To my mind an idea or a concept that is sound can stand up to being questioned and challenged. If demonstrated to be flawed, the idea can be modified or discarded. It's not really a personal thing unless it is made to be so, by, for example, taking the challenge to the idea as a personal attack on the one to propose it.
Yet this happens all the time. It is as if there is something to hide when, instead of responding to content, one deflects by focussing on something non-relevant but nonetheless provocative or sensationalist. I have seen these dynamics play out in my personal life as I look back in hindsight to the angry, discontented young man that I used to be. I am sensitive and I have taken a great many things personally. I have lashed out when challenged, just ask my ex-wife :).
Anyhow, I bring this up because of two things. The first is what seems to be a closing down of discussion around a great number of topical issues, including the undeniable censoring by social media of voices that question or challenge the mainstream narrative of supposed consensus. One sees everywhere statements made by government or other 'officials' about the dangers of 'misinformation' and the need to clamp down on it. The ostensible message seems to be 'we will not allow discussion for your own good/safety'. At the same time there is a relentless pushing of a 'consensus' narrative which is not allowed to be questioned, "coz it's about safety innit"! Official-sounding and official-looking information is presented to the public as fact and an endless stream of experts and publicly familiar faces are paraded to re-emphasise the narrative. Self-styled 'fact checkers' claim the authority to pound home the narrative and sweep the internet clean of all dirty misinformation.
The second issue, related to the first, is to do with the active suppression of those who question the narrative, those who dig deeper than the superficial level of appearances and easy conclusions, who discover that the narrative is not consistent - that it just doesn't add up. These voices are being smeared with ad-hominem attacks that distract away from the matter at hand - the thing being challenged.
The fact of voices being suppressed at all is a clear indication of something to hide - else why not simply show why what is being said is BS and be done with it? In other words, those with the power to manipulate messages at a national and trans-national level do not wish to have these messages challenged and their power is used in order to try and quash such voices as raise questions. The emperor's bollock nakedness will not be talked about, regardless of 'facts'. Language is twisted, tied up in knots and the output placed into neat-sounding packages which we are expected to accept with trusting compliance.
On an equal playing-field, and in a species where logic and the 'scientific method' really drive decision-making (rather than emotions doing just that, as in the case with human beings), things would certainly be different (and I'm not saying 'better' or 'worse').
As things stand, the burden of 'proof', as I see it, is twofold. Firstly, the burden of proof on the questioner, or challenger, is merely to show that the official narrative has cracks and appears flawed, to bring attention to these cracks and apparent flaws. Conclusions and speculations based on extrapolating from the perception of cracks are another matter altogether. I can assert that the endless statements issued by the UK government about the safety and need of vaccines do not appear to be factual or accurate, and I am not the only one to do so. This is not disinformation, but it does challenge the official narrative. I have multiple concerns about rushed through 'vaccines' but raising them leads to having the label of 'antivaxxer' applied to me, as if the 'anti' part of it equates to other 'anti's', like anti-semitism etc. The application of this label is the deflection that leaves the questions conveniently unanswered. Instead, the loaded label, the smear, is given attention.
The other burden of proof is on the entity, organisation etc being challenged - how do you respond when someone says "it looks to me like what you said is wrong and this is why I state this". The entity being thus challenged may choose to ignore or disregard the challenge and carry on as normal, and this is common! However, when the entity being challenged goes out of their way to counter-attack the challenger without responding to the challenge itself, one may begin to wonder why...what is there to hide?...did the challenge hit home then?
I recently came upon an account on the Hive blockchain which seems to the be engaging in a kind of pre-emptive counter-attack like the ones mentioned above. This account - 
This account -
The post opens as follows:
This is an account that keeps track of all sorts of quacks that have been infesting the Hive ecosystem like a disease. It has been created to inform the users about all sorts of quackery, delusional/irrational beliefs, toxic ideologies, and pseudoscience.
Although some of the information published by the users that have been added to the blacklist may have little harm, the majority of it are very dangerous ideas/beliefs that leech on poor rational thinking skills, poor understanding of science, and poor intellectual ability to separate the facts and evidence from lies, myths, and fake news. It is sad to admit that these cognitive shortcomings and deficits are dominating our society.
This account is a form of resistance to the spread of intellectual foolishness and lunacy that is threatening the intelligent and sustainable progress of human civilization.
