Skip to content
Share This Post

The original research in this video is made possible by generous contributions from supporters of the Dr.SHIVA Truth Freedom Health® movement. Please contribute so we may continue to bring you such original research, valuable education, and innovative solutions.

Key Points

  • Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD – Inventor of Email, Systems Scientist, engineer, educator – has a radio interview about the Elephant in the Room – Signature Verification.
  • At minimum, 215,856 early voting mail ballots (EVBs) should have been cured in Maricopa versus the ~25,000 cured by the County in the 2020 General Election.
  • This updated Extended Study (“the Study”) along with the Pilot Study are the first to calculate signature mismatch rates of EVBs for Experts – Forensic Document Examiners (FDEs), Trained Novices (non-FDEs), and in a Two-Step Review process using non-FDEs and FDEs.
  • One constraint of this Study is not having access to the signature files from the County. Maricopa County Election Dept. states it has a “rigorous signature verification process.”
  • Given the nearly 10x difference in EVBs to be cured between this Study and the County’s actual number cured, if the County were to provide their signature files, an update to this Study can be performed.
  • Of the 1,911,918 EVB signatures verified, the County reported only 25,000 were flagged as signature mismatches requiring review – “curing;” and after curing, the County concluded only 587 of the 25,000 (2.3%) to be “Bad Signatures.”
  • This Extended Study confirms the findings of the earlier Pilot Study and concludes that the process used for signature verification in Maricopa is a flawed signature verification process.

Garret Lewis: Ah yes 8:06 on this Thursday, March 10th. Garret Lewis with you. It is your Morning Ritual KNST AM- 790 Tucson’s Most Stimulating Talk. Quick three things I think you need to know: looks like Pima County GOP head honcho Shelley Kais is as corrupt as they come, forcing a quick resolution, quick vote to not, not repeal the part of that House Bill 2839 that takes the power away from the people by having elections for precinct committee men and giving it all to her as the head of a county party. She gets to pick and choose. She has been exposed.

Second thing I think you need to know: Yes, here we go, record high inflation. 40 years high. Here we go. Gas prices up, you name it. This is crazy. This is insane, but this is, this is Biden. This is Biden.

Third thing I think you need to know: The Republican Party never knows how to use leverage or they’re just corrupt. Also, a big omnibus spending bill was voted upon in two parts, one was security. The Republicans could have hung Democrats out to dry. There is $370 million in this spending bill to keep the government open, as if we would need it. It starts tomorrow. $370 million to secure the border of eight countries, none of which are named America. There’s zero money in there to secure our border. Three things I think you need to know.

Now speaking of security, we need secure elections. I think that unless, you might disagree, but obvious, I think the 2020 election was “totally legitimate election where absolutely nothing nefarious happened whatsoever as we are required to say by our YouTube and Facebook overlords”, and they had everything lined up ready to go. A lot of processes weren’t followed and one guy that’s been all over this is Dr.SHIVA and Dr.SHIVA joins me now. Dr.SHIVA, how you doing this morning?

Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai: I’m doing good. How are you?

Garret: I am fantastic, and I am looking at the studies that you’ve done. This latest study about the 200,000 ballot signatures that weren’t verified. Was that at the behest of the Arizona Senate? Did they ask you to do that?

Dr.SHIVA: Yes.

Garret: That’s what I thought

Dr.SHIVA: So, there’s two projects that I was given Garret, actually three projects. One was initially back in September to analyze the Ballot Images. We know that when all ballots get scanned, after the ballot, to count the votes, and they’re sent through machines, and there’s Artificial Intelligence Systems which analyze the ballots to determine the vote. So, that was one of the projects that I was given. Unfortunately, when I first got the Ballot Images, they were all corrupted. So only after the audit, did I get the good Ballot Images, and we’ll talk about that if you want later.

Garret: Oh, God, quick, can we stop right there real quick. So, you say they were corrupted, the files didn’t open, you couldn’t see the Ballot Images, things like that?

Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, several of them were corrupted. And the auditing firm, who gave them to us, had them, we found out later, but they gave us a corrupted version.

Garret: And even though you contacted them during the audit, they didn’t give you the actual real Ballot Images.


Garret: They waited until after the audit?

Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, and we had to get them through another source. And what we discovered in the Ballot Image Audit in December was, the whole end results they got, we could have figured out in probably about four weeks. All this counting paper ballots could have been done for less than $50,000 and done much earlier.

