TCW
Monday, July 22, 2024
TCW
HomeClimate WatchPost Office scandal, covid and climate change – the trinity of con...

Post Office scandal, covid and climate change – the trinity of con tricks

-

LIKE many others, I have been gripped by the TV serialisation of the Post Office scandal and horrified that it could have happened under a British justice system. I have also become staggered by the similarities between this scandal and those of the Great Covid Disaster in all its forms, from the ‘origins’ to the vaccine issues, as well as the total farce that is Net Zero.

Compare and contrast. The first commonality is the reliance on a new technology that has never been properly tested in real life. In the Post Office scandal, according to the drama, postmasters were forced to use a new software system called Horizon, in the infallibility of which the Post Office had blind faith. Backed up by its manufacturer’s lies, and the resistance of the Post Office to disclose information or co-operate, their lives were destroyed. (No, it was not Pfizer but a Japanese company called Fujitsu.) In the case of covid, after the obvious virus escape from the Chinese laboratory, society was destroyed by inane computer modelling from a team led by Professor Pantsdown (aka Neil Ferguson, the Mad Cow Man), weirdly resurrected in 2020 as a Government expert adviser despite his history of wildly wrong forecasts (just think of foot and mouth), and a humbug PCR test which falsely accounted the ‘pandemic’. Ferguson’s modelling gave the worst case scenario for viral spread which led to justifying lockdown without any consideration of modelling the downside – the huge economic, social, psychological and health costs of putting a large segment of the population under house arrest

From my point of view it seemed not to consider the real scenarios of virus epidemics where cases peak and drop dramatically without any intervention. The same useless modelling has been used to support the disastrous vaccine programme which governments keep reasserting as a fact, but which is a totally speculative prediction, that the vaccine programme saved 20million lives worldwide (wow!) How do they know outside a model based on a false efficacy claim?

I have recently been delving into the climate change controversy and, though late to the game, I have been horrified to find what genuinely science-based organisations like the Global Warming Policy Foundation have been trying to communicate – up against de-platforming and censorship – that the world wide rush to Net Zero is entirely based on (yes, you guessed it) useless computer models and simulations which have been heavily doctored to give the required answer. Past data has been homogenised to make it look as if recent climate change is something to do with manmade CO2 production when the available raw data shows no recent correlation at all and complete ignorance of the fact that rising CO2 levels tend to follow temperature change and not cause it. 

It then dawned on me that this manipulation of weather history is no different from analysing the effects of the covid vaccine programme.

What is going on? Two words spring to mind: specious and sophistry. In all cases the conclusions of the problems are ‘specious’, that is misleading information where two facts are presented to imply a causation between them when there is none. All other facts are censored and selective using only the facts that fit the arguments and where all those that do not are ignored or ridiculed (sophistry). Scholars of Politics, Philosophy and Economics will realise that this is standard practice in politics, which is why so many ministers have PPE degrees, usually from Oxford.

The question is how has this become accepted as standard practice for running big companies, Institutions, handling pandemics and predicting the climate?

All three cases, the Post Office scandal, the covid response and the climate change zealotry, manifest a management class with blind faith in technology that they could never truly understand, and a frightening propensity for self-righteousness even in the face of undeniable facts which they continue to ignore whatever the outcomes. They lie to themselves and others even when their asinine conclusions are leading to the large-scale destruction of innocent lives, jobs and sanity. In the case of the Post Office scandal, how could they keep telling the poor victims that they were the only ones when there were in fact several hundred? Just like the vaccine injured being told they are not, or that they are very few, when there are thousands and thousands. This is the same culture that slammed any critic of lockdown – scientists like myself and all the learned colleagues who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, who had actually thought the problem through and came up with the correct solution – as the lucky Swedes were to find out. 

The climate change lobby and now establishment have similarly stuck to one outcome, that of a short-term goal Net Zero (carbon emissions) without thinking through the facts, leading to clearly deranged zombies such as Just Stop Oil treating the general public as if they were errant Post Office employees.

Back to compare and contrast, and I cannot help but notice the similarity of the Post Office scandal to the covid vaccine programme with its contempt for facts that do not fit the pre-made conclusions. The hundreds of thousands (if not millions worldwide) victims of the ‘safe and effective’ vaccine whose lives (if they still have them, unlike those who have already died of heart attacks  and strokes etc) have been destroyed by a totally useless and unnecessary vaccination programme, have been as shamefully treated as the sub-postmaster and mistress victims, many of whom still have not received the promised miserably low and inappropriate compensation. Vaccine victims who can no longer work or who are suffering from vaccine-induced diseases have to prove 60 per cent disability to be even considered for compensation. Read the never-ending nightmare of a vaccine injured teacher up against first the NHS then the bureaucratic nightmare of applying for a disability allowance. 

There is something rotten in the system that must be dealt with, so big that it appears to have infected nearly every country in the world. I have termed this ‘The Death of Science’ which has now turned into a multi-author book with contributions from Clare Craig, Ros Jones, Karol Sikora and Sir Richard Dearlove. It is edited by Paul Goddard and myself and published by the Clinical Press, Bristol.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Professor Angus Dalgleish
Professor Angus Dalgleish
Angus Dalgleish is an expert in immunology and Professor of Oncology at St George's Hospital Medical School, London.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.