Where Did All the Workers Go?

Our young workforce is evaporating. As a result, employers struggle to find workers. We have no one to blame but our new virtuous and smarter-than-thou cancel culture of hate.

As a person who has executed a significant amount of corporate strategy, and has had to deal with some of these related issues in conducting staffing planning for my clients – I hope at least, that I bear a clean and direct grasp of how the employment market is affected by certain factors. This may not be popular, and my intention is not to excuse-make for this generation – nonetheless it is the truth.

These conditions did not exist 15 years ago and earlier – so be careful about quick comparisons to one’s ‘bootstrapping’ past. As a 24 year old in the United States of America (this is not me, this is a collection summarizing what I have heard or observed from this generation)1

  1. I don’t need a car, as I can Uber or Lyft.
  2. Nor especially do I desire to have car insurance, which both penalizes me for being 24 and rises 12% a year. They use all that obscene profit to compete for the most clever and worn-out ad campaign. Hey ‘Flo’, how ’bout you bundle this. Fuck that lizard and oversized turkey.
  3. My parents’ house has appreciated 150% since I was in high school and offers ample room for a home improvement loan since they have been paying their mortgage for 28 years now.
  4. My brother is disabled with autism spectrum disorder. This crushed my mom. She needs me, and sometimes it is like I am her only friend. Between them both working to make ends meet, I cannot leave them without help.
  5. My parents are both ill/addicted, and hide this from their friends and employers. I am there to help out so things don’t unravel.
  6. Homeowner’s and renter’s insurance goes up by 14% a year for absolutely no reason. We’ve never had a claim be accepted in 28 years, yet it is ‘mandatory’ – I get the game.
  7. The coffee I make for myself and my parents is better and less costly than you can get at an office or Starbucks by far.
  8. Taxes skyrocket between 40 K and 80K in income… the extra insane level of effort is not worth it at all. I pay very little to no tax now.
  9. If I make $40,000 in income or less, I get free healthcare now. If I make $80,000 I have to pay hundreds of dollars a month for it. Fuck that… The doctor does not listen to, nor help me, anyway. Why should I then also pay for that?
  10. President Barack Obama in a June 3, 2020 ‘Town Hall’ meeting, placed a Mark of Cain upon my race, deeming it a ‘plague of our society’ and declared that I bore an ‘original sin’, one which I carry because of my skin color and/or gender. There are no measurable objectives of success in this, so it will never end – I am forbidden to speak my view or exist as a full rights-bearing citizen in the meantime. I am not the horrible monster these people have crafted as the focus of their hate.
  11. Rent is just a useless and overpriced expense, it builds nothing for the future. Plus I have to have a ‘roommate’ in order to afford it now.
  12. Renting forces me to live in dangerous places where crime is skyrocketing and I might be a target because of my gender. Rent forces me to earn more (diluted enormously by taxes and healthcare premiums) as well.
  13. I survive on 1 meal a day because my endocrine/microbiome system is so damaged that if I do not fast most of the day, I gain weight like crazy. This also keeps food costs low.
  14. I feel like crap most of the time. My asthma, allergies, and food sensitivities are insane. I am gluten intolerant and it is almost impossible to avoid that shit. I have to avoid so many foods now that eating out is a disaster to my body.
  15. If I am to work, I have to shave and shower every day, and workout for an hour each day in order to be at my optimal appearance. I can do that, but what a pain in the ass, just to pay bigger tax, gas, auto insurance, and medical insurance bills.
  16. The Maskuerade.
  17. I can work from home in my lower income part time endeavor. I can work my own hours.
  18. No traffic. What idiot thinks I am going to sit in a car for them, for 2 hours a day any more? Not someone I trust.
  19. Employers want me to get three or four shots, and accept a subscription to more shots, just for the ‘privilege’ of working under some Boomer-fanatic overseer who wants 10+ hours per day out of me to show my ‘commitment’ and that I have a ‘work ethic’. I am willing to work very hard, but I am not an idiot.
  20. My gender and/or skin color is very unpopular now – I am already a minority in colleges, and yet I still cannot attend the college of my first choosing, and I won’t get promoted, so it is better to be in business for myself where I will not face discrimination.
