Earlier today when I was listening to his latest Brighteon episode I had the thought, 'what if this guy just stumbled into that Arizona University study pertaining COVID-19 and similarities to rattlesnake bites and then decided to jump on it while it was hot.' I swear, IIRC, that Arizona university story popped up in our circles just days before his interviews came out. It's possible it was the other way around (that the interviews dropped beforehand and caused the Arizona news to heat up), but i'm fairly sure it wasn't. So, imagine if, instead of "1000 hours over the past four months", he literally just pulled up a bunch of info and came up with this narrative over the weekend...

Either way, a lot of the stuff that he is saying is very plausible, and if he hadn't added his speculation about the water source being tainted, I think most of everything he said would have been provable (based on the studies he cites, etc.). I don't think, like Cliff High does, that the theory about the water source is automatically bullshit, but I also don't necessarily think that part is founded in anything real; just speculation based on the water testing.

However, to add to his speculation, it is worth noting that the big news narrative surrounding the lead tainted water in Michigan a few years ago was well timed, if the goal was to create a demand for federal involvement in local water treatment facilities. Anytime national news gives some kind of local story, which primarily impacts poor people, you know that trickery is afoot.

Earlier today when I was listening to his latest Brighteon episode I had the thought, 'what if this guy just stumbled into that Arizona University study pertaining COVID-19 and similarities to rattlesnake bites and then decided to jump on it while it was hot.' I swear, IIRC, that Arizona university story popped up in our circles just days before his interviews came out. It's possible it was the other way around (that the interviews dropped beforehand and caused the Arizona news to heat up), but i'm fairly sure it wasn't. So, imagine if, instead of "1000 hours over the past four months", he literally just pulled up a bunch of info and came up with this narrative over the weekend...

Either way, a lot of the stuff that he is saying is very plausible, and if he hadn't added his speculation about the water source being tainted, I think most of everything he said would have been provable (based on the studies he cites, etc.). I don't think, like Cliff High does, that the theory about the water source is automatically bullshit, but I also don't necessarily think that part is founded in anything real; just speculation based on the water testing.

However, to add to his speculation, it is worth noting that the big news narrative surrounding the lead tainted water in Michigan a few years ago was well timed, if the goal was to create a demand for federal involvement in local water treatment facilities. Anytime national news gives some kind of local story, which primarily impacts poor people, you know that some kind of trickery is afoot.

Just earlier today when I was watching his Brighteon show episode from yesterday, I had the thought, 'what if this guy just stumbled into the Arizona University study pertaining COVID-19 and similarities to snakebites and then was like "hey, I should jump on this while it's hot!"'. The thing that made me think this is that I swear the Arizona university story had popped up in our circles just days before his interviews came out. It's possible this was the other way around (that the interviews dropped beforehand and caused the Arizona news to heat up), but i'm fairly sure it wasn't. So just imagine if instead of "1000 hours over the past four months", he literally just pulled up a bunch of info and came up with this narrative over the weekend...

Either way, a lot of the stuff that he is saying is very plausible, and if he hadn't added his speculation about the water source being tainted, I think most of everything he said would have been provable (based on the studies he cites, etc.). I don't think, like Cliff High does, that the theory about the water source is automatically bullshit, but I also don't necessarily think that part is founded in anything real; just speculation based on the water testing.

However, to add to his speculation, it is worth noting that the big news narrative surrounding the lead tainted water in Michigan a few years ago was well timed, if the goal was to create a demand for federal involvement in local water treatment facilities. Anytime national news gives some kind of local story, which primarily impacts poor people, you know that some kind of trickery is afoot.

Just earlier today when I was watching his Brighteon show episode from yesterday, I had the thought, 'what if this guy just stumbled into the Arizona University study pertaining COVID-19 and similarities to snakebites and then was like "hey, I should jump on this while it's hot!"'. The thing that made me think this is that I swear the Arizona university story had popped up in our circles just days before his interviews came out. It's possible this was the other way around (that the interviews dropped beforehand and caused the Arizona news to heat up), but i'm fairly sure it wasn't. So just imagine if instead of "1000 hours over the past four months", he literally just pulled up a bunch of info and came up with this narrative over the weekend...

Either way, a lot of the stuff that he is saying is very plausible, and if he hadn't added his speculation about the water source being tainted, I think most of everything he said would have been provable (based on the studies he cites, etc.). I don't think, like Cliff High does, that the theory about the water source is automatically bullshit, but I also don't necessarily think that part is founded in anything real; just speculation based on the water testing.