Connect with us

Opinion

Does The CDC Have Evidence To Support Their Statement “Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism?”

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    In a recent lawsuit, the CDC admitted in federal court that they have no studies, evidence or science proving that vaccines don't cause autism.

  • Reflect On:

    Why did they lie for years about this? Why did they conduct a massive media campaign shaming those that questioned vaccines? Why did they invent the term 'anti-vaxxer' to put people who question vaccines in a negative light?

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.

This is truly a bombshell story when you understand the full implications of it, yet major media likely will not touch it. Independent media organizations like CE are left to have to tell these stories, and at the same time risk more demonetization for telling the truth that the public should know. Of course, we also know that since independent media’s reach has been cut, getting stories like this out is very hard and relies on you, the dear reader, to spread the word.

advertisement - learn more

As of March 2nd, 2020, the CDC provides documents in federal court that show they do not have evidence to support the claim that vaccines given to babies up to 6 months don’t cause autism. For years they claimed that the studies had been done, the evidence was clear, and that there was a consensus: “vaccines don’t cause autism.” Yet, this misleading when it comes to all vaccines. It appears the CDC only believes this for specific vaccines since they all they could supply data for.

--> Become A CE Member: The only thing that keeps our journalism going is YOU. CE members get access to exclusive benefits and support our shared mission.. Click here to learn more!

An organization called the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) was instrumental in bringing forth this admission. As they stated in their own press release:

In summer 2019, ICAN submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the CDC requesting “All studies relied upon by CDC to claim that the DTaP vaccine does not cause autism.”  ICAN also submitted this same request for HepB, Hib, PCV13 and IPV, as well as requesting the CDC provide studies to support the cumulative exposure to these vaccines during the first six months of life do not cause autism. Despite months of demands, the CDC failed to produce a single specific study in response to these FOIA requests. ICAN was therefore forced to sue the CDC in federal court, where the CDC finally conceded, in a stipulation signed by a Federal court judge, that that it has no studies to support that any of these vaccines do not cause autism.

ICAN’s strategy was to focus on vaccines given within the first 6 months of a baby’s life as per the standard schedule as this is when autism can start to be diagnosed. It should further be reiterated that ICAN asked for studies to show that the cumulative exposure to these vaccines, i.e. how they react together in the body, does not lead to autism.

In short, the CDC provided a list of 20 studies that were to claim these vaccines did not cause autism, only, none of these studies proved that. Within the list of 20, the CDC provided 18 studies that had nothing to do with the vaccines ICAN was focusing on. This either means that the CDC does not have any studies, or they do not want to provide them. The other two studies were interesting. One was a review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which was paid for by the CDC. This study performed a comprehensive review of studies relating to the DTaP vaccine. It was looking to determine general adverse reactions to vaccines including whether or not vaccines do or do not cause autism. The IOM was unable to identify a single study to support that DTaP does not cause autism.

advertisement - learn more

They concluded:

“Conclusion 10.6: The evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between diphtheria toxoid-, tetanus toxoid-, or acellular pertussis-containing vaccine and autism.”

What this means is that the CDC does not have studies that show there is no link between these vaccines and autism, thus the CDC cannot make the claim that vaccines don’t cause autism. This, of course, doesn’t mean they are saying vaccines do cause autism.

The last of the remaining two studies focused on antigens found in vaccines. This is the bacteria or virus used in the vaccines. The question was if there is more virus or more bacteria, would it increase the risk of autism? The study concluded that it made no difference how much bacteria or virus was used. Further, in the conclusion of the study they admitted that the study doesn’t prove that vaccines don’t cause autism.

“It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposure in infancy, inicluding vaccines; however, we found no association between exposure to antigens from vaccinees during infancy and the development of ASD withh regression.”

Ultimately, the CDC was asked to provide studies to prove that vaccines given with the first six months of life do not cause autism. But it appears they did not provide anything to suffice this.

So how does the CDC make this claim on their website as you can see in the image below?

They make that misleading claim with little evidence. While they do have a couple of studies to show that certain vaccines are not linked to autism, they do not have this for all, not for the cumulative effects of many vaccines given. Therefore, the CDC’s statement is simply a statement. Even if they have evidence that the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism, it doesn’t mean other vaccines don’t.

