Michael Yeadon xVP Pfizer, "there is no virus!" Germ Theory is finally sinking.

[joaquin]

I used to be one of the covid skeptics, then I got myocarditis from an infection last winter and still haven’t recovered. The No-covid dogmatists can technically argue that these symptoms are possible with common colds, but the fact is that the furin cleavage site is not found in other common coronaviruses.

The main contradiction in the covid dissident sphere is that they will usually admit the ruling class has open depopulation plans, but if you suggest that they’ve created a virus for this purpose, you will get lynched by these dissidents.

@trance I "got covid" too and yet I'm still a covid skeptic. You see, I use logic, trance. You toss out a phrase like "furin cleavage site" and I'm supposed to be wowed by such language?

All symptoms of covid can be found in other illnesses. I was worn down from travelling, eating all sorts of gut disrupting foods, breathing in filthy chemtrails and having my body bombarded by electrosmog (wi-Fi, airport security, airplane flights). I did not develop that illness because some floating mystical pathogen landed on my eyeball. And there was no Chinese lab leak. Gain of function? ROFLMAO!!

Go peddle your hollywood-spy-thriller TopGun pentagon invented rubbish elsewhere.

 

[Jam]

Dr. Lee Merritt Interview with Poornima Wagh PhD Virology​

View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/0wVQQXV1LkVd/


18th August 2022

Charlatan's Web

Our search for the scientific credentials of the latest 'covid truth' celeb turns up nothing. Poornima Wagh claims to have worked on analysis of 756 samples proving SARS-CoV-2 does not exist. Did she?

planetwavesfm.substack.com

 

[RealNeat]

Charlatan's Web

Our search for the scientific credentials of the latest 'covid truth' celeb turns up nothing. Poornima Wagh claims to have worked on analysis of 756 samples proving SARS-CoV-2 does not exist. Did she?

planetwavesfm.substack.com

Good find, she makes many valid points but is a newcomer to the public eye. It's important to confirm people are who they say they are. That article seems like good journalism, we'll have to see how it pans out, I'll do my own deep dive on her and see if I can find anything.

 

[RealNeat]

I'm not sure steping into such a warzone is good for my mental health but I have a question that I'm genuinely wondering (it might have been answered already sorry).

I wonder how are interpreted the sequenced genomes in the "SARS-CoV-2 does not exist paradigm". If we are sampling noise from an unpure medium, how can it be consistent over repetitions? Is it the sampling method that artificially produces this consistency (I guess it could because of the implications of the RNA swarm theory, which says that you would always have multiple virus versions existing together)? I admit I don't know how sequencing works at all. Maybe you have to indicate what you are looking for somehow, which would defeat the purpose of this procedure in the first place.

If it's the produce of an internal mecanism like exosomes, what do mutation of the genetic code we are sampling mean (you know, the "philogenetic trees of mutations and variants")?

Mike Stone has covered this ad nauseam, id quote it and pick the most relevant parts but there's a lot and I've already done that throughout several "virus" threads. Word search the articles in this tab, or just read them, he's very thorough;

Genomics – ViroLIEgy

Posts about Genomics written by Mike Stone

viroliegy.com

 

[joaquin]

I used to be one of the covid skeptics, then I got myocarditis from an infection last winter and still haven’t recovered. The No-covid dogmatists can technically argue that these symptoms are possible with common colds, but the fact is that the furin cleavage site is not found in other common coronaviruses.

The main contradiction in the covid dissident sphere is that they will usually admit the ruling class has open depopulation plans, but if you suggest that they’ve created a virus for this purpose, you will get lynched by these dissidents.

How many forums are you monitoring for virus talk?

 

[MC_55]

Charlatan's Web

Our search for the scientific credentials of the latest 'covid truth' celeb turns up nothing. Poornima Wagh claims to have worked on analysis of 756 samples proving SARS-CoV-2 does not exist. Did she?

planetwavesfm.substack.com

Bear in mind the Merritt is also forwarding the notion that the genetic basis of the spike protein, pertains to a group or "tribe" of people who engineered the injections, and specifically engineered a genomic specificity.

Let's cut to the chase. Merritt suggests the Ashkenazi Jews developed the vaccine to eliminate caucasian people specifically.

