I had a friendly discussion with Patrick Gunnels about whether viruses exist. He thinks they don't. I think they do. After 90 minutes, I heard nothing that changed my mind.
If you want to change my mind, it's simple. There has been a lot of evidence gathered over the past 100 years that viruses exist. Simply show me that the things we know about a virus are more consistent with the hypothesis A that viruses do not exist than the hypothesis B that they exist.
Or simply show that my 4 observations (golf partner, wife, me, brother) are more likely explained by A than B.
Basically show me that the preponderance of the evidence favors A.
Please explain why nobody has done that.
Or even easier, tell me if I am asked if there is a needle in a haystack and I do 1,000 measurement all consistent with a needle being in the haystack, but I cannot actually find the needle, is there a needle? Or does it not exist because I cannot physically find (aka isolate) it?
Hypothesis B ('that viruses do exist') does not qualify as a scientific hypothesis because it can not be tested by the scientific method(note: Biology demands the 'virus isolation experiment' to have a control group).
Hypothesis A ('that viruses do not exist') is not a hypothesis, because void (or non-existence) is not a phenomenon (an observable event).
The corruption dates way way back in the (re)education system.
Loved to see you two 'battling' for truth! But you really need a SECOND ROUND!
Please have a look at the never proven 'contagious' diseases to be contagious. (none of them!) i.e. the Rosenau 1918 experiment.
No contagion = no viral particle = no virus without the technical discussions.
Watch "The End of Germ Theory" on Bitchute which starts these experiment in which they could not transmit disease how hard they tried.
Viruses only exist as an idea, just like ghost and unicorns.
We can make unicorns 'exist' in a computer model if we take piece of horn from a rhino and a piece of fur from a horse and let the computer configure a unicorn. That is what 'virologists' are doing.
Even without a sample, they can find any 'virus' they look for.
That is what Stefan Lanka has done with his control experiment.
He did not have to pay the €100.000; in appeal the German CDC, the Koch (!) institute had to acknowledge that the Koch postulates were not followed.
Later in 2017 the supreme court judge ruled the same.
Watch "Flu is a detox" on Bitchute to understand why it seems we are 'infecting each other' and ask yourself: why does not everybody but most often just a few people get sick at the same time?
If the current Germ Theory was right, nobody would have lived to believe in it!
You need to debate Dr. Poornima Wagh who actually with money from NIH PROVED SARS COV2 does not exist. When she refused to lie about her findings Robert Redfield told her he did not care what she found she will say she found SARS COV2 or he would have her lab shut down. She refused. And the FBI raided her lab. This is Judy Mikovits all over again. The health industry in this country has been lying to people for 100 years are you so naive to think they haven't lied about viruses. The fact is when people get sick the causes are many and rarely just one cause. Send me information on how Poornima can contact you and if you are brave enough you can hook up and politely interview her.
Can you verify any if these Poirmina claims ?? Folks are reporting that they can not find that she has the PhD degrees she claims. Is she lying or did we miss something ?
According to Poornima she received her PhDs from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It did find an interview with her (not on science) in which she states that she has just about finished up her biology requirements at Santa Barbera Community College and had applied at LSHTM. I have not asked to see her certificates but I also have never asked Dr. Malone, Dr. McCullough, Dr. Merritt, Dr. Mikovits for their proof either. I do have an email from LSHTM stating they could not release her information with her written, signed and mail letter of permission. They did not say she did not attend they instructed that Poornima needed to give her permission to release that information. Personally, I do not think she is lying. She is way too knowledgeable to be lying. I attended a 4 hour interview with her in which international doctors grilled her and she never skipped a beat. These doctors also agree she knew way too much not to have the education and credentials she says she has. That is the best I can say at this time. I know that Poornima is away for the next month so it will be quite a while before I talk with her again.
I've recently watch the video from "Dr." Poornima Wagh and... I find it very suspicious. I am not sure if she has the credentials she says she does. I would bet that she does not. At some point in the video she says that "antibodies are fiction, they don't exist", which is an extreme absurdity. She also said that Wuhan scientists only found 40 bps for the genome of SARS-CoV-2, which is another absurdity. The fact that her lab received a $1.5M grant from the NIH to analyze 1500 samples from COVID-19 patients and she decided to do the analysis in the way she wanted, with the methodology she wanted... is an ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY. No one is going to pay you that amount of money for you to decide what to do with it, and the NIH, which is involved in this crime, is never going to do that to disprove themselves.
I don't know who Poornima is, but either she is not very knowledgeable and she is inventing stories, or she is just a fraud committing impersonation of an authoritative scientific figure.
So what credentials do you possess that make you more of an expert than Dr. Wagh? You need to pay closer attention to what she said. She explain the methodology used in the papers that were published proving isolation and the common sense listening to what she described would tell a person their method was not proper science but used to provide the response the CDC/NIH wanted to hear. Her method is a purified, isolated, causation method that has been the gold standard for decades until people found ways to fudge the process and get the result on the report the criminals wanted. Do you really think she would come right out and name Robert Redfield as the person that threatened her if she did not say she isolated SARS COV2 if it were not true? She is not the only person that does not believe in antibodies. Healthy internal organs and cells are what keep you from getting sick. You have every right to question her but I know for her fact her credentials are real and the work she did is real. She is also working with a team analyzing the contents of all of the injections not just those used in the US. $1.5 million from the NIH is recess money to them.
Ok, how do you " know for her fact her credentials are real and the work she did is real"? And what is all that about a Finance Degree and then she end up doing a PhD in Virology and another one in Immunology? That is a very peculiar trajectory, to say the least. And very absurd, to be honest. By the way a PhD doesn't mean anything, you can be mentally retarded and have a PhD. What she is talking about is what is important not her credentials. You don't judge a book by its cover, you have to read it.
The whole problem here is all that nonsense about credentials and authority, that is why we are in the situation that we are, because morons believe in the authority and credentials of other people (e.g. Fauci said, the CDC said, the FDA said...). So... that is a huge problem that is not going to be solved by looking for other experts with credentials that say something else. That is insane.
"She is not the only person that does not believe in antibodies." Ok, so... most of Molecular Biology is garbage then? That is also insane.
You can believe what you will, this person is a fraud and her story is completely absurd. I don't need to have more expertise than an imaginary person to prove that, because we would enter again in the Authority Principle, which is, as I said, insane.
You want to know why all of this is happening. Because people do not have intuition, they do not learn by themselves and they are slaves of some authority figure, some expert or someone else that is going to save them, because they are mentally weak.
Steve, again, a virus need not exist and asymptomatic transmission could just be a smoke screen with technologies available today.
I provided a presentation by Dr James Giordano of Georgetown University (DARPA connected), how about the former President of Microsoft Canada talking about the dangers of 5G:
Steve, please reach out to Dr. David Martin. You know who he is.
Also, it need not be a virus at all, these "symptoms" can be triggered in the body using various means, just ask Dr James Giordano of Georgetown University (they can do almost anything surreptitiously):
"There has been a lot of evidence gathered over the past 100 years that viruses exist." Where is it Steve? Can you produce one paper that doesn't rely on the "viral culturing" of vero cells or the ASSEMBLY (not sequencing) of particulate RNA/DNA into some new Frankensteinian creature? The issue you seem to be avoiding again and again is that nobody can FIND a "virus" except through these two deceptive methods. The "virus" does not exist in REALITY. Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you not see the simplicity of the situation? If as you believe, your wife "transmitted" this "virus" to you, then somebody should be able to find and IDENTIFY these "viruses" floating around in our environment - anywhere - on a table, counter, doorknob, bathroom counter, pillow, bed sheet, steering wheel, your hands etc. Or better yet, they could be easily found in the fluids and lung tissues of a sick person, right? How hard could it be? Why can nobody perform this simple task of finding a "virus" in REALITY? This is the PROBLEM with virology. On the one hand they claim we can spit/blow/wipe/sneeze/cough/spray/transfer these "viruses" between each other billions of times a day, every day, while at the same time claiming that nobody can actually FIND a REAL LIFE SAMPLE of a virus when looked for. How can a sick person spray millions/billions of viruses out into their immediate environment by talking/sneezing/coughing but nobody can analyze this polluted spray and find any viruses in it? This makes absolutely zero sense and no honest person can say with a straight face how this could possibly make any sense. How do you make sense of it? It's not a "size" problem as was clearly explained to you by Patrick regarding bacteriophages (he didn't mention exosomes as well). Both are the same general size as alleged "viruses". So the small size is clearly not what is preventing the discovery of "viruses in the wild". So now what's their next excuse? Because there has to be one, right? Excuse B -> "There's not enough there to find". Really? There's enough there to make you sick as all get-out, but not enough there to find? Does that make sense? Nobody in the history of virology/immunology/microbiology has ever been able to FIND an alleged virus anywhere in the wild...ever? Does that make sense to you? The only way they find "viruses" is to pour urine onto monkey kidney cells and then douse them in poison, and/or ASSEMBLE chunks of RNA/DNA into a Frankensteinian model in a virtual reality simulation program?
"Or simply show that my 4 observations (golf partner, wife, me, brother) are more likely explained by A than B." -> You each caused your own self to get sick, as is the case for all diseases, not just fake germ theory illnesses. Everybody hates this answer, and it's understandable as to why. The world at large isn't ready to hear this yet. We have been so deeply indoctrinated into "victim consciousness", that there's no graceful way to immediately unwind it. Step one is to allow for the possibility. Step two is to begin researching some of the big killers, i.e. heart diseases, cancers, etc. and see if we've really got the answers to what cause these dis-eases. Does a bad diet and poor exercise lead to heart disease? Is there irrefutable proof? How about cancer? Has somebody proven so-called carcinogens or mutation due to epigenetics? Look into it.
"Basically show me that the preponderance of the evidence favors A. Please explain why nobody has done that." -> Somebody has done that. And he spent the rest of his life being demonized, harassed, de-licensed, imprisoned, smeared, attacked, suppressed and ignored.
Your last question didn't make any sense to me. What do your "1000 measurements all consistent with a needle being in the haystack" consist of? A "Measurement" doesn't explain anything.
The issue at hand is very simple; nobody can FIND/LOCATE/ISOLATE any "viruses" floating around in our environment. Not in the air, not on any surfaces, not in the fluids of a sick person, nor in the bodily tissues of a living sick person, nor a dead person. If you buy the establishment virologists explanation as to why they can't pull off this seemingly simple feat, then there's really nothing left to talk about. You have chosen to BELIEVE their story...a story we find completely and utterly UNBELIEVABLE because there is zero science involved, and even more embarrassingly, zero control experiments involved. This is the land of pseudoscience and fairy tales where we just have to "take the experts word for it". Blind trust in authority is what's gotten us into this situation. A situation that is slowly but surely unwinding a little more each day now....
Keep digging Steve! You're getting closer. I'm on your side!
Mika, instead of having me produce 1M pages of documentation, why don't you simply explain to me when I asked patrick how long the RNA is for the virus he said 29,800 base pairs. HOW CAN THERE BE SUCH EXACT AGREEMENT on the length of the RNA if it doesn't exist?? thanks!
I would never want to put such a burden on you Steve. You're doing good work and I'm rooting for you every day of the week. And I'm overjoyed that you're keeping this topic alive instead of ignoring it like everybody else. I believe I only asked for 1 page (paper) that did NOT use the highly deceptive "viral culturing" or "RNA fragment assembly" manufacturing methods. I'm not aware of the existence of such a scientific paper so no burden on you...but you could ask a friend! :)
I'm pretty sure Patrick simply agreed that this is what the virologists claim, right? He clearly didn't agree this was an actual "thing" based in reality. The 29K base pair creation represents nothing more than the entirely SPECULATIVE genetic ASSEMBLY of "unknown origin" RNA fragments in their Pokemon virtual reality software programs (MegaHit, Trinity), right? Surely we agree that nobody has a physical sample to compare to this presumptive "29K creature", right?
