Lynda Esch

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS HIT WITH FEDERAL RICO LAWSUIT FOR VACCINE SAFETY FRAUD

This RICO enterprise illegally deceived parents for DECADES into injecting their children with large batteries of untested vaccines.

The AAP rakes in money from Pfizer, Moderna, and Merck to issue FRAUDULENT vaccine recommendations.

Our vaccine policies are run by an organized crime syndicate.

[Alex Ocana @DominicaCanaPt]

@walsh_kirk91371 @BowesChay https://t.co/I9HSHrvuPV

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@tunney24927 @BarronTNews_ Epstein

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@RobertKennedyJc MAHA

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@EricLDaugh Inquiring minds want to know what’s the ratio of FBI agents to actual terrorists. The plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan comes to mind.

[Del Bigtree @delbigtree]

You've seen what happened when I handed the science to someone who disagreed with me. This is what that study actually found.

Vaccinated children were two and a half times more likely to have at least one chronic disease. Across every major health category in the study, the unvaccinated children were healthier. Those are his numbers from his study.

I am gladly traveling the world to talk about it and the world is now watching "An Inconvenient Study"

[Ricardo @Ric_RTP]

This AI just exposed the BIGGEST legal insider trading operation in America.

A platform called GovGreed built a seven-layer machine learning system that cross-references every stock trade disclosed by every sitting politician against the bills their committees control, the campaign donations they receive, and the companies their votes directly impact.

It scored all 540 politicians currently in Congress. And the numbers are crazy:

56% of every stock purchase made by Congress in the last 16 months was on a stock directly affected by a bill the buyer later voted on. That is 6,170 out of 11,016 total purchases.

More than HALF of all congressional stock buys are on companies whose fate that same politician is about to decide.

343 of 540 Congress members actively trade stocks while holding access to nonpublic legislative information.

That is 63.8% of the entire legislature making market bets with an informational edge that would put any hedge fund manager in prison.

The AI identified 752 active "Triple Signals" in the current Congress. A Triple Signal fires when three conditions line up at once:

The politician sits on the committee controlling a bill, they traded stock in a company affected by that bill, AND they received campaign contributions from that same industry.

Bills carrying these insider indicators pass at 5.4 TIMES the normal rate.

Now look at the individual leaderboard:

- Nancy Pelosi's estimated portfolio sits at $194 million with a Greediness score of 98.1 out of 100
- Ro Khanna made 13,231 trades across 800+ different tickers
- Michael McCaul made 32,302 trades and filed 6,670 of them late
- Thomas Suozzi filed 86.4% of his trades late with an average delay of 396 days, meaning his disclosures landed over a YEAR after he made the trade

And then there is Lisa McClain, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House. She has made 1,443 trades in three years, more than 98% of all politicians tracked.

She violated the STOCK Act twice in a single year, disclosing up to $900,000 in trades months after the legal deadline. Her husband bought up to $250,000 in Elon Musk's xAI, which quietly converted into SpaceX equity before last Friday's $2 trillion IPO.

The penalty for all of this? A $200 fine.

The number of Congress members ever prosecuted under the STOCK Act since it passed in 2012? Zero.

And the cruelest part is this:

A bill to ban congressional stock trading was introduced in January 2026. It has bipartisan support. Over 80% of American voters want it passed.

But Congress is sitting on it, because the people who would have to vote yes are the same people making millions from the system staying exactly the way it is.

They write the insider trading laws, they exempt themselves from enforcement, they trade on the information those laws generate, and when they get caught, they pay a fine that is basically nothing.

The AI didn't discover anything Congress was hiding. It just organized what was already public into a pattern so obvious that nobody can pretend it isn't there anymore.

[Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil @ivan_8848]

‼️US Military whistleblower LT Scott Bennet drops bombshell on Ukrainian Bio-weapons Labs:

“It originally started in 2005 with the Defence Intelligence Agency…which created a 501 C3…called the Global Viral Forecasting Institute…with a Mossad Operative named Nathan Wolfe…which became Metabiota.

This was funded by Rosemont , an investment firm, where Hunter Biden was the head of…along with Christopher Heinz (John Kerry’s son) and Paul Pelosi…Nancy Pelosi’s son.

The West has been developing this under Obama and Biden for the last 10 years for the purposes of generating Biological and Chemical Warfare to use against the Russians, which is why they’ve been collecting DNA samples from Slavic People. Revelations of a Massive War Crime…Crimes Against Humanity …as it’s a violation of the Global Biological Weapons Agreement.

This shows America with its 30 BIOLABS in Ukraine was involved in the experimentation on Human to Animal Transmission…which is precisely the origin of ‘Covid-19’."

