Difference between revisions of "David Grimes"
(instant exposure, as if ...) |
m (Text replacement - "mainstream media" to "corporate media") |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{person | {{person | ||
|wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Robert_Grimes | |wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Robert_Grimes | ||
| − | |constitutes= | + | |constitutes=deep state functionary?, journalist |
|twitter=https://twitter.com/drg1985 | |twitter=https://twitter.com/drg1985 | ||
| − | |interests=Conspiracy Theories, Cancer, Water Fluoridation, Climate change, Mainstream media, Electromagnetic radiation | + | |interests=Conspiracy Theories, Cancer, Water Fluoridation, Climate change, Mainstream media, Electromagnetic radiation,fact checking, straw men |
|image=David Grimes.jpg | |image=David Grimes.jpg | ||
|birth_date=1985 | |birth_date=1985 | ||
|website=http://www.davidrobertgrimes.com/ | |website=http://www.davidrobertgrimes.com/ | ||
| + | |description=Says the things wanted, therefore allowed access to {{ccm}} as a 'debunker'. Very fond of the [[straw man]] argument. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | '''David Robert Grimes''' is a [[ | + | '''David Robert Grimes''' is a science [[journalist]] who has written a wide variety of topics from a narrow range of perspectices, i.e. in support of the [[Deep State]] sanctioned {{on}}.<ref name=pom>https://pieceofmindful.com/2016/10/24/too-many-people-on-the-viability-of-conspiratorial-beliefs/</ref> He also writes for {{ccm}} outlets such as ''[[The Irish Times]]'' and ''[[The Guardian]]''.<ref name="theguardian">"[http://www.theguardian.com/profile/david-robert-grimes David Robert Grimes]", theguardian.com. Retrieved 27 February 2016.</ref> |
| − | <ref name="irishtimes">"[http://www.irishtimes.com/search/search-7.1213540?q=david%20robert%20grimes&writerName=David%20Robert%20Grimes David Robert Grimes]", irishtimes.com. Retrieved 27 February 2016.</ref> He has written articles on water fluoridation, climate change, and cancer cures, and casting doubt on the medical power of [[cannabis]]. He is a major pusher of the safe [[vaccine]] narrative. In 2016 he published a paper on "[[conspiracy theories]]" which was widely reported by the {{ccm}}, leading to speculation that he might be part of an organised effort to try to equate dissent with mental illness.<ref>[[Document:Elites Link Anti-Government Thought to Mental Illness]]</ref> | + | <ref name="irishtimes">"[http://www.irishtimes.com/search/search-7.1213540?q=david%20robert%20grimes&writerName=David%20Robert%20Grimes David Robert Grimes]", irishtimes.com. Retrieved 27 February 2016.</ref> " He rarely questions the antics of [[Big Pharma]], yet - if he does - there always seems to be an ulterior motive at work."<ref name=obc/> He has written articles on water fluoridation, climate change, and cancer cures, and casting doubt on the medical power of [[cannabis]]. He is a major pusher of the "[[safe and effective]]" [[vaccine]] narrative. In 2016 he published a paper on "[[conspiracy theories]]" which was widely reported by the {{ccm}}, leading to speculation that he might be part of an organised effort to try to equate [[dissent]] with [[mental illness]].<ref>[[Document:Elites Link Anti-Government Thought to Mental Illness]]</ref> |
| + | |||
| + | == Funding == | ||
| + | Grimes "receives funding from [[Wellcome Trust]], and is endorsed by "Sense About Science". He is also a "consultant" to undisclosed "private companies" and "charitable" organizations."<ref name=obc>https://objectiveskeptic.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-ugly-face-of-science-david-robert.html</ref> | ||
==Mainstream media 'debunker'"== | ==Mainstream media 'debunker'"== | ||
| − | Grimes has a reputation for 'debunking' in | + | Grimes has a reputation for 'debunking' in [[corporate controlled media]], writing for many outlets and appearing on [[BBC]] radio and television in particular. His range of topics is wide. He has promoted the status quo on topics such as [[Water Fluoridation]], dismissing alternative evidence of [[toxicity]], supporting {{on}}s of the [[CDC]] and [[WHO]].<ref>https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/anti-fluoride-lobby-can-t-get-its-teeth-into-the-truth-1.1520290</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/apr/04/politicians-anti-fluoridation-campaigners-fluoride-water</ref>. He supports the conventional view<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/05/denying-climate-change-scepticism-motivated-reasoning</ref> on climate-change, calling skeptics 'denialists'<ref>https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/climate-change-is-real-ignore-the-denialists-1.1570833</ref>. He has also repeatedly dismissed suggestions that [[cannabis]] can help with [[cancer]] or other illnesses<ref>https://health.spectator.co.uk/the-rise-of-the-cannabis-cult-dont-believe-the-hype-about-medical-marijuana/</ref>, echoing the standard [[Big Pharma]] line. He has claimed that alternative [[cancer]] cures have no merit<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2017/jan/24/cancer-treatment-myths-clean-eating-cannabis-homeopathy-alternative</ref>, and was awarded for his work on fluoride by Sense About Science<ref>http://senseaboutscience.org/activities/2014-john-maddox-prize/</ref>. |