And all the other gene assembly teams around the world are piecing together their "29K...or so... virus" based on the data provided by the first guy. None of them are "starting from scratch". They all got a copy of the original "29K Book" to reference as they build their Pokemon variants. All of them are trying to assemble as near-identical a copy of the "29K book" as they can. But since a perfect replica is, by definition, impossible, their versions will always be slightly different.
Question back to you: Since nobody actually has a REAL LIFE "organism" ("virus") in their physical possession, what exactly do you believe there could be "exact agreement" upon other than more SPECULATIVELY ASSEMBLED Pokemon instances? I believe there are like 400,000-ish such Pokemon "variants" in the world's viral databases as of a relatively recent count from the documentary "The Viral Delusion". Quite an amazing creature it is. Darwin would be proud!
Here's the essence of what I, and what I believe Patrick is also getting at, put as simply as possible. The experts tell us the following three facts are true:
Fact #1 - The experts claim we spread these so-called "Fully Intact 29K Base Pair Viruses" by talking, spittling, sneezing, coughing, breathing, spraying, etc. airborne particulates of our saliva/mucous. Said particulates are minute and effectively invisible, so much so that they wouldn't hardly register any volume or weight, and yet, they are more than enough to make anybody within breathing distance sick.
Fact #2 - The experts also claim that they are unable to find/locate/isolate any of these self-same "Fully Intact 29K viruses" from comparatively massive quantities of bodily fluids and tissues which are the very SOURCE of these alleged deadly airborne particulates. We are told that even with say a quart of a sick person's saliva, mucous, urine, blood, etc., no viruses can be found in the sample. Doctors Cowan and Kaufman were even told by an eminent virologist that no viruses could be found in a VAT of 10,000 sick people's bodily fluids.
Fact #3: Virologists also claim that they cannot find the "Fully Intact "29K Viruses" in the fluid/tissue samples that they load up into their virtual reality software programs, instead they are only ever able to find tiny fragments of these once fully-formed "29K virus" creatures.
Thus, we are being told by the experts that the mythical "Fully Intact 29K Virus" can be only be found in the minute airborne spittle bombs we unwittingly hurl at each other every day. The "Fully Intact 29K Virus" creature cannot exist "intact", or be found anywhere else.
I'm unable to reconcile these 3 "facts". They can't peacefully coexist by my reckoning.
What do you think? Can these 3 "facts" peacefully coexist in your mind?
Thanks again for your attention to this topic and for being responsive to me, as well as your unrelenting perseverance in spreading the good word about the jabs! You're doing good work and I'm on your side!
It is interesting to see these images and their interpretation. Regardless of whether these particles are observed in Vero cells (as Mikovits states, it is a Monkey Virus), the data seem self consistent and consistent with their interpretations. Wether they are convincing at all to yiu folks, we will see. Regardless, we can see some apparent spikes in selected high resolution images.
These aren't images of monkey "viruses". You're looking at particles of decayed green monkey kidney TISSUE only. That's the whole trick. You don't need to understand anything else. They poison the kidney tissue with antibiotics and they break down into these itty bitty particles and some random brainwashed "expert" names them "muh viruses"!!
Again, you make assumptions saying "You're looking at particles of decayed green monkey tissues". But in no way have you proven this point. It is like someone saying "You are looking at particles of moon dust". Please try to do a more rational analysis of the publication's data.
Did you evaluate the large amount of detailed information in this article ? The use of an in vitro cell line as standard practice is likely irrelevant to the findings. Do you object to in vitro studies which show the appearance and proliferation of biological particles ? I would focus on what the data implies and what theory is consistent with this data. Certainly, these experiments done on homo sapien cell lines would be interesting, and are necessary to solve this viral propogation model. If these particles do not replicate in homo sapien cells, it would be very important to know to generate an accurate picture. Science involves data, discovery and interpretation. Please look at and evaluate the data in the few publications I presented here.
How many doctors have referred to this as Chimeric, Steve? Not a product of natural evolution right? It need not be a virus at all. How was Moderna able to turn around a shot in 3 hours? Because they sequenced the genome? So, what's the problem? I'm just playing devil's advocate
Steve, your insistence on this H-A and H-B is really disheartening. Your insistence that somebody has to prove a non-existence to you, shows how poor your understanding of scientific rules is. There is no "coldness". There is ONLY "warmness". When you open the door in the winter and feel the cold rushes in, it is really the warm air in the room rushing out. You feel the low level of heat, not the existence of cold. We have created the concept of "coldness" just for convenience (just like the negative pole in the DC current). It really does not exist. Only the lack of "warmness" can be proven because only heat exists. Your insistence in this false H-A or H-B duality is like telling people: it is hot here; if you don't believe me, you must then prove there is coldness here. People are saying to you that the amount of heat measurable here (your claims) is too low to qualify for "hot". Then you go on tangential reasoning that: then why the palms of hands are sweating? Why am I thirsty? Why the glass on windows are not sweating? H-A is the "coldness". It is just for convenience. It does not exist. It cannot be proven. Please drop it and concentrate on your claim H-B.
why don't you simply explain to me when I asked patrick how long the RNA is for the virus he said 29,800 base pairs. HOW CAN THERE BE SUCH EXACT AGREEMENT on the length of the RNA if it doesn't exist?? Everyone says the same thing. How can independent labs get the same sequences (for the same variants)?
A process can be reproducible without being meaningful. I can measure 100th word of every book on the shelves of a library and produce "the mutterings of God". I can measure it at millisecond frequency and get the same result almost every time, but every now and then it mutates. I can find patterns in the mutation - it seems to have a dormancy period on a cycle 86,400,000 - but the pattern is more complicated and worthy of further research. Across billions of measurements, the length seems to be rather stable.
Yet none of that is useful for predicting the future. No matter how hard we study the words to find hidden prophecy, it really isn't there.
No two labs ever got the same sequences. The sequence was concocted in ONE LAB and then published online. All other labs were then ORDERED to use that genome. Does that sink into your thick skull, Steve?
Steve, I will not speak for Patrick. But what I know about people who speak for "vaccine" (Vaccassin) manufacturers as how they could make their "vaccine" against a specific virus if they don't have the virus itself in the first place, they respond that the genomic map was sent to them from China on a flash drive. You must remember both US and UK departments of health admitted in writing that they do not have a sample of the virus when forced by an FOIA request. The number 29,811 comes from that flash drive, not from an established independent lab who God knows how put their hands on the virus when the government agencies couldn't. Now how China came up with that number is anybody's guess.
Dr Mike Yeadon former VP of Pfizer has changed his thinking, he is now in Andrew Kaufman's camp, and this man came from a 40 year career of doing work against towards his previous way if thinking.
Steve, will all due respect, we are in the same "side" and we are being distracted by this.
That said, out of all of the people pouring time and energy into this, you sir have the best rolodex and resources and you know it.
You're investigating therapeutics, you're orchestrating a nation wide tour with all kinds of big names with incredible resources... You're involved a lot.
My proposal, let's crowdfund for an answer. You have the platform to start it and we will all contribute.
I keep offering you someone that HAS actually proved the SARS COV2 does not exist and you never take up the offer. I have explained the entire story several times. She had NIH grant money and when her results did not make them happy they demanded she lie. She refused and Robert Redfield had her lab shut down. Dr. Poornima Pugh. Send me contact information and I will give you her contact information. She also had 6 universities duplicate her procedure and they all came out with the same results.
Simplifying, it is the most likely hypothesis based in what I called the Principle of Truth. I am not going to explain the whole principle here, which comes from my own definitions, but it is primarily based on Consequences.
Every Theory, every Hypothesis, has a range of validity, a phenomenological region of reality where it is empirically correct to some degree of accuracy given by the error of your measurements. One example of this is the Classical limit in physics, where you approximate to Classical Mechanics from Quantum Mechanics as the relevant action of your system becomes much larger than Planck's constant ħ.
Additionally, every Theory, every Hypothesis, has a range of validity in what I call The Configuration Space of Language Structures (which is another one of my own definitions). If a hypothesis has an equal or larger phenomenological region of validity, while at least maintaining its accuracy, but it increases its region of validity in The Configuration Space of Language Structures, it normalizes its consequences to a Broader Spectrum of Human actions minimizing the potential harms that can arise from those actions.
What this means is that it allows for the transfer of information in a broader region of the Conscience Space (where Language Structures exist) and therefore, the negative consequence that can arise from its applications to reality (e.g. new technologies, experimental settings, medical interventions, new policies, regulatory agencies, crisis management...) are considerably reduced, because it is taking into account a larger number of Language Structures that harmonize the Conscience Space were Human actions are produced.
That is why my Hypothesis is the more likely Hypothesis.
With regards to your other question "Do Lanka and the others agree with your hypothesis?"
I don't think that they would agree with it but I am sure that they will find it very refreshing, to the point that they may change their minds in some respects or they may be more open to discussion. Many Evolutionary Biologists, Virologists, Molecular Biologists, Biophysicists and others, with a broader perspective on Language, would agree with it, or at least they would say that it is compatible with what they are already saying.
"Then he used the time after I left the call towards the very end to promote the products he sells, to pray, and to promote Trump. I noted that the QAnon clip in his video promoted the “Question everything” philosophy which Patrick appears to support."
A swell guy like that is best described as an oily snake who deserves to be driven off the continent, or put down in place, with all the rest of his ilk. Let's envision this outcome and the steps to that happier place. We ought to question the amazing, hypocritical claim they have "unalienable Rights" anyway. QAnon says so.
I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, so I won't stick to the above stated format.
With your 100 year reference you are probably referring to, among others, the "Spanish flu". There are many treatises laid out in that space, but I personally think Occam had the right idea.
WWI, trench warfare, trench defecation and urination and addition of probably profuse blood spilling and improper body and body part disposal, which when combined with rain water and cold basically means there were hundreds of thousands of troops living, for long stretches of time, in absolutely putrid sewers. Oh yes, I forgot about the rats. I've read stories about horrific sounds the rats were making in noman's lands when they would forage for food from disposed cans, and even gnawing at corpses.
Trench meat was most probably not fed with anything that has any nutritional value but with something that was meant to prop up trench human meat for as long as possible. Like with everything else, an injured sol-dier needs to be fixed up not for after war peacetime, but to be able to go through another charge or to help hold off another charge.
That a lot of people got really sick in such conditions that abounded with filth and were deprived of nutrients is not a big mystery for me and I don't need complicated theories to help me understand what might have been going on.
So, instead of people who sent out so many to the trenches to be mutilated and maimed, to kill and be killed, taking the responsibility of these disease (eliminated by introducing proper living conditions in many "western" regions at the time) it was a lot easier to conjure up a flue and name it after the one country in the region that didn't want to send their people to die in vain. That's a very nice touch.
Instead of saying "we killed a lot of people because we forced them at gunpoint to live in their own filth for months" it was a lot better to transfer the burden to the one region where people did not sleep in their feces, but from which the lethal flue came from. Because areas that lack in killing and destruction breed novel "viruses".
Going back to "covid", what would be the most touted symptoms?
1. according to WHO propagandists, loss of senses of smell and taste. Wow, I must have had "covid" some 30 years ago, when as a kid I had my sinuses or my throat inflame on me. Or once even due to prolonged usage of antibiotics. It wasn't the antibiotics, after all, but "covid". Who knew.
2. dry cough. Wow, I didn't realize the last time me and the lads got a bit too rowdy during a match and started yelling too much after drinking a bit too much on a cool winter day, that my resulting dry cough was actually "covid" instead of being a consequence of doing stupid things.
3. slightly increased body temperature. Wow, I didn't realize that the last time I went for a jog in a rather hot and humid environment and got a bit too warmed up, to the point of sweating my glands off, that was actually "covid". It did last only half an hour and my heightened state did not manage to go through a cool shower, but still, who knew.
