Leader of Slovakia Shot After Demanding Investigation Into COVID Vaccines

Slovakia, a nice country in the heart of Europe, is unique in one important respect: it is the only country, out of the whole world, whose leader denounced COVID vaccines and announced a COVID inquiry into excess deaths, corrupt influence of Pfizer, and ill effects of COVID vaccines.

ht tps://twitter.com/SaiKate108/status/1751552779045552521

Many of us were wondering what would the outcome of this investigation be. Will excess deaths be finally correctly attributed? Will the cozy relationships between Pfizer and the media it sponsored be disclosed? What answers can we finally get, when a government is led by an honest man wanting to get to the bottom of the “pandemic response”?

Today, we have the answer.

https://apnews.com/article/slovakia-prime-minister-shooting-robert-fico-handlova-bdaaf0bba01035a700145a67d871a482

Robert Fico was shot and is now “fighting for his life” after multiple bullet wounds. Here’s a short video of the shooting:

The assassin, Juraj Cintula, is an operative of “Progressive Slovakia.” He is also the founder of the “Rainbow Literary Club”.

Juraj Cintula is a 71-year-old civilian. Was he capable of planning an assassination by himself? Was it possible for him to penetrate the state leader’s security and get to the right place at the right time, without help? In my opinion, that would be quite unlikely. He was probably not acting alone.

Did he get any help or money? If so, from whom? What are the interests whom Mr. Cintula served? I cannot speak with certainty. My guess would be as good as yours.

All we know is that the state-level investigation into COVID, possibly the only honest country-level inquiry, will likely be “postponed.”

Are you surprised?

Share

Drunken Student Stole Madonna Statue’s Head, Later Killed 6 Million People with a Deadly Virus He Designed

Sars-Cov-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, came from a laboratory. While there are some legitimate differences of opinion about who exactly released it, where, and for what exact reason, it is clear that Sars-CoV-2 was described in a certain 2018 financing proposal.

Who is Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, who submitted the proposal? Some new material surfaced about his early criminal life that may shed light on what kind of person Peter is.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/936079556/?fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjkzNjA3OTU1NiwiaWF0IjoxNzE1MjczNjc4LCJleHAiOjE3MTUzNjAwNzh9.nYaeeVdvVE4ciqwTh4Mu79zmo9U3OJwY7h89s7zTGwQ

While young, Peter Daszak apparently stole stuff he needed instead of paying for it, such as the above-mentioned TV set and a hi-fi radio. For entertainment, he broke off and stole the “head of a Madonna statue” and even painted its lips with lipstick. (Daily Post: The Paper for Wales, Thu, Jun 26, 1986 ·Page 3)

Why, of all things, did Peter decide to paint her lips? Was it for some perverse sexual gratification he wanted from Madonna’s head?

The drunkenness mentioned above, offered as an excuse for his behavior, may be fabricated to reduce his punishment. Generally, petty criminal behavior is typical for a growing sociopath. (other signs include harming animals, which is easy for a biology student to do)

Peter’s career led him to found EcoHealth Alliance, a venture to manage the health of the entire planet—not just the health of humans. The approach he champions is called “One Health.”

At EcoHealth Alliance we’re governed by a clear and direct philosophy; we call it One Health: that the health of humans, animals, and their environment are all connected. It’s that principle which guides our work from our headquarters in New York all the way to southeast Asia and everywhere in between. Those connections are apparent in everything we do.

“One Health” is an umbrella term for messing with the lives of humans and animals, an approach endorsed by Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, and the United Nations:

https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/32316/ZP.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

I personally never signed up to be governed by criminal psychopaths wanting to control the health of people and animals, who started their lives by breaking Madonna statue heads and painting Madonna’s lips with lipstick.

Should we be thankful to Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, and Peter Daszak for caring so much about our health?

Is it anti-science to mention prior sociopathic, criminal acts by leading proponents of “planetary health”?

What about you? Do you want convicted psychopaths to be heading efforts to govern planetary health?