  21. Being intelligent does not get one into university, rather you can be dumb as a door-post as long as you have straight A’s. It is just not worth the effort of kissing teacher asses, who are politically biased against you by their Union in the first place, in order to convert a couple B’s into A’s.
  22. My boss will be frightened, nepotistic, and chosen for their correctness, not competence. I am not willing to cast my pearls before swine.
  23. Knowing a trade is much more valuable than having a degree now. Work for yourself, part time is the way to go. If you can fix a pipe, circuit board, or electric motor, you are far more valuable than a college educated cubicle-dweller managing the overdue payment notification team.
  24. I refuse to be put on a unit-rate based ‘performance enhancement system’ which only offers me a livable wage if I work at an unsustainable pace – leaving me little work/personal life energy balance.
  25. Video games are incredibly real and immersive now, and highly addictive, on large 4K screens with fantastic sound. There is a new one each week. The social network around them is incredible, a lot of people just like me.
  26. My chances of catching Covid are higher the more I go out and huddle with people in small, poorly ventilated work spaces or restrooms. I cannot afford to give Covid to my parents. What would I do if one of them dies?
  27. I am constantly instructed as to how incorrect and unacceptable I am, in the workplace. It is justice and virtue to have fewer of me around, thus they will get their wish.
  28. I’ve seen what the industrial workplace did to crush/steal from my once vibrant and loving parents and disrupt my home, and I will never let that happen in my life. I’m not funding the next oligarch war or Greek island yacht from my hard efforts. If I work hard, it is going to be for me.
  29. Online porn is far less trouble than a real live friend of the opposite sex. Having one of those is like owning a monkey, with a chance of accidental pregnancy. Plus, after all, I live in my parents’ basement
  30. Cancel culture has made existence in public a miserable chore. Some people literally believe they hold a righteous license to truth and regard me as a ‘Nazi’ the moment they get the notion that I might not agree with their Narrative 100%. Go scream at someone else.
  31. I can get my food and booze delivered to me at my doorstep.
  32. Living in a micro environment so as not to place undue burden on my parents, is actually kinda’ cool. Plenty of savvy devices to make life workable. YouTube shows how it is both do-able and fun.
  33. I enjoy three-day excursion outdoor activities. It is a very rewarding and refreshing break from the same-same. I cannot do that with a ‘job’.
  34. I can’t take the risk of arrest, drug test detection by an employer, or accidental overdose by having to find a new supplier for the drug of ‘my choice’.
  35. I don’t want the burden of children. I probably should not be a parent either – how the hell am I going to inspire them? I don’t want to subject anyone to this life, especially an innocent person and against their own choice.
  36. I don’t want to introduce children who look like me, into a world which will vilify, hate, and disadvantage them by their appearance. So there is no reason to get married.
  37. My eyes have been opened to the fact that there is more going on around us than is acknowledged. I don’t know exactly what it is, but enough evidence is there to conclude that we have been lied to significantly. I do not possess an aversion to a new paradigm or ontology – instead, I despise being lied to, and being led by persons who think they bear the right to lie or conceal.
  38. All my old friends are local, in the same boat as me, we share the same interests, and we hang out and talk about this predicament. Who needs new friends?
  39. We don’t go to restaurants or bars to hang out, as that costs too much and is not near as much fun.
  40. I am not working, just because I should work… You need to inspire me with a mission where I can contribute value. Amazon and TwitGoogFace dominating the world is not a suitable ‘mission’.
  41. I do not trust our national leadership, nor do I feel I can change what is occurring, nor would they let me. If life does not take me seriously, then I’m not going to take it seriously, in return. It’s just simple action-reaction.
  42. They would gleefully sacrifice my life in a military conflict, but won’t even bother to count me as an unemployment statistic – preferring instead to replace me with imported voters. I am willing to lay down my life for my fellow citizens, but not for an encroaching third-world culture which is teaching hate, demeaning and replacing me – and from whom I get the stark impression that they would never fight alongside me in return.

