When I spoke to Poornima Wagh last week, a claimed double Ph.D., she didn't know that there were multiple versions of SARS-CoV-2 in the genetic libraries. There are currently 12 million of them.
In the original version of this article, I said that the Corman-Drosten paper proved the reality of the pandemic when it only claimed to. That paper has since been discredited as a work of scientific fraud by an independent peer review team.
You may read more about it and other important late 2020 developments here.
Talking about fishy occurrences, what’s with the Google results? I thought medical heretics got smeared, ignored and “fact-checked” on Google. Why was “Dr Poornima Wagh” getting pages of enthusiastic links?
But IF Poornima is a Pharma plant or a PR Operative, with billionaire backers, it's perfectly consistent that she's being pushed by Big Tech algorithms ("The Robot" as Eric likes to say).
But pushing this fraud only works up until the point where she is exposed as a fraud (It's in the script, near the last chapter of the story), "WHICH SHE NOW HAS BEEN".
Steve Kirsch will do his best to work with what he’s got so far about Miss Wagh, but it’s a relief that Eric dragged her hot air balloon back to earth before it came down in flames. It is instructive to see people’s reactions to the fraud, both those for (like Lee Merritt) and against. For my part, I found Wagh’s claims about the lab experiments - primarily her statement that no spike protein or mRNA had been found in the samples, only heavy metals - as potentially explosive, and more interesting than the issue of her credentials, but my primary concern was, “Is this actually TRUE?” Thankfully Eric et al did the necessary spadework and we can deduce that all the superficially convincing stuff about the lab experiments was hogwash as she is so obviously lying about her academic history. An interesting development is that now Eric has found it’s necessary to convince people why the issue of her fraud actually matters, and that it’s not enough that this crazywoman may have had “the right intentions.”
Yes, well, had she posed as an airline pilot, an EMT or a surgeon, we would not be as happy, nor if she was a chef who pissed in the broth. That's easier to understand. And I do wonder why.
The interesting thing about the Tremblay “Poornima faces her accusers” video is how this woman, who so artfully and energetically built this considerable facade, crumbled under the mild weight of sustained questioning about the facts. Clearly she knew how to ride the waves of attention, but sank as soon as she hit a few rocks. Lee Merritt would probably throw her a life belt.
She gave me her chart data. It is compelling and I am entitled to use it. I'll probably take it up on Planet Waves FM. It is relevant, and we are heading into a tsunami of deception what will center around Oct. 30 — and the chart for Oct. 30 and for Poornima Wagh have a lot in common.
But it's not just Eric that has to defend this. I'm getting the same exact comments too.
I'm intending to do some additional posts about this issue, but this was really hell week for me dealing with the fallout from this whole Poornima affair.
It's all sort of goofy when you really think about it.
What sort of made me wonder about "Poor Nima" was her appearance looked really wrong. She has a young face that doesn't match up with the elderly hair. Also, somehow her face belies her claim to have two PhDs. And the background from which she was broadcasting in her first couple of podcasts looked kind of like a set to me. I also thought it was kind of comical the way she said "the novel" (referring to her efforts to identify the virus).
What I am getting at is that sometimes one's gut, or instincts, try to let one know when something doesn't add up. People reveal more of themselves than they may realize when they do videos.
As for Lee Merritt, I sort of wondered about her affiliations in the first video I watched her in when I noted how cheerful she seemed when talking about how people will eventually have microchips. Again, it had more to do with body language or attitude on display.
Well body language is interpreted. Subject to error. Hunches are one thing. Need something rock solid to report. For me it was the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine saying they hadn't issued anyone with that name any PhD. That's hard data.
Sorry, wrestling with Substack's content system today. Here is the correct paragraph:
She claims to have personally proved the nonexistence of the virus from an astounding 1,500 samples of lung lavage from “covid positive” pneumonia patients (of which she claims that 756 were analyzed) in the United States— and to have written a scientific paper about this that she will not produce.
MIke Donio, one of my science sources in this investigation, says:
She really botched the agarose gel part. Badly.
You wouldn’t never follow up sequencing with a gel. Maybe PCR but it’s qualitative and crude. If she’s doing meta genomic sequencing, like high throughput mass tandem, there’s no way you could do a gel because you have millions of little pieces that you are simultaneously sequencing. I mean she literally says that you “can actually see the little particles of RNA and DNA”.