4. something that looks like a pneumonia. Wow, I didn't realize that the two pneumonia I had some 25 years ago was actually "covid".
All in all, I don't understand why they call "covid" a novel disease. I've obviously had it several times during the past 30 years.
I always understood the cause of the "Spanish Flu" was the vaccination of the American soldiers. They spread whatever the army put into their arms before taking off. They killed some 25 million (?) people and of course blamed it on somebody else who didn't have access to microphones. Is this hypothesis false? This scenario seems to be happening again with Covid. People (like Steve) who get vaccinated are now more likely to get sick multiples times as they get "boosted" more and more than unvaccinated people.
I really don't know what's false. I'm simply applying the razor:
Scenario 1 - some medical product is somehow help spread the disease among otherwise healthy people
Scenario 2 - hundreds of thousands are forced to live in a sewer for months and years
There are no extra explanations, whats and ifs needed for the latter scenario. However, of course if they indeed did "vaccinate" people en masse that could have contributed to whatever was later happening, but I don't think that would be spread related. There was simply no need.
Your wife and yourself may have been symptomatic due to damage being caused by the spike protein either because of the jab or because of shedding from someone else. I don't know if your golf partner or brother have been jabbed. Either way, shedding of the spike protein is a real possibility. There have been many reports of unvaxxed individuals falling ill after being around vaxxed individuals for long periods of time.
Your needle in the haystack analogy is quite ironic. This entire topic is about there being many needles in the haystack, but what is causing people to be sick is not something that can be found in the metaphorical haystack; it's something outside the haystack like a glyphosate, EMF, and/or some other unknown toxic/poison.
If you want a best alternative hypothesis so you can debunk it and move on, that's terrible scientific practice. Odds are high that in the sunburn on the beach example, the wind would be chosen as the alternative hypothesis. You'd tear it down and be triumphantly wrong.
An alternative hypothesis has been dismissed many times because the original has been polished. Epicycles on epicycles predicted better than heliocentric for a good while, and General Relativity was wrong when they could potentially have first tested it - but had been corrected by the time they succeeded with the experiment. Germ theory itself was laughable at the time, and Semmelweis died in an asylum... from infection, of course.
You need to beat the null hypothesis with your viral hypothesis - not with a post hoc narrative, but by being enabled in order to make excellent predictions. Should be really easy with a virus - synthesize/replicate it in a pure form and infect people. Otherwise the best you've done is found a biomarker and the vector is indeterminate.
The spike protein itself. That's my best alternative hypothesis given what we know about it. Patrick wasn't the best person to have an in depth conversation about this. I hope that you will have this conversation with Dr. Lee Merritt and/or another one of the well known aforementioned doctors.
These labs are not finding the entire length of the entire virus. They are finding fragments of it. Like a lot of other commenters have pointed out, I are very surprised to see that you have such a high confidence in these tests when we know that they do not specifically test for Covid-19, especially given the fact that this entire "pandemic" was only made possible by the fraudulent overcycled PCR tests that were literally using a sequence provided by China.
Your 'needle in a haystack' argument is backwards. First, it isn't us who have hidden the needle; it isn't us who claims that there is a needle in the haystack — it is the virus proponents. It's YOU who is making and affirming the claim!
Secondly, according to the claims of the virus proponents there isn't one needle in the haystack... It is claimed that "the total number of virions in an infected person during peak infection is 10⁹ to 10¹¹ RNA copies" (https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2024815118)... That's between 1 billion and 100 billion needles in the haystack. That should make it a little easier to find some.
You can use whatever technology you like in order to detect and hone in those needles... But ultimately you must provide the needle. Not a closeup picture of the needle. Not a bunch of computer generated sequences that you put together and then say corresponds to the needle... Show us some physical needles, AND THEN show us that the needles cause disease.
YOU claim that viruses exist. YOU must prove the claim.
Also, why have you simply passed over the bacteriophage issue brought up by Mr. Gunnel? Show us that pathogenic viruses exist in the same manner and to the same level that bacteriophages (whether they are actually classified as 'viruses' or not) have been shown to exist: PHYSICALLY isolated and purified. Since they are roughly the same size, it ought to be easy wouldn't you say?
As we approach, on one end, people doing quantum virology, and, on the other end, people denying their existance, we have perhaps reached some (quantum mechanical) entangled world where at the same time, viruses exist and do not exist, depending on the observational setup. ;)))
I have found that the people denying viruses do conclude the more humane "interventions" whereas the virus defenders tend to "measures". Just in tendency. What you work with seems to form your reality.
Still, when I observe illnesses that swept through our house, I rather hold it with
A) if it quacks and walks and looks like a duck, maybe it is.
(meaning: it is a mental model that let's me deduce new insights, and if tools would be used humanistically, and not in Level-4 labs for sinister military or wag-the-dog purposes, we could have a nice live on earth...
B) Pasteur and Bernard told us: the milieu is all. The human experimentator Robert Koch told us the pathogen is all. Both were wrong, but I think 95% Paseur and Bernard were right.
(So Robert Koch is only a 95% villain. For his experiments on humans and his greed for recognition, mainly, of course ;))
As for A): the model of viruses brought me to the thesis that you can do a vaccine in 30 seconds.
Infected person X blows snot in bowl. Sterilize, filtrate, and do in nasal spray.
Take 5x/day, 1 Week, and measure mucosal immunity before and after. Applicable to elderly people's homes missing to train their immune system by breathing air in gatherings.
Do this in a whole city and observe if a virus is suddenly tamed into coexisting mode by up-selecting more mild variants. Help it by Xylitol spray and C):
Up-selecting more mild variants is PROHIBITED by ALL measures. Masks, vaccines, Fear Porn, CDC un-hygiene rules (1,5m, elbow, hands (1/1000ths of infections). I set up better ones:
C)
- use VIRTUAL MASKS (antiviral nasal sprays) in need (protect vulnerables) that slowly make them less vulnerable, like xylitol (prebiotic, improves biome, reduces vulnerability; inorganic antiseptics (detox together with eg healing earth or ceolite)).
- C1): if SEVERE symptoms: call all contacts and cry STOP: don't spread, do PEP:
"post exposition prophylaxis", by doing I-PREVENT or I-CARE or at least doing what granny told when symptoms would be active of incident case
- C2) if MILD symptoms, give it a chance; ask your contacts: would you mind to get a cold? AND protect vulnerables (in doubt both using virtual masks AND avoiding droplet production in 3m 40sec radius, so go OUT for {NOSE BLOWING, cough, sneeze}, in need, cover under pullover by dragging the neck collar over your nose line and pressing it there by one hand, rafting it around waist, let drops settle, crouch out agian, "sorry", to catch DROPLETS, where 1 is infectious, which is why masks don't work, just reduce initial dose. Each mask has a part of the face contact line only pressed on lightly, so fleece is transmissive to droplets even. (The pullover works if good cotton, no holes, at least in family it prevented too many becoming too severly ill at once since 14 years now; Elbow is straight dumb as >70% droplets get reflected and still shoot 3m, AND no cotton there in summer, >90% reflected; as we work on habit, we have to train life long to be mindful ;)
C1 + C2 = UP-SELCTION in ?1-3months?
ONLY C1+C2 UP-SELECT mild variants in NO TIME, as ALL variants exist in parallel in waves, the fairy-tale of "long and winding road to endemy" is blewn away, measures make it long and winding; and their measurable dominant presence is only a reflection of our current BEHAVIOUR and our current IMMUNITY, which we can change in NO TIME, both. Spraying on iota carrageenan, xylitol with GSE or CIO2 or HClO is a short-lived immunity, or for the aviral community, DETOX.
Spring Cures modulate your immunity, even long-term if healing epigenetics, so also inheritable!
Curing the epigentics is the real cure against trauma like vaccination and will restore proper immune response. Help finding plant based interventions BACK-PROGRAMMING the epigenetic setup, un-doing the REPROGRAMMING of the PEG2k "medical device".
Many old healing systems could do this. I see no physician crying hello, I found the "UNDO" of the PEG2k REPROGAMMING of your epigenetic setup you inherited 3-6 generations along, sorry for messing with it by the way as I gave you the last shot.
And finding plants that free biome from mRNA producing plasmides, as were found 30% in vaccine vials, not 0.3% as max (should set 0% as goal for good manufacturing procedures!).
By the way, ALL remedies working against CoV diminish the problem of viral residues like EBV and relatives, and Lyme, and overshooting immunity due to mold (major trigger of mast cell activation, but I fear of MAS and AI as well). So I-RECOVER is a good apporach for all these modern symptoms.
So this debate may well have the end:
IT DOESN'T MATTER what you believe.
It matters that you listen to your heart and help people to get well or not ill in the first place.
And yes, I heared the spanish flu began 1km in front of fort knox and breed about it.
And yes, I heard the last Ebola problem also had an episode half way from some lab in US.
And yes, I was told the "vaccine" for ebola was done in ring vaccination, so people suffered from cytokine storm doubled by vaccine AND incubation, and so prematurely went ill, 4-7 days incubation instead of >10, but were not counted, so 100% vaccine "efficacy"...
Back to CoV:
And yes, my doughter had no illness, did a CoV test, went to PFi Vax, and 3 days later had CoV. So Vax depresses immune system, and incubation or viral residues become a problem, in the picture of no viruses: you inject a poison, and junk can replicate. And yes, our family split over the dicussion if the girls had to be vaccinated, the moloch won and did a check on this topic for us.
And yes, she could infect 4 others the day before symtoms, so yes, PRE-symtomatically is possible, but ONE day before infectiousness, her aerosol count when exhaling softly in a pm2.5 air qualtiy sensor rose by FACTOR 7 from base value the days before. So mucosal integrity can be non-specifically measured and interventions given at the right time. And vulnerable protected, for 25$ re-useable indefinetly for ANY malaise on mucosa, also tells me if I ate something I'm snesitive to. Nice for avoidance cure to calm down immune system, as it tells you 2 days before symptoms for IgG-based delayed "allergies".
Sci-fi part:
I once found a cool description of what viruses are more referring to extended parts or particles of life itself, inventing it a-new, transporting inventions across species borders, rising above us especially when we gather in a crowd, and communicating, exchanging, flipping between states, tunneling, whatever, so in one person, not all species of the zoo are present, only 8-10, but above a crowd, it get's complete, and vibrates as a quantum mechanistic swarm, massively parallel, distributed, quasi-beiing trying to hack our immune systems AND behaviour, also directly possible (see rabies). Perhaps all viruses in all beings that are similar communicate in some way globally. Perhaps the spike that is so identical due to vaccination is the single most powerful channel for this communication solely between humans and some zoo animals.
Perhaps it is in our reach to shape the swarm, tame it, play for us, if WE behave on this planet, and respect the vastness of the swarm, engulfing all Gaia! I think older civilisations were much further advanced in that respect without the concept of viruses. But doing the right things.
Of course, when you input bad things, like the prion snipped in wuhan spike, then bad things happen and people start to show neurodegenerative diseases.
Interestingly, the swarm itself expelled the prion really soon after wuhan. <
(Did it also expell the 4 AIDS snippets "randomnly" inserted in the spike, but converging in 3D model JUST next to the cleavage site, so very funcional? Of course, just accidentally they bend together as one...)
So this explains the need for the "dual booster", instead of "current strain only" booster, including the remainder for us of the bovine madness prion AND pretend to do something against the current strains, as to the last dumb vaxxing physician it began to deem strange why in the world wuhan spike should do some good.
"Pretend", as the swarm INSTANTLY dodges ANY vaccine and new ADE-I then 3 rounds later ADE-D variants are circulating.
NO humane, hippocratic, humanistic vaccine for rapidly mutanting pathogens can be based upon deep infection / transfection provoking b-cell based antibodies. PERIOD.
