Data now suggests (even though still nascent) that children not only have extremely low risk as mentioned above but also that they naturally have the capability of evading the SARS-CoV-2 virus due to the lack of the ACE-2 receptors in their nostrils. It escapes us as to why this deceit continues to be served to the public and has not been stopped forthwith.
CDC report: “Double masking might impede breathing or obstruct peripheral vision for some wearers, and knotting and tucking can change the shape of the mask such that it no longer covers fully both the nose and the mouth of persons with larger faces.”
Jordan Schachtel: No human beings were involved in this study. And yes, it was that simple. The CDC sprayed aerosols at mannequins and slapped a science™ label on their experiments. ... First and foremost, it is not a completed study at all. These are mere experiments conducted on mannequins, not humans. A proper study on the efficacy of masks needs to be a randomized controlled trial involving human beings in their normal settings — such as the Danish mask study that showed there is no evidence that masks do anything to prevent COVID-19 — and not mannequins in a laboratory.
Trevor Thomas: If you've enjoyed the last 10 months of foolish, science-denying lockdowns and mask mandates, the widespread destruction of businesses and economies, and the government telling you what jobs are "essential" and how you are to conduct yourself in your own home, then you must absolutely love the Democrats' climate agenda. ... Democrats in politics and the media rampantly spread Wuhan virus fear porn. Subsequently, Democrat mayors and governors across the U.S. — encouraged and enabled by their like-minded allies in D.C. and the media — enacted widespread and economically devastating lockdowns and accompanying measures. ...
Likewise, if you think the planet is doomed if we don't do away with fossil fuels or stop eating beef, then you are probably willing to give power to those who promise to take such things away — by force if necessary. After all, if the planet is doomed otherwise, what force to do such things could be unjustified? ... Whether a virus "emergency" or a climate "crisis," in an attempt to justify their totalitarian agenda, leftists the world over tell us we must heed their so-called "experts" along with their computer models.
Sadly, as 2020 well demonstrated, in such times, many of us are far too eager to become what Lewis called in 1958 "Willing Slaves of the Welfare State." Typically, in order for any oligarchy to rise and rule effectively, it needs some "extreme peril," something to cure, some desperate need that the rulers promise to fulfill. As Lewis asked, is this not "the ideal opportunity for enslavement?" ... When a generation lives in fear or dread of some looming crisis or when a society is made to believe that someone else can provide the things that it supposedly cannot live without, is this not the opportunity for those who seek to rule over us to be seen as liberators rather than the totalitarian tyrants they are? ...
Scientism almost always leads to a technocracy. "I dread government in the name of science," said Lewis. "That is how tyrannies come in." What a profound conclusion! How many of us have been duped in the name of "science"? How many of us cower and yield — or "shelter at home" — because, well, if the "scientists" (and then the politicians) tell us to do so, then we must do so?
Climate science has become such a joke that the "faithful" for years now have been led by a child. However, their dangerous and destructive climate policies are no joke.
Chomsky claimed that people who oppose wearing masks are an “epidemic” in American politics, more concerned about protecting their freedoms than following science:
“I mean, do you have an individual right to take an assault rifle and go to the supermarket or mall and start shooting randomly?” he questioned. “That’s what it means not to wear a mask. It’s a strange kind of individualism.”
On the HadCRUT4 data, there has been no global warming for close to eight years, since March 2014. That period can be expected to lengthen once the HadCRUT data are updated – the “University” of East Anglia is slower at maintaining the data these days than it used to be.
Michael Shellenberger: A major new staff report from the New York Federal Reserve Bank throws cold water on the over-heated rhetoric coming from activist investors, bankers, and politicians. “How Bad Are Weather Disasters for Banks?” asks the title of the report by three economists. “Not very,” they answer in the first sentence of the abstract.
The reason is because “weather disasters over the last quarter century had insignificant or small effects on U.S. banks’ performance.” The study looked at FEMA-level disasters between 1995 and 2018, at county-level property damage estimates, and the impact on banking revenue.
UK Independent: "Your home, sometime in the next decade. You click the heating on and receive an app notification telling you how much of your carbon allowance you’ve used today. Outside in the drive, your car’s fuel is linked to the same account. In the fridge, the New Zealand lamb you’ve bought has cost not just pounds and pence but a chunk of this monthly emissions budget too. Welcome to the world of personal carbon allowances – a concept that is increasingly gaining traction among experts as a possible response to the climate crisis. Each month, it would see every person or household in the country given a limited emissions quota to spend on heating, energy, travel, food and possibly consumer goods. Those who wish to expend more could buy top-ups. Those who require less would be able to sell their left-overs back to the ‘grid’." ... Now, in the wake of Cop26, many feel the concept – radical, perhaps, but demonstrably do-able – has never been riper for consideration. So, could this be our future? ... “By establishing an equal monthly budget for everyone, you create a sense of a shared effort to address a shared problem,” says Fawcett.