Not even close.
You see a band. That’s it. And you assume it’s the piece of DNA you think but only based on size. And there wouldn’t be RNA. You probably know this. When sequencing RNA one of the first steps is reverse transcription to convert the RNA to cDNA. Then you amplify with PCR and then sequence. This is actually a slightly more proper application for PCR versus the ridiculous tests. Regardless, she’s way off.
Prof. Massey! You remain my favorite home-spun journalist of the "covid" era. You provide the foundational layer of the actual fraud. We do not need to prove the virus does not exist. They already admit it.
There are good reasons people could not see through this. For one thing, imposters are a fact of history -- and there have been some big ones.
One reason in our time is digital conditions, which has nearly everyone in a dissociative fog. This goes unexamined.
The environment was waiting for someone like her to come along. She emerged in a perfect setup of mental and digital conditions — and scientifically illiterate people questioning her.
The "covid truth" movement needs to be a lot more curious about the science.
My first indication she was lying involved her poor characterization of the Corman-Drosten review report, which proved the WHO PCR is a fraud. She did not get the details right; we may have discussed that (if I recall, our assessment with Cindy was that she may not have been accustomed to using precise language in public statements). However, that's pretty lame; anyone who passed two doctoral programs in three years would be a ninja, and cite scientific line and verse.
Poornima spins more yarn than a knitting supply manufacturer. Christine you gave her the benefit of the doubt and there's nothing wrong with that, a lot of us did. She was avoiding the group primarily because she knows she's a fraud and would very quickly be found out if she interacted with members of the group. Her fraud would be more transparent to people that are steeped in the material.
I've been looking for evidence of this so-called FBI raid, which I believe is the key to this entire story because it's what made people want to listen in the first place.
No raid, no story. So where's the proof?
So far, there is nothing I have found to corroborate that this FBI raid on a Texas university campus on April 25, 2021, ever occurred... nothing noted by the FBI on their site from that period of time, nothing tweeted by college kids on campus who were interested in why a raid was occurring at their school or frightened by the presence of federal agents, nothing in local, regional, or state news during a time when 22 universities are under extreme scrutiny for supposed "ties to Wuhan," which at least one university has since admitted.
The press has been tightly surveilling these universities for two years now. And yet, this alleged FBI raid has gone unreported?
I love that this community is not allowing the behavior to go unaddressed, especially in light of the fact that the primary argument reduces one of the mainstream's darling Hegelian dialectics to absolute ash - no wonder it's under attack. Anyone who thinks it wouldn't be under attack is, to be honest, incredibly naive to the workings of tactical information warfare and needs to understand more clearly that this is exactly what is happening. This is information warfare, plain and simple.
Additionally, we already know how often and egregiously the truth has been stretched on multiple *provable* occasions, so I would like to urge people not to be fooled by crocodile tears. Your heartstrings are being played like a fiddle.
Eric, thank you for running with this and not letting it go. It's important for reasons that many simply do not understand yet. They will get there in time. It's an extremely complex topic with a lot of non-obvious moving parts.
I doubt they could scrub every tweet by every student without causing a backlash uproar that would have made them tweet about it even harder. Kids don't play nice like that. So, my gut is that it never happened, period.
Exactly. She'd be arrested for obstruction or for removing evidence had that occurred - and she claims the FBI showed up at her doorstep on April 27, 2021. So if that is the case and now she's been recorded multiple times admitting to having taken "evidence," how has she not been arrested for removing evidence from the scene or obstruction or some other similar charge? She openly said multiple times on camera that she had removed evidence from the scene.
I agree completely. There's also nothing to sue over, is there? People are merely asking questions, pointing out holes in a story. If I'm not mistaken, suing would only serve to bring those holes to light, no?
I would have thought she would have agreed to allow Regis to look her up. Perhaps not. But he was so kind about it and asked her in earnest. He went out of his way to help her clear up the questions people have.
It's like someone who claims to be a material sciences specialist who says pure iron melts at 1000 deg F under standard conditions, vs 2800 deg F. Re the Yankees: you never heard of the Yankees playing the Mets in an exhibition football game? :-)
did she also say that she couldn't find any partial sequences from the millions she has to choose from that matched the template of whatever 'original' she was using?
