I will debate you. What you wrote above is just pseudo-scientific gobbledygook.
1. The paper you linked to from the CDC has ALL the errors that Christine Massey and others have pointed out over and over again. No virus was isolated. It was claimed as isolated without isolation. What is so hard to see about that? Just read the paper.
2.…
I will debate you. What you wrote above is just pseudo-scientific gobbledygook.
1. The paper you linked to from the CDC has ALL the errors that Christine Massey and others have pointed out over and over again. No virus was isolated. It was claimed as isolated without isolation. What is so hard to see about that? Just read the paper.
2. The "isolate" that you linked to which you can buy also was never actually isolated virus, but as your scientist friend admitted above was just nasal swab added to cell culture. Just because I can buy a magic wand doesn't mean it has magic in it. Just because I can buy "virus isolate" doesn't mean it's isolated virus. Again, read the paper linked to on the purchasing website, which explains how it was "isolated." Nothing was ever isolated. Just read the paper.
3. Bacteriophages are not what's under debate. What is debated is that there are other active entities which act like bacteriophages and make you sick. But these have NOT been isolated. So back to square one.
4. Your sequencing section is ridiculous. That is not at all a proper metaphor for what is going on. Arguing by metaphor is silly anyway. BUT...you claim that everyone sequenced the same sequence of sars-cov2. That is riddled with flaws. First they assembled, not sequenced. Second, they have NOT assembled the same sequence. They arrive at slightly different sequences, which is why there are "variants" and why we have millions of such "variants" now being claimed to exist. Here is a better metaphor if we are playing that game. You claim there is a lego castle of 30,000 pieces in a box of legos that has about 15 billion pieces in it. I claim there is not. You cannot find such a lego castle by looking for it directly. When you do, you don't see it. So what you do is break everything in the box into small pieces and then run a computer check of millions of those small pieces until you assemble together on the computer what looks like your idea of the castle. In the original sars-cov2 paper they came up with thousands of different castles, and then CHOSE to go with one theoretical castle that was 85% similar to the theoretical castle of a bat-coronavirus. That is obviously NOT proof that such a castle existed in the box.
Finally, in the your photos of the "virus" there is no proof attached that the photos are of "the virus" and not of cellular debris. It is well accepted in the field of even virology and Electron Microscopy that one cannot tell these apart from a photo.
In conclusion, you have offered nothing new to the discussion. Instead you have rehashed 5 "proofs" of virus existence, of which NONE prove a virus, individually nor collectively.
Virology is the modern day equivalent of eugenics. It is pseudo-scientific story-telling based on unproven assumptions to attempt to justify those assumptions. It does not prove them. Its obvious flaws given the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on it since the 1950's make it clear that it is a worthless and misdirected effort. I tell you one thing - I would not want someone who believes in viruses to be my doctor. Because they would ascribe my illness to the wrong thing. They would think a little demon-virus is making me sick, when obviously something else was. That is the point. Insisting on viruses is distracting the nation and us from looking at what actually make us ill - all the of the attacks on our food, water and air that we need to be healthy.
Great description on the genetic sequencing/assembly method they use. It is the second most important aspect after the isolation question. Just a quick note here: it isn't always a nasal/lung fluid sample they throw into the biosoup mixture, sometimes viologists like to get into people's buttholes and scrape up fecal matter. Note that Sabine Hazan's paper Kirsch is relying on is called "Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from patient fecal samples by whole genome sequencing." So now we are to believe that we have covid leaking out of our bums.
What is not well understood or ever talked about is what spawned virology, and gene theory for that matter.
Rarely do you see a discussion which places the foundational "precepts" of these "sciences" in any historical, political or social context.
Both arose from the ideologies of the ruling class and were convenient, and financially lucrative, explanations and explorations that developed within the scientific and medical establishments of their time with the backing and promotion of the industrial interests who, even then, determined the direction scientific discovery would take.
Virology is quack science- gene theory is quack science.
The Genome Mapping Methodology is a blatant fraud of hypothesis treated as fact that would not pass Grade 9 science. There is no pure isolate for any of these so called 'viruses', and thus no test for, nor proof of anything at all.
The behavior attributed to something inert by definition is absurd. We are talking about genetic dirt, that has no central nervous system, does not eat nor expel waste, does not have a motor control system, and has no behavior but for that of a leaf in a stream or dust in the wind.