There is a name for this process. It has been done before. Our Constitution was written so as to preclude it ever happening again. Unfortunately we were way too smart to have a Constitution any longer – thanks in part to our fake skeptics, ‘doubting’ everything except what was important to doubt.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Where Did All the Workers Go?”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 8 Feb 2022; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=61962

Denial of Early Covid-19 Treatment – A Crime Against Humanity

American citizens were recently coerced into being part of the test or control groups of a medical experiment, without adequate knowledge and without their consent. Hundreds of thousands of Americans likely died from the resulting denial of timely and adequate treatment of Covid-19 and more importantly, its preventable secondary conditions.
This was an egregious violation of The Nuremberg Code on human rights. The time has come for jurisprudence and restitution to those harmed.

We as humans never, never, never possess a moral, financial, social, critical, risk, scientific, nor philosophical basis to argue that any and all treatment for a malady should be denied research or application. This is an absolute human right.

Update: As one can clearly observe here, we are winning this legal argument. Congratulations Folleagues!

“In consultation with the legal community, indications are that ‘failure to [early/timely] treat’ will now be considered ‘wanton disregard.’ As such, any perceived statutory immunity will be rendered invalid.”

~ Senator Mark B. Steffen, M.D., 31 Mar 2022

The EUA Mandate – A Pandemic of the Untreated

During my initial diagnosis with the Delta variant of Covid-19 back in August 2021, I reasonably inquired of the attending physician as to any candidate or approved therapies and treatments for the condition. In his response, the diagnosing clinician admonished me with the following well-rehearsed quip:

There is no treatment. Go home and sleep it off. You should have gotten the vaccine.

~ Diagnosing Physician at Clinic, Aug 18 2021

As it turned out, this was absolutely the worst advice I have ever received in my life, and from a medical professional no less. This apothegm is what I call a Höchste Mechanism, a fraudulent notion arrogantly passed off as official science – a notion that has become so important to protect, that ignorance is now mandated in defense of its ‘truth’. This misinformation was spun by the clinician as if it were ‘the standard of care’ (both a medical and legal definition)1 for Covid-19, when in fact this was far from the truth. What I have found in researching this ‘there are no treatments’ false claim, can be framed inside the legal provisions surrounding issuance of an Emergency Use Authorization for the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Specifically,2

(C) The Secretary may issue an [EUA] authorization under this section with respect to the emergency use of a product only if …the Secretary concludes—

(3) that there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating such disease or condition;

~ 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies

Since the EUA cannot sustain if an ‘alternative for treating’ Covid-19 exists, then there is no alternative treatment for Covid-19, quod erat demonstrandum. This is how modern science works, circular imperative (the Höchste), or the answer you bring to the problem in the first place, before solving for it. This mandate to not allow for any treatment use, development, or research, presented an ethical quandary to public health leaders, who in the end opted to serve monetary-power advantage rather than ethics. However, it gets worse. Once this bifurcation is established, between the vaccinated and ‘no treatment (allowed)’ cohorts, one has introduced a controlled experiment or what is known under The Nuremberg Code of 1947 as ‘medical experimentation’. This is the point at which an unethical choice transitions into a full-blown crime against humanity.

  1. Covid-19 treatment research, testing, evaluation, authorization, promulgation, conditions of use, timely employment, and advisement, were not only blocked by the US FDA and medical authorities, but communications regarding effective treatment were censored by US media (just as this article is being censored by those same media now).
  2. These illegal/unconstitutional restraints to trade were enacted to protect the Covid-19 vaccine Emergency Use Authorization, which could not legally exist without them.
  3. These illegal/unconstitutional restraints to trade were further employed to establish control/test cohorts inside a mandatory experiment on the entire US population; an immoral experiment which resulted in the majority of US Covid-19 related deaths (see Exhibit 1 below).