A disgrace indeed. The whole “truther” movement is largely ridiculous. Thank god for a few folks such as yourself, Eric. And people with sanity in some comments on the internet.
Yes she obviously lied, now can we move on? Do virus particles cause disease or are they the bi-product of a disease process caused by something else? Has disease ever been caused by anyone, anywhere at any time via a simple test of taking virus particles from a diseased animal or person and placing them in a disease-free animal or person?
This is not about her. This is about the standards and practices of "new media" presenters, and it's about the credulity of the public who could believe her tall tales even as they grew increasingly outrageous. And finally, it's about the digital environment, where this kind of thing is increasingly possible due to both the mental conditions that it creates in individuals, and the ability of people to morph themselves into whatever form they like. Finally, we need to be asking of this person was working for herself, or working for someone else. That has not been determined.
I agree that it's vitally important for everyone to be truthful but history shows there are an infinite number of dishonest people out there, even within the 'new media'. It's easier to bring hard evidence and proof to light than it is to keep people honest.
Thank you for exposing her before she could do more damage to the virus skeptic movement. I guess virus skeptics should be flattered the Deep State is trying to discredit them.
Apart from her fake credentials, is her name even real? Because if it is, it might be easier for a really diligent investigator to determine if she has ANY background at all, who she might be linked to, and whether or not she is some kind of strawperson-dissident-virologist needed and invented by Big Pharma and other string-pullers to throw us off the scent and make all dissident virologists look like phoneys, dupes or just plain unreliable. I strongly suspect that she is more than an attention-hungry grad student and more likely a weird meta-controlled opposition entity generated by the Borg.
Unless she copped her name from the Salisbury 1995 graduation program, that's how far back we have her. But she changed her major, claiming finance when it was really liberal studies. They are different schools and not in any way overlapping.
It’s totally fascinating. Now having scrolled through the Lee Merritt thing, I’m thinking she’s not a plant, but an attention-seeking brat looking for her 15 minutes, but if she thought she could contribute to Narrative B, or at least one sub-strand of it, she failed, and could only make it more temporarily, at least, damaging. Ballsy though.
she sure got her 15 minutes. she should still have me on, and we can address her mistake in a professional fashion and move onto a real conversation. Her email to me was total bullshit, making all the wrong points. Like she didn't know that a member of the press goes through the press office of an institution and then they do the work and bring back an official statement of the institution, approved by the president.
Now I appreciate the inclusion of the Yes Men segment. Love those guys. There are clever
and moral ruses and publicity stunts and then there are immature and foolish ones. It’s all about consequences and what one wants to achieve amidst what one thinks they can get away with. Cheers!
You bring so much to this discussion, you 40 year history of scientific, Investigative jouralism, the vast depth and breadth of your knowledge and experience, your humor, style, and pizzazz.
Thanks Eric for following up on this. I e-mailed you my concerns back in August - sorry I didn't respond, and I'm glad you got the word out about the red flags I sensed about Wagh in a way I couldn't. This whole situation has been incredibly disheartening to the point I'm so depressed I won't even open emails just to protect myself from the news. Also, you took the time to do a proper journalistic investigation - a full month of research and consideration.
Thanks for using true disinfectant on this situation. For every person who made social media posts about how Bill Gates and George Soros personally chipped their cousin, or how quickly someone shared a cobra venom meme, I have wanted to let them know that they are not furthering the cause. If the truth is what will prevail, your exposé keeps the cause pure. There is always someone selling a highjacked reality; as upsetting as it is that we can’t count Poormina as a trustworthy source, it is good practice for everyone to question everything.
All of this being said, Poormina was right that the foundations of science as we have been taught need to be completely re-examined and re-built. Even a broken clock...
Poormina did something completely unethical, and I’m not giving her any credit other than base compassion towards another human being. That does not equal trust or credit or reverence. I’m sure you have repeated information you have heard elsewhere before.
I absolutely have done that. And when i've done so, i have credited the source. I make it a point to not say stuff i cannot fully either credit or back up with my own info. LOTS of people have put forth a fundamental critique of the foundations of science as we have been taught, over the last 100 years. She was also right in stating there is no proof for the existence of SARS-CoV--2, but she is not remotely the person who originated this claim, so i don't credit her for that.
I sincerely thank you for your hard work; for the high quality and factual standards and practices you uphold, (for yourself and everyone else,) and for sharing your findings with us all.
