Common goals in differing public hoaxes

A short while back I learned from a Climate Change website I frequent, WattsUpWithThat, run by meteorologist Anthony Watts, that since 1980 the earth had experienced a 14% increase in greening effects, caused mostly by increased CO2 in the atmosphere. Eureka!, I thought. Of course. That’s the reason for the Climate Change hoax and demonization of CO2 – more greening leads to more food to more people. Climate Change, like Covid-19, is backed by eugenicists.

First, let me address an annoying topic in this (hopefully) short post: If you are a believer in warming and climate change and all of that, how can you be so dense? Look around, look at statistics (that have not been altered by EPA), and see that yes, while a little warming has been going on since the bottom of the Little Ice Age in the late 1600s, it only benefits us. We tend to thrive in warmth, perish in cold. Warming periods such as the Minoan, Roman, Medieval and now Modern eras saw great advances in civilization. Greenland ice cores show that there is no correlation between CO2 levels and temperature. But my real question for you is this: How can you stick your head out the window, see that nothing is changing, and still think everything is changing? You make no sense! You are purely a product of the power of suggestion. Every doom and gloom prediction coming out of junk science produced by climate alarmists is just that: A prediction. According to noted climatologist and all around really smart dude Prince Charles, it was all to be over for us in 2017. When that didn’t happen, the cretin merely changed the Doomsday date. If you think Climate Change is real, I want your photo to place aside Chuck’s in the hall of deceit and stupidity. (I deliberately searched for goofy pictures of Chuck. I was offered a wide selection.)

Anyway, final notice if you are a true believer: Smarten up.

Continue reading “Common goals in differing public hoaxes”

Free Wally: Tracing the Spike Protein Drama to a Llama

I dedicate this exploratory essay to my friends and family who received a COVID injection (without proper informed consent); and to all the individuals way back in the cheap seats, who may not be able to hear what I am saying, due to the drowned-out noise of Gain-of-Function (GOF) research, lab leaks, and e-mail leaks.

SPOILER ALERT: When I refer to a “spike protein” herein, it is NOT because I support the notion that a protein arose from a virus, nor do I think it “sheds” or operates in the way that has been postulated by individuals referenced below (all of whom maintain that there is a SARS-CoV-2 virus).

There has been much recent drama (and rightly so) centered around the spike protein of the purported SARS-CoV-2 virus, and more specifically, what is being described as the expression of the synthetic spike protein as a result of COVID injections.

It seems that Dr. Byram Bridle, Dr. Joseph Mercola (see here and here), Judy Mikovits, Stephanie Seneff, Dr. Russell Blaylock, and Dr. Sherri Tenpenny all agree that the spike protein — at the very least, the one that is being produced for/by the injections — is a toxin (see Endnote 1). The general consensus among them is that it is a bioweapon. Indeed, Tenpenny emphasized (interview linked above) that the spike protein is the bioweapon (not “the virus”), based on a study of a “harmless pseudovirus” that was conjugated with spike proteins, yet caused pulmonary arterial damage.

I am content knowing we can all move forward in agreeing this may be a lab-created bioweapon; however, why do so many still have tunnel vision, remaining fixated on GOF research? Could there be other labs doing related research — perhaps protein R&D, or even more precisely, “spike protein” R&D (sans virus)? And how do synchrotrons factor in to all of this? As you read further, I offer a plot twist in this regard, so I hope you can stay tuned as I set up the prelude . . . 

Continue reading “Free Wally: Tracing the Spike Protein Drama to a Llama”

Clearing the Air: Febreze and the J&J Jab

Raise your hand if you have a bottle of Febreze air freshening or fabric spray in your house. Okay, you can put your hands down. Actually, I have a feeling not too many POM readers have Febreze laying around the house.

I have never used Febreze products, so I do not have any anecdotal evidence pointing to their efficacy. However, the manufacturer, Proctor & Gamble (P&G), purports that it is the first company to develop technology that literally eliminates odors. As asserted by the company: “Back in 1994, a P&G research & development scientist discovered that a fancy little starch molecule used in dryer sheets (AKA cyclodextrin) could actually be used to clean away bad odors from fabrics—without throwing them into the wash. With an obsessive determination over the course of four years, he perfected that technology into a simple, water-based sprayable formula… and in 1998, Febreze Fabric Refresher made its debut.” Essentially, cyclodextrins used in the laundry product trap odor molecules so that they do not reach the scent receptors in your nose. This is curious in light of my previous POM post on chemosignaling and the significance of scents, as well as the phenomenon of anosmia purported to be a common symptom of COVID.

