Under the Nuremberg code, International Human rights, the common law (for countries that inherited their law from England), it is illegal to force people to take an experimental therapy.

There is now no doubt the jab doesn’t stop the spread of covid, as if anything, in most age groups, those with the jab (in the UK) are more likely to test positive.

Now we have research showing the assertions about “saving lives” are totally BS.

(source: https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/uk-data-shows-the-vaccines-are-not)

It is now, not just difficult to show that there is any benefit to the jab, it is impossible to show benefit whilst the breach of numerous serious law, treaties and international criminal law is unequivocal. There is now no doubt that politicians, those “health experts” and especially the pysops psychologists master-minding the mass Totalitarian propaganda that stirred it all up, will be going to jail.

I cannot vouch for this but it appears genuine: Greta is sinking “You can shove your climate crisis up your arse” for our US friends, that means “You can place your climate crisis where the sun don’t shine”.

The number of people who have gullibly gone along with the covid scam is astonishing. But even their gullibility is being strained by the lack of any benefit from the jabs as Big Pharma now roll out their latest money making scam of yearly boosters for a jab that doesn’t work.

What do I mean by “doesn’t work”. According the the 2019 definition of a vaccine … it produced immunity which stops people getting infected. By that definition, the jab has utterly failed as those over 30 are (slightly) more likely to test positive for covid.

Likewise, the death rate is also not on the jabs favour. The Indian variant in India showed 5% of the deaths per head of population compared to the UK variants in the UK. So, we would expect that without a jab, the Indian variant being so benign, would have around 5% of the deaths of the previous variants. What has been the result since we got both the jab and the Indian variant? The death rate is now 10% of what is was before the jab … or double what we would expect if we only had the Indian variant.

And that failure to reduce deaths was clearly visible in the Spring when those age groups who had got the jab showed no reduction in excess deaths compared to other age groups. Nor did they finish the epidemic earlier “due to” the jab.

I grant that we might expect undercounting of deaths in India, but even so, a doubling of the death rate in the UK is not evidence of success. However, it would be difficult to say it proves the jab is increasing covid deaths. On balance the null hypothesis (no significant effect) wins.

However, the “null hypothesis” of no effect is what we can say of the supposed benefit of the jab. But, when we start accounting for all the deaths and injuries already caused by the jab … and then factor in the unknown quantity of the number of deaths and long term illness caused by the jab, it becomes a no brainer that the jab was an appalling thing, for almost all people (I might be convinced of a benefit for those who had serious conditions which made them particularly vulnerable to covid, and who had a very short life-expectancy).

Now, I grant that the above needs a bit of knowledge and research … especially when the media still lie about the “effectiveness” of the jab. But people were let to believe by the UK government vile psyops nudge unit, that the jab would be the end of the abuses of human rights and lead to a prompt return to normal.

It does not take any maths to know that was a blatant lie.

Likewise the lockup. A leaked memo revealed that the UK governments own estimate of the “success” of the lockup was that it reduced deaths by 5%. If we assume 120,000 deaths that is 6000 lives “saved”. The cost of the lockup was, according to UK government, in excess of £300billion. That makes the cost per life £50million. But with an average age of death of 83 (higher than normal) and with almost all having multiple conditions the best we figure we could use of their life expectancy is 10 years (but that is very high as in reality it could be less than a year). So, the average cost per year of life “saved” was £5million. Which is  200x the maximum permitable cost of treatment in the NHS. Or to put it another way, for each year of covid life “saved”, we could have saved more than 200 years of life simply by having no lockup and putting the money into the NHS. Or to put it another way, if we had put a mere £1.5billion into the NHS and no lockup, we would have saved more lives (note we are now having to put in far more than that 1.5billion into the NHS to clear up the mess from the lockup)

And this appalling cost of the lockup … is before we start to factor in all the deaths caused by lockup. And when even lack of cancer treatment is predicted to cause 30,000 deaths, it is not difficult to see the death rate from the lockup far exceeds any suggested “saving”.

Peak Sheeple

if the jab had actually worked … people might have believed that the insane lockup was “worth it” … despite the economic insanity. If the lockup has worked to reduce deaths massively, then people wouldn’t have minded that the jab was an utter failure. But we now have a jab that is a failure and a lockup that completely failed to work.

And, worse for the vile people who broke international law and forced experimental medication on people, and those who broke the law of the UK and illegally detained millions of people in direct contravention of common law, Magna Carta and human rights, the sheeple are beginning to wake up.

I think it’s the realisation that this booster jab … means that there is no end … that no matter how much they go along with the profit making schemes of Big Pharma, that those loathsome “drug dealers” will always be demanding they pay for yet one more “fix” … and like all drug dealers, it will never end and it was all entirely utterly pointless.

Just seen a video on the North Atlantic Oscillation, and for the first time I’ve got an idea about a potential mechanism that transitions us into the ice-age. More important, this gives an idea of the timing … a few decades … indeed perhaps as long as a century before the ice-age “latches in”. In other words, we could experience conditions suggesting we are heading to another ice-age for a decade, and then return to the inter-glacial.

Still very tentative, but it’s starting to go together.

In short: I don’t have a clue what the figures mean for future covid.

