In relation to abuses of science, tailor-made corporate-sponsored pseudoscience has been used as a cover arm for profits that tie in with advancements of dictated political agendas.
Like the political agendas the shady science can be decided before any real scientific research begins.
Remember, however, no scientist, scientific, academic or related corporate institution or politician regardless of monied interests has a monopoly on truth. With this approach, how could integrity be maintained, using science for “ownership” by its scientific overlords, abusing their powers along the way?
-In light of this, not an exhaustive list, but here are 5 abuses of science used for power, profit and political gains.
There are 2 ways by which people wave, shape and mould their reality:
a) By going into agreement with the general consensus opinion of the masses (they can’t all be wrong…?) and
b) By also blindly accepting authority figures, especially so-called experts.
Care of political dictates and corporate sponsorship, media propaganda exploits this flawed reality construct by the masses to quote references from “experts” with their fraudulent or baseless scientific claims masquerading as “truth.” Many so-called experts have been forced to make these false claims or otherwise their research funding would run dry, or they would be shown the door should they dissent… Then there are those without scruples who are happy to be bought and paid off to disinform the masses with their abuses of science.
Could this category (and other categories to follow) be used to expose the fraudulent abuses of science used in the Green Agenda? Is the Green Agenda nothing more than a greed-driven con? There, at least, poses some challenging related questions.
Following on from 1, there are quite the number of unexplained claims considered by the masses to be true. Science as a religion with its “you must believe, believe, believe…” repeaters want the masses to blindly accept unexplained claims having no scientific backing, allowing those in high places to make those obscenely huge power, profit and political gains.
Examples include the unproven “germ theory” used to justify vaccines and vaccinations. Another example is the highly questionable claim that the COVID virus was present on physical cash so only digital transactions were allowed which ties in the push for the elite’s cashless society…
Another manipulation or illusion of scientific claim is the use of so-called science by opinion poll. For example, during the COVID heydays, I saw a newspaper clipping in the window of a convenience store showing an opinion poll claiming that 75% of people thought that masks should be worn. This had no validity because science is not about opinion poll, it’s only interested in facts. Did these people in support have any idea of the ineffectiveness or counter-productiveness of wearing masks? -See link referring to question 7.
In another opinion poll, is eco-alarmism indoctrination at work when the results showed that over 50% of teenagers consider it will be the end of the world during their lifetimes?
Above – Corporate in-house research claims Cereal had a greater nutritional value than beef. Abuses of science?
There are a number of cases where university scientific research is controlled and dictated by major corporate and government public relations offices. Research funding from these sources can be over 10 times the normal (highest bidder).
Take for instance nutrition research. This may be grossly misleading and biased favouring the corporation’s product: A corporate-sponsored published research paper claimed that its sugar laden diabetes threatening processed cereals Lucky Charms and Cheerios had a greater nutritional value than beef and eggs. Is this rating system grossly misleading? You decide. Article link here.
Corporate-sponsored pseudoscience has data manipulation down to a fine art to suit a favourable outcome. This includes:
a) Data Cherry Picking – Only selecting data that favours the desired outcome.
b) Selecting Groups – Similar to the above in that group subjects are deliberately selected, all with certain unannounced characteristic traits that will produce the desired experimental outcome.
c) Ignoring contradictions –
For example, during clinical trials Big Pharma has been known to ignore contradictory data: If a drug doesn’t’ work on animals they will conclude that it’s because an animal’s physiology is different to humans. -Thus, they claim that It will work on humans.
On the other hand, if the drug works on animals they will conclude that it works for humans. It will be concluded that humans basically have the same physiology as the animals selected for the trial. See below example:
d) Coverup; obscuring/withholding facts – Tobacco companies had known since the late 1940’s that cigarettes were linked to ill-health.
e) Bypassing – Which means deliberately avoiding science to allow profiteering. For example, COVID vaccines had bypassed the need for FDA approval because the pandemic had been declared a “state of emergency” and was in the hands of the military (militarization) as researched and diligently reported by Sasha Latypova.
-I wonder how many vaccinated people realized this, thinking that they had received a vaccine that had undergone the proper clinical trials…? Isn’t this a violation of the Nuremburg Code and informed consent?
f) Language – Can be used colourfully to exaggerate, oversimplify, confuse or mislead when making so-called claims.
Biotech GMO (genetically modified organism) research corporations have erroneously made out that the modification of one gene effectively produces one protein. However, it has now been established that this modification doesn’t just produce the desired advantageous protein but gives rise to a number of other proteins, some of which are potentially harmful. -A case here of exposing research oversimplification.
Using softening language with the words “suggests,” “may,” or “could” be used to mislead and coverup the fact that the scientific report really means nothing.
Language written in the style of the scientific vernacular can be used to mislead or confuse.
g) Moving the goal posts – Redefining/changing the rules, to make the chosen scientific approach valid, justifiable and lucrative. Example: The definition of a vaccine was changed so to include mRNA in vaccines.
Learn to distinguish politicized agendas and the dishonest abuses of science from truth so that you act and protect yourself. Through dedication, genuine concern and a truthful approach anyone can become an expert for informed decision-making.
If it inspires you then why not join activists demanding truthfulness, integrity, transparency, a climate of open dialogue and higher safety priority for the scientific approach that could give rise to the many wonderful benefits that science has to offer?
The global elite want you believe in a world that doesn’t exist and their science wing is no exception when it comes to contributing to the fakery.