New Media is *vital* (especially when MSM are clearly paid-for and imho, not to be trusted,) and you are correct to suggest that a code of ethics, or standards, should be created and adhered to so that we "the public" can trust the "alternative" sources of information we consume everyday. I hope your endeavours to bring this about are fruitful, for the good of humanity, in this crazy digital world!
I have made a small donation because people like yourself deserve to be encouraged, funded, supported and cheered for the work that you do for the greater good. I am not a scientist, an investigative journalist, or an academic. I am just a UK-based husband and father who is trying to make the right decisions to keep my family safe and well, and by stumbling across your work by chance, I feel I am ever-closer to that goal. Thank you so much.
CORRECTION
In the original version of this article, I said that the Corman-Drosten paper proved the reality of the pandemic when it only claimed to. That paper has since been discredited as a work of scientific fraud by an independent peer review team.
You may read more about it and other important late 2020 developments here.
https://planetwaves.net/no-excess-covid-deaths-pcr-fraud/
Another minor correction to your article: it's Robert Redfield, not James Redfield.
Talking about fishy occurrences, what’s with the Google results? I thought medical heretics got smeared, ignored and “fact-checked” on Google. Why was “Dr Poornima Wagh” getting pages of enthusiastic links?
Paul, everyone sees a unique view of Google's search results. ("Filter Bubble”)
Could you screenshot what you are seeing and email WilliamAHuston@gmail.com ? Thx.
But IF Poornima is a Pharma plant or a PR Operative, with billionaire backers, it's perfectly consistent that she's being pushed by Big Tech algorithms ("The Robot" as Eric likes to say).
But pushing this fraud only works up until the point where she is exposed as a fraud (It's in the script, near the last chapter of the story), "WHICH SHE NOW HAS BEEN".
Steve Kirsch will do his best to work with what he’s got so far about Miss Wagh, but it’s a relief that Eric dragged her hot air balloon back to earth before it came down in flames. It is instructive to see people’s reactions to the fraud, both those for (like Lee Merritt) and against. For my part, I found Wagh’s claims about the lab experiments - primarily her statement that no spike protein or mRNA had been found in the samples, only heavy metals - as potentially explosive, and more interesting than the issue of her credentials, but my primary concern was, “Is this actually TRUE?” Thankfully Eric et al did the necessary spadework and we can deduce that all the superficially convincing stuff about the lab experiments was hogwash as she is so obviously lying about her academic history. An interesting development is that now Eric has found it’s necessary to convince people why the issue of her fraud actually matters, and that it’s not enough that this crazywoman may have had “the right intentions.”
Yes, well, had she posed as an airline pilot, an EMT or a surgeon, we would not be as happy, nor if she was a chef who pissed in the broth. That's easier to understand. And I do wonder why.
The interesting thing about the Tremblay “Poornima faces her accusers” video is how this woman, who so artfully and energetically built this considerable facade, crumbled under the mild weight of sustained questioning about the facts. Clearly she knew how to ride the waves of attention, but sank as soon as she hit a few rocks. Lee Merritt would probably throw her a life belt.
Does astrology hold any clues to this riddle?
She gave me her chart data. It is compelling and I am entitled to use it. I'll probably take it up on Planet Waves FM. It is relevant, and we are heading into a tsunami of deception what will center around Oct. 30 — and the chart for Oct. 30 and for Poornima Wagh have a lot in common.
Agree on all counts.
But it's not just Eric that has to defend this. I'm getting the same exact comments too.
I'm intending to do some additional posts about this issue, but this was really hell week for me dealing with the fallout from this whole Poornima affair.
Thanks for your comments. ❤️🙇🙏
It's all sort of goofy when you really think about it.
What sort of made me wonder about "Poor Nima" was her appearance looked really wrong. She has a young face that doesn't match up with the elderly hair. Also, somehow her face belies her claim to have two PhDs. And the background from which she was broadcasting in her first couple of podcasts looked kind of like a set to me. I also thought it was kind of comical the way she said "the novel" (referring to her efforts to identify the virus).
What I am getting at is that sometimes one's gut, or instincts, try to let one know when something doesn't add up. People reveal more of themselves than they may realize when they do videos.
As for Lee Merritt, I sort of wondered about her affiliations in the first video I watched her in when I noted how cheerful she seemed when talking about how people will eventually have microchips. Again, it had more to do with body language or attitude on display.