History’s Commentary on Mandatory Experimentation

The notion that one need withhold any and all forms of putative treatment or therapy as the EUA-stipulated approach in addressing Covid-19 or its symptoms, is a principle which functions under the philosophy of a ‘controlled experiment’ (i.e. medical experimentation to confirm an approach as sound/unsound). We now know too late, that there exist a variety of viable treatments for Covid-19 and in particular, its dangerous secondary conditions.3 4 5 6 Treatment not for everyone who tests positive certainly, but rather for those experiencing heavy cytokine storm or who bear a stark risk-compounding factor (dysbiosis, metabolic disorder, age, dementia, etc.). The antithesis, refusing any and all outpatient treatment or ‘doing nothing’, as it turns out was an unsound approach to the majority of moderate to severe Covid-19 cases. ‘Long Covid’ for instance, is a set of thromboembolic injuries which resulted from exactly this illegitimate ‘there are no treatments – you should have been vaccinated’ control-oriented philosophy.7 8 The reader should note that we reject the term ‘Long Covid’ for these deaths, and instead cite the actual etiology, EUA Shadow Deaths, outlined below.

The Nuremberg Code of 1947 addresses the context of circumstance wherein the standard of care has not been identified for a medical or therapeutic condition, and various approaches to treatment (including the action of withholding treatment so as to provide for a ‘control group’) are under consideration or testing (aka ‘experimentation’ in 1947).9 In the real life scenario above, I was involuntarily coerced into becoming part of an experimental protocol of withholding all treatment (the control), in favor of testing a vaccine purported to offer certain benefits against Covid-19 infection or severity. The various arguments made as to the efficacy of that vaccine are moot. A decision was made to coerce me, without sufficient knowledge on my part nor my consent, into participating as a control-group member in an experiment evaluating test-group vaccines versus the action of withholding any and all treatment. Much as a healthy beagle might be terminated after starvation for comparative autopsy in a pesticide toxicity study. All this of course as part of various vaccines’ completion of Phase III and IV testing now underway.10

A controlled experiment is one in which every factor is held constant except for one variable per test group.11 In this case, that one variable is the introduction of a particular vaccine (say the Pfizer-BioNTech version) to a test group. The fact that the vaccine was not held to standard against ‘the best alternative medical treatments or therapies’, means that denying me access to those available remedies, constituted indeed a control-test experiment exposing me to a potential of harm through contrived inaction. An experiment which risked my person, well being, health, and life without my knowledge or consent – and nothing else. My diagnosing clinician even stated as much, without fully realizing it.

In other words, I was allowed to choose whether I would be a member of
the ‘no treatment allowed’ control group or alternately one of the vaccine test groups;
however, through denying me timely treatment in order to protect the vaccine EUA,
I was not offered the ethical choice of not participating in the experiment altogether.

Neither was I informed as to the nature of this experiment, nor was I made aware that other treatments or therapies were at my avail, should I decline participation.

Nor was I allowed to be made aware of the comparative strength of natural immunity versus the vaccine, nor to see critical cohort testing data indicating the adverse effects risk quotients of the vaccine itself (both very basic ethical information sets), so that I could make an informed choice.

I was fraudulently coerced by medical professionals (and by advising health officials) into the belief that I had no choice, I had to participate. My life was endangered and I was exposed to unnecessary amounts of suffering and expense as a result of this coerced experiment. I was not offered the remedies or recourse to address the situation in the instance where the experiment failed or failed to ensure my safety (the experiment failed in both these regards), nor was I given the opportunity to bring the experiment to an end.

This set of actions constituted a violation of my human rights, subject to The Nuremberg Code of 1947. The following excerpts from that Code apply to the specific offenses outlined in my circumstance.12

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur;

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

~ The Nuremberg Code of 1947 (see footnote 12)

A seven-count violation of my human rights. I lost loved ones to this experiment. My family suffered extensive career and financial losses, we all suffered physically and mentally beyond reason, and any member could have died inside this experiment.

One elder family member who underwent a severe cytokine storm, very nearly died of blood clots in her lungs and other organs twelve days later (right on time as per Exhibit 1 below), solely because she was actively refused treatment by her general physician until she was actually dying – a tortiously late intervention in an otherwise foreseeable and treatable condition.

Each of us fell victim to contrived ignorance, fully unaware that our lives were being exploited for experiment, experimental use money flow, and political purposes. Millions of American citizens each bore a similar drama inside this crime against humanity.

The time has come for jurisprudence and restitution regarding this crime.

How Many Persons Were Impacted by this Unethical Experiment/EUA Exclusion?