Please, WHICH vaccine project solely relies upon mucosal TRAINING (of innate antibodies, mainly), and does not ENTER the body through the mucosa, which many nasal / inhalative vaccines do?
Mika, SO, WHERE IS YOUR ANALYSIS OF 1) THE POSTULATES OF VIROLOGY and 2) THE EVIDENCE CITED BY VIROLOGISTS IN SUPPORT OF THESE POSTULATES. THAT is where to start the discussion, since I can assure you, that these scientists in sophisticated labs equipped withvarious analytical devices have a SIGNIFICANT body of evidence. WHERE IS IT ? DID YOU LOOK ? Once you provide it, wecan analyze it. Until then, you will fail the course cause you just didn't do your homework.
Tomatoe Bushy Stunt Virus - the first virus structure determined by X-Ray crystallography (1976).
Poliovirus and rhinovirus (1986).
Many X-ray crystal structures of viruses to 2 angstrom resolution resolves the specific amino acid chains and all the (larger) atoms in the side chains.
(Sorry, virus deniers, we can not Cancel hard science. Real data. Strong proof. If you folks want to destroy our society and massive knowledge base, please think twice).
Steve, How would some information on X-Ray crystal structures on crystals of various viruses do for evidence? X-ray crystal analysis is a hard science technique used with many smaller molecules for many years.
We tend to have a limitation on what we know and what we can verify. Thanks for being willing to talk with others, I’ve only come across Patrick because of Patel Patriot deep diving Devolution. Thanks for including Judy’s take, I like her a lot. There will be a tremendous work ahead to re-do much science that has since been deemed compromised. Can’t wait for the elementary science fairs to prove reality.
The key is, these folks make the same 5-10 points of partial information, but have NEVER listed the claims or points that a standard Virusibelieving virologist uses as the basis for viral theory, as I will call it. As you state, they should start at the beginning of published research in virology and at least review the major papers, such as papers contained in review articles. A dishonest effort = a dishonest approach = darkness and not light. Those who do not seek the truth as hid gold, obtain the fruit of their laziness = darkness, blindness and ignorance. They get Exactly what they deserve. Shake the dust off your feet, but at the same time, reach out to deceived sheep when you encounter them. There are operatives at many levels. Those aware of the deception they spread, those paid, and many duped at various levels. Buyer beware. Buy the Truth and sell it not. I have rwached out to many. But many have their minds already shreaded by the psycho operations. They are currently quite lobotomized.
Steve, My approach to folks who promote or appear to believe the No Virus mantra, is to simply deal with evidence and logic. I fully accept that any postulate might be correct, but that probably (??) Only one is correct, or more accurately, will be found consistent with all the available confirmed data. This is the meaasge of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" which I alerted all to in March or April 2020. I further expressed that Keptner-Tregoe Problem Analysis methodoligy should be used to avoid jumping to conclusions. But I wonder if anyone "heard" what I said by obeying those key rules. An existing paradigm is accepted in science, but is supplanted when 1. An anomaly is found which does not fit this paradigm and 2. A new paradigm is proposed which includes all confirmed observations.
The problem is, the level of many of the folks I have been talking to is such that strict logic and reading comprehension is missing ! Here is an example. In late Aug 2020, an article "went viral" titled "Did the CDC Reduce their Covid-19 Death Count by 94%" (or a very similar title). The mere suggestion in this article was that with the Release of Table 3 of Comorbidities, the CDC may have reduced their CV-19 death counts. People immediately JUMPED to a ludicrous conclusion. To me, this was an obvious cognitive psychological operation. These folks must have never read Table 3. No where in this table did the CDC state they reduced the death counts (until this year, they reduced it by about 72k, as I recall, in a totally separate release). Well, my brilliant ass-ociates didn't turn on their minds...or what ? People are not carefully thinking, are shocked into disbelief of everything and easy believism based on unverified snippets. I am in disbelief at the level of degradation of cognition. Or is it just that the average mind is so below average and I have associated too long with the top few percent in intelligence ? Both, I suspect. James Corbett describes the relevance of The Structure of Sci Revolutions (Kuhn, or & Popper version) in his "Science Says" episode. Can we get just a few folks to screw their heads on straight ? I have to keep checking if mine is attached in the age of mis mass information.
Please see Rense & Erica Khan's comments on Robert Young (alleging Sci Fraud in a publication submission using other's credentials) via Kevin McKarin's (sp) investigation and the Malone "threat" to Peter Breggin.
Steve, I would prefer to e-mail you. The discussion with Gunnels is laborious and begins with expressions on your face which indicate that you find his position apriori highly questionable. Gunnels' body language begins or soon morphs into defensive postures. He also shifts in his seat often, which is a characteristic Tom Cowan exhibits in some or most of his videos. This shifting appears to me to show a lack of confidence.
Regardless of the ineffectively laborious nature of your questioning, I find your research showing difficulty in Poormina's claimed PhDs is stunning, seeing the widespread distribution of this, and the easy acceptance of One lady claiming observations, while the scientific standard is reproducibility. If we had 10 people claiming the same data, it would strictly be hearsay to us. I can not confirm results if I do not do the measurements or experiments. Traditionally, there has been a network of scientists who have established trust relationships, so their results are believed by close associates in the field. I see that the ease of information distribution today gives 1. The village idiot a platform and 2. Tends to equally weight qualifed, unqualified and total liars. This situation creates a severe problem for the multiple non-realities or Virtual realities thus created. We have a problem here ! Beam me up, Scotty.
These phages are "hybrids between what we think of as traditional viruses and traditional living organisms," such as bacteria and archaea, senior author Jill Banfield, a University of California, Berkeley, professor of Earth and planetary science and of environmental science, policy and management, said in the statement. This huge phages' genome is much larger than the genomes of many bacteria, according to the statement.
Show the data which demonstrates a virus isolated, purified, and then shown to be able to infect people.
It isn't there, no matter where you look.
The methodologies used to "isolate the virus" are known to kill cells ( antibiotics etc ) and so you are not looking at a natural environment, but one which has been poisoned - not by a "virus" but by the so called isolation techniques.
The strong likelihood is that the "viruses" seen on microscopy are simply internal cellular components trying to get out; not infectious "viruses" trying to get in.
The whole idea of infectivity is fake, as Pasteur eventually acknowledged - but the paradigm can be exploited for profit, and so it is maintained and defended, against all the evidence.
Just as an analogy, the supposed virus causing "Spanish Flu" was never isolated, nor could any of the secretions of the sick ever be used to infect the healthy.
This is itself strongly indicates that the paradigm is hopelessly wrong - but lucrative, hence irs continuation.
I guarantee that BG would not have invested so heavily in quackzines if he were not able to make massive profits from so doing.
Kirsch was not convinced by antivirus opinions, but his mind is set, as many minds are also set on other demonstrable falsehoods, such as the "holohoax" which he also believes in and promotes.
Steve, I don't think you were fair in your critique of Patrick. The person who makes the claim bears the burden of proof, not the person unconvinced by the claim. Even if a majority of scientists believe viruses exist, that's not proof it actually does exist. Patrick stated that unless you provide sufficient evidence to back up the claim that viruses exist, you have failed to demonstrate that viruses exist and therefore cannot just conclude they do by default. They may exist or they may not, but if one cannot show they do, one cannot assume they do regardless of whether an alternative explanation can be given. An unproven claim does not become true just because an alternate claim isn't provided in its place. That is why Patrick did not provide one. You claimed giving a good alternate explanation would go a long way to convince you viruses don't exist. Perhaps it would. But the topic was not what is needed to convince Steve Kirsch to believe that viruses don't exist. Nor was it what alternative explanation is most likely to be true. Nor was it why have so many virologists believed viruses exist for so many decades if they actually don't exist. The topic was is it true that viruses do exist? If one claims they do, that person bears the burden of proof. You couldn't do that and you can't just presuppose it. Frankly you looked very silly and were quite demeaning toward Patrick. You also claimed you would do some homework based on the discussion and now it appears that you're backing out of that. How disappointing.
Just to be clear, I am fully in agreement with Steve Kirsch regarding the virology. However following their encounter I wrote to Mr. gunnels the following:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 4:12 PM
Dear Patrick,
I want to compliment you on the powerful representation of your position you delivered vis a vis the existence of disease causing infectious particles in the interview with Steve Kirsch. You revealed him to be arrogant, insulting, gullible and of dubious honest scientific curiosity undermining his credibility significantly in my mind. Your manner is confident and calm. You never went for his throat when he would misspeak. Numerous times he made assertions seemingly “for the record” where you gently but firmly brought him back to your fundamental themes.
Needless to say, I see and admire your similar confident deference in your regular appearances with Jon (Patel Patriot) on the power hour with his fairly frequent wrong word choice, etc…. Your self erudition is at Mark Steyn levels!!
I couldn’t tolerate Dr. Kirsch to the end of the video, so if in fact, you solved all the worlds problems and I missed it, I apologize, but I still don’t understand where the disagreement is. Perhaps I’ll have to wait for Threadfest 2!!
If I may ask… I have seen electron micrographs of bacteriophages free floating and attaching and injecting nucleic acid information and replicating and being released in large numbers where the host bacteria dies. Have you seen those images? If so, where is the snag?
You have seen the images, and then you have decided in line with standard opinion that these are "bacteriophages" etc etc.
But these particles cannot be said to be injecting anything when viewed as a still image.
Could they not equally be said to be "ejecting" themselves from a damaged cell?
How do you know they are "replicating"?
Because there are many of them?
Does sand "replicate" on the seashore?
As to the "host bacteria dying" you would die too, if exposed to all the toxic chemicals used in the supposed isolation and characterization procedures they use.
The fact remains that virology is a hoax, when even its most dramatic manifestation, the so called Spanish Flu pandemic, was never once able to demonstrate that secretions or blood from "infected" individuals was then able to "infect" the healthy.
https://youtu.be/yi0hwFDQTSQ As soon as you apply the scientific method in this rabbit hole you will find out the truth. It will be quick and decisive. The choice to know is yours
If you want to change my mind, it's simple. There has been a lot of evidence gathered over the past 100 years that viruses exist. Simply show me that the things we know about a virus are more consistent with the hypothesis A that viruses do not exist than the hypothesis B that they exist.
Or simply show that my 4 observations (golf partner, wife, me, brother) are more likely explained by A than B.
Basically show me that the preponderance of the evidence favors A.
Please explain why nobody has done that.
Or even easier, tell me if I am asked if there is a needle in a haystack and I do 1,000 measurement all consistent with a needle being in the haystack, but I cannot actually find the needle, is there a needle? Or does it not exist because I cannot physically find (aka isolate) it?
Dear Steve,
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Hypothesis B ('that viruses do exist') does not qualify as a scientific hypothesis because it can not be tested by the scientific method(note: Biology demands the 'virus isolation experiment' to have a control group).
Hypothesis A ('that viruses do not exist') is not a hypothesis, because void (or non-existence) is not a phenomenon (an observable event).
The corruption dates way way back in the (re)education system.
Loved to see you two 'battling' for truth! But you really need a SECOND ROUND!
Please have a look at the never proven 'contagious' diseases to be contagious. (none of them!) i.e. the Rosenau 1918 experiment.
No contagion = no viral particle = no virus without the technical discussions.
Watch "The End of Germ Theory" on Bitchute which starts these experiment in which they could not transmit disease how hard they tried.
Viruses only exist as an idea, just like ghost and unicorns.
We can make unicorns 'exist' in a computer model if we take piece of horn from a rhino and a piece of fur from a horse and let the computer configure a unicorn. That is what 'virologists' are doing.
Even without a sample, they can find any 'virus' they look for.
That is what Stefan Lanka has done with his control experiment.
