Page 38 | Russel has spoken

Whyismyfacealwaysdry · 2023-09-22T21:31:44+00:00

On Instagram, has anyone seen? What are your thoughts?

Furryrug · 27/09/2023 13:53

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 13:49

Is he still able to add content to YouTube?

I think so , he just won't get paid for it. Which contradicts some of his arguments I think.

vlo · 27/09/2023 14:02

He’s back on insta again now, carrying on, joking about as though nothing ever happened

Its5656 · 27/09/2023 14:03

Yes he can still post on YouTube but he won't be paid for it. He's asking his conspiracy fans to head over to Rumble and pay £50 a year to listen to his waffle. He needs the money because you know.. He's really skint.

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 14:06

Imagine being willing to pay for what goes on in his nogging.

Its5656 · 27/09/2023 15:12

It's ridiculous, The Innocent until proven guilty mob require zero evidence when it comes to his conspiracy theories. Pure hypocrisy.

BigMandsTattooPortfolio · 27/09/2023 15:23

Its5656 · 27/09/2023 15:12

It's ridiculous, The Innocent until proven guilty mob require zero evidence when it comes to his conspiracy theories. Pure hypocrisy.

Haha. This.😂

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:24

WomblingTree86 · 27/09/2023 11:27

I think in this case it didn't end well for them in that they were robustly challenged.

Show quote history

For the 100th time, I had absolutely NO problem with being 'robustly challenged'. I had a problem with being called 'f*ing thick', being gaslit and having others enter the conversation just to have a dig, not to contribute to the debate. There is a MASSIVE difference!

Openly slagging me off to others is STILL bullying and I have reported this comment. As I will any others I see.

TooBigForMyBoots · 27/09/2023 15:36

vlo · 27/09/2023 14:02

He’s back on insta again now, carrying on, joking about as though nothing ever happened

What, no messianic message for his believers? Maybe he's saving those for his paying customers.

In the meantime, be present folks.
twitter.com/silviotattiscon/status/1704209878779154495?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

WomblingTree86 · 27/09/2023 15:36

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:24

For the 100th time, I had absolutely NO problem with being 'robustly challenged'. I had a problem with being called 'f*ing thick', being gaslit and having others enter the conversation just to have a dig, not to contribute to the debate. There is a MASSIVE difference!

Openly slagging me off to others is STILL bullying and I have reported this comment. As I will any others I see.

Show quote history

Whilst your points have certainly been robustly challenged, anyone reading this thread can see that you have not been bullied, gas lit or openly slagged off.

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 15:40

So from that vid, he's basically asking people to overlook his past mistakes as he has been born again?

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 15:41

Fuck those that he's hurt. I thought you would have to repent your sins and not try to bury them, to be forgiven?

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:41

Biochemist · 27/09/2023 10:36

Opinions that aren't the 'preferred narrative' ARE repeatedly silenced and dismissed as 'conspiracy theories'.

Opinions not based on robust evidence (sars-cov-2 vaccines were a big mistake, women shouldn't have smear tests) are dismissed because they have been repeatedly disproven and there is a solid body of work behind this. Reputuable news outlets don't give nonsense airtime, for good reason @Jumpingthruhoops

There is nothing to stop influencers going to their preferred platform and making money from pushing out monetised vidoes/books/blogs, building up what can only be described as a cult-like following, and charging ££££ for giving talks and consultations though. Whilst screaming that they have been silenced and getting their followers to do the same.

The latest I've seen? A wellness blogger claiming glasses are harmful, they're another con of "big pharma" (or "big-opticians?") and we can all develop perfect vision with appropriate vitamins and healthy lifetsyle - and also some snakeoils she's selling. Hundreds of people paid to attend her class on this, god knows how many more bought products or have subscribed to her monestised channels.

As I've said on many a-COVID thread, a scientist can make far more by developing an "anti-mainstream science" niche than from just working as a normal researcher, it's an incredibly lucrative career path.

Edited

If you're going to comment, at least get your facts right.

Not a single person said the "covid jabs were a mistake'. Just that the harms aren't being properly reported. How are those two things in any way similar?

Equally, not a single person said 'women shouldn't have smears'. Just that the information about false positives etc, cash incentives paid to GPs isn't common knowledge (and, contrary to popular belief, not everyone is on Mumsnet).

So, my question to you is, where would the masses go to obtain these facts?

Furryrug · 27/09/2023 15:43

TooBigForMyBoots · 27/09/2023 15:36

What, no messianic message for his believers? Maybe he's saving those for his paying customers.

In the meantime, be present folks.
twitter.com/silviotattiscon/status/1704209878779154495?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

Show quote history

Maybe he'll go for an insanity plea.

bombastix · 27/09/2023 15:46

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 15:40

So from that vid, he's basically asking people to overlook his past mistakes as he has been born again?

God that is so predictable.

No stature of limitations on criminal complaints here.

Next step, moves to some jurisdiction where he can't be extradited. Carry on finding god and sending cultist absurdities to those still prepared to listen.

Biochemist · 27/09/2023 15:50

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:41

If you're going to comment, at least get your facts right.

Not a single person said the "covid jabs were a mistake'. Just that the harms aren't being properly reported. How are those two things in any way similar?

Equally, not a single person said 'women shouldn't have smears'. Just that the information about false positives etc, cash incentives paid to GPs isn't common knowledge (and, contrary to popular belief, not everyone is on Mumsnet).

So, my question to you is, where would the masses go to obtain these facts?

Show quote history

You seem to be itching for an argument? I didn't claim anyone on the thread said these things, I was using them of examples as the kind of fakes claims that are used to build an "anti mainstream science" profile from which people then make a career out of @Jumpingthruhoops

So, my question to you is, where would the masses go to obtain these facts?