Share

Pandemic Officials are “Disappointed in Themselves”, per the New York Times

An article in the New York Times is titled “Thousands Believe Covid Vaccines Harmed Them. Is Anyone Listening?” (no paywall)

https://web.archive.org/web/20240503093636/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/03/health/covid-vaccines-side-effects.html

The author, Apoorva Mandavilli, was correctly described by Vinay Prasad as the worst science reporter. She states her surprise about “thousands” who believe that Covid vaccines harmed them. While we know that number to be an understatement, it is interesting how the New York Times recognizes them after years of stonewalling.

But in a recent interview, Dr. Janet Woodcock, a longtime leader of the Food and Drug Administration, who retired in February, said she believed that some recipients had experienced uncommon but “serious” and “life-changing” reactions beyond those described by federal agencies.

“I feel bad for those people,” said Dr. Woodcock, who became the F.D.A.’s acting commissioner in January 2021 as the vaccines were rolling out. “I believe their suffering should be acknowledged, that they have real problems, and they should be taken seriously.”

FDA’s Dr. Woodcock is disappointed in herself:

I’m disappointed in myself,” she added. “I did a lot of things I feel very good about, but this is one of the few things I feel I just didn’t bring it home.”

The article discusses thousands of people gaslit by vaccine promoters and their doctors, who were intimidated not to report vaccine injuries:

Similar sentiments were echoed in interviews, conducted over more than a year, with 30 people who said they had been harmed by Covid shots. They described a variety of symptoms following vaccination, some neurological, some autoimmune, some cardiovascular.

All said they had been turned away by physicians, told their symptoms were psychosomatic, or labeled anti-vaccine by family and friends — despite the fact that they supported vaccines.

Even some key vaccine promoters report vaccine injuries, which they could not report anywhere:

Dr. Gregory Poland, 68, editor in chief of the journal Vaccine, said that a loud whooshing sound in his ears had accompanied every moment since his first shot, but that his entreaties to colleagues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to explore the phenomenon, tinnitus, had led nowhere.

He received polite responses to his many emails, but “I just don’t get any sense of movement,” he said.

The federal officials in charge of setting the policy still refuse to believe these reports:

Federal health officials say they do not believe that the Covid vaccines caused the illnesses described by patients like Mr. Barcavage, Dr. Zimmerman and Ms. France. The vaccines may cause transient reactions, such as swelling, fatigue and fever, according to the C.D.C., but the agency has documented only four serious but rare side effects.

The excuse that these officials give for ignoring vaccine harms is that they were fighting misinformation:

The rise of the anti-vaccine movement has made it difficult for scientists, in and out of government, to candidly address potential side effects, some experts said. Much of the narrative on the purported dangers of Covid vaccines is patently false, or at least exaggerated, cooked up by savvy anti-vaccine campaigns.

Questions about Covid vaccine safety are core to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign. Citing debunked theories about altered DNA, Florida’s surgeon general has called for a halt to Covid vaccination in the state.

“The sheer nature of misinformation, the scale of misinformation, is staggering, and anything will be twisted to make it seem like it’s not just a devastating side effect but proof of a massive cover-up,” said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, a vice dean at Johns Hopkins University.

So, get this please, the massive coverup was necessary to debunk ‘“misinformation” about the existence of a massive coverup. I hope it makes sense to you, my dear reader!

They finally note miscarriages caused by COVID vaccines:

Among the hundreds of millions of Americans who were immunized for Covid, some number would have had heart attacks or strokes anyway. Some women would have miscarried. How to distinguish those caused by the vaccine from those that are coincidences? The only way to resolve the question is intense research.

Another way to get the alarm signal of miscarriages is to ask, why does the Moderna vaccine cause 42% more miscarriages, compared to the Pfizer vaccine:

Are we observing a paradoxical awakening of honesty among federal officials and vaccine researchers? Have Apoorva Mandavilli and her employer finally decided to come clean about Covid vaccines?

Did these dishonest people suddenly straighten their ways, after being paid millions in research grants, CDC vaccine promotion fees paid to the media, etc? As much as I hope people can improve, I doubt that explanation.

The most likely explanation is that:

  • Most vaccine-injured people are Democrats

  • Facing a tough election in 2024, the Democratic party is afraid that the victims of vaccines that their party promoted and that disproportionally affected their core voters, might divert their votes and vote for an anti-vax Democrat, Robert Kennedy.

