YouTube Consensus Video

Some classic YouTube videos on scientific consensus.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to YouTube Consensus Video

  1. Eli the Pit Bull says:

    YouTube won’t allow this video, featuring the crimes against humanity

    • Eli the Pit Bull says:

      Number one on the list was enough for me to say no. Anyway my daughter is a pediatrician who quit the hospital, refusing the vaccine. She now is in private practice. Yesterday she visited a new patient (she does house calls)
      The parents fired the old Dr after vaccine injuries (doc recommended a second dose even after the child had a seizure from the first) I won’t go into details but the girl is home from the hospital with seizures controlled with heavy sedation. The saddest part is, 3 weeks later the child is still unable to speak

  2. Sean Galbally says:

    The main problem seems to be to get the people to realise that most of what the climate change alarmists say is simply not true.
    Most people do not have the scientific background to be able to understand that man made carbon dioxide does not and cannot affect global warming. The western world is committing suicide through its ridiculous net zero carbon policy which will achieve nothing. China and India must be watching us cut our own throats with the escalating price of “green” energy courtesy of the marxist environmentalists, with absolute glee.

  3. arn says:

    Consensus is political correctness of science.
    And political correctness is fascism hiding behind good intentions = marxism.

  4. GreyGeek says:

    Today’s “science” is indistinguishable from Lysenkoism. In fact, it IS Lysenkoism. Mann is a re-incarnation of Lysenko, and the Dems are actually the Communist Party.

  5. David A Nichols says:

    All this information is out there for the politicians to see and read but, since, they depend on money from the billionaires, globalists, and major pharmaceutical companies they, the politicians, become willfully blind. (Willful blindness is a legal term that involves: “conscious avoidance of the truth and gives rise to an inference of knowledge of the crime in question.” ( And this whole Covid-19 vaccination debacle is an ongoing criminal action of unbelievable proportions.

  6. Shawn Marshall says:

    A more nuanced view of Galileo and the Church. Galileo was a devout Catholic… he was developing a theory of a deceased Catholic priest Copernicus. He got in trouble with the pope because the pope felt he had been duped by his former friend. A group
    Of Cardinals did make an unfair judgment against Galileo but it was many years before scientific evidence could confirm his theories…. Many scientists were very skeptical of them… Tony often trashes the Church in this conflict. The Church was the supporter of science… She just thought Galileo was wrong and that he should be more cautious in declaiming his theory which some mistakenly thought was a scriptural.
    I am very grateful for Tony exposing todays scientism and fraud.

    • David says:

      Excellent, Shawn. I’m constantly trying to correct people’s incorrect understanding of the Galileo affair. Another piece of the reality was that all of the evidence Galileo put forth to support the heliocentric theory turns out to be wrong. For instance, he attributed the tides to the heliocentric motion, but it turns out it is due to the gravitational interaction between the earth and moon. He had the right answer for all the wrong reasons.

  7. JB says:

    Keep preaching, Tony. I’ll keep tuning in.

  8. Robert says:

    500 years ago, Galileo was given a stipend to work on his defense of the heliocentric model of Copernicus. Copernicus himself was supported by high ranking Catholics, including two Popes. The only condemnation in his lifetime came from Luther. Kepler was supported by Jesuits while working at a Catholic University.

    “De revolutionibus was not formally banned but merely withdrawn from circulation, pending “corrections” that would clarify the theory’s status as hypothesis. Nine sentences that represented the heliocentric system as certain were to be omitted or changed. After these corrections were prepared and formally approved in 1620 the reading of the book was permitted”
    The book was too difficult to read for anybody but expert astronomers, and was being used in a theological context, unlike what Copernicus intended. Galileo was also guilty of this.

    It’s not that the Church was above criticism, it had it’s idiots, but what is happening now is far more medieval.

    • Vegieman says:

      “The church”, “religion”, and similar references when used with a negative connotation is a defense to justify a godless position. The church is not the Roman Catholic church nor is any other denomination (division) created by humanity in their attempt to define and categorize an omnipotent (all powerful), omniscient (all knowing), omnipresent, (infinite) God. The Bible is written by men, yet is unambiguously purposed by the creator of all heaven and earth.

      An extended visit of Henry Ford to his assembly line disguised as a common worker to evaluate his work force is not unlike God taking the form of a man for a much greater purpose of proving the hearts of those created in his image and likeness. Jesus is the manifestation (express image) of God and his purpose is not just to check in on us but to become the redemption for our ruined state. In this incognito context, the purpose of this life in light of the gospel (good news) of Jesus Christ is quite obvious even to the defiant.

      The lumping together of the “religious” pharisees with the genuine children of God is no different than the lumping together of the charlatan “scientists” with the majority of those here that I recognize to be intelligent, critical thinking individuals. The difference is quite obvious in both instances for those operating in truth and honesty. The following is a relevant PragerU presentation by Stephen Meyer:

  9. Walter L. Wagner says:

    Dr. Malone posted the below video on his Twitter account, which was suspended a few minutes later. I got a copy before it went down:

  10. Walter L. Wagner says:

    I should note that this video exposes that the Pfizer trials showed a lot more injury/illness following vaccination, than the placebo group. The video itself uses the data Pfizer presented. They just presented that data in an appendix, and stated the conclusion that you should get the jab anyway because of its Absolute Risk reduction of catching Covid of about 1%, even though there were statistically far more illness/injury in the vaccinated than the placebo.

    This is the Pfizer data, not extraneous research.

    But it does seem to promote vaccine hesitancy, ergo Twitter suspended Dr. Malone. Can’t have the facts dissuading you from self-injury, now can we.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *