RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2120Goal: $3500

James Corbett

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Even planet Earth looks down on them.
Some dare call it
Conspiracy
Icon conspiracy.svg
What THEY don't want
you to know!
Sheeple wakers
If you have watched all four parts of this exploration on Bill Gates, then you are now one of the most informed people on the planet…
James Corbett caring for his readers[1]. Literally everything you need to know about what conspiracy theorists and their believers think about themselves…

James Corbett is an Anarcho-capitalist/Anarcho-voluntarist YouTuber, conspiracy theorist, and an indie ‘new journalist’ with a penchant for spreading Russian propaganda and fake news.[2] He performs amateur analysis of politics conspiracy theories and purported propaganda in The Corbett Report, YouTube, Global Research TV, RT news and other shows and websites such as the Boiling Frogs Post, NewsBud, 5G summit and other such occasional events, despite having no credentials in any of these fields, such as 9/11 and the JFK assassination being false flag attacks, government mind control, water fluoridation and chemtrails lowering IQ to make it harder to wake up sheeple, the “Clinton Body Count”, 5G sends toxic EMF, Bill Gates is a Nazi eugenicist, GMOs cause tumours, Climate change is a hoax, vaccines never worked and are also a hoax, moon landing is hoax,[3] eugenics is still alive, America is secretly a socialist country,[4] pizzagate is real,[5] Trump wants to establish a New World Order, among many, many others.

Anytime anything interesting happens anywhere on the planet, there's a very high chance James has found "proof" it is either a false flag operation by the New World Order or a "massive coverup operation" run by the New World Order to implement the New World Order and has already discussed about it on one of his episodes on YouTube or a podcast on his channel. No exceptions. You would think the New World Order would've eliminated this widely-known bearer of all their secrets, but no, for some reason they see fit to let him continue.

The Corbett Report[edit]

A refreshing detail about Corbett is that he is generally not merely JAQ-ing off but firmly asserting some wonderfully insane, totally reality-independent claims.
Encyclopedia of American Loons[6]

Founded in 2007 by Canadian expatriate James Corbett, a former English teacher who was fired when it became clear he had mental illnesses. “The Corbett Report”, an “independent, listener-supported alternative news source” (podcasts, interviews with other cranks, articles, YouTube videos) “about current events and suppressed history from an independent perspective” (batshit lunacy Corbett has made up) which operates on the principles of "open source intelligence" (surfing the internet in the comfort of his home and sharing what he found on NaturalNews). Corbett sure doesn’t get his news from "Rothschild Reuters". Supported by subscriptions of his webshite, he discusses statism, 9-11 conspiracy theories, chemtrails, climate change denial[7] and anti-dogma conspiracies that mainstream media would never want you to know, as well as making claims about Obama's Trump's New World Order.[8] The most clickbait-y articles of his are, unfortunately, locked behind a paywall, which probably gets him away with brainwashing.[note 1]

In addition to the history of oil, power, and economics, alleged false flag events like the Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theories,Wikipedia the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and Operation Gladio.Wikipedia Corbett claims to detail scandalous corruption, injustices, and expose conspiracies, psy-ops, black-ops, and the covert "deep-state secret", "ghost politics", globalist control, and domination agendas of the NWO advocating a "revolution of the mind" to counter-cultural brainwashing dogmas to ultimately foil all centralized governments' monopolistic use of violence, often by using unfunny mockery. Ultimately, however, all he achieves is talking to an echo chamber of other dangerous morons about the same nonsense. He is also a vigorous denier of climate change and doesn't like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Wikipedia,[9] Agenda 21 or Bill Gates.[10]

In conclusion, he is your typical kook, his web design better than most conspiracy lunatics, his writing less so, although skillful in being impervious to the truth and presenting allegations based on weak reasoning that purposely avoids reflection and alternative explanations, avoiding anything that could damage and challenge the narrative he creates.

Views[edit]

Corbett is your usual conspiracy theorist spreading the classics in conspiratorial bullshit

Bill Gates[edit]

We must spread the word about the dark nature of this population control agenda to as many people as we can before our ability to speak out against this agenda is taken away for good!
—James Corbett trying to get more PR for profit.[11]
Where do you even get such pictures of Bill Gates?

Corbett believes that Bill Gates is manipulating this COVID pandemic with lockdowns etc. so as to push untested vaccines for economic benefit, establish population control with microchip implants, and depopulation as he is an alleged eugenicist. The entire documentary is filled with poor analogies to Rockefeller conspiracy theories, comparing his actions to them. He implies that anyone who is working for a company or any foundation even remotely sponsored by Bill Gates cannot be trusted. That includes any medical professionals or other people who have studied their claims far more than Corbett.

Despite the numerous scientific studies conducted that conclude the virus is not human-made, the fact that many other fact checkers that are not sponsored by Bill Gates have debunked his claims, they are all wrong and somehow secretly paid by his foundation’s PR to engage in semantics in Corbett’s mind.

496,000 children paralysed in India by Gates’ polio vaccine[edit]

Corbett has also spread misinformation about Gates, such as the claim that his polio vaccine paralysed 496,000 children in India, citing a 2018 study[12] which states, "A total of 640,000 children developed NPAFP in the years 2000–2017, suggesting that there were an additional 491,000 paralyzed children above our expected numbers for children with NPAFP."

This does not directly support the claim, and if Corbett had cared to go down in the paper a little further, the study debunks his own claim by stating:[12]

The AFP surveillance data from India does not provide information about the etiology of NPAFP, and it is tempting to suggest that OPV-related [the vaccine] GBS [Guillain-Barré syndrome] may be the cause for the rise in NPAFP seen across the country.

However, GBS is unlikely to be the sole reason for the increase in NPAFP. GBS, caused by OPV, was usually reported soon after an OPV campaign [18,19,20]. Our finding that the NPAFP rate in each year correlated best with the cumulative doses administered over the previous 5 years, suggests that they may not all have been OPV-caused GBS (occurring in 5 days to 6 weeks).

Correlation does not imply causation.

The study was slammed by critics for having “questionable” inferences and “should be considered spurious unless proved otherwise by further study and analysis using more rigorous methods”.[13] Some of the “important variables” left ignored in the study that “might have affected the validity of the correlations” are:

1.The Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) surveillance data that the authors have used include reported cases of the 0–15 year age group and the rates are calculated forthwith. However, the use of Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) in Intensified Pulse Polio Immunization (IPPI) or Pulse Polio campaigns is targeted toward children in the age range of 0–5 years. Hence, correlating the two does not actually answer the hypothesis unless some analytical evidence is provided to show that the AFP rate in the 5–15 year age group is not influencing the results.

2. There is the possibility that the sensitivity of surveillance and, therefore, the number of AFP cases reported depended not only on the broadened case definition, to include even atypical or non-classical AFP cases, but also on the focus and efforts in terms of active case search (ACS) visits by the surveillance officers. It is a reality that due to the transitioning plans, a shifting of focus from polio, and the reduced presence of specialized surveillance system workforce from partner agencies such as WHO, especially in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the number of ACS visits to the reporting and informer units of the AFP reporting network have decreased considerably. This might also be correlated with the non-polio AFP rates in recent years.

There were 5 other points in the comment.

The authors responded to these criticisms, but noted a few key caveats, including "it is possible that new neurotropic enteroviruses colonizing the gut may induce paralysis." They also explicitly stated that:

We did not say that the NP AFP reported in our paper were cases of vaccine induced paralysis. Non-polio AFP, by its very definition, excludes polio vaccine induced paralysis.

Unfortunately, the majority of his viewers are unable to understand such terminology or have the ability to research any of the claims made by him.