In the lab, they routinely treat human cells with neurotoxins to 'produce virus', a total contradiction to the fairy tale Sesame Street storybook narrative everyone has been been fed since birth.
Whatever they are actually up to, they are concealing it behind the flat Earth, medieval, faith based hypothesis of an 18th century farmer, from an era of bloodletting, over 50 years before doctors stopped losing their licenses for suggesting they should all be washing their hands.
2+2=5 is not calculus, it is FRAUD.
Maybe Steve can start here with 3 chapters from Janine Roberts' excellent book "Fear of the Invisible" :
Honestly, I can't speak for her. I don't know. But I am happy to debate this with anyone right here on this reply chain, in person, on a boat, while eating sushi. whatever. do you have thoughts on this issue? happy to talk about them. i believe this is super important. the claims of viruses are THE distraction from people realizing that the toxification of our planet is what makes us ill and it must be confronted.
I'm not an expert on either side, just looking to learn more to figure out the significance of this issue. And I prefer listening or watching a video than reading long documents. I do find 5 hours excessive though. At that point, I might as well just read the 1000 pages. Perhaps you could arrange a group to discuss with Steve's group, even if Christine doesn't join.
Happy to do that. anytime. Steve Kirsch are you for for a group debate/discussion? I bring 2 people, you bring 2 people. How is that? Anytime works for us.
"I would not want someone who believes in viruses to be my doctor. Because they would ascribe my illness to the wrong thing. " Well, good luck with that, mon ami. The list of practicing shamans and witch doctors is rather exiguous these days.
the idea that sickness HAS to be from a virus is totally absurd. is that what you are arguing? that either your sickness comes from a virus or it comes from something a witch-doctor heals? what is your point? because if you believe sickness comes either from witchcraft or viruses, i def dont want you to recommend a doctor either. there are MANY causes of sickness. Why are people so attached to the idea of tiny floating evil ufos? You my friend ARE a witch-doctor if your health advice relies on virus theory. Do you think cancer comes from a virus? The govt spent 30 years and god knows how much money on that theory before finally giving it up because it was blatantly obvious that its not true. What about scurvy? What about the diseases caused by malnutrition? Do you think if you get sick from air pollution its really secretly a virus floating in there? Virus theory is a giant distraction from the real serious political problems we have finding ways to live on a clean and healthy planet. what is so hard to understand about that. You think little unicorns make you sick? Fine. Prove it.
I've noticed over the years that fanatics seem to suffer from a very curious disease, diarrhea of the mouth (and keyboard). I'm not sure if this is due to a virus but I try to avoid them as assiduously as I would religious proselytizers knocking at my front door.
1. Smallpox and flu vaccines do not work. That is overwhelmingly clear from the historical record. This is well established in the historical record, even if modern medical authorities have chosen to ignore that record. For instance, rates of flu have risen ever since the flu vaccine was introduced. Smallpox incidence has nothing to do with vaccine uptake and that is also clear from the record. Without having looked at Tenanus I would venture to say it doesn't work either, and I would be flabbergasted if you were able to provide proof they do work.
2. It is simply not true that anyone with an EM can pick out viruses and distinguish them from other cellular debris. Here is a quote from the National Academy of Sciences, July 2016: "“It is almost impossible to distinguish extra-cellular vesicles [of many different kinds] from viruses and to separate them…”
3. Which are the scientific theories about viruses that are repeatable you speak of? What makes them scientific? To have a scientific theory, one must begin with an independent variable and then show cause and effect based on that variable. The CPE experiments that have traditionally been used to claim virus existence meet no such standard. They have no isolated independent variable for one. I can do a similar experiment and claim the existence of tiny invisible unicorns. Where and when was it determined that cytopathic effects in a cell culture MUST result from the existence of a virus. Nowhere, that's where. Because it's not true. There are many reasons why a cell culture may show cytopathic effects. Its an appeal to the consequent, otherwise known as a logical fallacy.
4. Your claim that this theory MUST be true because so many people believe it just silly. It's not a conspiracy that everyone believes it, it's a broken paradigm - one that happens to be unbelievably insanely profitable for the pharma industry so it remains financially the central way to get research funds in the field. Everyone believed witches caused baby deaths through incantations 500 years ago. Does that make it true? Of course not. Widespread belief in broken paradigms is par for the course in science. Have you read any philosophy of science? Thomas Kuhn? Any medical history? How do you feel about bloodletting? How about phrenology? Harvard had a huge department of phrenology back in the day. Eugenics was considered solid science until the end of ww2 when it suddenly wasn't. There are tons of broken paradigms at work. Heart disease re: cholesterol and fats and The "Mediterranean " diet is a big one today. Many would argue chemotherapy is a broken paradigm. It was the editor of the NEJM herself who said that 50% of papers printed in her journal are now provably wrong.
