Thursday, May 14, 2020

Cognitive Dissonance








Journalist:  
Good morning. In the next few days Americans will die of this novel virus, and those deaths will likely eclipse the total combined amount of deaths in the Korean, Vietnam, Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq wars.

FarmerJoe:  
If you think that’s big, you should pay attention to how many deaths and life-destroying injuries are caused by vaccines. Oh, and don’t forget that Planned Parenthood murders thousands of infants every year, too, FAR beyond covid-19 deaths.

LionBow:  
None of this is true. “Abortion” has nothing to do with “infants”. Vaccines save millions of lives every year, as we don’t lose children and adults to diseases like polio or the measles anymore. You might want to stay away from conspiracy theory websites.

FarmerJoe: 
Wait. Wait. Wait. Are you seriously resting your entire response on semantics? 
My point doesn't depend upon using an apolitically correct term one time. 
To your point: If “abortion”, i.e. the termination of a human pregnancy, has “nothing” to do with infants, then why are they killed inside the womb before expulsion? 
Were the children in the womb not human or alive?

LionBow:  
They weren't "children" at all. You are attempting to change the meaning of words to fraudulently strengthen your statement and pull on heart strings. That is dishonest.

FarmerJoe: 
I’m the one being “dishonest”? 
I agree with all of medical and scientific literature: children, infants, and fetuses are fully human beings. 
So at what point do you advocate homicide (i.e. the killing of another human being)? 
Inside the womb it’s okay, but outside it’s not?

LionBow: 
You are being dishonest. Fetuses aren't infants as you claimed them to be. And, no one should be forced to give up the use of their body against their will. Having sex does not create a contractual agreement to carry a fetus to term.

FarmerJoe: 
It doesn’t seem to me that you care enough about the human-being being murdered inside the mother’s womb. So far, you haven’t answered my other questions.

LionBow: 
I don’t advocate the killing of anyone at any time. But, I don’t think that anyone should be forced to give up the use of their body against their will so that another can survive. "Infants", by definition, cannot be killed in the womb. Fetuses are not infants. Your statement was false. And, no human being should be forced to give up the use of their bodies against their will. Abortion is sad, but the right for women to control their reproduction is vital. 

FarmerJoe: 
Again, you’re playing Semantics. 
Are fetuses human? 
Are they human beings who are alive before being aborted? 
I’m glad to see that you agree with me, that the human being in the womb should not be forced to give up the use of his/her body against his/her will.

LionBow: 
You must have reading comprehension issues. No one should be forced to give up the use of their body to ANOTHER against their will. Women shouldn't be forced to carry fetuses to term against their will.

FarmerJoe: 
Should any female human fetus’ body be forced against its will to give up the use of its body and die?
Honest question. 
Is that justified because the mother is killing the daughter inside her body?

LionBow: 
Your question is nonsensical. My point is simple. People shouldn't be forced against their will to give up the use of their body to keep another alive. Should we be forced to give up organs to save others?

FarmerJoe: 
I find it interesting that I’m being accused of toying with the meaning of words, yet you have changed the meaning of abortion, i.e. the killing of a human being inside its mothers womb, to mean: being forced to give up the use of ones body to keep another person alive. That’s sad.

LionBow: 
I'm not changing the meaning at all. I fully understand and agree that a byproduct of aborting a pregnancy is the death of the fetus. But, when you force a woman to carry a fetus to term against her will you are forcing that woman to give up the use of her body against her will.

FarmerJoe: 
Wow. Now the murder of an innocent human being in its mothers womb is being described as the “byproduct” of abortion. 
How convenient. 
So is it okay to murder a fully BIRTHED child outside its mothers womb if that, too, is a “byproduct” of some procedure chosen by its mother?

LionBow: 
Obviously not, as once the baby is born, it is no longer necessary for it to use the mother's body against her will. She can give it up for adoption.