This claim was also fact checked by Full Fact,[14] AFP,[15][16] The Logical Indian,[17] Lead Stories,[18] and PolitiFact.[19] While it is true that the observed incidence of NPAFP cases increased in the late 2000s and has stayed relatively high, but this doesn’t mean the polio vaccine was necessarily the cause. The funding of charities boosted polio vaccinations as well as better diagnosis and reach of healthcare.

The BBC reported that public healthcare along with diagnosis of polio have been substantially better.[20] While it is true that more than 496,000 children were paralysed, and that rate is higher than the past decade, but better reach of healthcare in India is accountable for the high numbers.

Other countries, including the UK, have also observed increased reports of unexplained AFP.[21]

Although the polio vaccine can itself result in cases of “vaccine-associated paralytic polio” according to the World Health Organisation,[22] but the rate is low. Approximately 1 in 2.7 million doses of the oral polio vaccine are associated with paralytic polio.[22] Using that 10 billion doses as a benchmark and WHO's figure of 1 paralyzed child for every 2.7 million doses equates to about 3,700 children paralyzed worldwide over a decade — still a tragic number, but far from Corbett’s estimates. Hence, in order of it be true, 1,339,200 million (1 trillion) children must be vaccinated in the limited 7 year time, which is more than the population of the entire earth. You don’t need a mathematician to tell you that is extremely low and disproves the claim.

The Global Polio Eradication Initiative says acute flaccid paralysis has causes far beyond polio, from Guillain-Barré syndrome to transverse myelitis to snake bite:[23]

In 2013, the World Health Organization received reports of over 100,000 AFP cases worldwide, of which only 404, or less than 0.5%, were confirmed as polio.

Since the eradication of polio in India, there have been some scares of tainted vaccines. But data from the WHO show that, between 2000 and 2017, there were 17 cases of vaccine-derived poliovirus.

40 children paralysed in Chad by Gates’ MenAfriVac[edit]

Another claim spread by Corbett involving paralysed children because children are great propaganda props[24] is that the Gates-funded MenAfriVac paralysed 40 children in Chad. Corbett cited a link to a newspaper article of a French newspaper, probably because it was the only half-credible source reporting on it. A peer-reviewed study from PMC stated:[25]

The campaign, which had started in Gouro on 11 December 2012, was abruptly stopped on December 15 when vaccinated children reportedly fell ill.

The incident prompted a Chadian journalist (subsequently identified as a regime opponent) to post a story on December 22 that described 40 children who had become severely ill (some with paralysis) in Gouro after being vaccinated with MenAfriVac. Within 24 hours the story was reposted by an online national news channel, and a few days later the information made headlines in Chadian print and online media. The story was subsequently picked up by European and US antivaccination activists, who accused MVP and partners of deliberately committing genocide among Africa's poorest and most fragile populations. The story was published on the website of an international news agency 41 days after the publication of the first blog, but was removed within a couple of hours thanks to the swift intervention of MVP communicators.

Chadian authorities invited an international team of clinicians and epidemiologists to investigate the problem. An investigation proceeded; all cases were examined by physicians, who did not find cases of paralysis, and all of the affected individuals recovered without incident. These findings were published in an official report. The episode was determined to be "mass psychogenic illness" — an unusual phenomenon that has been well described, the affected tending to be clusters of young girls with unusual clinical findings that gradually improve

To repeat: According to the 2015 evaluation, the incident was a case of "mass psychogenic illness". Psychogenic means that the causes were mental or emotional rather than physical. The evaluation found that "all cases were examined by physicians, who did not find cases of paralysis, and all of the affected individuals recovered without incident". The symptoms were triggered in part by “the occurrence of crises among other patients”, and even an unvaccinated child complained of similar illness. Chad’s Ministry of Public Health said the “mass psychogenic phenomenon” was also known as “collective hysteria” or “collective obsessive behaviour”.

The Chad government on the issue said “all the different medical examinations performed on the patients were normal”.[26][27] Not only did physicians find no cases of paralysis, but all the children recovered. A Lancet study on meningitis vaccinations in Chad also referred to the Gouro incident: “Coverage in the last phase of the vaccination campaign fell after reports of adverse events after vaccination, concerns that were subsequently shown to be unfounded.” [28]. This was also debunked by Africa Check,[29] but they are paid by Bill Gates so obviously everything they have ever said is false.

Gates funded PATH vaccine lead to death of 7 girls[edit]

See the main articles on this topic at Wikipedia: PATH (global health organization) § PATH's work § Epidemic diseases § HIVWikipedia and PATH (global health organization) § ControversiesWikipedia

Corbett cited a government inquiry (inquiry, not trial, as many suggest)[30] as proof that Gates controlled PATH to establish vaccines for monetary gain and violated human rights and used Indians as guinea pigs.

Gates and his foundation merely provided funding for PATH, and could not control it. Furthermore, Gates has earned money from a few investments in vaccines, but there was no monetary gain of the foundation in funding this endeavour.[citation needed]

The violation of the human rights was:

  • The warden/teachers/headmasters were not given written permission by the parents/ guardians to sign on behalf of their girls.
  • There were some problems with identification, and incomplete forms were obtained.
  • In some forms, the name is of the father but signature is probably the mother's.

The claim is based on the fact that in 2009, all the eligible girls in 10-14 years age-group in three blocks in the districts of Khammam, Andhra Pradesh and Vadodara, Gujarat were vaccinated with the HPV.

This was part of a global project, titled “HPV Vaccine: Evidence for Impact” which was carried out in India, Peru, Uganda and Vietnam. An American NGO, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), carried out the project in collaboration with state governments and the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).

However, according to the government inquiry, all the three doses in the 13,791 girls in Andhra Pradesh (where absolutely nothing went wrong) were completed, but in Gujarat only 9637 out of 10259 girls had received the third injection of the vaccine when the study was suspended in March 2010, because of the sudden reports of the deaths of 7 of the girls who had received the HPV vaccine under the PATH project.

In order to inquire into these deaths, a committee was constituted by the Government of India. According to the committee’s findings, there were five deaths from Andhra and two from Gujarat.

Out of the five deaths reported from Andhra Pradesh, two died due to consumption of organophosphorus and one drowned. The committee also said in its report that the fourth girl died of an unrelated disease, unlinked to HPV, while the fifth “possibly died of severe malaria after eight days of treatment in health facilities.”

With respect to Gujarat, one girl died of snake bite and the other of severe malaria. Therefore, the committee observed that there was no reason to suggest that the deaths were caused by the vaccine, which Corbett claimed.

This brings us back to the claim of the documentary that India is suing Gates over this vaccination. This is both false and misleading because the organisation that ran the project is PATH, and the study in question was merely funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The project itself was not run by Gates in any way. Moreover, there are no reports of the Government of India suing PATH over this project, much less Gates.

The foundation still works in India.[31]

The Indian government cut all ties with Bill Gates[edit]

Corbett stated: In 2017, the government responded by cutting all financial ties between the advisory group and the Gates Foundation [due to the reasons described above].

While it is true that the government has cut ties with many of Bill’s funded endeavours, they are not because of the reasons as described.

The cut-offs are actually part of the plan, so as to help India get on its feet on its own. By 2021, India is supposed to cut off all deals with Gates and his foundation.[32]

Corbett states that India's concerns are growing about Bill Gates for the above (now debunked) reasons. This is also false, the Gate's funded initiatives are still in rapid action in India.[31] Bill Gates also met with the current PM of India, Narendra Modi.[33]

Bill Gates stole code MS-DOS from QDOS[edit]

To support this, Corbett cites, nothing. It is false,[34][35] and an obvious ad hominem.

DRI's lawyer at the time, Gerry Davis, said that the company's forensic researchers found that 86-DOS infringed on DRI's intellectual property. But DRI never pursued legal action against Microsoft or IBM. Kildall died in 1994, but the rumor that Microsoft copied his creation persisted.