This is interesting and revealing. The author (I have no personal issue with him/her and am even well-disposed towards one or two Hive accounts that are supporting it with upvotes) seems to be adopting a position of self-styled fact checker but the language is not neutral or objective. Terms like 'infection' and 'disease' when referring to human beings suggests a view of beings who are sub-human, to be destroyed or wiped out perhaps. The author goes on to state the level of perceived threat posed by 'quackery', using adjectives like 'very dangerous' and claiming that these misperceptions (propagated by the quacks) are 'dominating our society'. Here too, the use of 'our' is interesting as it suggests a 'them' (the quacks? the ideas?) which are separate and apart from 'our' society. Finally, and most dramatically of all, the author claims that the 'intelligent and sustainable progress of human civilization' is threatened by such activity and persons, necessitating (presumably) the resistance that the
Phew, quite something in and of itself, but the author goes on to provide a table - evidently the result of a certain amount of research and perhaps embattled engagement from another Hive account incarnation. This table currently - in its most updated form - lists 95 'blacklisted quack accounts' with the 'quack account names' listed under one column and the 'type of quackery' practiced by each account under the other.
The post also includes a number of videos which - I guess - purport to show the solidity and grounded-in-scienceness of the author. These include videos about the 'scientific method' and videos attacking 'religion/religiosity' and linking it to brain damage.
I'm tempted to paste the entire list here - which to me reads like an honours board lol - but I will simply show you the entry for 
| Quack Name | Type of Quackery |
|---|---|
| Covid-19 Hoax, QAnon, Quack Medicine/Medical Practices, Chemtrails, Reptilian Illuminati/NWO, Climate Change Denial, Advocacy of Science Confusionism, Anti-vaxxing, Truther |
Given that the list contains a number of accounts I follow, and given the response in the comments referring to the high quality of the list, I am rather honoured to be mentioned. Perhaps the author ran a script searching for keywords like 'chemtrails' etc used as tags or in posts, perhaps the compilation was more laborious and actually included wading through (but perhaps not reading) content. Who knows!
I'm not quite sure where to go from here. I've no interest in defending myself against a label applied by someone who clearly has a bee in his/her bonnet. I don't wish to psychoanalyse them further or speculate on their motives. I don't know them and also do not wish to engage in ad-hominem tit-for-tats. There is division aplenty already!
The fact is, regardless of where TRUTH may lie (and it's unlikely to be in WHAT anyone says), humanity is - at a high level - on the same boat...we're in this together regardless of whether the threat faced by 'us' (sic) be a deadly virus which we all need to be protected from by established organisations and pharmaceutical companies (or any variation of this, such as the 'threat' of climate change) OR whether we are being played in a massive psy-op by a powerful, mysterious and hidden cabal who want to control the fuck out of us. Either way, and all variations and in-betweens, it implies the same fundamental position for humanity as a whole - we are in this together.
Another thing about the so-called 'Quacks' is that many/all of us - certainly I did - came to our 'quackery' from a previous position of accepting the mainstream narrative, perhaps with disgruntlement, but nonetheless without realising that it wasn't the only narrative. Being exposed to those who question it and shine light upon the cracks led me to ask further questions, and so on. Again, the issue of drawing conclusions and theories based on an observation of cracks (not quacks ;) is a separate issue. I do not claim to know what is WHAT, but I do have a better understanding of what is NOT - and this 'not' is discernible from a simple, objective analysis of any of the issues. Besides, a historical perspective does not consider it at all controversial to state that lies have been used in the past at very high levels in order to manipulate public opinion. Even
Aaa'rite, that's me done on the pedestle! However, this post would not be complete without responding to (not reacting to, not rejecting, not accepting) the 'types of quackery' listed next to my account name.
In brief, here are my opinions on the subjects listed under my 'type of quackery'. These are labels only, useful up to a point but mere distractions thereafter:
- Covid-19 Hoax: regardless of the existence of a virus from which even the CDC calculates a 99+% recovery rate, the narrative around it is a web of lies and half-truths. There is no pandemic - overall mortality figures tell this story. Besides, if folk were droppiing like flies, there would be no need to have fearmongering messages thrust down our thoats 24/7, it would be obvious. This is clearly a pLandemic/scamdemic.