 

[Peatness]

Charlatan's Web

Our search for the scientific credentials of the latest 'covid truth' celeb turns up nothing. Poornima Wagh claims to have worked on analysis of 756 samples proving SARS-CoV-2 does not exist. Did she?

planetwavesfm.substack.com

Thank you. I was sent this yesterday on another thread. I responded there.

 

[RealNeat]

Del Bigtree comments on the "virus" debate with some interesting insights into his personal experience, even if I don't align with all of his statements. Worth watching timstamp 44:00:00

If I had one word of advice to him it would be to look deeper into pleomorphism and consider that germ theory caused this mess to begin with. I however understand his sentiments and appreciate their efforts which is why I actively donated to his platform, even though I was torn by his interpretation of the fraud. Imagine how many other things we are forced to "play in their court" for and how that hinders scientific progress and transparency. The most critical issues get put on the back burner simply to appease the masters and have our next serving of breadcrumbs.


View: https://odysee.com/@theconsciousresistance:7/activation19:d

 

[LLight]

Mike Stone has covered this ad nauseam, id quote it and pick the most relevant parts but there's a lot and I've already done that throughout several "virus" threads. Word search the articles in this tab, or just read them, he's very thorough;

Genomics – ViroLIEgy

Posts about Genomics written by Mike Stone

viroliegy.com

I've rapidly read the The Case Against “Viral” Genomes article.

I try to summarize his points: genome sequencing is highly error prone and virus are not isolated so the results cannot be trusted (the process can also make "variants" appear artificially), it's especially not a proof that viruses exist and are causing diseases.

What I was wondering: if this process is error prone, why do we seem to record consistent (stable genetic code <- note that this might be an erroneous statement) genomes as output. If we are sequencing something which is not a virus, what is it?

Also, if variants are artifacts of sampling errors, why are philogenetic trees showing that genomes seem to evolve, like variants being mutated versions of previous virus and so on. This is not something you would expect from random error.

 

[RealNeat]

I've rapidly read the The Case Against “Viral” Genomes article.

I try to summarize his points: genome sequencing is highly error prone and virus are not isolated so the results cannot be trusted (the process can also make "variants" appear artificially), it's especially not a proof that viruses exist and are causing diseases.

What I was wondering: if this process is error prone, why do we seem to record consistent (stable genetic code <- note that this might be an erroneous statement) genomes as output. If we are sequencing something which is not a virus, what is it?

Also, if variants are artifacts of sampling errors, why are philogenetic trees showing that genomes seem to evolve, like variants being mutated versions of previous virus and so on. This is not something you would expect from random error.

Before I attempt to answer your question in detail I want to ask a question. Why do you think a virus would evolve? What's the evolutionary advantage if they are not living? Why would they want to better infect a host? Ray has mentioned that they (if they exist) are as a result of the emission of a higher organism, but that means the organisms they "infect" lead to their evolution, which in the literal sense of the word (evolution) makes no sense.

To expand on this theory which I think is more plausible than the current viral dogma (but still unproven); Its like a game of telephone where the message (virus) supposedly gets altered every time it is relayed, but the message originated from a person, the message did not all of a sudden become sentient. The message is also neutral it has no reason to multiply or find a reason to better "infect" a person. It is simply a transmission of information. But to claim it causes disease is something else entirely, its like saying a chair, by itself causes disease, you choose what to do with the chair. I really don't think the body is dumb enough to read a code from another organism that says "kill yourself" (besides endogenous apoptosis) and just agree. Ray commented that the cell would take what it needs from such packets of information (which he mentioned there is a innumerable amount of) and leave the rest. What he commented for its ability to cause disease is that a weakened body may be susceptible to "forced information." Paraphrasing of course. That would be like the chair example being a "cause of disease" when a person can barely move and gets muscle atrophy from sitting, or they use the chair for unintended purposes like changing a light bulb or they are so weak that they miss the chair and fall, all of which are not a fault of the chair.

A little off topic but its the only way I can even begin to make sense of a so called virus along with other competing theories like pleomorphism, exosomes (isolation techniques starting to look almost as unreliable as "viruses") and cellular debris.

 

[LLight]

Before I attempt to answer your question in detail I want to ask a question. Why do you think a virus would evolve? What's the evolutionary advantage if they are not living? Why would they want to better infect a host? Ray has mentioned that they (if they exist) are as a result of the emission of a higher organism, but that means the organisms they "infect" lead to their evolution, which in the literal sense of the word makes no sense.