Those that questioned vaccines have been called anti-vaxxers, unscientific and extreme about their views, yet were they wrong to claim that vaccines may cause autism? Were they wrong to question the safety of vaccines? Sure, this does not prove that vaccines do cause autism, but that’s not the point. The point is instead of doing the proper research and ensuring the public vaccines are safe, the CDC has been misleading people about what information they do have about all vaccines.

“We Don’t Know”

One could argue that if the CDC was being responsible and honest they would have said “we don’t know” when it comes to whether or not vaccines are linked to autism. This is in fact the correct response to the question “do vaccines cause autism?” This has been the correct response since many years ago when people began asking the question. Instead, the CDC elected to claim that the science shows vaccines don’t cause autism, which was unscientific and dishonest.

The detail that hits close to home for us here at CE is that fact-checkers have been handing out false claims about our vaccine content, stating that “vaccines don’t cause autism.” This has led to a reduction in our reach and the near-complete destruction of our business due to demonetization. Yet, where did these fact-checkers get their information from? The CDC? And now we know, the CDC never had the evidence to make the claims they made about all vaccines, and the fact-checkers were in fact wrong or truly misinformed. These false claims from the CDC have also effectively led to creating a culture of blind vaccine acceptance even though there is no evidence they are safe.

This leads to the challenge not many are realizing about fact-checking organizations like Snopes, or the ones that work on Facebook; what they do, is turn to major organizations and the government to get their ‘facts.’ And those facts overrule anything brought forth that challenges those ‘facts.’ So essentially fact-checkers are merely purveyors of facts produced by governments and major corporations. Some also happen to be paid by major corporations.

“The most recent data from CDC shows that 1 in 36 children born this year in the USA will develop autism,[…] This is a true epidemic. If the CDC had spent the same resources studying vaccines and autism, as it did waging a media campaign against parents that claim vaccines caused their child’s autism, the world would be a better place for everyone.”

The CDC complains that those raising concerns about vaccine safety are unscientific and misinformed,” […]“But when we asked the CDC for studies to support its claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism,’ it is clear that their claim is not grounded in science.” – Del Bigtree, Founder of ICAN

What fact checkers left out of their criticism of this article was that this study only referred to the MMR vaccine, which ICAN did not even ask about. Also, fact checkers pointed to a study that actually concludes that vaccines cannot be ruled out in the onset of childhood autism.

“It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposures in infancy, including vaccines; however, we found no association between exposure to antigens from vaccines during infancy and the development of ASD with regression.”

One thing you will also notice is that fact-checkers never address the studies provided that do link vaccines to autism. Instead, only studies from experts they deem worthy are to be taken seriously. There is an abundance of science showing that vaccines could be linked to autism, in many different ways. Take aluminum for example, A study published in 2018 discovered high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism:

Human exposure to aluminium has been implicated in ASD with conclusions being equivocal [7][8][9][10]. To-date the majority of studies have used hair as their indicator of human exposure to aluminium while aluminium in blood and urine have also been used to a much more limited extent. Paediatric vaccines that include an aluminium adjuvant are an indirect measure of infant exposure to aluminium and their burgeoning use has been directly correlated with increasing prevalence of ASD [11]. Animal models of ASD continue to support a connection with aluminium and to aluminium adjuvants used in human vaccinations in particular [12].

The fact that aluminum in adjuvant form does not exit the body as aluminum in our own food, for example, is one of multiple ways that scientists have shown how vaccines could be implicated in the onset of autism. You can read more about vaccines and aluminum specifically, here.

The Takeaway

This is not the first time in history that major health organizations, scientists and doctors claimed that something was safe when it wasn’t. Look at cigarettes, agent orange, and DDT. These were just a few that became common knowledge after many people brought awareness forward about the dangers associated with these products. All the while, the companies who owned them, and their cronies fought to claim these people were unscientific, liars and wrong.

