I'm very sorry for the people we have lost, got sick or lost income as a result of the pandemic. Unfortunate and unfair things happen every single day. Life is unfair. COVID was an issue in 2020 - 2022, not considered an issue now by most.
You are free to keep whinging, whining and banging on and on about the jabs, and what poor outcomes they had for a small minority. Many I know refused to have the jabs, so it wasn't mandatory and this was the cause of a lot of tension within families and the community. Vaccines at the time were promoted to be the best way forward to avoid the lockdowns, which was a massive diruption to just about everybody.
One thing we all know, and agree with, is that no one will ever have to be held to account for perceived mistakes that government made - so get over it. It's in the past.
Maybe we will learn something, but probably not. Likely in next outbreak more will die as more people will hesitate over precautions that may have worked or decisions that government will make. Thing is, we will never know.
I don't accept your proposition that we have to move on and that it is in the past.
I also don't accept your claim that a small number of people were injured, as the all cause mortality figures are still running way above average, all since the jab rollout. Before the jab in 2020 there was barely a blip in the all cause mortality rates. About the same as an average flu season.
It's OK, we don't have to agree on the truth, as it speaks for itself.
The lies will continue to be exposed, especially after Trump's inauguration.
Remember brother, we shouldn't be squabbling, since that is exactly what our common enemy - the establishment - wants us to do.
Best thing we can do is realise this, come together and do what we can to bring about peace on Earth once again.
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..
When was there ever 'peace on earth', what day was that, how long did it last?
Sure there was - in tribal living. Before city-states and nations and empires. Australia was probably one of the most interesting examples.
Is there a reason to avoid bringing peace about?
Isn't it possible?
Just imagine, as John Lennon said before he was murdered by the warmongers "imagine all the world living life in peace".
If we can't even imagine it - it will never happen. Basic manifestation reality.
Why would anyone knowingly defend the modern debt slavery system and it's spokespeople - the corrupt lying politicians? In honest ignorance that's one thing - but to do it knowingly is another thing entirely - is it not?
Population growth, it's as simple as that. Too many humans competing for limited resources.
But feel free to believe whatever myth you want.
I wish it was that simple.
Natural and healthy competition of the species has been taken hijacked and taken to extremes by self-appointed elitist groups that have long controlled trade and commerce through wars, money, usury, quasi military-style rules of engagement, legal, admiralty law, Roman Civil Law, rampant bureaucracy and ever increasing taxes, creating a planetary false scarcity.
The divine and cosmic laws (nature) and the law of the land has been supplanted.
In truth, Mother Earth's bounty is plentiful and she is highly resilient. Look at how the Barrier Reef has recovered, despite the hysterical leftists and Climate Change Cultists warning about its demise a few years back. Look at our overflowing dams. Tim Flannery must be hiding under a baby cot sobbing by now.
These elitists (WEF, UN, World Bank, IMF, Central Bankers etc. and their mouthpieces in politics) use frightening and guilt-inducing language and propaganda like "boiling oceans" and "climate change emergency" and "sustainable development goals" to corral us into accepting their narrative that resources are scarce, that we are responsible for every environmental problem and that only these self-appointed know-it-alls have the answer - yet more regulation and red tape.
If peace is a mythical concept to anyone, then it will never be a reality.
I one wakes up and says "what a **** day it is" then that's most likely how it will turn out.
Peace, brothers and sisters.
Peace.
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said..
hysterical leftists and Climate Change Cultists
So much hatred. What would you do to them if you were part of the Trump administration?
Surely these people who disagree with you are entitled to their opinion and be free of all the persecution?
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..peacenlove said..
hysterical leftists and Climate Change Cultists
So much hatred. These people who disagree with you are entitled to their opinion.
Oh for goodness sake, hatred? Of course i agree that all should be free to state their opinion. I am also free to state my opinion that they are hysterical members of a cult. They have been proven wrong by reality. I don't hate them at all - that's just your opinion - which by the way does sound a bit judgemental and hateful towards me, dear brother.
Edit: carbon is essential to life on Earth so by logical extension it is not a pollutant but a bringer of life. The Cretaceous and Carboniferous! Geological eras were a time where life literally, exploded and in massive form.
Holy Guacamole, why do you hate me? Christmas is a time of giving and friendship. I'm sorry you carry such a big chip on your shoulder.
Interesting move by Port Headland Council:
thelightaustralia.com/assets/pdf/ISSUE-15-THE-LIGHT-FINAL-VERSION_SCREEN_SINGLE-PAGES.pdf
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..
So much hatred. What would you do to them if you were part of the Trump administration?
