I always wondered about Lysenko, and what the real story is. Wikipedia is notoriously unreliable and would certainly have a strong anti-Soviet Union bias. Some prominent geneticists I knew in the past loved pointing to Lysenko as evil incarnate. They also love GMO's, believe the whole HIV-AIDS dogma and the Covid dogma. Is there an open-minded and curious Russian historical researcher out there who can sift through Soviet archives that have now been released and tell us more?
You are right, that was the point of your argument in your article.
It just shows the soup we are in: our discussions are so difficult as we are caught in an enormous web of lies, and the arguments are so fraught with implications, as the falsehood is literally everywhere and each of us have a different set of facts or knowledge of subjects, and we easily get entangled into arguing about whether or not this is trustworthy or that is a fact -- which in fact IS the main job we have right now: trying to figure out the truth of reality, while we've been fed an astronomical amount of lies throughout our whole lives.
The gaslighting is so omnipresent, that we're all trying to point to false narratives whenever we meet them, in whatever context. Discussions have become a real challenge lately. And not by accident. It will take some time before we're out of this mess I guess.
I suppose that violent oppression never leads anywhere, but from what Wikipedia says here it seems that Lysenko was closer to the truth than Western science has been in ages. If you check out Stefan Lanka and co's work, and people like Bruce Lipton, you quickly get the message that yes, also about genetics and certainly cell biology, the wool has been pulled over our eyes big time. Western "science" was, as simply everything in our society, hijacked and abused to only serve the psychopathic agenda of the leading elite, in charge since millennia. There's just about nothing we're allowed to know the truth of, because knowing the truth of something will lead to wanting to know the truth of other things, and elites can only rule masses when the masses consent, and the masses will only consent if they don't understand anything of reality and think black is white.
William Casey famously told Reagan that "we will know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false". "Everything" is not a few things here and there.
Just this morning I watched a piece by a great investigative journalist, Sheryl Attkisson, about a girl whose pro-vaccine parents enrolled her and her siblings into Pfizer Covid vaccine trials.
The daughter was in the 'treated' group and got very very sick shortly after her injections. And you guessed it, Pfizer and the government agencies did the very best job they knew how, to gaslight the family.
I guess I'm skeptical because I grew up in such a staunch religious environment where we were told what the 'truth' was and there were no alternatives possible, lest one sin against god and incur eternal punishments. It's so similar to these 'anti-denialist' folks insisting there's only one 'truth' to subscribe to, or else....
Oh it’s totally a religion, the religion of scientism. I’ve said it before (many times), and I’ll say it again (many times), but the history of science indicates that most of what we believe is true at any given time is wrong, and there is no reason to believe that is not the case today.
i am gonna be denialist. None of the things i have heard on the mainstream lamestream media have had even the most remote resemblance to anything i can call truth. Worse, i'm bathing in it, like bad dish soap. I din't get no dammm injextions, but those who did shed that shit all over me, it smellls bad to me, or used to , when i noticed like four years ago that strange metalic kind a smell, not like that bad rock band, but like the skypainting, seemed like something rotten not too far away in Nantucky sometin funky.
i want to remove the scamdemic Harmacide hacksxxxine viruganda lockdown depopulation injextions nocomony from my being, from my memory, from my having to contemplate why they be trying to kill us all? They destroyed their own source of wealth and control because we weren't scared enough, i guess, none of it makes any sense , least of all telling folks what to think, some of us don't take kindly to being told how to think rather than to think for yourself, the only truethful sentiment i haven't heard for four years, but from the rare and ignored,
The "researchers" found that - ("No amount of rebuttal can make up for the exposure to misinformation") - although the "researchers" are reporting this "un-ironically" - this is exactly what I encounter when I attempt to discuss "material reality" with most of my MSM watching friends and family. As in - brief exposure to my arguments - no matter how well informed and sound those arguments are - can't possibly counter endless hours of "MSM disinformation" on everything from lockdowns, to vaccines, to war propaganda. Of course these "researchers" would never for a moment imagine that the "disinformation" needing to be "rebutted" is all coming from official government sources - instead preferring to believe it is we who dare question those sources that are the dreaded - "purveyors" of such "disinformation." : /
Thanks for showing us the brave new world, which is basicly the brave old world. There is no thing like science anymore ... again. We still believe people who want to sell us snake oil ... again. Just looking at how science works today shows you what it is, computer models for everything, based on a thin layer of reality. The science has indeed settled in the last decades, its now sitting in her beach chair enjoying her last days on earth ... or the last days of earth ? Hopefully not.
