks" on reason.

That is not what I am doing with these observations.

I am merely observing where reason works and where it doesn't within the context of crowds and elections.

By way of analogy, showing the limitations of an automobile under water does not mean I am attacking automobiles. They works perfectly on road and can take us far.

Ditto for reason.

If we are to use reason in persuasion, it has to be as preparation, not as deployment. We use reason to look at the nature of the mind, look at the nature of messaging, choose what works, build up the relevant resources, then let 'er fly. But we can't expect that same reasoned frame of mind to be operating in the culture once Pandora's box opens and the whole world goes mad.

 

We either learn how to fight the demons while they are flying about or we lose the world to them. And demons don't use reason as a weapon, not even as a shield.

Guns work, though.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I'm just going to leave this right here for your enjoyment.

California couple sentenced for $20 million in COVID fraud

NYPOST.COM

---

A California couple was sentenced to prison for illegally obtaining more than $20 million in COVID-19 relief funds -- but authorities need to catch them first.

Quote

A California couple was sentenced to prison for illegally obtaining more than $20 million in COVID-19 relief funds — but authorities need to catch them first.

Richard Ayvazyan, 43, was sentenced to 17 years behind bars and his wife, 37-year-old Marietta Terabelian, received a six-year sentence in federal prison on Monday for conspiracy, bank fraud and money laundering, according to the Department of Justice.

The two are on the run from authorities and were sentenced in absentia.

Federal officials said they cut off their tracking bracelets on Aug. 29, federal officials said.

We can't expect much from the FBI these days, poor things. They are too busy trying to set up parents so they can call them terrorists.

 

Here's a question, though. Granted, what this couple did is illegal.

But what about all that money that went to the Chinese Communist Party to develop bioweapons while calling it something else?

Isn't that fraud, too?

And in both cases, wasn't the money stolen government money? In other words, taxes?

Apparently, under the Biden junta, crime does pay. 

Michael

[tmj]

Very busy

It Begins: FBI raids house, terrorizes family of mom who protested local school board, elections – LeoHohmann.com

LEOHOHMANN.COM

---

By Leo Hohmann via Worldview Weekend Report An FBI SWAT team raided the home of an activist mother of three in Colorado on...

 

[Jules Troy]

They are probably holed up over a really BIG bag of cocaine lol.  Hopefully somewhere warm with no extradition laws.

[william.scherk]

26 minutes ago, tmj said:

Very busy

From the story cited:

Quote

[Sherronna Bishop] said the agents would not tell her why they were searching her home. They did leave behind documents related to the search warrant, saying they entered her home because she was suspected of causing “intentional damage to a protected computer, wire fraud and conspiracy to cause damage to a protected computer.”

“I don’t know anything about this. They couldn’t explain any of this,” she said. “I will tell you why: they were at my home to intimidate me, to shut me up, because I was using my First Amendment rights to advocate for [Mesa County Clerk] Tina Peters on the issue of Dominion [voting machines] and the damage done in our election. And they’ll never be held accountable. Instead they will criminalize this woman who has stood up.”

From another angle, a few more items to chew on:

Quote

The FBI on Tuesday raided the home of a Colorado election clerk and three others in an investigation into a voting system security breach.

Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, a Republican, was accused by state officials in August of helping to leak voting system passwords to a right-wing blog. Peters later appeared at MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell's conspiracy-laden "cyber-symposium," where the pillow magnate promised but failed to produce evidence of election-rigging. Peters later briefly went into hiding with Lindell's help amid FBI scrutiny.

On Tuesday morning, the FBI and local prosecutors raided Peters' home.

[...]

"We executed four federally court-authorized operations today to gather evidence in connection with the investigation into the Mesa County Clerk and Recorder's Office," District Attorney Dan Rubinstein told Colorado Politics. "We did so with assistance from the DA's office from the 21st Judicial District, the Attorney General's Office and the FBI."

Peters in an interview on Lindell's online streaming channel said the raid left her "terrified."

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I bet the Tina Peters raid has a lot to do with Mike Lindell's upcoming thing with state AGs and the Supreme Court.

After all, Tina was there at Mike's Cyber event and supplied a smoking gun.

And it looks like he actually is getting SCOTUS involved.

Once again, the FBI is embarrassing itself.

Michael

[Marc]

55 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I bet the Tina Peters raid has a lot to do with Mike Lindell's upcoming thing with state AGs and the Supreme Court.

After all, Tina was there at Mike's Cyber event and supplied a smoking gun.

And it looks like he actually is getting SCOTUS involved.

Once again, the FBI is embarrassing itself.

Michael

I cannot believe that they can do that in Cuba, I mean North Korea, I mean in the United States.

[tmj]

No , no ,no secret state police are bad  , overt ones are democratic.

[Marc]

Just now, tmj said:

No , no ,no secret state police are bad  , overt ones are democratic.

True, true!!

[Dglgmut]

Remember, don't take medical advice from anyone but a doctor, unless it's a TV personality, radio host, politician, celebrity, stranger on the street, or really anyone that tells you to get the vaccine... and any doctor that disagrees is a quack. And now for the objective News:

 

[Jules Troy]

So what your saying is..we shoulda bought oodles of Pfizer stock BEFORE the pandemic….d’oh!! BART!

[Ellen Stuttle]

25 minutes ago, Jules Troy said:

So what your saying is..we shoulda bought oodles of Pfizer stock BEFORE the pandemic…

I bet there are people who did just that.

Ellen

[Peter]

4 hours ago, Dglgmut said:

Remember, don't take medical advice from anyone but a doctor,

And Captain Kirk.

[Peter]

Phillip Boyce. Commander Katherine Pulaski. Leonard McCoy, Julian Bashir. The Doctor, an Emergency Medical Hologram Mark I played by Robert Picardo. Doctor Phlox.

Played by Gene Roddenberry’s real-life wife, Majel Barrett, Nurse Chapel was a compassionate, fan-favorite character who cared for her patients with all her heart and ability.

By far my two favorites are the Emergency Medical hologram and of course . . . Doctor Beverly Crusher.