Reports News Search
Home Wiki

Six-Feet Social Distancing Has No Scientific Basis and Is Made Up

Social distancing in which disease-free healthy people keep away from other disease-free healthy people by six-feet is pure, raw superstition[1] and a fabrication of the disbelievers and arises from their exaggeration and misguidance in the matter of contagion, and their erroneous, flawed theories of disease, from which is the fraud and pseudoscience of Virology which is being used as a tool to advance Collectivist agendas on the world stage, along with the global warming hoax.

The implemention of this superstition is now widely acknowledged to have caused much harm and ruin to individuals (mentally and materially), to families, societies, the economies of nations, and the physical and mental development of children.

Shaykh al-Albānī lamented that Muslim doctors have blindly followed the disbelievers in their exaggeration in the matter of contagion, which enters them into whisperings (waswasah) and needlessly cutting off ties. Indeed, this affair evidently enters into superstition[2] and is nothing but the exaggeration and imitation of disbelievers that the scholars of the past clearly warned against (see Ibn Rajab and Sulaymān Hamdān).

What’s the difference between wearing a bracelet for relief from pain and keeping six-feet away from a disease-free healthy person fearing a disease that he does not have? There is none. Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) explained this subject matter of the ways and means and minor shirk very clearly, providing clear principles in that respect.

Sadly, people dislike hearing this being said, despite it being the plain manifest truth, both religiously and in terms of factual reality. It is only sheer arrogance that prevents people from acknowledging this now, or pure shame and embarassment for having fallen for the lies of the disbelievers and also acting as if the Muslim doctors and specialists, and those who may rely upon them from the rulers and scholars, are infallible, and can never be mistaken in worldly affairs of science, let alone affairs of religion.

Some of the scholars such as Shaykh al-Luḥaydān (رحمه الله) did not believe in this falsehood nor did he act upon it in his mosque nor around his students nor his family, and no one distanced in his funeral prayer or his burial, because instinctively, they knew this measure to be baseless.

Note: Alongside clarifying the above since the summer of 2020, we enjoined obedience to the Muslim authorities in these affairs from the angle of maintaining order and not causing commotion, as alluded to by Shaykh ʿUbayd al-Jābiri (رحمه الله), while having patience upon hardships.

Anthony Fauci—a big-pharma plant, charlatan and fraudster who launched his career on the HIV/AIDS scam during the 1980s—was grilled in a closed-hearing on 8th and 9th January 2024. The hearing is not going to be made public and a very brief summary of the proceedings has been reported in the media.

In this hearing, Fauci admitted that social distancing has no scientific basis and "just appeared". Here is some reporting regarding this:

Former COVID czar Dr. Anthony Fauci gave closed-door testimony before Congress last week...

Then there’s the anti-COVID policies he championed: social distancing and vaccine mandates for schools and businesses.

On social distancing, it seems he’s admitted the whole thing was completely fake from the start.

The idea was everyone staying six feet away from each other would slow the virus spread.

From that flowed the “need” to close businesses, shut schools, and generally immiserate average Americans.

New York Post — 13 January 2024

Anthony Fauci has never struggled to speak his mind. But now that he has left government, he is finally speaking at least some of the truth about government policies and Covid.

For instance, the six-feet rule for social distancing “sort of just appeared” without a solid scientific basis. That’s one of the admissions that Members of Congress say the former National Institutes of Health potentate made this week in two days of closed-door testimony to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

It’s not news that the six-feet rule lacked scientific rhyme or reason. A BMJ article in August 2020 explained as much.

Wall St. Journal — 11 January 2024

Dr. Anthony Fauci confessed to lawmakers Tuesday that guidelines to keep six feet of separation — ostensibly to limit the spread of COVID-19 — “sort of just appeared” without scientific input.

Fauci, 83, revealed to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic that the “six feet apart” recommendation championed by him and other US public health officials was “likely not based on scientific data,” according to Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), who is also a physician.

Schools nationwide remained closed well into the second year of the pandemic as a result of the social distancing guidelines, which were disputed by both research studies and other health officials.

New York Post — 10 January 2024

Dr. Paul Alexander (former HHS Department Official) recounting his experience in 2020: "I asked (CDC Director) Dr. Redfield about the science the CDC used to make six feet social distancing rules etc... He said there is no science, we made it up."

Dr. Francis Collins also admitted while giving testimony that six-feet social distancing has zero evidence and is devoid of science or data to back it up, rendering it nothing but raw superstition, psychological manipulation and unwarranted fearmongering.