FarmerJoe:  
Why is it “obviously” not okay once the baby is born, but it’s okay if the baby is not yet born? 
We are both talking about a HUMAN baby, correct? 
Why can’t the mother NOT kill her baby in the womb, give birth, and then give it up for adoption?

LionBow: 
A woman should not be forced to give up the use of her body against her will. Once the baby is born, that is no longer at issue. If we force women to carry fetuses to term why not force people to donate organs to save lives? Because it is a violation of our constitutional rights.



**RETURNS TO CHECK ON THE INITIAL COMMENTS**



Journalist:  
Good morning. In the next few days Americans will die of this novel virus, and those deaths will likely eclipse the total combined amount of deaths in the Korean, Vietnam, Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq wars.

FarmerJoe:  
If you think that’s big, you should pay attention to how many deaths and life-destroying injuries are caused by vaccines. Oh, and don’t forget that Planned Parenthood murders thousands of infants every year, too, FAR beyond covid-19 deaths.

LionBow:  
None of this is true. “Abortion” has nothing to do with “infants”. Vaccines save millions of lives every year, as we don’t lose children and adults to diseases like polio or the measles anymore. You might want to stay away from conspiracy theory websites.

FarmerJoe:  
Vaccines SAVE lives? 
I don’t think you have looked into that subject very deep. 
Did Gardisil SAVE lives?

LionBow:  
Vaccines have saved hundreds of millions of lives. Polio alone used to kill 1 in 4 children. Measles used to kill close to that amount. Vaccines have almost completely itradicated them. Just as with all medicines, there are risks, but the benefits far outweigh those risks.

FarmerJoe:  
I believe I offered resources first. So how about you do better than a quick google search to cofirm your bias, and actually watch the video I linked to and read the book I attached.

LionBow:  
I have researched the subject. There is overwhelming evidence that vaccines are effective and save lives.

FarmerJoe: 
Well then, you shouldn’t have any problem writing a detailed review and rebuttal of the resources I already provided (above)



LionBow:  
Laugh all you want, but an overwhelming majority of experts in preventable diseases agree with me. You are part of a fringe group that believes in an unfounded conspiracy.

FarmerJoe: 
Since others seem to like this post, they should look into the hundreds of peer reviewed medical literature about vaccine safety. Be informed with real science, not reactionary, blind faith: Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers 

BoozyMerchant: 
The person who wrote that book isn't a doctor and is the director of an anti vaccine book. It's not peer reviewed work at all. It's him manipulating the data of who knows what studies.

FarmerJoe:  
I think it’s hilariously obvious that you have not read the book. 
It contains HUNDREDS of peer reviewed studies cited in it. 
“It’s not peer reviewed at all”, said the idiot who wiki searched other idiotic opinion-blogs instead of reading the actual book.

BoozyMerchant:  
His book analyzes released studies. His own analysis is not peer reviewed and the book was released to horrible reviews by the scientific community.

Why don't you just admit you're a shill for the anti-vaccine movement? There's not one legit scientist out there saying "look, maybe we need to reanalyze vaccine risks." Not one. You're making shit up to push conspiracy theories and authors who make money off the anti-vaxx movement.

FarmerJoe: 
I’m a shill? 
Are you serious? 
I personally know CHILDREN who are vaccine injured 
I personally know adults who are vaccine injured 
I personally know three children who have DIED from vaccines
Do you have anything more to offer than insensitive and naively canned accusations? 
Watch this video and try to HONESTLY accuse all these VICTIMS of being “shills”

BoozyMerchant: 
Fortunately for us all, you have very few followers and very few interactions with real accounts.

FarmerJoe:  
Also, fortunately, I’m not a shill. I just care about others who are vaccine injured, and I care about real vaccine data, and real interactions with people who have been injured by vaccines, and I know others personally who are vaccine injured and/or have died from vaccines.

