Re: “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber”

It’s “viral”. And anonymous. I guess it was written by several people, may be by women, to alleviate the scandalous situation with “gender bias”. It was written by stupid, intellectually inferior writer(s) as there is no actual proof of its multiple arguments. The arguments and the proof for the women lagging behind men in intellectual abilities, however, do exist.

Among the thousands of painters who created the treasures of our civilisation, there were only a couple of second class women painters. The same with the architects, scientists, writers, etc., etc. Were women prevented, as the jewish communists tell us, from creating all these treasures? Certainly, not: these men, the pride of our civilisation, were, for all previous centuries, mostly self-educated! They had interest in all these areas, and they pursued their interests. Even today, after decades of literally forcing women to study, they cannot do what men can. Moreover, it is clear that when the task becomes more complicated, the gap in intellectual abilities is increasing; with the simple tasks, women succeed equally.

While the difference is clear, the causes of it remain obscure, in great part due to the political prohibition on such research. I have some thoughts on these causes.

What is scientific mind? Who are the scientists? A scientist is a person who is able to perceive and has intuition to tell what the Nature is able or not able to do. He, subconsciously, due solely to the his peculiar direction of thinking, finds a correct solution for the problem. How? O, that’s very simple.

He understands the things, the phenomena and the words literally, i. e. he removes associative meanings from the text. He reads slowly, very slowly. A scientist does not memorize anything. His mental job is to find the analogy of the process, or the phenomenon studied, in a graphic representation. He understands that words are a poor approximation to the reality, while the graphic representation, the mechanical picture of the process in his mind’s eye can be built, studied, compared to reality and corrected.

Women do not use this way of thinking, they use words. Words form their memory, their knowledge base and their “scientific”, God forbids, papers. (And that’s why, above, I first mentioned painters, not scientists.)

And, there is another, connected, difference – women have little interest and ability in mechanics. But the Nature operates, at all levels, physics, chemistry, biology, only mechanically. In every process, there is an underlaying mechanical level which of course explains the phenomena of the upper level of organisation of matter.

In fact, the current system of education is reinforcing that inborn difference between men and women. They teach fast reading, use of generic terms rather than the concrete ones. It is teaching fraudulent manipulations with words. It has drowned science in the fraudulent teachings of the jewish “philosopher” Derrida. It makes clear things obscure and “relativistic”.


Climate change. Not understanding science

Some ten years ago I posted, in the Chronicle of Higher Education, a short note debunking the global warming theory. The points, as I remember them, were:

1. Nobody ever measured the average temperature of the Earth.
2. It surely would seem ridiculous to every scientist to talk about the increase of 0.6 degrees in 100 years, because fluctuations of temperature and the local differences make the 0.6 degrees indistinguishable from the noise.
3. The apocalyptic predictions of the effect of the increase in CO2 are ridiculous because in the Earth past there was time when life was thriving in giant forests and the concentration of CO2 was certainly much greater.

The finding of global warming is claimed to be a result of computer calculations. It certainly looks to me as feeding to the computer such data which had to result in the convenient, not too big, not too little, 0.6 degrees increase.

Global warming theory is using a wrong statistics for a proof. The increase in temperature within the last 100 years, whether it is true or false, is nothing but an anecdotal evidence. There is no comparison with other 100-year periods; of course, there are no such data, but without such data the 0.6 degrees is just a meaningless figure. Moreover, we know that in the Middle Ages there was what is called the Little Ice Age. Obviously, even much greater than 0.6 degrees changes in temperatures can occur without any human activity involved.

Apparently, understanding that the 0.6 degrees increase over the last 100 years tells us absolutely nothing about the future 100 years, the “warmists” went further. They found the mechanism of global warming in the man made increase of the CO2 concentration in the air. The 0.6 degrees increase in temperature now stays in the background, and the CO2 theory serves as a basis for apocalyptic predictions. Nice and very scientific, isn’t it? Except that apocalyptic predictions based on CO2 have nothing to do with science (see # 3 above). Yet, we should not simply ignore the possibility that the temperatures (and humidity) in the age of giant forests were very likely higher!!

Canada TV is showing scientist David Suzuki explaining global warming to little kids. He tells them how to understand the warming: “Climate change, says he, means: we are in trouble”. He is not using the words “global warming” but using a new modification of the formula – the “climate change”, which he wants to be understood as warming. The little kids are deceived, they are told: have a fear of the catastrophe in your guts, trust the government and pay enormous taxes. Suzuki is using fear mongering and the total inability of the public to understand science.

Feminism, communist terror in Canada

A few months ago, Prime Minister Trudeau said he is a feminist. Nobody reads newspapers, but watching TV is becoming essential. TV let us know that hate of feminism is hate crime; not saying it is the law, but that is the usual method of introducing communist terror. Slogans into your brain, then – into the law.

What is feminism? It is a conspiracy theory (men hate and exploit women) manufactured by communist revolutionaries in 19th century to attract 1/2 of humanity into the crowd of the deprived and exploited. Semi-educated, mentally deranged, sexually deviant, abandoned, violent women were recruited in Russia by the revolutionaries. Feminism further degraded these women, to the animals; they became females. Millions of these women became an insane, wretched, syphilitic refuse of the revolution.

