Connect with us

Alternative News

NASA Says Antarctica Is Gaining More Ice Than It’s Losing & Here’s Why It’s Confusing

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

According to a new study that was recently published by NASA, Antarctica is actually gaining more ice than it has lost. NASA made the announcement after their satellites examined the heights of the region’s ice sheet, and the findings are contradicting the claim (with more than decades of research behind it) that Antarctica has been losing ice and that this loss is and has contributed to a rising global sea level.

advertisement - learn more

 The paper is titled “Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses,” and was published in the Journal of Glaciology last Friday. (source)

--> Read: A rare mineral can remove harmful toxins & heavy metals with just 30 seconds a day. Click here to learn more.

The authors of the study, from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, the University of Maryland and Sigma Space Corporation, analyzed satellite data showing that Antarctica has actually gained 112 billion tons of ice annually from 1992 to 2001 and it’s been increasing ever since.

Again, these findings are completely contradicting previous research that’s been conducted by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which suggests that Antarctica’s ice sheets are melting and causing the sea level rise, thus contributing to global climate change.

According to Jay Zwally, lead author of the paper and NASA glaciologist:

“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away…But this is also bad news…if the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”  (source)

advertisement - learn more

Many scientists (not all) believe that certain parts of Antarctica, like the peninsula and parts of Western Antarctica are losing ice, and that the rate of ice lost is increasing. On the eastern part of the continent, however, there have been ice gains, and that includes part of the interior as well. Scientists are now pointing to the fact that these gains are far greater than the losses we’ve been seeing in the rest of the region. As a result, the net gain  would, again, mean that Antarctica is actually not contributing to see level rise, which begs the question in the quote above, where else could it be coming from? This means that scientists are underestimating the impact from other sources of sea level rise, like the heating of the oceans or the melting that’s occurring in Greenland perhaps?

With that being said, Zwally also mentioned that:

“If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years—I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.” (source)

The paper did mention some limitations, for example, the difficulties associated with measuring the height of ice in Antarctica, new technology is needed to perform the task better. According to RT news, the US space agency is currently developing a new satellite that’s more capable of accurately measuring long-term changes in ice in Antarctica.

It’s also interesting to note that Arctic ice extent (we are constantly hearing about the melting of ice in the Arctic) makes up only 10 percent of the world’s total ice extent. When it comes to the ice extent of Antarctica (ice examined in this study), this makes up for 90 percent of the world’s ice extent. Three years ago, Data from the university of Illinois Polar Research Group showed that Antarctic sea ice extent reached an all time high. It was the second largest extent logged at any time dating back to 1979, when record keeping first began.  (source)(source)(source)

Possible explanations for the rise in ice extent include what’s known as the Polar Vortex. A study published in the Journal of Climate by Jinlun Zhang, a University of Washington scientist reports that:

“The polar vortex that swirls around the South Pole is not just stronger than it was when satellite records began in the 1970s, it has more convergence, meaning it shoves the sea ice together to cause ridging. Stronger winds also drive ice faster, which leads to still more deformation and ridging. This creates thicker, longer-lasting ice, while exposing surrounding water and thin ice to the blistering cold winds that cause more ice growth.” (source)

Other explanations include that the recovery of the stratospheric ozone layer may be slowing and delaying Antarctic warming and ice melt. Studies out of NASA have suggested that the oceans are warming and that this is melting the ice from underneath, therefore we can’t see it yet. Several possible explanations have been hypothesized but no one has really figured out why this is happening.

Other Factors To Consider About Climate Change

Climate change is indeed happening, and in my opinion there is absolutely no doubt about that. Sure, human impact has destroyed our environment at a rapid pace, and our actions have no doubt influenced our ecosystem, atmosphere and beyond in harmful ways that we are probably not even aware of yet. Given that, it’s important to remember that we know very little about Earth’s climate. We have to look beyond human impact and factor in natural cycles, and other factors when we are pondering the catalysts for climate change. With that being said, the time for us to move on from our archaic ways of generating energy for example are long overdue. These, and several other factors, are indeed contributing to the destruction of our planet.

One of these factors is the sun:

“The fluctuations in the solar cycle impacts earth’s global temperature, which becomes slightly hotter during solar maximums and cooler during solar minimums” – Thomas Woods, University of Colorado in Boulder (source)

Scientists have learned that about 1,361 watts per square meter of solar energy reaches Earth’s outermost atmosphere during the sun’s quietest periods. But when the sun is active, 1.3 watts per square meter more energy reaches Earth. This measurement is extremely important to climate models that are trying to access Earth based forces on climate change.