The real issues here, Garret, are upstream. By the time the paper comes in, and the ballots are imaged, everything is obviously going to be matching up. But we did find some interesting anomalies, the fact that legislators no longer have any control of how these machines are actually counting what’s the vote or not, because the AI is doing the counting.

And that was the analysis that I recently submitted to the Arizona Senate and to the Attorney General on analysis of the Ballot Images. Unfortunately, that should have been done much, much earlier. It’s like, if you go into surgery, you don’t just start opening up the patient. You do a biopsy first. The Ballot Image Analysis is that and then it tells you where you need to look. The real place to look here is way upstream, Garret, the Signature Verification, the Chain of Custody.

So, on the second project, which we started in September, and by the way, we did that second project in less than 22 days. What you saw me present at the Arizona Senate where we were given a limited scope of work, which was to get all the Envelope Images.

Now we’re going upstream, when paper ballots come, when people submit paper ballots, and by the way in Maricopa 92% of the ballots were through mail-in Early Voting Mail Ballots, 92%, which means 1,911,918 ballots were mail-ins. Only about 165,000 were by in person. So just look at the dynamics, it’s 92% were mail-in.

Now, when those ballots come in, they’re in an envelope. The outside of the envelope has a signature on it. And so, a company called Runbeck scans all those envelopes, and images them. Then what happens is, now you can’t open up the envelopes until a very, very important process takes place. That’s called Signature Verification. So how is this done?

Well, it’s a multi-step process. The first part of this process is, once those images, you have those images of the envelopes, an individual, a trained novice or a trained staff member who gets around two to three hours of training, as I understand through a PowerPoint presentation, they’re not Forensic Document Examiners, are given about 4 seconds to 30 seconds to look at two images on a screen. On the left is the envelope’s signature, whatever, you sign your name, Garret Lewis, and on the right is your genuine signature from the voter registration file. And within 4 to 30 seconds, this individual has to make a decision; is that a match or a no match.

If it is a match, then the envelope is opened, and it’s tabulated. If it’s not a match, they do another secondary review. And we’re not sure if it’s done all the time, but let’s give the county the benefit of the doubt, that they have a manager who has more expertise, who also reviews it, all the no matches.

And if they say it’s a no match, then it goes to a process called Curing, c-u-r-i-n-g. It’s a very weird term that we learned about after we found out in our Signature Detection Project that there were 17,000 Ballot Images, which are duplicates, and they said “Aha, Dr.Shiva is an idiot, don’t you know we do this process called curing.”

So, that’s when we found out this process curing exists and curing all those ballots, which were set for curing, get bipartisan review. They call up the person, maybe the person had broken their arm or they had Parkinson’s, so they give them another shot. And then then finally, those found to not match then it’s called a Bad Signature.

So, let’s look at the numbers. In Maricopa, out of the 1,911,918 Early Voting Mail Ballots, 25,000, upwards of 25,000, it’s very interesting, the county didn’t give the exact number they said upwards of 25,000 were sent to curing. 25,000 out of 1.9 million, which is, and you probably want to write this down, 1.3%, went to curing. Now after they were cured, 587 were found to be bad signatures. 587 out of all the Mail-in Ballots represents three one hundredths of 1%: .03%. Out of the ones that were cured 2.3%.

So, those are the actual situations that took place in Maricopa. So, we had asked, part of our third project, ‘hey, could we get the Signature Verification Files, the Voter Files that they use, because we have the capability to run everything.

But we weren’t able to get that. But what we did was, I’ve been involved in the field of pattern recognition, AI, since I was a 14-year-old kid, done a lot of work, my degrees are in this field, etc. So, what we did was, we said, we were very fortunate to find out on the Maricopa Recorder’s Website, they have signatures you can get off deeds. So, if you bought a home, there’s your signature.

And by the way, those signatures are notarized. So, we did a project where we got three Trained Novices, three who followed the guide and three Forensic Document Examiners. These are people who are brought into courtrooms, Garrett, they’re like high level people, whose decisions can decide if someone loses their fortune, or someone goes to prison.

So, presented to them, we did an initial pilot study, where we presented 500 signatures, the same ones to each person, in separate times, and they all reviewed all those 500. By the way, chose a random sample of 500 out of that 1.9 million. Statistically speaking, that means it’s a 95% confidence with about 4% margin of error. So, when we did that initial test, we found out about 200,000+ should be cured.

Garret: Wow

Dr.SHIVA: It was quite interesting, when we put it out there, it was literally crickets from the press. So, this is what’s fascinating about Signature Verification. You know, people have been talking about all these nothing burgers and I just have to make this comment. In this Election Integrity field there’s three groups right now: the people who deny everything, nothing’s there, move along; the people who are the Grifters who’ve been coming up with garbage.

