In about 30 minutes, Dr. Tom Cowan explains how virology lies about viruses.
Viruses do not exist. They do not make people sick. They are just fragments of material that is created in a laboratory. They do not exist in the human body, or any other animal.
Watch this, and the whole thing makes sense.
SARS-CoV-2 does not exist. Whatever has been making people sick, it is not a virus.
No more vaccines. No more face masks. No more lies. No more funding these criminals.
I've tried to participate in discussions about germ theory vs. terrain theory in the past, and I always end up as confused and/or unconvinced afterwards.
One of the main points that is never addressed satisfactorily is the story about how the Europeans wiped out the Native Americans here in North America with diseases they didn't have immunities towards. How else might this have occurred?
Parasites. You are naming the symptom. Dr. Cowan addresses this with the Chernobyl example. In my view, I believe pretty much all diseases are spread by fecal matter containing parasites. It has been shown polio is spread this way.
i heard it was farm chemicals. see andrew kaufman 'rooster in the river of rats'
Thank you for this. I will watch this. In my research of more than 30 years, I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority of traditional diseases in the past spread through fecal matter. The parasites and toxins within is indisputable. Virologists took some thirty years of research to realize the polio virus was a fecal pathogen. Yes, it’s transmission was fecal-oral - bad anal/hand hygiene or touching a contaminated surface, then pathogen-tainted fingers travel to the mouth. During those frustrating years, they tried control measures such as instructing the public to spray every room in their home with DDT each day.
Yea, that helped. NOT. Now, to add the anal/hand lack of hygiene criteria, toxic chemicals everywhere is added to tax our immune systems and make us more sick.
Good sanitation, good hygiene, and good nutrition is infinitely better at preventing disease than any and all vaccines ever invented. In fact, a pandemic cannot exist when these three criteria are met.
Hell, maybe paleface got redskin drunk on fire water, and a bunch of them died from it, but it was too embarrassing to put in the history books approved by the government. I don't know what happened (or if it happened).
But if viruses do not exist, then it was not a virus. That, we can say for certain.
Good point. And I’m genuinely curious but how come the Europeans weren’t wiped out as well? The isolation would work both ways - we also know there was previous interactions with trade then reported. How accurate are the numbers? So much is theory, so much is unknown. People do get sickS Bacteria infections exist. Siphilis is a bacteria infection, so are most std’s.
There are microscopic things that make people sick - germs, and all of these things are parasites because they require a host. Penicillin is a cure and it is made from mold. The argument is that the virus as it has been described doesn’t exist - and it may be mostly a linguistic argument for the laymen or not medically educated - landscape theory argues instead the ‘virus’ is a byproduct of a reaction, and illness is caused from other issues mostly. So the argument is that the virus is a symptom rather then the cause, and any treatment to the symptom is not curing the cause. The test for viruses and original studies themselves are a fallacy - and it’s recognized as a theory. This is okay, and still useful and amazing. See the studies on the tobacco plant epidemic and the system they used to test for viruses and see if you can spot the ‘problem’. Ask if you have more questions and I’ll try to explain more if I can. Additionally, I won’t rule out either I am still researching but the very idea that something is incurable is strange. HIV especially is strange if you research it.
Good points.
Better sanitation?
Possibly, but natives didn’t have the same overpopulation issues Europeans did and practiced personal hygiene close to the earlier Arabs. And sanitation issues we’d expect to be related more to bacterial infections again - much larger problem then for viruses - few viruses live outside the body long.
Again my medical knowledge is limited this could very well be exactly the reason - but again I am skeptical and instead argue that if a layman is able to cast doubt then certainly some more studies are worth investigating and investing in.
What do you know about it?
Books?
How do you KNOW what happened?
Watch the video.
Then we can talk.
Good point. The Europeans we're able to conquer North America, because most Native Americans died. Some places the death toll was 90+%, and it spread across the continent. Early counts of Native American populations in the West and Pacific Northwest were much higher than counts that occurred later with European settlement in those regions, which seems to indicate that disease took out a significant portion there too.
What if it was just a slaughter by gunfire, and the history books called it a disease for political correctness?
We don't know.