About a year ago, I found a new translation by Philip Boehm of the recently discovered complete text of Arthur Koestler's book: DARKNESS AT NOON.
Set in the 1930s at the height of the Great Purge and show trials of a Stalinist Moscow, Darkness at Noon follows former party leader and aging revolutionary Nikolai Rubashov as he is imprisoned, tortured, and forced through a series of hearings by a corrupt regime he helped to create. As the pressure to confess to preposterous crimes increases, he relives a career that embodies the ironies and betrayals of a merciless totalitarian movement masking itself as an instrument of deliverance.
Koestler's portrayal of Stalinism is as chilling and resonant today as it was in the 1940s and during the Cold War. Like 1984 and Animal Farm, Darkness at Noon is a powerful work of 20th century literature that explores the moral danger inherent in a system that is willing to enforce its beliefs by any means necessary.
A personal comment: It's the sort of novel that transcends ordinary limitations.
(Scribner, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, Inc. Scribner trade paperback edition September 2019.)
I read this "novel" in the 80s, which inspired me to read more Koestler - and more appropriate to the point in question, "The Case of the Midwife Toad" (1971). Also read Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" because quantum physics was becoming a thing when the electric universe (Tesla/Birkland) and aether was the way we should've been going instead, had we not been diverted from truth yet again. Who possibly could've guessed back then that "medicine" would be the way they would try to conquer the world...
good morning Gregory. The first book I read by Koestler was The Ghost in the Machine. About three months ago I read Koestler's Scum of the Earth. It's the story of Koestler's survival after retreating to Paris and was imprisoned by the French as an undesirable alien even though he had been a respected crusader against fascism. His shrewd observation of the collapse of French determination to resist during the summer of 1940 is an illustration of what happens when a nation loses its honor and its pride.
Here are four more Koestler novels: The Gladiators, Arrival and Departure, Thieves in the Night, The Age of Longing.
Four Autobiographies: Dialogue with Death, Arrow in the Blue, The Invisible Writing, The God that Failed (with others).
I read Thomas S. Kuhn's first edition copyright 1969, 1970, 1996,2012. About five years ago, I bought the 50th anniversary edition with an introductory essay by Ian Hacking from The University of Chicago Press, www.press.uchicago.edu. I consider this edition a collectors item. The price was $15.00 paperback. Check out Chicago Press website.
Science? Science is supposed to be a method of inquiry, not this religious or political dogma! Let's make *1984* fiction again; the current dystopia is obscene. Your essay, however, is excellent!
The Scientific Method deformed into Scientism. Many people believe scientism is the religion of the twentieth century, and thee authority of its clergy (scientists) is beyond question or challenge and that its rules and findings can indisputably explain the past and predict the future of human existence and our individual behaviors.
Scientism and its clergy is molded by society. The dominant social and economic forces in society determine to a large extent what scientists do and how they do it. Scientism is based and influenced by a business (economic) model. Maximize profits for short term gain.
“The science”—really scientism—is an occult secular/materialist Apocalyptic religion, with its own set of sins, the apex of which is now “misinformation.” Because this religion has removed the saving grace of Christ (or at least the presumption that God allows us a free wiil, and that even those of us in “error” are allowed to live because only God judges in the end), all of those who commit the sin of “misinformation” are required to be censored at best, and imprisoned or killed at worst. Masking is now (as it was from the beginning of the most recent manifesting of this scam in 2020) an occult symbol of being a member of this materialist religion.
Oh, and the world of medicine isn't the only arena of science that this 'anti-denialism' thing is happening. One of my favorite areas of contention that most people don't know about is the Standard Model of cosmology, believing that we have it all nailed down and understood. But there are equally interesting 'dissidents' within this realm that question the central tenets of the standard model. It's sometimes referred to as Plasma Cosmology or the Electric Universe, where they put forward that a gigantic mistake was made in cosmology assuming that gravity is the central reigning force in the universe. Everything literally revolves around this, and they say it's utterly wrong and has led to all kinds of nonsensical contrivances and inventions in the form of black holes, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars and other things to try and explain the universe. Their belief is that electricity is the actual fundamental force. Their documentaries and ideas are absolutely fascinating to me, but they are called 'denialists' in equal terms to what happens in the medical sciences.
Interesting article. However, anyone of us crying or laughing, depending on the effects and ways of coping with the horror, on ourselves or on friends, cannot possibly believe in the parasite elite anymore, or can we?
- The very idea that the parasite elite believe in their own mass murderous lies and took the shots themselves, is a bit naive, in my opinion, isn't it?
You should realize, by now, they just want to kill us all, like vermin on "their" lawn, and they will, like all other psychopaths, lie until the very end, hoping to get away with it. Good, naive people will never be able to even imagine the evil.
