You're looking at the wrong part of his resume. The important thing here isn't the company he used to work for, but what his profession- a data scientist. In case you're unfamiliar with the profession, I found a quick primer for you. Quoting from it:
**
Data scientists use their expertise in statistics, mathematics, and computer science to extract meaningful insights and knowledge from large and complex datasets. They use their analytical skills and domain knowledge to solve problems, make data-driven decisions, and develop predictive models. Data scientists collect, clean, and analyze data, employing advanced statistical techniques, machine learning algorithms, and data visualization tools to uncover patterns, trends, and correlations that can drive business strategies and innovation.
Data scientists work with various datasets, ranging from structured databases to unstructured data like text, images, and social media content. The field of data science is continuously evolving, demanding continuous learning and adaptability to stay at the forefront of technological advancements and to meet the challenges posed by the ever-increasing volume and complexity of data.
**
Source:
https://www.careerexplorer.com/careers/data-scientist/
Don't you think it might be a tad useful to have these types of skills when dealing with a lot of data, such as the data used in the study referenced in the opening post?
Can you provide links to all your sources? In the meantime, I'll let you know what I found out about Dennis Rancourt:
Dennis Rancourt:
**
On this website you can learn about me, and find my main articles and interviews in science, public policy and social theory.
I currently write about medicine, COVID-19, individual health, climate change, geopolitics, civil rights, political theory, sociology … and I have also written over 100 peer-reviewed-journal articles in technical areas of science and technology.
I obtained BSc, MSc and PhD degrees in physics. I held post-doctoral research positions at prestigious institutions in France and The Netherlands, before being a physics professor and lead scientist at the University of Ottawa for 23 years.
I am an experienced self-represented litigant at several levels of court and in many administrative tribunals, in both Ontario and Quebec. I have been a volunteer Researcher with the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (ocla.ca) since 2014.
**
Source:
https://denisrancourt.ca/page.php?id=1&name=home
Alright, let's break this down a bit. For those not in the know, an epidemiology is "the study and analysis of the distribution (who, when, and where), patterns and determinants of health and disease conditions in a defined population",
according to Wikipedia.
Fun fact: you don't need to be an epidemiologist to do this. Anyone who's good at analyzing the right numbers can do it, and I've seen no one refute the study that's the central theme of this thread.
Not sure if I've mentioned this to you before, but after a long hard look at virology, I've come to believe that most if not all of it is fraudulent. If you'd like to learn more on why I think this, feel free to take a look at the following thread that I started last year:
Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com
Music to my ears. Perhaps one or more of them have also begun to think that much of virology isn't true.
That's unfortunately become the price of admission to those who challenge the mainstream narratives on things of this nature.