Bill Gates at Microsoft sold an operating system to IBM, and reaped then-unimaginable rewards, shedding a cloud of speculation hung over that part of the story, whether the code was stolen from CP/M (QDOS).

Kildall maintained that QDOS, and subsequently MS-DOS, had been directly copied from CP/M and thus infringed on his copyright. DRI attorney Davis claimed forensic experts had proven that MS-DOS had been copied from CP/M, but that in 1981 there was no way to go to court over copyright infringement and get a judgment. The latter, at least, was found to be not true. Just one year earlier, Congress had passed the Computer Software Copyright Act of 1980, which made copyright protection of software explicit, so why DRI didn’t take the battle to court at the time further suggests that the accusation was baseless.

Microsoft has stated that its hands were clean. Kildall maintained that QDOS, and subsequently MS-DOS, had been directly copied from CP/M and thus infringed on his copyright.

Recently, Bob ZeidmanWikipedia examined the code in question using a set of tools he developed for detecting copyright violations in software, and last month he published his findings in the pages of IEEE Spectrum.[36] He didn't find any evidence that MS-DOS copied code from CP/M (QDOS).[37]

How Zeidman did it and the real history behind it is extensively documented on the pages of IEEE Spectrum and the Journal of Software Engineering and Applications.

…comparing binary with source code, I found 80 matching identifiers. But with a couple of exceptions, these identifiers were all common words from operating systems and programming or just from the English language. I also found 11 matching strings, but again, these strings were all common words or phrases. And once I filtered the matching elements to eliminate common identifiers found more than 100 times on the Internet, all the matches evaporated…

…Next I compared the MS-DOS 1.11 binary code with CP/M binary code. There was only one matching identifier: “com.” This is a common abbreviation for a communication port like a serial port or printer port, and certainly not a sign of copying. There were also 65 matching strings, but they were all common words or phrases used in many operating systems…

…And that is that. Every lead brought me not to Bill Gates but to a dead end. QDOS was absolutely not copied from CP/M, and MS-DOS showed no signs of copying either. Kildall’s accusations about Bill Gates were totally groundless…

Kildall indeed deserves credit for creating the first personal computer operating system, but his operating system didn’t come out of nowhere; it was essentially a simpler version of many other operating systems in use at the time, including Unix, developed in 1969, and VAX/VMS, introduced in 1978. And while Kildall is sometimes remembered as a pauper for “being cheated by Bill Gates,” DRI was actually a successful company for many years, and Kildall sold it to Novell in 1991 for $120 million. Kildall was undeniably very creative and innovative, but he was also a poor businessman who was nonetheless very successful. If he was not as successful as Bill Gates, it wasn’t because Microsoft stole the CP/M source code.
—Bob Zeidman

There is also a $100,000 Prize if you are able to prove that MS-DOS was copied from QDOS.[38]

Bill Gates went on eugenicist Jeffery Epstein’s island[edit]

The report cites a Daily Mail article to prove that Gates flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s island. Given the ever low credibility and falling level of truth in the Daily Mail, it just shows the level of amateurish nature of Corbett's journalistic capabilities.

This claim was fact checked by Reuters,[39] Factcheck.org,[40] Check your Fact,[41] and NewsBrig.[42]

Copies of these flight logs can be seen online, uploaded by Gawker.com[43] and by Factcheck.org.[44] there was no mention of Gates in the first collection of flight logs, and in only one instance in the second. The log shows ‘Bill Gates’ noted as a passenger on March, 2013, from Teterboro airport in New Jersey to Palm Beach International airport, Florida, not to Little Saint James (the island).

Miscellaneous[edit]

The documentary cherry picks certain viewpoints of Bill Gates that were supposedly before he started charitable work, including a lawsuit and footage of him getting hit with a pie on his face. Turns out, all of them happened after 1994, when Bill Gates formed the “William H Gates Foundation” when he donated some of his stock, which would be later converted to the “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation”.

The ‘report’ goes on to say how he funds every news organisation in the world by linking to some of Bill Gates’ grants to non profit organisations such as Our World in DataWikipedia and NPRWikipedia, hence everything you know about him is wrong and the video you are seeing is right. But how a charitable grant given to a nonprofit helps Bill Gates literally control the entirety of the organisation is left unexplained.

After this, the viewer is forced to listen to the list of everything Bill Gates has done in the field of vaccines, but with ominous music in the background. And how Tedros is related to Gates, so you shouldn’t trust him either.

The report keeps cherry-picking everything that has gone wrong with vaccine trials that were in any way related to Bill Gates. Most repeated are:-

  • Gates’ funded PATH violated human rights while conducting trials (with very huge emphasis on “violation of human rights” — The actual violation in question is left unexplained. The violation of ethics was that the trial documents were filled “very carelessly” and mismatched guardian signatures. The justification was that the parents were “unreachable”. Furthermore, The ICMR, India’s highest medical research authority, reviewed and approved the protocol for this project, including its design and methodology. Bill Gates had nor has any control over PATH, and merely provided funding for it. The project was not directed by Bill Gates in any way. The report also left the actual successful trials of PATH in India which received.[45][46]
  • 490,000 people developed paralyses from Bill Gates’ oral polio vaccine — This was debunked above. Bill Gates also had no role in organising or dictating how the trial should take place, he merely gave grants to GPEI organisations.
  • MenAfriVac lead to 40-500 children being paralysed — This one was also debunked above.

‘Documentaries’[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Schlockumentary

Corbett's videos on Bill Gates are like a tangential thought process in narrative form, but each tangent is not a new fact to consider: The tangents are suggestions of explaining Gates' actions or words, tangents are on second-guessing motives, he reinforces those ideas with stories and opinions related to the gruesome topics of 'Bill's master plan'. He builds on the previous guessing by using crafty language to omit reflection, and incomplete unchallenged reasoning. The process results in painting those explanations into a smear with a huge question mark afterwards, as if he was just asking questions and not making allegations. There is no proof that Gates is planning a mass murder or genocide in line with an evil worldview, and no evidence he plans to microchip the public without consent and lord over them like they were slave. These ideas are implied by the detailed and captivating picture that Corbett paints.

GMOs[edit]

See the main article on this topic: GMO

Corbett believes GMOs cause tumours, do not feed millions of people, and that all studies not saying so are sponsored despite the plethora of independent scientific documentation. He also insists that there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.

As usual, he is reckless in spreading misinformation about it by making claims such as…

GMOs do not increase crop yield[edit]

The report[47] cited a 2009 article from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCSUSA)[48] (who are, quite ironically, famous for debunking climate denialism[49] which Corbett has indulged in, hence the name).

It is worth noting that it is not rare for UCSUSA to publish unverified studies on GMOs, hence gaining criticism from many scientists such as Harvard microbiologist Kevin Bonham.[50] By applying Corbett's own methodology, the study is wrong because UCSUSA has invested a lot in organic farming and is paid by them.

The non-peer reviewed study was debunked by the Genetic Literacy Project (GLP),[51][52] which has been rated as a pro-science resource with high factual reporting by Media Bias/Fact Check. It is also worth noting that the GLP has been accused many times of accepting funding from corporations that are involved in the agriculture genetics business due to their acceptance of the consensus of science as it relates to GMOs. On the GLP website they offer a full disclosure of their funding disproving the fact that they receive funding from pro-GMO companies such as Monsanto.

