This book is not for those who just want to be told what to believe. Rather, it is designed to demonstrate to the reader what is the genuine expertise and what is not. And to empower them to discern for themself what is true expertise rather than false.
With 36 graphs and hundreds of scientific references, this information-crammed book seeks to guide the reader to answers to crucial questions such as the following.
How can you distinguish real expertise from false?
How can you tell who are the real medical experts?
How do people become experts anyway?
How do some get recognised as experts, and others not?
Does that expertise-recognition process actually make sense?
Or could it actually be severely flawed?
Why are many senior science people so critical of medical research?
Is “peer review” a useful indicator of competence?
Is it safest to just follow what the most senior professors say?
Why were no safety studies published of the non-gamma-2 amalgams now contained in millions of people’s teeth?
This unique book (written before the Covid) shows for the first time:-
- How the science bureaucracy’s system of “peer-reviewed” journals suppresses scientific truth and talent rather than advances it.
- How millions of people in the US, UK, and elsewhere have had health and lives devastated by pseudo-evidence-based healthcare promoted by officially-designated experts (causing mainly non-autistic disabilities).
- The system of evidence-defying untruths issuing from official experts to deceive victims and cover up this catastrophe.
- How the fact of this medical catastrophe of pseudo-expertise has itself been kept censored by the cheap false excuses of the anonymous unaccountable so-called peer-review system.
- Why brain-changing air pollution has caused moral and cultural-social transformations, including the revolution of some longstanding attitudes.
- Practical ways you can distinguish life-saving genuine expertise from death-threatening official charlatanism.
- The institutional changes needed to end the failures both of health systems and of systems of scientific publication and promotion.
Robin P Clarke is uniquely-qualified to write on these matters, having authored a number of notable medical scientific papers including the definitive unfaulted theory of autism, with numerous confirmed predictions, and yet unusually having no conflicts of interests (commercial, institutional, career). And with far too much direct personal experience of how the medical “expertise” system actually works in grim practice.
"Robin P Clarke is one of those rare souls with the ability to assimilate and synthesise large amounts of information and generate new and interesting ideas" - Bernard Rimland, founder of Autism Research Institute, founder of Autism Society of America, debunker of Bettelheim's theory, and originator of the modern bio/genetic concept of autism.
What makes someone's writing about science worthwhile for reading? That they have excelled in the parrotting exams? That they have been promoted and won posh awards thanks to sheepishly going along with what their professors have asserted?
There is an altogether more useful, crucial genuine criterion in science, which is confirmed predictions. Such confirmed predictions (if not too pre-predictable such as "my cup will fall on the floor when I let go of it") are the very Gold Standard of scientific excellence, against which any number of professorships or PhDs are of no significance whatsoever. And most PhDs and professors never make any predictions of any significance. And that is even if they aren't being biased by conflicts of interests (commercial, career, political), as they are most of the time.
In addition to my various published discoveries, my predictions confirmed by others' data include the following.
1. The prediction that mercury pollution would cause increased IQ rather than the decreased IQ mistakenly assumed by all the other researchers (and thereby providing the first coherent explanation of the mystery of the huge Flynn Effect).
2. The prediction that the same (genetic and environmental) factors which generally cause increased IQ also at higher levels cause autism (and vice-versa).
3. The correlation of body symmetry with IQ.
4. That autistic individuals would have less irrational prejudice.
5. Inference from autistic hand-flapping that there were rat-like prehuman ancestors (Purgatorius for 160 million years).
6. No cure for Alzheimer's disease (despite 20 years intensive research since).
7. Antiinnatia factors (mercury) causing certain abrupt peculiar changes of society.
8. Autism-related genes being mainly about general regulation of gene-expression (Casanova et al, 2016).
9. And indeed causing reduction of gene-expression (MECP2).
10. Mercury as a cause of autism (see Experts Catastrophe Chapter 3).
11. Major increase of adult disability coinciding with the autism increase (likewise see Chapter 3). and
12. Enormous increases of disability in four countries following the original introduction of amalgam in the 19th century (likewise Chapter 3).
My confirmed predictions are far from confined to one sphere. For just one example, in 2105 I warned the "experts" (in the UK) that imprisoning people for the pseudo-crime of merely carrying knives to protect themselves would result in a huge increase of real knife crimes. Immediately after the ignoring of my warning the two years of decreasing knife crime changed to the disastrous increase I had predicted and within three years it started to dawn on some of those involved that such a stupid policy could not work.
I've omitted some important other confirmed predictions because some people have an allergic reaction to too much of the "wrong" reality intruding into their cocoons!
