I am a retired Philosophy Lecturer trained for logical analysis of different kinds of reasoning. This is the most important logical analysis I have ever written. Why? Because the totally overblown fear propaganda at the center of the Covid-19 pandemic around "Save Lives" has created a situation in which the respect for human life has been completely overridden.
Consider this. A report was published about what is called a "Covid-19 outbreak" at a nursing home in Auburn, N.Y. 137 residents were infected and 24 died. As you read the article you discover first three deaths at the home were reported Dec. 29. Then you find the following paragraph:
The nursing home began vaccinating residents Dec. 22. So far 193 residents, or 80%, and 113 employees, or less than half the staff, have been vaccinated. The nursing home plans to do more vaccinations Jan. 12.
Before the Covid-19 hysteria, I am certain the nursing home would have halted the vaccinations because so many people had died immediately after receiving one. Instead, they planned to carry on vaccinating residents in order to "Saved Lives". THE VERY HUMAN DESIRE TO SAVE LIVES HAS BEEN TURNED INTO A DRACONIAN ORDER TO VACCINATE EVERYONE EVEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE OBVIOUSLY DYING FROM THE VACCINATIONS THEMSELVES.
This is not just a defect in reasoning, a failure to recognize vaccination as a cause of the death of nursing home residents. It is a failure to stop the process of "Saving Lives" because human lives are being lost. Here we see a sinister manipulation of ordinary people to override their normal concern for human life. We have been tricked into no longer placing the highest value on human life itself. This is perhaps the worst of all the horrible consequences of this cynical attack on human society which began in March 2020. If we don't start to care about the murder of fellow citizens who do you think will be next? We will be the next!
RESIDENTS DIE AT CARE HOME AFTER COVID-19 VACCINATION - NOTHING TO SEE HERE
Coronavirus outbreak: 22 deaths at Pemberley House Care Home
"Within three weeks, 22 people had died - over one-third of the home's residents. It is understood the outbreak started as residents began to have their first coronavirus vaccines. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulation Agency (MHRA) said there was no suggestion the vaccine was responsible for the deaths."
This is one of many articles appearing in the West describing how residents in care homes have died shortly after being injected with a coronavirus vaccine. There are several more of these articles listed in VACCINE DEATH WATCH - "Bring out yer dead." (https://australianvoice.livejournal.com/46218.html) What I find amazing is that there is generally an official statement like the one above - "there was no suggestion the vaccine was responsible for the deaths" - attached to the report.
Why do I find this amazing? I spent decades teaching logic, critical reasoning and philosophy of science at university level. With a basic understanding of how the existence of causal connections can be justified in ordinary life it is blindingly obvious that there is a causal connection between the injection of these vaccines and the deaths Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines kill. The question is: How can the authorities get away with such obviously false claims?
IS THE CAUSE OF RESIDENTS' DEATHS A "SCIENTIFIC" QUESTION?
Why does it take the statement of a doctor, let alone a public official who has not investigated the cases, to determine the cause of the deaths in care homes? Finding causal explanations for single events is a part of daily life. If we hear the sound of glass breaking in the next room and find a broken window with a cricket ball on the floor, it is natural, and reasonable, to conclude that someone batted or threw the ball which hit and broke the window. This is a simple causal explanation of a single event. You have probably never heard it described as such, but you know instantly what a causal explanation is. Could a Professor of Physics get away with saying: "There was no suggestion the ball was responsible for the broken window." If there is no evidence anything else broke the window, the ball is the cause.
Consider another example. Suppose we witness a robbery in which a person is shot and later dies. Unless the person is later stabbed or smothered, we can conclude that the cause of the person's death was the gunshot. Perhaps the person died from excessive blood loss. In this case the blood loss and resulting death were still caused by the gunshot.
HOW IS A RESIDENT'S DEATH FROM AN INJECTION DIFFERENT FROM A DEATH BY GUNSHOT?
It is useful to examine the death of a Florida doctor Gregory Michael MD. This is part of the report by his wife, Heidi Neckelmann:
"He was vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine at MSMC on December 18, 3 days later he saw a strong set of petechiae (dots on your skin which are a sign of blood leaking from capillaries under your skin) on his feet and hands which made him seek attention at the emergency room at MSMC. The CBC that was done at his arrival showed his platelet count to be 0 (A normal platelet count ranges from 150,000 to 450,000 platelets per micro liter of blood.) He was admitted in the ICU with a diagnosis of acute ITP (Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura, a rare autoimmune disorder that causes low platelet levels) caused by a reaction to the COVID vaccine." (https://www.ibtimes.sg/florida-doctor-dies-weeks-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-wife-blames-side-effects-54728)
Now look at the reply from Pfizer:
"We are actively investigating this case, but we don't believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine.