I think the admitted answer would be that it's to stop being detected by the immune system (more a consequence than a will of the virus).

It could happen without any advantage, just a consequence of the faulty copy mechanism.

I'm not sure to understand the second part of your post but I believe I've heard that the host could modulate the evolution (mistakes in the copy mechanism) rate as a defence mechanism because at some point, when there is too much mutations the genetic material would not produce functional proteins.

Ps: I'm not sure it was clear in my message, but when I used the word "consistent", I wanted to mean that the genetic material seems to be somehow (except mutations of course) stable over time and space (laboratory, countries).

 

[tankasnowgod]

I wonder how are interpreted the sequenced genomes in the "SARS-CoV-2 does not exist paradigm". If we are sampling noise from an unpure medium, how can it be consistent over repetitions? Is it the sampling method that artificially produces this consistency (I guess it could because of the implications of the RNA swarm theory, which says that you would always have multiple virus versions existing together)? I admit I don't know how sequencing works at all. Maybe you have to indicate what you are looking for somehow, which would defeat the purpose of this procedure in the first place.

From what I understand, it's not consistent at all. That's why you have talk of "variants." We've heard about the more famous ones (delta and omicron), but according to Andrew Kaufman, there are well over 5.5 Million "variants," or variations of the genetic sequence.


View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/3afWsXJUybnh/

 

[MC_55]

Before I attempt to answer your question in detail I want to ask a question. Why do you think a virus would evolve? What's the evolutionary advantage if they are not living? Why would they want to better infect a host? Ray has mentioned that they (if they exist) are as a result of the emission of a higher organism, but that means the organisms they "infect" lead to their evolution, which in the literal sense of the word makes no sense.

Moreover, if the entity is not alive then why are the considered as a part of biology? Genetic material structures water, mRNA is one of numerous ways the genome can shed error ridden informations as feature of it detoxification process, the ejecting genetic material structures the envelope phase boundary of the 'virus' in the same manner DNA mediates the structure of cytoplasm.

The failure to isolate mature viruses from most human tumors, together with the model of ‘cancer growth genes’ (oncogenes) led molecular biologists to assume that most cancers were caused by defective RNA viruses (specifically, retroviruses) that had become integrated into human chromosomes, and transmitted across generations as a part of the genome. In other words, the isolation problem is so well recognized in other biological disciplines, its actually critical to popular theory.

Herein then is my above point about the philosophy of science and the problem of assembling complete descriptions of dynamic systems using the empirical method, in that, the Quine/Duhem underdetermination of data thesis, you can have multiple conflicting scientific paradigms and theories whose individual methodologies all “work” and whose descriptions all fit the appearances/data, but nevertheless still wouldn’t be “true” given the fact that they contradict each other. I think its all or mostly garbage and is used as a social engineering tool.

 

[RealNeat]

Moreover, if the entity is not alive then why are the considered as a part of biology? Genetic material structures water, mRNA is one of numerous ways the genome can shed error ridden informations as feature of it detoxification process, the ejecting genetic material structures the envelope phase boundary of the 'virus' in the same manner DNA mediates the structure of cytoplasm.

The failure to isolate mature viruses from most human tumors, together with the model of ‘cancer growth genes’ (oncogenes) led molecular biologists to assume that most cancers were caused by defective RNA viruses (specifically, retroviruses) that had become integrated into human chromosomes, and transmitted across generations as a part of the genome. In other words, the isolation problem is so well recognized in other biological disciplines, its actually critical to popular theory.

Herein then is my above point about the philosophy of science and the problem of assembling complete descriptions of dynamic systems using the empirical method, in that, the Quine/Duhem underdetermination of data thesis, you can have multiple conflicting scientific paradigms and theories whose individual methodologies all “work” and whose descriptions all fit the appearances/data, but nevertheless still wouldn’t be “true” given the fact that they contradict each other. I think its all or mostly garbage and is used as a social engineering tool.

I think the solution to this dilemma, and one that I often refer to in practice (out of the realm of theory and methodology) is that of ancient medicine. Where these type of conversations weren't had but there were humors, doshas, elements, meridians, temperaments. I had made a cheeky thread titled "don't treat the cause treat the symptoms" where in I present the argument that the symptoms help signal the treatment, making these type of conversations (this thread) obsolete. None the less I still choose to engage in debate and have a bias because of the intense lack of credibility in this field, I think we can do better.

