Covid Conspiracy Theories

Someone has shared with me a few things that were quite startling to me.

It boils down to the notion that there is a greater agenda in the global pandemic than meets the eye, and that there are voices that aren’t being heard (ie suppressed).  In particular to do with the Covid vaccines as being harmful.

To support this view, a video from Dr Ryan Cole was shared with me (https://rumble.com/vkopys-a-pathologist-summary-of-what-these-jabs-do-to-the-brain-and-other-organs.html?fbclid=IwAR26FiUBr1ZO1J99L5qcT_mlkQUuN8zNzxaJm-04cxENIu6HEUTQ7MrTRMc) which contains his views on the pandemic and in particular the vaccines.  

A quick listen and it became clear he was making unsubstantiated and false claims.  This was later confirmed when I checked https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-idaho-doctor-makes-baseless-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/

I asked i this person if they had heard of factcheck.org (going to steer them towards a site that would reveal some substantiated claims), and yes they said they had, and revealed to me that the site is funded by the pharma companies profiting from Covid, and George Soros, and Bill Gates, and so therefore can’t be trusted as it's biased.  As evidence for this, I was pointed to https://www.australiannationalreview.com/state-of-affairs/george-soros-and-bill-gates-funding-facebooks-fact-checkers/ 

I had never heard of the “Australian National Review”.  A quick poke around the site was not promising, with conspiracy theories about chem-trails, anti climate-change and anti-gmo propaganda, among others.  There was surprisingly little on the web about the site, however mediabiasfactcheck.com review site classifies the ANR as a site as being “a strong conspiracy and pseudoscience source based on the promotion of false or misleading science claims”.  (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/australian-national-review/).  It is highly dubious that it’s in any way reliable as an information source.  I also asked my Facebook friends, none of the responses were positive to say the least. One person even said it was the epitome of a fake news site.

The author of the article, Baxter Dmitry, is a pseudonym of an author who has been widely criticized for deliberately false news articles put on the internet by extremist right-wing propaganda sites - particularly peddling conspiracy theories and blatant lies. EG https://sciencefeedback.co/authors/baxter-dmitry/

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-vaccinate-childr-idUSKBN22B26Z

Anyway, Baxter Dmitry says in this article that sites like factcheck.org are linked to the poynter organisation, which is funded by George Soros and Bill Gates.  

Even if true, why would that discredit them on its own?  Soros is a frequent target in multiple bizarre conspiracy theories, and Bill Gates is starting to be equally attacked.  It's quite telling that they are being targeted again, as if the mere mention of their names is enough to invalidate anything they are involved in.  

He mentions that Bill Gates and others also donated to Hillary Clinton.  Okay?  Even if true, what does that about factcheck.org?  

He quotes "It gave me goosebumps to hear those names because they have actually a very strong political agenda", the hypocrisy here is galling.  

Fact is, the code of conduct for fact checkers is very reasonable.  Look at it yourself and tell me if any of these are unacceptable to you.  https://www.ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/know-more/the-commitments-of-the-code-of-principles

Dmitry then goes on to quote a Danish "pro-Russian" named Thranholm.  Why this is relevant I have no idea other than the quote fits his narrative.  Thranholm is very outspoken, and often branded a Russian propagandist.  She apparently often speaks of Vladimir Putin as “saving Christianity”, which is just bizarre.  The EU has apparently targeted her for promoting pro-Russian propaganda, with the intent of destabilizing Europe.  So quoting this person, someone who is known to be spreading misinformation, is a bit silly.  I guess he hoped no one would check.  

Dmitry concludes with "Welcome to 1984’s Ministry of Truth, where only selected facts are allowed to exist while other facts that don’t fit Washington’s neoliberal narrative will be labelled “fake news” and suppressed." Yet he provides no evidence of this in the article.  He hasn't shown how fact checking organisations only select certain facts to exist.  In fact he hasn’t presented any actual evidence at all, only his own personal opinions.  

Of course conspiracy theory websites, and websites promoting propaganda and misinformation would try to undermine anyone who can so easily disprove their wacky conspiracy theories.  After all, that's the exact thing that these fact-check organisations actively work against.  It's the whole reason for their existence - to check claims and report on accuracy with high levels of transparency and high requirements of verifiable evidence.  

In conclusion, he gives no reason whatsoever to mistrust factcheck.org.  factcheck.org openly reveals their funding sources, they provide all the evidence for their conclusions in their articles, 

Which brings us back to Dr Ryan Cole and his dubious claims.  A quick google reveals multiple independent websites evaluating his rather unique claims.  Such as that Covid is a seasonal virus (false), that ivermectin has been proven an effective treatment (false), and so on.  He apparently did respond to one site with an explanation, apologizing for seeming dismissive of the deaths from Covid, and explaining that he is definitely not an anti-vaxxer (see https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/208/garden-city-doctor-reacts-fact-checking-his-statements-lawmakers/277-6d4ba8c6-3eb7-4334-bfe2-2052c57a7e0e).  

The most concise is the factcheck.org investigation linked above and again here which deals with his many baseless and false claims: https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-idaho-doctor-makes-baseless-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/.  

Which brings us all the way back to the start with the notion that that there is a greater agenda in the global pandemic than meets the eye, and that there are voices that aren’t being heard (ie suppressed) and that Covid vaccines are harmful.  So far, the evidence supporting this claim is non-existent.  Thus, I remained concerned for my friend who is using this as ‘evidence’ to support the conspiracy theory claims being made.