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@Aestheticsn1 Only if you have some to spare

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@Gosleepriya 254

[Nav Toor @heynavtoor]

You have noticed it. ChatGPT feels dumber than it used to. Your prompts that worked six months ago produce worse results now. The writing sounds flatter. The ideas sound safer. The internet itself feels like it is shrinking. Every article reads the same. Every email sounds the same. Every answer sounds like it was written by the same voice.

You thought it was you. It is not you.

Researchers at Oxford and Cambridge published a paper in Nature proving what is happening. They call it Model Collapse.

Here is the mechanism in one sentence. AI trained on AI-generated data gets dumber every generation until it forgets what real human data looked like.

The internet is filling with AI-generated content. Blog posts. Articles. Reviews. Comments. Social media. AI companies scrape the internet to train the next generation of models. Which means the next generation of AI is being trained on the output of the current generation.

Each cycle loses information. Not randomly. It loses the rarest, most unusual, most creative parts first. The researchers call these the "tails of the distribution." The weird ideas. The unexpected perspectives. The things that made the internet feel human. Those disappear first.

What remains is the average. The safe. The expected. The bland.

Then the next generation trains on that. And loses more. And the next generation trains on that. And loses more. The researchers proved this is not a slow decline. Major degradation happens within just a few iterations. Even when some of the original human data is preserved.

They tested it on large language models. On image generators. On statistical models. The pattern was the same every time. The output converges toward a narrow, flattened version of reality that looks nothing like the original data.

The lead researcher put it plainly. "Large language models are like fire. A useful tool. But one that pollutes the environment."

The pollution is invisible. You cannot see which sentence on the internet was written by a human and which was written by AI. Neither can the AI that is about to train on it. And once the tails are gone, they do not come back. The damage is irreversible.

This is not a prediction anymore. It is a diagnosis.

The internet you grew up on was built by humans writing things no algorithm would have written. Strange, personal, imperfect, alive. That internet is being diluted. One generation of AI at a time. And the models trained on what remains are learning a smaller and smaller version of the world.

Model Collapse is not a technical problem. It is a cultural one. The thing that made the internet worth reading is the thing that disappears first.

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@SqSehrish @MehwishFaraz9 When I am with 40 people there are 41 of us. Check your own IQ

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@niyetsel Mindful

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@Simi_2210_ Skin

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@ikisabicanal I’d recognize him anywhere

[Lynda Esch @LouWeeeGee]

@Alex_Oloyede2 @JohnEdgarCarter lol, why would a country with hypersonic missiles give you years to catch up? Seems the better choice would be to take you out now, and that you aren’t afraid of that scenario tells me every thing I need to know.

[Murray Rothbard @MurraySuggests]

The Iranian navy, which has been destroyed eight times, has apparently closed the Strait of Hormuz again, because the United States, for the seventh time, won the war that wasn’t a war, so now the United States has to open the Strait of Hormuz that was already open before the not-war began.

The not-war began because Iran had uranium that was totally, completely, beautifully obliterated, so they can’t build the nuclear bomb they weren’t building, which is why the United States had to start the not-war it definitely didn’t start.

Now the United States, which has nuclear weapons, is threatening to use nuclear weapons to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, because nuclear weapons are far too dangerous for countries with nuclear weapons to allow other countries to have.

If the United States saw the United States doing what the United States does in other countries, the United States would invade the United States to liberate the United States from the tyranny of the United States.

[Glenn Diesen @Glenn_Diesen]

There is a strange development in which academics of international politics are expected to publicly condemn adversarial countries before they are allowed to participate in public discourse. The complexity of international politics is reduced to a moral question of good versus evil, and academics must make moral declarations before even discussing facts, history, strategy, and interpretations. Academics should explain why states behave as they do; they are not moral validators.

What value does it bring to an analysis if the analyst "condemns" one side? After Russia invaded Ukraine, the former Norwegian foreign minister actually argued that "this is not the time to understand, but to condemn". This ridiculous position is pushed on academics. However, understanding is not endorsement, explanation is not advocacy, and ignorance is not strength. I argue it is in Russia's security interest to push NATO away from its borders, it is in Iran's interest to control the Strait of Hormuz, and it is in China's interest to create a new international economic architecture. This is not advocacy, nor is it a normative position about how the world should work; rather, it is a recognition of how the world actually works.

An academic should examine interests, capabilities, and strategic calculations that produce such policies—not participate in ritualised declarations of virtue that contribute absolutely nothing. Furthermore, moralism and condemnation often lead to a lack of understanding and increased conflict. When the conclusion is always that the good guys are confronting the bad guys, then the solution is always "peace through strength", "weapons are the path to peace", and defeating the latest reincarnation of Hitler. If you want war, condemn the other side as pure evil. If you want peace, the first step is to understand the other side.

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

This video was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film in 1961.

The Blue Danube.