I've been calling it The Coronavirus Novel since the beginning.
https://planetwaves.net/the-coronavirus-novel-covid-collection-by-eric-francis/
Well body language is interpreted. Subject to error. Hunches are one thing. Need something rock solid to report. For me it was the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine saying they hadn't issued anyone with that name any PhD. That's hard data.
Sorry, wrestling with Substack's content system today. Here is the correct paragraph:
She claims to have personally proved the nonexistence of the virus from an astounding 1,500 samples of lung lavage from “covid positive” pneumonia patients (of which she claims that 756 were analyzed) in the United States— and to have written a scientific paper about this that she will not produce.
MIke Donio, one of my science sources in this investigation, says:
She really botched the agarose gel part. Badly.
You wouldn’t never follow up sequencing with a gel. Maybe PCR but it’s qualitative and crude. If she’s doing meta genomic sequencing, like high throughput mass tandem, there’s no way you could do a gel because you have millions of little pieces that you are simultaneously sequencing. I mean she literally says that you “can actually see the little particles of RNA and DNA”.
Not even close.
You see a band. That’s it. And you assume it’s the piece of DNA you think but only based on size. And there wouldn’t be RNA. You probably know this. When sequencing RNA one of the first steps is reverse transcription to convert the RNA to cDNA. Then you amplify with PCR and then sequence. This is actually a slightly more proper application for PCR versus the ridiculous tests. Regardless, she’s way off.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Brilliant work, Eric. Thank you so seeing so clearly what I could not.
Prof. Massey! You remain my favorite home-spun journalist of the "covid" era. You provide the foundational layer of the actual fraud. We do not need to prove the virus does not exist. They already admit it.
There are good reasons people could not see through this. For one thing, imposters are a fact of history -- and there have been some big ones.
One reason in our time is digital conditions, which has nearly everyone in a dissociative fog. This goes unexamined.
The environment was waiting for someone like her to come along. She emerged in a perfect setup of mental and digital conditions — and scientifically illiterate people questioning her.
The "covid truth" movement needs to be a lot more curious about the science.
My first indication she was lying involved her poor characterization of the Corman-Drosten review report, which proved the WHO PCR is a fraud. She did not get the details right; we may have discussed that (if I recall, our assessment with Cindy was that she may not have been accustomed to using precise language in public statements). However, that's pretty lame; anyone who passed two doctoral programs in three years would be a ninja, and cite scientific line and verse.
Watching your interview with Regis now... it's also brilliant :)
xoxo
https://rumble.com/v1in7c1-investigating-poornima-wagh.html
Poornima spins more yarn than a knitting supply manufacturer. Christine you gave her the benefit of the doubt and there's nothing wrong with that, a lot of us did. She was avoiding the group primarily because she knows she's a fraud and would very quickly be found out if she interacted with members of the group. Her fraud would be more transparent to people that are steeped in the material.
hahahahaha! I will spirit that line, Phil — it would go great in a horoscope.
and yes as I once said to my guitar teacher early in my studies, "Now I can convince someone who knows nothing that I know something."
But really — Regis Tremblay and Lee Merritt should know better. Ask a fucking followup question please.
I've been looking for evidence of this so-called FBI raid, which I believe is the key to this entire story because it's what made people want to listen in the first place.
No raid, no story. So where's the proof?
So far, there is nothing I have found to corroborate that this FBI raid on a Texas university campus on April 25, 2021, ever occurred... nothing noted by the FBI on their site from that period of time, nothing tweeted by college kids on campus who were interested in why a raid was occurring at their school or frightened by the presence of federal agents, nothing in local, regional, or state news during a time when 22 universities are under extreme scrutiny for supposed "ties to Wuhan," which at least one university has since admitted.
The press has been tightly surveilling these universities for two years now. And yet, this alleged FBI raid has gone unreported?
How is that even possible?