They are similar to cute little innocent cats, who, unseen, or in the open, happily play with and murder birds. Still, we love them and feed them, don't we? People are preparing to feed the ice cream munching pedo psycho and the "warp speed" Trumpy Pumkin in the next election, aren't they? Are you?
I see nobody organizing any political broad election coalition against them, except myself in Sweden. But if you are, then do contact me, and I will tell the world about your fantastic initiative!
Until then:
”Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”
We now recognize "climate change" and "virus pandemics' for the hoaxes they are, but my skepticism of "science" began decades ago when my research as a biochemist contradicted Darwinian and its subsidiary stories I had been taught and accepted at university. "Science" teaches that Laws of Science, of physics, of geology, or biology, are to be disregarded in favor of unproven hypotheses in regards to formation of matter from no matter, formation of stars and planets, formation of the elements, and creation of life itself. Are we to believe stories which defy common sense such as the "science" teaching that absolutely flat layers of sedimentary mud seen around the world have million of years "missing" in between? Why do we believe it?
The eruptions of Mt. St. Helen rebutted many of the hypotheses of "settled science," proving that processes claimed to take "millions of years" required only weeks, days, or even hours. Speeding mud flows formed giant canyons in hours that we are taught require "million of years" to form. "Ancient forests" of upright bark-less, root-less trees formed in months as eruption-stripped trees floating in Crystal Lake became waterlogged, sank, and were embedded in the organic mat on the lake's bottom. Newly formed rock from the earth's core were sent incognito to the world's premier radiometric dating facilities and given ages of tens of thousands to millions of years.
As a scientist, or as a member of the public, should one believe the actual evidence and one's own common sense, or should one accept "the story" presented that runs counter to actual evidence and common sense? That is a decision left up to each individual. But my investigations indicate that the real foundational dogma of the scientific establishment is "by natural means only," and any scientist wishing to remain in good graces in establishment science, must not contradict that doctrinal belief, even if it requires ignoring evidence and one's own common sense.
I always wondered about Lysenko, and what the real story is. Wikipedia is notoriously unreliable and would certainly have a strong anti-Soviet Union bias. Some prominent geneticists I knew in the past loved pointing to Lysenko as evil incarnate. They also love GMO's, believe the whole HIV-AIDS dogma and the Covid dogma. Is there an open-minded and curious Russian historical researcher out there who can sift through Soviet archives that have now been released and tell us more?
My point was not whether he was correct or not, but to point out the anti scientific way dissidents were treated.
You are right, that was the point of your argument in your article.
It just shows the soup we are in: our discussions are so difficult as we are caught in an enormous web of lies, and the arguments are so fraught with implications, as the falsehood is literally everywhere and each of us have a different set of facts or knowledge of subjects, and we easily get entangled into arguing about whether or not this is trustworthy or that is a fact -- which in fact IS the main job we have right now: trying to figure out the truth of reality, while we've been fed an astronomical amount of lies throughout our whole lives.
The gaslighting is so omnipresent, that we're all trying to point to false narratives whenever we meet them, in whatever context. Discussions have become a real challenge lately. And not by accident. It will take some time before we're out of this mess I guess.
I suppose that violent oppression never leads anywhere, but from what Wikipedia says here it seems that Lysenko was closer to the truth than Western science has been in ages. If you check out Stefan Lanka and co's work, and people like Bruce Lipton, you quickly get the message that yes, also about genetics and certainly cell biology, the wool has been pulled over our eyes big time. Western "science" was, as simply everything in our society, hijacked and abused to only serve the psychopathic agenda of the leading elite, in charge since millennia. There's just about nothing we're allowed to know the truth of, because knowing the truth of something will lead to wanting to know the truth of other things, and elites can only rule masses when the masses consent, and the masses will only consent if they don't understand anything of reality and think black is white.
William Casey famously told Reagan that "we will know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false". "Everything" is not a few things here and there.
Whether he was right or not, the way dissenters were treated says it all. That’s not how science works.
Just this morning I watched a piece by a great investigative journalist, Sheryl Attkisson, about a girl whose pro-vaccine parents enrolled her and her siblings into Pfizer Covid vaccine trials.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fC90quQ6oz8
The daughter was in the 'treated' group and got very very sick shortly after her injections. And you guessed it, Pfizer and the government agencies did the very best job they knew how, to gaslight the family.
I guess I'm skeptical because I grew up in such a staunch religious environment where we were told what the 'truth' was and there were no alternatives possible, lest one sin against god and incur eternal punishments. It's so similar to these 'anti-denialist' folks insisting there's only one 'truth' to subscribe to, or else....
