We Were Not Just Wrong. We Were Hysterically Wrong.

Part I: The Complaint

Think back to the early months of 2020. Do you remember what was happening? Do you remember what we were thinking back then? Do you remember what we were doing? When I think about those months, I can’t find a fairer word to describe our behavior than hysteria.*

Think back. Remember the early predictions of a 10% mortality rate? Do you remember how we worried about how long the virus could linger on everything from apple skins to paper bags to plastic handles?

Do you remember how we shut down our beaches because we believed that the virus could spread itself in the sea breeze? There were even discussions about whether it could survive in the ocean!

Do you remember that hospitals would not allow family members to be with their loved ones, even during their final hours of life?

Looking back on all that now, it seems certifiably crazy. But it wasn’t just a brief, initial overreaction. Have you thought about all the things that we were thinking and doing in the second half of that year and in the following 18 months? Are you aware of how many things we believed (and were told to believe by the CDC and government health officials) that turned out to be dead wrong?

We want to believe that what we did was sensible. That we always “followed the science.” We want to believe that we began with an abundance of caution (better-safe-than-sorry), and then scaled back the regulations and restrictions as we learned more.

But that’s not what happened. In retrospect, it’s becoming increasingly obvious that we took part in a massively destructive and very much unscientific government-sponsored exercise in fearmongering, gaslighting, witch hunting, and mass manipulation.

And it cost us dearly. In human and financial capital. A cost that cannot be recouped.

Early in 2020, when I was writing about COVID regularly, it was obvious that some of what we were being told made no sense. On top of that list was the mortality rate. It was said to be as high as 30% before falling to 10%, where it was widely publicized, resulting in a tidal wave of fear that spread through the developed world. Today, we know that the mortality rate was much, much lower. More importantly, we know that this should have been obvious to anyone that had the slightest knowledge of logic, as I argued in those early blogs.

That initial level of fear has abated. For most of us, it’s almost entirely gone. We all know dozens of people that have contracted COVID and recovered fully.

We now have more than 30 months of experience with the virus and with our reactions to it. And we have data from hundreds of national and international studies and dozens of mega-studies. What they are telling us is that many, if not most, of the important “facts” we were told about COVID by WHO, the CDC, and the media were downright false. And many of those falsities were being promoted by health professionals that knew, or should have known, better.

The US lost tens of thousands of profitable businesses, trillions of dollars in revenue, and two years of critical schooling for our youngsters. This is a big deal. And the media should be writing about it.  What they are doing instead is gradually letting out bits and pieces of truth, hoping that the public will not realize they were bamboozled.

They want to bury the “facts” they were reporting. Or, if that can’t be done, they want to be seen as blameless. And if that can’t be done, they want to be forgiven.

Last month, The Atlantic published an essay by Emily Oster in which she acknowledges that a good deal of what the media reported was false and/or misleading. But she argues that it was done with good intentions. There’s no point in pointing fingers now, she says. We should give the media (and others involved) a sort of pandemic amnesty. “Let’s focus on the future,” she writes. “And fix the problems we still need to solve.”

Another tactic from the media that I’ve been seeing lately also admits to promoting the falsehoods, but makes light of them, as if the lockdowns and the mandates were all in good fun.

For example, this editorial from The Washington Post.

A Conversation with Bill Bonner and Porter Stansberry 

If you are in the mood to learn something about the state of the economy and why I believe a major recession is inevitable, listen to this conversation between two of my better-educated friends and colleagues here.

How Secure Is Your Meta Account? 

Meta reportedly fired or disciplined more than two dozen workers who took over some user accounts. In some cases, for bribes. Read the details here.

Bipartisan Agreement on TikTok: What’s Going On? 

In 2020, Donald Trump signed an executive order banning TikTok, a video-sharing medium owned by a Chinese conglomerate. The federal courts halted the order, and Joe Biden revoked it after taking office.

But over the next two years, Democrat sentiment on the issue changed. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer discussed TikTok’s links to China at a press conference in 2020. “I have urged that TikTok be closed down in America,” he said. Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) took it even further. “I think Donald Trump was right,” he recently admitted on Fox News.