Are we seeing this now with vaccines? It sure seems to be following the same pattern. One thing I always look at is if major organizations cannot answer the simple question, and instead turn to ridicule, name-calling and media campaigns to cast doubt, then you know they are hiding something. In my feeling, the CDC knows full well the dangers of vaccines, and they are buying time to figure out how to keep themselves clean for when the cards fall. Because they will.

This, of course, is all part of a greater awakening that is taking place amongst humanity right now as we collectively move from a state of childhood into adulthood. Empowering ourselves as individuals, changing our relationship with the earth, each other, and ourselves. Shifting the way we idolize and put money above everything else. Of course, seeing past the deceptions of today is an early step in this evolution of consciousness. I outline all of this in my 4 part video series about these ongoing changes.

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

Opinion

The End Goal Of All True Freedom Movements Must Be Unity

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read

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 deception, the manipulation, and the injustices that have long been perpetrated by the ‘socioeconomic elite’ are quickly coming to light in public perception. The ‘Pandemic’ and all of its restrictive measures are, in my opinion just part of a larger agenda to create a global technocratic surveillance state to permanently enslave us.

But all of this activity has started to awaken a sleeping giant. The mind of this giant is nothing less than the collective consciousness of humanity. Whether this giant will awaken in time, or at all, remains to be seen. In a free will universe, nothing is guaranteed. It’s a challenging game, but that’s why we all came here to play it.

A Call to Action

Many individuals have emerged as leaders, often when their personal ‘line in the sand’ has been crossed and has compelled them to take some form of action. Some leaders are modeling freedom in their everyday lives, some have formed groups to challenge regulations in public, some have taken to the courts or even bypassed them to invoke Natural/Common Law, some are researching and proliferating the truth in the face of increasing mainstream propaganda and social media censorship.

There is no need to debate what is the ‘best’ strategy or point of focus. Everybody has a role to play here. Each leader that is truly following their conscience inherently believes that their course of action is the best, and that is as it should be. What is paramount is that we see where all our roads intersect, and create a unified field of energy around that.

Any action that an individual takes to to truly free themselves is an action that seeks the liberation of all of humanity. The quest for freedom is grounded in TRUTH, motivated by LOVE resulting in a spirit of UNITY. The quest for freedom only for oneself or one’s tribe is actually a quest for CONTROL, grounded in DECEPTION, motivated by FEAR resulting in a spirit of DIVISION.

The latter is the modus operandi of the ruling class. Their quest for ‘freedom’ is actually just a desire for extreme self-enrichment that necessarily enslaves the majority of humanity. Their motivation is something that we, as imperfect human beings, have to admit we have some familiarity with.

So then it is important for all of us, especially those of us who would lead the quest for human freedom, to take the time to look inside, on an ongoing basis, and reflect on whether or not some parts of us still have a need for control, and whether some of our words and actions are inadvertently creating a spirit of division.

Leaders Unity Affirmation

In order to help these efforts of self-reflection, I have created a ‘Leaders Unity Affirmation,’ a 10-minute guided affirmation that is available for those who would stand for human freedom.

I will be contacting leaders of the current freedom movements to see if some of them would like to come together virtually to create a powerful field of unified energy through this affirmation. Anyone who would like to be alerted to such an event can email me at daocoaching.awakening@gmail.com.

All are welcome. This affirmation is not only for ‘leaders’ but also for ‘followers,’ and I use those terms very judiciously because I truly believe each individual has to act as a leader, insofar as each individual in any freedom movement is equal, has a voice and a perspective, and needs make sure their group’s activities resonate with them on an energetic level. Individuals within the group are responsible for having a conversation with their leader when they feel that leader may be creating division. (This kind of dialogue is explored in depth in my book Parables for the New Conversation). We have to guide our leaders even as they are tasked with guiding us.

Go With the Flow

Of course some leaders may pay no heed to the insights of their followers, and there is no problem there. Eventually, each person will naturally gravitate over to other individuals and groups that they resonate more with. The energy of unity attracts like energy, as does the energy of division. In this natural and organic process, leaders will eventually learn what they are ready to learn, while followers will slowly gain more courage to step up and express themselves. As is spoken in the affirmation,

Ultimately leaders must be willing to follow.

Followers must be willing to lead.