But that is not the full story . . . In its infancy, Febreze was not a marketing success. In fact, as reported in 2016 by Anand Damani, of Behavioural Design, it was a major flop, and P&G desired to promote their product more effectively. Apparently, as Damani elucidated, P&G hired behavioral experts to create a “craving” for the product, by instilling the habitual use of Febreze. In 2012, Charles Duhigg, Pulitzer-prize winning journalist, who has a special interest in the science of habits (particularly, the militarized application of the science of habit formation) presented an interesting back story on the creation of the “Febreze habit loop.” He described that P&G had kept an extensive (and proprietary) library of videos of homemakers cleaning their houses, from which they studied their cleaning rituals. From their observations, the company’s R&D specialists had determined that a new marketing campaign needed to focus on the Febreze product being the final touch ritual after a cleaning session, emphasizing that the area cleaned would smell as good as it looked. But there was no reward there, because the product destroyed scents. Duhigg explained that the researchers went back to the lab, and P&G “spent another 3 million dollars inventing a perfume that was strong enough to withstand the chemicals of Febreze, so that they could pour it into the bottles.” Febreze sales skyrocketed, and it became a billion dollar a year product — chemically designed to “kill bad scents.”

My aim in this short essay is to clear the air on this “fancy little starch molecule” — cyclodextrin, and 2-hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HPBCD), in particular. So bear with me, as I geek out a bit on the science. I think, by the end, you will see why I took a vested interest. 

Continue reading “Clearing the Air: Febreze and the J&J Jab”

Climate Change: A Mild Case of Covid

Green

This is not new to me or anyone who has followed the “climate change” hoax. Due to increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, the planet is [not getting warmer, but rather] greening. Better yet, we are producing more food. 

Here’s a post, Fantastic Findings: German Study Shows Added CO2 Has Led to 14% More Vegetation Over the Past 100 Years!, which I picked up at Watts Up With That, the website I use to keep abreast of climate matters. It is named after its founder, Anthony Watts, a TV meteorologist. 

Continue reading “Climate Change: A Mild Case of Covid”

Part 9: Tuned In ~ A Mother’s Intuition on Transmission from the Jabbed to the Un-Jabbed

Part 9 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”

My maternal instinct leads me to sense a relatively new feature has been added to the dystopian, anti-life, nature-defeating and dangerous game afoot . . . Given the abundance of anecdotal reports from women (both injected and non-injected with medical devices pertaining to COVID) exhibiting menstrual irregularities, and pregnant women enduring unexplained miscarriages, I have been occupied with ascertaining knowledge about the potential method of transmission. What I have uncovered, within the context of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs), may be applicable to plausible concerns that have surfaced in the past month. 

Accordingly, multiple researchers have been questioning, speculating, and even debating amongst themselves with respect to the mode of passage from one jabbed person to another, who is unjabbed. These bright minds are also attempting to hone in on precisely what is being transmitted. Please read here (Makia Freeman posits that re-wiring genetic code may be affecting physical and energetic fields), and watch here (from the 28 to 37 minute timestamps, Dr. Carrie Madej suggests injected people may be acting as wireless antennae), here (David Icke hypothesizes the jabbed may be broadcasting a frequency), and here (five prominent physicians emphasize this is an undetermined form of transmission, but not viral shedding) in this regard.

The central question I would like to address is as follows: If ENPs are present in these new, experimental injections — purportedly addressing a new condition called COVID — are they able to be transmitted to non-injected individuals; and if so, by what mechanism?

Continue reading “Part 9: Tuned In ~ A Mother’s Intuition on Transmission from the Jabbed to the Un-Jabbed”

Good Germans

I am aware of suspicions surrounding the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, and can only reinforce my attitude that the program, while not “working” in any sense, is a somewhat reliable gauge for intelligent speculation on the full range of adverse events, including death and hospitalization, surrounding various Covid-19 vaccines, most prominently Pfizer and Moderna.

