Full paper title: Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study
Not sure if this makes sense. Looking for someone who's an expert or knows more to dissect it. At first glance I would dismiss it but you never know.
Just been reading into this as someone shared it with me, from other discussions:
Scientists do "journal clubs" where we present and critique journal articles. It's been a long time. I'll bite, just for fun.
There is subjective language in the abstract that is politically inflammatory. That's a big no-no. I'm referring to this: "From such research,reasonable inferences can be drawn about observed injuries worldwide that have occurred since the injectables were pressed upon billions of individuals."
Nobody has a picture of their microscope be a figure.
Nobody makes a figure out of drawings done by hand.
Figure 5-7: No control.
Table 4 and Figure 4: Flu vaccine an inappropriate control. Your control needs to match everything except for the thing that you hypothesize has an effect.
Figure 5: Does nothing to address the hypothesis. This one to me is particularly egregious.
Figure 8: Still images of a field of sperm cells not an effective way to show changes in cell motility.
No positive controls anywhere
I gave up there. The paper is very long.
A research paper must be completely objective. There must be both positive and negative controls, the purpose of which are to prove that the specific thing you say is causing your hypothesis to be true, is the thing causing it. All figures must address your hypothesis. All figures must prove the thing that you're saying. This article fails at all of these.
1⃣ ORCID ID record for Lee is blank, she is not a molecular biologist (& address does not validate)
2⃣ No ethics approval despite clinical samples (blood and semen - seriously?)
3⃣ Vials were incubated for a year without bacterial or fungal growth - these people have never done cell culture.
4⃣Quoting #Sashagate as a source in scientific paper is a massive red flag
The lead author is listed as a Professor of Rhetoric and Applied Linguistics in the Graduate School of Intercultural Communication at Okinawa Christian University. He supposedly specializes in the research of propaganda.
Nothing about this paper is legitimate scientific research in the area of mRNA vaccines.
I actually suspect it's a vehicle for research with regards to dissemination of propaganda or articles that support cognitive biases on social media platforms etc.
I just realised that I had similar experience. I can still picture things in my mind but dreams only came back a few weeks ago after being absent for a long, long time. Thinking about it it's not been months but a year or two.
Went through a few mechanical keyboards, both cheap and expensive along with many non-mechanical ones over the years. Finally settled on Cherry Stream. I never miss a key on this one.
Culture shock was big for us when we moved from 'bad socialist block of flats' like that to a new, modern and expensive London block of flats made out of cardboard. I know that my flat in old country will still be there for my wife and I to retire if we move back, while this one will probably seriously deteriorate.
I agree, cabling is a pain but oh my are they taking us for a ride with these newbuilds with easy cabling. Houses are no better here. They say these newbuilds are all fireproof and engineers come once a week to test everything. Of course, I hope we never have to find out if the certificate is worth anything.
All in all, those Yugoslav socialist buildings put these newbuilds to shame. Even those 40 year old locally made lifts are better than whatever Otis is installing into newbuilds these days. Our lift is loud, shaking. Never experienced that kind of shaking in any of socialist buildings. I suspect though that newbuilds in Slovenia these days are pretty similar cardboard boxes...
Sounds like they need to learn how to deal with this. Turning off notifications might help as well. Eventually typewriter will not work as it's a mind issue and not a tool issue imo.
I don’t think this is true. They might struggle with distractions elsewhere but if they’ve created a ritual out of writing in this distraction free environment they’ve created it will probably always work for them (and maybe better over time). Having the experience of doing things without distraction might also help them ignore distractions elsewhere.
By way of analogy, learning to swim in calm waters helps you learn to swim in rough waters by giving you the experience of what swimming is even like.
For a long time I blamed myself for things being difficult. But self knowledge surely includes knowledge of how conditions affect your nervous system. Totally plausible a given nervous system works better with a typewriter than any networked device. Even like when you have to take a break from the thinking you will be more productive pacing or taking a walk on the grounds than flipping over to y combinator.
Make it easy to be good isn't just a parenting precept, it works to manage yourself as a mature adult as well.
I read an anecdote once that novelist Jonathan Franzen writes on a laptop which has had the WiFi card removed and Ethernet port glued shut. He's pretty successful so whatever works imo.