That is how we will achieve unity.

We are in a very exciting time in human history. We are being presented with an opportunity to participate in the definitive awakening and liberation of humanity. If we all keep an eye on the bigger picture and focus on our common goal, we will indeed awaken the sleeping giant and have the power to create a better world at our collective fingertips.

This article was originally published on my website daocoaching.com

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

Opinion

Fact-Check Blog ‘HealthFeedback’ Is Punishing Balanced Journalism

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read

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.

It happened like it has happened many times before, we wonder why our Facebook reach is suddenly cut to virtually nothing only to find out another fact check has arrived. “What is it going to be this time?” We often ask. It’s become frustrating. We tirelessly spend time as journalists checking our facts, gathering different perspectives, seeking experts and putting it into a story. Then we’re told “you can’t say that.” But why?

In case you assume that we’re just upset and that the fact check was valid, let’s look at it and get this out of the way.

Iria Carballo-Carbajal one of the team members at Health Feedback has used her many years in academic training to strike down a piece we wrote discussing the claims of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche. In our piece, we focus on claims Bossche has made about the COVID-19 vaccines and his theory that the current vaccines could potentially create stronger variants. In the article we clearly lay out:

This is the hallmark of a well written and balanced journalistic piece. This is how you would be taught to write a piece that’s honest and transparent. Just because this is no longer common in journalism today, doesn’t mean it’s not how it should be done. So why was it fact checked by Iria Carballo-Carbajal? Did she even read the piece? Or did she just assume that it was ‘bad’ based on the title and shut it down? The fact check article she leads our audience to is not even about our article, it’s about other pieces of content that make different claims and that may not have been fully balanced. So why are we getting punished?

I can’t say we know. We have reached out to their team to get an answer from them as to how such a dishonest and defaming decision could have been made. We will certainly update you when we know more, but for now this story is yet another example of how over the last 5 years fact checking is only sometimes about checking facts, while other times it appears to be about stopping certain narratives from spreading. Typically, narratives that support establishment rules, decisions and products.

Is HealthFeedback more concerned with shutting down a topic than supporting honest journalism? Do they think readers can’t look at different perspectives in an article and inform themselves on the fact that yes, there are experts who have different opinions right now? How could trained scientists be operating so unscientifically?

As you can see below, we received a ‘partly false’ rating. But of course, as usual, there is no clarity on what is false because the fact check has nothing to do with our content and we have made it abundantly clear in the piece that Bossche’s claims may in fact be false.

Many have been losing trust and faith in our institutions, primarily because there is often a lack of transparency, honesty, and the fact that it responds to differing perspectives through force. Instead of listening, allowing scientific dialogue to occur, government, Big Tech and their armed fact checkers are literally shutting down journalism.

I debated writing this piece. I do not want to get further into the ‘bad books’ of fact checkers as they already seem to have a watchful eye on what we do and, at least in my perspective, are complicit in creating an incredibly unfair marketplace for journalism today that has absolutely crippled our business – I don’t want them to come after us even harder. But I feel that if I don’t say something people won’t know the type of stuff that we’re facing, the stuff that is affecting the information they see and the perspectives they have access to.

Decisions made by the general public are not as informed as they should be due to the overreaching power fact checkers have. We see this as a huge problem. Journalists are the ones there to help expose dishonesty in government and hold them accountable, that’s how it has always been. But now, those journalists aren’t allowed to speak, and long time journalists like those at NewsGuard have even joined in the fight against their own professions. Perhaps it’s because they see where culture is headed and they might as well join the side who has all the power – for now.

We are being pushed into manufactured echo chambers, not because people love them, but because speech is being silenced so aggressively that there is no way to have public discourse on important topics without having to go to the fringes to find a new perspectives. Unfortunately, mainstream perspective doesn’t live on the fringes to challenge alternative perspectives, and vice versa, so echo chambers emerge by nature.

In my view, these echo chambers are the result of an authoritarian mindset and culture that is arming fact checkers with way too much power, not realizing the long term damage they are causing.