That might explain a puzzling turnaround in reporting vaccine injury in major newspapers such as the New York Times.

Do you have any other explanation? Please share your opinion in the comments.

I apologize to my readers for a lower post volume last month. There are several reasons, and I must explain them.

I am experiencing discomfort and cognitive dissonance about where I am finding myself.

The Covid pandemic is experiencing a lull. Vaccinations are no longer mandatory. The people who continue to harm themselves with Covid vaccines, for the most part, are not the people I deeply care about. Let them take as many shots as they want!

The lab origin of Sars-Cov-2 has become common knowledge, to the point that discussing it is almost redundant. The general public is aware that the people who made the virus and the vaccine are mostly the same people.

The World Economic Forum, always a source of amazing conspiracies it was promulgating, has wisened up and publishes mostly utterly boring, trivial articles on its public website, which I still peruse daily in hopes of finding something newsworthy, with less success than before.

So, naturally, I and many other commentators have fewer topics coming up that are worth discussing.

As a result, the anti-COVID-19 vaccine community, fighting for the declining attention of still-interested readers, has deteriorated. I am deeply embarrassed by some people (I will not name them) posting outright garbage just to stay relevant.

Even though I always try to make posts based on solidly confirmed public information or good research studies, I occasionally ask myself if I am one of them. What topics should I discuss on my blog? What would be good subjects about which I know enough, that are compatible with my values and would be interesting to my readers?

This is further exacerbated by some doubts about my foundational beliefs. I followed a variety of “conservative commentators” and Twitter accounts, many pseudonymous. I slowly recognized that their posts consistently upset me more than they enlightened me.

For example, while I have serious phobias regarding some sexual minorities, I realized that one thing I dislike even more than certain sexual behaviors is people posting about those minorities and their behaviors incessantly. Are the various gross and disgusting videos purposely selected to anger readers published for my benefit? Or are they simply monetizing emotions? Who pays them, and are their sponsors wishing their readers well? Who benefits from whipping up anger and division?

I have to ask, do people who engage in private sexual behaviors that make me deeply insecure, deserve equality and respect despite my discomfort? (yes they do)

I love money and my Substack revenue, but I do not love it so much that I start telling falsehoods to “gain market share.” I have a nice net worth and sources of income outside of Substack that make it unnecessary.

I want to continue posting, and I have many ideas. I have to work out my concerns, possibly by removing the paid option entirely so that the money does not unduly influence me. Worrying about revenue stands in the way of free thinking. I am very thankful to my paid readers, whom I love, and yet, I want to be sure that I am free of unavoidable, perverse financial incentives.

I hope you understand, and again, I am sorry about my two-week silence.

What do you think?

Share

Whites Twice as Likely to Die of COVID in California Than Non-Whites

San Jose Mercury News reports an unusual COVID pattern detected in California.

What is interesting is that despite comprising only 37% of Californians, White people account for 60% of all COVID deaths during the recent period.

The article compares Feb-Aug 2020 (highlighted in blue) vs. Sep 2023 through Feb 2024 (highlighted in red).

The results for 2020 confirm a modest advantage that we would expect from the “white privilege”: Whites comprised only 30% of deaths despite being 37% of the population.

Whites were able to mitigate the effects of the pandemic due to a more privileged position: belonging to the ”laptop class,” not working in as many customer-facing jobs, having better medical insurance, living in less dense housing, and so on. So, it is not a surprise that in 2020, White people were slightly less likely to die from Covid (30% of deaths despite being 37% of the population).

The real surprise is what is happening in 2024. While the overall number of COVID deaths thankfully declined, deaths among White people (59.48%) account for much more than their share of the population (37%)!

The Whites’ share of COVID deaths doubled from 30% in 2020 to 60% in 2024.

Why would that be?

Is it a coincidence that White people are also more vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19?

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-by-race-ethnicity/

The more vaccinated and boosted race in California is accounting for GREATER share of Covid deaths compared to their share of the population. Meanwhile, Black and Hispanic Californians, who are less vaccinated, account for fewer deaths than their share of the population would suggest.