But how can we even begin to quantify just how large a crime it was? In researching the mechanisms of death involved in either Covid-19 itself, or its even more dangerous secondary effects, I sought out medical publications and studies which would serve to parse Covid deaths into their actual root physiological cause. What I found disturbed me greatly. Covid-19 itself, comprising the indicators and symptoms of fever, cytokine storm, cough, and diarrhea, was rarely the cause of actual death in most Covid mortality. Most mortality occurred a good eight days after all these maladies were well over. Instead, the primary cause of death was ‘venous and arterial thromoembolic events’ (see the black arrow in Exhibit 1 below). That is to say, that 50 to 75% of all Covid deaths came from blood clots.13 14 15 Blood clots (as well as endothelial dysfunction) are conditions which are eminently treatable, provided they are addressed in a timely manner. If they are left untreated for long, myriad systems and organs within the human body will be negatively impacted.

This circumstance was akin to telling potential cancer patients to
‘Check back in with us next year and we’ll take a look at your growing lump then.

In the meantime, if you find yourself starting to die, go to the emergency room’.

Covid Did Not Kill Them – We Killed Them

This set of events constituted a highly unethical, nay monstrous, set of decisions on the part of American health officials. One which has resulted in death and immeasurable harm, from delayed treatment which was administered only under the extreme condition wherein the sufferer was dying. A dying person literally had to force their way into an ER or hospital’s care, just to get access to Heparin or a simple lifesaving novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) pill16 which could have prevented the entire tragedy (as well as offset hospital/ICU overloading) if it had been administered twelve to fifteen days earlier as an outpatient instead.

50 to 75% of all Covid-19 deaths were a result of endothelial dysfunction and blood clotting. Conditions that would not have been fatal if timely out-patient treatment had been made available to the victims.17 18 19

Such readily available treatments were denied to patients, under a contrived ignorance and the unethical protocol of an involuntary experiment that placed them at risk of harm and death. These treatable secondary effects/risks, which were not addressed until a person showed up at the ER dying included

  • blood clots/coagulopathy/circulatory deaths
  • sepsis/bacteremia
  • endothelial inflammation/major organ/heart damage
  • related physical pneumonia/dyspnea
  • dysbiosis (coprobacillus, clostridium ramosum and clostridium hathewayi)20
  • MTHFR homocysteine clearing issues
  • macrocytic anemia
  • metabolic disorder.

Of course, I am not even going to venture a guess as to the financial losses incurred by American citizens under this barbaric method of managing a pandemic. The restitution numbers will be staggering. More appropriate for this analysis however, is a quantification of the human loss in terms of injury, suffering, and life. In particular, we estimate that

  • 20+ million citizens experienced negative life-impacts/injuries/long-Covid aside from the mere pandemic virus itself,
  • 6.5 million citizens experienced excessive suffering, hospitalization, injury, and expense, and
  • 420,000+ citizens died from being denied early and timely treatment of endothelial and thromboembolic conditions (click on the image to expand Exhibit 1 below).
Exhibit 1 – Most hospitalization is too late to prevent otherwise treatable etiology.

Covid EUA-Shadow Injury and Death

Most death associated with Covid-19 occurred after the cessation of primary symptomology (Days 1 – 12 in Exhibit 1), and rather was due to secondary and imminently treatable conditions (Median Day 18.5 in Exhibit 1). These constituted conditions which were neither looked for, detected, nor treated in a timely manner outside a hospital setting, due to the vaccine emergency use authorization (EUA) 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 stipulation that no alternative treatment could exist.

(C) The Secretary may issue an [EUA] authorization under this section with respect to the emergency use of a product only if …the Secretary concludes—

(3) that there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating such disease or condition;

~ 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies

This false standard of care was enforced upon medical professionals (by the Federation of State Medical Boards, healthcare officials, and medical insurance companies) in order to keep the vaccine EUA in place, both before and after the introduction of the vaccine into the population. This error and malfeasance resulted in the majority of deaths and delayed deaths from Covid-related organ injury, from thromboembolitic, endothelial inflammation, and coagulopathy related causes. Causes which killed Covid patients anywhere from thirteen days to several years after infection.

