9 Comments
User's avatar
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Aug 20
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Tim West's avatar

Hi

The article embeds two other long articles which you would also need as text.

I think Substack generates text automatically?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Aug 20
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Tim West's avatar

I will write one stand alone paper soon.

Expand full comment
Tim West's avatar

Yes. What he calls Scientism is ‘brown stuff’.

He doesn’t seem to really get the DATA-MODEL split, what he calls the real science is a mix of DATA and MODELS clearly distinguished.

I think he would appreciate the foundational rigour of the two-colour protocol. If you have anyway of reaching him that would be great. 🙏

Expand full comment
Tim West's avatar

I’m quite a way through the documentary.

Interesting that he assumes that the Descartes split implies the outside world be populated with things and mathematical ones at that and so sees it as a central flaw.

The Descartes split is in fact very close to the two-colour protocol. Wolfgang I feel slightly misses this.

It’s my impression that everyone overthinks.

Wolfgang would be clearer if he took science down to its basic essence,

Don’t make shit up

(Don’t mistake pink for green)

Expand full comment
Dr Mike Yeadon's avatar

Very helpful as ever.

Almost everything you’re told by others is pink stuff, even if you regard the person as expert and honest.

Unless you have a green background yourself in the subject matter at issue.

Otherwise, you’re being pinked at.

Most people appear to be very willing to accept other people’s pink stuff, as if it was green stuff.

Problem is, many are easily fooled and way too inclined to trust official looking people.

Imagine a world in which everyone on TV is a clever murderous crook in league with other clever murderous crooks.

Interpreting their pink statements as green is likely to get you killed.

Expand full comment
Sean S.'s avatar

Just yesterday I was explaining to a friend the virus cultivation/isolation process, which brought me to the conclusion that although viruses may exist, they have never been proven to exist, and even if they do exist, they have never been proven to cause a particular disease. While I was explaining the process he agreed that it was absolutely stupid on its face, could not prove the existence of viruses, or that they cause disease. Essentially, I showed him the green regarding viruses. I then segued into the theory of preventing diseases, that have never been proven to be caused by pathogens, with vaccines (or any preventative for that matter). The absence of a disease state in the vaccinated does not prove the vaccine worked because there is also the absence of the disease state in the unvaccinated. The pink immediately jumped into the green and he replied, "But viruses exist, don't they?" This sparked a discussion of pseudoscience (religion) being passed down through the colleges as fact. No one sitting in class dares to fact check the professor or they assume that someone has already vetted the information, so it must be true. This is the uphill battle we are facing in a society that has been fed pink pablum their entire lives.

Expand full comment
Matthew Putegnat's avatar

Fantastic! Very nice. Thank you.

Expand full comment
My Friend Lisa's avatar

In your list of denial names you forgot ai and media.

Expand full comment