- QAnon: a catchy idea that has galvanised many (look at footage of vibrant Trump election rallies vs empty Biden ones), but also looks awfully like a psy-op.
- Quack Medicine/Medical Practices: Marijuana? Energy healing? Ohhh yes please, no Big Pharma for
- Chemtrails: one of many openly-secretive projects that abound, and not the most destructive either. I do not remember discussing chemtrails on the blockchain as I have not looked into the phenomenon in detail. Perhaps I mentioned it somewhere and this was picked up by
- Reptilian Illuminati/NWO: this is in the realm of speculation as to who the cabal is/are. For me, it is clear that there seems to be a chain of command that reaches up higher than anything visible ie. higher than Rockerfellers, Rothschilds, Gates, Big OilPharmaAgro blah blah, although these guys are very much the 'faces' of 'it'. What form this takes, well shapeshifting of course lol. Jokes (or not) aside, global policies are decided by a tiny handful and implemented by sleepwalkers with greater or lesser vested interests. Please see links below for further exploration around this and other topics.
- Climate Change Denial: like with the section on covid-19 hoax, the narrative is manipulated and not based on science. Instead there is a sciency scientific consensus - by no means scientific - which pumps the narrative of bad, naughty, sinful humans, Earth would be better without us - a version of 'original sin'. I wonder if
- Advocacy of Science Confusionism: this is the black magic of language manipulation. In reality, challengers of non-science, sciency scientific consensus who use the actual scientific method are labelled sciency in the language of confusionism. The statement 'the science sez so' is used as a big hammer to squash challenges, regardless of the outcome of objective hypothesis - observation - findings. Numbers and statistics are made to conform to pre-determined conclusions. Actual Science is made a mockery of!
- Anti-vaxxing: anti is a strong word, loaded with hidden slurs! As for the C-19 'vaccine', there are numerous valid concerns over it; I will not take it; I consider it to be something utterly other than what it purports to be.
- Truther: not sure of the label itself, but as per this definition: "one who believes that the truth about an important subject or event is being concealed from the public by a powerful conspiracy"......fuck yeah, for sure! Is this state of affairs not clear to everyone?
We can choose to take the 'safe and easy' route, convince ourselves that we know "coz, like, we've always known" - about such things as quacks and conspiracy theories, and we can continue to believe what the 'experts' say and we can do as we are told. Anyone who suggests otherwise is simply nuts (
As a species, as a human collective, we swim or sink together - there's no middle ground here. There is nothing to junk, nothing to debunk, no internal 'enemy' to destroy. We can usefully forget what we've been told by anyone and start bottom up investigating issues for ourselves. 'Quacks' and 'Quackwatchers' alike, it is possible to inform OURSELVES without seeking elevation and emotional gratification through the suppression/degradation of others.
Okay, onwards and upwards and anywaywards. I provide some mild 'quack'-links below, a selection of topics and sources providing alternative perspectives on well known events past and current. There's nothing worth fighting about thought there's plenty worth fighting for! There's a vast array of information out there that we can, as individuals, sift through to make some sense of what is going on (or NOT going on). We also have the evidence of our eyes and ears, our hearts and minds - these are not separate, but deeply interconnected with it all!
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/12/klaus-schwab-his-great-fascist-reset/
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/14/watch-the-parallels-between-9-11-and-covid19/
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/26/who-taps-anti-conspiracy-crusader-to-sway-public-opinion-on-covid-vaccine/
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/27/anthony-fauci-40-years-of-lies-from-azt-to-remdesivir/
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/09/06/%ef%bb%bffabricating-a-pandemic-who-could-organize-it-and-why/
- https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/31/even-while-it-was-happening-it-wasnt-happening/
- https://redpilluniversity.org/2020/09/01/global-warming-totally-and-mercilessly-debunked/
- https://www.corbettreport.com/the-ipcc-exposed-video/
- @barge/how-and-why-big-oil-conquered-the-world-by-corbettreport
- https://www.corbettreport.com/who-is-bill-gates-full-documentary-2020/
- https://www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-documentaries/
And here's one that's maybe not so 'mild' :)
I'd like to invite all fellow 'quacks' to read this but
Here's to a collective awakening from the dream of slavery, full 3600 around. Peeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeece.
Edit: 