Massive bodies flying in and around our solar system also have an effect on the whether of all the planets in our solar system. It’s well documented that solar activity has a direct effect on weather here on Earth, and that comet activity has a direct effect on solar weather. (source)(source)(source)

Research results presented at the 2012 Fall American Geophysical Union illustrated that comets help highlight the intensely dynamic environment of the sun’s atmosphere. As a result they have a direct effect on the weather of all the planets in our solar system, and the Earth’s own magnetic field. (source)

Union Of Concerned Scientists  outlines that over the time-scale of millions of years the change in solar intensity is a critical influence on climate, however:

“Changes in solar heating rate over the last century cannot account for the magnitude and distribution of the rise in global mean temperature during that time period and there is no convincing evidence for significant indirect influences on our climate due to twentieth century changes in solar output.” (source)

Who Is Suggesting That Humans Are Not Contributing To Climate Change?

The past few years have been quite controversial when it comes to the topic of climate change. Although it’s rare to find those who say climate change isn’t happening, it’s not rare to find credible scientists suggesting that the human impact on global climate change isn’t as big as it’s ‘marketed’ to be. The climate is changing, no doubt about that, but is human impact really the leading cause of global climate change? And with the study highlighted in this article, it just adds more confusion to the topic.

Hundreds of world renowned scientists believe there is some shady business going on. For example, Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish climatologist, former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg and winner of the 51st IMO Prize of the World Meteorological Organization for his pioneering work in numerical weather prediction, and four of the world’s top climate scientists recently had their research rejected for suggesting that the climate might be less sensitive to greenhouse gases than had been claimed by the IPCC.

According to him:

“The problem we have now in the scientific community is that some scientists are mixing up their scientific role with that of climate activist. It is an indication of how science is gradually being influenced by political views. I am worried about the gradual influence of political views on science. Policy decisions need to be based on solid fact. The reality hasn’t been keeping up with the computer models.” (source)

Bengtsson is one of many examples. Not long ago, NASA was blasted by approximately 50 of their own personnel regarding their global warming stance. (source)(source)

There is also more interesting research like the fairly recent report by Principia Scientific International’s (PSI) Martin Mlynczak alongside NASA tracked infrared emissions from the Earth’s upper atmosphere during and following a solar storm last March. They found that the vast majority of energy released from the sun during this coronal mass ejection was reflected back up into space rather than deposited into Earth’s lower atmosphere.  The result of this was an overall cooling effect because carbon dioxide and nitric oxide (greenhouse gases) were reflecting heat energy rather than absorbing it. This study suggests carbon dioxide is in fact cooling the atmosphere.(source)

There is also what’s known as the Vostok data, this refers to an ice core sample that was obtained by drilling down into the ice above Lake Vostok to a depth of 3623m. The graph built from the Vostok ice core data shows us the relationship between CO2 in the atmosphere and global temperature. The Vostok data showed that CO2 increases lag behind temperature increases by about 800 years. According to this study, CO2 may not the cause of our current increased temperatures.

All of the science on both sides has led to a ‘people bashing people’ campaign. One in which those who say the human impact on climate change is not as big as we thought are conspiracy theorists, and those who say human impact is the number one cause of climate change are also conspiracy theorists, one being false and used to promote a specific agenda.

International Business Times points out that the effects of climate change are irreversible. Sea levels have been rising at a greater rate year after year, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates they could rise by another meter or more by the end of this century. As National Geographicshowed us in 2013, sea levels would rise by 216 feet if all the land ice on the planet were to melt. This would dramatically reshape the continents and drown many of the world’s major cities.

Here is a video they published showing what the earth would look like if all the ice melted.

Personally, after looking at all of the data I’ve looked at, it’s clear to me that we are going through, and have been going through drastic climate change, and there is a lot of data that shows without a doubt that the climate change is real. As far as the level of impact humans have had on it, and whether greenhouse gases do contribute to climate change as much as the mainstream thinks they do, I’m still confused, and my next point just adds to my confusion.

I’d like to make it clear, again, that I am not denying climate change, and the way we are doing things here on our planet is clearly destroying our environment and our atmosphere, which does (I believe) have an effect on climate. How large that affect is, again, I’m not so sure, but as far as destroying our environment and polluting our world (which also contributes to climate change), it’s time to implement the solutions we’ve had for years and go above and beyond all the Red Tape that prevents us from implementing them.

Why Has Everybody Been Talking About Climate Change Without Mentioning This?