A coincidence? If so, it continues a long line of other subpopulations where higher vaccination rates are associated with greater mortality:

Remember the economic advantages I mentioned that made White people have fewer deaths in 2020? Those have not changed in 2024: the laptop class, better medical care, less dense housing, etc, are still disproportionally available to White people.

And yet, despite those advantages, in 2024, Whites are more likely to die of Covid than their less privileged, and also less vaccinated, Hispanic and Black counterparts! The “white privilege” mysteriously stopped working after the whites were disproportionately vaccinated.

We were told that Covid vaccines save lives. If so, can we ask why they make the groups that received more of them more likely to suffer COVID deaths?

Any thoughts?

Share

Religious Faith Can Be “Turned Off” by Magnetic Transcranial Stimulation, Scientists Find

Many of us hold strong religious beliefs. Religions are foundational not only for individuals; they support entire societies, preventing self-destruction by keeping perverse and antisocial behaviors in check.

Religion is an ephemeral connection between humans and God, a private and direct bond that is, paradoxically, mediated by ancient traditions and group practices in houses of worship. People believed in supernatural beings for about as long as they were human:

We can ask a question: can the invisible link between the faithful and God be severed by a third party armed with the tools provided by the latest scientific advances?

Disturbingly, the answer may be yes. Scientists led by Dr. Colin Holbrook at UCLA undertook a multi-year endeavor to discover ways to stop “religious beliefs and right-wing prejudice.” They attempted to apply direct electromagnetic stimulation to the brain to alter human beliefs, specifically turning off belief in God.

https://www.jove.com/v/58204/continuous-theta-burst-stimulation-posterior-medial-frontal-cortex-to

Dr. Holbrook has led extensive research on this topic for many years. He described how electromagnetic stimulation of the frontal cortex (frontal part of the brain) “experimentally decreased avowed belief in God”:

After using a purposely made device, scientists describe a significant reduction in expressed belief in positive religious ideas:

Religious belief: We next tested the effects of TMS on endorsement of religious beliefs following a reminder of death. In a marginal trend, overall avowed religious belief (including both positive and negative beliefs) was reduced in the TMS condition relative to the sham condition 2.95 vs 4.26. As predicted, this shift was driven by a significant reduction in expressed belief in positive religious ideas. Participants in the TMS condition reported an average of 32.8% less conviction in positive religious beliefs.

That study was extremely unethical! When recruiting study subjects, Dr. Holbrook lied about the purpose of the study (using electromagnetic waves to reduce belief in God) and offered participants $25 while promising “ostensibly unrelated” activities:

Undergraduates were recruited for a study, ostensibly consisting of a series of unrelated measures, in exchange for $25.

Now, as we know, to religious people, abandoning belief in God is blasphemy and puts them at risk of going to Hell, shunning, and so on.

If I were a study participant whose deeply held faith was endangered by reckless scientists’ electromagnetic experiments, I would be quite outraged.

For years after that, Dr. Holbrook continued to work on “religious neuromodulation” and electromagnetic waves to reduce undesirable (to him and his sponsors) beliefs, such as religious faith and “prejudice.”

His 2018 work “Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses” further develops methods to downregulate group bias and religious belief.

This is the description of how electromagnetic waves were applied:

This is how the device looks (also note the possessed look of the researcher and the sad face of the subject, as if he has a premonition):

The outcome was, indeed, a dramatic reduction of religious beliefs:

Also consistent with predictions, participants who received cTBS reported an average of 32.8% less positive religious conviction (M = 3.05, SD = 1.92) relative to the sham participants

Guess who sponsored this work?

The researchers leading the work to “neuromodulate religious beliefs” are extreme political partisans. Consider Dr. Holbrook’s 2020 article, since deleted (wonder why?) but fortunately preserved by the Internet archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20200206003718/https://evolution-institute.org/conservative-extremists-are-afraid-of-threats-that-dont-exist/

Some pearls from this left-wing ideologue researcher:

If, as the large and growing body of evidence outlined above suggests, conservatives truly are more threat-reactive and more credulous of alleged threats, then a polarized media environment in which conservatives are inundated with disinformation about outgroup threats may set the stage for far-right extremism to flourish. Indeed, levels of conservatism track the intensity of belief in conspiracy theories.4

The author is not prone to subtleties. An idea to check if there is such a thing as left-wing conspiracy theories, threats that do exist, practices of the hysterical left-wing press credulously seeing “threats to democracy” behind every tree, and so on, do not enter his mind.