"It is important to note that serious adverse events, including deaths that are unrelated to the vaccine are unfortunately likely to occur at a similar rate as they would in the general population." (https://www.ibtimes.sg/florida-doctor-dies-weeks-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-wife-blames-side-effects-54728)
The US company also noted that there is no indication that the vaccine could be connected to thrombocytopenia.
This is a very evasive reply. Unlike the MHRA in the UK, they don't say there is no connection. They say "we don't believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine". But this is just as false as the claim of the MHRA. They know there is a connection, but they also know they don't have to worry about any government raising the alarm.
Does anyone remember how tobacco companies held there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer? Didn't asbestos miners deny any connection between asbestos and mesothelioma? Pfizer does not believe there is any direct connection between the ITP and subsequent death and their vaccine. But why should we agree with them? Also notice the statement "serious adverse events, including deaths that are unrelated to the vaccine are unfortunately likely to occur". In effect they admit that such deaths are likely to occur but they deny they are caused by the vaccine. What would a jury say if a defendant admitted shooting a person but denied there was any connection between the gunshot and the death of the injured person? I don't think they could avoid time in jail with this defense.
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES IN THIS PANDEMIC
One of the many disturbing aspects of the Covid-19 Scamdemic is the way that most people seem unable to see what is right before their eyes or think in a critical way about what they hear. It seems that over the last 70 years as television has become the only source of information for many people. I believe that this is what has led to the well known phenomena of conflict between friends, relatives, and even partners over Covid-19. The normal respect that would exist between friends or family members instantly disappears once you disagree with anyone about the many bogus claims that make up the "Covid-19 Narrative". You are simply labelled a tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorist. People no longer trust the information you give to them if it is not consistent with the Official Line they get from the media and the government. All past relations you might have had with them count for nothing. You are simply not going to be believed.
People are beginning to understand some people die after a Covid-19 vaccination but they seem to accept the "no connection" story from health authorities and the pharmafia itself. There should be howls of outrage at the outright lie from the MHRA. How can these killers be held responsible if relatives meekly accept that the vaccination did not cause the death of their loved one?
The purpose of this article is to give people the confidence in their own assessment of what they see. There is absolutely no reason to defer to the pharmafia, health authorities or even the deluded doctors and nurses who perhaps from self-interest or simple ignorance insist that there is no causal connection between these mRNA vaccines and the deaths of people who have had the misfortune to experience the most serious "adverse event" the vaccines can produce.
A FINAL WORD ON THE STATUS OF SCIENCE AND ORDINARY CAUSAL EXPLANATIONS
In the last few years we often hear that "the science" of the weather or of Covid-19 cannot be mistaken and cannot be wrong. If you challenge these results or these claims, you are then accused of being "anti-science". "The science" is taken to be a kind of Gospel Truth, and the proof if its truth is that such views are "the consensus" of scientists in this area.
This is a complete misunderstanding of the status of science. Almost no philosopher or scientist in the last 100 years has claimed that the results of scientific investigation are certain. Remember mathematics is different. It may be called a science, but it is an ideal system. Mathematical statements and theorems may be considered absolutely true or certain, but they do not describe the real world, and they are not justified by empirical evidence.
The ethos of modern experimental science was stated clearly by the Royal Society:
"The Royal Society's motto 'Nullius in verba' is taken to mean 'take nobody's word for it'. It is an expression of the determination of Fellows to withstand the domination of authority and to verify all statements by an appeal to facts determined by experiment."
Notice that ALL of the appeals to "the science" by the UK government take the form of appeals to authority. There is no place for "experts" or "authorities" in science. The same is true for consensus. The history of science consists of one consensus after another being overturned by further investigation.
This also applies to the ordinary causal explanations discussed above. The claim that the ball broke the window IS NOT CERTAIN, even if it is obvious. There may always be something we missed that can be use to challenge our statement. In the same way the claim that the death of Gregory Michael MD was caused by the injection of a Covid-19 vaccine IS NOT CERTAIN. It can be challenged by showing that something else caused the Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura which lead to his death. If Pfizer could find something like this, then the claim would be shown to be mistaken.
However in the absence of any investigation and the absence of any other causal factor for the ITP, HE WAS KILLED BY THE VACCINE. END OF STORY. There is a burden of proof on Pfizer or the MHRA to provide evidence of some other causal factor if they want to claim there was no connection between the vaccination and the death. Talk means nothing. Evidence alone will decide the question.