This makes me very uncomfortable. Does anyone reading this understand what’s going on?

Stopping the “Stop Oil” Numbskulls

To publicize their idiotic cause of “no more oil production,” protestors have been targeting art treasures in museums in Europe almost non-stop since the beginning of this year.

At the start, their strategy was to glue themselves to the frames of well-known paintings. This got them the press coverage they were looking for. But after doing it a half-dozen times, they found that they were losing their audience. So, they tried to keep up the momentum by gluing themselves to ever more famous works. And when that didn’t work, they did the only other thing they could think of. They began assaulting the art. First, by throwing non-staining liquids at the masterpieces. Then by upping it to maple syrup, which caused temporary damage. And then by upping it again to diesel fuel and oil, which did serious damage.

The museums did their best to respond to the attacks with a degree of Woke sympathy. (Museums, if you don’t know, are among the most Woke institutions in the world.) They expressed dismay at the acts, but support for the cause.

The last such attack happened in early November when three young people from Finland, Denmark, and Germany attempted to glue themselves to Edvard Munch’s The Scream at the National Museum of Norway. “The glue didn’t stick this time. But we won’t give in until the government meets our demands,” the activist group posted on Twitter.

The Norwegian museum directors couldn’t let this one go with a little slap on the wrists. It was, after all, The Scream! The protestors were arrested.

Click here.

Anna Delvey Under House Arrest: “I’m Still Living Better Than All of You!”

Did you see the Shonda Rhimes-produced Netflix series Becoming Anna? It tells the story of Anna Sorokin, a 31-year-old Russian woman going by the alias of Anna Delvey, who scammed her way through New York City’s upscale art scene, using an invented trust fund to persuade the city’s power brokers to invest in a members-only arts club. It’s a good-but-not-great series. But it will leave you wanting to know more about the central character.

The short version: She was arrested and convicted for bilking investors out of $200,000, spent nearly two years at Riker’s Island, and is currently living in a one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan, under house arrest.

Here’s an amusing little interview with her. 

This video was sent to me by a high school friend…

Under the link, he wrote: “Very cool! And the inventor is a kid.”

It’s a new technology that will make finding your gate at the airport, and getting to it, much easier. In the video, you can see how much people like it.

My friends that were copied on the email agreed that it is marvelous. “Amazing!” one wrote. “What will they think of next?” wrote another.

I’ll tell you what I think… I think it’s scary. Inevitable, but scary. And I’ll tell you why.

In the context of negotiating your way through a busy airport, it is a very attractive benefit. No more scouring the departure boards. No more worry about finding your gate or getting to it on time. The system will guide you every step of the way, letting you know about any changes and when, exactly, you will arrive at the gate.

That’s great. But how does it work?

When you confirm your registration, the device scans your body image and converts it into digital information. It will then be able to track you and communicate with you during the entire time you are in the airport.

After your plane takes off, your data is deleted from the database. That’s what the people behind the technology say. And in the beginning, that’s what they will do. But I am absolutely certain that before long the government will step in and claim this digital information for its homeland security database. It will be necessary, they will say, to track down terrorists and keep everyone safe.

And no one will object to it. Because no one, except terrorists, will have anything to hide. So, the digital body images will be collected and stored in a federal digital bank. And the collection of data will grow from there. Devices like this one will be installed at every train and bus station and inside and outside of all public buildings. To transport yourself by train, plane, or rented automobile, you’ll have to submit to a scan. And despite assurances that it won’t be done, this data will eventually be used to track every movement of virtually every person, citizen or alien, 24/7.

Add this to the coming of the digital dollar, and you have the makings of a zero-privacy society. It will be a society where we will all have social credit scores that will determine what privileges and freedoms we are allowed. And it will be a society where everyone is okay with that because everyone will have “nothing to hide.”

Are We Living in George Orwell’s Nightmare or Aldous Huxley’s? 

How many times in recent years have you thought, “This is just like 1984.”? Or “This reminds me of Brave New World”? Click here to read a short, but insightful essay on that subject.

 

A Canadian university, to better study the dynamics of rivers, has built its own river…