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

Opinion

European Defence Industry Claims It Will Crack Down On UFO & ET Discussion

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 10 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The European Defense Industry & Space has claimed it will look to crack down on disinformation occurring online with regards to the UFO and ET phenomenon, following a rapidly growing culture of censorship.

  • Reflect On:

    Who will decide what is true and what's false about the UFO and ET phenomenon? Can we trust government, mainstream media and intelligence agencies who have misled people on these subjects for decades?

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.

In a recent tweet from the European Commission’s Defense Industry and Space (DEFIS), they claimed they will begin to crack down on online discussion relating to Flat Earth, UFOs, and Aliens as they feel there is disinformation permeating all sectors of our society when it comes to these subjects. They intend on working with the EU Digital Services Act to put a plan in place in the coming months.

Who knows what their plan will look like when it’s ready, but it falls in line with a rapidly building culture within government of taking mass control of narratives that are controversial and important to the general public. In the process, government and mainstream media seem to be the only ones allowed to have a voice anyone can hear.

At first glance, the move by DEFIS might seem a useful tactic, after all there is disinformation being spread about all of these topics. But who decides what is disinformation and what isn’t? What if information is in fact real and suddenly that content is ‘censored’ in the wide net that is cast to stop this apparent problem? How will the public even know what is being censored and what is not? Will this push control over who can talk about and disseminate ‘facts’ about these topics to mainstream media and government only?

Before we might jump into the idea that my questions above may come from a paranoid mind, let’s look at the facts.

There has been a long held veil of secrecy around the UFO subject for years. Governments deny realities that their own intelligence communities know are real. With the recent US Navy UFO videos that were released a couple of years ago, people began to realize that a subject long ridiculed was in fact heavily studied by governments, even as they pretended as if nothing was there. This caused a huge resurgence in a fascinating topic that deeply touches the very worldviews that inspire how we design and live our lives.

In 2017 when we all saw the US Navy footage released, did it not suggest that perhaps the US government had known about this phenomenon for decades? How long might government lie about other pieces of information related to the UFO topic before they come out saying it was true all along? Like they did in 2019, confirming the Navy footage was authentic.

Let’s take a quick look at the next obvious question people ask when thinking about a UFO sighting: “Who is manning that craft? A human? An ET? Is it remote controlled?”

That question brings up the next: what evidence do we have of ET bodies? With this we inevitably all know that there is no publicly available evidence that suggest beyond any reasonable doubt that an ET body exists, however, we have credible whistleblowers from institutions many often trust who have stated quite clearly that government knows about different ET species and even has ET bodies. Do we trust them? Can we be more open to this reality given their testimony? If not, why do we trust these types of credentialed people for COVID information but not ET information?

Which leads to even bigger questions: do we really lack the information to make informed decisions about the UFO and ET phenomenon? Or are we too busy protecting our existing worldview to take an honest and unbiased look?

Popular By Design?

I also want to point out that I’ve noticed an interesting phenomenon take place within media as it relates to controversial conversations and it makes me hypothesize whether there are ulterior motives involving social engineering at play. I’ll explain. But before I do, let me be clear, I don’t support the idea of censorship or the banning of free speech. I don’t believe certain people should be censored while others not.

It’s no secret that in recent years, many people have been losing trust in government and mainstream media due to a lack of transparency, obvious agendas, and consistent lies. People have no reason to fully trust these sources anymore, and so they have looked elsewhere with different perspectives. As a result, independent media has gained a lot more influence when it comes to informing public perception. You might imagine that those with a monopoly on information might not be too happy about this. Powerful and wealthy people who enjoy having the media outlets they bought to influence public perception would see a loss in their power as well.

When I think of things like the resurgence of the ‘flat earth’ discussion that began years ago on Reddit, YouTube, and other social media sites, I wonder how and why this random topic blows up in pop culture instead of fizzling out like so many other trends do.

With flat earth, people began adamantly claiming that beyond all reasonable doubt, the earth was flat, and this was the biggest secret kept from humanity. Huge YouTube channels popped up, documentaries were made about it, and major NBA and pop culture influencers were all on board.

