Regarding deaths of American citizens in 2020, the departure from the truth about them is fundamentally in the concealing, counting, and recording of numbers.  What we've seen in the numbers reporting this year is subject to a timeless trick of deceptive reasoning with statistics and control.

The trick, performed by, let's say, Tricky Tester, first names as "novel" something that almost no one has heard of.  Its actual oldness or novelness does not matter.  Only the position of being able to control the testing and reporting matters.

Tricky Tester, being in control of the means of testing, conveniently allows no anonymous testing to be added to the reporting.  It would be logistically almost impossible to count anonymous tests, anyway.  Therefore, only those who wish to be known by and associated with the institutions doing the testing will then self-select for being tested for it.  Without anonymous self-tests, there are no results from people who don't want to be associated with the testing facilities or suffer the possible consequences of doing so (like the well advertised threat of involuntary medical quarantine and isolation, notwithstanding whether the result is accurate or false).  The plausible ubiquity of the molecular strand being tested for, then, can never be known.

So beyond scientifically controversial, if not meaningless, testing such as PCR, beyond the debate over comorbidities, and beyond other scientific chips in the narrative's armor — meaning no disrespect to hardworking professional microbiologists here — what invalidates the claim of a new virus being causal to 210,000 deaths is the framing of the untenable argument itself.  For unspoken in the argument's premise is the fact that one doing testing wilI find microorganisms, strands of DNA, and what people call viruses in dying and dead people, and in all people.  It is a given. 

The sly Tricky Tester can pick one molecular strand as "the cause."  Once selected as "the one," it will be found in cases of morbidity because it exists in people.  The presence in human beings of such molecular strands, which will inevitably be detected, is called the human microbiome, and the human virome in particular, which are well-documented.

The unscrupulous Tricky Tester, one and the same with unscrupulous policy-influencers, can simply name and select one molecular strand, above all others, to be the "novel" one to be tested for.  By this position, Tricky Tester possesses leverage over the message, so long as they never remind people that we have a human virome of trillions of existing molecular variations that they could have selected to test for. 

In terms of the numerical illogic, it would be like claiming that the reason a certain quantity of pennies are found in a canyon underneath a bridge has something to do with one of the typically airborne molecules now found dissolved in the pennies' copper.

No, the airborne molecule got dissolved in the copper surface of the pennies one way or another, before or after the pennies arrived at the bottom of the canyon, but the reason the pennies got down into the bottom of the canyon is because they got over the edge, and gravity took over.

Likewise, causes of illness accrue and send people over the edge into the canyon of their death.  The controlling tester has sufficient power to designate one thing that most people have never heard of as a novel "cause" of the death.  That reported narrative will persist as long as there is no strong voice saying, "What is your evidence that this biomolecular strand you found there has sent these people to their deaths?"  Microbiologists, virologists, and health professionals may scoff that this is dismissive of their professions, but it is simply an unanswered request for proof.

A molecule from air droplets found in the fallen pennies is not what sent them over the edge of the bridge.  Gravity did, and gravity will not be written over those molecules in air droplets.

And a molecule from air droplets cannot be proven to be the cause of deaths, even if the testers call it "novel."  The molecule's existence is not sufficient evidence for basing a theory of death.

Tricky Tester's argument, at the very least, would require that the molecular strand's claimed "novelness" be proven by securely testing old, pre-2019 corpses.  It would also require that many independent people, who do not want to subject themselves to a test and its possible fallout, be enabled to do so anonymously, in order to actually determine the strand's ubiquity, and these are key data which will likely never be feasible to collect.

Pennies fall, and, more sadly, people tumble over the edge of their lives into death.  But without the supporting evidence described here, to blame a molecule found in either the person or the penny is a ploy used to rewrite reason, causality, and the scientific method, which logic will not allow.

Michael Bedar is an author and a documentary filmmaker who provides private consultation to organizations, businesses, and individuals.