In some ways, I wonder if they’re working with the other groups, so we don’t look at the big issues upstream, which are Signature Verification, which are Chain of Custody, which are these AI Systems? So anyway, here, we did that analysis, and it’s fascinating. No one said anything. Then we cranked up our own standards in science. You do initial hypothesis, called the Pilot, then we did an extended to study. We did now 2700 signatures, five times more samples at a 99% Confidence Rate.

And in fact, one of the things we wanted to do was remember, our biggest constraint is, if we could get cooperation with the county and get their Signature Files, right, we’re using exactly what they did. So, we’re mimicking what they did, because we have the Deed Signatures. So, if six of the people all said, ‘Hey, these are all mismatches,’ guess what we did, we gave the county the benefit of the doubt. We threw those out. We said, well, maybe we got the wrong signatures.

And even after we did that, what you find is at minimum, and we apply this two-part process, right, the Novices and the FDS, you get 11.29%, 215,000 plus signatures should have been Cured.

Garret: Wow

Dr.SHIVA: We’re not saying they’re bad, but they should have gone through Curing. Now one of the important things, Garret that I think the audience needs to understand is, this election issue is dividing this country, but I can tell you this, if you go even read the quote/unquote Left newspapers, like The Atlantic, the magazine, or the LA Times, two to three years ago, they had both written articles, very thoughtful articles, in fact, saying how screwed up Signature Verification is, that it’s a witchcraft. It’s a black art. Those are the words that they’ve used.

But they weren’t able to put a quantitative metric. In science we want to know by how much. So, this is an opportunity to unite this country. Because Signature Verification is the Big Elephant in the Room. And we put out this study, we did the release on it, and it’s fascinating: Crickets on the Left and the Right. If you’ve noticed that?

Garrett: Crickets. I mean, this should be the biggest thing. The fact that you put out this information, I remember reading it a week or two ago in Just the News. And again, the fact that you did the smaller study, about 12% of the Early Voting Ballots had Signature Mismatches and that matched the 11.3%, approximately, the 215,000 you did in one study; ‘wow, this is bad. Let’s blow it up and do it bigger’, and it was almost identical to the numbers, right, the amount that should have been tossed. And that’s just in one county, just Maricopa County by itself. So, let’s just say 11% of that 215,000…. But what’s that?

Dr.SHIVA: What we’re saying, Garret, is that they should have gone to curing,

Garret: Yes, okay. Not all thrown out but curing.

Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, the curing process was created by the people on the Left who were concerned, ‘hey, people, some young kids don’t learn cursive, they sign in all different ways or, certain people don’t know how to write properly’. So, the curing process was created to give another shot. Okay, well, you’re not even sending enough to curing and even the Left should be concerned about that.

So, this is not a Left or Right issue. And that’s what’s fascinating. The Mainstream Establishment does not want to focus on the real Election Systems issues. They’re the ones who want to give rise to the nothing burgers a lot of the Grifters, frankly, and those people should be also admonished. they’re taking ridiculous issues like bamboo stuff on paper. Just nonsense. These are the big issues.

Garret: Dr.SHIVA, who again, did this study. And imagine this with the audit. It could have been done a lot cheaper, a lot more quickly too, right, just to knock this out like this is. There’s a lot of things going on out there, and I want to talk to him about AI as well. But this is a big deal.

I’ve never thought, I’m sure there’s some good people and some bad people, volunteer to do this stuff. These random people are going to be able to match up signatures? Oh, yeah, close enough. I mean, I’ve never thought about that. All right. Don’t go anywhere. Morning Ritual. Garrett Lewis right here KNST AM 790

Now let’s get back to Dr.SHIVA really quick. I mean, Dr.SHIVA, at the end of that you’re looking at all this stuff, and this is just in Maricopa County, and if you just do the 11% of all, almost 2 million, you’re looking at a lot of ballots possibly being tossed. And that’s just in one county. I’m sure this, I’m sure this would continue.

You tell me your expertise. Do you think this would continue? I’m in Pima County, which is the second largest county in Arizona. Wouldn’t you find these same kinds of issues in the other counties around Arizona as well?

Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, I mean, let’s just not just talk about Arizona. Look, what was interesting when I did this study, Garret, by the way, we have two Scientific Symposiums which have accepted this study, One in August, and in October. this is not just some random fringe analysis, which is important to understand. But if you look at what’s going on in the academic circles, when I was doing this, I said, okay, someone else must have surely done signature matching studies In the literature.