Former NIH Director’s Jaw-Dropping Testimony Released to Public for First Time

There was no science or data behind the six-foot social distancing recommendation, according to the testimony of the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH), Dr. Francis Collins.

But unfortunately the social distancing recommendation had real life consequences that made it nearly impossible for schools nationwide to re-open due to the pressure from teachers unions to follow this unscientific, made-up guideline. In addition, businesses had to adapt at great cost or risk complete closure.

Vigilant News — May 16, 2024


Covid ‘Expert’ Francis Collins Finally Admits There Was No Science For Six-Foot Social Distancing

In the Covid soap opera, the lockdowners, the “follow the science” preachers, took years from our lives on a foundation of bad science. Some of us knew that while we were in the throes of the endless Covid Red Alert; the rest are learning it these days from the same charlatans who ran the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Testifying earlier this year in a closed-door interview before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, a transcript of which was released this week, former NIH Director Francis Collins confessed that the government’s sweeping social-distancing guidance wasn’t backed by the science we were all supposed to be following.

when asked whether he believed any science or evidence supported the six-feet rule, Collins said he did not.

“Is that I do not recall or I do not see any evidence supporting six feet?” a Covid subcommittee staff member asked the good doctor.

“I did not see evidence, but I’m not sure I would have been shown evidence at that point,” Collins replied.

But what about four years later?

“Since then, it has been an awfully large topic. Have you seen any evidence since then supporting six feet?” the staffer asked.

“No,” the former NIH director conceded.

Youth suicide rates exploded in the wake of lockdown isolation. Schoolchildren everywhere were left behind in an arbitrary and unnecessary lost year-plus of education. Small businesses in droves shut down. Government bureaucrats stepped all over basic rights, abridging travel, livelihoods, and even worship.

And they did it all with no evidence

The Federalist — May 17, 2024

Related Note

Virology is as much a science among worldly sciences as tawʾīl of the attributes (a fabricated baseless science of the Jahmiyyah used to twist, distort and misinterpret revealed texts) is a science among religious sciences and it is to worldly science as are the ḥadīths of the Rāfiḍah to the ḥadiths of Ahl al-Sunnah in the science of transmission. It is founded upon lies, deception, sleight of tongue linguistic tricks, sleight of hand laboratory tricks and sleight of hand diagnostic tricks.

The one who refuses to acknowledge this is either ignorant of the truth therein, without having made investigation in these affairs, or a blind-follower who does not know the difference between science and pseudoscience. Further, just as a) the presence of millions of Jahmites, thousands of their scholars and their books on this matter, and hundreds of their institutions, who all make taʾwīl of the attributes, does not make it an acceptable Islāmic science, and b) the practice of hundreds of millions of Muslims in celebrating the Mawlid, supported by thousands of scholars and hundreds of Islamic institutions, who claim to have “evidences” does not make it a legislated act of worship, legitimate and true, then in the same way: The presence of hundreds of thousands of “virologists” and their experts, and their books and published papers, does not make it a genuine science that proceeds upon the scientific method of inquiry. For just as there can be misinterpretation and deliberate distortion of revealed texts for goals and objectives, there can also be misinterpretation and distortion of creational realities, whether by error, or deliberate intent for goals and objectives.

What distinguishes an authentic ḥadīth from a weak or fabricated ḥadīth are clearly defined scientific principles regarding transmission. And it is the same in worldly sciences. A true science is distinguishable from pseudoscience through the correct application of the scientifc method. Thus, we investigate to find out if the scientific method has actually been applied to construct the theoretical foundations of a discipline, allowing us to examine the veracity of claims made.

No one is above these principles, whether we speak of religious sciences, such as authentication of ḥadīths or worldly sciences, and something does not become true because a specialist, or an institution, or a ruler says so, its only true if it is demonstrated to be true with evidences that fulfil the scientific requirements of that particular discipline.

As for the issue of conceding to and obeying the authorities in which they make ijtihād and may err, not reaching the truth, for whatever reasons, that is a separate matter.

Further reading:

1. Superstition is defined as: belief that is not based on human reason or scientific knowledge; a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary; irrational belief usually founded on ignorance or fear; a belief or way of behaving that is based on fear of the unknown; a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.
2. Superstition is based on confusion and error in causation and underlies some aspects of minor shirk.

© Abu Iyaad — Benefits in dīn and dunyā


Enter your search term and hit enter.