==Vaccine pusher== | ==Vaccine pusher== | ||
| − | Grimes is a known [[vaccine]] agent<ref>https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/anti-hpv-vaccine-myths-have-fatal-consequences-1.3213118</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/jan/11/why-is-there-opposition-hpv-vaccine-cervical-cancer</ref>, and has suppressed the work of Dr. Andrew Wakefield in national media, protesting the screening of his documentary and labeling him a | + | [[David Grimes claiming that COVID 19 jabs had saved millions of lives.png|left|400px]] |
| + | Grimes is a known [[vaccine]] agent<ref>https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/anti-hpv-vaccine-myths-have-fatal-consequences-1.3213118</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/jan/11/why-is-there-opposition-hpv-vaccine-cervical-cancer</ref>, and has suppressed the work of Dr. [[Andrew Wakefield]] in national media, protesting the screening of his documentary and labeling him a "..long-debunked fear merchant whose attempt to paint himself as a Galileo-like figure is at once completely narcissistic and utterly dishonest".<ref>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/disgraced-antimmr-vaccine-doctor-andrew-wakefield-gets-invitation/</ref>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[BBC]] employed him to attack the claims of [[Andrew Bridgen]], the first UK MP to publicly raise the issue of the health effects of the [[COVID-19 jabs]].<ref>https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-misplaced-attacks-on-bridgens</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Dismissing EMF health concerns== | ||
| + | Grimes dismisses concerns about Wi-Fi and cellphone electromagnetic frequency in the corporate media<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/feb/17/electromagnetic-radiation-doesnt-make-you-ill-or-give-you-cancer-heres-why</ref>. Predictably, he also attacked claims a conspiracy might be at play<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard</ref>. He also published an academic paper, which criticised another paper which claimed Wi-Fi was linked to [[cancer]] and [[autism]]<ref>https://peerj.com/preprints/3355/</ref>. | ||
| − | == | + | ===5G=== |
| − | + | In 2019 he was widely cited as "a cancer researcher".<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wireless-cancer.html</ref> | |
==Government advisor== | ==Government advisor== | ||
| Line 24: | Line 35: | ||
==Paper on "Conspiracy Theories"== | ==Paper on "Conspiracy Theories"== | ||
| − | In [[2016]] David Grimes published a simplistic statistical model of conspiracies which he proposed "might be useful in counteracting the potentially deleterious consequences of bogus and anti-science narratives".<ref name=grimes>[http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905 "On the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs"]</ref> This was given what one commentator referred to as "massive [corporate] [[corporate media|media]] coverage"<ref name=pom/>, including the [[BBC]].<ref>http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684</ref> | + | In [[2016]] David Grimes published a simplistic statistical model of conspiracies which he proposed "might be useful in counteracting the potentially deleterious consequences of bogus and anti-science narratives".<ref name=grimes>[http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905 "On the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs"]</ref> This was given what one commentator referred to as "massive [corporate] [[corporate media|media]] coverage"<ref name=pom/>, including the [[BBC]].<ref>http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684</ref> Ignoring the possibility of [[compartmentalization]] he assumed that each conspirator was equally well informed about the conspiracy and that each was equally likely to "expose" it, which would result in its instant "failure". He calibrated this model using three exposed conspiracies (or collusions), with no explanation of why he had chosen these three: |
# The [[NSA/PRISM]] programme "exposed by" [[Edward Snowden]]; | # The [[NSA/PRISM]] programme "exposed by" [[Edward Snowden]]; | ||
# The [[Tuskegee syphilis experiment]] "exposed by" [[Peter Buxtun]]; and, | # The [[Tuskegee syphilis experiment]] "exposed by" [[Peter Buxtun]]; and, | ||
| Line 30: | Line 41: | ||
===Equal information=== | ===Equal information=== | ||
