Jan 29, 2023Liked by David Thunder

Hi David,

I follow many Substacks (as many of us do) & cant possibly read everything that comes in. I read mostly headlines and titles and go into depth including comments on very few. I read this particular essay of yours today and wanted you to know that you produce thoughtful, well written content. The fact that you have surprisingly few comments and likes (compared to other higher profile Substacks), shouldn’t deter you. You have your own voice and way of communicating that is really solid and from an angle that is relevant to a wide audience if only they weren’t so distracted by some of the more sensational content. I hope more people will find you and interact with your content. Keep up the good work.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your kind words Damien! Yes, it is difficult to make a "splash" with non-sensational content. But it's good to see that people appreciate cool-headed, evidence-based analysis.

Expand full comment

1(b) could be to engineer/foster an atmosphere in which would-be dissenters are disinclined to speak out. For example,

- bring in laws that penalise any scientific experts who contradict official policies.

- Exploit scientists' dependence on corporate funding for research purposes: make an example of certain dissenters by withdrawing their funding.

- etc

Expand full comment

Expert now filed in the same box as msm, dod, government & any others you feel would be usefully added to the garbage pile.

As never before in human history have the politicotards so lost sight of who elects them & more importantly who pays their wages.

Time to replace the current mockeries of democracy world wide.

Expand full comment