 

[MC_55]

I think the solution to this dilemma, and one that I often refer to in practice (out of the realm of theory and methodology) is that of ancient medicine. Where these type of conversations weren't had but there were humors, doshas, elements, meridians, temperaments. I had made a cheeky thread titled "don't treat the cause treat the symptoms" where in I present the argument that the symptoms help signal the treatment, making these type of conversations (this thread) obsolete. None the less I still choose to engage in debate and have a bias because of the intense lack of credibility in this field, I think we can do better.

My point exactly, disease is metaphysical and beyond the reach of post-Enlightenment techne. I think we agree. The eastern systems have been validated and supressed by western "physics." Energy IS and it appeals to that which is not coporeal.

 

[5LGreenback]

So scanning thru this thread quickly, and I'm open to the "viruses don't exist" idea, it may very well be true.

However it seems some are claiming covid-19 is just a cold/ flu. Which again, that may very well be true, but unless I'm mistaken, the cold and flu are viruses, so do those viruses exist but covid-19 doesn't?

I find the whole thing fascinating, and understand keeping the lie of virology going may be necessary to keep the lie of vaccines going. If it isn't viruses, it sure would be nice to know how the heck these illnesses are transmitted.

I had "covid", it was 1 day of a really bad flu, followed by several days of a cold with a much higher level of fatigue that came in waves for about a week and a lingering cough.

I am thankful for the protection my unvaccinated-ness provided me (I actually did fare much better than my vaxxed co workers).

Admittedly though, the symptoms I experienced were unlike anything I have had before. I realize this still doesn't prove it was a virus, but to me it does prove SOMETHING novel seems to be causing an illness. Maybe its occult witchcraft? (kidding, kind of).

 

[joaquin]

@5LGreenback
Have you ever mistakenly left a fork on a plate in the microwave? Perhaps all the metal nano-particles man has been showered with since the late 1990s has made us somewhat like the aluminum foil in the microwave.

 

[5LGreenback]

@5LGreenback
Have you ever mistakenly left a fork on a plate in the microwave? Perhaps all the metal nano-particles man has been showered with since the late 1990s has made us somewhat like the aluminum foil in the microwave.

Yes, perhaps!

I just wish there was more solid "proof" behind such theories.

 

[tankasnowgod]

However it seems some are claiming covid-19 is just a cold/ flu. Which again, that may very well be true, but unless I'm mistaken, the cold and flu are viruses, so do those viruses exist but covid-19 doesn't?

I find the whole thing fascinating, and understand keeping the lie of virology going may be necessary to keep the lie of vaccines going. If it isn't viruses, it sure would be nice to know how the heck these illnesses are transmitted.

Don't confuse real world, objectively observable symptoms with the alleged cause of those symptoms. When most people say they have a cold or the flu, they mean that they have a fever, are stuffed up, are coughing, sneezing, have fatigue, and body aches, and such. Many of these symptoms are objectively observable by others.

"Officially," the cause of the cold and flu is a "virus," and most people think this is the case. They don't have much reason to question it. But, in all the times I've had colds in my life, along with friends, family, and coworkers, I never heard of anyone running down and getting "tested" to see what kind of "virus" they had, prior to 2019. So really, people assume the cause, but don't know. (of course, any "tests" themselves have plenty of issues, as they can only be surrogate tests in the first place).

Even if viruses don't exist, it could still be other germs, like bacteria or fungi. Or, something else completely. The topic was discussed on the forum before Covid was ever a thing. For example, this thread suggesting that endotoxin is chiefly responsible for cold and flu type symptoms-

The "Flu" May Be Simply A Sign/Symptom Of Elevated Endotoxin

Ray has said a number of times that he thinks the majority of "flu" cases are simply symptoms of toxicity caused by increased levels of endotoxin in the blood. It seems that he may have been right about this. The study I am posting here is interesting for two reasons. One of them is more or less...

raypeatforum.com

If so, this means things like stress or intestinal leakage or an increased bacteria load could be what triggers "the flu."

 

[5LGreenback]

Ill give that thread a read.

It seems to me, that given how shady/ evil the vaccine industry is, the idea that the field of virology is a fraud is certainly plausible.