Oh it’s totally a religion, the religion of scientism. I’ve said it before (many times), and I’ll say it again (many times), but the history of science indicates that most of what we believe is true at any given time is wrong, and there is no reason to believe that is not the case today.
i am gonna be denialist. None of the things i have heard on the mainstream lamestream media have had even the most remote resemblance to anything i can call truth. Worse, i'm bathing in it, like bad dish soap. I din't get no dammm injextions, but those who did shed that shit all over me, it smellls bad to me, or used to , when i noticed like four years ago that strange metalic kind a smell, not like that bad rock band, but like the skypainting, seemed like something rotten not too far away in Nantucky sometin funky.
i want to remove the scamdemic Harmacide hacksxxxine viruganda lockdown depopulation injextions nocomony from my being, from my memory, from my having to contemplate why they be trying to kill us all? They destroyed their own source of wealth and control because we weren't scared enough, i guess, none of it makes any sense , least of all telling folks what to think, some of us don't take kindly to being told how to think rather than to think for yourself, the only truethful sentiment i haven't heard for four years, but from the rare and ignored,
what do you think?
The "researchers" found that - ("No amount of rebuttal can make up for the exposure to misinformation") - although the "researchers" are reporting this "un-ironically" - this is exactly what I encounter when I attempt to discuss "material reality" with most of my MSM watching friends and family. As in - brief exposure to my arguments - no matter how well informed and sound those arguments are - can't possibly counter endless hours of "MSM disinformation" on everything from lockdowns, to vaccines, to war propaganda. Of course these "researchers" would never for a moment imagine that the "disinformation" needing to be "rebutted" is all coming from official government sources - instead preferring to believe it is we who dare question those sources that are the dreaded - "purveyors" of such "disinformation." : /
Thanks for showing us the brave new world, which is basicly the brave old world. There is no thing like science anymore ... again. We still believe people who want to sell us snake oil ... again. Just looking at how science works today shows you what it is, computer models for everything, based on a thin layer of reality. The science has indeed settled in the last decades, its now sitting in her beach chair enjoying her last days on earth ... or the last days of earth ? Hopefully not.
Great post Rebecca.
About a year ago, I found a new translation by Philip Boehm of the recently discovered complete text of Arthur Koestler's book: DARKNESS AT NOON.
Set in the 1930s at the height of the Great Purge and show trials of a Stalinist Moscow, Darkness at Noon follows former party leader and aging revolutionary Nikolai Rubashov as he is imprisoned, tortured, and forced through a series of hearings by a corrupt regime he helped to create. As the pressure to confess to preposterous crimes increases, he relives a career that embodies the ironies and betrayals of a merciless totalitarian movement masking itself as an instrument of deliverance.
Koestler's portrayal of Stalinism is as chilling and resonant today as it was in the 1940s and during the Cold War. Like 1984 and Animal Farm, Darkness at Noon is a powerful work of 20th century literature that explores the moral danger inherent in a system that is willing to enforce its beliefs by any means necessary.
A personal comment: It's the sort of novel that transcends ordinary limitations.
(Scribner, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, Inc. Scribner trade paperback edition September 2019.)
I read this "novel" in the 80s, which inspired me to read more Koestler - and more appropriate to the point in question, "The Case of the Midwife Toad" (1971). Also read Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" because quantum physics was becoming a thing when the electric universe (Tesla/Birkland) and aether was the way we should've been going instead, had we not been diverted from truth yet again. Who possibly could've guessed back then that "medicine" would be the way they would try to conquer the world...
good morning Gregory. The first book I read by Koestler was The Ghost in the Machine. About three months ago I read Koestler's Scum of the Earth. It's the story of Koestler's survival after retreating to Paris and was imprisoned by the French as an undesirable alien even though he had been a respected crusader against fascism. His shrewd observation of the collapse of French determination to resist during the summer of 1940 is an illustration of what happens when a nation loses its honor and its pride.
Here are four more Koestler novels: The Gladiators, Arrival and Departure, Thieves in the Night, The Age of Longing.
Four Autobiographies: Dialogue with Death, Arrow in the Blue, The Invisible Writing, The God that Failed (with others).
I read Thomas S. Kuhn's first edition copyright 1969, 1970, 1996,2012. About five years ago, I bought the 50th anniversary edition with an introductory essay by Ian Hacking from The University of Chicago Press, www.press.uchicago.edu. I consider this edition a collectors item. The price was $15.00 paperback. Check out Chicago Press website.
And two more: The Thirteenth Tribe, and The Sleepwalkers 🙂
Thanks G. Swain! Enjoy the weekend.
