Just Thinking (Digital Overload) 5/7/2020

In this age of digital overload, it’s hard to know who to trust for information when faced with such an unprecedented situation as the recent turn of events. Personally, Over the course of my career I’ve tried to understand the underlying causal events for what is happening in my world.  I do my best to do my own research. With that in mind, I thought I’d share some things I’ve learned. 


I believe all of this information to be factual, what to make of it is up to the individual. I don’t advocate you trust me but would encourage everyone to do their own digging. 


This information is becoming increasingly difficult to find, especially if you’re Googling, but it is out there. 

1)      The 2.2 Million USA deaths projected in the beginning of this event, the number that formed the basis of our response to this pandemic was authored by “expert” Dr. Neil Ferguson, a mathematical epidemiologist at Imperial College London. I think we can all agree that that number has demonstrated itself to be grossly in error. A few more examples of Dr. Ferguson’s handiwork: 

•   In 2009, he estimated Swine Flu to kill 65,000 in the UK. Actual deaths: 457
•  In 2005, he estimated H5N1 Avian Flu to kill up to 200 million. (The W.H.O. projected a possible 150 million) Actual deaths: 384 from ’03-13(Did anyone lockdown for that one?) 

•           In 2001, his modeling recommended the culling of local (UK) farm animals due to an outbreak of “hoof and mouth disease”, regardless of whether they tested positive for the disease or not.  This resulted in the slaughter of 6 million cattle, sheep, and pigs at a cost to the UK of an estimated £10 billion.Later, Michael Thrusfield, professor of epidemiology at Edinburgh University found Ferguson’s modeling “severely flawed”, that it made a “serious error by ignoring the species composition of farms”. Sadly, the damage was already done. 

Ferguson just resigned for having been exposed for breaking lockdown, (one that was arguably of his own making), to engage in an affair with a married woman. Granted, this has no bearing on his occupational skills but perhaps adds some insight into what kind of a human being he is. 

2) The W.H.O., widely regarded as the source of “authoritative truth” (more on that term later) is currently headed up by Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. The first W.H.O. Director General in history who is not a medical doctor. Prior to coming to The W.H.O., he was the Minister of Health for Ethiopia. While acting in this capacity, Ghebreyesus was: 

•          Accused of covering up 3 cholera outbreaks from 2006-2011 and delaying necessary countermeasures. 
•          Failed to declare a state of emergency during Ebola outbreaks causing a delay of necessary countermeasures. 
•          Various Civil Rights abuses: https://www.roughestimate.org/roughestimate/the-crimes-of-tedros-adhanom
•          Covering for China: https://www.cfr.org/blog/who-and-china-dereliction-duty

I looked hard at these people/entities because of their instrumental roles in forming the foundation of what this pandemic might mean to society at large. I then looked into how/where our response to the pandemic was crafted. 


In October of last year, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in conjunction with Johns Hopkins hosted “Event 201,” a purpose-built “summit” designed to “war-game” a pandemic situation nearly identical to the one we recently experienced. There’s nothing secret about this, all of the information can be found here: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/  Can you spell coincidence?


There’s A LOT to digest in this summit, but some of the key takeaways are as follows:

• The expressed need for “Big Tech” to merge with government in order to control information and provide direction
• The expressed need for a coalescence of “public/private” organizations to provide support and engineer responses
• The expressed need for a source of “authoritative truth” to disseminate information to the public
• The establishment of The W.H.O. as that source of “authoritative truth”
• The commitment on behalf of Google/YouTube (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al) to support “authoritative truth” and remove any content that conflicts with its messaging

There are a lot of more moving parts to all this.  This paper simply presents a snapshot of some of the more relevant things that we should be interested in. 


A few conclusions that resonated with me personally: 

• Repeated references to “authoritative truth”. Why the qualifier? If something is in fact the legitimate and factual truth, why the addition of the “authoritative” descriptor? Are there more than one “truth”.
• The specter of “Big Tech” merging with government.  If you don’t find this even slightly alarming, then I guess we don’t really have anything else to talk about.
• The coalescence of “public/private” organizations. Based on what I’ve found, this is fancy language for government assuming control of private business, e.g. “we” now own a stake in airlines bailed out with taxpayer dollars. And when I say “we”, I mean government. 

This is just scratching the surface.  Hopefully, I’ve provided some useful information. There’s a lot more where this came from, you just have to put in the work to find it. 

It’s becoming increasingly difficult to find as it runs afoul of the “authoritative truth” designation.