The GLP claims that there are over 6000 studies that disprove this claim. A selection of them can be found on their article about it.[51]

2017 research led by Jayson Lusk, professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at Oklahoma State University, suggests that the UCS analysis showing no difference in yields between GE and non-GE corn was wrong because it did not control for weather. “Once temperature and precipitation controls are added, GE adoption has significant effects on corn yields,” the study found.[53][54]

A completely independent study conducted in Italy published in the reputable and peer reviewed journal Nature disproves this claim.[55]

For even more refutations to this massively flawed study, see the main article on this topic: Union of Concerned Scientists § Promotion of Agroecology

It is impossible for independent studies on GMOs to take place without consent[edit]

See the more in depth article on this topic at Wikipedia: Genetically modified food controversies § Restrictive end-user agreements.Wikipedia

While the claim[47] has a little bit of truth in it, it is misleading.

Before 2009, some scientists really did have some trouble doing their work, due to patent restrictions. But the same scientists who protested the limitations now say the problem is largely fixed.[56]

A good portion of the research on GM foods is funded by the companies developing these products. But there’s also a lot of independent research, as well. For instance, the Genetic Engineering Risk Atlas (GENERA) has documented more than 2000 scientific studies looking into the safety of GM foods. Of those, independently funded studies make up about one-third of the list.[57]

Most companies freely allow research of their GMOs with no questions asked.

GMOs do not reduce chemical usage[edit]

See the more in depth articles on this topic at Wikipedia: Genetically modified food controversies § Secondary pestsWikipedia and Genetically modified food controversies § Resistant insect pestsWikipedia

The report[47] cited an article from Reuters[58](who have also, ironically, debunked many of Corbett’s Bill Gates claims).

Yes, there are problems like herbicide resistant "superweeds", but this is not a problem unique to GMOs — any strategy to stop pests, be they insects or weeds in agriculture, or infectious microbes in humans will lead to resistance. The mechanism is different but the end result is the same.

Critics of crop biotechnology often point to the growth of “superweeds” in corn and soybean fields over the past 20 years as illustrative of the ecological problems posed by crops genetically modified to be resistant to herbicides like glyphosate (trade name Roundup). But superweeds — so named because of their ability to withstand specific herbicides—predate the introduction of GMOs in the 1990s and glyphosate in the 1970s.

As weed scientist Andrew Kniss puts it:[59]

If GM crops have contributed significantly to the development of herbicide resistant weeds, we would expect the number of unique instances of these superweeds to increase following adoption of GM crops. … In the eleven-year period before GM crops were widely grown, approximately 13 new cases of herbicide resistance were documented annually. After GM crop adoption began in earnest, the number of new herbicide resistant weeds DECREASED to 11.4 cases per year.

Scientists say weeds will eventually develop resistance to any chemical, including those used by organic farmers, through repeated exposure. Glyphosate resistance has gotten so much attention in recent years largely because of the popularity of the herbicide, which has helped farmers realize substantial yield improvements and lowered farming costs. But there is a consensus among weed scientists that GMOs do not uniquely cause the development of hardier weeds; other non GMO crops have more serious weed problems; and various technologies and management strategies can adequately manage the challenge.[60]

GMOs cause tumours[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Seralini § "GMO causes cancer" study
See the more in depth article on this topic at Wikipedia: Séralini affair.Wikipedia

Corbett cites a now redacted study[61] that fed rats GMOs and they developed tumours.

For refutations to this massively flawed study, see the main article on this topic: Seralini#"GMO_causes_cancer"_study

There is no scientific consensus for the safety of GMOs![edit]

See the main article on this topic: Genetically modified food § Scientific consensus
See the more in depth article on this topic at Wikipedia: Genetically modified food controversies § Health.Wikipedia

One of the primary arguments of James Corbett is that there is no scientific consensus on the topic of GMOs, which is blatantly false.[62][63][64] Given below is an excerpt from a Wikipedia article that contains citations of the scientific consensus regarding GMOs.

New world order and deep state[edit]

The bitter truth is that in a surprising number of cases, NGOs are the Deep State’s Trojan Horses.
—James Corbett justifies his stance on GMO, vaccines, climate change etc. by labelling all charitable work certain organisations have done which are against him as covert deep state agents and government shills.

He believes that Trump wants to establish some New World Order, and he is one of the many leaders in history since World War I who is trying to establish it. He has devoted an entire series of shows named #FLNOW (Film, Literature and New World Order) how nearly every movie in existence is specially designed to spread propaganda and misinformation brainwashing the masses. From the films Contagion,[85] to the Rambo trilogy,[86] to Daredevil from Netflix,[87] to even poetry and stories from writers such as F. R. Scott, Charles Dickens, the Catcher in the Rye and even more. Basically, don’t believe or don’t be inspired by any form of media imaginable or you will become a sheep in the NWO, unless Corbett talks about it of course, like the books on NWO he told you to read.[88]

He is even writing an entire book on the NWO, Reportage: Essays on the New World Order.[89]

Now, from a conventional, historiographical point of view, the term ‘New World Order’ tends to be seen as just... not a World Government or anything like that. So my question is: How do you understand the term ‘New World Order’, in the way that you use it in your book, Reportage: Essays on the New World Order.? How do you mean it as you use it there?

JaC: My forthcoming book, I should stress to the audience. You have broadly outlined the two main definitions for this term. I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive; that we have to pick one... so I think it’s just part of that same old idea that has gripped would-be rulers of all sorts.

Fact-checking sites[edit]

They use ‘psychological techniques’ like semantics to brainwash sheeple and just because the foundation gave a grant to a fact-checking website sometime 4 to 5 years ago means that all the fact checking websites currently in existence are sponsored by Bill Gates and hence totally wrong (unless they haven’t debunked one of Corbett’s outlandish claims of course).

Even though there are many fact-checking organisations that have not been funded by Gates' foundation, that doesn’t stop Corbett from openly ranting about anything that has tried to debunk one of his claims, and spreading more moronic bullshit in the process.

It is notable that he doesn’t actually debunk any of the fact checkers, just poorly performed circumstantial ad hominems.

9/11[edit]

See the main articles on this topic: 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden

One of the first conspiracy theories on his independent ‘news’ site was 9/11. He believes that its investigation was intentionally stopped for economic gain. Did you know that the shooting of Osama bin Laden was a hoax?[90] According to Corbett, there is a consensus that bin Laden died years ago. He was not involved in 9/11 either, and the US government is in an intimate conspiracy with the bin Laden family (Obama himself ensured that many of the bin Laden family members were transported safely out of the US after 9/11 where they had been in various shady meetings with American government figures).

While the 9/11 rhetoric is often presented by James Corbett, it is noteworthy to detail how he accomplishes this. His work relies on purposefully omiting other sides of an argument. Meaning that one would be unable to gain new knowledge to win an argument against another even after watching any of his documentaries in its entirety.

It must have been impossible for the hijackers to hit the 9/11 targets![edit]

This was briefly debunked by Mike West and TLO of Metabunk.org[91] using simulation software and elementary physics by a man completely inexperienced in flying aircraft. The major flaws in his theory are:[92]

  • The pilots (Hanjour, Pentagon) had significant training and a commercial jet pilot's license.[93]
  • The targets were all wide, and wider than even the runway. KPHX's three runways are all 150' wide, and the towers were over 200' wide each, the Pentagon larger still.
  • The targets were obviously stationary. In the various naval ship/air battles in WWII, and a moving target (even at 30 kt) is quite hard to hit, even when it's a carrier.
  • They had no airborne or ground flak defense to avoid. This cuts even a poor pilot a lot of slack in acquiring and hitting a target, especially when it's with the plane you're flying.
  • The biggest challenge likely would have been any crosswinds to compensate for.
  • Once the plane is in the air, and in stable flight, and you're not trying any radical maneuver, not worried about air traffic control, and your target is as big as each was, it's not so difficult.

