A friend sent me this Denis Rancourt interview. It is very long but very good. If you have the time I highly recommend that you watch it.
If you don’t have the time I will briefly discuss what for me were some of the interview highlights. I must confess that many of the things that resonated with me are thing or similar themes that you can find on this blog.
One theme that pervades the interview which Steve Kirsch manages to not pick up for the whole 2 hour interview is the detrimental effects of stress. Stress and isolation kills. You don’t need a virus to kill people you just need the fear generated by the thought of a deadly pathogen and some government enforced isolation. This is a topic I have returned to multiple times. The government knew damn well the lockdowns would kill.
Scientists have known for 1000 years that stress negatively impacts health. Stress on its own can kill. A few decades ago an American scientist was able to show that the stress of unemployment was so deadly that excess mortality correlates to excess unemployment. Unemployment kills and our governments shut down businesses and threw people in to unemployment.
And, it was not long before the numbers showed that the lockdowns were killing people.
There is no scientific basis for a lockdown to prevent viral spread. There was a lot of science indicating lockdowns would come with a horrible cost. The data is showing that now.
Steve Kirsch constantly wanted to discuss anecdotal evidence of strange health outcomes. Kirsch wanted to blame everything on either the virus or the vaccine. Rancourt failed to explain to him that the overwhelming stress from unprecedented government intervention will produce strange health results. Some of what we saw was undoubtable no more than what Rancourt described as the governments assault on the populous. Viruses and vaccine may be a convenient way for the government to kill but they are not the only way.
Nothing was spreading
Rancourt states he sees no evidence that a deadly pathogen was spreading quickly. All that was spreading quickly was tyranny. Excess deaths correlate to government malfeasance not a viral outbreak. Again this is a theme explored many time on this blog. The virus didn’t kill but the government did and the only reason we found the virus everywhere we find deaths is that the virus was released months ahead of time to create the illusion that it was spreading quickly.
The second release was followed quickly by manufactured videos of people dropping dead in the street. Suddenly the virus was discovered everywhere. We were told this was due to how incredibly contagious this virus was when really it was just because the virus had a 5 month head start. The fear factor was ramped up, society was shut down, and then the deaths started to happen.
There was no deadly pathogen just deadly government
Rancourt took things one step further than I did. I maintained that the virus was not spreading as quickly as they wanted us to believe. Rancourt is not convinced there was a virus. While I have never discussed this I did touch on a similar them lately. If we had identified the correct virus then why didn’t the jabs help even a little?
This was always a bit of a mystery to me because while I think it was an enormously bad idea to risk long term complications for partial protection, the jabs still should have helped with COVID. Then after watching this video a light went on. Maybe the jabs did not work because they were designed for the wrong virus?
After listening to Rancourt I must admit his explanation that there may not even have been a virus is just as plausible as my explanation.
Some conspiracy theories are just that, conspiracy theories
Rancourt took a question about 5 G and gave an opinion that 5G was likely not a factor in the plandemic. I have never written about 5G on this blog for just that reason. On the urging of a reader I tried to correlate 5G to increased deaths and I could not. I also don’t think 5G is a contributing factor. The tin foil hat crowd has had a remarkable track record during COVID but not everything they believe can be substantiated by the data.
Finally the most important part
I know this whole blog post must come across as my attempt to make it all about me and I confess I am proud of my track record for the last 4 years. With a little research and logic I have been right far more times than I have been wrong. But, there is one big difference between Denis Rancourt and me. Rancourt is a serious, rigorous scientist and I am just an engineer pissed off about the direction of the world. I am willing to give an opinion after an hour or two of analysis often taking data at face value. That is something Rancourt simply will not do.
If you take the time to watch the interview you will see that Rancourt is very careful with what he says. This is how a real scientist speaks. He will give an opinion but he is clear when his opinions are based on only a basic knowledge and interpretation of data he has not spent the time to verify. Rancourt is much more definitive about things he has spent the time to analyze at great depth.
To me this was the most impactful part of the interview; just the overall tone. Rancourt is very careful with what he does and does not endorse. He comes across as a very thoughtful and diligent scientist interested in the truth and not the source of his next grant. He is an old school scientist from a time when it was a calling not an occupation. As a real scientist Rancourt is not prone to hyperbolic statements. He does not say things he can’t back up.
Rancourt is a very careful measured scientist who only comments forcefully on things he can back up and he is the co-author of a paper concluding 17 million people have already died from the jabs. Do you still think the jabs are safe?