Undercut by Data, Globalists Resort to Full Censorship

This is something that appears to have gone under the radar when it appeared, but is important to note: In March, MIT published a study on coronavirus and big pharma skeptics after studying their social media habits. They found that the majority of the voices in the skeptic movement were not morons, but rather highly informed, and were using the available data to make their argument.

Of course, anyone who has spent five minutes looking at the counter-arguments to this globalist virus hoax knows that skeptics are obsessed with data. However, it is very interesting that the establishment admitted this, and yet, the media continues to frame skeptics as uniformed morons who are fighting back against the government because they’ve been lied to by disinformation.

The corporate media must maintain the illusion that there are only two choices:

  • You agree with everything the corporate media and regime say, or
  • You are a buffoon, believing stupid conspiracy theories that make no sense.

So, it is logical that this study was buried and ignored.

The study was about “data visualization,” i.e., infographics, and their use in informing people about the alleged virus pandemic.

Their ultimate conclusion appears to be that people will believe the official narrative more the less information they have.

MIT News, March 4, 2021:

A study from MIT shows how coronavirus skeptics have marshalled data visualizations online to argue against public health orthodoxy about the benefits of mask mandates. Such “counter-visualizations” are often quite sophisticated, using datasets from official sources and state-of-the-art visualization methods.

The researchers combed through hundreds of thousands of social media posts and found that coronavirus skeptics often deploy counter-visualizations alongside the same “follow-the-data” rhetoric as public health experts, yet the skeptics argue for radically different policies. The researchers conclude that data visualizations aren’t sufficient to convey the urgency of the Covid-19 pandemic, because even the clearest graphs can be interpreted through a variety of belief systems.

A lot of people think of metrics like infection rates as objective,” says Crystal Lee. “But they’re clearly not, based on how much debate there is on how to think about the pandemic. That’s why we say data visualizations have become a battleground.”

As data visualizations rose to prominence early in the pandemic, Lee and her colleagues set out to understand how they were being deployed throughout the social media universe. “An initial hypothesis was that if we had more data visualizations, from data collected in a systematic way, then people would be better informed,” says Lee. To test that hypothesis, her team blended computational techniques with innovative ethnographic methods.

They used their computational approach on Twitter, scraping nearly half a million tweets that referred to both “Covid-19” and “data.” With those tweets, the researchers generated a network graph to find out “who’s retweeting whom and who likes whom,” says Lee. “We basically created a network of communities who are interacting with each other.” Clusters included groups like the “American media community” or “antimaskers.” The researchers found that antimask groups were creating and sharing data visualizations as much as, if not more than, other groups.

Typical Big Pharma Supporter.

And those visualizations weren’t sloppy. “They are virtually indistinguishable from those shared by mainstream sources,” says Satyanarayan. “They are often just as polished as graphs you would expect to encounter in data journalism or public health dashboards.”

“It’s a very striking finding,” says Lee. “It shows that characterizing antimask groups as data-illiterate or not engaging with the data, is empirically false.”

Lee’s team followed and analyzed conversations about data visualizations in antimask Facebook groups — a practice they dubbed “deep lurking,” an online version of the ethnographic technique called “deep hanging out.” Lee says “understanding a culture requires you to observe the day-to-day informal goings-on — not just the big formal events. Deep lurking is a way to transpose these traditional ethnography approaches to digital age.”

The qualitative findings from deep lurking appeared consistent with the quantitative Twitter findings. Antimaskers on Facebook weren’t eschewing data. Rather, they discussed how different kinds of data were collected and why. “Their arguments are really quite nuanced,” says Lee. “It’s often a question of metrics.” For example, antimask groups might argue that visualizations of infection numbers could be misleading, in part because of the wide range of uncertainty in infection rates, compared to measurements like the number of deaths. In response, members of the group would often create their own counter-visualizations, even instructing each other in data visualization techniques.

“I’ve been to livestreams where people screen share and look at the data portal from the state of Georgia,” says Lee. “Then they’ll talk about how to download the data and import it into Excel.”

