We need to move away from demanding credentials. Anyone presenting facts and evidence that can be backed up with data and shown to be accurate by research and analysis has presented a legitimate argument.
Demanding some kind of credential bee associated to the presenter before we accept the information and analysis as important or true is frankly idiotic.
By requiring credentials, we are falling for the game of academia run by the deep state that would decieve the people. The actual data and evidence gets side stepped and replaced with first whether your presenter is credentialed (by their system) to be allowed to know what he is presenting. Second it sets up the equally stupid game of lining up their credentialed people against your credentialed presenter and discrediting the presenter based on a reductive count of who has the most credentialed people supporting their position.
In both of these scenarios, the requirement of credentials before reviewing evidences presented removes the actual data from consideration in what is presented. We all lose by default because nobody sees the data.
Stop demanding credentials and instead learn to think critically, do your own research and analysis, and determine for yourself if the presenter has backed up what is claimed with actual data and correctly analysed and drawn conclusion from said data.
If we do not take responsibility for our own knowledge and understanding, we will be doomed to be controlled by whomever controls the assignment of credentials and controls the credentialed with their money or power.
He was taken seriously enough by the FDA to be heard as a speaker. Therefor for anyone to dismiss him and the statistics he provided for not being a "doctor" would be foolish. It would make the FDA look bad for allowing him to speak if anyone smears him.
This is the perfect example of the disinfo technique called "poisoning the well".
The info is solid. The guy has good information. He is competent and intelligent and qualified enough that the FDA saw fit to have him speak at this event. It's not like he's going to be presenting bad information.
So how do you poison this information? You make it look like he has some credential he doesn't actually have, or make it look like he works somewhere he doesn't actually work.
Even though that doesn't affect the fact that his information is solid, and he is a speaker that the FDA expressly allowed to speak at their event, they will use this straw-manned "debunking" to smear him and distract the sleepers from hearing from what he has to say.
He had three minutes to speak. The entire meeting was 8 hours long. I think he was one of many speakers so I'm not sure how much influence he had considering a real doctor came on after him.
He's speaking to the fda,isn't he? Even if he is just some schmuck like me,that should still be enough to make people question something. Not a redpill but might get some people hands to reach for the bottle.
He had 3 minutes to talk and the meeting was 8 hours long. I'm assuming there were many speakers. A doctor came on right after him. I'm sure he's red pilling many but he could also be used to ' poison the well' as u/Death_Metal_Patriot explains.
Then the HUGE question is why would the FDA even allow his speech during the hearing? It is not like they let anyone off the street be part of that! It is tightly controlled. There must be a reason why he was featured in the FDA hearing! A very good reason. There must be people who disagree within the FDA and they are trying to tip it over. This is great news!
Or as u/Death_Metal_Patriot, they may be poisoning the well with this guys bombastic claims. It could go either way. Many were thinking this was the FDA themselves stating this or someone that worked there when in fact this guy has no medical background and no connection at all. It could help us or it could in fact hurt us if it does indeed poison the well.
Bro so what? He's not interpreting anything that requires a medical license - it's data and math and logic. Stop relying on muh edumacated to regurgitate your own logic and common sense, that's a big part of what has put our world to sleep in the 1st place.
If Daffy Duck presented his data - I would still believe what I felt was truth and logical. That's what everyone needs to do for themselves.
I don't care about his credentials but as u/Death_Metal_Patriot stated, his statement could be used to poison the well. People are passing this around like it's gospel from the FDA themselves when in fact he was just one of many speakers that got a mere 3 minutes to present their case. Many here were lead to believe he was FDA when he doesn't even have a background in medicine. People need to know this.
Everything needs to be taken with a million grains of salt. Always. From everyone. The point I was getting at was you making a point of fact regarding him not being a doctor and that detail being the core reasoning behind your grain of salt comment is unfounded. He was reporting data sets that requires basic common sense, basic logic and 2nd grade math. He wasn't diagnosing a biopsy of a lung. So saying his data was potentially less reputable because he doesn't hold a doctorate is a fallacy. Nothing more.
How much do they part you guys to spread this message lol
Looks like we are over the target
Edit: I might have pegged you wrong. But this theme of lost keeps coming from the shills all day today. Is not factually wrong, but you are falling for the subtle narrative
We need to move away from demanding credentials. Anyone presenting facts and evidence that can be backed up with data and shown to be accurate by research and analysis has presented a legitimate argument.
Demanding some kind of credential bee associated to the presenter before we accept the information and analysis as important or true is frankly idiotic.