However, these ideologically obsessed experimenters work hard to develop technology to disable religious beliefs and undesirable right-wing ideologies. In doing so, they are sponsored by the United States government (Air Force).

Use of government funds to electromagnetically weaken the free exercise of religious beliefs of unsuspecting experimental subjects directly contradicts the prohibitions of the First Amendment:

Such a violation does not seem to concern anyone involved.

I am not a religious person. I am an agnostic. I tried to read holy books to see if I should adopt a particular religion. The books left a lasting impression on me and fostered my respect for religion and its role in history, but I am not ready to adopt a particular denomination. I realize that God’s existence or nonexistence is unprovable by the very definition of God.

And yet, I fully respect and support the right of every human to forge a connection with God. This link should be free of crazed science ideologues trying to meddle with it by sneaky use of electromagnetic devices and $25 bribes given under false pretenses.

The material I am discussing is nothing short of insane. If a person whom I just met told me that scientists use electromagnetic waves to turn off faith in God, I might have dismissed such an approach as crazy talk. It instantly evokes tinfoil hats (which would not work due to the low 50 Hz frequency of the signal) and other artifacts of mental illness.

And yet, here we are: ideologically obsessed researchers like Dr. Holbrook conduct scientific experimental studies that successfully turn off religious faith and other foundational beliefs in half the subjects. The US Government sponsors such studies. Nobody is asking questions.

Dr. Holbrook

Some will try to label this post a “conspiracy theory.” Far from it: it is based on existing scientific research and background information on the researchers conducting unethical experiments on religious people – experiments that likely pave the way for future large-scale human modification projects.

The only good news I could find is that half the people did not reduce their religious beliefs after their prefrontal cortex was irradiated with 50 Hz electromagnetic waves. Their faith remained strong.

So, I want to ask my religious readers:

  • do you think that Dr. Holbrook’s experiments could sever YOUR ties to God?

  • Will those unfortunate experimental subjects whose religious ideation was successfully minimized be subject to God’s wrath, or will they be forgiven?

  • (question to all) Are other electronic devices, such as Facebook’s virtual reality headsets, unknowingly affecting the posterior medial frontal cortex?

Share

Religious Faith Can Be “Turned Off” by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Scientists Find

Many of us hold strong religious beliefs. Religions are foundational not only for individuals; they support entire societies, preventing self-destruction by keeping perverse and antisocial behaviors in check.

Religion is an ephemeral connection between humans and God, a private and direct bond that is, paradoxically, mediated by ancient traditions and group practices in houses of worship. People believed in supernatural beings for about as long as they were human:

We can ask a question: can the invisible link between the faithful and God be severed by a third party armed with the tools provided by the latest scientific advances?

Disturbingly, the answer may be yes. Scientists led by Dr. Colin Holbrook at UCLA undertook a multi-year endeavor to discover ways to stop “religious beliefs and right-wing prejudice.” They attempted to apply direct electromagnetic stimulation to the brain to alter human beliefs, specifically turning off belief in God.

https://www.jove.com/v/58204/continuous-theta-burst-stimulation-posterior-medial-frontal-cortex-to

Dr. Holbrook has led extensive research on this topic for many years. He described how electromagnetic stimulation of the frontal cortex (frontal part of the brain) “experimentally decreased avowed belief in God”:

After using a purposely made device, scientists describe a significant reduction in expressed belief in positive religious ideas:

Religious belief: We next tested the effects of TMS on endorsement of religious beliefs following a reminder of death. In a marginal trend, overall avowed religious belief (including both positive and negative beliefs) was reduced in the TMS condition relative to the sham condition 2.95 vs 4.26. As predicted, this shift was driven by a significant reduction in expressed belief in positive religious ideas. Participants in the TMS condition reported an average of 32.8% less conviction in positive religious beliefs.