There’s not one paper written on this Garret. That’s, that’s what’s amazing. And, in fact, one of the journals that liked this, they wrote me back saying, this is a very important study, but we can’t accept it because it’s too political.

Garrret: Wow.

Dr.SHIVA: What’s happened is the academic circles, which are typically your liberal left, who are in academia, are afraid to do research on this, because they’ll probably not get funded. Now, fortunately, because I was able to do all this research and in previous enterprise, and we have our own Institute, we were able to do this independently without being moved by any of the politics. That’s a very important thing to understand.

Why isn’t academia, the major institutions, why haven’t they done a study on this? Why did we have to do this, they have a lot more resources. That’s the first thing. But what emerges out of this is Maricopa is showing us this is, any time you have mail ballots, anytime 22 states have the curing process in place, other states don’t even have curing. this is a whole nother issue.

But the fact is not enough ballots are going to curing. And we did it in such a conservative methodology, we threw out all of the ones, even if six people said, we’re no match. So, if it’s occurring in Maricopa, where we have a very nice sample size, it probably is occurring everywhere else.

The high probability, not only Pima, in every place that Early Voting Ballots are being done with this type of Signature Verification, quote/ unquote, “Rigorous Signature Verification Approach,” which is what the election officials call it in their guide. They say we have the Rigorous Signature Verification, those three words.

And what we’ve shown is it’s flawed, so if this is rigorous, and maybe it’s no fault of their own, then you have to have, it’s a serious issue, because it’s sort of, it’s exactly what the writer at The Atlantic said, David Graham, he said, It’s witchcraft.

Garret: Well, it doesn’t it defy logic, Dr.SHIVA, and common sense, and any smarts whatsoever, to think that random people that volunteer to do this work, they think they’re doing their civic duty, whether they’re good or bad, maybe they’re just purely partisan, want to just knock out every Trump vote they can get, whatever it is, but just to think that these people could somehow look at a screen, like you said, in 4 to 30 seconds and say, yeah, that matches or no, or Yeah, close enough. I mean, we never should have had faith in that system.

Dr.SHIVA: Well, what’s interesting is, when I was doing this research, I was trying to find the areas that were similar to this. Because typically, Garret, when even the Forensic Document Examiners, they do this kind of matching, they were even saying how hard of a problem this is, even for them.

Let me tell you why. Typically, when they, when they have to define if something’s a questionable signature, they have the questionable signature, let’s say some guy, Joe Smith, signs, he produces evidence, he goes, look, Bob told me all of all of the estate is mine, and he’s got Bob signature. So, what do they do in that case? They look at that signature, but they typically get 10 or 20 different genuine signatures, you see, what Bob signed this letter over here, he signed the deed, he signed this contract.

In this case, even the experts are just getting two, it’s called a signature matching problem. And this problem is, in fact, a relatively new field in science about 10 years ago. And what’s even more fascinating, the closest paper I could find on this is with radiologists, where they have a radiologist expert, he gets two images, and he’s got to decide if they’re the same.

It turns out the interns are so horrible at doing this, you need to go through training. That’s what that research showed, and that was published in IEEE Imaging Journal. So here you’re taking novices. They call them, let’s say interns, and you’re trying to tell them to do the front-end process before it goes to the quote/ unquote managers, who are supposedly the experts, and they’re not even Forensic Document Examiners.

So, the whole process is flip-flop, you have the Forensic Document Examiners upfront, and then maybe you do additional review with the curing afterwards. So, what we noticed was when something is a match, Garret, it’s definitely a match. You can see it. But the issue is when you have the gray area and in AI we call that the confusion space, and those should be going to curing. But if you’re not curing enough, you’re counting signatures that potentially should never be counted. And that’s really the issue here.

Garret: I tell you Doctor, Doctor real quick, too. And I want to keep you on if you don’t mind. You said, you have the hour with us, which I’m going to gladly take. But just really quick you gave all this information, is incredible. And it just reminds me of how there was, took months and months for a medical journal to have the guts to publish the mask study that was from Denmark.

Nobody wanted to touch it, nobody wanted to touch any of this stuff. Because you’re right, they didn’t want anyone to lose funding, they didn’t want to just be controversial, because they all think the same way. But you did this study at the request of the Arizona Senate. I’m assuming you gave your study to the Arizona Senate. The results?

Dr.SHIVA: We delivered both, all the studies to the Arizona Senate. And more importantly, we delivered it to the Attorney General’s office.

