Top Ten Ways Humanity is Being Murdered in the Name of "Evidence-Based Science"

In my opinion the title is self explanatory but i will elaborate a little before I proceed.

Most people are not surprised that things which are deemed to be safe are actually very harmful. I am in agreement with all the listed "ways" that we are being harmed by these so called safe items. Personally I may have changed the order a bit but I will keep it in the order that the article listed since I am using them as my source. The fact that we are exposed to various poisons/toxins on a daily basis without any say in the matter (in most cases, as some of these can be avoided by lifestyle changes) angers beyond any words can explain. It also angers me that many people/corporations become wealthy from the distribution of many of these items but that is the world we live in, money talks and every thine else walks. I also believe that there are sick people out there who are purposely exposing us to these poisons to forward their agenda of global depopulation. I won't go too far in my opinions on this agenda, but I have no doubt in my mind that this agenda exists (my opinion of course).

Each item that I will list will be in order from 10-1 will have a link you can click on to view the supporting evidence for each item, there are many sources within the links that help support their case. Please point out any evidence or points that they make that you disagree with and why, the last thing I want to do is promote disinformation as the source "Natural News" has a not so credible reputation on ATS, so let's please attack the content and not the source

#10 Radiation

#9 Cosmetics

#8 Plastics

#7 Chemotherapy

#6 Synthetic pesticides

#5 Food additives

#4 Pharmaceuticals

#3 Fluoride

#2 Vaccines

#1 GMOs

I believe that the top three on the list will bring out the pro/anti-fluoride/vaccine/GMO crowds which usually becomes a heated debate so let's please try and keep it civil folks.

In fact, I have even seen various members on different threads say "Radiation is good" so don't be surprised if we see some of that in this thread as well.

I invite anyone to share their opinion on the items listed as these are what I consider to be very important issues.

As I mentioned I agree with the items on this list, especially the top three but the other 7 are equally important when you think of the grand scheme of things as all these poisons/toxins are killing us slowly and the more people hear about it the better.

If you agree with me and this list please share this information with your loved ones as many of them may have no idea about the dangers of our daily exposure to these substances.

Cheers!

I hate to be the kid on ADD meds, eating his GMO corn flakes with food additives that were sprayed with synthetic pesticides. Just add some hormone infused mike that you picked up in a plastic container at the store that comes from a cow in the Midwest that drinks fluorinated water that has been bombarded by fukashima radiation.

All before you get your buster shoots later in the afternoon.

Now why do we have a rise in Autism again?

I usually dont give pseudo science malarkey like this more than a second glance but that sentence caught my eye. No one is saying “radiation is good”, they are explaining the concept of hormesis as it relates to ionizing radiation. Radiation in a high enough dose is dangerous but radiation in a low dose is not harmful and might actually strengthen the body by stimulating its own defenses.

Paracelsus summed it up best when he said “the dos makes the poison” meaning that all substances are toxic when taken in sufficiently high enough doses … from plutonium, to methylisocyanate, to caffeine, to pure water.

reply to post by SirMike


I have seen various studies that claim low amounts of radiation can help build up an immunity to radiation at the cellular level, but these studies always convientely leave out the part that regardless of developing a "tolerance" to radiation, there is no escape from the cancers that various forms of radiation cause. I am no expert on this subject so I am speaking my opinion based on research that I have done and am not claiming this to be fact, but I find it difficult to believe that any level of radiation can be good.

"Sure, I have developed a tolerance to radiation, but darn this cancer sucks "

Also, there is plenty of real science to support the claims made in the list so you can't dismiss it all as "pseudo-science".

I've said it before. If there is somebody out there ("science" in this case) actively trying to eliminate humanity, then they are doing an extremely lousy job of it, seeing as how our population continues to swell, and our life expectancies continue to lengthen.

And somehow I don't think anyone is planning to kill us off by overpopulation. I would think a nice, unstoppable fatal zombie virus of some kind would be much more effective.

reply to post by Blue Shift


I know the stats on this issue can be manipulated/misinterpreted for various reasons, but do you agree or disagree that cancer, autism, diabetes and other diseases especially auto-immune disorders are on the rise?

