In 2013, George Zimmerman was acquitted of the charge of murdering Trayvon Martin, a black teenager. This was the spark that lit the Black Lives Matter movement (BLM). Three self-described “radical black organizers” responded: Alicia Garza coined the phrase in a “love letter” to black people, Patrisse Cullors turned the phrase into a hashtag, and Opal Tometi started organizing followers online and building BlackLivesMatter.com.

 

Tometi, the daughter of Nigerian immigrants, was raised in Phoenix, Arizona. She attended the University of Arizona, where she earned her bachelor’s in history and her master’s in communication and advocacy. Before BLM, she served for eight years as executive director at the Black Alliance for Just Immigration.

 

According to her BlackLivesMatter.com biography, Tometi “is a student of liberation theology and her practice is in the tradition of Ella Baker, informed by Stuart Hall, bell hooks and Black Feminist thinkers.” Furthermore, as a “transnational feminist,” Tometi “supports and helps shape the strategic work of Pan African Network in Defense of Migrant Rights, and the Black Immigration Network.” 

 

Patrisse Cullors is now the executive director of the Black Lives Movement Global Network Foundation. This foundation's financial support initially flowed through a nonprofit co-chaired by Susan Rosenberg, a co-founder of the May 19th Communist Organization, a domestic terrorist group active in the 1980s. In a 2011 memoir, An American Radical, Rosenberg stated: “I pursued a path that seemed to me a logical step beyond legal protest: the use of political violence. Did that make me a terrorist? In my mind, then and now, the answer is no.”  

 

Cullors wrote a 2017 memoir that expresses similar sentiments. She titled it When They Call You a Terrorist. For its epigraph she chose lines penned by Assata Shakur, another domestic terrorist, that echo Marx’s Communist Manifesto: “It is our duty to fight for our freedom. / It is our duty to win. / We must love each other and support each other. / We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

 

According to When They Call You a Terrorist, Cullors was born in Van Nuys, California, and raised in the San Fernando Valley in a mostly Hispanic neighborhood. Her mother became pregnant at 15 and was thrown out of the house by her family, who were Jehovah’s Witnesses. Later, she had several more children, including Patrisse. The father, who worked at a GM plant, was able to support them until the plant closed. When Cullors was six, he ceased to live with the family, though he didn’t “disappear entirely from our lives.” At age 12, Cullors discovered an upsetting truth: “Alton is not your father, [mother] says. He’s Paul’s and Monte’s and Jasmine’s. But in between Monte and Jasmine, we broke up and I fell in love with Gabriel and we had you.”

 

In high school, Cullors entered a magnet program with a humanities curriculum “rooted in social justice.” In this program, the students studied “apartheid and communism in China. We study Emma Goldman and read bell hooks, Audre Lorde. . . . We are encouraged to challenge racism, sexism, classism and heteronormativity.” She began to question “the Jehovah’s Witnesses world I had come up in.” 

 

“I always knew I wasn’t heterosexual,” she writes, and describes how she came out in high school. By senior year, she and a friend were “completely on our own, couch surfing” or sleeping in cars. After graduation, an art teacher let the girls live with her. This experience inspired her ideas about “intentional families,” she says, as opposed to biological ones. 

Even though many or even most UFO sightings are best explained as delusions, hoaxes, and ordinary stuff misunderstood, there appears to be a large remnant (>1000) that are much harder to explain, and which show consistent patterns. Such as ~30-1000 second episodes peaking near ~9pm (tied to local sideral time), at random spatial locations, of quiet lights or objects in the sky with intelligent purposes and amazing speeds and accelerations. Sometimes confirmed by many people and recorded by many instruments.

 

If they aren’t delusions, hoaxes, or misunderstandings, the main remaining explanations are a) some sort of secret society or agency that arose on and is tied to Earth, or b) some sort of aliens. I’m not saying its aliens, but in this post, it’s aliens. That is, here I want to “go there”, and think about how best to explain UFOs, if they are in fact aliens.