BoozyMerchant:  
Almost all made up horseshit with a few coincidences. You're completely full of shit, yes. You are a shill. You share videos by people who take advantage of people. You're the second worst kind of human. The worst are the makers of this videos. Then there's you, pushing their lies.

FarmerJoe: 
You cannot possibly be serious?  
I have not met many people as insensitive and conceited and myopic as you right now. 
If you watch the video I linked above, you’d have to be completely heartless to accuse the people who share this as “shills”!

BoozyMerchant: 
They're not shills, they've been taken advantage of. You're a shill. The maker of that video - shill. Worse, you spread this shit. You're literally just a fake news dump to the world. 

FarmerJoe: 
What is wrong with you? 
I don’t have the slightest idea why you have made a point of throwing bogus accusations like “shill” at strangers like me. 
It’s really childish and unnecessary.

BoozyMerchant:  
Vaxxed are movies by Andrew Wakefield. He's a known liar for the anti-vaxx movement. He is a discredited scientist. You're just a pusher for stupidity.

FarmerJoe: 
I get the feeling that the most you know is from google searches and blogs that confirm your biases.  If you’re truly interested in Andrew Wakefield and whether you’re just blindly following the mantras of others, watch this film:

BoozyMerchant:  
I'm not going to watch videos that defend a man that lied, then built a career on that lie. Or did you not know that he had corporations ready to profit off his research that he owned? I'm not interested in anything you have to say at this point. You’re discredited yourself.

FarmerJoe:  
How do you know the film defends Andrew Wakefield if you haven’t watched it?
And how do you know he lied, instead of others lying about him? 
You’d have to watch the film to even comment.
I can’t think of anyone with such an arrogant confirmation bias as yourself.

BoozyMerchant:  
What I said is completely true and provable by the fact you are posting clips from Andrew Wakefield movies.

FarmerJoe:  
Actually, the three video clips I shared are, as far as I know, not produced by Wakefield. 
The first two were from the sequel to Wakefield’s one and only film. 
And the third was produced and directed by an independent studio. 
Adding to that, have you even seen Wakefield’s actual film?

BoozyMerchant:  
He’s literally a snake oil salesman and you are literally a moron for believing him. There's a half dozen books written before him that tried the same thing. All wildly misrepresenting the studies inside. 
Andrew Wakefield basically abused the children in his study as well. He's an unethical piece of shit and you're a moron who follows his successors blindly.

FarmerJoe:  
I cannot fathom how childish and incoherent your remarks are. Please cite these books you’re thinking of, so I can study them also.

BoozyMerchant:  
No. You can Google your favorite author and see all the other books with similar goals that wildly misreport and misrepresent actual science. I'm done with you. You associate with the scummiest snake oil shit in America right now while misrepresenting real science.

FarmerJoe:  
How convenient. 1st you accuse me of being a “shill” with zero evidence. 
Then you claim to personally know a “half dozen” books that are somehow relevant to discrediting what I have shared so far. 
But as soon as I ask you what some of those books are, you name-call and evade.

RandomZah:  
These damn anti-vaccine people need to go to a 100+ year old graveyard and look at all the headstones of children that didn’t make it to the age of 3. Maybe that will help set it right in their minds how well vaccines work.

FarmerJoe:  
Tell that to the parents of children who are severely injured or died from vaccines: https://youtu.be/CC8QZD3IG3I

LionBow:  
So your anecdotal "stories" should outweigh decades of scientific studies and actual evidence?

FarmerJoe:  
*My* anecdotal stories? 
“Decades” of “scientific” studies? 
Do you just regurgitate mainstream pablum? 
You sure don’t seem well researched in either anecdotes or scientific studies.

RandomZah:  
Most every article written by virologist and immunologist’s ever done agree with me. I trust them far more than some rando on twitter. But hey you do you and maybe your children won’t sue you when they get old enough to know what potential pain you put them through.

FarmerJoe: 
They agree with *you*?  

