How Faucing Wrong and Arrogant Can One Person Be?

July 6, 2020 in Columnists, News by RBN Staff



By: Je suis Spike, for RBN


How Faucing Wrong and Arrogant Can One Person Be?

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth to call Anthony Fauci a dokter, and evven my keybored resist$ mi atemps to wright it.

Leaving that behind, Dr. Anthony Fauci recently said that a significant percentage of people (Americans) are anti-authority, anti-science and anti-vaccine.  I take issue with his claim.  Few are actually anti-science, but many question the scientists and their work.  And, as for authority over me, I grant it to those whom I judge worthy,* and fight it otherwise.  That’s rather American, I think, to question authority.  And, of course, Anthony Fauci is not so much an authority but an authoritarian sort.

Though it cannot answer all questions, science is like logic; by definition, it is trustworthy.  But not all people who are called scientists are actual scientists, or at least they are not all practicing science.  Many of them wear white lab coats and look and talk like scientists- even on TV- but if they’re not following the criteria that science demands, they’re disgusting pretenders and worthy of no respect.  Before tearing into the basis of the Faucing assertion, let me direct your attention to an article from The Lancet medical journal, which is described via Yahoo search as:  “…is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal.  It is among the world’s oldest and best-known medical journals.”

When Dr. Fauci denigrates the people, you know, us, and claims we are anti-science, I would direct his attention to The Lancet article, “Offline:  What is medicine’s 5 Sigma?” Written by Richard Horton, whom Yahoo describes thusly: “Richard Charles Horton FRCP FMedSci (Born 29 December 1961) is editor-in-chief of The Lancet, a United Kingdom-based medical journal.  He is an honorary professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, University College London, and the University of Oslo.”  Sounds rather educated to me, for what that’s worth.  And he is concerned for the veracity of science, as we learn in his article.

I would suggest that you actually read the article I cite at the following link which literally may be read in five or six minutes:  This article starts with Horton writing, “’A lot of what is published is incorrect.’  I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked [instructed] to observe Chatham House rules.  We were also asked [instructed] not to take photographs of slides.  Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in “purdah”—a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll.  Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution?  Because this symposium—on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, [the essence of what make science valuable] held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week—touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today:  the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations.”  [Underlined emphasis mine, throughout.]  That great human creation which has gone awry?  It’s science, he suggests.  But it’s not really science that has gone wrong, as science is what it is; it is the authorities in whom we are told to trust when they falsely claim to be doing science who have gone wrong. 

Mr. Horton continues his exposure of so-called scientific authority, “The case against science is straightforward:  much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may be simply untrue.”  Think of that.  If half of what we all heard today were to be untrue, there is no way we could have a function, livable society.  Yet, we are possibly dealing with half of the scientific literature, to which we are commanded, by “men” like Fauci, to listen to and to believe, being untrue.  Oh, that it were only honest errors, but the untruth is not that.

Mr. Horton lists why he makes the assertion of untruthfulness of our scientific overlords:   “Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance,[**] science has taken a turn towards darkness.”  Science has taken a turn towards darkness?  Wow!  The light-bringers, themselves, have turned toward darkness.  And Dr. Fauci has the hubris to claim, with contempt, that some of the people are anti-authority and anti-science.  If there is an overlord of darkness in medicine, I mean in addition to Bill Gates, I cannot help but believe the (little “p”) prince of darkness is Darth Fauci.  And is Bill Gates not a candidate for the younger of the next pair of James Bond supervillains who would rule the world, Soros and Gates?  But back to the matter…

Admitting some culpability in the matter of the bastardization of science, Mr. Horton goes on to explain why these listed untruthful assertions gain acceptance in medical journals, including “Our [journal editors’] love of significance pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale.”  Continuing to widen the circle of jerks who attempt to push falsehoods down our throats, he adds, “Journals are not the only miscreants.  Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as high-impact publication.”  Doesn’t it seem like good, actual science should be rewarded with, well “significance” and “money,” instead of weird, fawning bending of the truth to whatever lunacy the “authorities” have conjured, or had placed in their minds by the voices in their heads?

The good news is that Horton endeavors to seek a solution.  He asks, “Can bad scientific practices be fixed?”  It is a step in the right direction to ask such a question, of course.  But, should we be hopeful?  He continues, “Part of the problem is that no-one is incentivised to be right.  Instead, scientists are incentivised to be productive and innovative.”  Of course, in this case, “productive” means speak and write very much, and innovative means to think, and “prove” stupid things such as there are 71 genders, and if you disagree with that lunacy you are proving Fauci correct in his tiny little Faucing mind; you are rejecting science and authority.

So, is there hope?  Mr. Horton tells us that, “The conclusion of the symposium was that something must be done.  Indeed, all seemed to agree that it was within our power to do that something.  But as to precisely what to do or how to do it, there were no firm answers.  Those who have the power to act seem to think somebody else should act first.”  Then the bad news, “The bad news is that nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system.”  I would be remiss to fail to inform you that there was a secret video made of this portion of the proceeding—but that recording was destroyed—but was then reproduced by professional English actors, with the topic of discussion changed; but the firm decision to do something remaining.***

God blessed America,

Je suis Spike


*  Here is a man to whom I am willing to at least give the benefit of the doubt regarding the worthiness of his authority-

The children who comprise this vaccine-injured generation are now aging out of schools that needed to build quiet rooms and autism wings, install wobble chairs, hire security guards and hike special ed spending to 25% to accommodate them. They are landing on the social safety net which they threaten to sink. … The good news for Big Pharma, of course, is that many of these vaccine-injured children have lifelong dependencies on unaffordable blockbuster drugs like insulin, Adderall, anti-psychotic drugs, Epi-Pens, asthma inhalers, and diabetes, arthritis, and anti-seizure meds made by the same companies that made the vaccines.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

**  I would nominate for the first “obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance” to be expunged from science, along with it proponents:  There are more than 2 genders.

For the record, the date of this article is April 11, 2015 and is from Volume 385.  Also, I attempted to email Mr. Horton, as his email is included at the end of the article, and I received no reply.  He might be waiting for Dr. Fauci to take the lead in straightening out science, and making vaccines safe and effective.

*** If you are not amused by Monty Python, I extend my apologies; they’re not for everybody.  (And, politically, they seem mostly like idiots.)