January 20, 2022

Facts are awful important now days, particularly to journalists. They use "fact checking" and insist on the facts of science for global warming and the pandemic. But any attempts to resolve the facts of those subjects end up in confusion.

The reason why no one can resolve the confusion is because journalists assume facts are a proclamation by a suitable authority. They assume facts can be proclaimed. I show evidence for facts, and they despise the result.

Facts are supposed to be reliable, not a form of propaganda. To make realities reliable, there needs to be a source that is reliable. A reliable source of realities must evolve over time. Truth evolves forward through the interactions of realities, while corruption is weekened by the interactions of realities.

Therefore, the reliable source for facts must be evolved truth which has been accepted as fact for some time, not authorities making proclamations. One of the differences is that real facts can be evaluated and explained, while proclamations by authorities cannot. An authoritative fact must be a generalization so broad and vague that it has no meaning.

Science has that purpose. It creates a reliable basis for basic knowledge. But nonscientists including journalists don't have a clue as to what the basic knowledge produced by science consists of; so they rely upon some fraud who claims to be speaking for scientists.

Knowledge cannot be spoken for by authorities. It must be independently arrived at from the reliable source that has evolved the realities. That means 500 years of evolved truth derived through proper scientific methods. Yet journalists impose nihilism upon society disallowing critics to explain what the reliable source of scientific truth consists of.

With global warming, nothing could be more ridiculous than a miniscule molecule in the atmosphere disrupting normal weather or climate. Dupes who have been convinced otherwise are not going to allow critics to explain the science of the subject.

In the area of the pandemic, scientists have been saying very little, while journalists impose fraud upon the public. Scientists keep saying that masks and social distancing are important even after getting vaccinated, while journalists tell people that getting vaccinated solves their problems and allows them to return to "normal behavior" which means a lot of partying.

The flair-ups follow a sociology pattern rather than a vaccination pattern, because the vaccines are not very effective at preventing the spread. All real scientists have been saying is that the vaccines will reduce the seriousness of the disease; they haven't been saying vaccines will stop the spread of the disease.

On top of that problem is that even if the vaccines ended every problem related to the disease, going out and partying would draw in unvaccinated persons who would spread the disease. Since that fact is so obvious, and the propagandists promote it anyway, the underlying purpose points to a motive of allowing unvaccinated persons to get diseased. In fact, journalists often say that unvaccinated persons deserve to get the disease, since they refuse to get vaccinated.

The disgusting thing about the propaganda of the journalists is their ungodly stupidity on every element of the subject including the nature of the disease and what the vaccines do and then trying to railroad the social result in the direction of spreading the disease by partying and diseasing the persons who defy them. The self-righteousness is a product of their stupidity. They claim their fraud is a promotion of facts of science.