Yes, I am aware that we have made major advances in science and are more capable of detecting these things which probably accounts for a lot of the higher rates, but it has been proven that many of these items on the list are toxic, in fact some of them are deadly after a lifetime of steady consumption.

If they cared about us so much, why would they expose us to these items on a daily basis?

Perhaps you have missed the stories that report these incidents, but the people who are supposed to protect and care about us actually use us as guinea pigs in various ways including but not limited to injecting minorities with sexually transmitted diseases, using citizens of poor countries as test subjects in medicinal trials, they have even used their own citizens to test the effects of radiation after exploding nuclear bombs.

It's not so far fetched that these very same people who allow the above things to happen would actually have sick motivations to reduce world population, or at the very least purposely make us sick so we pay for their treatments that they come up with when in reality they sould in fact be coming up with cures.

Financial motivation is an obvious factor, but I believe there are other variables at play.

There are a load more I would add that are causing many more deaths and problems around the world than are on that list, here's a quick few off the top of my head:

Alcohol
Tobacco
Sugar
Cars
Fats
Guns

If they cared about us so much, why would they expose us to these items on a daily basis?

Originally posted by Subterranean13
There are a load more I would add that are causing many more deaths and problems around the world than are on that list, here's a quick few off the top of my head:

Alcohol
Tobacco
Sugar
Cars
Fats
Guns

If they cared about us so much, why would they expose us to these items on a daily basis?

To be fair, no one is required to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, ingest sugar, drive a car, eat fatty foods (which are actually good for you in a balanced diet), and guns is a touchy subject.

People kill people, not guns.

But yes, if they really cared about us, a lot of things would be much different.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


If there was a real quantifiable risk in low level radiation, we would expect to see statistically significant differences based on geographical differences in background ionizing radiation .. Denver has twice the background radiation than Chicago does for example, but we dont see any relationship between (relatively) high background levels and human health effects.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


Are people living longer on average now than 50 years ago?

Shouldn't life expectancy be dwindling if your correct?

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
I know the stats on this issue can be manipulated/misinterpreted for various reasons, but do you agree or disagree that cancer, autism, diabetes and other diseases especially auto-immune disorders are on the rise?

Everything is on the rise because those are people problems, and there are a lot more people and they're living longer. The human body is designed at its core to die and free up resources for the next generation. But these days, with our advancements in medicine, more people are living longer with cancer and other diseases.

You know what the biggest threat to humanity is? LOVE. Love is what motivates us to buy big, resource eating SUVs, and have children that we don't need, and work very hard to keep people alive longer than practical with more extreme medical treatment. So our world runs out of fresh water and food and we spread a massive pandemic pretty soon.

It's not science that will do us in. It's love.

Originally posted by SirMike
I usually dont give pseudo science malarkey like this more than a second glance but that sentence caught my eye. No one is saying “radiation is good”, they are explaining the concept of hormesis as it relates to ionizing radiation. Radiation in a high enough dose is dangerous but radiation in a low dose is not harmful and might actually strengthen the body by stimulating its own defenses.

Paracelsus summed it up best when he said “the dos makes the poison” meaning that all substances are toxic when taken in sufficiently high enough doses … from plutonium, to methylisocyanate, to caffeine, to pure water.

it's dangerous to define everything one disagrees with as "pseudoscience malarkey".

radiation is mostly dangerous. it increases the risk that dna will be damaged in a cell and that it will start replicating quickly and become cancerous. at low enough levels the body can up it's defenses to counter this, but it means the destruction of more cells, or at the very least more cells are forced to never reproduce again. this might slightly lower cancer rates, but it is by no means "good" for you.

reply to post by Blue Shift


Wrong.

Human science & human love are both suffering an equally destructive problem, but Love is not the biggest problem.

People are selfish, by nature. Selfish love is a problem, but selfish science/ industrialisation is the biggest problem.