The Native Americans had greater numbers, and they knew the geographical terrain better than the Europeans. I doubt the Europeans could have taken the continent by force, even if they had muskets.
The Pacific Northwest population decline supports a disease. Only a few European explorers went there, and later it was significantly less populated.
What if there never were native Americans 👾👽
I try to keep an open mind. But if warts, like plantar warts, aren't viruses, what are they? Same goes for cold sores.
Watch the video.
Weak answer. If you watched, you should have at least an answer or two yourself. I've seen similarly-titled stuff, and read terrain theory. Terrain theory doesn't explain disease contagion very well. And I've seen plantar warts that don't go away with a dietary change, and I know that you can get sick by kissing a sick person, which can be explained with virology as a reasonable explanation. Doesn't mean it's true, just that it seems reasonable. I'll bookmark it to view later, but if you've seen it and understand it, you should be able to defend it a little.
Cowan discusses this subject in the video.
You want me to have a discussion with someone who is ignorant of the subject being discussed?
Why would I want to do that?
Watch the video. Then, we can discuss it.
OK, so I watched the video. You have to understand the time involved in watching all these videos people post...a half hour here...an hour there, etc., etc. It really begins becoming an investment in time. I wish folks would post a summary, and then, if others are interested in learning more, they can watch. Anyway...
I found this guy's presentation facetious, sarcastic, and devoid of evidence. His entire talk was basically, "I say it's so, and these doctors say it's so, so therefore this is how it is." That's not proof of a theory. That's bullying an audience to believe something because he (or others) says it's so. No scientific evidence whatsoever was offered. A slide or two showing viral particles? What does that mean? Without evidence, one must take his word that the other researchers he's quoting are relevant, or even exist. That's why scientific discussions should also include tests, experiments, or other forms of evidence...to help prove the theory.
Is he saying that the entire science of virology is a farce? Why are there labs like the Wuhan lab, studying coronaviruses? Why do researchers climb into bat caves to collect samples? Why does Dr. David Martin claim that there are 73 patents on coronaviruses from 2009 to 2017? Why does Dr. Peter Daszak claim that manipulation of coronaviruses is easy, through the insertion of sequences? This doctor's presentation had more in common with a comedy routine than a scientific discussion.
I'd like to understand more about germ theory vs. terrain theory, but this video, quite frankly, was a waste of time. I'm sorry I didn't find it as informative as you did.
I am revisiting this thread, so I don't know if you will see this. I'll respond, anyway.
I agree with you. That's why I posted a summary. It's not easy to summarize, though.
As opposed to Anthony Fauci or the others who say, "Trust muh science?" He goes into great detail why his theory is likely correct. Has any virologist even tried to refute him? Supposedly yes, and unsuccessfully according to him, but I have not seen that. He is not the only doctor/researcher who is saying these things. He is one of many.
Besides that, you are committing the logical fallacy of Argument from Popularity, along with a little ad hominem. He DID explain his theory. He DID NOT simply say this is what it is an believe me because I say so.
He explained how ALL virologists claim a virus exists and how they claim a virus causes illness. He explained that no virus has ever been isolated and purified, how virologists simply re-define the world "isolated" to mean something it does not actually mean, and then use a computer model to create the so-called sequence, which is used to "test" for the virus.
How is that not a clear explanation? He also showed results of a lab study done by another researcher -- the first time it has ever been done in nearly 70 years (because no virologist has ever thought of doing it) -- that actually used a CONTROL to figure out what virologists are looking at.
It is not JUST his word. He backs it up. It is up to the viewer to understand what he is saying.
That is a false statement.
You clearly did not understand the significance: (a) it is claimed that person has a virus inside their body, (b) a sample of their snot it taken, which is claimed has a sample of the virus, (c) other genetic material NOT from the person is added to the sample, (d) additional chemicals are added to the sample that are designed to kill genetic material, (e) the soup is added to monkey kidney cells, (f) the monkey kidney cells die, (g) fragments are left of the soup, and (h) those fragments are claimed to be proof that the virus existed inside the person, and that this virus is what made the person sick.
This is what you are referring to as "viral particles."