*You* must be someone special.


























Saturday, May 9, 2020

Simpatico Enterprises









Who will guide me?
the sheeple said

Look here!
he said

Look there!
she said

Do not listen to them! 
I will guide youI, the one, who knows.
I can peel back the layers of truth and reveal to you all its secret inward parts.
said the gatekeeper

Why should we listen to you?
Who made you the one to authenticate?
the sheeple inquired

The Scientific Community.
said the gatekeeper

We have the degrees. 
We have letters of recommendation.
We have articles published and peer reviewed.
We have the required skills of the scientific tradition, 
to teach, train, and discern the truth.
said the gatekeeper

But I have a PhD, also.
said Mr. Humilis

And I have letters of recommendation from seven reputable universities.
said Ms. Tenir

I have dozens of articles, and even one book about my research, all of which have been peer reviewed before publication.
said Mrs. Vilificare

And I have many of the required skills of the accepted scientific tradition, too.
said Mr. Artire

Aha! But do you have the support of society?
And does society support your values or affirm your passions?

We, the ones who know, have such support and affirmation. 
By understanding and living within the rigorous thought world of the communally supported Scientific Community, we can work together to inoculate and immunize future generations against the unhealthy consumption of propaganda.
Together we become safer, at home, and essential for the future good of society.

So beware: Who you choose to listen to forms your ability to see either correctly or in a warped and twisted manner. 
Please listen to the Scientific Community instead of merely thinking independently, or following those who are offering conspiracy theories.
We want you to not only think for yourself, but also to think communally, where knowledge is cultivated and distributed by discerning knowers.
the gatekeeper sternly warned

You may hear about information wars, and even rumors of culture wars. 
But be sure to not let anyone lead you astray with fake news. 
For many will come to you in the name of the Scientific Community,
and they will try to lead you astray, as they have with many others.
Do not listen to them, or encourage them.
Do not share their nonsense.
Lean not on your own understanding,
but in all your ways acknowledge Science, 
and it will direct your paths,
in ways which the future of society must go.
the gatekeeper insisted

But we’ve heard all that before.
said the sheeple

Gatekeepers like you have been selling that dogma for two thousand years,
and we think your predictions about the future are horseshit.

Your authenticated community of knowledge was once our community, too,
until some of us attempted to publish our peer reviewed research,
and tweet our professional, data-driven opinions publicly.
Then we were arrested and jailed on trumped-up charges,
and were publicly maligned by false reports,
or had our reputations publicly twisted,
or our integrity shot with holes by the people with influence around our circles,
or we were just completely ignored as deviants.

We repeatedly asked for evidence of what was an error, 
and all we got was the typical libel of scientific cronyism.
We were fired and fined,
sued and weakened with constant financial assaults,
accused of being the ones spreading lies,
made out to have holes in our stories,
and persecuted.
We looked at the evidence according to your community guidelines and standards—which were ours at that time, too.
We closely inspected the reports and claims of others with degrees and letters of recommendation,
with published and peer reviewed articles,
and all the required skills of your sacred tradition—the same skills that many of us have, too.
Yet we became convinced that the public should not listen to you, the gatekeepers of discerning knowers,
and we no longer think that your guild should be the ones to authenticate what should be cultivated and distributed to guide others.

We published and publicized the data of our experience,
yet our research has been retracted by you.
Our life saving research has been withheld from public appeal because of you.
Our stories and documentaries were taken down from social media by those conspiring with you.
The artificial labels slapped upon us consist of quacks, theorists, and criminals.
We have become the ones shoved into a concentration camp for ethical cleansing.
And our experience of knowing within the Scientific Community is revealing: 

You are the false prophets. You are the priests of culture. You are the rulers of this age, beholden to Herodian-like dynasties, centered on your precious temple, with your empire of thought built around it.