Selfish people make war, rip people off, steal & pursue BS projects which are destructive/ dehumanising, simply to make money. Big cars tempt people into buying them. Build/ manufacture responsibly,and it won't exacerbate the climate impact, etc, etc. Selfish marketing people use the selfishness of the average person to sell them crap they don't need, for profit, using the delusion that it makes you a better person if you have more stuff. Industrialisation has led to the population boom. The natural impact of advanced medicine, technology, infrastructure, logistics & food production/distribution without equitable distribution of said power and resources is a population explosion. Simple fact. Without clever & ethically advanced governance of an entire group of people receiving better standards of goods & services, care, etc, then populations will explode, resources will dwindle, wars will erupt (both by necessity & by design when selfish powerful people make war to secure more power & control of resources, wealth, etc)

Selfish people also suffer from the delusion that exerting control over others can be taken as being 'Love'.

True love will live in harmony with a family, community, wider social sphere & ecosphere, satisfied even when they don't have much 'stuff'. Trouble is, as naturally selfish beings, we are easily duped by the suggestion that we 'deserve' more stuff, and are duped further that we must provide this 'stuff' in order to love & be loved. NB - People tend to have big families in poor countries, simply because there is the (real) perception that more workers = more income for the family, where less government support is distributed to families. Mostly, we are wired to love each other, scientific fact. And it can be stated with almost exacting certainty, that if there is a metaphysical sphere beyond this realm of flesh & bone, then the higher qualities of mind/heart/soul will be those which are valued in that sphere.

Love, is a 'good' thing therefore, being as it is rooted in unselfishness when expressed properly, without delusion, without perversion of intent toward selfish abstracts.

Love is real, and it is not the problem. Selfish expression of love is part of the problem, but the real major problem is industrialisation without proper ethical (loving?) management of the results of said industrialisation.

We will sadly destroy ourselves as a race, because we are somehow wired/ programmed by culture & environment to be selfish, more often than we are unselfish. Humanity is technically 'fallen' (inherently selfish) and thus 'redemption' (resulting in benevolence & beneficence), is the way out on an individual basis - learning to make willful choices to act unselfishly in as many circumstance as are possible, trusting in that Highest ideal of a perfect order & harmony with the spheres around & above us.

In terms of the wider community on Earth presently? Wowzer. I think 'apocalypse' makes perfect sense given the evidence to date. We will destroy ourselves/ our rulers will destroy us, it's just a matter of time - unless we are aided by unselfish advanced humans/beings to create an advanced & ethical society. Or, by 'God'.

Don't try to say we can ethically manage the outcome of the present scenario? Massive kill-off by TPTB, followed by the establishment of a fourth reich, comprised elite rulers & slave workers, is pretty much what they seem to be planning. If what exists is broken, then it must in some fashion be taken down in order to be rebuilt. I would rather some incredibly advanced being does the 'take-down', in order to create a perfect world, as opposed to TPTB doing it, to create a living hell.

IMHO, 'Someone' is likely to intervene & stop them in their tracks before they get chance.

Call me crazy, I don't care. You seem to think Love is 'wrong' somehow. Without cooperation rooted BOTH in self-preservation & a desire to procreate/ love/ be loved, we would have no community. Without love (IE - when selfishness completely takes over the governance, as presently), community will collapse.

Where are we at? And what hope is there? Do the top 1% holders of wealth & resource care about the rest? Not likely. If they did, they would not be the top 1%

Maybe 1% of the top 1% would care, and try to redress the balance somehow. But that won't save us.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


Hey Bob - not seen you for a while, hope all is well. I agree with your comment. Taking a purely 'mainstream' view, in light of all the blatant conspiratorial shenanigans of the rich & powerful is self-contradictory & can lead to no intellectually honest or accurate worldview/ philosophy (given that change & argument fill those spheres, along with a shedload of propaganda & selfish agendas.)

Cheers,

FITO.

