The Enlightenment Has Died and Is Making Way for a New Religion, Transhumanism

by

The Enlightenment is one of the greatest cultural, social, and philosophical achievements of modern times [1]. However, it has not achieved its goal of freeing humanity from its immaturity and bondage to dogmatic beliefs, political power ambitions, and moral constraints. Instead, it has died a quiet death. Editorial writers and columnists have neither noticed nor commented on its demise. A new religion has taken hold, one that is more intolerant, dogmatic, and at least as violent as the old one from which the Enlightenment sought to liberate us. This new religion is the belief in science, scientism, with its transhumanist creed that man is God and can therefore execute everything that he can technically accomplish and socially enforce [2-8].

Enlightenment

The Enlightenment was a gradual process. It is often associated with great names such as Leibniz, Kant, Voltaire, D’Alembert, Holbach, and Diderot in the philosophical realm, as well as with “enlightened” monarchs like Joseph II and Frederick the Great and the founding fathers of the United States of America. However, at its core, it was an ongoing process. It was made possible by the insights of science, which provided humans with a deeper understanding of the world, thus offering new means of control. Simultaneously, it rendered certain aspects of religion, particularly those verging on superstition, more questionable—for example, the notion that an earthquake or plague was divine punishment. Nonetheless, it must not be forgotten: Without religion, there would never have been an Enlightenment. The Enlightenment essentially began in the Middle Ages with those thinkers and philosophers—clergy, all of them—who used their intellects to explore the fundamental questions of existence [11].

Read more

Comirnaty With Up to 500-Fold DNA Contamination Compared to Approval Guarantee

by

Comirnaty vaccine batches are contaminated with DNA at levels 300- to 500-fold higher than initially approved

Pfizer’s modified RNA injections, along with those from other manufacturers, pose several issues. A significant concern is the contamination with DNA. This deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) originates from genetically modified bacterial strains engineered to produce the target RNA of the spike protein, intended to trigger the immune response. The DNA, therefore, is a byproduct that should be thoroughly removed. Kevin McKernan identified and publicized this over a year ago. Recently, Professor König from Magdeburg has demonstrated that this issue is also present in Germany, even in standard vaccine batches provided by Pfizer [1]. Professor König is a virologist at the University of Leipzig and conducted these investigations in her private laboratory in Magdeburg. The findings (refer to the figure below corresponding to Fig. 2 from the original publication) show that the DNA content in these batches exceeds permissible levels by a factor of 300 to 500:

Read more

Publication Policy through “Retractions”

by

Our Experience with Two Own “Retractions” and Thoughts Thereon are Now Published

During the COVID period, I co-authored two papers with colleagues, both of which were published in succession and retracted in close sequence; known as “retractions” in scientific parlance. One was a risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 “vaccines,” and the other was our study on children’s masks. Both have been republished [1-4].

Read more

The RKI Files Show: The Government Has Lied to Us

by

Our analysis of the infection data proves it: The RKI has lied to the population. 

We urgently need an honest and competent reappraisal

 “RKI files” is what I call the RKI documents released by Mr Schreyer and his multipolar magazine. These are mainly minutes of meetings about the events that led to the declaration of a national state of emergency with all its consequences: curfews, restaurant, theatre, sports club and other closures, popularly known as “measures”. They are available in their entirety and have already been commented on in detail by Multipolarmagazin and others (RKI Protocols 1 and RKI Protocols 2). I would like to point out a few important details and, in the second part of this article, discuss a study that I helped with a little and which is now available on the Zenodo preprint server [1]. It shows that Just 13.5% of all people who have ever tested PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 were actually infected or had an immune response, detectable by IgG antibodies. The RKI knew this very early on, or could have known it. So they could have stopped the testing mania and the measures very soon if they had wanted to. The whole thing runs like a train on two tracks. Both tracks are called “political will”. And the train is not travelling in the direction of “caring for citizens”. I don’t know where it’s going. But I do know that none of this had anything to do with care and diligence, but at best with political power.

Read more

Even Crazier than Homeopathy – But Apparently It Works

by

Peter Chappell’s AIDS Remedy PC1

Our field study in Africa has been published

Background story

I’ve always found off-the-wall therapies interesting because, historically, scientific innovations and new findings have very often come from the fringes of the mainstream. Not always, but very often. That’s why I became interested in homeopathy when friends and colleagues dragged me to Dr Köhler’s legendary homeopathy lectures during my student days. At the time I thought: This is so crazy, if it’s true, then it’s revolutionary. As a result, I became scientifically involved with homeopathy. I did some drug trials and clinical research and then, after about 10 years of intensive research, 3 books [1-3], a series of peer-reviewed papers [4-10], extensive work on placebo effects [11-15], I realized: Yes, something is happening that is beyond random fluctuations, but that we do not understand in any way and certainly cannot explain with the conventional causal models of science [16]. I have tried to make this tangible with the scientific models currently available, but I still don’t know whether that actually leads anywhere [17].

While my hot homeopathic research period was cooling down in the early 2000s, I was approached by Harry van der Zee, a Dutch homeopathic doctor. He wanted to replicate our headache study, but better than us. That study is one of the studies in the homeopathic database that found by far the worst effect for homeopathy [7, 10]. I invited Harry round. We spent a few days together and cooked up the supposedly unbeatable design. Harry went home, did a pilot study, which turned out to be what I predicted, not what he expected. And because there was no funding, nothing came of it in the end. 

Read more