He did not have to pay the €100.000; in appeal the German CDC, the Koch (!) institute had to acknowledge that the Koch postulates were not followed.
Later in 2017 the supreme court judge ruled the same.
Watch "Flu is a detox" on Bitchute to understand why it seems we are 'infecting each other' and ask yourself: why does not everybody but most often just a few people get sick at the same time?
If the current Germ Theory was right, nobody would have lived to believe in it!
You need to debate Dr. Poornima Wagh who actually with money from NIH PROVED SARS COV2 does not exist. When she refused to lie about her findings Robert Redfield told her he did not care what she found she will say she found SARS COV2 or he would have her lab shut down. She refused. And the FBI raided her lab. This is Judy Mikovits all over again. The health industry in this country has been lying to people for 100 years are you so naive to think they haven't lied about viruses. The fact is when people get sick the causes are many and rarely just one cause. Send me information on how Poornima can contact you and if you are brave enough you can hook up and politely interview her.
Can you verify any if these Poirmina claims ?? Folks are reporting that they can not find that she has the PhD degrees she claims. Is she lying or did we miss something ?
According to Poornima she received her PhDs from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It did find an interview with her (not on science) in which she states that she has just about finished up her biology requirements at Santa Barbera Community College and had applied at LSHTM. I have not asked to see her certificates but I also have never asked Dr. Malone, Dr. McCullough, Dr. Merritt, Dr. Mikovits for their proof either. I do have an email from LSHTM stating they could not release her information with her written, signed and mail letter of permission. They did not say she did not attend they instructed that Poornima needed to give her permission to release that information. Personally, I do not think she is lying. She is way too knowledgeable to be lying. I attended a 4 hour interview with her in which international doctors grilled her and she never skipped a beat. These doctors also agree she knew way too much not to have the education and credentials she says she has. That is the best I can say at this time. I know that Poornima is away for the next month so it will be quite a while before I talk with her again.
Hi Karen,
I've recently watch the video from "Dr." Poornima Wagh and... I find it very suspicious. I am not sure if she has the credentials she says she does. I would bet that she does not. At some point in the video she says that "antibodies are fiction, they don't exist", which is an extreme absurdity. She also said that Wuhan scientists only found 40 bps for the genome of SARS-CoV-2, which is another absurdity. The fact that her lab received a $1.5M grant from the NIH to analyze 1500 samples from COVID-19 patients and she decided to do the analysis in the way she wanted, with the methodology she wanted... is an ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY. No one is going to pay you that amount of money for you to decide what to do with it, and the NIH, which is involved in this crime, is never going to do that to disprove themselves.
I don't know who Poornima is, but either she is not very knowledgeable and she is inventing stories, or she is just a fraud committing impersonation of an authoritative scientific figure.
So what credentials do you possess that make you more of an expert than Dr. Wagh? You need to pay closer attention to what she said. She explain the methodology used in the papers that were published proving isolation and the common sense listening to what she described would tell a person their method was not proper science but used to provide the response the CDC/NIH wanted to hear. Her method is a purified, isolated, causation method that has been the gold standard for decades until people found ways to fudge the process and get the result on the report the criminals wanted. Do you really think she would come right out and name Robert Redfield as the person that threatened her if she did not say she isolated SARS COV2 if it were not true? She is not the only person that does not believe in antibodies. Healthy internal organs and cells are what keep you from getting sick. You have every right to question her but I know for her fact her credentials are real and the work she did is real. She is also working with a team analyzing the contents of all of the injections not just those used in the US. $1.5 million from the NIH is recess money to them.
Ok, how do you " know for her fact her credentials are real and the work she did is real"? And what is all that about a Finance Degree and then she end up doing a PhD in Virology and another one in Immunology? That is a very peculiar trajectory, to say the least. And very absurd, to be honest. By the way a PhD doesn't mean anything, you can be mentally retarded and have a PhD. What she is talking about is what is important not her credentials. You don't judge a book by its cover, you have to read it.
The whole problem here is all that nonsense about credentials and authority, that is why we are in the situation that we are, because morons believe in the authority and credentials of other people (e.g. Fauci said, the CDC said, the FDA said...). So... that is a huge problem that is not going to be solved by looking for other experts with credentials that say something else. That is insane.
"She is not the only person that does not believe in antibodies." Ok, so... most of Molecular Biology is garbage then? That is also insane.
You can believe what you will, this person is a fraud and her story is completely absurd. I don't need to have more expertise than an imaginary person to prove that, because we would enter again in the Authority Principle, which is, as I said, insane.
You want to know why all of this is happening. Because people do not have intuition, they do not learn by themselves and they are slaves of some authority figure, some expert or someone else that is going to save them, because they are mentally weak.
As I said, believe what you will.
Steve, again, a virus need not exist and asymptomatic transmission could just be a smoke screen with technologies available today.
I provided a presentation by Dr James Giordano of Georgetown University (DARPA connected), how about the former President of Microsoft Canada talking about the dangers of 5G:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h4TdY344Now
Steve, please reach out to Dr. David Martin. You know who he is.
Also, it need not be a virus at all, these "symptoms" can be triggered in the body using various means, just ask Dr James Giordano of Georgetown University (they can do almost anything surreptitiously):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N02SK9yd60s
Thanks for that reference. I've read one of his publications but I haven't seen Dr. James Giordano talking yet.
Of course! Information like this needs to be shared and awareness needs to be heightened.
Check out the short video entitled "targeted individuals."
They call it "Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy" to throw you off, "shielding" as many call it might have helped so-called "Havanna Syndrome"
Steve, this scientist may be worth debating:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/p9HhjmD0INVV/
"There has been a lot of evidence gathered over the past 100 years that viruses exist." Where is it Steve? Can you produce one paper that doesn't rely on the "viral culturing" of vero cells or the ASSEMBLY (not sequencing) of particulate RNA/DNA into some new Frankensteinian creature? The issue you seem to be avoiding again and again is that nobody can FIND a "virus" except through these two deceptive methods. The "virus" does not exist in REALITY. Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you not see the simplicity of the situation? If as you believe, your wife "transmitted" this "virus" to you, then somebody should be able to find and IDENTIFY these "viruses" floating around in our environment - anywhere - on a table, counter, doorknob, bathroom counter, pillow, bed sheet, steering wheel, your hands etc. Or better yet, they could be easily found in the fluids and lung tissues of a sick person, right? How hard could it be? Why can nobody perform this simple task of finding a "virus" in REALITY? This is the PROBLEM with virology. On the one hand they claim we can spit/blow/wipe/sneeze/cough/spray/transfer these "viruses" between each other billions of times a day, every day, while at the same time claiming that nobody can actually FIND a REAL LIFE SAMPLE of a virus when looked for. How can a sick person spray millions/billions of viruses out into their immediate environment by talking/sneezing/coughing but nobody can analyze this polluted spray and find any viruses in it? This makes absolutely zero sense and no honest person can say with a straight face how this could possibly make any sense. How do you make sense of it? It's not a "size" problem as was clearly explained to you by Patrick regarding bacteriophages (he didn't mention exosomes as well). Both are the same general size as alleged "viruses". So the small size is clearly not what is preventing the discovery of "viruses in the wild". So now what's their next excuse? Because there has to be one, right? Excuse B -> "There's not enough there to find". Really? There's enough there to make you sick as all get-out, but not enough there to find? Does that make sense? Nobody in the history of virology/immunology/microbiology has ever been able to FIND an alleged virus anywhere in the wild...ever? Does that make sense to you? The only way they find "viruses" is to pour urine onto monkey kidney cells and then douse them in poison, and/or ASSEMBLE chunks of RNA/DNA into a Frankensteinian model in a virtual reality simulation program?
"Or simply show that my 4 observations (golf partner, wife, me, brother) are more likely explained by A than B." -> You each caused your own self to get sick, as is the case for all diseases, not just fake germ theory illnesses. Everybody hates this answer, and it's understandable as to why. The world at large isn't ready to hear this yet. We have been so deeply indoctrinated into "victim consciousness", that there's no graceful way to immediately unwind it. Step one is to allow for the possibility. Step two is to begin researching some of the big killers, i.e. heart diseases, cancers, etc. and see if we've really got the answers to what cause these dis-eases. Does a bad diet and poor exercise lead to heart disease? Is there irrefutable proof? How about cancer? Has somebody proven so-called carcinogens or mutation due to epigenetics? Look into it.
"Basically show me that the preponderance of the evidence favors A. Please explain why nobody has done that." -> Somebody has done that. And he spent the rest of his life being demonized, harassed, de-licensed, imprisoned, smeared, attacked, suppressed and ignored.
Your last question didn't make any sense to me. What do your "1000 measurements all consistent with a needle being in the haystack" consist of? A "Measurement" doesn't explain anything.
The issue at hand is very simple; nobody can FIND/LOCATE/ISOLATE any "viruses" floating around in our environment. Not in the air, not on any surfaces, not in the fluids of a sick person, nor in the bodily tissues of a living sick person, nor a dead person. If you buy the establishment virologists explanation as to why they can't pull off this seemingly simple feat, then there's really nothing left to talk about. You have chosen to BELIEVE their story...a story we find completely and utterly UNBELIEVABLE because there is zero science involved, and even more embarrassingly, zero control experiments involved. This is the land of pseudoscience and fairy tales where we just have to "take the experts word for it". Blind trust in authority is what's gotten us into this situation. A situation that is slowly but surely unwinding a little more each day now....
Keep digging Steve! You're getting closer. I'm on your side!
Mika, instead of having me produce 1M pages of documentation, why don't you simply explain to me when I asked patrick how long the RNA is for the virus he said 29,800 base pairs. HOW CAN THERE BE SUCH EXACT AGREEMENT on the length of the RNA if it doesn't exist?? thanks!
I would never want to put such a burden on you Steve. You're doing good work and I'm rooting for you every day of the week. And I'm overjoyed that you're keeping this topic alive instead of ignoring it like everybody else. I believe I only asked for 1 page (paper) that did NOT use the highly deceptive "viral culturing" or "RNA fragment assembly" manufacturing methods. I'm not aware of the existence of such a scientific paper so no burden on you...but you could ask a friend! :)
I'm pretty sure Patrick simply agreed that this is what the virologists claim, right? He clearly didn't agree this was an actual "thing" based in reality. The 29K base pair creation represents nothing more than the entirely SPECULATIVE genetic ASSEMBLY of "unknown origin" RNA fragments in their Pokemon virtual reality software programs (MegaHit, Trinity), right? Surely we agree that nobody has a physical sample to compare to this presumptive "29K creature", right?
And all the other gene assembly teams around the world are piecing together their "29K...or so... virus" based on the data provided by the first guy. None of them are "starting from scratch". They all got a copy of the original "29K Book" to reference as they build their Pokemon variants. All of them are trying to assemble as near-identical a copy of the "29K book" as they can. But since a perfect replica is, by definition, impossible, their versions will always be slightly different.
Question back to you: Since nobody actually has a REAL LIFE "organism" ("virus") in their physical possession, what exactly do you believe there could be "exact agreement" upon other than more SPECULATIVELY ASSEMBLED Pokemon instances? I believe there are like 400,000-ish such Pokemon "variants" in the world's viral databases as of a relatively recent count from the documentary "The Viral Delusion". Quite an amazing creature it is. Darwin would be proud!
Here's the essence of what I, and what I believe Patrick is also getting at, put as simply as possible. The experts tell us the following three facts are true:
Fact #1 - The experts claim we spread these so-called "Fully Intact 29K Base Pair Viruses" by talking, spittling, sneezing, coughing, breathing, spraying, etc. airborne particulates of our saliva/mucous. Said particulates are minute and effectively invisible, so much so that they wouldn't hardly register any volume or weight, and yet, they are more than enough to make anybody within breathing distance sick.
