Discover more from Steve Kirsch's newsletter
Daniel Wilson, PhD: A master of misdirection
Daniel Wilson aka "Debunk the Funk" claims to be a scientific truth-teller. In my opinion, he's a master of misdirection. I'm going to show you why I think that including a video.
I asked Dan Wilson aka “Debunk the Funk” to explain the Ontario data showing a 39% increase in deaths from COVID in the year after the vaccines rolled out.
He wrote back essentially that it is because lockdowns lowered deaths in 2021, it’s no surprise that the COVID deaths increased in 2022.
I immediately saw the flaw in this argument because I had read a certain paper (more on that later).
If you know exactly what I’m talking about, you qualify for my elite “debunk the debunkers” team for future debunks. Be sure to sign up here.
When I asked him for the underlying data (since he didn’t cite his source), he deliberately misdirected me to a page which had no data at all, then he mocked me for being incapable of finding the data.
He finally sent me to the page with the charts he used, but I wanted the source data.
He did not give me the death data source data, and instead did a screenshot of the hospitalization page. So I found it on my own and it has data only up to mid-2022.
He basically wasted my time on a wild goose chase before finally giving me this link of the death data for vaxxed vs. unvaxxed in Ontario.
I plotted the unvaxxed rates and the vaxxed rates below for the 60+ age group from the data he sent me. Look what I found… it tracks, diverges, and tracks again in just a few days later. Sorry, but that cannot happen in the natural world
I documented the deliberate misdirection and him mocking me for not being able to find what is not there in this video:
Then I wrote up five ways to debunk his explanation and added it to my original article, “COVID deaths up 39% after vaccines rolled out in Ontario Canada.” It includes the paper I alluded to above. Can you guess which paper I’m talking about?
Hint: It’s 62 pages long and the authors work at a top university and it was viscously attacked in the media, but if you read it, you’ll be very impressed. All my “misinformation spreader” friends have high praise for this paper.
Did I miss anything in my five ways to counter his argument?
The bottom line is he couldn’t come up with a plausible explanation for the 39% increase. You can start with this tweet and scroll up to read backwards to see most of the discussion (the article below includes the full discussion):
I have greater respect for Daniel Wilson than Ian Copeland.
Copeland refused to supply an explanation and then went on twitter to explain it was the variants. Also, Copeland is nearly 100% insults in his conversations and Wilson is around 70-30 insults. At least Wilson comes up with explanations that would fool a lot of people.
Wilson is familiar with the data and the papers and on the surface, makes arguments that sound plausible if you aren’t familiar with the literature.
Susan Oliver (and her dog Cindy) I actually respect more than Wilson because Susan (or maybe it is Cindy working behind the scenes) actually does a lot of work in researching her videos such as the one she did on Mark Skidmore’s paper. But she deliberately neglects to show you her “corrected” result on the Skidmore paper. So she’s not an intellectually honest scientist at all. If you make the minor corrections that she points out, the results are still devastating for the narrative. If she’s honest, she would give the number.
It’s funny that when I ask people to explain the Ontario result, I get different answers from different people. All of them hand-waving. Every time.
That tells you pretty much everything you need to know.
None of them can explain the data.
That’s the problem they have. That Ontario COVID death data is a very inconvenient truth. See COVID deaths up 39% after vaccines rolled out in Ontario Canada for the whole dialog with Wilson.