 

Many have worked on trying to explain UFOs in terms of their immediate physical effects. I kinda like “laser pointers for cats” style theories wherein aliens in orbit send beams to paint a local disturbance, while using telescopes to watch local reactions. But these details aren’t that important for whether we believe that UFOs are aliens, as aliens would almost surely be a lot more advanced than us, and so plausibly capable of a wide range of such approaches.

 

No, it seems obvious to me that the main reason that most resist believing that UFOs are aliens (or secret societies for that matter) is the apparent implausibility of the social thesis. We find it hard to integrate this hypothesis with the rest of our social world views. That is, with our views on what agents can exist, how they are socially organized, and the sorts of behaviors that we expect of social agents within particular kinds of organizations. If aliens are around, why haven’t they made more direct contact, or built more obvious stuff, or traded with us, or conquered or killed us?

 

If the main block to believing in UFOs as aliens is a lack of a plausible enough social theory of aliens, then it seems a shame that almost no one who studies UFOs is a social science theorist. As I’m such a person, why don’t I step in and try to help? If we can find a more plausible social theory, we could become more willing to believe that UFOs are aliens. And if we can’t, we can at least confirm more expertly that the usual reluctance is justified; the social theories you’d have to invoke are so crazy unlikely that yeah, we gotta attribute UFOs to delusions, hoaxes, and misunderstandings, no matter what our eyes and instruments seem to say.

 

In social science, we often prepare for theorizing about a topic by first summarizing its “stylized facts”. These are key data patterns in need of explanation, phrased in language that is closer to theory. In this post, I will attempt this “stylized fact” exercise for UFOs-as-aliens. In my next post I’ll take my shot at explaining them. Here are three key stylized facts:

 

1. LIMITATION – The very idea that UFOs are aliens, rather than a secret society on Earth, implies either a completely independent origin from us, or that any common ancestor was long ago. (~100Myr+.) So unless aliens civilizations are very short-lived, then any modest randomness in the timing along either evolutionary path implies that one of us reached our current level of civilization millions of years before the other. And since we just got here, it must be they who reached our level millions of years ago.

 

(Note that having a civilization last for many millions of years is itself quite an achievement. Which raises obvious questions: what sort of genetic, cultural, organizational, etc. changes were required to achieve that, and at what cost came such longevity?)

 

Right now the Chinese are furiously working in their biolabs, as are a whole host of other nefarious nations, such as North Korea and likely Iran.

 

What are they working on?

 

Threlkeld added, Williams also had been vaccinated for COVID about a month ago and that testing found the two types of antibodies in his system - one type of antibody that results from a natural COVID infection, and a second type of antibody from the vaccine. Threlkeld also said Williams tested negative for COVID-19 while in the hospital. 

 

From The Hunt For Red October:

 

YOU ARROGANT ASS YOU KILLED US!

 

Coronaviruses are notorious for ADE reactions, where antibody presence potentiates the infection instead of protecting against it.  Using that as a bioweapon is stupid because you will score "own goals" on your own people and there is no way to control that.  As a result biological weapons generally are dumb; poison gas and such don't have this risk since it does not propagate but any disease does.

 

The poster child for ADE in coronaviruses was an attempted vaccine for a feline coronavirus that often made cats very sick.  The vaccine killed every one of them in the test when they were later exposed, wildly potentiating the infection.

 

Read that again folks: NOT ONE VACCINATED CAT SURVIVED A CHALLENGE WITH THE ACTUAL VIRUS.

 

Ordinary vaccines we have lots of experience with, such as measles, the flu shot, mumps and similar do not carry a risk beyond that of natural infection and cannot be weaponized because they produce the exact same antibody response as a natural infection.  If you have had either the measles or the shot you will have antibodies but an antibody test will not tell you which since they're not distinguishable.

