Replies

— Similar numbers to “Worldometer”:
— John Hopkins:
— Our World in Data:

Re: “deep dives” into fake data, I concur.

When I cite the JHU, CDC and Worldometers numbers, and apply a simple arithmetic examination, the HUGE anomalies become evident. And evident enough that some FReepers bark back, all the while drifting off into even stranger “excess death” estimates.

How huge is a single anomaly? How about the “accepted” and therefore reported China “data?”

According to JHU, China as of today reports a mere “4,849” Covid deaths for a population of 1.4 billion. Whatever one thinks of Covid, the number is outrageously anomalous. Therefore, all numbers should be questioned.

If a virus affects a population approximately the same and in general, then one should see rather similar reports.

And yet just across the border India reports 483,463 deaths for a similar size population, while the US is tagged as the “deadliest” in terms of percentage of a population. This is ridiculous.

The virus stops at the India border with China?

The virus is massively more virulent in the US than India?

The anomalies in the “official” data leap out, and yet the media and some Freepers turn a blind eye to these glaring data issues. I will continue to cite these "official" -- and yes, suspicious -- numbers to show that, at the minimum, the "official" numbers suggest the entire "event" is media- and academic gaslighting.

Else, the whole "pandemic" results "officially" as: ( 5,440,715 "global deaths) / 7,917,528,778 global population ) x 100 = 0.0687%

Less than seven one-hunredths of one percent "global deaths" from Covid over two years.

Not much of a pandemic, don't you think? I think this proves the "con" has been afoot for the entire time.

With what goal? The dreamed of European-style "green pass" which would incorporate medical, climate and banking issues for the purpose of exactly what the Chinese Communists do to their people.