Fact #2 - The experts also claim that they are unable to find/locate/isolate any of these self-same "Fully Intact 29K viruses" from comparatively massive quantities of bodily fluids and tissues which are the very SOURCE of these alleged deadly airborne particulates. We are told that even with say a quart of a sick person's saliva, mucous, urine, blood, etc., no viruses can be found in the sample. Doctors Cowan and Kaufman were even told by an eminent virologist that no viruses could be found in a VAT of 10,000 sick people's bodily fluids.
Fact #3: Virologists also claim that they cannot find the "Fully Intact "29K Viruses" in the fluid/tissue samples that they load up into their virtual reality software programs, instead they are only ever able to find tiny fragments of these once fully-formed "29K virus" creatures.
Thus, we are being told by the experts that the mythical "Fully Intact 29K Virus" can be only be found in the minute airborne spittle bombs we unwittingly hurl at each other every day. The "Fully Intact 29K Virus" creature cannot exist "intact", or be found anywhere else.
I'm unable to reconcile these 3 "facts". They can't peacefully coexist by my reckoning.
What do you think? Can these 3 "facts" peacefully coexist in your mind?
Thanks again for your attention to this topic and for being responsive to me, as well as your unrelenting perseverance in spreading the good word about the jabs! You're doing good work and I'm on your side!
You have shown none of these nlenumerated "Facts" to be true. You merely state they are true without showing ANY (?) evidence of such.
It is interesting to see these images and their interpretation. Regardless of whether these particles are observed in Vero cells (as Mikovits states, it is a Monkey Virus), the data seem self consistent and consistent with their interpretations. Wether they are convincing at all to yiu folks, we will see. Regardless, we can see some apparent spikes in selected high resolution images.
https://portal.fiocruz.br/en/news/microscopy-images-reveal-process-cellular-infection-sars-cov-2
These aren't images of monkey "viruses". You're looking at particles of decayed green monkey kidney TISSUE only. That's the whole trick. You don't need to understand anything else. They poison the kidney tissue with antibiotics and they break down into these itty bitty particles and some random brainwashed "expert" names them "muh viruses"!!
Again, you make assumptions saying "You're looking at particles of decayed green monkey tissues". But in no way have you proven this point. It is like someone saying "You are looking at particles of moon dust". Please try to do a more rational analysis of the publication's data.
This one is from Ralph Baric's lab !!
It looks like an abbreviated version. I'll post the complete article if I can find it. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMicm2023328
Here is one crude TEM images articke. Not sure where they got the virus particles from. https://journals.lww.com/ijmr/fulltext/2021/05000/electron_microscopy_imaging_of_sars_cov_2_at.30.aspx
Poisoned monkey kidney cells as usual -> "Vero CCL-81 cells".
That's the only source IN REALITY that they ever find any "viruses".
Did you evaluate the large amount of detailed information in this article ? The use of an in vitro cell line as standard practice is likely irrelevant to the findings. Do you object to in vitro studies which show the appearance and proliferation of biological particles ? I would focus on what the data implies and what theory is consistent with this data. Certainly, these experiments done on homo sapien cell lines would be interesting, and are necessary to solve this viral propogation model. If these particles do not replicate in homo sapien cells, it would be very important to know to generate an accurate picture. Science involves data, discovery and interpretation. Please look at and evaluate the data in the few publications I presented here.
How many doctors have referred to this as Chimeric, Steve? Not a product of natural evolution right? It need not be a virus at all. How was Moderna able to turn around a shot in 3 hours? Because they sequenced the genome? So, what's the problem? I'm just playing devil's advocate
Steve, your insistence on this H-A and H-B is really disheartening. Your insistence that somebody has to prove a non-existence to you, shows how poor your understanding of scientific rules is. There is no "coldness". There is ONLY "warmness". When you open the door in the winter and feel the cold rushes in, it is really the warm air in the room rushing out. You feel the low level of heat, not the existence of cold. We have created the concept of "coldness" just for convenience (just like the negative pole in the DC current). It really does not exist. Only the lack of "warmness" can be proven because only heat exists. Your insistence in this false H-A or H-B duality is like telling people: it is hot here; if you don't believe me, you must then prove there is coldness here. People are saying to you that the amount of heat measurable here (your claims) is too low to qualify for "hot". Then you go on tangential reasoning that: then why the palms of hands are sweating? Why am I thirsty? Why the glass on windows are not sweating? H-A is the "coldness". It is just for convenience. It does not exist. It cannot be proven. Please drop it and concentrate on your claim H-B.
why don't you simply explain to me when I asked patrick how long the RNA is for the virus he said 29,800 base pairs. HOW CAN THERE BE SUCH EXACT AGREEMENT on the length of the RNA if it doesn't exist?? Everyone says the same thing. How can independent labs get the same sequences (for the same variants)?
A process can be reproducible without being meaningful. I can measure 100th word of every book on the shelves of a library and produce "the mutterings of God". I can measure it at millisecond frequency and get the same result almost every time, but every now and then it mutates. I can find patterns in the mutation - it seems to have a dormancy period on a cycle 86,400,000 - but the pattern is more complicated and worthy of further research. Across billions of measurements, the length seems to be rather stable.
Yet none of that is useful for predicting the future. No matter how hard we study the words to find hidden prophecy, it really isn't there.
No two labs ever got the same sequences. The sequence was concocted in ONE LAB and then published online. All other labs were then ORDERED to use that genome. Does that sink into your thick skull, Steve?
Steve, I will not speak for Patrick. But what I know about people who speak for "vaccine" (Vaccassin) manufacturers as how they could make their "vaccine" against a specific virus if they don't have the virus itself in the first place, they respond that the genomic map was sent to them from China on a flash drive. You must remember both US and UK departments of health admitted in writing that they do not have a sample of the virus when forced by an FOIA request. The number 29,811 comes from that flash drive, not from an established independent lab who God knows how put their hands on the virus when the government agencies couldn't. Now how China came up with that number is anybody's guess.
You are very misinformed.
Why don't you sequence it yourself and prove they got it wrong?
Dr Mike Yeadon former VP of Pfizer has changed his thinking, he is now in Andrew Kaufman's camp, and this man came from a 40 year career of doing work against towards his previous way if thinking.
Good luck with this one, Steve:
https://brandnewtube.com/watch/dr-mike-yeadon-concludes-quot-there-are-no-respiratory-viruses-quot_KevEbey6JMdTM3v.html
Steve, will all due respect, we are in the same "side" and we are being distracted by this.
That said, out of all of the people pouring time and energy into this, you sir have the best rolodex and resources and you know it.
You're investigating therapeutics, you're orchestrating a nation wide tour with all kinds of big names with incredible resources... You're involved a lot.
My proposal, let's crowdfund for an answer. You have the platform to start it and we will all contribute.
We all want answers.
I keep offering you someone that HAS actually proved the SARS COV2 does not exist and you never take up the offer. I have explained the entire story several times. She had NIH grant money and when her results did not make them happy they demanded she lie. She refused and Robert Redfield had her lab shut down. Dr. Poornima Pugh. Send me contact information and I will give you her contact information. She also had 6 universities duplicate her procedure and they all came out with the same results.
I am "misinformed" because I did not sequence "it" myself?
You are well-informed because you sequence "it" yourself?
I claimed anybody "got it wrong"?
A double vaxxer telling a non-vaxxer that he's misinformed. haha
Poornima Wagh has 2 PhD’s. 1 in Virology and 1 in Immunology.
Hi Steve,
I think that this topic is very important so I have answered you in a substack:
Alternative Hypothesis to Communicable Disease-Causing Agents & Notes on Virology in relation to the No-Virus People
In response to Steve Kirsch's newsletter in friendly discussion with Patrick Gunnels
https://agustinsanchezcobos.substack.com/p/alternative-hypothesis-to-communicable
I still have to check for error but this is the first version,
Take Care!
explain to me why that is the MORE likely hypothesis.
Do Lanka and the others agree with your hypothesis?
Hi Steve,
Simplifying, it is the most likely hypothesis based in what I called the Principle of Truth. I am not going to explain the whole principle here, which comes from my own definitions, but it is primarily based on Consequences.
Every Theory, every Hypothesis, has a range of validity, a phenomenological region of reality where it is empirically correct to some degree of accuracy given by the error of your measurements. One example of this is the Classical limit in physics, where you approximate to Classical Mechanics from Quantum Mechanics as the relevant action of your system becomes much larger than Planck's constant ħ.
Additionally, every Theory, every Hypothesis, has a range of validity in what I call The Configuration Space of Language Structures (which is another one of my own definitions). If a hypothesis has an equal or larger phenomenological region of validity, while at least maintaining its accuracy, but it increases its region of validity in The Configuration Space of Language Structures, it normalizes its consequences to a Broader Spectrum of Human actions minimizing the potential harms that can arise from those actions.
What this means is that it allows for the transfer of information in a broader region of the Conscience Space (where Language Structures exist) and therefore, the negative consequence that can arise from its applications to reality (e.g. new technologies, experimental settings, medical interventions, new policies, regulatory agencies, crisis management...) are considerably reduced, because it is taking into account a larger number of Language Structures that harmonize the Conscience Space were Human actions are produced.
That is why my Hypothesis is the more likely Hypothesis.
With regards to your other question "Do Lanka and the others agree with your hypothesis?"
I don't think that they would agree with it but I am sure that they will find it very refreshing, to the point that they may change their minds in some respects or they may be more open to discussion. Many Evolutionary Biologists, Virologists, Molecular Biologists, Biophysicists and others, with a broader perspective on Language, would agree with it, or at least they would say that it is compatible with what they are already saying.
"Then he used the time after I left the call towards the very end to promote the products he sells, to pray, and to promote Trump. I noted that the QAnon clip in his video promoted the “Question everything” philosophy which Patrick appears to support."
A swell guy like that is best described as an oily snake who deserves to be driven off the continent, or put down in place, with all the rest of his ilk. Let's envision this outcome and the steps to that happier place. We ought to question the amazing, hypocritical claim they have "unalienable Rights" anyway. QAnon says so.
I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, so I won't stick to the above stated format.
With your 100 year reference you are probably referring to, among others, the "Spanish flu". There are many treatises laid out in that space, but I personally think Occam had the right idea.
WWI, trench warfare, trench defecation and urination and addition of probably profuse blood spilling and improper body and body part disposal, which when combined with rain water and cold basically means there were hundreds of thousands of troops living, for long stretches of time, in absolutely putrid sewers. Oh yes, I forgot about the rats. I've read stories about horrific sounds the rats were making in noman's lands when they would forage for food from disposed cans, and even gnawing at corpses.
Trench meat was most probably not fed with anything that has any nutritional value but with something that was meant to prop up trench human meat for as long as possible. Like with everything else, an injured sol-dier needs to be fixed up not for after war peacetime, but to be able to go through another charge or to help hold off another charge.
That a lot of people got really sick in such conditions that abounded with filth and were deprived of nutrients is not a big mystery for me and I don't need complicated theories to help me understand what might have been going on.
So, instead of people who sent out so many to the trenches to be mutilated and maimed, to kill and be killed, taking the responsibility of these disease (eliminated by introducing proper living conditions in many "western" regions at the time) it was a lot easier to conjure up a flue and name it after the one country in the region that didn't want to send their people to die in vain. That's a very nice touch.
Instead of saying "we killed a lot of people because we forced them at gunpoint to live in their own filth for months" it was a lot better to transfer the burden to the one region where people did not sleep in their feces, but from which the lethal flue came from. Because areas that lack in killing and destruction breed novel "viruses".
Going back to "covid", what would be the most touted symptoms?
1. according to WHO propagandists, loss of senses of smell and taste. Wow, I must have had "covid" some 30 years ago, when as a kid I had my sinuses or my throat inflame on me. Or once even due to prolonged usage of antibiotics. It wasn't the antibiotics, after all, but "covid". Who knew.