If all of this research has been evaluating human impact on global climate change, why is nobody creating awareness about factory farming? Did you know that in 2006, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization issued a report stating that the livestock business generates more greenhouse gas emissions than all forms of transportation combined? Did you know that 51 percent (or more) of global greenhouse-gas emissions are caused by animal agriculture? (source) (source)(source)(source)

You can find out more about this from an article we titled “Disturbing Aerial Photos Show What Killing Billions of Animals For Meat Is Doing To The Environment.”

If you’re concerned about the climate, focusing on your eating habits is one of the biggest ways you can help.

Credit: Thanks to Deborah Zabarenko from Reuters for the picture.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

UFOs: More Advanced Intelligent Life Could Exist Right Here On Earth

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 7 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The UFO phenomenon may not only be indicative of extraterrestrial life, but perhaps intelligent life from here on our planet, perhams in other realms or dimensions that are not always perceivable to our senses.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is the UFO phenomenon receiving extreme amounts of legitimacy within the mainstream after years of ridicule?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), now commonly known as Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAPs) have become a big topic of discussion within the mainstream as of late. We are talking about objects that have been photographed, videotaped, tracked on radar, and seen by high ranking military personnel as well as civilians on the ground and in air-craft. These objects perform maneuvers and travel at speeds no known man made piece of machinery can. They truly defy our understanding of aerodynamics and, and in some cases, physics.

The next discussion to arise is, are those manning these craft human or something else?

Based on my years of research, just as there was strong evidence for the existence of these objects decades ago when they were deemed a conspiracy theory, there is strong evidence now, and in my opinion, there is evidence these objects are not human made.

As far as credible sources that support this idea, Colonel Robert Friend, in his very last interview before his death, who was a director of Project Blue Book from 1958-1962, suggested that the U.S. Air Force knew what these objects were even at that time. The former director of the Pentagon’s UFO program, Lue Elizondo, recently gave an interview to the NY Post saying that he had a meeting with a very senior Department of Defense official who mentioned he knew the craft were not of human origin as well. Former Air Force Colonel Ross Dedrickson also claimed to have information that these objects were not human made, and from what he knew, the beings are benevolent, concerned about the well being of our planet.

I recognize not all people will consider these sources ‘credible evidence.’

Beyond these testimonies are things like documented cases of sightings or “contact” experiences. According to these cases, people report both benevolent and malevolent experiences, often linked to the UFO phenomenon.

So, if they are not human, what are they? The obvious truth is, we don’t know, but there’s no harm in speculating.

Are They From Here?

Plato once said, as documented in Phaedo:

And upon the Earth are animals and men, some in a middle region, others (elementals) dwelling about the air as we dwell about the sea; others in islands which the air flows round, near the continent; and in a word, the air is used by them as the water and the sea are by us, and the ether is to them what the air is to us.

The truth is, much of our “reality” isn’t even perceivable to our human senses. We can only see within a tiny frequency of the entire visible light spectrum. We have to use special equipment like infrared telescopes and more to see things that we otherwise couldn’t. Quantum mechanics and the emergence of post-material science has shown us that there are “invisible” parts of what we perceive to be our physical and material world that make up the vast majority of it. Some, like Plato, referred to this as the ether, or aether. Who is to say that life does not dwell in these realms? They exist all around us, perhaps some of these objects originate from there – or as you might say, right here on Earth.

Another interesting quote from ancient philosophy:

“And they allowed Apollonius to ask questions; and he asked them of what they thought the cosmos was composed; but they replied; “Of elements.” “Are there then four?” he asked. “Not four,” said Larchas,  “but five.” “And how can there be a fifth,” said Apollonius, “alongside of water and air and earth and fire?” “There is the ether,” replied the other, “which we must regard as the stuff of which gods are made; for just as all mortal creatures inhale the wire, so do immortal and divine natures inhale the ether.” “Am I,” said Appollonius, “to regard the universe as a living creature?” “Yes,” said the other. – The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Philostratus, 220AD (source)

Even Rene Descartes proposed the theory that “space,” (what we perceive as empty space) is completely filled with matter in various states. There is evidence to suggest he was executed by the Church because his science entered into the realm of metaphysics.

Many ancient cultures have stories and texts which refer to ‘magical’ and ‘mythical’ lands that co-exist alongside our reality. Whether these places are actual physical places, or places that reside in ‘another dimension,’ for lack of a better term, has been the subject of great discussion within various material throughout the ages. These stories can be found in ancient Buddhism and Vedic philosophy, along with oral stories passed down from Native cultures throughout the world.

