[Disinformation] Wisest Woman On Earth, Found imo

[Aianawa]

Twenty minutes in and just wow, so far ahead of our times, lol Irish i think as well.

Very interested in your feels and opinion with this data and person Aragorn.

https://adversereactionreport.com/br...dsWWzFW3BjpgaM

[Aianawa]

Also Moddy if you have time also, love your take on this wise lady, her brain n mind that is , not hair colour lol.

[modwiz]

Also Moddy if you have time also, love your take on this wise lady, her brain n mind that is , not hair colour lol.

Not my vibe, man.

A peek at it was all my mellow could handle.

So, I have no take on it.

[Aragorn]

Twenty minutes in and just wow, so far ahead of our times, lol Irish i think as well.

Very interested in your feels and opinion with this data and person Aragorn.

https://adversereactionreport.com/br...dsWWzFW3BjpgaM

Also Moddy if you have time also, love your take on this wise lady, her brain n mind that is , not hair colour lol.

Not my vibe, man.

A peek at it was all my mellow could handle.

So, I have no take on it.

I found it excruciating to listen to because of the long-winded replies, and I have certain red flags going off with some of her statements, but I'll reserve judgment for later. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so time will tell.

[Aianawa]

Not my vibe, man.

A peek at it was all my mellow could handle.

So, I have no take on it.

Ta for sniffing Moddy.

I found it excruciating to listen to because of the long-winded replies, and I have certain red flags going off with some of her statements, but I'll reserve judgment for later. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so time will tell.

That she was so intelligent and aware in the 80's of what has already happened is exstrawdinary indeed and time is telling. Ta for enquiring Aragorn.

[Aragorn]

I found it excruciating to listen to because of the long-winded replies, and I have certain red flags going off with some of her statements, but I'll reserve judgment for later. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so time will tell.

That she was so intelligent and aware in the 80's of what has already happened is exstrawdinary indeed and time is telling. Ta for enquiring Aragorn.

I did find the following on her, in a Wikipedia article about the Irish Freedom Party, an alt-right Irish political party...:

	Dolores Cahill Shortly before her resignation from IFP in March 2021, Dolores Cahill stoked anger for hosting a party, amid Covid-19 lockdown restrictions, of up to 60 guests at her castle in Athy Kildare. Cahill also promoted COVID-19 related conspiracy theories, stating that "globalists" pushed for mandatory mask wearing because "oxygen-deprived people are easier to manipulate". After contesting the 2021 Dublin Bay South by-election as an independent, Cahill was refused entry to the count-centre for refusing to wear a mask and was recorded "verbally abusing gardaí and security staff".

So she's not quite as innocent, wise and unbiased as she appears, which is what my intuition was already telling me when watching and hearing her talk in that video. The rest of that page is also worth looking at...

[Aianawa]

Once she spoke her truth, her findings scientificalllly, her research, well as she explained, she prepared well beforehand as she saw the everdance from her peers, her work, her science really annoyed many because she proved well known scientests were lying or getting their results incorrect, she knew the pandemic in one form or another was coming because they ( they = controllers n putrids ) avertised it in their circles ( you see that part Aragorn ? ), even knew the years 2020-22 and then the seasons data would kick in as it did, how she managed knowing these things all that time is imo amazing, gosh many friends and family of late are comprehending agenda 2030 un data council wise, because of the digital CV19 plus library plus council enforcing and segragation elements and especialllly the lockstep aspect, gee i thought that was organised in 2019 201 event but nope was way back when and only being reinforced at event 201.

She has and will be getting everything possible thrown at her to shut her down ( because she is massively intelligent and wise and respected ). imo

[Aragorn]

Once she spoke her truth, her findings scientificalllly, her research, well as she explained, she prepared well beforehand as she saw the everdance from her peers, her work, her science really annoyed many because she proved well known scientests were lying or getting their results incorrect, she knew the pandemic in one form or another was coming because they ( they = controllers n putrids ) avertised it in their circles ( you see that part Aragorn ? ), even knew the years 2020-22 and then the seasons data would kick in as it did, how she managed knowing these things all that time is imo amazing, gosh many friends and family of late are comprehending agenda 2030 un data council wise, because of the digital CV19 plus library plus council enforcing and segragation elements and especialllly the lockstep aspect, gee i thought that was organised in 2019 201 event but nope was way back when and only being reinforced at event 201.

She has and will be getting everything possible thrown at her to shut her down ( because she is massively intelligent and wise and respected ). imo

A little bit of nuance here, Vern: that is what she says, now, in 2022. It's easy to claim that you already knew a long time ago that a certain something was going to happen in 2020-2021 when we're in 2022 already.