5. The paradigm IS falling apart. You are watching it in real time.
6. Pseudo-science means exactly what i think it means. Here is a definition from the dictionary: "a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on the scientific method." That is exactly what is going on here. People think the scientific method is being used. But it is not. There are few if any proper controls applied. Basic logic is not adhered to. Instead, technical processes are repeated (e.g. the cpe process, the pcr process, the EM process, the genetic assembly process) and then these are used to "validate" hypotheses without the validity of the process to do so having been proven. SARS-Cov2 is only the latest example, but certainly an egregious one.
I recommend checking out the video below which reveals the true history of these diseases from the 1800's to the modern day versus the rate of vaccine uptake.
You simply state that smallpox/tetanus/flu vaccines work, but that claim is far from proven. For example, for the flu vaccines, there's no evidence that they prevent hospitalization or death from flu (according to a massive Cochrane meta-analysis). So, what does it mean to say that they "work"? That they reduce mild or moderate cold symptoms? But even if they do, it's not clear that reducing these symptoms is useful. Maybe the body knows what it's doing and is trying to heal, and those symptoms are a necessary part? And maybe the flu vaccines are just damaging that part of the immune system responsible for doing this healing? And what are the effects on all-cause mortality ("nonspecific effects" in the lingo of vaccine studies)? I'm not claiming to know the answers to all these questions. I'm just pointing out that the "vaccines are effective" arguments are based on a large number of questionable assumptions that are never cashed out.
I will debate you. What you wrote above is just pseudo-scientific gobbledygook.
1. The paper you linked to from the CDC has ALL the errors that Christine Massey and others have pointed out over and over again. No virus was isolated. It was claimed as isolated without isolation. What is so hard to see about that? Just read the paper.
2. The "isolate" that you linked to which you can buy also was never actually isolated virus, but as your scientist friend admitted above was just nasal swab added to cell culture. Just because I can buy a magic wand doesn't mean it has magic in it. Just because I can buy "virus isolate" doesn't mean it's isolated virus. Again, read the paper linked to on the purchasing website, which explains how it was "isolated." Nothing was ever isolated. Just read the paper.
3. Bacteriophages are not what's under debate. What is debated is that there are other active entities which act like bacteriophages and make you sick. But these have NOT been isolated. So back to square one.
4. Your sequencing section is ridiculous. That is not at all a proper metaphor for what is going on. Arguing by metaphor is silly anyway. BUT...you claim that everyone sequenced the same sequence of sars-cov2. That is riddled with flaws. First they assembled, not sequenced. Second, they have NOT assembled the same sequence. They arrive at slightly different sequences, which is why there are "variants" and why we have millions of such "variants" now being claimed to exist. Here is a better metaphor if we are playing that game. You claim there is a lego castle of 30,000 pieces in a box of legos that has about 15 billion pieces in it. I claim there is not. You cannot find such a lego castle by looking for it directly. When you do, you don't see it. So what you do is break everything in the box into small pieces and then run a computer check of millions of those small pieces until you assemble together on the computer what looks like your idea of the castle. In the original sars-cov2 paper they came up with thousands of different castles, and then CHOSE to go with one theoretical castle that was 85% similar to the theoretical castle of a bat-coronavirus. That is obviously NOT proof that such a castle existed in the box.
Finally, in the your photos of the "virus" there is no proof attached that the photos are of "the virus" and not of cellular debris. It is well accepted in the field of even virology and Electron Microscopy that one cannot tell these apart from a photo.
In conclusion, you have offered nothing new to the discussion. Instead you have rehashed 5 "proofs" of virus existence, of which NONE prove a virus, individually nor collectively.
Virology is the modern day equivalent of eugenics. It is pseudo-scientific story-telling based on unproven assumptions to attempt to justify those assumptions. It does not prove them. Its obvious flaws given the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on it since the 1950's make it clear that it is a worthless and misdirected effort. I tell you one thing - I would not want someone who believes in viruses to be my doctor. Because they would ascribe my illness to the wrong thing. They would think a little demon-virus is making me sick, when obviously something else was. That is the point. Insisting on viruses is distracting the nation and us from looking at what actually make us ill - all the of the attacks on our food, water and air that we need to be healthy.
