Yes, I'm writing a long bullet point cover note and at this point I can add a bit about political implications and when not to be politically partisan with evidence.
My concerns are that the content is otherworldly and may overshadow the rest of the message for a normie, especially one who may not be able to interpret the medical sources and may have a bias for trusting the authorities,
It moves the message from medical conspiracy to full on great reset / depopulation / control agenda
We know that's real, but it might just cause a blue screen effect in a normie.
General protection fault - parameters out of range!
I thought the hard core truth of it made the transhumanism plausible. Have a backup, Bards of War did some good talks on transhumanism. Scott Kestner??
Good idea about backup. I think In my cover note I'll only personally endorse the parts of it which I know and understand well and claim that my own knowledge is spotty on transhumanism, even with my biomedical materials background.
It really is a great letter isn't it! It's actually fairly conservative in its claims. I need to folow some of the links to check they are pertinent.
I haven't heard from the headteacher yet. I'll get back to you. If I forget, you are welcome to DM me. Actually, would you like me to DM you the covering email I sent?
If you have read my comments over the past few months, you'll know I'm quite well up with my medical understanding of the virus and the vax and my geopolitical instincts are inline with what's happening.
I have a biomedical degree and a computer science degree.
This means that it is difficult for me to bridge the gap to a normie, my daughter's headteacher who recently sent my daughter home for not having a PCR test in the last two days. I know so much now that I don't know where to begin with a redpill email. I've had a super high speed face to face redpill session with him which got him listening. I am persuasive face to face because I can react quickly to questions and body language,
What I want to say and more is covered by this huge "Spartacus" essay which has good mainstream medical source links in.
I would like to know if we all think it has any serious inaccuracies and how to present it with a cover note.
I will add u/Huffmann98 's vax treatment list, maybe edited with some more sources for ivermectin and with a warning about pine needle tea potential toxicity.
Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.
I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.
There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.
I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical citation references within the text.
I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".
For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who aren't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.
Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.
Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO. (At least not on a first date.)
Warn person about political stuff at beginning and end. Also say Sparticus seems like one or more infectious disease specialists writing anonymously.
Yes, I'm writing a long bullet point cover note and at this point I can add a bit about political implications and when not to be politically partisan with evidence.
It's great isn't it, but thank Spartacus whoever they are!
Do you think it'll help a curious normie?
Just to be clear. I'm not Spartacus, neither is the editor of theautomaticearth.com
I've just written a very long email covering and summarising note to go with the Spartacus letter and sent it to a redpilled friend for review.
Perfect!
What about the transhumanist section?
What are your concerns about the 'transhumanist' section?
My concerns are that the content is otherworldly and may overshadow the rest of the message for a normie, especially one who may not be able to interpret the medical sources and may have a bias for trusting the authorities, It moves the message from medical conspiracy to full on great reset / depopulation / control agenda
We know that's real, but it might just cause a blue screen effect in a normie.
General protection fault - parameters out of range!
I thought the hard core truth of it made the transhumanism plausible. Have a backup, Bards of War did some good talks on transhumanism. Scott Kestner??
Thanks fren!
Good idea about backup. I think In my cover note I'll only personally endorse the parts of it which I know and understand well and claim that my own knowledge is spotty on transhumanism, even with my biomedical materials background.
It really is a great letter isn't it! It's actually fairly conservative in its claims. I need to folow some of the links to check they are pertinent.
It is perfectly dispassionate while its raison d'etre is perfectly passionate.
I haven't heard from the headteacher yet. I'll get back to you. If I forget, you are welcome to DM me. Actually, would you like me to DM you the covering email I sent?
You could rewrite it a bit and use it for your friends.
Hi frens
If you have read my comments over the past few months, you'll know I'm quite well up with my medical understanding of the virus and the vax and my geopolitical instincts are inline with what's happening. I have a biomedical degree and a computer science degree.
This means that it is difficult for me to bridge the gap to a normie, my daughter's headteacher who recently sent my daughter home for not having a PCR test in the last two days. I know so much now that I don't know where to begin with a redpill email. I've had a super high speed face to face redpill session with him which got him listening. I am persuasive face to face because I can react quickly to questions and body language,
What I want to say and more is covered by this huge "Spartacus" essay which has good mainstream medical source links in.
I would like to know if we all think it has any serious inaccuracies and how to present it with a cover note.
I will add u/Huffmann98 's vax treatment list, maybe edited with some more sources for ivermectin and with a warning about pine needle tea potential toxicity.
Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.
I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.
There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.
I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical citation references within the text.
I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".
For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who aren't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.
Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.
Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO. (At least not on a first date.)