Masking within 'scientific' consensus

I noticed this phrase in this article wherein assertions of scientific veracity refuse and deny any scientific challenge or debate:

"The vast majority of scientific opinion"

I couldn't make this up!
Politics seeks consensus.
Science challenges it.
If 99.9% of scientists - or anyone else - base their logic on a false presumption - the fact doesn't change because of a 'consensus' - but there is now an investment of reputation, status, privilege and power on the false model being maintained regardless of 'facts'. And so a true humanity is sacrificed to support a world-view felt 'too big to fail' - by those who are the 'Establishment' of power that has grown upon and around the error.

The iron fist shows through as the velvet glove disintegrates - and a 'truth' that is imposed upon us, associated with rage over terror or pain of loss, and is raised up like a god who cannot be named - because its 'power' is fearful and it 'protection' is a racket.

Yet it is a survival urge that cannot allow a breach in its foundation. But what 'survives' is the error - and the tragic consequences of the error persist. A god of fear is a false foundation - but the fear of fear - and the beliefs arising that seek a source of power over a feared nature - are deeply imprinted in and formative of human consciousness. It doesn't matter if it's true or not - they need to believe in it - so it works because they need to maintain the belief - or the St George of Science finds its dragon not only unvanquished but encircling an increasing fear of powerless-ness; the rise of 'irrationality, emotionality and loss of control'. But science is not threatened in any way excepting one neglects to enquire and open to the discovery of truth. Truth is never threatened - but our model of it can seem to be - when we forget it is a model - and take it as true - and live from a false image and suffer it real because in pride we inflated a sense of power that we now cant - or wont - release to what is truly moving here.

It is never the mistake that causes the bigger problem - but the attempt to cover it up. Errors are mistakes from which we can learn. Lies are hatreds we find hard to forgive - and fear of exposure covers lie with more lies. The spell is cast. Who can wake from it?





Down in the comments I saw this:

survivor3305 says:   

It is possible that both sides are correct. Pro vaccine people are right because in its pure form, vaccines do protect and cause no harm like autism. But the anti vaccine people could be right too. It is possible that substances have been added or subtracted from pure vaccines for who knows what reason, causing side effects like autism. One aspect of this controversy is telling. Censorship is so strong and pervasive indicates that a cover-up by some powerful people, which sure makes the anti-vaccine people’s case that vaccines are dangerous in their current form and that a cover-up is in full swing.

To which I responded:

Have a look at the ingredients. I don’t feel ‘pure vaccine’ is linguistically meaningful here. The canary in the mine warned of gas – but the coal dust was killing them slowly.
If anyone crosses that line to research the documentation of a critical perspective on vaccination history, then they walk out of an invisible self censorship that becomes felt IF you give permission to open your mind to listen and learn.
There are many such hidden in broad daylight.

There is an ancient pattern of self-harming or self-limiting as a way to pre-empt expected punishment. This is so pervasive as to be invisibly normal. Or greying down from a spectrum of living contrast to homogeneous lack of vitality and imagination.

There are very many very serious issues with vaccinations that are not addressable because it is enforcing state power, brooking no discussion. Full and true information is necessary for choice to be meaningful. Anti-coercion is an understandable reaction – but a misnomer. Communicate without coercion and deceit. That is not anti anything.