Feminist maxims are read as the code of behavior of hardened criminals: Never apologise, Never be questioned by a man, etc. In Toronto, feminists bombed Litton Industries. In Sweden they drink menstrual blood on feminist festivals, (there exists a recording). The females became simply “pussies”. In Moscow, they desecrated Christian Temple. In Italy they set museum on fire. Thousands of these crimes are being committed. Feminists are communist criminals, their goal is destruction of civilisation. Feminists are trained in insanity, savagery and irrationality. They go naked on the streets and protest sexual “objectivisation” of women.

The original teaching the feminists received from jewish communist criminals (trotzkiists), whose goal was the world communist revolution. However, a few decades ago, some of them decided that jews are too rich to be true communists, and they separated. Never mind, both groups are sadistic communist destroyers.

In Canada, feminists are pushed to the top of the country administration, using a completely fraudulent claim of the past discrimination which they suffered before they were born. They became communist attack dogs, conducting “gender wars” and destroying every decent individual, men and women alike. They penetrated universities creating completely fraudulent “social science” and “women studies”. Communist and feminist propaganda is making a heroic intellectual out of every pornographer, narcoman and pervert. It has been reported that 1 in 4 teenage girls now has sexually transmitted disease.

One of the crimes committed by the feminists is killing their children to “punish” and “revenge” their boyfriend or husband. Yet, in the new feminist Canada, this is not a crime anymore, it became “post-partum depression” that curiously may last for several years and is not connected to any revenge. Feminists decision makers routinely abolish the civilized law and subvert justice.

For many years, the standard of attitude for canadian women was: “I am not a feminist, but …”, followed by some moderate female grievance. The standard now is: obey to feminism, under the pain of being fired from the job or imprisoned. Finally you have to realise why people call these monsters “feminazis”. They are women-parasites stealing from the real doers and killing them.

Canada, 100% jewish media loves Muslims?

This 100% jewish mainstream now loves Muslims and believes (really?) the public has no memory. But what about the fascist jewish campaign that continued for years on all their outlets in support of that scoundrel who called Koran Devil’s Verses? I can’t forget the jews-journalists, sociologists, politicians and human rights jews, their eyes dancing from one end to the other end of the television screens in celebration of the repeated insults hurled at Islam. It was almost everyday, jewish eyes were dancing, with tears of joy, appealing to the public – see, see, the Muslims are devils, their religion is devil!!!

When was this? Exactly when the wave of Muslim immigrants were coming to Britain. Britain was greeting Muslim immigrants. British tv was greeting this scoundrel, Canada mainstream was translating his BBC interviews. I don’t remember any such jewish exultation on any other occasion.

The most Canadian of all stories

A couple of days ago, a nurse was charged with murdering 8 people in the last 7 years in a nursing home and in CAMH – University of Toronto Mental Hospital. The canadian element here is that this was known to some doctor but never reported. On the Tee-Vee, an official of some sort explained that Canada is such a progressive free country that doctors have an obligation not to disclose confidential information. That’s obviously a crap: confidentiality is related only to their patients. But there are other rules preventing reporting the crimes of the co-workers.

Why? What this is all about? I thought for a few moments and… aha, I know why! What would happen if people could report the crimes of their co-workers? They obviously know so much about each other’s crimes that every governmental office, every hospital, university, etc., will cease to exist withing a few months.

Canada is listed as #9 least corrupt country in the world. If reporting of crimes of the co-workers were allowed, Canada would move to the first place on the corruption index.

Exactly the same “confidentiality” rules exist in the science administration – in universities and in their “watchdog” – NSERC; actually, these rules are imposed by the NSERC and all the “associations” (read – trade unions). The criminals inside remain inside. So, what happened to this nurse, she obviously made some mistake; was she caught denying jewish holocaust or was she a sexist?


In the 1980’s universities became an abode for political activists who did not come for science and literature, but for spreading counterculture, marihuana and other items of “change”. In science, they were incapable and infantile. They started an avalanche of falsifications and plagiarism in research. By now, most of the research in biomedicine cannot be reproduced or is an outright fraud.

My main web site – tells how these cretins removed me from the university and plagiarised my discoveries; see the story and the 50 documents on Google Cached. This site is now continued with new documents at

My theoretical work began with finding the basic pattern of cell proliferation in the organism at the condition of the limited number of somatic cell divisions (Hayflick limit). Then, the 3-D topological model of intestinal crypt was built. Surprisingly, the structure of carbon nanotubes discovered in 1992 exactly corresponded to this model proposed by me in 1980. Some references:
1. “Count of Cell Generations”, (in Russ.)
2. “Topological Solution for Cell Proliferation in Intestinal Crypt”,
J. theor. Biol. 1980 (87), 189-200 (htpps://
3. “Structure and Growth in the Living Tissue and in Carbon Nanotubes”,

Michael Pyshnov