9/11 Commission member said Commission was setup to fail[edit]

Another quote-mining technique used by Corbett, taking an expert out of context. This was debunked at the Skeptic Project.[94]

Climate Change[edit]

See the main articles on this topic: Climate change and Global warming denialism

Corbett believes the idea that the UN is intentionally deceiving, as it is funded by corrupt scientists with limited resources, that the UN wants to cause disorder in society by the creating the myth of climate change which has now been solidified by numerous studies, and that all of the studies are false and paid by the UN. Corbett fails to realise that the effect of greenhouse gases on global warming was discovered long before oil industries and the supposedly corrupt governments of the modern world. Corbett also asserts that the UN is literally pumping hot air to create the illusion of climate change.[95] Given how much effort is needed to create this much deception to the point where the entirety of the world have a noticeable average temperature increase, it's probably easier to just pin the blame on human civilisation, but that wouldn’t make him money from the conspiracy junkies who follow him. Many of Corbett’s own subscribers comment in his articles about the sheer illiteracy of such conclusions drawn from nothing.[note 2][96][97]

5G[edit]

See the main article on this topic: 5G
The truth is that the development of 5G networks and the various networked products that they will give rise to in the global smart city infrastructure, represent the greatest threat to freedom in the history of humanity!
—James Corbett on how 5G will enable the New World Order, and quite possibly enable mind control

Corbett also believes that the EMF radiation from 5G is harming our bodies, and is some sort of “weapon” to implement the New World Order. Even some of his own subscribers comment how stupid this is.[note 2][98]

James Corbett is also an “expert” on 5G at the 5G Summit,[99][100] which offers “Adavnced Training Material” (in all caps, written in lowercase for legibility) on how 5G causes “weakened immunity, cancer, sterility, DNA damage and other harm… especially to our children”! The summit has other experts cranks such as anti-vaxxer Robert Kennedy, Jr.; alternative medicine promoter anti-vaxxer and anti-GMO Sayer Ji, and many more.

Vaccines[edit]

Apparently, James believes that “Dr. confesses Cancer & other Viruses is found in Vaccines”,[101][102] which is false for obvious reasons, but nonetheless was debunked by Snopes.[103]

He also cites NaturalNews[101] to “expose” the Gardasil vaccine “hoax”,[104] and “the flu shot virus SCAM”[105] which is enough to bring his credibility down to zero. The video itself implies that everyone since Pasteur has been wrong about vaccines and the entire scientific community never realized this, or did and kept silent in a 130-year-long conspiracy.

Anthrax attacks[edit]

According to James Corbett, the 2001 anthrax was caused by an accidentally released Bioweapon that was being manufactured by the US government.

Criticism[edit]

Controversy with Allan Weisbecker[edit]

To James Corbett fans who might be thinking nasty thoughts about me: Critical thinking means having the desire and ability to follow the evidence wherever it leads, and to have the self-reflection necessary so that when the occasion arises you are able to slap yourself on the forehead and exclaim, ‘How could I have been so stupid?’
—Alan C. Weisbecker[106].

On June 11, 2015, Alan Weisbecker, author and journalist, wrote an open letter to James Corbett, debunking his videos on 9/11 and "How to spot disinformation", accusing him of using NLP, and highlighting the inconsistency and contradictory nature of his report.

Many of Corbett's followers contacted him for his response to the criticism. He dismissed the points in Weisbecker’s letter by claiming he had invited him to an interview but he declined it to write an essay about him. Alan counters this by another open letter, “Corbett Flat Out Busted”[107] which showcases other emails and essays he sent to Corbett that got him kicked out of the interview.

Corbett hasn't answered the points in either of the open letters, why the essay was rejected, and why Weisbecker wasn’t invited to an interview (because of the essays, probably).

Dana Durnford[edit]

Ryan Dawson & James Corbett owner of nuke propaganda site Fukushimaupdate have lied so many times it's disturbing how remorseless they are and how much contempt they have for life…
—Dana Durnford[108]

Dana Durnford, conspiracy theorist and a leader in the anti-nuclear movement who has claimed the Fukushima nuclear accident is still leaking and killing wildlife, accused Corbett and conspiracy theorist Ryan Dawson of spreading pro-nuclear propaganda, and that Corbett is a Canadian officer spreading misinformation.[109][110]

Durnford also posted a video refuting some of many statements that Corbett had made on 9/11.[111] As of now, Corbett hasn’t answered any of the points in the video.

You keep putting the same 9/11 narrative on your show repeatedly, but Dr Judy Wood has 3 degrees 35 years experience and 500 pages of sourced information that you never touched and she has been at it for years. Do you think your too indoctrinated and brainwashed to consider another narrative and trapped in a tiny compartmentalized box that makes it easy to put college kids who steal other peoples work on a pedestal and ignore real researchers who produce 500 pages of original material.
—Dana Durnford[111]

Media Bias/Fact Check[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Media Bias/Fact Check

The Corbett Report is a Conspiracy-Pseudoscience source that publishes unverifiable information with tinfoil hat conspiracy level, moderate pseudoscience level and low factual reporting.[112]

PropOrNot[edit]

The Corbett Report made it into the PropOrNot list.[113] Considering Corbett's frequent appearances in Russian propaganda sites (RT,[114] Fort-Russ,[115] Sputnik[116]) the process of getting into the list was an automatic one.

Encyclopedia of American Loons[edit]

Given the uncertainty of his whereabouts, and the untimely death of Stefan Frederick Cook, one of Orly Taitz’s less than ideally hinged plaintiffs in one of her many birther lawsuits (Joe Kovacs and Chelsea Schilling thought Cook had a point, but then again Kovacs and Schilling write for the WNDSean Hannity thought he had a point as well), this entry should have gone to the legendary conspiracy theorist William Cooper if he hadn’t passed away (as well) 10 years ago. I am confident that there exists conspiracy theories to the effect that he is still alive. Surely he was one of the models for James Corbett’s “The Corbett Report”
Encyclopedia of American Loons[117]

Metabunk[edit]

Mick West, the founder of the Metabunk forum, debunked some of Corbett’s claims on the New World Order, and how his content was age-restricted because Google doesn’t want you to see it![118]

Why am I debunking this trivial-sounding claim? Corbett is a promoter of classical conspiracy theories, and now he's trying to start one of his own. Casting doubt on Google's content policing is a way of promoting his own content as legitimate. His claim here is part of laying a general foundation of distrust where he can play the hero against the villains of Google and Youtube. So allowing claims like this to go unchecked is allowing a subtle boost in credibility for all his other videos. That's a boost they do not deserve, and one built upon false pretences.
—Mick West

Metabunk has also targeted many of Corbett's claims about paralysed children by Bill Gates vaccines, 9/11, climate change and GMOs.

Mother Jones[edit]

Mother Jones describes Corbett as a political extremist and conspiracy theorist.[119] which is well-justified for the channel in question is basically extremist anarchist propaganda.

It was created by a channel called the Corbett Report, which also boasts documentaries touting conspiracy theories, including that 9/11 was staged by the US government and that global warming is a hoax. Watching the video quickly leads users down a rabbit hole of “recommended videos” that detail Illuminati conspiracy theories and blame Israel for 9/11.
Mother Jones reporter Tonya Riley

Chris Hayes[edit]

Chris Hayes, news anchor and author, refers to Corbett's video on the Federal Reserve and how it is supposedly enslaving us as "conspiratorial quackery"[120] and for good reason.

Buzzfeed[edit]

James Corbett appeared in a BuzzFeed article titled: “5 People Still Pushing 9/11 Conspiracy Theories — They're still going strong, and they want you to know it.”[121] referring to him as “This Blogger”.