Well, as a start you can try following the claims people make back to the actual source. As is always the case - and I've done it dozens of times for fake claims about SARS-COV-2 vaccines - what is said does not reflect the evidence that they are claiming it is from. There must be hundreds of threads with examples of this in the COVID section.

When it comes to a question like "should I have X vaccine which has been recommended?", my answer would be you can't answer this yourself. I'm a scientist and I can't answer it myself.

Health policy decisions are made by synthesising all available evidence (which includes a robust assessment of quality) and making recommendations. This is done by teams of experts, often working full time for weeks/months. It's not possible for a single person to do the same kind of robust assessment, let alone someone who isn't specifically qualified in an area. I would personally read the summary documents, and look out for anything I thought to be a red flag.

If ten electricians came to my house and said to varying degrees that it needed rewiring or else it would blow up, but one plumber disagreed and said they were just trying to con me, I'd go with the consensus opinion from experts.

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:51

WomblingTree86 · 27/09/2023 15:36

Whilst your points have certainly been robustly challenged, anyone reading this thread can see that you have not been bullied, gas lit or openly slagged off.

Show quote history

Well, no, because all those comments have since been deleted!

YOU were literally just openly slagging me off to another person, that's why I responded! Now you're telling me I'm imagining that I'm being gaslit!? Do you not see the irony in that!?

TooBigForMyBoots · 27/09/2023 15:55

It's predates the C4/Times expose. Its the bullshit he's been grooming his followers with for years.

bombastix · 27/09/2023 15:55

Brand is despicable really, stoking fear to make money. He is still doing it. Except having now got a captive audience who are psychologically invested in him and give him money, he goes for the brains with a terrible word salad.

What he is doing is mentally harmful to people. And unlike many of his apparent previous activity, legal.

WomblingTree86 · 27/09/2023 15:57

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 15:51

Well, no, because all those comments have since been deleted!

YOU were literally just openly slagging me off to another person, that's why I responded! Now you're telling me I'm imagining that I'm being gaslit!? Do you not see the irony in that!?

Show quote history

Most of the deleted comments are yours. My comments have not been deleted as far as I can see. I wasn't slagging you off or gaslighting you. Despite this, I was on your list of people you claim have bullied you.

MentholLoad · 27/09/2023 16:13

'harms' [from COVID vaccines] ARE being reported though @Jumpingthruhoops . And investigated. what makes you think that they aren't?

IClaudine · 27/09/2023 16:20

Jumpingthruhoops if the harms from covid vaccines aren't being properly reported, where does Brand and those of his ilk get the data they use to base their claims on🧐?

Jumpingthruhoops · 27/09/2023 16:26

Biochemist · 27/09/2023 15:50

You seem to be itching for an argument? I didn't claim anyone on the thread said these things, I was using them of examples as the kind of fakes claims that are used to build an "anti mainstream science" profile from which people then make a career out of @Jumpingthruhoops

So, my question to you is, where would the masses go to obtain these facts?

Well, as a start you can try following the claims people make back to the actual source. As is always the case - and I've done it dozens of times for fake claims about SARS-COV-2 vaccines - what is said does not reflect the evidence that they are claiming it is from. There must be hundreds of threads with examples of this in the COVID section.

When it comes to a question like "should I have X vaccine which has been recommended?", my answer would be you can't answer this yourself. I'm a scientist and I can't answer it myself.

Health policy decisions are made by synthesising all available evidence (which includes a robust assessment of quality) and making recommendations. This is done by teams of experts, often working full time for weeks/months. It's not possible for a single person to do the same kind of robust assessment, let alone someone who isn't specifically qualified in an area. I would personally read the summary documents, and look out for anything I thought to be a red flag.

If ten electricians came to my house and said to varying degrees that it needed rewiring or else it would blow up, but one plumber disagreed and said they were just trying to con me, I'd go with the consensus opinion from experts.

Edited

Show quote history

But that's exactly the point I've been trying to make this entire thread... 'experts' won't necessarily give you the WHOLE truth, especially if that truth is unpalatable, ie, it highlights dangers or financial incentives.

Your electrician/plumber analogy is a great example... but I'd say THIS scenario might better describe what I'm referring to:
10 electricians come to your house and say to varying degrees that it needs rewiring or else it would blow up.
Nine of them are singing the praises of these pioneering new materials they're using - not revealing that these materials are only being promoted because of cash incentives attached to them and they have no real idea about the safety data.

The remaining one electrician then comes round; he is using the same new materials but openly tells you about the cash incentive and the question marks over safety. Do you dismiss him as a 'scaremongering conspiracy theorist' and go with the nine 'experts' who aren't being transparent just because that's the 'general consensus'?

Slightly tenuous, of course, but I'm hoping it might illustrate where I'm coming from.

Bingbangbongbash · 27/09/2023 16:26

WomblingTree86 · 27/09/2023 15:36

Whilst your points have certainly been robustly challenged, anyone reading this thread can see that you have not been bullied, gas lit or openly slagged off.

Show quote history

Absolutely this. Misinformation, from anti-vax to Covid to climate change denial has to be robustly challenged each and every time. It’s dangerous not to. Framing alternate views as equal in status or evidence cannot be left to stand.

squareyedannie · 27/09/2023 16:33

That analogy could be used on both sides of the debate.

MentholLoad · 27/09/2023 16:38

10 electricians come to your house and say to varying degrees that it needs rewiring or else it would blow up.
Nine of them are singing the praises of these pioneering new materials they're using - not revealing that these materials are only being promoted because of cash incentives attached to them and the

this isn't what is happening though. the 10th person in this scenario is not an electrician at all. they are a TV presenter/actor who knows nothing about electrics, wiring or novel materials. he just enjoys the sound of his own voice and manipulating people into giving him money, instead of listening to the experts