Surely these people who disagree with you are entitled to their opinion and be free of all the persecution?
Projection is Conspiracy Theorists special skill.
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..
Holy Guacamole, why do you hate me? Christmas is a time of giving and friendship. I'm sorry you carry such a big chip on your shoulder.
I don't hate anyone brother. Peace and love brother.
Why are you obsessed with hate all of a sudden? Why make it personal? Don't you realise when you tell something what they are thinking, whether it is true or not, it is a form of projection? It doesn't make sense that you are saying sorry for judging me to have a chip on my shoulder. If you're apologising i guess it must be something to do with projection as Remery says. Makes zero sense at all!
Yet this topic's about critical thinking and being sceptical? Isn't that now suffering under the weight of the judgement and subject-avoidance?
Select to expand quoteremery said.. Projection is Conspiracy Theorists special skill.myscreenname said..
So much hatred. What would you do to them if you were part of the Trump administration?
Surely these people who disagree with you are entitled to their opinion and be free of all the persecution?
Oh there we have it - anything remotely challenging, outside of the mainstream, not sanctioned by the corporate press and lying politicians and requiring a little sceptical critical thinking must be a conspiracy theory.
If only everyone could just use that get-out clause to avoid reason and cool calm collected chats. How simple it would be!
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said..
Interesting move by Port Headland Council:
thelightaustralia.com/assets/pdf/ISSUE-15-THE-LIGHT-FINAL-VERSION_SCREEN_SINGLE-PAGES.pdf
The misguided Port Hedland decision was based on the work of Prof Buckhaults who has since commented...
"The DNA is real, however the risk of this DNA is theoretical. There is no need to panic about past vaccination," he wrote in the post.
Prof Buckhaults said his senate hearing comments were targeted at regulators and industry experts, not the general public, and had resulted in "totally inappropriate anxiety".
"IMO (in my opinion), these vaccines saved a lot of lives. Far more than the number of people who have had medical events subsequent to vaccine," he added.
Select to expand quoteremery said..peacenlove said..
Interesting move by Port Headland Council:
thelightaustralia.com/assets/pdf/ISSUE-15-THE-LIGHT-FINAL-VERSION_SCREEN_SINGLE-PAGES.pdf
The misguided Port Hedland decision was based on the work of Prof Buckhaults who has since commented...
"The DNA is real, however the risk of this DNA is theoretical. There is no need to panic about past vaccination," he wrote in the post.
Prof Buckhaults said his senate hearing comments were targeted at regulators and industry experts, not the general public, and had resulted in "totally inappropriate anxiety".
"IMO (in my opinion), these vaccines saved a lot of lives. Far more than the number of people who have had medical events subsequent to vaccine," he added.
In truth, if you'd in fact read the article, brother, you'd find that the council's decision was based on the work of genomics scientist Kevin McKernan and the opinion of oncology Professor Angus Dalgleish, but let's not spoil the fun with the truth hey? Science should be fertile ground for many opinions and ideas that lead to knowledge, hopefully some wisdom and ultimately enlightenment, not a place for absolutes and dogmatic opinions.
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said..
In truth, if you'd in fact read the article, brother, you'd find that the council's decision was based on the work of genomics scientist Kevin McKernan and the opinion of oncology Professor Angus Dalgleish, but let's not spoil the fun with the truth hey? Science should be fertile ground for many opinions and ideas that lead to knowledge, hopefully some wisdom and ultimately enlightenment, not a place for absolutes and dogmatic opinions.
Hence the first post in this thread about science being self correcting. Conspiracy theories are not.
Select to expand quoteremery said..Hence the first post in this thread about science being self correcting. Conspiracy theories are not.peacenlove said..
In truth, if you'd in fact read the article, brother, you'd find that the council's decision was based on the work of genomics scientist Kevin McKernan and the opinion of oncology Professor Angus Dalgleish, but let's not spoil the fun with the truth hey? Science should be fertile ground for many opinions and ideas that lead to knowledge, hopefully some wisdom and ultimately enlightenment, not a place for absolutes and dogmatic opinions.
Brother, science when done properly is self correcting but when we ignore or dismiss outright new evidence because it disagrees with a belief in what an authority figure is telling us - as you are doing right now - that's the exact opposite of science - it's wilful neglect and dogma.
True scientific inquiry is a continuous exploration of ideas that are tested and re-tested. Yesterdays hypotheses are today's myths. You Remery, don't get to define what is true and not - hence this discussion.