Also, it's no surprise that she knew that a pandemic was coming, because scientists all over the world have been predicting that for years. We all knew it was only a matter of time, simply because of our careless and casual way of living. We've been inviting this pandemic, just as we've been inviting other diseases as well for years now.

And nobody has been lying about it, because everyone in the scientific community has been ringing the alarm bell for years already, if not decades. But people didn't want to hear it. And yet, here we are, and the pandemic is real — albeit that it cannot be called a pandemic anymore at this point in time, because it has sort of ebbed away by now, and the remainder has become endemic; you can still catch it, but it's not as lethal anymore as before due to a combination of the virus' mutation and the fact that most people are now sufficiently immune.

[Aianawa]

Spose a few scientests have have indeed lied of late, even flippy floppy Faucxi on camera, maybe i am too trusting.

[Dreamtimer]

We lost over one million here in the US. Since home testing is so widely available now we don't know how many Covid cases there are right now. It's a lot. Fortunately, as Aragorn has stated, there are fewer resulting deaths. The long-term concerns remain as the virus effects systems throughout the body and can lead to varied long-term problems.

There were some 'wise' people who said I'd be dead or on the way to death by now due to being vaccinated. Not the case.

I'd be curious to know if this woman went that far. Did she call herself a pure-blood?

Wealthy people like to defy laws. They call their money the 'ticket' to speed or host pandemic parties or whatever. It certainly happened here in the states.

I've noticed the 'easy to manipulate' theme in the conspiracy theories. That's what Tuckums says about immigrants. That 'the Dems' are trying to bring in obedient people. Which is amazing since the immigrants are also supposed to be criminal rapist drug dealers. Which are not obedient types at all. But then when have I ever expected common sense coming from that direction?



If scientists publish studies with bad data, maybe they're lying, maybe they're incompetent, maybe they rushed to publish because money, those studies will be debunked and that work will not be followed up or pursued. Scientists don't work in a vacuum. If they fail, they don't get support. No grants, no labs, no funding, no assistants, no benefactors, they just can't persist.

But people will believe what they want, eh?

[Emil El Zapato]

The Strange Case of Dr. Cahill and Ms. Hyde
Professor Dolores Cahill’s scientific résumé can legitimize her false claims about COVID-19. Her crusade of misinformation raises the question of how far academic freedom goes.

“If you’re under, like, 70 or 65 and you’ve no underlying conditions, this is all a hoax.” You’d be forgiven for thinking that this wild assertion about a pandemic that has killed over 4.3 million people worldwide and caused sequelae for an untold number of survivors came from someone who knows nothing of medicine and immunology. These words were spoken by Professor Dolores Cahill, a tenured professor at the School of Medicine of University College Dublin with a doctorate degree in immunology. She is part of a coterie of outspoken academics and healthcare professionals spreading harmful misinformation about COVID-19, people who should know better, and their contrarian crusade creates friction between two competing ideas: academic freedom and scholastic rigour.

Cahill, who until recently was teaching a class for first-year medical students called “Science, Medicine and Society,” has been making a number of staggeringly erroneous claims about COVID-19 and its associated vaccines since the beginning of the pandemic, never correcting her mistakes and always doubling down. She has said, falsely, that COVID-19 can be prevented by taking vitamin C, vitamin D and zinc, and that the most efficient treatment is in the form of hydroxychloroquine, a cheap medication against malaria and autoimmune diseases that turned into an object of worship for some individuals, even as the evidence clearly showed it did not work against COVID-19. She has boldly stated that children wearing a mask—the kind that doctors, nurses and dentists have been wearing for decades—would be starved of oxygen and see their IQ lowered. As for the RNA-based vaccines, she falsely claimed they did more harm than good. “If you paid me ten million,” she warned, “I wouldn’t take it. I would go to prison first. If someone vaccinated me [with an RNA vaccine], I would charge them with attempted murder.”

Bolstered by Cahill’s academic and scientific credentials, her misinformed and hazardous claims have grown to the point where students at her university wrote a 33-page scientific rebuttal of these claims, a document that was signed by 133 students from the university’s own School of Medicine and sent to its administrators. One of the claims these students had to debunk: that once you get COVID-19, you are immune for life. This brazen assertion’s confidence is in contradiction with actual knowledge in the field, which is that we do not clearly know how long immunity does last. But this is the upside-down world at University College Dublin right now, where students are teaching their own professor basic facts about a topic she should be familiar with.