As someone who was diagnosed with ADHD at the age of two and have dealt with it my entire life I gotta completely agree with you. The quest for quiet is impossible. You will never have completely stimulus free environments. The way our bodies work competes against this whole idea. If you're in a dark room your eyes adjust. If you are in a quiet room your ears basically have a compressor built in. Everything that was in the shadow or in the quiet will eventually make itself known. Thrive in noise, thrive in distraction, thrive in chaos.
Edit: but one thing that is incredibly important is partitioning your workspace. Perform work where work should be performed and keep that separate from where you automatically do leisure activities or seek out pleasurable distractions.
That feels a bit like saying you disagree with farm automation so you fired your oxen and pull the plow yourself now.
There's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I'm empathetic to the people that feel like they can't focus in commercial operating systems, but their only option is to adapt or fall off. Making MacOS or Windows into a usable and non-distracting environment is basically the only way I have been able to make money in the tech industry. If I told my boss I was switching to a typewriter for efficiency purposes, I'd be gone before the end of the day.
It doesn't even need to be code; I simply can't turn in work physically. If I type out my project notes or Kaizen report in a typewriter, I'll be asked to make a digital copy next. This isn't just programming, everywhere you go is digital-first and would vastly prefer a digitized copy from the start as opposed to OCRing a photo of my typewritten document.
Again - for personal use, go crazy. Nostalgic stuff is fun! This is not a solution for 90% of the workforce though and I would argue that relying on a typewriter for isolation is harming your professional prospects. Apply to any job and compare the reactions you get bringing your typewriter to the first interview with the reactions you get from bringing your laptop.
It's not a strawman at all. The parent claimed "The typewriter is them dealing with it" and I am listing all of the different ways a can typewriter impair you personally.
If you don't care about the way people perceive you, how productive you are, how accessible your work is or how error-proof your product is, maybe a typewriter is for you. I cannot imagine a practical application (even casually) where you would benefit from a typewriter over a word processor and inkjet printer. I say this as someone with a typewriter not 20 feet away from where I'm standing now; they suck.
You are still missing the point of why they use a typewriter. With a word processor on a computer, I can easily start browsing TikTok instead of writing my paper. Not so with a typewriter. Of course, it has its own cons compared to a computer as you state, but to say there are no "practical applications" is wrong, as evidenced by the fact that people do in fact use typewriters as I've stated. If it were not practical at least in some small way, they wouldn't be using it.
> With a word processor on a computer, I can easily start browsing TikTok instead of writing my paper.
Is that a personal problem, or a computer one though? Many people (myself included) have zero issue ignoring Twitter and Instagram while we work. In fact, typing on a computer is much easier than using a typewriter for a number of reasons:
- Don't need to buy ink ribbons or paper to continue typing
- Don't need to stop and switch out stamps to change your typeset
- Can infinitely reproduce a single document as many times as you want
- No white-out or paper strips required when you make a mistake
I don't know if you've ever used a typewriter before, but it should simply be common knowledge that it's the slower and more distracting way to type. Every second you spend using a typewriter instead of getting comfortable with a computer is wasted effort. Every time you take your typewriter apart to make a simple change, that's time you could be spending writing uninterrupted on a digital medium.
> Is that a personal problem, or a computer one though? Many people (myself included) have zero issue ignoring Twitter and Instagram while we work.
Then it's not for you, continue using a computer. It's a personal problem solved by the use of a single purpose technology rather than a multipurpose one, as I've initially stated.
I have used a typewriter and while it can be slower than a computer, some wasted time is better than wasting all one's time because one can't focus and distracts themselves instead. Sounds like you still simply don't get it, and I'm not sure how I can explain it further as I've restated my points several times now that those who use it can't focus when writing on computers.
I don't get it. I also have a typewriter and would rather use Vi to type a term paper than even entertain the thought of switching out LATEX typesets. It's a no-brainer, it's far, far easier to dumbify your computer than it is to modernize a typewriter.
Creative writing can be better accomplished with a typewriter. Imagine yourself in a cabin in a forest, with no electricity. That's extreme, but you get the idea.
Also, having a physical copy of your work >feels< safer.
And amazingly, people did that for a century or so before word processors came along...published books and magazines, too. And before the typewriter, there was pen on paper. People really were creative before computers!
Nah, if you don't set up on a train station platform and do all your work from there you simply have a mind issue and should learn how to deal with distractions
Career writers have been using "dumber" text editors and computer systems to better mentally isolate their work for decades. It's not even an attention thing.
Full paper title: Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study
Not sure if this makes sense. Looking for someone who's an expert or knows more to dissect it. At first glance I would dismiss it but you never know.