| − | Grimes' assumption that everyone in a conspiracy is equally well informed about it flies in the face of the hierarchical nature of organisations and what is known about conspiracies. The [[Manhattan Project]] involved over 100,000 workers, of whom a [[1945]] ''[[Life (magazine)|Life]]'' article estimated that the [[compartmentalisation]] was such that before the [[Hiroshima bombing|Hiroshima]] and [[Nagasaki bombing]]s "probably no more than a few dozen men in the entire country knew the full meaning of the Manhattan Project, and perhaps only a thousand others even were aware that work on atoms was involved." The magazine wrote that over 100,000 others employed on the project "worked like moles in the dark".<ref name="life1945082091"> | + | Grimes' assumption that everyone in a conspiracy is equally well informed about it flies in the face of the hierarchical nature of organisations and what is known about conspiracies. The [[Manhattan Project]] involved over 100,000 workers, of whom a [[1945]] ''[[Life (magazine)|Life]]'' article estimated that the [[compartmentalisation]] was such that before the [[Hiroshima bombing|Hiroshima]] and [[Nagasaki bombing]]s "probably no more than a few dozen men in the entire country knew the full meaning of the Manhattan Project, and perhaps only a thousand others even were aware that work on atoms was involved." The magazine wrote that over 100,000 others employed on the project "worked like moles in the dark".<ref name="life1945082091">https://books.google.com/books?id=hkgEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=true </ref><ref name="owens">http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/06/the-secret-city/100326/#img06 </ref> If ''Life'' is to be believed, the assumption that all personnel are equally informed would appear in this case to out by 4-5 orders of magnitude, directly contradicting Grimes' finding that large conspiracies "quickly become untenable."<ref name=grimes/> |
===Instant exposure=== | ===Instant exposure=== | ||
| Line 38: | Line 49: | ||
|caption=The televised confession by Loyd Jowers of involvement in the [[MLK assassination]] | |caption=The televised confession by Loyd Jowers of involvement in the [[MLK assassination]] | ||
|date=16 December 1993 | |date=16 December 1993 | ||
| − | | | + | |subjects=MLK/Assassination |
|authors=Loyd Jowers | |authors=Loyd Jowers | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:17, 14 December 2023
 David Grimes      (deep state functionary?, journalist) | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Born | 1985 |
| Interests | • Conspiracy Theories • Cancer • Water Fluoridation • “Climate change” • Mainstream media • Electromagnetic radiation • “fact checking” • straw men |
Says the things wanted, therefore allowed access to commercially-controlled media as a 'debunker'. Very fond of the straw man argument. | |
David Robert Grimes is a science journalist who has written a wide variety of topics from a narrow range of perspectices, i.e. in support of the Deep State sanctioned official narrative.[1] He also writes for commercially-controlled media outlets such as The Irish Times and The Guardian.[2] [3] " He rarely questions the antics of Big Pharma, yet - if he does - there always seems to be an ulterior motive at work."[4] He has written articles on water fluoridation, climate change, and cancer cures, and casting doubt on the medical power of cannabis. He is a major pusher of the "safe and effective" vaccine narrative. In 2016 he published a paper on "conspiracy theories" which was widely reported by the commercially-controlled media, leading to speculation that he might be part of an organised effort to try to equate dissent with mental illness.[5]
Contents
Funding
Grimes "receives funding from Wellcome Trust, and is endorsed by "Sense About Science". He is also a "consultant" to undisclosed "private companies" and "charitable" organizations."[4]
Mainstream media 'debunker'"
Grimes has a reputation for 'debunking' in corporate controlled media, writing for many outlets and appearing on BBC radio and television in particular. His range of topics is wide. He has promoted the status quo on topics such as Water Fluoridation, dismissing alternative evidence of toxicity, supporting official narratives of the CDC and WHO.[6][7]. He supports the conventional view[8] on climate-change, calling skeptics 'denialists'[9]. He has also repeatedly dismissed suggestions that cannabis can help with cancer or other illnesses[10], echoing the standard Big Pharma line. He has claimed that alternative cancer cures have no merit[11], and was awarded for his work on fluoride by Sense About Science[12].
Vaccine pusher
left|400px Grimes is a known vaccine agent[13][14], and has suppressed the work of Dr. Andrew Wakefield in national media, protesting the screening of his documentary and labeling him a "..long-debunked fear merchant whose attempt to paint himself as a Galileo-like figure is at once completely narcissistic and utterly dishonest".[15].
The BBC employed him to attack the claims of Andrew Bridgen, the first UK MP to publicly raise the issue of the health effects of the COVID-19 jabs.[16]
Dismissing EMF health concerns
Grimes dismisses concerns about Wi-Fi and cellphone electromagnetic frequency in the corporate media[17]. Predictably, he also attacked claims a conspiracy might be at play[18]. He also published an academic paper, which criticised another paper which claimed Wi-Fi was linked to cancer and autism[19].