First, the larger context: This morning I reviewed mask requirements in Colorado, finding that there are none in most places due to small populations. In my county, Jefferson, Dr. Mark Johnson, former head of county health, perhaps in a fit of freedom and conscience, vamoosed, but I don’t know that. I only know he is gone, replaced by Dr. Dawn Comstock, referred to by a friend as a wild lady. Masks are still required here in Jeffco, and compliance, while not at 100%, is very near that. I only see one person not wearing a mask in stores … me. I’ve had clerks happily whipping theirs off when I approach without one, but for the most part, crickets.

Continue reading “Good Germans”

Confessions of an Engineered Nanoparticle

A fictional account told in first “particle” (as I have not yet achieved personhood status)

This is my story of how I am often mistaken as a virus . . . 

It seems an appropriate time to speak out.

I am not a naturally occurring nanoparticle (i.e., produced by cosmic dust, volcanic activity, forest fires, iron mining, wind erosion, or solar energy). 

I am synthesized for nano-bio interface projects that are often kept secret from civilians. I am called an engineered nanoparticle, or ENP. 

I am not produced by gain-of-function virus research projects. However, it may be helpful to review that work and its implications in some instances.

I may cause certain conditions that can be mis-attributed to viruses, but are instead novel forms of cytotoxicity produced by oxidative stress from ENPs, which I call nano-bio cytotoxicosis.

Continue reading “Confessions of an Engineered Nanoparticle”

Two essential conversations on health freedom

Following are two conversations I heard today that I feel are vital, and among the most enlightening and enriching I have absorbed since the beginning of the pandemic narrative. Hint: the one common denominator is Dr. Tom Cowan.

If (like me) you have listened to nearly all of Tom’s interviews during the past year, in reference to viruses and vaccines, there are still new intellectually stimulating, health-supporting, heart-stirring, and life-affirming nuggets to glean from these two April 2021 chats.

Continue reading “Two essential conversations on health freedom”

Part 8: Trust Codes, Vaccine Passports, and Scannable Humans

Part 8 the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”

I will keep this comparatively short and sweet . . . 

I consider myself a honey enthusiast. I am not a beekeeper, although I purchase local raw honey from reputable beekeepers. When I say “reputable,” I do not imply that I have verified through some meticulous process that their honey is 100 percent pesticide-free, or superior in flavor and consistency than another. I simply seek out, and consume, honey using my intuition and asking basic questions about the purveyors’ source and methodology. In any case, I indulge in the consumption of raw honey nearly every day for culinary purposes — in my herbal teas, on my fresh fruit, on gluten-free toast, and sometimes by the spoonful sprinkled with cinnamon and cardamom. As I said, I am a honey enthusiast

Recently, instead of a local store purchase, I ordered New Zealand-produced Manuka honey online. Though I can buy it in nearby stores, it is produced exclusively in Australia and New Zealand. I have been enjoying raw Manuka honey for the last five years, for its potentially therapeutic properties, including internal healing, such as aiding in digestion and anti-inflammation. I always keep some on hand in the event of external wounds as well. It is an expensive item, so I use it sparingly. If you are not familiar with Manuka honey and its individualized “grading system” called Unique Manuka Factor (UMF), please read here.

Due to its purported medicinal value, and its UMF ranking (in addition to other rating systems), Manuka honey production is recognized for its strict enforcement. This also follows because as one of the most expensive honey products, the adulteration and “counterfeiting” of Manuka honey is reportedly rampant. Hence, it should not have been a surprise when I saw that this particular Manuka honey brand had a scannable Quick Response (QR) code on the jar lid, to verify its traceability, and therefore, its authenticity. I had not noticed that when ordering.

Continue reading “Part 8: Trust Codes, Vaccine Passports, and Scannable Humans”

Friday notes

I do not understand “blockchain” but know it is somehow intertwined with “bitcoin.” Just brief reading on the subject this morning told me that it is coming down [the pipe], and that we cannot stop or change it.

It is like that with most things … if a discussion is allowed, it means that the matter is already decided. For instance, there was much talk and trepidation concerning “one world government” over my decades of being alive. I never knew to fear it or welcome it, but it is now apparent that we have it, have had it for a long time, and that good or bad, we cannot change it.

Continue reading “Friday notes”