Garret: There you go. So, what has happened, you gave it to the Senate, and you gave it to Mark Brnovich, the Attorney General. Has anybody actually contacted you to ask you what this means or anything like that from the Arizona Senate or from Attorney General Brnovich’s office?

Dr.SHIVA: What I can tell you is because I can’t reveal those communications to you, at a high level, I can tell you that we have gotten inquiries back from the Attorney General’s. That’s a good thing. And what I feel, again, I get back to the central point, is that there are big issues here. And I think you have to understand, politicians are politicians, they’re not going to move on stuff until, if the wind is blowing in that direction, or they have everything perfect. And so, a lot of the stuff that was grifted on was not so perfect, frankly, Garret, but this stuff is unassailable,

Garret: So, this is the best, this is the best evidence to prove the election was stolen?

Dr.SHIVA: Well, yeah, it’s not only this election, if you believe that elections are potentially selections, or potentially both parties work together, if you want to take that approach.

And now look, I’ve been in the systems field for, when you look at an entire system, when you’re building an airplane, or you’re building a transportation system or a healthcare system, it’s not only one place you look, but also the entire system. If you think about it, a cookie making factory, you don’t just look at the cookies at the end of the process.

You look at all the points from the time, in this case, the voter rolls, how the envelopes came in, how they were opened, how they were scanned, you get to look at the entire factory. It’s called a Systems Approach. And in my view, there are deficient leaks in the system along this process.

And that takes an Engineering Systems Approach which we use everywhere in the world. If we ran these elections, and had this non-systems approach that’s done in elections, and we applied that to aeronautical engineering, you’d have a plane falling out of the sky probably every day.

Garret: So then how do we get the wind to blow, and I know you don’t want to say but it’s like your study’s results should be the ultimate example of why we need legislation right now because the legislature is meeting in session here in Arizona, and they should say based on all of this, we can’t trust Mail-In Ballots.

92% of people in Maricopa County sent Mail-In Ballots, but we can’t trust the system. You can’t trust Signature Verification. And by the way I’m assuming really quick, Artificial Intelligence, you’re saying this company that looks at this was Runbeck? They use Artificial Intelligence so that can be manipulated as well, can’t it?

Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, so there’s a second process here. So now, we eventually in December did get the Ballot Images. And in literally three weeks we found out, we did a three part analysis, you get the Ballot Images and we found out was there were about, we would have only had to check on 15,000 paper ballots. Because our AI, we matched it against the Dominion AI. Let me explain what I mean.

Garret: Thank you very much. Dr. Shiva is on KNST. This guy is a flippin genius and has stumbled upon this. This is by far the most easy to understand and in your face evidence that the election was a “totally legitimate election where absolutely nothing nefarious happened whatsoever as we are required to say by our YouTube and Facebook overlords.”

Alright let’s get back to Dr.SHIVA right now and this is incredible stuff. Dr.SHIVA just basically did, not one, but two studies. If I’m following that correctly, sir, in basically showing that again, the Signature Verification is a joke, not just here in Arizona, but across the country. My point before we went to the break here, Dr.SHIVA is that the information that you have given the Arizona Senate and of course you’ve given it to Attorney General Brnovich’s office, that should be used, they should be waving that as a white flag saying, ‘we need to end Mail-In Ballots’, like it, to me Mail-In Ballots were done.

You could say it was convenience, but it’s been converted and corrupted in a way to cheat, I think. And there needs to be, I think, the only safe way to vote, you tell me: one day- one paper ballot-one vote. Like that should be it, shouldn’t it? Shouldn’t everything that you have given to our legislature should be used to get rid of Mail-In Voting,

Dr.SHIVA: Well, I’ve always been a proponent. And I noticed this in my own election here, when I ran for Senate against Warren and another Republican RINO here that both parties have created, the establishment wings of both parties have created a situation, they don’t want to really address the systemic issues. But, in my view, is that Election Day should be a holiday, it should be a civic holiday, everyone should participate in the voting process, it should be in person.

And in fact, young kids should learn what it means to participate in this process.

Because I was born originally in India, it was a great honor to come to this country. And corruption was really seen in these Third World countries, why my parents left India to come here. And the fact that you have the potential leaks in these systems like Signature Verification, which we’ve discovered, should be a big issue for everyone. So yes, it should be in person. Now the exceptions, there’s always going to be some exception, let’s say someone’s deathly ill, or they’re military.

That’s where Mail-In Ballots originally came from. It was for military personnel, outside of the United States, US citizens. But that should be the exception. And what’s happened over time, step by step by step that’s become the norm. So used to be maybe 2% or 3% of people were Mail-In because they were military, or they had some disability, something like that. Now in Maricopa, that’s 92%.