As one may observe in Exhibit 1 above, the median day of Covid mortality (day 18.5) falls right in the middle of the disease progression timeframe in which venous and arterial thromboembolic events were almost exclusively occurring on average. In fact, the majority of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality events associated with Covid-19, were a direct result of otherwise treatable endothelial dysfunction and blood clots.21 22 23

Also take note, that the majority of this knowledge shown in Exhibit 1 was held by April 2020. Medical authorities had ample time to distribute, control, and monitor treatments for endothelial and thromboembolitic conditions. They simply chose not to.

An action which resulted in the USA holding a #1 ranking in national deaths, a full 37% higher than even the #2 ranked nation (Brazil) in terms of total deaths.24

Most people did not die of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, nor even its primary Covid-19 symptoms. They died at the hands of obdurate-minded and unaccountable public health officials. They died as the result of a horrendous experiment in humanity on the part of The Party – one conducted gleefully on their political opponents. While at the same time rubbing their noses in the destruction of their children’s lives, shuttering of their small and medium-sized businesses, and overall impingement upon their quality of life.

We, the American citizens, seek remedy for this crime against humanity.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Denial of Early Covid-19 Treatment – A Crime Against Humanity”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 30 Dec 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=59250

A Dialogue in Rhetoric

The rhetorician spends more time invested in Nelsonian ‘not understanding’, clouding with non-sequitur, and shifting the topic at hand to ‘you’, than they do actually studying the subject.
Structurally, these are all actual garbage arguments which I face each day on Twitter.

Rhetty: “Your contention is conspiracy theory babble, and purposely confusing. I am trying to understand it, but cannot. Can you re-state it in English please.”

TES: “2 + 2 = 4”

Rhetty: “Your words are purposely confusing. Your graph is nonsense and babble. If you cannot put this in everyday English, then you do not understand it.”

TES: “OK, if I take two of something, and add two more of that same something to the set, then I have four of that something in the final set.”

Rhetty: “You are purposely using overly complex words to confuse. You must be hiding an agenda. ‘Something’ of what? Beans, balls, pencils? The term ‘set’ only means something to you. The word means to ‘put something down onto a surface.'”

TES: “Set of anything. What ‘something’ is, is not material to the argument at hand. ‘Set’ is the correct term here.”

Rhetty: “Of course it is material. Why didn’t you label what ‘something’ was? And of course you, as always, failed to cite your recitation source. Plus you flowed your math to the right, when you should have had it flow downwards and put a line under the second ‘2’. And then you did not label the number 2 with the word ‘two’ on your graph, so that we could know what it was. By being enigmatic with your words you are being purposely deceptive.”

TES: “It is not a ‘graph’, it is a chart. I’m not in high school. There is no single ‘recitation source’ – this is a derivation of my own work, through standard math practice. Math is only required to flow ‘down to a bottom line’ in accounting and the third grade. We are at the Bridgman Point here, this cannot be simplified any lower.

Rhetty: “None of the axes are even labeled. What is the x-axis? Is it time? And there is no zero on it. Are you claiming that zero does not exist? What is the y-axis? Without these things the graph is totally nonsense.”

TES: “The entire description of the chart is in the title “Adding 2 (two) and 2 (two) to get 4 (four) – How to Add Numbers Along an X-Axis”. Did you even read it? No, the x-axis is the counting numbers. That is where the math occurs. Zero was just unnecessary on this simple a chart. There is no y-axis. Again, this is a chart, and not a graph.

Nevertheless, why don’t we do this. Why don’t you explain the equation back to me, in your own words. Just to see if we are talking about the same thing.”

Rhetty: “I can’t repeat back babble. These made up words only mean something to you. Plus you didn’t label the x-axis. Where do I even find it?”

TES: “No, the replies indicate that over 100 people understood the entire chart, and responded to it by asking the logical next question. Perhaps you should actually read down in the thread where I answered intelligent and honest questions about the chart. That might help.”

Rhetty: “You did not explain (every single thing about) this chart (and its implications in one single 280-character tweet). I don’t need to read further because I stopped at ‘no y-axis’ and said ‘this is bullshit’ (and because stopping with one tweet was advantageous to my argument, because my argument gets stronger the less information I have).