If only it was that simple - allege something is a conspiracy theory to avoid new evidence. What alleged conspiracy theory are you alluding to? Perhaps this conspiracy is the US Congress finding that vaccine mandates, six foot distancing, masking etc. were not based on science?
Kevin McKernan simply measured the DNA fragment content of many vaccine vials and reported that it was far higher than the legal safe limit and Professor Dalgleish reported on the highly unusual increase in aggressive cancers since the CV-19 vaxx rollout. These experiments have been repeated numerous times and the data is robustly supported.
Do you accept as truth that a safe limit for DNA fragments in vaccines has been set by the public health authorities?
Select to expand quoteremery said..
Isn't that in direct contradiction with the US Congress Subcommittee Investigation Into the Coronavirus Pandemic findings?
Quote: "The virus possesses a biological characteristic that is not found in nature"
Quote: "By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced."
Perhaps the US Congress is also part of your alleged "Conspiracy Theory" - whatever that moving feast is?
oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-select-concludes-2-year-investigation-issues-500-page-final-report-on-lessons-learned-and-the-path-forward/
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said..
I don't accept your proposition that we have to move on and that it is in the past.
So you supported the Voice and Aboriginal aspirations then?
Definitely not. The Voice would have put the originals under the corporate parliamentary system for good. A neat little scam.
i support sovereignty for the originals, which was never ceded nor traded nor won by the foreign occupiers by conquest. This principle is based on hundreds of years of international law. No treaty, no trade or no conquest means no sovereignty was ceded - and fraud has no sunset clause in law.
The British admiralty knew this full well, which is why they developed the principle of terra nullius by doctrine and by practice. Specifically, the New South Wales governor's proclamation of 1835 declared that all lands not yet claimed by whites were quote "vacant lands of the crown" - clearly a delusion and a fraud.
also, placing the prefix 'ab' before 'original' makes it the opposite, like normal and ab-normal. Those elders who know this view the voice and the use of the word 'aboriginal' as fraud and an insult to their un-ceded sovereignty.
unltimately, sovereignty will need to be transferred from the originals back to all the people, who are the rightful 'commonwealth'.
One for the sceptics and critical thinkers who stayed the course with reality:
www.zerohedge.com/weather/doesnt-fit-msm-narrative-latest-arctic-ice-data-shows-26-larger-2012
(I know, another subject, oops)
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said.
Do you accept as truth that a safe limit for DNA fragments in vaccines has been set by the public health authorities?remery said..Hence the first post in this thread about science being self correcting. Conspiracy theories are not.peacenlove said..
In truth, if you'd in fact read the article, brother, you'd find that the council's decision was based on the work of genomics scientist Kevin McKernan and the opinion of oncology Professor Angus Dalgleish, but let's not spoil the fun with the truth hey? Science should be fertile ground for many opinions and ideas that lead to knowledge, hopefully some wisdom and ultimately enlightenment, not a place for absolutes and dogmatic opinions.
Brother, science when done properly is self correcting but when we ignore or dismiss outright new evidence because it disagrees with a belief in what an authority figure is telling us - as you are doing right now - that's the exact opposite of science - it's wilful neglect and dogma.
True scientific inquiry is a continuous exploration of ideas that are tested and re-tested. Yesterdays hypotheses are today's myths. You Remery, don't get to define what is true and not - hence this discussion.
If only it was that simple - allege something is a conspiracy theory to avoid new evidence. What alleged conspiracy theory are you alluding to? Perhaps this conspiracy is the US Congress finding that vaccine mandates, six foot distancing, masking etc. were not based on science?
Kevin McKernan simply measured the DNA fragment content of many vaccine vials and reported that it was far higher than the legal safe limit and Professor Dalgleish reported on the highly unusual increase in aggressive cancers since the CV-19 vaxx rollout. These experiments have been repeated numerous times and the data is robustly supported.
Do you accept as truth that a safe limit for DNA fragments in vaccines has been set by the public health authorities?
Everyone ignored this question at the end of my post. Should it upset me? - nah because it's to be expected of the big issues that might just open the truly sceptical mind back up to critical thinking
so let's pretend to be sceptical critical thinkers . it is fun hey?
Bwaaaaahahahaha
PeaceNLove is my new favourite troll account
Just needs more brother love
Select to expand quotepeacenlove said..
Everyone ignored this question at the end of my post. Should it upset me? - nah because it's to be expected of the big issues that might just open the truly sceptical mind back up to critical thinking
so let's pretend to be sceptical critical thinkers . it is fun hey?
Don't be sad brother, everyone here is very caring. Occasionally, others will take more time to uncover the truth. We can tell you are well meaning by your username and the 38 practical and loving posts you have shared with your brothers and sisters here.