By requiring credentials, we are falling for the game of academia run by the deep state that would decieve the people. The actual data and evidence gets side stepped and replaced with first whether your presenter is credentialed (by their system) to be allowed to know what he is presenting. Second it sets up the equally stupid game of lining up their credentialed people against your credentialed presenter and discrediting the presenter based on a reductive count of who has the most credentialed people supporting their position.
In both of these scenarios, the requirement of credentials before reviewing evidences presented removes the actual data from consideration in what is presented. We all lose by default because nobody sees the data.
Stop demanding credentials and instead learn to think critically, do your own research and analysis, and determine for yourself if the presenter has backed up what is claimed with actual data and correctly analysed and drawn conclusion from said data.
If we do not take responsibility for our own knowledge and understanding, we will be doomed to be controlled by whomever controls the assignment of credentials and controls the credentialed with their money or power.
He was taken seriously enough by the FDA to be heard as a speaker. Therefor for anyone to dismiss him and the statistics he provided for not being a "doctor" would be foolish. It would make the FDA look bad for allowing him to speak if anyone smears him.
I completely agree but you know how this game is played. This will effect impact especially if MSM decides to pick it apart.
the Dr. Steve Kirsch I know is a board certified Mayo Clinic trained pathologist. Does that meet your standards?
Don't think it's the same Steve. His own site says he's an engineer. If he was a doctor I think he would've included it.
Copy that fren. i am wrong reference that video. you got the right Kirsch. I have hazed myself 🤙🏽
This is the perfect example of the disinfo technique called "poisoning the well".
The info is solid. The guy has good information. He is competent and intelligent and qualified enough that the FDA saw fit to have him speak at this event. It's not like he's going to be presenting bad information.
So how do you poison this information? You make it look like he has some credential he doesn't actually have, or make it look like he works somewhere he doesn't actually work.
Even though that doesn't affect the fact that his information is solid, and he is a speaker that the FDA expressly allowed to speak at their event, they will use this straw-manned "debunking" to smear him and distract the sleepers from hearing from what he has to say.
That's exactly what I'm afraid of.
He had three minutes to speak. The entire meeting was 8 hours long. I think he was one of many speakers so I'm not sure how much influence he had considering a real doctor came on after him.
lol the evil people have credentials! what does that matter now. its up to each of us to decide.
Fauci has "credentials" and look at him. Credentialism is dead.
He's speaking to the fda,isn't he? Even if he is just some schmuck like me,that should still be enough to make people question something. Not a redpill but might get some people hands to reach for the bottle.
He had 3 minutes to talk and the meeting was 8 hours long. I'm assuming there were many speakers. A doctor came on right after him. I'm sure he's red pilling many but he could also be used to ' poison the well' as u/Death_Metal_Patriot explains.
Then the HUGE question is why would the FDA even allow his speech during the hearing? It is not like they let anyone off the street be part of that! It is tightly controlled. There must be a reason why he was featured in the FDA hearing! A very good reason. There must be people who disagree within the FDA and they are trying to tip it over. This is great news!
Or as u/Death_Metal_Patriot, they may be poisoning the well with this guys bombastic claims. It could go either way. Many were thinking this was the FDA themselves stating this or someone that worked there when in fact this guy has no medical background and no connection at all. It could help us or it could in fact hurt us if it does indeed poison the well.
Bro so what? He's not interpreting anything that requires a medical license - it's data and math and logic. Stop relying on muh edumacated to regurgitate your own logic and common sense, that's a big part of what has put our world to sleep in the 1st place.
If Daffy Duck presented his data - I would still believe what I felt was truth and logical. That's what everyone needs to do for themselves.
I don't care about his credentials but as u/Death_Metal_Patriot stated, his statement could be used to poison the well. People are passing this around like it's gospel from the FDA themselves when in fact he was just one of many speakers that got a mere 3 minutes to present their case. Many here were lead to believe he was FDA when he doesn't even have a background in medicine. People need to know this.
Everything needs to be taken with a million grains of salt. Always. From everyone. The point I was getting at was you making a point of fact regarding him not being a doctor and that detail being the core reasoning behind your grain of salt comment is unfounded. He was reporting data sets that requires basic common sense, basic logic and 2nd grade math. He wasn't diagnosing a biopsy of a lung. So saying his data was potentially less reputable because he doesn't hold a doctorate is a fallacy. Nothing more.
How much do they part you guys to spread this message lol
Looks like we are over the target
Edit: I might have pegged you wrong. But this theme of lost keeps coming from the shills all day today. Is not factually wrong, but you are falling for the subtle narrative