2. dry cough. Wow, I didn't realize the last time me and the lads got a bit too rowdy during a match and started yelling too much after drinking a bit too much on a cool winter day, that my resulting dry cough was actually "covid" instead of being a consequence of doing stupid things.
3. slightly increased body temperature. Wow, I didn't realize that the last time I went for a jog in a rather hot and humid environment and got a bit too warmed up, to the point of sweating my glands off, that was actually "covid". It did last only half an hour and my heightened state did not manage to go through a cool shower, but still, who knew.
4. something that looks like a pneumonia. Wow, I didn't realize that the two pneumonia I had some 25 years ago was actually "covid".
All in all, I don't understand why they call "covid" a novel disease. I've obviously had it several times during the past 30 years.
The RNA sequences are new. It doesn't look like SARS-CoV-1.
I always understood the cause of the "Spanish Flu" was the vaccination of the American soldiers. They spread whatever the army put into their arms before taking off. They killed some 25 million (?) people and of course blamed it on somebody else who didn't have access to microphones. Is this hypothesis false? This scenario seems to be happening again with Covid. People (like Steve) who get vaccinated are now more likely to get sick multiples times as they get "boosted" more and more than unvaccinated people.
I really don't know what's false. I'm simply applying the razor:
Scenario 1 - some medical product is somehow help spread the disease among otherwise healthy people
Scenario 2 - hundreds of thousands are forced to live in a sewer for months and years
There are no extra explanations, whats and ifs needed for the latter scenario. However, of course if they indeed did "vaccinate" people en masse that could have contributed to whatever was later happening, but I don't think that would be spread related. There was simply no need.
Your wife and yourself may have been symptomatic due to damage being caused by the spike protein either because of the jab or because of shedding from someone else. I don't know if your golf partner or brother have been jabbed. Either way, shedding of the spike protein is a real possibility. There have been many reports of unvaxxed individuals falling ill after being around vaxxed individuals for long periods of time.
Your needle in the haystack analogy is quite ironic. This entire topic is about there being many needles in the haystack, but what is causing people to be sick is not something that can be found in the metaphorical haystack; it's something outside the haystack like a glyphosate, EMF, and/or some other unknown toxic/poison.
Just pick you best alternate hypothesis please. Patrick couldn't even propose ONE that fit the observed facts.
And explain why all these labs find the SAME length of the virus and the virus mutates over time.
If you want a best alternative hypothesis so you can debunk it and move on, that's terrible scientific practice. Odds are high that in the sunburn on the beach example, the wind would be chosen as the alternative hypothesis. You'd tear it down and be triumphantly wrong.
An alternative hypothesis has been dismissed many times because the original has been polished. Epicycles on epicycles predicted better than heliocentric for a good while, and General Relativity was wrong when they could potentially have first tested it - but had been corrected by the time they succeeded with the experiment. Germ theory itself was laughable at the time, and Semmelweis died in an asylum... from infection, of course.
You need to beat the null hypothesis with your viral hypothesis - not with a post hoc narrative, but by being enabled in order to make excellent predictions. Should be really easy with a virus - synthesize/replicate it in a pure form and infect people. Otherwise the best you've done is found a biomarker and the vector is indeterminate.
The spike protein itself. That's my best alternative hypothesis given what we know about it. Patrick wasn't the best person to have an in depth conversation about this. I hope that you will have this conversation with Dr. Lee Merritt and/or another one of the well known aforementioned doctors.
These labs are not finding the entire length of the entire virus. They are finding fragments of it. Like a lot of other commenters have pointed out, I are very surprised to see that you have such a high confidence in these tests when we know that they do not specifically test for Covid-19, especially given the fact that this entire "pandemic" was only made possible by the fraudulent overcycled PCR tests that were literally using a sequence provided by China.
Your 'needle in a haystack' argument is backwards. First, it isn't us who have hidden the needle; it isn't us who claims that there is a needle in the haystack — it is the virus proponents. It's YOU who is making and affirming the claim!
Secondly, according to the claims of the virus proponents there isn't one needle in the haystack... It is claimed that "the total number of virions in an infected person during peak infection is 10⁹ to 10¹¹ RNA copies" (https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2024815118)... That's between 1 billion and 100 billion needles in the haystack. That should make it a little easier to find some.
You can use whatever technology you like in order to detect and hone in those needles... But ultimately you must provide the needle. Not a closeup picture of the needle. Not a bunch of computer generated sequences that you put together and then say corresponds to the needle... Show us some physical needles, AND THEN show us that the needles cause disease.
YOU claim that viruses exist. YOU must prove the claim.
Also, why have you simply passed over the bacteriophage issue brought up by Mr. Gunnel? Show us that pathogenic viruses exist in the same manner and to the same level that bacteriophages (whether they are actually classified as 'viruses' or not) have been shown to exist: PHYSICALLY isolated and purified. Since they are roughly the same size, it ought to be easy wouldn't you say?
As we approach, on one end, people doing quantum virology, and, on the other end, people denying their existance, we have perhaps reached some (quantum mechanical) entangled world where at the same time, viruses exist and do not exist, depending on the observational setup. ;)))
I have found that the people denying viruses do conclude the more humane "interventions" whereas the virus defenders tend to "measures". Just in tendency. What you work with seems to form your reality.
Still, when I observe illnesses that swept through our house, I rather hold it with
A) if it quacks and walks and looks like a duck, maybe it is.
(meaning: it is a mental model that let's me deduce new insights, and if tools would be used humanistically, and not in Level-4 labs for sinister military or wag-the-dog purposes, we could have a nice live on earth...
B) Pasteur and Bernard told us: the milieu is all. The human experimentator Robert Koch told us the pathogen is all. Both were wrong, but I think 95% Paseur and Bernard were right.
(So Robert Koch is only a 95% villain. For his experiments on humans and his greed for recognition, mainly, of course ;))
As for A): the model of viruses brought me to the thesis that you can do a vaccine in 30 seconds.
Infected person X blows snot in bowl. Sterilize, filtrate, and do in nasal spray.
Take 5x/day, 1 Week, and measure mucosal immunity before and after. Applicable to elderly people's homes missing to train their immune system by breathing air in gatherings.
Do this in a whole city and observe if a virus is suddenly tamed into coexisting mode by up-selecting more mild variants. Help it by Xylitol spray and C):
Up-selecting more mild variants is PROHIBITED by ALL measures. Masks, vaccines, Fear Porn, CDC un-hygiene rules (1,5m, elbow, hands (1/1000ths of infections). I set up better ones:
C)
- use VIRTUAL MASKS (antiviral nasal sprays) in need (protect vulnerables) that slowly make them less vulnerable, like xylitol (prebiotic, improves biome, reduces vulnerability; inorganic antiseptics (detox together with eg healing earth or ceolite)).
- C1): if SEVERE symptoms: call all contacts and cry STOP: don't spread, do PEP:
"post exposition prophylaxis", by doing I-PREVENT or I-CARE or at least doing what granny told when symptoms would be active of incident case
- C2) if MILD symptoms, give it a chance; ask your contacts: would you mind to get a cold? AND protect vulnerables (in doubt both using virtual masks AND avoiding droplet production in 3m 40sec radius, so go OUT for {NOSE BLOWING, cough, sneeze}, in need, cover under pullover by dragging the neck collar over your nose line and pressing it there by one hand, rafting it around waist, let drops settle, crouch out agian, "sorry", to catch DROPLETS, where 1 is infectious, which is why masks don't work, just reduce initial dose. Each mask has a part of the face contact line only pressed on lightly, so fleece is transmissive to droplets even. (The pullover works if good cotton, no holes, at least in family it prevented too many becoming too severly ill at once since 14 years now; Elbow is straight dumb as >70% droplets get reflected and still shoot 3m, AND no cotton there in summer, >90% reflected; as we work on habit, we have to train life long to be mindful ;)
C1 + C2 = UP-SELCTION in ?1-3months?
ONLY C1+C2 UP-SELECT mild variants in NO TIME, as ALL variants exist in parallel in waves, the fairy-tale of "long and winding road to endemy" is blewn away, measures make it long and winding; and their measurable dominant presence is only a reflection of our current BEHAVIOUR and our current IMMUNITY, which we can change in NO TIME, both. Spraying on iota carrageenan, xylitol with GSE or CIO2 or HClO is a short-lived immunity, or for the aviral community, DETOX.
Spring Cures modulate your immunity, even long-term if healing epigenetics, so also inheritable!
Curing the epigentics is the real cure against trauma like vaccination and will restore proper immune response. Help finding plant based interventions BACK-PROGRAMMING the epigenetic setup, un-doing the REPROGRAMMING of the PEG2k "medical device".
Many old healing systems could do this. I see no physician crying hello, I found the "UNDO" of the PEG2k REPROGAMMING of your epigenetic setup you inherited 3-6 generations along, sorry for messing with it by the way as I gave you the last shot.
And finding plants that free biome from mRNA producing plasmides, as were found 30% in vaccine vials, not 0.3% as max (should set 0% as goal for good manufacturing procedures!).
By the way, ALL remedies working against CoV diminish the problem of viral residues like EBV and relatives, and Lyme, and overshooting immunity due to mold (major trigger of mast cell activation, but I fear of MAS and AI as well). So I-RECOVER is a good apporach for all these modern symptoms.
So this debate may well have the end:
IT DOESN'T MATTER what you believe.
It matters that you listen to your heart and help people to get well or not ill in the first place.
And yes, I heared the spanish flu began 1km in front of fort knox and breed about it.
And yes, I heard the last Ebola problem also had an episode half way from some lab in US.
And yes, I was told the "vaccine" for ebola was done in ring vaccination, so people suffered from cytokine storm doubled by vaccine AND incubation, and so prematurely went ill, 4-7 days incubation instead of >10, but were not counted, so 100% vaccine "efficacy"...
Back to CoV:
And yes, my doughter had no illness, did a CoV test, went to PFi Vax, and 3 days later had CoV. So Vax depresses immune system, and incubation or viral residues become a problem, in the picture of no viruses: you inject a poison, and junk can replicate. And yes, our family split over the dicussion if the girls had to be vaccinated, the moloch won and did a check on this topic for us.
And yes, she could infect 4 others the day before symtoms, so yes, PRE-symtomatically is possible, but ONE day before infectiousness, her aerosol count when exhaling softly in a pm2.5 air qualtiy sensor rose by FACTOR 7 from base value the days before. So mucosal integrity can be non-specifically measured and interventions given at the right time. And vulnerable protected, for 25$ re-useable indefinetly for ANY malaise on mucosa, also tells me if I ate something I'm snesitive to. Nice for avoidance cure to calm down immune system, as it tells you 2 days before symptoms for IgG-based delayed "allergies".
Sci-fi part:
I once found a cool description of what viruses are more referring to extended parts or particles of life itself, inventing it a-new, transporting inventions across species borders, rising above us especially when we gather in a crowd, and communicating, exchanging, flipping between states, tunneling, whatever, so in one person, not all species of the zoo are present, only 8-10, but above a crowd, it get's complete, and vibrates as a quantum mechanistic swarm, massively parallel, distributed, quasi-beiing trying to hack our immune systems AND behaviour, also directly possible (see rabies). Perhaps all viruses in all beings that are similar communicate in some way globally. Perhaps the spike that is so identical due to vaccination is the single most powerful channel for this communication solely between humans and some zoo animals.
Perhaps it is in our reach to shape the swarm, tame it, play for us, if WE behave on this planet, and respect the vastness of the swarm, engulfing all Gaia! I think older civilisations were much further advanced in that respect without the concept of viruses. But doing the right things.
Of course, when you input bad things, like the prion snipped in wuhan spike, then bad things happen and people start to show neurodegenerative diseases.