According to Paracelsus, a German-Swiss physician and alchemist (like Issac Newton) who established the role of chemistry in medicine, in his Philosophia Occulta, translated by Franz Hartmann: 

“Man lives in the exterior elements and the Elementals live in the interior elements. The latter have dwellings and clothing, manners and customs, languages and governments of their own, in the same sense as the bees have their queens and herds of animals their leaders.” The Secret Teachings of All Ages, An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy, 1928, Manly P. Hall

What’s also interesting is that these objects are commonly observed entering or exiting our oceans. Sometimes when they “fly away” they don’t appear to fly away, but rather dematerialize. In other cases they are observed “taking off” at tremendous speeds.

The point is, there could be a number of different explanations, and chances are not all objects originate from the same source. It truly calls into question what we think we know about the nature of reality. And I feel we’re at an important time to question this curiously. Recall that there was a time when scientists, like Galileo, were condemned for the discoveries that they made and ideas they presented. Are we really any different today? How open are or minds to concepts of reality that don’t fit within the current framework of accepted knowledge?

One thought I’ve often had is that it can feel concerning to that topics like UFOs have to be presented in mainstream media before most will see it as legitimate. Footage has to be verified by the Pentagon, as it recently was, for the masses to realize that these objects are indeed real. Less than a decade ago the evidence for the existence of these objects was already very strong.  Yet we have to be told by government or mainstream media before the general populace can see it as real?

Does this highlight just how reliant humanity has become on these sources for information? What are the implications of that? As with so many geopolitical issues, it’s hard to trust mainstream media, or government for that matter, to get an accurate depiction of what’s really happening. This is why I am concerned that so many people rely on these sources when it comes to an honest depiction of the UFO phenomenon. Perhaps this phenomenon is one that requires a citizens initiative as well?

One thing to look out for with critical thinking is the US government’s suspicion that these objects are Russian or Chinese in origin. I believe this narrative is an effective to heighten the national security state, for no legitimate reason, while simultaneously controlling the extraterrestrial and/or other life hypothesis that goes with this phenomenon.

Perhaps they will paint these objects as a threat, even though the vast majority of the time these objects perform evasive maneuvers to avoid our own aircraft. We seem to be the ones chasing them.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Are Lockdowns Affecting Children?

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 2 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    We spoke to activist and mother Stephanie Sibbio about her co-creation of an organization called 100 Million Moms which seeks to empower women to stand up against injustices.

  • Reflect On:

    Are we choosing virus mitigation methods that are short sighted and harmful over the long term? Are they more harmful than the virus itself?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

The potential downsides of lockdowns during pandemics have been explored quite a bit – and the truth is the scientific community is quite divided on whether it’s the right move. On one hand a case can be made for effectiveness of lockdowns, but at quite a cost, while on the other hand many have shown lockdowns to be ineffective in slowing spread. How a study is organized and conducted can also dramatically change results.

Interestingly a study in Nature showed that “less disruptive and costly NPIs can be as effective as more intrusive, drastic, ones (for example, a national lockdown).” This essentially states that governments could choose effective ways to mitigate virus spread effectively without inducing unwanted and long term side effects on society as a whole via lockdowns – regardless, lockdowns are still widely being used.

One question we might have is, what about factors that are not so easy to measure right away? Things like long term psychological damage of being constantly stressed, out of touch with community and friends, and confined to our homes. What affects are children experiencing in their development and learning? We may not know exactly for quite some time.

I felt inspired to speak to a mother who has not only be asking this question with regards to her child, but who has decided to do something to push back against government measures, like lockdowns, that many citizens and scientist don’t agree with.

Along with another activist, Stephanie Sibbio created a movement called 100 Million Moms who, as their Instagram states, are a rights-based movement empowering moms all over the world to stand up against injustice. We advocate for natural health & medical freedom.

I spoke to Stephanie about how she has seen lockdowns affecting children, and her story in co-creating 100 Million Moms. In this discussion you will learn how you can get involved as well.

Further Discussion

A large meta analysis on mask wearing has shown that children are having physiological issues and learning challenges with prolonged mask wearing.

A group of doctors did a panel worth considering that discusses the potential harms of lockdowns and the science that supports the idea.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Yankee Stadium & Citi Field To Seat Fans In Vaccinated & Unvaccinated Sections

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 6 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Fully vaccinated spectators will also be able to attend Yankees and Mets games in sections designated for 100% capacity starting this month. Unvaccinated people will have to sit in a separate section and maintain social distancing.

