a reply to: dug88
Admittedly I've only seen this one and read reports of him spinning comments to meet is predefineed narrative of a NWO l by Bill Gates are using
vaccines to reduce the population. He has made many false claims like like the Polio vaccine killed over 500,000 children in india to support his
With this video he takes the mask comments completely out of context and ignores that the first claim was when there were hardly any cases and the
second was made when the number oof corona cases were in the 1,000,000+.
If there's only 500 cases then the maths shows there is no point wearing a mask as there's almost zero probability of coming into contact with an
infected person or being currenty infected.
When it's established then in areas like New York where cases were concentrated, the science and maths shows wearing a mask as there's a much higher
probability of coming into contact with an infected person or currently being infected.
Meta analysis of mask efficacy has shown they recduce the spread by 15 - 25% based on which mask type is worn. They're not a rep;acement for good
hygeine or washing hands properly but due to the exponential spread of corona they cause a significant reduction in cases.
The science and maths also shows there's no point wearing them in areas where there are hardly any cases like a lot of counties in the US due to such
a low probability so there's no point wearing one as they cause almost zero benefit.
The spread of a pandemic is not static it is dynamic. The conclusions of the marths and science update as cases rise. He ignores all the basic science
and maths to sell his agenda thar science is weaponised and form of mind control on the population.
Ignoring all the real world events to fit the narrative he sells to the audience completely misrepresents how science and maths functions in the real
world in response to events. When the situation changes and cases rise the results of the maths and conclusions of the science update in response as
time is a fundamental part of the scientific method.
After he completely misrepresents science he goes on a ramble supporting the anti-science movement to his audience because of his ignorance of science
and bias, His conclusions are completely wrong as he has no basic understanding of the maths and science involved.
I didn't watch past the 15 min mark as I found his presentation style annoying and condecending so it could be my personal bias but due to his lack of
awareness of dynamic models and the mathematical equations update in response to time and the R rate of cases I didn't see any point watching more as
he didn' know what he was talking about.