Because Dolores Cahill is not a naturopath, or a multilevel marketing supplement saleswoman, or a bestselling author claiming that a spirit whispers medical information from the future into her ear. She has a proper biomedical research background, working for many years at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Genetics and as an advisor and international expert on many boards and committees, including the Irish Government’s Advisory Science Council. Ironically, she has also been active in the field of scientific integrity. To say that her credentials are at odds with her public campaign of COVID denialism is to put it mildly: her pre- and post-pandemic academic selves seem completely at odds with each other. When, arguing against physical distancing, she claimed that “only three organisms are transmitted in that way [via the air]: it’s tuberculosis and smallpox and Ebola,” I’m at a loss for words. Has she never heard of measles? Does she not know that hospitalized patients with the flu are isolated to prevent transmission? Does she understand respiratory infections?

While the School of Medicine eventually distanced itself from her views on COVID-19, the university cited strict guidelines on academic freedom as a reason for their inaction. Can university professors say whatever they want, no matter the harm they cause, and get away with it?

Freedom from truth?
The idea of academic freedom is very old: it can be traced back to Ancient Greece and it made its way into the German university system from which it was adopted into the United States in 1876, with the founding of the first American research university, Johns Hopkins University. Academic freedom is meant to protect the search for truth. It is the right for members of academia to pursue research, to publish and to teach without restraint or control from their employer. Basically, if a university is uncomfortable with the fact that the sky is blue—perhaps because many of its donors belong to a group that believes the sky is yellow—its professors are allowed to conduct and publish research showing that the sky is blue without fear of losing their jobs.

This principle of academic freedom, which is argued to be useful to attract high-quality professors and to protect them from ideological witch-hunts, has encountered a growing challenge. Professors are more and more taking to social media, to video-sharing platforms, and to podcasts to address society at large, and what they are saying has, in a few cases, been wildly inaccurate and potentially harmful. Cahill does absolutely not represent the majority of academics, who tend to be responsible when speaking to the public, but she is unfortunately not alone. I am aware of a Canadian university professor who has repeatedly made ill-informed statements about the pandemic. When a concerned citizen contacted the university president, the reply was a limp statement of the problem with no solution in sight: the university was at once deeply committed to academic freedom and to the highest standard of scholastic integrity.

The friction between the two is not easily resolved. For example, there are tensions between Stanford University and the Hoover Institution it helped spawn. Dr. Scott Atlas, a senior fellow at Hoover, became the coronavirus adviser for the White House and contradicted public health guidance during the pandemic. When he spread health misinformation essentially under the name of Stanford University, many of the university’s professors were troubled. Academic freedom does have limits: in fact, tenured professors (meaning professors who achieve an indefinite appointment at their university and benefit the most from academic freedom) can be declared unfit for duty. The problem is, what constitutes unfitness? It is rarely made explicit.

Returning to Cahill as an example of an academic who divorced herself from science while benefiting from her credentials, her constant misinformation is embedded in a larger ideology. She was the chairperson of the right-wing, Eurosceptic Irish Freedom Party until March of this year, when she quit after being condemned for spouting COVID-19 misinformation. She is currently the president of the World Freedom Alliance, whose website identifies her as “Professor Dolores Cahill” and links to her University College Dublin public profile. Like so many anti-lockdown groups that sprouted during the pandemic, her Alliance fetishizes freedom to the exclusion of public health. In her mind, health is simply a matter of personal responsibility and sickness can be avoided by eating right, taking in sunlight, and buying the right supplements. Cahill’s Alliance has already partnered with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense, a rallying point for the modern anti-vaccination movement. The World Freedom Alliance also has a youth wing; its Custodean platform publishes a notice of liability for people to give to their doctor who refuses to treat them with hydroxychloroquine; and it has embraced the notion of “natural law,” by which institutions and their laws are not recognized, only “the Creator’s laws.”

While academic freedom may protect her, some academics have pushed back more generally at the idea that tenure should provide some sort of blanket immunity. Their arguments can be summarized pithily. Academic freedom is not the same as freedom of speech. Academic freedom can be misused and abused. What is controversial, and therefore ought to be protected, is not the same as what is incorrect. Factual statements are not opinions. There are minimum benchmarks of academic rigour that should be met by members of academia. The harm caused by repeatedly spreading misinformation should not be swept under the rug. Professors hold a special position in the community and therefore ought to have special obligations: medical academics, for example, have a responsibility around public health. As Spider-Man learned from his Uncle Ben, with great power comes great responsibility. Someone interested in “the Creator’s laws” might instead turn to the Bible: “to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask the more.”