Regular series and specials[edit]

  • #NewWorldNextWeek with Media Monarchy
  • Corbett Report Extras
  • #PropagandaWatch
  • 9/11 Whistleblowers
  • #FLNWO (Film, Literature and New World Order)
  • Who is Bill Gates?
  • Well Read Anarchists
  • Questions for Corbett
  • Corbett Report Radio

Special guests and interviews[edit]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. The most clickbaity titles are locked, and in order to see them, you need a membership to the site. For example: How to become a bajillionare the Clinton way! or 4 signs the world isn’t ending (by climate change) and all of these articles including these ones Unfortunately, for those who haven’t drunk the Kool-Aid, it shows: This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.
  2. 2.0 2.1 In order to comment on his articles, you need to buy a Corbett Report mebership subscription, which also gets you access articles hidden behind paywalls and more hidden content. Really weird site.

References[edit]

  1. "Jump to the last paragraphs for the full quote.". 
  2. . PropOrNot.com. 27 November 2016. http://www.propornot.com/p/home.html. Retrieved 28 November 2016. 
  3. The Kubrick Question (Video) Corbett Report (07/02/2012). Jump to “How Stanley Kubrick faked the Apollo Moon Landings: Alchemical Kubrick II”
  4. Earth to Trump: America Is ALREADY A Socialist Country (02/10/2019)
  5. Reddit Bans #Pizzagate Investigation. The Corbett Report Continues It. Corbett Report
  6. "James Corbett". 
  7. Climate Change is Unfalsifiable Woo-Woo Pseudoscience by CorbettReport (December 8, 2015) Youtube.
  8. https://www.corbettreport.com/how-to-herd-your-tax-cattle-transcript/
  9. 'The Corbett Report', October 17, 2018
  10. "Who is Bill Gates?". 
  11. He is a eugenicist. Don’t ask why, because the media is obviously wrong
  12. 12.0 12.1 Correlation between Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis Rates with Pulse Polio Frequency in India by Rachana Dhiman et al. (2018) International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(8):1755. doi:10.3390/ijerph15081755. The study claimed to be proof of paralysed children in India by Bill Gates' polio vaccine.
  13. Comment on Dhiman, R. et al. Correlation of Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis Rate with Pulse Polio Frequency in India. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1755 Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;16(1):13. Published 2018 Dec 21. doi:10.3390/ijerph16010013 PubMed
  14. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation wasn’t kicked out of India (30th Jun 2020) Full Fact.
  15. Did Bill Gates-backed Polio Vaccine Paralyse Children In India? (22 May 2020 7:53 AM) AFP via BOOM.
  16. Gates Foundation targeted with misleading claims about India polio vaccine campaign (22 July 2020 21:06) AFP
  17. Fact Check: Were 496,000 Children In India Paralyzed Between 2000 & 2017 From "Bill Gates Polio Vaccine"? by Aditi Chattopadhyay (24 May 2020 / Updated: 26 May 2020 7:22 PM) The Logical Indian.
  18. Fact Check: 496,000 Children In India Were NOT Paralyzed From 'Bill Gates Polio Vaccine' From 2000-2017 by Wayne Drash (Apr 23, 2020) Lead Stories.
  19. Anti-vaxxers spread conspiracy about Bill Gates and India’s polio vaccination by Daniel Funke (April 23, 2020) PolitiFact.
  20. "BBC article on Bill Gates’ polio vaccine". 
  21. Information on the reporting, investigation and management of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) and acute flaccid myelitis (AFM).
  22. 22.0 22.1 Vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) and vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV) (February 2015) World Health Organization.
  23. The Global Polio Eradication Initiative
  24. The irony! Children are great propaganda props!. In this article he claims that Greta Thunberg, advocate for climate change, is just another government shill, and whenever someone says “Think of the children!” its is propaganda even if its true and I say it.
  25. "Communication Challenges During the Development and Introduction of a New Meningococcal Vaccine in Africa". 
  26. "Experts on the event". 
  27. Chad says no link between sick kids and meningitis shot (22 Jan, 2013) AFP via MedicalXpress
  28. "Effect of a serogroup A meningococcal conjugate vaccine (PsA–TT) on serogroup A meningococcal meningitis and carriage in Chad: a community study". 
  29. No, 50 children not paralysed by ‘Gates-backed’ meningitis vaccine (01:42 | 26th May 2020) AfricaCheck
  30. Alleged Irregularities in the Conduct of Studies using Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Vaccine by Path in India
  31. 31.0 31.1 Indian Office of the Foundation
  32. By 2021, India is to fund itself, according to the official website
  33. PM's interaction with Bill Gates
  34. Why it is said that Bill gates stole MS-DOS from Gary Kildall and GUI from Xerox PARC?, Quora
  35. Where would Bill Gates be if his mom was not on the board of directors at IBM and Gates was not able to purchase a ripped-off version of Gary Kindall's operating system?, Quora
  36. Did Bill Gates steal the heart of MSDOS?
  37. Code Correlation Comparison of the DOS and CP/M Operating Systems Zeidman, Bob. (2014). Journal of Software Engineering and Applications. 7. 10.4236/jsea.2014.76048.
  38. Expert says system calls, but not source code, were copied from CP/M to MS-DOS. But there's $100,000 if you can prove he's wrong
  39. False claim: Bill Gates traveled to Epstein’s island multiple times - Reuters
  40. False Claim Targets Gates Using Epstein Connection
  41. FACT CHECK: DID BILL GATES VISIT JEFFREY EPSTEIN’S PRIVATE ISLAND AT LEAST 17 TIMES?
  42. Bill Gates didn’t visit sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein’s island repeatedly
  43. Flight logs
  44. Flight logs
  45. Addressing questions about the HPV vaccine project in India
  46. Statement from PATH: cervical cancer demonstration project in India
  47. 47.0 47.1 47.2 5 GMO myths (facts) busted (refuted with more bullshit)
  48. Failure to (not) yield
  49. Scientists are concerned about climate! (shocker)
  50. "Kevin Bonham on UCSUSA". 
  51. 51.0 51.1 "Does GMO corn increase crop yields? 21 years of data confirm it does...". 
  52. "Genetic Literacy Project on UCSUSA". 
  53. New York Times’ Danny Hakim claimed GMOs haven’t increased crop yields; Here’s why he’s wrong
  54. Adoption of Genetically Engineered Corn on Yield and the Moderating Effects of Weather, Soil Characteristics, and Geographic Location
  55. "Italian study from Nature: Impact of genetically engineered maize on agronomic, environmental and toxicological traits: a meta-analysis of 21 years of field data". 
  56. "Genetically modified seed research: What’s locked and what isn’t". 
  57. "Who conducts research on GMOs?". 
  58. "GMOs ramping up pesticide usage". 
  59. "Stop calling it Superweeds!". 
  60. "Herbicide diversity in crops.". 
  61. RETRACTED: Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize Food and Chemical Toxicology, ISSN: 0278-6915, Vol: 50, Issue: 11, Page: 4221-4231
  62. The Scientific Consensus and GMOs GMO Answers
  63. GMO safety debate is over by Mark Lynas (May 23, 2016) Alliance for Science
  64. Scientific consensus on GMO safety stronger than for global warming by Jon Entine, Rebecca Randall (Jan 29, 2015) Genetic Literacy Project
  65. Nicolia, Alessandro; Manzo, Alberto; Veronesi, Fabio; Rosellini, Daniele (2013). "An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research". Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 34 (1): 77–88. doiWikipedia:10.3109/07388551.2013.823595. PMID 24041244. "We have reviewed the scientific literature on GE crop safety for the last 10 years that catches the scientific consensus matured since GE plants became widely cultivated worldwide, and we can conclude that the scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazard directly connected with the use of GM crops.

    The literature about Biodiversity and the GE food/feed consumption has sometimes resulted in animated debate regarding the suitability of the experimental designs, the choice of the statistical methods or the public accessibility of data. Such debate, even if positive and part of the natural process of review by the scientific community, has frequently been distorted by the media and often used politically and inappropriately in anti-GE crops campaigns."
     