However, it is now clear the jab has been a total failure … it does nothing to stop the spread of covid, indeed if anything those with the jab are more likely to spread it, and if it does reduce deaths, the jab is as likely to increase deaths both immediately after taking the jab, and more worryingly long term.

So, basically, no fit and healthy person should be taking the jab … the risks outweigh the “benefits”. And, in an ideal world I’d tell people with serious conditions to talk to their GP … but GPs are now unobtainium.

But I only mention jabs, because the jabs are easy … the evidence is pretty clear they do not work to stop the spread of covid and are dangerous so only a very few people should even consider them.

But the covid stats … they just look like noise … loud noise, with a high level of positives. There is no longer any sign of “epidemics”, instead it’s just a continuous high level with massive fluctuations … which could have a long term trend up … but could just as easily turn to a long term downward trend. Is this the “lull” before the storm … or is this the dying waves after the event? Indeed, are the stats still real at all? Are they just being made up? Are we being fed total lies …. and if so, is this to hide what is happening or to hide what could happen … or to manufacture more profit for BIG PHARMA by keeping the scare going … or to normalise covid to make the panic go away.

Antibody Dependent Enhancement

The only thing that can be said for sure … is that we know people have begun to lose immunity, so now, the longer we don’t hear anything that clearly shows ADE is happening, the less chance there is that ADE will occur.

However, it is also true, that I haven’t seen anything to suggest ADE will not occur. Indeed, the more bizarre the stats, the more concerned I am, that in some way that I do not understand, the stats indicates that ADE is occurring.

And note: this is also the argument “for” global warming. They don’t understand the weather stats or “trends”, so the stats “must” indicate what they fear.

But, also note, like global warming … the stats get changed to suit whatever the agenda of those in control of the stats have. And, the bizarre behaviour of the “stats” may simply be indicative of meddling in the stats.

A few years ago, when I was trying to explain what led to the ice-age, I began with an expectation that I could include CO2 as at least explaining part of the cycle … but it turned out that when I looked in detail, that dramatic changes in temperature had no relationship to CO2 … and as problematic, the change in CO2 lagged temperature.

This left me with a problem, because without a plausible form of positive feedback sufficiently large to induce a catastrophic decline into the ice-age, I could not explain the ice-age cycle.

One possibility I did consider was a change in the Hadleigh cell structure from the current 3 south, 3 north to either 1+1, or 5+5. The reason for this, is that the equator is always the hottest zone so sees rising air, and the poles are colder, so see descending air. The current three zone structure is created by descending air over the latitude of the Sahara (making it dry) and rising air over the latitude of the UK (making us wet).

This creates a potential mechanism to shut of the current three cell structure. The North Atlantic drift (wrong termed the Gulf Stream), is the dominant current that brings warm water from the south up toward Britain. (There is also another and much smaller current that enters the Arctic ocean which often gets talked about as it can shut off due to changes in ice, but it is really quite insignificant).

The problem with shutting off the 3 cell structure, is that North Atlantic drift and the equivalent current in the Pacific, supply much of the energy to create the rising cell structure  at the UK that maintains the 3+3 cell structure. But the 3+3 structure also creates the northward going trade winds which drive the North Atlantic drift (which get diverted by the earth’s spin so in the UK our predominant winds are from the SW). So, the 3+3 structure is maintained by the North Atlantic Drift, which is driven by the northerly winds by the 3+3 structure. So, if either the cell structure of the current were to cease, then the other would also cease and this could permanently “latch” the world’s climate into a new structure. That could explain the almost “two state” climate we see between “ice-age” and “interglacial”, but it doesn’t explain what the new state might be, nor how it makes the world cooler.

Proposal

I guess it was looking out the window, waiting for the day to warm so that I could do my car bearings, that started me thinking about which clear days are colder and how High pressure results in cooler conditions. I then started thinking about what would happen if we got a long period of high pressure over the UK in the winter: the ground would freeze, although we wouldn’t get as much precipitation, what we would get would be snow, and that would start to accumulate. And that in turn changes the colour of the ground so that more sunlight gets reflected. That is all well known. But then I started thinking about the air movement patterns. Instead of air moving generally along the “Hadleigh cells”, when we get High pressure over land, the air descends over land and then pushes out onto the sea. And, if the land were ice-covered, or covered in deserts and so reflecting more sunlight so getting less heat than the sea there could possibly develop a permanent wind pattern of descending air over the land, and rising air over the sea.

Importantly, this kind of wind pattern must occur, because globally, what we see in the ice-age period is that much of the land turns to desert. That indicates an absence of moist onshore winds, which means the predominant wind direction must change to be offshore.

Also importantly, this explains why the ice-age can be “latched in”, whilst the solar input hardly changes. The land becomes colder … partly because of the higher reflectance of heat from the ice sheets and deserts that form, but partly because the predominant movement of air is that of cold-dry descending air over land. Conversely, over the sea the air must be ascending, so here we have warm, moist ascending air, which undoubtedly means a lot of rain … but the rain is occurring over the sea and not the land. So, globally the temperature could be very similar … it’s just colder than now over land, and warmer over the sea. Likewise, the rainfall could be very similar, but in the ice-age, it predominantly occurs over sea.