The question that remains is how someone with Cahill’s training and expertise can be so incredibly wrong about the pandemic.

The wisdom of the expert crowd
Scientists, doctors, and more generally (and to borrow a bit of British slang) “boffins” are not immune to brain farts and inconsistencies. Some experts venture outside their field of expertise and suffer from a bad case of overconfidence bias. Appraising scientific papers is itself challenging. The peer review of manuscripts before publication is just one layer of this critical appraisal; bad statistics and questionable methodologies can escape detection until the paper is read by the right person. Strongly held values can also inform motivated reasoning. If a professor has an all-consuming focus on individual liberties, it may guide her interpretation of the evidence in favour of her position. Once a public position has been clearly taken, walking it back might invite shame, so doubling down becomes attractive. These days, with social media, academics and healthcare professionals who are predisposed to filling the role of the martyr or guru can find attention, money, and a large following by becoming a contrarian, especially in the middle of a public health crisis that has reshaped our world. Receiving a Ph.D. from a university does not, unfortunately, immunize you from these forces.

In fact, there is a phenomenon known as Nobel disease which is an extreme example of what Dolores Cahill exemplifies. Some Nobel Prize winners go on to endorse strange notions later in life. For example, Linus Pauling became obsessed with the idea that megadoses of vitamin C could cure many diseases, and Luc Montagnier who co-discovered HIV is now consumed by the pseudomedicine of homeopathy.

If the average consumer of health news cannot automatically trust an expert simply because of their individual credentials, how then to find truth? The best bet remains to seek out the consensus if it exists. As scientific data accumulate, different lines of inquiry converge on an answer, and large professional and scientific bodies recognize this emerging consensus. If 99 atmospheric scientists agree that the sky is blue but one argues it is always yellow, a blind person’s best gamble is to trust the consensus. The idea of the renegade scientist who upends science and ushers in a revolution has been overplayed: most of the time, scientific knowledge evolves in small steps built upon a solid foundation.

And finally, Cahill’s claims can be put to the test of time. Have her apocalyptic predictions come true? In late December 2020, Cahill claimed in a filmed discussion that, regarding the COVID-19 vaccines being rolled out in the UK, “most of the elderly, most of those people will have serious adverse events or will die in the next few months.” That has not happened. Elderly people were vaccinated first in many countries and they did not suddenly fill up hospitals’ intensive care units after receiving the jab, or swiftly drop like flies. In fact, the people dying of COVID now are almost exclusively the unvaccinated.

If Cahill’s bold prediction did not come to pass, what else has she been wrong about? A whole lot, as it turns out, and her university credentials can’t help her save face.

Take-home message:
-Dr. Dolores Cahill is a professor at the School of Medicine of University College Dublin who has consistently spread misinformation about COVID-19, including the myth that children wearing masks would have a lower IQ
-University professors who, during the pandemic, have spread clear and harmful falsehoods about COVID-19 are said to be protected by academic freedom, but there is a tension between this freedom and scholastic rigour
-People with science doctorates and medical degrees are not immune to believing untrue things, being motivated by their values, or failing to properly understand and appraise the scientific literature

@CrackedScience

How do you find this stuff Aianawa

[Aianawa]

How ?, imagine if you will and are able, politicians were not trust worthy, most msm just read the script in front of them, medical industry ran on a 8% business model, ( if not able to see pharma abuse, well who really wishes to even lift that putrid rock ), mainly asking spirits guidance though BNP.

Hatchet job upon this incredible lady is n was par for course.

[Aragorn]

I did find the following on her, in a Wikipedia article about the Irish Freedom Party, an alt-right Irish political party...:

	Dolores Cahill Shortly before her resignation from IFP in March 2021, Dolores Cahill stoked anger for hosting a party, amid Covid-19 lockdown restrictions, of up to 60 guests at her castle in Athy Kildare. Cahill also promoted COVID-19 related conspiracy theories, stating that "globalists" pushed for mandatory mask wearing because "oxygen-deprived people are easier to manipulate". After contesting the 2021 Dublin Bay South by-election as an independent, Cahill was refused entry to the count-centre for refusing to wear a mask and was recorded "verbally abusing gardaí and security staff".

So she's not quite as innocent, wise and unbiased as she appears, which is what my intuition was already telling me when watching and hearing her talk in that video. The rest of that page is also worth looking at...