That study was extremely unethical! When recruiting study subjects, Dr. Holbrook lied about the purpose of the study (using electromagnetic waves to reduce belief in God) and offered participants $25 while promising “ostensibly unrelated” activities:

Undergraduates were recruited for a study, ostensibly consisting of a series of unrelated measures, in exchange for $25.

Now, as we know, to religious people, abandoning belief in God is blasphemy and puts them at risk of going to Hell, shunning, and so on.

If I were a study participant whose deeply held faith was endangered by reckless scientists’ electromagnetic experiments, I would be quite outraged.

For years after that, Dr. Holbrook continued to work on “religious neuromodulation” and electromagnetic waves to reduce undesirable (to him and his sponsors) beliefs, such as religious faith and “prejudice.”

His 2018 work “Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses” further develops methods to downregulate group bias and religious belief.

This is the description of how electromagnetic waves were applied:

This is how the device looks (also note the possessed look of the researcher and the sad face of the subject, as if he has a premonition):

The outcome was, indeed, a dramatic reduction of religious beliefs:

Also consistent with predictions, participants who received cTBS reported an average of 32.8% less positive religious conviction (M = 3.05, SD = 1.92) relative to the sham participants

Guess who sponsored this work?

The researchers leading the work to “neuromodulate religious beliefs” are extreme political partisans. Consider Dr. Holbrook’s 2020 article, since deleted (wonder why?) but fortunately preserved by the Internet archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20200206003718/https://evolution-institute.org/conservative-extremists-are-afraid-of-threats-that-dont-exist/

Some pearls from this left-wing ideologue researcher:

If, as the large and growing body of evidence outlined above suggests, conservatives truly are more threat-reactive and more credulous of alleged threats, then a polarized media environment in which conservatives are inundated with disinformation about outgroup threats may set the stage for far-right extremism to flourish. Indeed, levels of conservatism track the intensity of belief in conspiracy theories.4

The author is not prone to subtleties. An idea to check if there is such a thing as left-wing conspiracy theories, threats that do exist, practices of the hysterical left-wing press credulously seeing “threats to democracy” behind every tree, and so on, do not enter his mind.

However, these ideologically obsessed experimenters work hard to develop technology to disable religious beliefs and undesirable right-wing ideologies. In doing so, they are sponsored by the United States government (Air Force).

Use of government funds to electromagnetically weaken the free exercise of religious beliefs of unsuspecting experimental subjects directly contradicts the prohibitions of the First Amendment:

Such a violation does not seem to concern anyone involved.

I am not a religious person. I am an agnostic. I tried to read holy books to see if I should adopt a particular religion. The books left a lasting impression on me and fostered my respect for religion and its role in history, but I am not ready to adopt a particular denomination. I realize that God’s existence or nonexistence is unprovable by the very definition of God.

And yet, I fully respect and support the right of every human to forge a connection with God. This link should be free of crazed science ideologues trying to meddle with it by sneaky use of electromagnetic devices and $25 bribes given under false pretenses.

The material I am discussing is nothing short of insane. If a person whom I just met told me that scientists use electromagnetic waves to turn off faith in God, I might have dismissed such a suggestion as crazy talk. It instantly evokes tinfoil hats (which would not work due to the low 50 Hz frequency of the signal) and other artifacts of mental illness.

And yet, here we are: ideologically obsessed researchers like Dr. Holbrook conduct scientific experimental studies that successfully turn off religious faith and other foundational beliefs in half the subjects. The US Government sponsors such studies. Nobody is asking questions.

Dr. Holbrook

Some will try to label this post a “conspiracy theory.” Far from it: it is based on existing scientific research and background information on the researchers conducting unethical experiments on religious people – experiments that likely pave the way for future large-scale human modification projects.

The only good news I could find is that half the people did not reduce their religious beliefs after their prefrontal cortex was irradiated with 50 Hz electromagnetic waves. Their faith remained strong.

So, I want to ask my religious readers:

  • do you think that Dr. Holbrook’s experiments could sever YOUR ties to God?

  • Will those unfortunate experimental subjects whose religious ideation was successfully minimized be subject to God’s wrath, or will they be forgiven?

  • (question to all) Are other electronic devices, such as Facebook’s virtual reality headsets, unknowingly affecting the posterior medial frontal cortex?

Share