 

I suspected from the start that due to the way these mRNA shots work -- they are not actually a vaccine at all in that they do not "mimic" natural infection but rather cause your cells to produce the spike protein that the virus has and that elicits an immune response -- that the antibodies produced by those jabs would be distinct and distinguishable from natural infection.

 

It is yet to be determined how bad this might get, but it could get very, very bad.

 

Go back and read this article again.

 

This risk is real and its universal with all the Covid "vaccines" currently being produced and in trials in the US.  Worse, we relied on the RNA and protein data directly from China without independent validation via Koch's postulate and our own isolation and purification of the virus itself.  Today, as you read this, that isolation, purification and confirmation via Koch's postulate in the United States has not been done.

 

If you choose to accept that risk because, in your sole opinion, the risk is higher if you get The Coof than from taking this sort of vaccine, have at it.  It is my considered opinion that for virtually everyone under the age of 60, and almost without exception anyone under the age of 25 or 30 that's a very bad bet with the odds spread being nearly 100:1 against you.

 

Remember, if this bet is lost there is no hiding if you took any of these vaccines.  ADE-initiated harm is extremely likely to kill; in trials when it has shown up it has been nearly 100% fatal to the animals under test.  This, by the way, is why I consider coercion by any person toward anyone to force them to take such a shot to be justification for a "Hannibal" style response out of said victim or (if they expire) their family members.

 

But I want to focus today on a very important distinction between the three common EUA'd vaccines today and a couple that may show up later this year (NOT AstraZeneca's; that's the same basic technology as J&J.)  The J&J (viral vector) and two mRNA vaccines are all parlor tricks and IMHO extraordinarily dangerous.

 

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny is an American osteopathic physician who is making some disturbing claims about the dangers to human health from the new vaccines being produced by companies such as Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZenica — dangers she predicts will manifest themselves over the next three to six months or so.

 

These mRNA vaccines contain instructions for building antibodies to the spike protein that has been identified on the surface of the COVID virus.  On her website, vaxterr.com, Dr. Tenpenny explains how there are two primary types of white blood cells called macrophages: type 1 (M1) kills the pathogen cells, and type 2 (M2) cleans up dead cells and promotes healing.  She maintains that the antibodies produced by the vaccines increase the production of M1 cells, but they also degrade or kill off the M2 healing cells, which will result in the "destruction" of our lungs and the disruption of our immune systems.

 

Dr. Tenpenny cites a 2019 study from the Journal of Clinical Investigation conducted to test the possible effects of vaccine-induced spike proteins on the immune system.  Twelve macaque monkeys were given two injections: all twelve were injected with a "modified vaccinia virus" (SARS-CoV); six of them were injected with a spike protein vaccine, and the other six were given a control vaccine made without the spike-producing antigen.  The twelve monkeys were then sacrificed between 9 and 21 weeks after the injections.  Dr. Tenpenny presents a summary of those findings on that same webpage: 

 

We present evidence of a detrimental role of the anti-S-IgG (anti-spike protein antibody) and acute lung injury during a SARS-CoV infection.

 

Vaccine-induced, spike-specific antibodies resulted in severe acute lung injury in SARS-CoV infected Chinese macaques

 

Anti-S-IgG antibody failed to prevent SARS-CoV lower respiratory tract infection (pneumonia) and amplify (increase) M1 macrophage infiltration and accumulation in the lungs.

 

Anti-S-IgG causes severe acute lung injury (ALI) when the lungs become re-infected and/or re-exposed to coronaviruses by removing the inflammation-resolving work of the M2 macrophages.

 

Animals who died of SARS-CoV infection had an accumulation of pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages and an absence of wound-healing M2 macrophages in their lungs.

 

Histological examination [the lung tissue of the sacrificed animals] in 6 of the vaccinated macaques revealed acute diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) with various degrees of severity. Most of the macaques in the control group given the non-spike protein vaccine showed only minor to moderate lung inflammation. (Note: alveoli are the tiny air sacs in the lungs that oxygenate the blood.)