The Strange Case of Dr. Cahill and Ms. Hyde
Professor Dolores Cahill’s scientific résumé can legitimize her false claims about COVID-19. Her crusade of misinformation raises the question of how far academic freedom goes.

“If you’re under, like, 70 or 65 and you’ve no underlying conditions, this is all a hoax.” You’d be forgiven for thinking that this wild assertion about a pandemic that has killed over 4.3 million people worldwide and caused sequelae for an untold number of survivors came from someone who knows nothing of medicine and immunology. These words were spoken by Professor Dolores Cahill, a tenured professor at the School of Medicine of University College Dublin with a doctorate degree in immunology. She is part of a coterie of outspoken academics and healthcare professionals spreading harmful misinformation about COVID-19, people who should know better, and their contrarian crusade creates friction between two competing ideas: academic freedom and scholastic rigour.

Cahill, who until recently was teaching a class for first-year medical students called “Science, Medicine and Society,” has been making a number of staggeringly erroneous claims about COVID-19 and its associated vaccines since the beginning of the pandemic, never correcting her mistakes and always doubling down. She has said, falsely, that COVID-19 can be prevented by taking vitamin C, vitamin D and zinc, and that the most efficient treatment is in the form of hydroxychloroquine, a cheap medication against malaria and autoimmune diseases that turned into an object of worship for some individuals, even as the evidence clearly showed it did not work against COVID-19. She has boldly stated that children wearing a mask—the kind that doctors, nurses and dentists have been wearing for decades—would be starved of oxygen and see their IQ lowered. As for the RNA-based vaccines, she falsely claimed they did more harm than good. “If you paid me ten million,” she warned, “I wouldn’t take it. I would go to prison first. If someone vaccinated me [with an RNA vaccine], I would charge them with attempted murder.”

Bolstered by Cahill’s academic and scientific credentials, her misinformed and hazardous claims have grown to the point where students at her university wrote a 33-page scientific rebuttal of these claims, a document that was signed by 133 students from the university’s own School of Medicine and sent to its administrators. One of the claims these students had to debunk: that once you get COVID-19, you are immune for life. This brazen assertion’s confidence is in contradiction with actual knowledge in the field, which is that we do not clearly know how long immunity does last. But this is the upside-down world at University College Dublin right now, where students are teaching their own professor basic facts about a topic she should be familiar with.

Because Dolores Cahill is not a naturopath, or a multilevel marketing supplement saleswoman, or a bestselling author claiming that a spirit whispers medical information from the future into her ear. She has a proper biomedical research background, working for many years at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Genetics and as an advisor and international expert on many boards and committees, including the Irish Government’s Advisory Science Council. Ironically, she has also been active in the field of scientific integrity. To say that her credentials are at odds with her public campaign of COVID denialism is to put it mildly: her pre- and post-pandemic academic selves seem completely at odds with each other. When, arguing against physical distancing, she claimed that “only three organisms are transmitted in that way [via the air]: it’s tuberculosis and smallpox and Ebola,” I’m at a loss for words. Has she never heard of measles? Does she not know that hospitalized patients with the flu are isolated to prevent transmission? Does she understand respiratory infections?

While the School of Medicine eventually distanced itself from her views on COVID-19, the university cited strict guidelines on academic freedom as a reason for their inaction. Can university professors say whatever they want, no matter the harm they cause, and get away with it?

[...]

So... It would appear that this is once again a thread destined for the Misinformation, Disinformation, Propaganda & Hoaxes category.

I already had a feeling it was going to go in that direction when I skimmed the video...

[Aianawa]

Mainstream media is doing an amazing job of sorting all the lies out spose.

All that intelligence and degree's etc, all that amazing work to help people and her peers and she throws it all away.

[Aragorn]

Mainstream media is doing an amazing job of sorting all the lies out spose.

All that intelligence and degree's etc, all that amazing work to help people and her peers and she throws it all away.

Well, she went into politics, and particularly, a far-right political party. Not only does that mean that she was willing to compromise on her ideals — because if you go into politics and you want to survive as a party, then that's exactly what you have to do — but it was probably a two-way street, whereby she herself was subconsciously getting influenced by the members of her party and the conspiracy theories they are buying into.

Yet, as you say, she did throw away an outstanding career in science by compromising on her common sense and ideals, and that is highly regrettable.

Politics is a filthy game, Vern. I've seen it from up close when I was working for the authorities over here, and then I also got to see it from the inside later when I myself was a supporting member of a (now no longer existing) "alternative" political party. I've also had numerous conversations with people who had tried to start a political party before me, and they all warned me of what a cesspool it is. And boy, were they right about that...