Fakeologist Forums

Good link from Nick on the death stats in England and Wales.
https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2023/01 ... ross-2023/

fakeologist wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 6:19 pm Good link from Nick on the death stats in England and Wales.
https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2023/01 ... ross-2023/

Fascinating series of pdfs.
[The death stats page does cement the nuclear hoax, however]

The site reminds me a bit of the old Aangirfan blog, always hinting at things, use of colour.

But the writer's on board with the virus hoax - see pages on Sam Baileyy and Tom Cowan.

Seems unavoidable them having to mix up truth and lies. Masses have no doubts re: nuclear, molecules atoms etc. Or the globes: The death stats are H/T Napoleon, to start the die electic process, fear ramped up and masses unsure who to trust. Their overall 'Project Fear' Miles Mathis calls it

Gonsalo Lira last year pointed to escalating death rates- but also pushed the Ukr war. So taking it as indicative, not definitive. How can I KNOW?

Hegelians always stir the pot, muddying pools = because there are many agendas aimed at many diff audiences. Maybe it's almost out of their total control ... maybe that's another part of their image creation? They're highly skilled manipulators with vast experience remember

Luckily here there's expertise at penetrating thru' their bs/obfustication... to some extent.
Stereoscopic in depth vision sort of, to get 'deeper' insight, peeks behind the drapes, maybe. Bits here and there among the fakery getting to the real.

Learning what is real when we're surrounded by the fake. That's a challenge, how to tell the difference? Here there's many different views on that ...

On that site, a page on Mike Adams who did "wake up" to the virus hoax
https://malagabay.files.wordpress.com/2 ... -adams.pdf
His interview with Cowan/Kaufman is interesting, especially towards the end.
Cowan refers to the infectiousness of yawning and harmonising menstrual cycles at one point. However, I don't think all those fake dead sims' reported smiles were really 'infectious'....

https://www.brighteon.com/08e2ac4b-461e ... 2bded2a1ea

Footnote
Christian Drosten is an author of this report into SarsCov2 "infectiousness"
Science, May 25 2021
Estimating infectiousness throughout SARS-CoV-2 infection course

Respiratory disease transmission is highly context-dependent and difficult to quantify or predict at the individual level.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi5273
The paper is full of "estimates". The word occurs 120 times in the paper. A "viral load" of nosense"

Viral load is semiquantitative, estimating RNA copies per entire swab sample, whereas only a fraction of the volume can reach the test tube. The quantification is based on a standard preparation tested in multiple diluted replicates to generate a standard curve and derive a formula in which RT-PCR cycle threshold values are converted to viral loads.

Right, got it....

They reckoned [estimated...] that the

viral load was highly variable, but was about 10-fold higher in persons infected with the B.1.1.7 variant.

What's 'viral load"