Science? Science is supposed to be a method of inquiry, not this religious or political dogma! Let's make *1984* fiction again; the current dystopia is obscene. Your essay, however, is excellent!
The Scientific Method deformed into Scientism. Many people believe scientism is the religion of the twentieth century, and thee authority of its clergy (scientists) is beyond question or challenge and that its rules and findings can indisputably explain the past and predict the future of human existence and our individual behaviors.
Scientism and its clergy is molded by society. The dominant social and economic forces in society determine to a large extent what scientists do and how they do it. Scientism is based and influenced by a business (economic) model. Maximize profits for short term gain.
Scientists for sale.
I love that participants needed “debriefing” after hearing “rebuttals.”
“The science”—really scientism—is an occult secular/materialist Apocalyptic religion, with its own set of sins, the apex of which is now “misinformation.” Because this religion has removed the saving grace of Christ (or at least the presumption that God allows us a free wiil, and that even those of us in “error” are allowed to live because only God judges in the end), all of those who commit the sin of “misinformation” are required to be censored at best, and imprisoned or killed at worst. Masking is now (as it was from the beginning of the most recent manifesting of this scam in 2020) an occult symbol of being a member of this materialist religion.
Oh, and the world of medicine isn't the only arena of science that this 'anti-denialism' thing is happening. One of my favorite areas of contention that most people don't know about is the Standard Model of cosmology, believing that we have it all nailed down and understood. But there are equally interesting 'dissidents' within this realm that question the central tenets of the standard model. It's sometimes referred to as Plasma Cosmology or the Electric Universe, where they put forward that a gigantic mistake was made in cosmology assuming that gravity is the central reigning force in the universe. Everything literally revolves around this, and they say it's utterly wrong and has led to all kinds of nonsensical contrivances and inventions in the form of black holes, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars and other things to try and explain the universe. Their belief is that electricity is the actual fundamental force. Their documentaries and ideas are absolutely fascinating to me, but they are called 'denialists' in equal terms to what happens in the medical sciences.
And check out the Tychos model of our solar system. Even THAT was abused for political gain.
Interesting article. However, anyone of us crying or laughing, depending on the effects and ways of coping with the horror, on ourselves or on friends, cannot possibly believe in the parasite elite anymore, or can we?
- The very idea that the parasite elite believe in their own mass murderous lies and took the shots themselves, is a bit naive, in my opinion, isn't it?
You should realize, by now, they just want to kill us all, like vermin on "their" lawn, and they will, like all other psychopaths, lie until the very end, hoping to get away with it. Good, naive people will never be able to even imagine the evil.
They are similar to cute little innocent cats, who, unseen, or in the open, happily play with and murder birds. Still, we love them and feed them, don't we? People are preparing to feed the ice cream munching pedo psycho and the "warp speed" Trumpy Pumkin in the next election, aren't they? Are you?
I see nobody organizing any political broad election coalition against them, except myself in Sweden. But if you are, then do contact me, and I will tell the world about your fantastic initiative!
Until then:
”Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”
/Plato
We now recognize "climate change" and "virus pandemics' for the hoaxes they are, but my skepticism of "science" began decades ago when my research as a biochemist contradicted Darwinian and its subsidiary stories I had been taught and accepted at university. "Science" teaches that Laws of Science, of physics, of geology, or biology, are to be disregarded in favor of unproven hypotheses in regards to formation of matter from no matter, formation of stars and planets, formation of the elements, and creation of life itself. Are we to believe stories which defy common sense such as the "science" teaching that absolutely flat layers of sedimentary mud seen around the world have million of years "missing" in between? Why do we believe it?
The eruptions of Mt. St. Helen rebutted many of the hypotheses of "settled science," proving that processes claimed to take "millions of years" required only weeks, days, or even hours. Speeding mud flows formed giant canyons in hours that we are taught require "million of years" to form. "Ancient forests" of upright bark-less, root-less trees formed in months as eruption-stripped trees floating in Crystal Lake became waterlogged, sank, and were embedded in the organic mat on the lake's bottom. Newly formed rock from the earth's core were sent incognito to the world's premier radiometric dating facilities and given ages of tens of thousands to millions of years.
As a scientist, or as a member of the public, should one believe the actual evidence and one's own common sense, or should one accept "the story" presented that runs counter to actual evidence and common sense? That is a decision left up to each individual. But my investigations indicate that the real foundational dogma of the scientific establishment is "by natural means only," and any scientist wishing to remain in good graces in establishment science, must not contradict that doctrinal belief, even if it requires ignoring evidence and one's own common sense.