Great description on the genetic sequencing/assembly method they use. It is the second most important aspect after the isolation question. Just a quick note here: it isn't always a nasal/lung fluid sample they throw into the biosoup mixture, sometimes viologists like to get into people's buttholes and scrape up fecal matter. Note that Sabine Hazan's paper Kirsch is relying on is called "Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from patient fecal samples by whole genome sequencing." So now we are to believe that we have covid leaking out of our bums.
https://gutpathogens.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13099-021-00398-5
Great comment Mike.
What is not well understood or ever talked about is what spawned virology, and gene theory for that matter.
Rarely do you see a discussion which places the foundational "precepts" of these "sciences" in any historical, political or social context.
Both arose from the ideologies of the ruling class and were convenient, and financially lucrative, explanations and explorations that developed within the scientific and medical establishments of their time with the backing and promotion of the industrial interests who, even then, determined the direction scientific discovery would take.
Virology is quack science- gene theory is quack science.
The Genome Mapping Methodology is a blatant fraud of hypothesis treated as fact that would not pass Grade 9 science. There is no pure isolate for any of these so called 'viruses', and thus no test for, nor proof of anything at all.
The behavior attributed to something inert by definition is absurd. We are talking about genetic dirt, that has no central nervous system, does not eat nor expel waste, does not have a motor control system, and has no behavior but for that of a leaf in a stream or dust in the wind.
In the lab, they routinely treat human cells with neurotoxins to 'produce virus', a total contradiction to the fairy tale Sesame Street storybook narrative everyone has been been fed since birth.
Whatever they are actually up to, they are concealing it behind the flat Earth, medieval, faith based hypothesis of an 18th century farmer, from an era of bloodletting, over 50 years before doctors stopped losing their licenses for suggesting they should all be washing their hands.
2+2=5 is not calculus, it is FRAUD.
Maybe Steve can start here with 3 chapters from Janine Roberts' excellent book "Fear of the Invisible" :
http://FearOfTheInvisible.wordpress.com
If it's so obvious, why won't she debate so everyone can listen to both sides?
Honestly, I can't speak for her. I don't know. But I am happy to debate this with anyone right here on this reply chain, in person, on a boat, while eating sushi. whatever. do you have thoughts on this issue? happy to talk about them. i believe this is super important. the claims of viruses are THE distraction from people realizing that the toxification of our planet is what makes us ill and it must be confronted.
I'm not an expert on either side, just looking to learn more to figure out the significance of this issue. And I prefer listening or watching a video than reading long documents. I do find 5 hours excessive though. At that point, I might as well just read the 1000 pages. Perhaps you could arrange a group to discuss with Steve's group, even if Christine doesn't join.
Happy to do that. anytime. Steve Kirsch are you for for a group debate/discussion? I bring 2 people, you bring 2 people. How is that? Anytime works for us.
Amen. Dr. Kaufman's recent video does discuss all this: https://www.bitchute.com/video/UnpfmjmXNH0O/?utm_source=MASTER%20NEWSLETTER%20LIST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Virus%20Isolation-%20Is%20it%20Real%3F%20%28YrHAVg%29&_kx=At2u_YFQ8Bz4-Fx8DLAF8FP1DJR9Dvf7wPLODBudBC8%3D.UpXyYd
I appreciate your comment. You said it better than did I.
Cheers.
well said
"I would not want someone who believes in viruses to be my doctor. Because they would ascribe my illness to the wrong thing. " Well, good luck with that, mon ami. The list of practicing shamans and witch doctors is rather exiguous these days.
the idea that sickness HAS to be from a virus is totally absurd. is that what you are arguing? that either your sickness comes from a virus or it comes from something a witch-doctor heals? what is your point? because if you believe sickness comes either from witchcraft or viruses, i def dont want you to recommend a doctor either. there are MANY causes of sickness. Why are people so attached to the idea of tiny floating evil ufos? You my friend ARE a witch-doctor if your health advice relies on virus theory. Do you think cancer comes from a virus? The govt spent 30 years and god knows how much money on that theory before finally giving it up because it was blatantly obvious that its not true. What about scurvy? What about the diseases caused by malnutrition? Do you think if you get sick from air pollution its really secretly a virus floating in there? Virus theory is a giant distraction from the real serious political problems we have finding ways to live on a clean and healthy planet. what is so hard to understand about that. You think little unicorns make you sick? Fine. Prove it.