I outlined the outstanding questions I still have about this here: https://starfirecodes.substack.com/p/who-is-poornima-wagh-and-why-is-the - and when I realized that my prediction about her rise and fall was being played out to the full extent of the limited notoriety she had already achieved, I updated here: https://starfirecodes.substack.com/p/the-plan-to-prop-up-and-then-take, but I also wanted to point out that Moon Maiden Musings took one of the questions I had from the first article and went into a super impressive and thorough deep dive on that topic which I found incredibly helpful, and that's here: https://moonmaiden.substack.com/p/is-fuellmich-positioning-to-prop
I love that this community is not allowing the behavior to go unaddressed, especially in light of the fact that the primary argument reduces one of the mainstream's darling Hegelian dialectics to absolute ash - no wonder it's under attack. Anyone who thinks it wouldn't be under attack is, to be honest, incredibly naive to the workings of tactical information warfare and needs to understand more clearly that this is exactly what is happening. This is information warfare, plain and simple.
Additionally, we already know how often and egregiously the truth has been stretched on multiple *provable* occasions, so I would like to urge people not to be fooled by crocodile tears. Your heartstrings are being played like a fiddle.
Eric, thank you for running with this and not letting it go. It's important for reasons that many simply do not understand yet. They will get there in time. It's an extremely complex topic with a lot of non-obvious moving parts.
Most welcome.
You're unlikely to find evidence of an FBI raid even if it happened.
I doubt they could scrub every tweet by every student without causing a backlash uproar that would have made them tweet about it even harder. Kids don't play nice like that. So, my gut is that it never happened, period.
They can scrub the tweets and silence the backlash uproar, we've seen it happen in the last 3 years.
They would start memeing the scrub. We just saw this with the flood of memes related to redaction recently.
Thanks for your excellent work, including the expose of Reiner Fuellmich, who also grasped on to Poornima Wagh.
Thank you! The Fuellmich piece belongs to Moon Maiden Musings - I thought it was very well done too! :)
If there was an FBI raid seizing evidence/documents she's on video claiming to have absconded some of the documents during the raid. Really?!
Exactly. She'd be arrested for obstruction or for removing evidence had that occurred - and she claims the FBI showed up at her doorstep on April 27, 2021. So if that is the case and now she's been recorded multiple times admitting to having taken "evidence," how has she not been arrested for removing evidence from the scene or obstruction or some other similar charge? She openly said multiple times on camera that she had removed evidence from the scene.
Also note she's more concerned about being sued than being hauled off to jail by the FBI for obstruction. This is why she can't name names and places.
I agree completely. There's also nothing to sue over, is there? People are merely asking questions, pointing out holes in a story. If I'm not mistaken, suing would only serve to bring those holes to light, no?
I would have thought she would have agreed to allow Regis to look her up. Perhaps not. But he was so kind about it and asked her in earnest. He went out of his way to help her clear up the questions people have.
They were going to arrest her, but a professor intervened on her behalf. :-)
Oh, of course! 😃🤣
It's like someone who claims to be a material sciences specialist who says pure iron melts at 1000 deg F under standard conditions, vs 2800 deg F. Re the Yankees: you never heard of the Yankees playing the Mets in an exhibition football game? :-)
Wait, this sounds familiar.
Anniversary is straight ahead, 21 years.
and a pinch of nanothermite.
did she also say that she couldn't find any partial sequences from the millions she has to choose from that matched the template of whatever 'original' she was using?
yep she said that too. she really wrote a book, didn't she. that's in the earlier article.
A disgrace indeed. The whole “truther” movement is largely ridiculous. Thank god for a few folks such as yourself, Eric. And people with sanity in some comments on the internet.
Yes she obviously lied, now can we move on? Do virus particles cause disease or are they the bi-product of a disease process caused by something else? Has disease ever been caused by anyone, anywhere at any time via a simple test of taking virus particles from a diseased animal or person and placing them in a disease-free animal or person?
This is not about her. This is about the standards and practices of "new media" presenters, and it's about the credulity of the public who could believe her tall tales even as they grew increasingly outrageous. And finally, it's about the digital environment, where this kind of thing is increasingly possible due to both the mental conditions that it creates in individuals, and the ability of people to morph themselves into whatever form they like. Finally, we need to be asking of this person was working for herself, or working for someone else. That has not been determined.
I agree that it's vitally important for everyone to be truthful but history shows there are an infinite number of dishonest people out there, even within the 'new media'. It's easier to bring hard evidence and proof to light than it is to keep people honest.
She’s clearly delusional. I kind of feel sorry for her. Mental illness is real. She’s certainly not helping the movement
Thank you for exposing her before she could do more damage to the virus skeptic movement. I guess virus skeptics should be flattered the Deep State is trying to discredit them.