  • Reflect On:

    How safe and effective is the vaccine? Is mass vaccination justified? Are mandatory measures like this scientifically sound and justified? If so, why censor so many doctors and scientists who say otherwise? What's really going on here?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has announced that Mets and Yankees games will allow full capacity in some areas of their ballparks. Starting May 19th, both fields will have separate sections set aside for those who are vaccinated and those who are not. In the vaccinated sections, social distancing restrictions will be no more, however fans will be required to wear a mask. Full capacity seating will be available for vaccinated people while 33 percent of seats will be available to the unvaccinated but they will have to social distance. In the future, tickets will be marked vaccinated or unvaccinated.

Why This Is Important: We are creeping into a world that seems to be pushing hard for the loss of certain rights and freedoms for people who choose not to be vaccinated for COVID. It’s still uncertain how things will rollout, but many countries are already starting to implement, or have announced that they will implement vaccine passports, like Canada for example.

It’s still unclear whether or not the unvaccinated will have the option to travel to certain places, and if they are allowed, it seems they will most likely be subjected to test requirements and/or a mandatory quarantining period.

Scientists and doctors who oppose these measures, as well as oppose lockdowns and mandatory mask measures, have been ignored, ridiculed and in many cases censored during this pandemic, no matter how much research and evidence they present. Scientific critique seems to have been halted, and any discussion that discourages or points out scientific flaws in the mandatory measures that are being put in place is not allowed on big tech platforms like social meida. Furthermore, mainstream media has gone so far as to call anything that opposes the mainstream narrative a “conspiracy theory.”

 An article in The Spectator provides one of countless examples of how important discussion is being shut down:

This week representatives from Facebook and Twitter were brought before parliament to discuss their firms’ censorship of discussion around Covid. Two particularly pertinent cases were raised — though there are many more. The first was a statement by Martin Kulldorff, a professor at the Harvard Medical School and one of the key authors of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration. His tweet last month, suggesting that not everyone needed to be vaccinated, particularly those who had previously been infected, was labelled ‘misleading’ by Twitter. Tweeters were rendered unable to interact with it and were instructed that ‘health officials recommend a vaccine for most people’. Similarly, in November, Facebook labelled a Spectator article on the efficacy of masks, penned by Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson of Oxford University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, as ‘false information’.

Here we have two social-media giants effectively intervening in scientific debate. Kulldorff, Heneghan and Jefferson are not snarling conspiracy theorists or bluffers wading into things they don’t understand. They are dissenting scientists and medics who hold positions at esteemed institutions. On what basis could Facebook or Twitter simply declare their arguments null and void?

The point is, many people do not agree with the mainstream narrative around COVID that is being force fed to the public. There is a lot of evidence out there supporting the idea that those who want to get vaccinated should, and those who don’t shouldn’t be required to, and that vaccinated individuals who are not susceptible and vulnerable to COVID may not make much of a difference when it comes to the transmission of the virus. This perspective is, according to many, completely false, ridiculous and has no backing when in fact, that’s not true at all.

I recently published an article going into detail as to why so many people are hesitant to get vaccinated. You can access that here.

Whether the COVID-19 vaccine will be effective is something we’ll know in time. A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years. (source) Given COVID appears to be a fast changing virus, this may be something to consider.

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors claim that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” This is one of multiple reasons why so many suggest voluntary choice as opposed to vaccine mandates.

Further, many experts in the field have argued that the clinical trials for COVID vaccines did not actually show a 95% efficacy rate.

Below is a screen shot from a presentation by Viral immunologist, Professor at the University of Guelph, and vaccine expert Dr. Bryan Bridle, who has explained several concerns regarding the rollout of COVID vaccines. You can read more about that in detail here.

 

Final thoughts: People are extremely polarized in their beliefs right now, so much so that even talking about this subject is hard to do with family and friends who have an opposite point of view. Sometimes I wonder if those who support mandating vaccines for schools, sporting events, travel and more would support mandatory vaccines for going outside.

Is it strange to imagine that one day large support could gather for isolating the unvaccinated in lockdown facilities for life? I doubt that would happen, but how far can mandates be pushed and supported by the people? This is why it’s important to look at and consider evidence that contradicts what you believe in.

At the end of the day, more important than being right and wrong is to see from the perspective of another and be able to understand why they have come to the conclusions they have. In many cases, it is in fact based on evidence. When things are so controversial and are not as black and white as mainstream media makes them out to be, should freedom of choice not always remain? Why is one perspective being heard and marketed to the masses, while the other is being completely ridiculed and censored? What is going on here?

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!