Anyway, here are my questions, which you abjectly refuse to even answer. There is no proof that 2, even multiple 2’s, is actually 4. And your use of confusing graphs and fancy diagrams no one can interpret shows that you are trying to spin conspiracy theory.”

TES: “So now we are shifting into refutation and delivery? I thought you said that you did not understand it?”

Rhetty: “I understand that this supposed math is an assumption on your part.”

TES: “No it isn’t. It is based upon well-vetted tenets of maths, numerals and addition. 2 + 2 = 4. It is inference, not assumption.”

Rhetty: “‘Well-vetted’ bunk. You made the claim. You have the burden of proof. Prove it.”

TES: “2 added to another 2, is 4.”

Rhetty: “I need a peer reviewed study with a retrospective meta-synthesis, a meta-cohort analysis, and a confident interval with lots of Cochrane p-values, forest plops, and such – or you are full of shit.”

TES: “OK, the primary, but not only, resource I used for my work is at the link here. The work is mostly deduction and merely one calculation, so it does not require any of those trappings. In fact, knowing when you don’t need these things is a measure of competency… hint, hint.”

Rhetty: “Well someone is wearing the tin-foil hat now. That’s old and debunked information. Everyone knows that JoHaG is no longer a credible scientific journal (I read this in an online forum of my ‘friends’). Scientists have raised doubt about this ‘extra twos’ business and the consensus is that it’s a conspiracy theory.”

TES: “‘Scientists’, have not even spoken with you. You don’t know what they think. Can you falsify the mathematical formula? …and do you even understand it?”

Rhetty: “Here, I used multiple 2’s in a graph I drew and came up with 8 as the outcome. This is proof you are wrong. Another time I came up with 14. So, you have no basis to say that multiple 2’s result in only 4. That is stupid.”

TES: “Two ‘2’s’, not ‘multiple 2’s.”

Rhetty: “You are cherry picking.”

TES: “No I am not, the whole context of the argument is one specific circumstance to begin with. I am not cherry picking through a murder’s life by citing the days in which they did the murders. Besides, it would be special pleading, not ‘cherry picking’.”

Rhetty: “You are ignoring the entire realm of possibilities. You have not considered all the options. It could be 16, or 6 or 12.”

TES: “This is deduction, not induction. All the possibilities are already falsified, by the equation itself.”

Rhetty: “Show me the peer reviewed studies which falsify that a multiple set of twos can end in any even number. And there are an infinity of them, so the odds of the answer being just ‘4’ are very low.”

TES: “I don’t have to, because ‘other even numbers’ are not salient to the argument to begin with.”

Rhetty: “Look in the graph I produced (crayon drawing), most every combination of multiple 2’s ends in something other than 4. Therefore, 4 is merely an assumption and bias on your part.”

TES: “It is not an assumption, it is an inference. And your ‘analysis’ is orthogonal to my argument.”

Rhetty: “You claim that multiple 2’s are 4, and are avoiding my questions through lots of hand waving.”

TES: “That is a straw man. Why do you insist that I defend your made up version of my chart? I have sincerely answered every single question you have asked so far.

Tell you what, what is your argument then?”

Rhetty: “That you are ignorant and imbecilic, for missing that multiple ‘2’s’ can end up in multiple outcomes besides 4, and for avoiding my questions about bullshit graphs. Only a complete idiot thinks in conspiracy theories – and you are the biggest idiot I have seen lately.”

TES: “So your argument is that I am an ‘imbecilic idiot’? And ‘2 + 2 = 4’ being wrong, was merely your working example of that argument then?

Rhetty: “You are a working example of a conspiracy freak. Imbecile.”

TES: “OK, let’s sum up. You lied when you said that you needed this ‘stated in English’ and that you had ‘Questions’ – then you went personal. Maliciousness and dishonesty are not a great way to start a dialogue which is supposed to be about maths. Rather ironic in fact. This discussion is ended.”

TES: [Block]

Rhetty: “A block, of course! I triggered him! He refuses to answer my questions despite my repeated asking!”

The Ethical Skeptic, “A Dialogue in Rhetoric”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 14 Dec 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=58559