I've noticed over the years that fanatics seem to suffer from a very curious disease, diarrhea of the mouth (and keyboard). I'm not sure if this is due to a virus but I try to avoid them as assiduously as I would religious proselytizers knocking at my front door.
Bad manners do nothing to refute the salient comments made.
I never intended to refute this nonsense. I merely wanted to say it's little more than bs.
In your opinion..... but I see you wish to persist with your gutter behaviour anyway.
I do indeed, Frannie.
1. Smallpox and flu vaccines do not work. That is overwhelmingly clear from the historical record. This is well established in the historical record, even if modern medical authorities have chosen to ignore that record. For instance, rates of flu have risen ever since the flu vaccine was introduced. Smallpox incidence has nothing to do with vaccine uptake and that is also clear from the record. Without having looked at Tenanus I would venture to say it doesn't work either, and I would be flabbergasted if you were able to provide proof they do work.
2. It is simply not true that anyone with an EM can pick out viruses and distinguish them from other cellular debris. Here is a quote from the National Academy of Sciences, July 2016: "“It is almost impossible to distinguish extra-cellular vesicles [of many different kinds] from viruses and to separate them…”
3. Which are the scientific theories about viruses that are repeatable you speak of? What makes them scientific? To have a scientific theory, one must begin with an independent variable and then show cause and effect based on that variable. The CPE experiments that have traditionally been used to claim virus existence meet no such standard. They have no isolated independent variable for one. I can do a similar experiment and claim the existence of tiny invisible unicorns. Where and when was it determined that cytopathic effects in a cell culture MUST result from the existence of a virus. Nowhere, that's where. Because it's not true. There are many reasons why a cell culture may show cytopathic effects. Its an appeal to the consequent, otherwise known as a logical fallacy.
4. Your claim that this theory MUST be true because so many people believe it just silly. It's not a conspiracy that everyone believes it, it's a broken paradigm - one that happens to be unbelievably insanely profitable for the pharma industry so it remains financially the central way to get research funds in the field. Everyone believed witches caused baby deaths through incantations 500 years ago. Does that make it true? Of course not. Widespread belief in broken paradigms is par for the course in science. Have you read any philosophy of science? Thomas Kuhn? Any medical history? How do you feel about bloodletting? How about phrenology? Harvard had a huge department of phrenology back in the day. Eugenics was considered solid science until the end of ww2 when it suddenly wasn't. There are tons of broken paradigms at work. Heart disease re: cholesterol and fats and The "Mediterranean " diet is a big one today. Many would argue chemotherapy is a broken paradigm. It was the editor of the NEJM herself who said that 50% of papers printed in her journal are now provably wrong.
5. The paradigm IS falling apart. You are watching it in real time.
6. Pseudo-science means exactly what i think it means. Here is a definition from the dictionary: "a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on the scientific method." That is exactly what is going on here. People think the scientific method is being used. But it is not. There are few if any proper controls applied. Basic logic is not adhered to. Instead, technical processes are repeated (e.g. the cpe process, the pcr process, the EM process, the genetic assembly process) and then these are used to "validate" hypotheses without the validity of the process to do so having been proven. SARS-Cov2 is only the latest example, but certainly an egregious one.
I recommend checking out the video below which reveals the true history of these diseases from the 1800's to the modern day versus the rate of vaccine uptake.
https://youtu.be/clJQV9HiPII
You simply state that smallpox/tetanus/flu vaccines work, but that claim is far from proven. For example, for the flu vaccines, there's no evidence that they prevent hospitalization or death from flu (according to a massive Cochrane meta-analysis). So, what does it mean to say that they "work"? That they reduce mild or moderate cold symptoms? But even if they do, it's not clear that reducing these symptoms is useful. Maybe the body knows what it's doing and is trying to heal, and those symptoms are a necessary part? And maybe the flu vaccines are just damaging that part of the immune system responsible for doing this healing? And what are the effects on all-cause mortality ("nonspecific effects" in the lingo of vaccine studies)? I'm not claiming to know the answers to all these questions. I'm just pointing out that the "vaccines are effective" arguments are based on a large number of questionable assumptions that are never cashed out.