Interestingly, the swarm itself expelled the prion really soon after wuhan. <
(Did it also expell the 4 AIDS snippets "randomnly" inserted in the spike, but converging in 3D model JUST next to the cleavage site, so very funcional? Of course, just accidentally they bend together as one...)
So this explains the need for the "dual booster", instead of "current strain only" booster, including the remainder for us of the bovine madness prion AND pretend to do something against the current strains, as to the last dumb vaxxing physician it began to deem strange why in the world wuhan spike should do some good.
"Pretend", as the swarm INSTANTLY dodges ANY vaccine and new ADE-I then 3 rounds later ADE-D variants are circulating.
NO humane, hippocratic, humanistic vaccine for rapidly mutanting pathogens can be based upon deep infection / transfection provoking b-cell based antibodies. PERIOD.
Please, WHICH vaccine project solely relies upon mucosal TRAINING (of innate antibodies, mainly), and does not ENTER the body through the mucosa, which many nasal / inhalative vaccines do?
Mika, SO, WHERE IS YOUR ANALYSIS OF 1) THE POSTULATES OF VIROLOGY and 2) THE EVIDENCE CITED BY VIROLOGISTS IN SUPPORT OF THESE POSTULATES. THAT is where to start the discussion, since I can assure you, that these scientists in sophisticated labs equipped withvarious analytical devices have a SIGNIFICANT body of evidence. WHERE IS IT ? DID YOU LOOK ? Once you provide it, wecan analyze it. Until then, you will fail the course cause you just didn't do your homework.
The structure if Zika Virus was determined by Cryo-Electron Microscopy
Https://www.virology.ws/2016/04/05/structure-of-zika-virus/
More strong evidence fo viruses. The complexity of the structure makes it so much more convincing.
Tomatoe Bushy Stunt Virus - the first virus structure determined by X-Ray crystallography (1976).
Poliovirus and rhinovirus (1986).
Many X-ray crystal structures of viruses to 2 angstrom resolution resolves the specific amino acid chains and all the (larger) atoms in the side chains.
(Sorry, virus deniers, we can not Cancel hard science. Real data. Strong proof. If you folks want to destroy our society and massive knowledge base, please think twice).
Steve, How would some information on X-Ray crystal structures on crystals of various viruses do for evidence? X-ray crystal analysis is a hard science technique used with many smaller molecules for many years.
https://www.virology.ws/2016/04/05/structure-of-zika-virus/
We tend to have a limitation on what we know and what we can verify. Thanks for being willing to talk with others, I’ve only come across Patrick because of Patel Patriot deep diving Devolution. Thanks for including Judy’s take, I like her a lot. There will be a tremendous work ahead to re-do much science that has since been deemed compromised. Can’t wait for the elementary science fairs to prove reality.
The key is, these folks make the same 5-10 points of partial information, but have NEVER listed the claims or points that a standard Virusibelieving virologist uses as the basis for viral theory, as I will call it. As you state, they should start at the beginning of published research in virology and at least review the major papers, such as papers contained in review articles. A dishonest effort = a dishonest approach = darkness and not light. Those who do not seek the truth as hid gold, obtain the fruit of their laziness = darkness, blindness and ignorance. They get Exactly what they deserve. Shake the dust off your feet, but at the same time, reach out to deceived sheep when you encounter them. There are operatives at many levels. Those aware of the deception they spread, those paid, and many duped at various levels. Buyer beware. Buy the Truth and sell it not. I have rwached out to many. But many have their minds already shreaded by the psycho operations. They are currently quite lobotomized.
Steve, My approach to folks who promote or appear to believe the No Virus mantra, is to simply deal with evidence and logic. I fully accept that any postulate might be correct, but that probably (??) Only one is correct, or more accurately, will be found consistent with all the available confirmed data. This is the meaasge of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" which I alerted all to in March or April 2020. I further expressed that Keptner-Tregoe Problem Analysis methodoligy should be used to avoid jumping to conclusions. But I wonder if anyone "heard" what I said by obeying those key rules. An existing paradigm is accepted in science, but is supplanted when 1. An anomaly is found which does not fit this paradigm and 2. A new paradigm is proposed which includes all confirmed observations.
The problem is, the level of many of the folks I have been talking to is such that strict logic and reading comprehension is missing ! Here is an example. In late Aug 2020, an article "went viral" titled "Did the CDC Reduce their Covid-19 Death Count by 94%" (or a very similar title). The mere suggestion in this article was that with the Release of Table 3 of Comorbidities, the CDC may have reduced their CV-19 death counts. People immediately JUMPED to a ludicrous conclusion. To me, this was an obvious cognitive psychological operation. These folks must have never read Table 3. No where in this table did the CDC state they reduced the death counts (until this year, they reduced it by about 72k, as I recall, in a totally separate release). Well, my brilliant ass-ociates didn't turn on their minds...or what ? People are not carefully thinking, are shocked into disbelief of everything and easy believism based on unverified snippets. I am in disbelief at the level of degradation of cognition. Or is it just that the average mind is so below average and I have associated too long with the top few percent in intelligence ? Both, I suspect. James Corbett describes the relevance of The Structure of Sci Revolutions (Kuhn, or & Popper version) in his "Science Says" episode. Can we get just a few folks to screw their heads on straight ? I have to keep checking if mine is attached in the age of mis mass information.
Please see Rense & Erica Khan's comments on Robert Young (alleging Sci Fraud in a publication submission using other's credentials) via Kevin McKarin's (sp) investigation and the Malone "threat" to Peter Breggin.
Steve, I would prefer to e-mail you. The discussion with Gunnels is laborious and begins with expressions on your face which indicate that you find his position apriori highly questionable. Gunnels' body language begins or soon morphs into defensive postures. He also shifts in his seat often, which is a characteristic Tom Cowan exhibits in some or most of his videos. This shifting appears to me to show a lack of confidence.
Regardless of the ineffectively laborious nature of your questioning, I find your research showing difficulty in Poormina's claimed PhDs is stunning, seeing the widespread distribution of this, and the easy acceptance of One lady claiming observations, while the scientific standard is reproducibility. If we had 10 people claiming the same data, it would strictly be hearsay to us. I can not confirm results if I do not do the measurements or experiments. Traditionally, there has been a network of scientists who have established trust relationships, so their results are believed by close associates in the field. I see that the ease of information distribution today gives 1. The village idiot a platform and 2. Tends to equally weight qualifed, unqualified and total liars. This situation creates a severe problem for the multiple non-realities or Virtual realities thus created. We have a problem here ! Beam me up, Scotty.
It's debatable what phages are: https://www.livescience.com/largest-bacteriophage-discovered.html
These phages are "hybrids between what we think of as traditional viruses and traditional living organisms," such as bacteria and archaea, senior author Jill Banfield, a University of California, Berkeley, professor of Earth and planetary science and of environmental science, policy and management, said in the statement. This huge phages' genome is much larger than the genomes of many bacteria, according to the statement.
"Show me the data" says Steve - indeed.
Show the data which demonstrates a virus isolated, purified, and then shown to be able to infect people.
It isn't there, no matter where you look.
The methodologies used to "isolate the virus" are known to kill cells ( antibiotics etc ) and so you are not looking at a natural environment, but one which has been poisoned - not by a "virus" but by the so called isolation techniques.
The strong likelihood is that the "viruses" seen on microscopy are simply internal cellular components trying to get out; not infectious "viruses" trying to get in.
The whole idea of infectivity is fake, as Pasteur eventually acknowledged - but the paradigm can be exploited for profit, and so it is maintained and defended, against all the evidence.
Just as an analogy, the supposed virus causing "Spanish Flu" was never isolated, nor could any of the secretions of the sick ever be used to infect the healthy.
This is itself strongly indicates that the paradigm is hopelessly wrong - but lucrative, hence irs continuation.
I guarantee that BG would not have invested so heavily in quackzines if he were not able to make massive profits from so doing.
Kirsch was not convinced by antivirus opinions, but his mind is set, as many minds are also set on other demonstrable falsehoods, such as the "holohoax" which he also believes in and promotes.
Steve, I don't think you were fair in your critique of Patrick. The person who makes the claim bears the burden of proof, not the person unconvinced by the claim. Even if a majority of scientists believe viruses exist, that's not proof it actually does exist. Patrick stated that unless you provide sufficient evidence to back up the claim that viruses exist, you have failed to demonstrate that viruses exist and therefore cannot just conclude they do by default. They may exist or they may not, but if one cannot show they do, one cannot assume they do regardless of whether an alternative explanation can be given. An unproven claim does not become true just because an alternate claim isn't provided in its place. That is why Patrick did not provide one. You claimed giving a good alternate explanation would go a long way to convince you viruses don't exist. Perhaps it would. But the topic was not what is needed to convince Steve Kirsch to believe that viruses don't exist. Nor was it what alternative explanation is most likely to be true. Nor was it why have so many virologists believed viruses exist for so many decades if they actually don't exist. The topic was is it true that viruses do exist? If one claims they do, that person bears the burden of proof. You couldn't do that and you can't just presuppose it. Frankly you looked very silly and were quite demeaning toward Patrick. You also claimed you would do some homework based on the discussion and now it appears that you're backing out of that. How disappointing.
Just to be clear, I am fully in agreement with Steve Kirsch regarding the virology. However following their encounter I wrote to Mr. gunnels the following:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 4:12 PM
Dear Patrick,
I want to compliment you on the powerful representation of your position you delivered vis a vis the existence of disease causing infectious particles in the interview with Steve Kirsch. You revealed him to be arrogant, insulting, gullible and of dubious honest scientific curiosity undermining his credibility significantly in my mind. Your manner is confident and calm. You never went for his throat when he would misspeak. Numerous times he made assertions seemingly “for the record” where you gently but firmly brought him back to your fundamental themes.
Needless to say, I see and admire your similar confident deference in your regular appearances with Jon (Patel Patriot) on the power hour with his fairly frequent wrong word choice, etc…. Your self erudition is at Mark Steyn levels!!
I couldn’t tolerate Dr. Kirsch to the end of the video, so if in fact, you solved all the worlds problems and I missed it, I apologize, but I still don’t understand where the disagreement is. Perhaps I’ll have to wait for Threadfest 2!!
If I may ask… I have seen electron micrographs of bacteriophages free floating and attaching and injecting nucleic acid information and replicating and being released in large numbers where the host bacteria dies. Have you seen those images? If so, where is the snag?
With Respect,
Bruce Hecht
•Reading Epic Threads paid sub (Twitch)
•Stephen Patrick Gunnels fan
•Devolution enthusiast
•American Patriot
•Pediatric Cardiologist (MD)
You have seen the images, and then you have decided in line with standard opinion that these are "bacteriophages" etc etc.
But these particles cannot be said to be injecting anything when viewed as a still image.
Could they not equally be said to be "ejecting" themselves from a damaged cell?
How do you know they are "replicating"?
Because there are many of them?
Does sand "replicate" on the seashore?
As to the "host bacteria dying" you would die too, if exposed to all the toxic chemicals used in the supposed isolation and characterization procedures they use.
The fact remains that virology is a hoax, when even its most dramatic manifestation, the so called Spanish Flu pandemic, was never once able to demonstrate that secretions or blood from "infected" individuals was then able to "infect" the healthy.
I believe the snag is Shown is the first paragraph of the challenge https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0215/5262/7812/files/SETTLING_THE_VIRUS_DEBATE_-_Source_8798d0e1-0b5b-46b8-9565-9c7624df7932.pdf?v=1658265221
namely, " defined as replicating, protein-coated pieces of genetic material, either DNA or RNA,
exist as independent entities in the real world and are able to act as pathogens"
IMO I think it's clear that the pathogenicity is with respect to animals.
https://youtu.be/yi0hwFDQTSQ As soon as you apply the scientific method in this rabbit hole you will find out the truth. It will be quick and decisive. The choice to know is yours