The Deep State would have done a much better job. She's a lone wolf.
Apart from her fake credentials, is her name even real? Because if it is, it might be easier for a really diligent investigator to determine if she has ANY background at all, who she might be linked to, and whether or not she is some kind of strawperson-dissident-virologist needed and invented by Big Pharma and other string-pullers to throw us off the scent and make all dissident virologists look like phoneys, dupes or just plain unreliable. I strongly suspect that she is more than an attention-hungry grad student and more likely a weird meta-controlled opposition entity generated by the Borg.
Unless she copped her name from the Salisbury 1995 graduation program, that's how far back we have her. But she changed her major, claiming finance when it was really liberal studies. They are different schools and not in any way overlapping.
It’s totally fascinating. Now having scrolled through the Lee Merritt thing, I’m thinking she’s not a plant, but an attention-seeking brat looking for her 15 minutes, but if she thought she could contribute to Narrative B, or at least one sub-strand of it, she failed, and could only make it more temporarily, at least, damaging. Ballsy though.
she sure got her 15 minutes. she should still have me on, and we can address her mistake in a professional fashion and move onto a real conversation. Her email to me was total bullshit, making all the wrong points. Like she didn't know that a member of the press goes through the press office of an institution and then they do the work and bring back an official statement of the institution, approved by the president.
Now I appreciate the inclusion of the Yes Men segment. Love those guys. There are clever
and moral ruses and publicity stunts and then there are immature and foolish ones. It’s all about consequences and what one wants to achieve amidst what one thinks they can get away with. Cheers!
FABULOUS work, Eric! (as always)
You bring so much to this discussion, you 40 year history of scientific, Investigative jouralism, the vast depth and breadth of your knowledge and experience, your humor, style, and pizzazz.
Bravo. Thank you for your work.
🙇🙏❤️
Thanks Eric for following up on this. I e-mailed you my concerns back in August - sorry I didn't respond, and I'm glad you got the word out about the red flags I sensed about Wagh in a way I couldn't. This whole situation has been incredibly disheartening to the point I'm so depressed I won't even open emails just to protect myself from the news. Also, you took the time to do a proper journalistic investigation - a full month of research and consideration.
Thanks for using true disinfectant on this situation. For every person who made social media posts about how Bill Gates and George Soros personally chipped their cousin, or how quickly someone shared a cobra venom meme, I have wanted to let them know that they are not furthering the cause. If the truth is what will prevail, your exposé keeps the cause pure. There is always someone selling a highjacked reality; as upsetting as it is that we can’t count Poormina as a trustworthy source, it is good practice for everyone to question everything.
All of this being said, Poormina was right that the foundations of science as we have been taught need to be completely re-examined and re-built. Even a broken clock...
She was only repeating what she heard elsewhere, as with anything she said which was genuine.
Poormina did something completely unethical, and I’m not giving her any credit other than base compassion towards another human being. That does not equal trust or credit or reverence. I’m sure you have repeated information you have heard elsewhere before.
I absolutely have done that. And when i've done so, i have credited the source. I make it a point to not say stuff i cannot fully either credit or back up with my own info. LOTS of people have put forth a fundamental critique of the foundations of science as we have been taught, over the last 100 years. She was also right in stating there is no proof for the existence of SARS-CoV--2, but she is not remotely the person who originated this claim, so i don't credit her for that.
I give you full credit for everything you just said
Logical, unless you can find someone who said exactly the words i have here, before today. :-)
Dear Eric,
I sincerely thank you for your hard work; for the high quality and factual standards and practices you uphold, (for yourself and everyone else,) and for sharing your findings with us all.
New Media is *vital* (especially when MSM are clearly paid-for and imho, not to be trusted,) and you are correct to suggest that a code of ethics, or standards, should be created and adhered to so that we "the public" can trust the "alternative" sources of information we consume everyday. I hope your endeavours to bring this about are fruitful, for the good of humanity, in this crazy digital world!
I have made a small donation because people like yourself deserve to be encouraged, funded, supported and cheered for the work that you do for the greater good. I am not a scientist, an investigative journalist, or an academic. I am just a UK-based husband and father who is trying to make the right decisions to keep my family safe and well, and by stumbling across your work by chance, I feel I am ever-closer to that goal. Thank you so much.
Please don't ever change!
Ian