5G
In 2019 he was widely cited as "a cancer researcher".[20]
Government advisor
Grimes has been known to secretly advise governments and his exactly influence is unclear. He has been active in trying to criminalize people providing alternative cancer treatments in Ireland[21].
Paper on "Conspiracy Theories"
In 2016 David Grimes published a simplistic statistical model of conspiracies which he proposed "might be useful in counteracting the potentially deleterious consequences of bogus and anti-science narratives".[22] This was given what one commentator referred to as "massive [corporate] media coverage"[1], including the BBC.[23] Ignoring the possibility of compartmentalization he assumed that each conspirator was equally well informed about the conspiracy and that each was equally likely to "expose" it, which would result in its instant "failure". He calibrated this model using three exposed conspiracies (or collusions), with no explanation of why he had chosen these three:
- The NSA/PRISM programme "exposed by" Edward Snowden;
- The Tuskegee syphilis experiment "exposed by" Peter Buxtun; and,
- The FBI Laboratory "exposed by" Dr Frederic Whitehurst.
Equal information
Grimes' assumption that everyone in a conspiracy is equally well informed about it flies in the face of the hierarchical nature of organisations and what is known about conspiracies. The Manhattan Project involved over 100,000 workers, of whom a 1945 Life article estimated that the compartmentalisation was such that before the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings "probably no more than a few dozen men in the entire country knew the full meaning of the Manhattan Project, and perhaps only a thousand others even were aware that work on atoms was involved." The magazine wrote that over 100,000 others employed on the project "worked like moles in the dark".[24][25] If Life is to be believed, the assumption that all personnel are equally informed would appear in this case to out by 4-5 orders of magnitude, directly contradicting Grimes' finding that large conspiracies "quickly become untenable."[22]
Instant exposure
| The televised confession by Loyd Jowers of involvement in the MLK assassination |
The paper ignores the fact that corporate media is controlled, assuming that any conspirator could instantly expose a conspiracy. This ignores historical evidence to the contrary such as, for example, the televised 1993 confession of Loyd Jowers that he was involved in the assassination of Martin Luther King. Not only do a large proportion of the US public remain ignorant of this fact, but the FBI showed no interest in his testimony, even after the 1999 civil trial in which a jury unanimously found that Jowers and agents of the US government were involved in his killing.[26]
References
- ↑ a b https://pieceofmindful.com/2016/10/24/too-many-people-on-the-viability-of-conspiratorial-beliefs/
- ↑ "David Robert Grimes", theguardian.com. Retrieved 27 February 2016.
- ↑ "David Robert Grimes", irishtimes.com. Retrieved 27 February 2016.
- ↑ a b https://objectiveskeptic.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-ugly-face-of-science-david-robert.html
- ↑ Document:Elites Link Anti-Government Thought to Mental Illness
- ↑ https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/anti-fluoride-lobby-can-t-get-its-teeth-into-the-truth-1.1520290
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/apr/04/politicians-anti-fluoridation-campaigners-fluoride-water
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/05/denying-climate-change-scepticism-motivated-reasoning
- ↑ https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/climate-change-is-real-ignore-the-denialists-1.1570833
- ↑ https://health.spectator.co.uk/the-rise-of-the-cannabis-cult-dont-believe-the-hype-about-medical-marijuana/
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2017/jan/24/cancer-treatment-myths-clean-eating-cannabis-homeopathy-alternative
- ↑ http://senseaboutscience.org/activities/2014-john-maddox-prize/
- ↑ https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/anti-hpv-vaccine-myths-have-fatal-consequences-1.3213118
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/jan/11/why-is-there-opposition-hpv-vaccine-cervical-cancer
- ↑ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/disgraced-antimmr-vaccine-doctor-andrew-wakefield-gets-invitation/
- ↑ https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-misplaced-attacks-on-bridgens
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2016/feb/17/electromagnetic-radiation-doesnt-make-you-ill-or-give-you-cancer-heres-why
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard
- ↑ https://peerj.com/preprints/3355/
- ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wireless-cancer.html
- ↑ https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-quack-law-to-stop-peddling-of-fake-cancer-treatments-xh3fnk0s6
- ↑ a b "On the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs"
- ↑ http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684
- ↑ https://books.google.com/books?id=hkgEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=true
- ↑ http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/06/the-secret-city/100326/#img06
- ↑ https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/apr/04/fbi-mlk-jowers/