And you have to really wonder about that. How did it go from 2% or 3%, 4% to 92%? And I think that’s a philosophical issue. It’s an issue of you value voting. And I think people have forgotten that. And I think we need to get back to those roots that Election Day should be a National Holiday.

In many other countries, people get time off from work, they go do it, because it’s, you honor that day, if one day should be honored, it should be Election Day. And I think giving people time off to do that, I could even see the high school teenagers participating, in the ballot processing, so they understand how all of this works. What other better education for a history teacher to take their kids to understand this. But I think it’s been diminished; Okay, just fill out something, send it in.

And then all of these corporations are running these processes now. In Maricopa, there is one company which is imaging it, another company called Dominion is running the AI systems, that’s where we left off. So, when your ballot goes in, it’s converted when it goes through those scanners. Now, the other study we did on Ballot Images separately was that most of the ballots that come in are analyzed by the 23 tabulators at a centralized facility, and all the other 165,000 votes were done at 300 tabulators in person.

But anyway, the paper ballot is scanned into, think about an image, and then the Artificial Intelligence in this case, Dominion’s Artificial Intelligence looks, so if you have in the race for President Biden, Trump, and Jorgensen, it’s looking for how much of that circle is filled in. So, think about that. If it’s half, is half-filled in a vote or is it, does it have to be 90% filled in?

Now in the old days, when you had human beings doing that, they had very strict rules, what’s a vote, what isn’t. What we discovered in the Ballot Images Analysis was, yes, the final set of Ballot Images matches the canvas report. But when we looked at the pre- adjudication states, we found some very interesting exceptions, that there were cases where the machine is saying something as a vote, and later on it’s being adjudicated.

So, the issue is, what is a vote? And I would guarantee you this, Garret, ask any legislator in any part of this country, can they tell you what is a vote and what’s not a vote. They won’t be able to. Like, if the circle is half-filled in, is it a vote or is it 25%? You see what I’m saying?

The AI is making decisions now. So, my end conclusion of the other analysis, which we also submitted to the Senate, and the Attorney General, is there must be legislation that We the People, the legislator dictates. If you’re going to use machines, that’s the way you want to go, then you better know how that robot is deciding what is the vote or not? Because right now, there’s many, many areas for error there. Because it took three PhDs, when we did the Ballot Image Analysis, we did it in three weeks, to really understand this whole adjudication process.

And that’s where we found out these very, very important exceptions. There were votes that were given to Trump or given to Biden, it was clearly designated as an IsVote, not to be adjudicated. And later on, it gets adjudicated out of nowhere. It’s like the O Ring on the Space Shuttle.

It’s a little small, dinky thing, don’t worry about it, but eventually blows up the Shuttle. And we need people who are taking an Engineering Approach to this, not politicians, not people get two, three hours training. Because this is a modern engineering system. And, you talked about the issue with the math, to know math.

Back in, I had given a lecture because my PhD is in the field of Biological Engineering, back in 2019, I said, look, there’s no reason to give everyone the exact same medicine, and that, everyone should not be getting the exact same shot. And that became, and that was, and then we were the first ones to call out Fauci. And we wrote an analysis on the masks.

The problem is, our legislators are not listening to the right people, or they don’t have training. And when legislators do not have where technology is going to, they’re always going to make bad decisions. Even if you look at the CCP in China, most of their legislators are engineers, and scientists. They can see a bullet coming 50 years ahead.

If you look at the public policy that’s being designed by legislators, they don’t even know the implications of these technologies until it’s too late. And this has been a recurrent process, over the last 70 years. The Founders weren’t like this. The Founders of this country were engineers. Washington was a surveyor, they built things they made things, and politics was something they did on the side, it wasn’t a full-time career.

When legislators don’t understand the mechanics of how these systems work, we’re going to be 10 years too late. So, the AI Systems are what’s running these voting machines right now. If you’re going to use AI, and this is a big question, in general, as more and more we start using robots, you need to understand what is going to be the legislation now, not like 10 years from now.

And that’s what the Ballot Image Analysis discovered. The Signature Verification Analysis we’ve discovered is, there’s a fundamental flaw in how we’re doing the Signature Verification. But these are engineering scientific questions. And I hope people recognize this, this is beyond Left and Right. This is way beyond Left and Right. And we can unify this country when we approach it like this. But if we want division, it can be the deniers versus the grifters.