  66. "State of Food and Agriculture 2003–2004. Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor. Health and environmental impacts of transgenic crops". Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Currently available transgenic crops and foods derived from them have been judged safe to eat and the methods used to test their safety have been deemed appropriate. These conclusions represent the consensus of the scientific evidence surveyed by the ICSU (2003) and they are consistent with the views of the World Health Organization (WHO, 2002). These foods have been assessed for increased risks to human health by several national regulatory authorities (inter alia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, the United Kingdom and the United States) using their national food safety procedures (ICSU). To date no verifiable untoward toxic or nutritionally deleterious effects resulting from the consumption of foods derived from genetically modified crops have been discovered anywhere in the world (GM Science Review Panel). Many millions of people have consumed foods derived from GM plants - mainly maize, soybean and oilseed rape - without any observed adverse effects (ICSU)." 
  67. Ronald, Pamela (May 1, 2011). "Plant Genetics, Sustainable Agriculture and Global Food Security". Genetics 188 (1): 11–20. doiWikipedia:10.1534/genetics.111.128553. PMC 3120150. PMID 21546547. ""There is broad scientific consensus that genetically engineered crops currently on the market are safe to eat. After 14 years of cultivation and a cumulative total of 2 billion acres planted, no adverse health or environmental effects have resulted from commercialization of genetically engineered crops (Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, Committee on Environmental Impacts Associated with Commercialization of Transgenic Plants, National Research Council and Division on Earth and Life Studies 2002). Both the U.S. National Research Council and the Joint Research Centre (the European Union's scientific and technical research laboratory and an integral part of the European Commission) have concluded that there is a comprehensive body of knowledge that adequately addresses the food safety issue of genetically engineered crops (Committee on Identifying and Assessing Unintended Effects of Genetically Engineered Foods on Human Health and National Research Council 2004; European Commission Joint Research Centre 2008). These and other recent reports conclude that the processes of genetic engineering and conventional breeding are no different in terms of unintended consequences to human health and the environment (European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2010)."" 
  68. But see also:

    Domingo, José L.; Bordonaba, Jordi Giné (2011). "A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants". Environment International 37 (4): 734–742. doiWikipedia:10.1016/j.envint.2011.01.003. PMID 21296423. "In spite of this, the number of studies specifically focused on safety assessment of GM plants is still limited. However, it is important to remark that for the first time, a certain equilibrium in the number of research groups suggesting, on the basis of their studies, that a number of varieties of GM products (mainly maize and soybeans) are as safe and nutritious as the respective conventional non-GM plant, and those raising still serious concerns, was observed. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that most of the studies demonstrating that GM foods are as nutritional and safe as those obtained by conventional breeding, have been performed by biotechnology companies or associates, which are also responsible of commercializing these GM plants. Anyhow, this represents a notable advance in comparison with the lack of studies published in recent years in scientific journals by those companies." 

    Krimsky, Sheldon (2015). "An Illusory Consensus behind GMO Health Assessment". Science, Technology, & Human Values 40 (6): 883–914. doiWikipedia:10.1177/0162243915598381. "I began this article with the testimonials from respected scientists that there is literally no scientific controversy over the health effects of GMOs. My investigation into the scientific literature tells another story." 

    And contrast:

    Panchin, Alexander Y.; Tuzhikov, Alexander I. (January 14, 2016). "Published GMO studies find no evidence of harm when corrected for multiple comparisons". Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 37 (2): 213–217. doiWikipedia:10.3109/07388551.2015.1130684. ISSN 0738-8551. PMID 26767435. "Here, we show that a number of articles some of which have strongly and negatively influenced the public opinion on GM crops and even provoked political actions, such as GMO embargo, share common flaws in the statistical evaluation of the data. Having accounted for these flaws, we conclude that the data presented in these articles does not provide any substantial evidence of GMO harm.

    The presented articles suggesting possible harm of GMOs received high public attention. However, despite their claims, they actually weaken the evidence for the harm and lack of substantial equivalency of studied GMOs. We emphasize that with over 1783 published articles on GMOs over the last 10 years it is expected that some of them should have reported undesired differences between GMOs and conventional crops even if no such differences exist in reality."
     

    and

    Yang, Y.T.; Chen, B. (2016). "Governing GMOs in the USA: science, law and public health". Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 96 (4): 1851–1855. doiWikipedia:10.1002/jsfa.7523. PMID 26536836. "It is therefore not surprising that efforts to require labeling and to ban GMOs have been a growing political issue in the USA (citing Domingo and Bordonaba, 2011). Overall, a broad scientific consensus holds that currently marketed GM food poses no greater risk than conventional food... Major national and international science and medical associations have stated that no adverse human health effects related to GMO food have been reported or substantiated in peer-reviewed literature to date.

    Despite various concerns, today, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the World Health Organization, and many independent international science organizations agree that GMOs are just as safe as other foods. Compared with conventional breeding techniques, genetic engineering is far more precise and, in most cases, less likely to create an unexpected outcome."
     
  69. "Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors On Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods". American Association for the Advancement of Science. October 20, 2012. Retrieved August 30, 2019. ""The EU, for example, has invested more than €300 million in research on the biosafety of GMOs. Its recent report states: "The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies." The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion: consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques."" 

    Pinholster, Ginger (October 25, 2012). "AAAS Board of Directors: Legally Mandating GM Food Labels Could "Mislead and Falsely Alarm Consumers"". American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  70. A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001–2010). Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Biotechnologies, Agriculture, Food. European Commission, European Union.. 2010. doiWikipedia:10.2777/97784. ISBN 978-92-79-16344-9. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  71. "AMA Report on Genetically Modified Crops and Foods (online summary)". American Medical Association. January 2001. Retrieved August 30, 2019. ""A report issued by the scientific council of the American Medical Association (AMA) says that no long-term health effects have been detected from the use of transgenic crops and genetically modified foods, and that these foods are substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts. (from online summary prepared by ISAAA)" "Crops and foods produced using recombinant DNA techniques have been available for fewer than 10 years and no long-term effects have been detected to date. These foods are substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts.

    (from original report by AMA: [1])""
     "REPORT 2 OF THE COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND PUBLIC HEALTH (A-12): Labeling of Bioengineered Foods". American Medical Association. 2012. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Bioengineered foods have been consumed for close to 20 years, and during that time, no overt consequences on human health have been reported and/or substantiated in the peer-reviewed literature." 
  72. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: United States. Public and Scholarly Opinion". Library of Congress. June 30, 2015. Retrieved August 30, 2019. ""Several scientific organizations in the US have issued studies or statements regarding the safety of GMOs indicating that there is no evidence that GMOs present unique safety risks compared to conventionally bred products. These include the National Research Council, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Medical Association. Groups in the US opposed to GMOs include some environmental organizations, organic farming organizations, and consumer organizations. A substantial number of legal academics have criticized the US's approach to regulating GMOs."" 
  73. National Academies Of Sciences, Engineering; Division on Earth Life Studies; Board on Agriculture Natural Resources; Committee on Genetically Engineered Crops: Past Experience Future Prospects (2016). Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (US). p. 149. doiWikipedia:10.17226/23395. ISBN 978-0-309-43738-7. PMID 28230933. Retrieved August 30, 2019. ""Overall finding on purported adverse effects on human health of foods derived from GE crops: On the basis of detailed examination of comparisons of currently commercialized GE with non-GE foods in compositional analysis, acute and chronic animal toxicity tests, long-term data on health of livestock fed GE foods, and human epidemiological data, the committee found no differences that implicate a higher risk to human health from GE foods than from their non-GE counterparts."" 
  74. "Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foods". World Health Organization. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Different GM organisms include different genes inserted in different ways. This means that individual GM foods and their safety should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that it is not possible to make general statements on the safety of all GM foods.