Thursday, May 7, 2020

Scrabbling



This one is obsessive
like the green beans of star dollars
charred so badly that its ashes
pioneer through mounds of cream and sugar
that would, quite dogmatically
never be added to any mug

Others are compulsive
so we're told, yet this one's a broken record 
of twanging strings and acts of reading
over and over and over
with words like bees hovering around my lobes
and forty messages a day to chug

The mantra of everyone else's disorder
is repeated again and again and again
and the leitmotif of calling, leading, and Jesus praying
blessing us with a loud voice rising early in the morning
refreshing each like continually dripping water
nipping every intrigued pant leg as a puppy dog









Sunday, May 3, 2020

Tell me what you really think





There goes one more

. . . Who knows what they're thinking . . .

Drifting down the road

spokes twirling

pedals rotating

fifteen miles per hour

while wearing a stupid mask





Did you hear that?

. . . There goes another . . .

making a left turn

after a stop sign

blasting music so loud

that they can't hear a hole in their muffler

and the driver is wearing a stupid mask





And did you see that lady

on Instagram

selling crochet'd masks?

She might as well be wearing a sock

with holes and a coffee filter

over her stupid face





Oh, there goes another 

and another

and another

jogging, driving, biking

while wearing stupid masks





Wow, another blissful wanderer

walking their dog

down the sidewalk

pausing and veering 

to keep two yards away

from another idiot wearing a stupid mask

who also is walking their dog

which is wearing its own custom-made stupid mask









The Theorist










                      Who can be trusted?

                                                                 And who exactly are "they"
                                                 behind the scenes,
                                                    planning and attending meetings,
                                                                                        writing the script?
                       
                                      Why should I trust what "they" say,
                                                                                   whoever they were on Thursday?
                                                   
                                    And what's the difference between what "they" say
                                                                                              and what "they" determine?

                             How does anyone know if such reported hearsay is true?

     
                                 And so what if they made one determination,
                                                                but are still investigating another?
                                         
             How can people not see this smoke over here and those mirrors over there?
                                               
                               And why are they using the generic term, "coronavirus," at this time?
                                   
                                    Isn't that the most unspecific and slippery description available?
                                     
                                          And isn't the flu, by classification, also the coronavirus?
                                     
                                                                                   How is that even meaningful?
     
                                                    And why should anyone trust
                                 a report about how it was not made or modified?

                                                Are these journalists so inept that they have overlooked

                                                                        who owns its patents?

                                                                    And what about all of the medical research,

                                                                                and the data about its modifications?
                           
                                   Why does it matter if it came into contact with people
            through an accident at a Chinese lab?
                                                   
                                 And why all that specific verbiage used to describe it?
                                                                                               
Why report it as an accident?
                                                                                       And why is it, all of a sudden,
                                                             politically correct to shift public attention
                             and potential blame to the "Chinese lab"?
                           
                     Why frame such speculation as though Trump was its primary source?
                           
                 And who are the alleged "aides" of his, who are also culpable?
         
            Why should anyone trust assertions by mainstream media,
                                                                        their Hollywoodesque accusers?
     
And doesn't this shifty rhetoric look strategically planted
                       
              to discuss and coordinate

                what will be reported nationwide


                                     for all to see and for how it will likely be viewed

     
                                                so the public knows exactly who they can trust?














Saturday, May 2, 2020

Hourglass







This great mystery
I have been allowed to know 
this sublimely incalculable figure
                                               
Its stability
its practicality
it's inviting me

It's attentive
to detail
to simplicity 
to order

This glass
is stunning
in time
in motion
every minute of every hour

Once molten
and now cool
its pair of bulbs
connected vertically
by a slender, toned neck
teasing with perfection

Everything has its place
with it
no batteries are needed
all it asks for
is a little guidance
a turn over here 
a turn over there

Its gentle, steady, reliable flow
from top to bottom
is beyond understanding
and most glorious
every grain
every mark
every freckle is gold
an inner alchemy of divinity