Gotta love luddites.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment

thanks for the well wishes, i've been around though not commenting a terrible amount, i hope things are going well for you.

research is becoming much like the media, very controlled. original papers are difficult to obtain or view and controversial findings are rarely published without an angle. what happened to tesla is happening to everyone, if new technology is developed that is inexpensive and effective it is buried or ridiculed because there isn't money to be made in bettering the world effectively. solving problems would eliminate business.

Nice compilation Corrupty. * & F buddy

One thing we all need to remember is that our country's healthcare system is a "for profit" system whereas many other country's are not. That's a possible reason for WHY things like Fluoride, GMO, various chems and pharma are banned in the EU when they're perfectly legal here.

Also remember that since our health systems are "for profit", the rich and able DO NOT get the same level of care that the average citizen gets.

So...Yes. We're being slowly murdered but it's not for any science except for the science of Greed

One of the key reasons this kind of health issue persists is the very clever way the health discourse changed some years ago. Those in charge of such matters ended any multi-context discussion about all health matters when the substituted "cancer" as the only litmus test necessary.

Somewhere along the line those in charge figured they could simply control the conversation by testing for cancer causing issues only. Today you can have plastics that cause all manner of problems for people but........ "they have never been proven to cause cancer" and with that the conversation ends. "Does it cause cancer" is the only measure that is important with the overlords of health, and if it hasn't been PROVEN to cause cancer then there is no issue at all. And lab tests are easily altered, interpretations are easily rigged in the cancer causing world.

Cell phones cause behavior changes in people, any numbskull can see that, but because they have not been "proven" to cause cancer, there is nothing unsafe about them and those that question the health problems associated with constant cell phone radiation are met with, "there are no studies showing cancer."

Damn the process of mind control is clever.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


Ok, after clicking on your first link I simply can´t take you serious. More or less the first sentence is about a "network of unstable and dangerous nuclear power plants".

That statement alone is ridiculous enough to discredit the source.

And surely there are some things that we have to be carefull about, but let me ask you this.

Who exactly is forcing you to NOT grow your own produce if you are so worried? Who is telling you at what local farms to buy? Are the police crews forcing you to buy the crap in the supermarket?

IF you think we are all being killed / dumbed down / infected / whatever by these additives, then in gods name don´t buy them. Is that so hard?

And about factors like radiation. Well a lot of the classical power plants come with risks and benefits. Nuclear plants produce no pollution for example. I do not think that tchernobyl (verly old story, very old engineering, in no way comparable to modern power plants) and fukushima equal a "network of unstable plants".

The rest of it is as usual the same recipe we always get. A base layer of facts garnished with a lot of exaggerating and false interpretation.

I have to slightly agree about gmo´s though, but not in the way you mentioned it. They market seeds to make a profit and that goes against nature.

In short, watch where you buy what and do not take all that stuff too seriously.

reply to post by Nightaudit

Who exactly is forcing you to NOT grow your own produce if you are so worried? Who is telling you at what local farms to buy? Are the police crews forcing you to buy the crap in the supermarket? IF you think we are all being killed / dumbed down / infected / whatever by these additives, then in gods name don´t buy them. Is that so hard?

it is actually that hard. if monsanto seeds are found growing in your crops and you did not pay for them, monsanto will take your whole farm. they've sued almost 500 small farms and businesses to win a total sum of 23 million.

Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta together hold 53 percent of the global commercial seed market, which the report says has led to price increases for seeds -- between 1995 and 2011, the average cost of planting one acre of soybeans rose 325 percent and corn seed prices went up 259 percent.'"

not to mention that monsanto is now legally protected from prosecution should any of their seeds have harmful effects, AND they can keep selling them and planting them even after they've been deemed unsafe. all without labeling.

parents have their children taken away if they refuse vaccines. sure you can refuse them as an adult, but only after you get 20 to 30.

nuclear power plants could switch to thorium and eliminate harmful nuclear waste. it's even more efficient than uranium, but that means companies can't charge as much because there would be more electricity available, which would bring down the demand and price.