    GM foods currently available on the international market have passed safety assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved. Continuous application of safety assessments based on the Codex Alimentarius principles and, where appropriate, adequate post market monitoring, should form the basis for ensuring the safety of GM foods."
     
  75. Haslberger, Alexander G. (2003). "Codex guidelines for GM foods include the analysis of unintended effects". Nature Biotechnology 21 (7): 739–741. doiWikipedia:10.1038/nbt0703-739. PMID 12833088. "These principles dictate a case-by-case premarket assessment that includes an evaluation of both direct and unintended effects." 
  76. Some medical organizations, including the British Medical Association, advocate further caution based upon the precautionary principle:

    "Genetically modified foods and health: a second interim statement". British Medical Association. March 2004. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "In our view, the potential for GM foods to cause harmful health effects is very small and many of the concerns expressed apply with equal vigour to conventionally derived foods. However, safety concerns cannot, as yet, be dismissed completely on the basis of information currently available.

    When seeking to optimise the balance between benefits and risks, it is prudent to err on the side of caution and, above all, learn from accumulating knowledge and experience. Any new technology such as genetic modification must be examined for possible benefits and risks to human health and the environment. As with all novel foods, safety assessments in relation to GM foods must be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the GM jury project were briefed on various aspects of genetic modification by a diverse group of acknowledged experts in the relevant subjects. The GM jury reached the conclusion that the sale of GM foods currently available should be halted and the moratorium on commercial growth of GM crops should be continued. These conclusions were based on the precautionary principle and lack of evidence of any benefit. The Jury expressed concern over the impact of GM crops on farming, the environment, food safety and other potential health effects.

    The Royal Society review (2002) concluded that the risks to human health associated with the use of specific viral DNA sequences in GM plants are negligible, and while calling for caution in the introduction of potential allergens into food crops, stressed the absence of evidence that commercially available GM foods cause clinical allergic manifestations. The BMA shares the view that there is no robust evidence to prove that GM foods are unsafe but we endorse the call for further research and surveillance to provide convincing evidence of safety and benefit."
     
  77. Funk, Cary; Rainie, Lee (January 29, 2015). "Public and Scientists' Views on Science and Society". Pew Research Center. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "The largest differences between the public and the AAAS scientists are found in beliefs about the safety of eating genetically modified (GM) foods. Nearly nine-in-ten (88%) scientists say it is generally safe to eat GM foods compared with 37% of the general public, a difference of 51 percentage points." 
  78. Marris, Claire (2001). "Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the myths". EMBO Reports 2 (7): 545–548. doiWikipedia:10.1093/embo-reports/kve142. PMC 1083956. PMID 11463731. 
  79. Final Report of the PABE research project (December 2001). "Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe". Commission of European Communities. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  80. Scott, Sydney E.; Inbar, Yoel; Rozin, Paul (2016). "Evidence for Absolute Moral Opposition to Genetically Modified Food in the United States". Perspectives on Psychological Science 11 (3): 315–324. doiWikipedia:10.1177/1745691615621275. PMID 27217243. 
  81. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms". Library of Congress. June 9, 2015. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  82. Bashshur, Ramona (February 2013). "FDA and Regulation of GMOs". American Bar Association. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  83. Sifferlin, Alexandra (October 3, 2015). "Over Half of E.U. Countries Are Opting Out of GMOs". Time. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  84. Lynch, Diahanna; Vogel, David (April 5, 2001). "The Regulation of GMOs in Europe and the United States: A Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory Politics". Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved August 30, 2019. 
  85. "Contagion is propaganda!!". 
  86. "Rambo is also propaganda!!". 
  87. "Marvel is bought by Disney, which spreads propaganda.". 
  88. "Books on NWO you should believe". 
  89. in the way that you use it in your book, Reportage: Essays on the New World Order?...
  90. Ah, yes, of course, he supposedly died of kidney failure and did not do anything in 9/11
  91. How hard is it to hit the 9/11 targets? — Metabunk (Aug 6 2020)
  92. 9/11: How hard is it to hit a building at 500mph? — Metabunk
  93. Old Time Crime: Arizona was a training ground for the September 11th attackers (4:53 PM, Sep 12, 2019) by Courtland Jeffrey, ABC
  94. Quotes - 9/11 Commission member said Commission was set up to fail Skeptic Project
  95. The IPCC is releasing hot air!
  96. How did I get here again? I've been drinking and I can't quite follow you. This is a "Global warming is a hoax" post. Correct? Who benefits from making this claim? It's pretty damn obvious who benefits from making the opposite claim. So you'll excuse me if I don't jump on the whole, "humans can't kill God's Earth," bandwagon.
  97. And all the hot Air from IPCC is joining over the arctic ocean right now. Guess what the avowed fans of James had to say about this? It’s all fake!
  98. As far as I listened this seems to be completely inaccurate. I was waiting for the punchline like you were with Sacha Baron Cohen.
  99. The 5G Summit, Worldwide cause for Action! It causes cancer, and you better believe it!
  100. James Corbett, expert on 5G. Only at the 5G summit, that is...
  101. 101.0 101.1 Vaccines as Silent Weapons! They are coming for you!
  102. Merck Dr. ADMITS Cancer & Other Viruses Found In Vaccines Unfortunately, the original video Corbett linked to was removed, so this what it could be.
  103. Did the CDC ‘Admit’ 98 Million Americans Were Given a ‘Cancer Virus’ via the Polio Shot?, Snopes
  104. Gardasil HPV Vaccine Hoax EXPOSED (Remix)
  105. The Flu Shot Vaccine SCAM (Sweet Remedy clip) Featuring homeopathic practitioner telling you that flu vaccine is a SCAM, and you better believe it!
  106. "Jump to the last paragraph of the letter to see the full quote.". 
  107. "Corbett Flat-out Busted.". 
  108. Radiation At Fukushima Reactors (allegedly) Uncontrollable - Nuclear Scientist (allegedly) Ran Away And Never Came Back!
  109. James Corbett and Ryan Dawson discussing Fukushima
  110. A very strange debate between two cranks.
  111. 111.0 111.1 9/11 Questions for James Corbett Report As you can see, even cranks believe James is a crank.
  112. Media Bias Fact Check on the Corbett Report
  113. The prop or not list.
  114. James Corbett RT YouTube search
  115. James Corbett, Fort Russ search
  116. James Corbett, Sputnik news search
  117. James Corbett
  118. Debunked: Corbett Report Targeted by Google/Youtube
  119. Mother Jones on the Corbett Report
  120. You watch videos on YouTube all the time, so you go home and put "Federal Reserve" into YouTube's search bar. This is the first video that comes up (1.6 million views) by Chris Hayes (3:34 PM · Sep 6, 2018) Twitter.
  121. 5 People Still Pushing 9/11 Conspiracy Theories by Jessica Testa (Sep 12, 2012)
  122. [2] Corbett Report: Chossudovsky search
  123. Corbett Report Radio 142 with Guest Host Stefan Molyneux 05/29/2012
  124. Corbett Report Radio 137 with Guest Host Stefan Molyneux 05/22/2012
  125. 125.0 125.1 James Perloff: About
  126. https://www.corbettreport.com/?s=James+Perloff
  127. The Sandy Hook Controversy – James Tracy on GRTV (01/29/2013) The Corbett Report
  128. Interview 250 – Robert-Scott:Christy (11/09/2010) The Corbett Report.
  129. Interview 1043 – Meet Alfred Adask, Sovereign Citizen (05/21/2015) The Corbett Report.
  130. Natural Society Credibility
  131. The GMO Agenda!
  132. “Alex Jones” search
  133. “Mike Adams” search