I decided to look into it all  for a few days, and as an open minded person and journalist who spends a ton of time reading paranormal and supernatural research, the evidence and arguments for a flat earth were bad. I didn’t see any reason to take it seriously. This doesn’t mean I wouldn’t look at a new piece of evidence should someone provide one, but from having looked into the subject, there really isn’t anything there that is worth time in exploring further.

Is it possible that subjects like this are seeded out into the collective consciousness to see what people will pick up on? What they will believe? Perhaps an experiment by intelligence agencies who seem obsessed with sniffing habits, data, and culture through mass surveillance?

The resurgence of flat earth and the amount of clout it was getting in pop culture made me feel odd. Was it being placed into large conversations and given so much algorithmic power on social media so that a topic so obviously wrong can now be the focus of a pointing finger that says: “see, look what happens when people talk online, they believe crazy things.” I wasn’t incredibly convinced by my theory, but I was open to it. However it was further solidified when the Q phenomenon took over next.

The Q phenomenon, or as it’s known in the mainstream ‘Qanon,’ is based on the idea that a secret group of ‘patriots behind Donald Trump were working to pull off an intelligence operation to inform the public that Trump and team were poised to take down an evil cabal that ran the world. This subject was everywhere. Mainstream media covered it constantly, using it to show how everyone who believed in it were unhinged, crazy, conspiracy theorists who likely had sociopathic tendencies. It made its way into politics and was brought up in countless mainstream discussions leading into the 2020 US election. It became a clear cultural position: “if you believe in Qanon and the subjects related to it, you’re a dangerous and crazy conspiracy theorist.”

Once that was clear and in place, mainstream pundits and other pop culture voices began using “Qanon” to take down anyone who believed in discussing any other controversial subject. Vaccines, COVID, UFOs, Aliens, you name it – if you wanted to ask questions about these topics in a way that was not accepted in the mainstream, you might as well be one of those crazy “Qanon” people.

Then comes the discussion of evidence. For “Q” it was one of those you either believe or you don’t type conspiracies. But with so many of the other topics being systematically linked to Q, like vaccines or UFOs, does it matter if there is actual evidence to support the controversial conversations people are having? It would appear that it doesn’t, because the culture had made any of these subjects synonymous with the more extreme and unfounded views seen within Q enthusiasts.

Did the Q phenomenon become a useful tool for censorship? An opportunity to grab hold of every controversial narrative and say no one can talk about this except for trusted sources, or else look… crazy Qanon people will shoot up Capitol Hill if we don’t stop all of this madness.

Back in the summer of 2020 I wrote an essay called “Conspireality: Time for a Serious Conversation?” It’s purpose was to have a discussion about the fact that YES, conspiracy is real, it exists, and your government lies to you, we know this for a fact, but it doesn’t mean that EVERYTHING is a conspiracy. It also goes on to suggest that we have to be more discerning in critical in our thinking and exploration of these topics, as some information is flat out false and it takes away from the legitimate information that can be focused on to create change.

Further, it suggests that if we aren’t careful as a culture, big tech and governments will work to shut down any inquiry into these topics as too many are going about it in an unbalanced way, often with no evidence or fake evidence. It’s my feeling that this approach doesn’t help with meaningful progression and conversation, but actually pulls down all conversation around controversial topics.

So I asked, are people going about this information in that manner actually speeding up the censorship process? After all, much of what they post is indeed false.

I said, and still say, all of this with first hand experience. Having had our social media accounts shut down, demonetized, our website removed from Google news, all because we talk about subjects that sound like the ‘crazy Qanon people or flat earthers.’ It doesn’t matter that we go about these subjects in a credible, evidence based manner, we are guilty by association. This inevitably led me to ask: is it possible that powerful social engineers actually spent time focusing deeply on some of these extreme topics purposefully, to set up a call and need to take down that which was obviously false, and bring down all other ‘uncontrollable’ yet truth-filled conversations in the process?

I can’t help but see that these subjects acted as a magnet to suck all sound alike conversations into the abyss of censorship. And even as we watched it all happened, many of my colleagues criticized me for simply bringing forth the question: should we be thinking more critically about which conspiracies are real and which are not, and how we might go about having a more grounded conversation about it all so that mass culture doesn’t cancel ALL conversation?

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!