Garret: But isn’t this though, where the Left doesn’t want to acknowledge it, because it makes them easy, it makes it easy to cheat. And they don’t want any attention brought to this. That’s why nobody in the Fake News Media has called you about this. They’ll go on for three or four years that Trump is a Russian stooge, and there’s no evidence and now we have the New York Times Senior Reporter admitting when he didn’t know he was recorded to Project Veritas, there was no such thing as the PeePee tape, which we knew. But they ran with that for years.

They just don’t want; you can say it’s not Left or Right but it kind of is because the Left has corrupted this in a way to say we can take advantage of this and cheat in the election to make sure we win. Like that’s what it comes down to. And I guess, it’s up to all of us to get involved to fight back.

Dr.SHIVA: Look at it this way, you won’t have Tucker cover stuff like this.

He’ll wait until if the wind is blowing enough, he’ll wait six months, eight months when it’s popular. Alan McDonald, the guy who was the head of the Morton, the project for the Space Shuttle on January 26, 1986. He, they were forcing him to sign off on hey, sign off so the shuttle can launch, he goes, I’m not going to do it, because he knew the O rings were going to bust. The important thing in life in my view, Garret is to do the right thing at the right time.

You have all of these people after the fact now they’re saying, oh, yeah, the mask was bad. Or the vaccines? Well, you didn’t say it in 2020. So that’s what I mean, where we’re at. We’re at an important point in history, where it’s really important to say the right thing at the right time. So yes, you have the Left and the Right, but even the Right quote/unquote, Mainstream Media waits a year, when they know the stuff is right there.

Garrett: I know. Listen, I, that’s why I saw this. I wanted to get you on. I mean, we had you on for an entire hour. I think there’s no reason to not have you on to talk about this. This is big stuff and, and like I’m trying to, I’m trying to make the wind blow by getting the information you had, that you discovered, you study, get it out there and have that wind blow straight at our legislators so they can do the right thing.

They’re pressured by my listeners to do the right thing. And to me, you tell me we only like a minute left. I mean to me, and we’ve talked about it earlier, the right thing, the only way to really trust elections, I guess Wisconsin kind of has it right where it’s again, you have to have a doctor’s note and all this other stuff to get an absentee or mail-in ballot. The only way to really get it right and have the most accurate election is to have one day, one paper ballot, counted by a human with witnesses around. That’s what it should be.

And they do that in France, by the way. Steve Bannon’s brother, you tell me on that, to follow up real quick, Dr.Shiva, Steve Bannon’s brother lives here up in Pima County, and I was at a meeting with him, and he said he had dinner with, I believe it was a French government official. And the French government official says we don’t do electronic computer stuff for elections. We basically have people fill out a ballot by paper. And there’s like six political parties. You have one person for each party, they witness it, they all agree on who the person voted for, they mark it down.

And Chris Bannon said, well, that must take you forever to figure out who won. He said we know who won three hours after the election is over.

Dr.SHIVA: Yes, that’s all nonsense. I mean, human beings can do a lot. Look, Brexit was done within hours. The entire Brexit system. As a technologist, I can tell you, sometimes human beings are the best way to do stuff. Look at all the, you have more and more points of failure when you do these systems. So, it should be mail-in, I mean, it should be in person voting, except for the rare cases. And I really believe Election Day should be a National Holiday, you get it off, we should celebrate it. And that’s the right way to do this.

And if anything that comes out of this, I hope people recognize that sometimes the best technology is the simplest technology. Just because you can do things really complex and you can do machines, and you can do this AI, doesn’t mean it’s the right thing.

It doesn’t mean it’s sometimes the simple stuff is the right technology. And so, I think that’s part of Garret, what we need to recognize is, who is running the world? Is it the technologist? Or is it the people? Because just because you can throw technology at something, who is deciding that that technology should be used? Was it the technologists? Was it the technocrats who paid off the politician to bring their technology? Or did we as people decide, hey, in this case, we don’t need that technology.

In this case, we should use this technology. And that’s called Sociotechnical Systems. It’s not just a technology efficiency question. It’s a societal question, combined with a technology question. You see?

It’s a complex systems problem. And this is why any legislator listening to this, if you want to, every Monday evening, by the way, I teach a course that I used to teach at MIT, to citizens all over the world, on how to look at the world as a complex system. And the future of this world is even before reading, writing, and arithmetic, people need to understand System Science. We live in a world of interconnected complex systems.