Jones says the antimask groups’ “idea of science is not listening passively as experts at a place like MIT tell everyone else what to believe.” He adds that this kind of behavior marks a new turn for an old cultural current. “Antimaskers’ use of data literacy reflects deep-seated American values of self-reliance and anti-expertise that date back to the founding of the country, but their online activities push those values into new arenas of public life.”

Combining computational and anthropological insights led the researchers to a more nuanced understanding of data literacy. Lee says their study reveals that, compared to public health orthodoxy, “antimaskers see the pandemic differently, using data that is quite similar. I still think data analysis is important. But it’s certainly not the salve that I thought it was in terms of convincing people who believe that the scientific establishment is not trustworthy.” Lee says their findings point to “a larger rift in how we think about science and expertise in the U.S.” That same rift runs through issues like climate change and vaccination, where similar dynamics often play out in social media discussions.

To make these results accessible to the public, Lee and her collaborator, CSAIL PhD student Jonathan Zong, led a team of seven MIT undergraduate researchers to develop an interactive narrative where readers can explore the visualizations and conversations for themselves.

Lee describes the team’s research as a first step in making sense of the role of data and visualizations in these broader debates. “Data visualization is not objective. It’s not absolute. It is in fact an incredibly social and political endeavor. We have to be attentive to how people interpret them outside of the scientific establishment.”

So, the regime-adjacent propagandists are not outright saying “give the cattle even less information,” but that appears to be the obvious direction they are headed.

Indeed, we’ve been seeing this trend over the last several weeks, and more intensely in the last week. The illegitimate Biden regime is now just aggressively calling for a total shutdown on any information that runs counter to the big pharma mystery shot narrative.


If you’ve listened to what Biden and his people have been saying for the last week, you know this is not an exaggeration: they are saying “shut down anyone who has any questions about the vaccines, and silence them across all platforms.”

If the data could stand alone and lead people to the same conclusions about the threat of ‘corona virus’ versus the competing threat of the big pharma poison shots, there would be no need for censorship by the regime. The current claim is that the people who disagree with the corporate media and the regime (which are the same thing) are like babies who need to have their thoughts controlled by the regime, but the reality is that most people who are standing against the deadly big pharma poison shots are well informed on the data.

Here’s a funny censorship example, which proves everything stated in this post.

The censorship of Luigi Warren

For example, we know that anyone who has a positive PCR ‘corona’ test – or is suspected of having ‘corona’ – is recorded as a ‘corona-virus’ death, regardless of the actual cause of death. Conversely, we know that the only way the deaths from the big pharma poison shots are being tracked is through the half-assed self-reporting system of the VAERS database.

With the data having failed them, the government is now relying on outright lies. They’re now telling us that deaths are rising at the same time that the big pharma poison shots are being deployed, and claiming falsely that the only people who are “spreading the virus” are those who avoid the big pharma shots. This is at the same time that state authorities are reporting mass death among the ‘vaxxed,’ supposedly from ‘corona virus.’ They are claiming (a) that the big pharma shots work, and (b) the ‘unvaxxed’ are somehow spreading corona to the ‘vaxxed’ somehow. Obviously, both of these things cannot be true.

What the data is actually showing is total ‘vaccine’ failure, with most of the deaths globally attributed to the ‘corona virus’ now coming from the people taking the big pharma shots.

The truth is more powerful than lies, and that is why this entire system is falling back on brutal, communist-style forms of censorship, 100%, to defend its lies.

Don’t let these people tell you you’re a moron. You’re not a moron. If you were a moron, you would believe everything the regime says, despite the fact that they have constantly been caught lying to you, over and over and over again.

The regime never cared about your health before. There are thousands of examples of the regime pushing harmful products and behaviors onto the masses. You really think they ‘all of a sudden’ care about your health because of ‘corona?’

The globalists’ authoritarian dream.

And you know that there is no level of submission that these people will accept – other than total surrender of your body and soul to the globalist / corona agenda.

You need to strengthen yourself, strengthen your faith in God, and remind yourself that under no circumstances will you submit to the regime and to big pharma poison shots.


  1. Reblogged this on The Most Revolutionary Act and commented:
    The current claim is that the people who disagree with the corporate media and the regime (which are the same thing) are like babies who need to have their thoughts controlled by the regime, but the reality is that most people who are standing against the deadly big pharma poison shots are well informed on the data.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s