This short video clip staggered me! How can evidence like this exist, and virtually no one know of it?Thanks for reading Heroes and Villains! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. I’ve added Dr. Paul Thomas to my list of heroes. And all the parents that did what they had to to enable us to retain a control group of unvaccinated. Otherwise, how would we be able to see?
The villains have access to the biggest propaganda machine the world has ever known.
If they can take one of the nastiest things ever created such as the smallpox injections and implant into the minds of almost everyone the idea that it was a miracle that eradicated disease, anything's possible.
Thank you for the very clearly written, easy to comprehend explanation of why the results presented in their paper were misleading. I think I understand the flaws now.
In my reading of the evidence, it appears that the journal was violating prioritization of the scientific truth to retract the article in the way they did, but were loyal to their (evidently) primary mission of "circling the wagons" to protect the reputations of those who will be seen as having inflicted harm on innocents once the reality of the net-harm caused by childhood injections becomes obvious and the racket can no longer be sustained. I see why they did it, and I judge it immoral to perpetuate harm of innocent children to maintain a criminal racket.
My current understanding is that you take the position that the JLW paper referenced *deserved* to be retracted, and that JLW was "whining" about such retraction. That he lost fair and square, and he is/was a sore loser. Is that what you are saying?
Good stuff. Subscribed!
The villains have access to the biggest propaganda machine the world has ever known.
If they can take one of the nastiest things ever created such as the smallpox injections and implant into the minds of almost everyone the idea that it was a miracle that eradicated disease, anything's possible.
Did you just discredit his hypothesis, or confirm it?
Thank you for the very clearly written, easy to comprehend explanation of why the results presented in their paper were misleading. I think I understand the flaws now.
Have you noticed the story that (allegedly) these objections have been addressed in a new study based on the records of PT's practice? https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/59
Of course... "Nothing to see here! Move along, folks."
In my reading of the evidence, it appears that the journal was violating prioritization of the scientific truth to retract the article in the way they did, but were loyal to their (evidently) primary mission of "circling the wagons" to protect the reputations of those who will be seen as having inflicted harm on innocents once the reality of the net-harm caused by childhood injections becomes obvious and the racket can no longer be sustained. I see why they did it, and I judge it immoral to perpetuate harm of innocent children to maintain a criminal racket.
My current understanding is that you take the position that the JLW paper referenced *deserved* to be retracted, and that JLW was "whining" about such retraction. That he lost fair and square, and he is/was a sore loser. Is that what you are saying?