And if we don’t do that, we’re going to be like the blind men looking at the elephant where we only see one part. And we think the elephant is a snake. We’re touching the trunk, or we think the tail is a brush, that kind of thing. That’s the world we live in right now. So, the news, the Mainstream News Media can just touch one piece of the problem and amplify that. We need to start looking at the whole system’s problem. This is a whole system’s problem.

Garret: Critical thinking…

Dr.SHIVA: Yes, critical thinking, Systems Thinking, the word is Systems Thinking

Garret: Where can people get that course? Is it on your website?

Dr.SHIVA: They can go, go to, and for many, many years, my goal was to recognize that if you take Truth, Freedom and Health, if you think about it this way, people used to just fight for freedom, right, the 1A, 2A people. (1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment) Then you had the nerds fighting for science and truth. And then you had the Yoga Nazis, or people wanting organic food, right to help.

All these three movements are interconnected. Because without Freedom, we can’t have debate to get to real science, which is Truth. And if we can’t do real science, we’re never going to find out what’s right for our body. So, and without Health, we get sick people who can’t fight for Truth or Freedom. And that’s why the last two years were significant, because it exposed the fact that the scientific community has been completely compromised.

They won’t tell the truth anymore, because they don’t want debate. So, everything becomes everyone should wear a mask, everyone should get vaccinated. It’s one size fits all solution, which modern medicine knows it’s wrong. So, this is and when you take a Systems Approach, even to look at the world, you start seeing interconnection between Truth and Freedom and Health. You start seeing connections between the Envelopes Images, and the Ballots and the AI. You see it’s not any one thing. When you take a Systems Approach, we unify the world

We bring people together to solve problems. Otherwise, we’re just going to be killing each other.

Garret: Well, I’ll tell you what, Dr.SHIVA, I appreciate everything you’re doing, and all my listeners do as well. If not enough is being done, you think, not enough action. I know it’s hard, you’re not in Arizona and not enough action is being done based on what you have discovered with your studies and you want you think things should happen with our Arizona legislators, you let me know and we’ll get you on and we will, we will hound them like hell to make sure they do the right thing. Dr.SHIVA, you’ve been fascinating.

Dr.SHIVA: I mean Garret, I think there’s a lot of good people in there. But the problem is they have been getting such bad information quote/unquote from the Left. Bad information from the Grifters. It’s hard for them too, they’ve been in this hell of confusion, that they don’t even know what’s real anymore.

And they can then bank on that, right. So, they’re very, very diffident. But I’m telling you, what we’ve done with this study is real. We’re in fact asking the County to give us the data. We’ll even rerun the study with them. That’s called Science. Science is, evidence is, reproducible.

So, we can reproduce this over and over and over again. So, let’s hang our hat on truth.

And that’s what’s here. And legislators, all the people in Arizona, for that matter, people in this country should recognize as we move to a Systems Approach, and we really put the real focus on what’s real here. Can we reproduce it and present data and evidence? It becomes much more compelling, and we can move forward.

Garret: We just got to get rid of the corrupt ones out of the way. Dr.SHIVA I am out of time, and you’ve been awesome, and I would love to get you on again as this develops. Thank you so much for everything.

It’s time we move beyond the Left vs. Right, Republican vs. Democrat. It’s time YOU learn how to apply a systems approach to get the Truth Freedom Health you need and deserve. Become a Truth Freedom Health® Warrior.

Join the VASHIVA community – an integrated EDUCATIONAL, COMMUNICATIONS – independent of Big Tech -, and LOCAL ACTIVISM platform to empower YOU to actualize Truth Freedom Health in your local communities by employing a SYSTEMS APPROACH.

The platform we are building for Truth Freedom Health® provides the infrastructure to take on Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Academia. Many of you have asked how you can help. You can contribute whatever you can. Based on your level of commitment to get educated, I have also created some wonderful educational gifts to thank you for your contribution.

To get the education you need and deserve, join Dr.SHIVA on his Foundations of Systems course. This course will provide you three pillars of knowledge with the Foundation of Systems Thinking. The three pillars include: 1) The System Dynamics of Truth Freedom Health, 2) The Power of a Bottom’s Up Movement, and 3) The Not So Obvious Establishment. In this course, you will also learn fundamental principles of all systems including your body.

Course registration includes access to his LIVE Monday training, access to the Your Body, Your System tool, four (4) eBooks including the bestselling System and Revolution, access to the Systems Health portal and communications tools – independent of Big Tech – including a forum and social media for you to build community with other Truth Freedom Health Warriors.

This course is available online for you to study at your own pace.

It’s time to Get Educated, or Be Enslaved.

Share This Post
Back To Top
Powered By MemberPress WooCommerce Plus Integration