Don't let this small misnomer, you made, distract your efforts in helping and communicate your truth with the rest of us so we can discover true peace and harmony on earth together.
I speak for all in the seabreeze community when I say: welcome, we are all hear to listen and learn. Don't be shy brother, let your frustrations and thoughts run free like a cool mountain breeze.
Shalom
Select to expand quoteFroth Goth said..
PeaceNLove is my new favourite troll account
Have you noticed that peacenlove is an anagram of AC envelope ?
An envelope of that size would be 457 x 610 mm or 18 x 24 inches (Arch C paper size). This paper sizing is only used in the USofA. Everybody else uses the ISO 216 International Paper Size standard.
But what is interesting is that Arch C is four times the size of the Government Legal standard paper size at 216mm x 330mm. This means peacenlove could fit four US government legal document pages into one AC envelope.
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..peacenlove said..
Everyone ignored this question at the end of my post. Should it upset me? - nah because it's to be expected of the big issues that might just open the truly sceptical mind back up to critical thinking
so let's pretend to be sceptical critical thinkers . it is fun hey?
Don't be sad brother, everyone here is very caring. Occasionally, others will take more time to uncover the truth. We can tell you are well meaning by your username and the 38 practical and loving posts you have shared with your brothers and sisters here.
Don't let this small misnomer, you made, distract your efforts in helping and communicate your truth with the rest of us so we can discover true peace and harmony on earth together.
I speak for all in the seabreeze community when I say: welcome, we are all hear to listen and learn. Don't be shy brother, let your frustrations and thoughts run free like a cool mountain breeze.
Shalom
Well brother, that's exactly what I've been doing, but you do seem far more interested in examining me than having a chilled chat about public topics. Ya know, i didn't start the topic nor the subject either but hey, that's cool too.
Now forgive me while i go chatting about stuff again . Remery made a point about high levels of DNA fragments in vaccines not being a problem and he quoted one doctor/scientist to elucidate his belief.. Contrary to Remery's belief, i happen to know that the public health authorities set a "maximum safe" limit for DNA in vaccines for very good reason. Since DNA has been consistently found in these new mRNA shot vials at hundreds of times the safe limit and, the nano-technology in the shot specifically transports this material into human cells - I ask the question;
Are the public health authorities wrong about setting a safe limit, or is the sciencey bloke Remery quoted dangerously ignorant of the health regulations?
All of a sudden i feel like eating vegetables and going to school brother but bruce willises the 5th envelope is playing on the khmer rouge park mans phone
?si=sfcUvA1QYCNw-kG- he says if i finish watching it with him he can make me youtube famous like peaceNlove
The role of conspiracy mentality in denial of science and susceptibility to viral deception about science
Asheley R Landrum, Alex Olshansky
Politics and the Life Sciences 38 (2), 193-209, 2019
"Members of the public can disagree with scientists in at least two ways: people can reject well-established scientific theories and they can believe fabricated, deceptive claims about science to be true. Scholars examining the reasons for these disagreements find that some individuals are more likely than others to diverge from scientists because of individual factors such as their science literacy, political ideology, and religiosity. This study builds on this literature by examining the role of conspiracy mentality in these two phenomena. Participants were recruited from a national online panel (N = 513) and in person from the first annual Flat Earth International Conference (N = 21). We found that conspiracy mentality and science literacy both play important roles in believing viral and deceptive claims about science, but evidence for the importance of conspiracy mentality in the rejection of science is much more mixed.
www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/role-of-conspiracy-mentality-in-denial-of-science-and-susceptibility-to-viral-deception-about-science/943F0F58B7A2864A0E3121A2C9EE8174#
Peace and Love.
I'm sorry mate, back in the late 60s early 70s, there was a big movement in that direction, but that vibe seems to have disappeared under the "greed is good" attack.
The main problem is of course humans!
We evolved in a tribal situation, where the rule of the jungle was in full swing.
We have yet to evolve out of some of that conditioning.
There will always be those that strive for superiority in Power and wealth.
The will be the odd one amongst them that has no morals or conscience, and will manipulate and use others to their advantage.
So we get people like Putin, Trump and very many others. Plus the various "religious factions" vying among them selves for superiority.
Peace and love just isn't going to become universal under these conditions.
The only thing you can do is try to be the best you can yourself.
The only hope you have of changing others is by example.
Rants on seabreeze probably has more of a negative effect than a positive one.
Just realise, the desire to win an argument is only ego on your part. The only way to peace is just to walk away from conflict.