In the very same experiment, the researcher ran a control (something virologists NEVER do). In that control, he performed the exact same steps as above, EXCEPT he never took a sample from a person to start with. He just added all the other genetic material, the chemicals, and the monkey kidney cells. He ended up with the EXACT SAME RESULT in the control as he did in the test subject.
This PROVES that the images seen are NOT from a virus, because there is no claim that a virus was in the control soup.
The researcher who did this experiment, that Cowan refers to, is a German named Stefan Lanka. He exists. He won a court case in Germany over this issue (a damn near impossible thing to do, considering that German courts are even more corrupt in favor of the estblishment than American courts are).
Yes. And so are many others, not just him.
Follow the money. Who is getting rich off bogus research? How do you tack the money spent by the Wuhan lab in China? How many offshore bank accounts received money for "consultants?"
Gain of function could also be used for bioweapons (aka "vaccines") to make them more deadly, with the S1 protein/virus story being a diversion so people will not look at what is really going on. I don't know, but we should be considering multiple ideas, not just one.
Because those patents do exist. But the FIRST thing to establish is whether or not there is ANY evidence that can withstand scrutiny that viruses exist in the first place. If they do not, then those patents were for something ELSE (such as bioweapons).
Virology is operating on a FALSE PREMISE. It is entirely possible that most virologists BELIEVE what they are saying, or don't really but go along for the ... $$$$$$$$$.
Robert Gallo eventually admitted that he NEVER had any evidence that HIV causes AIDS. NEVER. HAD. EVIDENCE. But he lied and let other people believe it, and he also got rich from the lie.
I am not familiar with his work. But the SARS-CoV-2 sequence is an "in silico" sequence. That means it was CREATED INSIDE A COMPUTER PROGRAM. It does NOT EXIST in nature -- at least, the sequence itself does not prove it exists in nature. It was created in a computer.
This is why I am skeptical of Dr. Judy Mikovitz. She BELIEVES all of here work on HIV was relevant and real. Imagine if she was just a "useful idiot" during her entire career. How difficult would THAT be to admit to herself, much less admit to the public?
Some of these people believe what they are saying. But ...
That does NOT mean they are right. They MIGHT be wrong.
And if viruses do not exist, then they ARE wrong.
And there is NO EVIDENCE that viruses actually exist -- at least, not when it is scrutinized.
Virology was going "out of business" in the 1940's and 1950's, because virlogists could NOT prove they were right about anything. Then Enders came along and created the current fake method of "isolation" of a virus. Even HE wrote that when he did a control experiment without DNA, the results were the same as a test with DNA.
That was 1954.
NOBODY ... has EVER ... done another control experiment to test the basic premise of the existence of viruses ... until 2021.
That was Dr. Stefan Lanka.
https://greatreject.org/dr-stefan-lanka-claims-about-viruses-are-false/
https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/Lanka_Bardens_Trial_E.pdf
Thank you for your lengthy response. Obviously you understand much, much more about this subject than I do. I really would like to understand it better, so that I can perhaps shed a bit more light on this germ theory vs. terrain theory controversy. Germ theory is so ingrained in my thinking, I admit it's difficult to entertain anything else...especially when it seems that my own lifetime experience of infections supports it.
I was being a bit facetious when I characterized the talk as containing nothing more than references to other researchers as evidence. Of course he provided a bit more than that, but to a layman like myself, I need to see something quantifiable to at least provide context. Dr. Fauci would represent the extreme example of "trust what I say."
I'd have to dig to try to find the interview of Dr. Daszak revealing his findings on manipulating coronavirus DNA. The interview is a few years old, indicating this work had been going on for quite a while. Daszak was the U.S. funnel for NIH funding to Wuhan.
I'm skeptical by nature, but at the same time have an open mind to consider new possibilities. I find it frustrating when people post controversial things on this messageboard, and most accept what is said with no evidence whatsoever. (The most recent example of this is the photo being posted of Juan O. Savin on a stage next to what is alleged to be Melania's dress. Comparing this dress to the photo of Melania reveal that it is not the exact same dress.) Unless one is careful, the messageboard can easily become a source of the misinformation we're trying to uncover.
I wish I could have read what you composed above when I watched the video you linked the first time. There are so many videos on my "to do" list, I may not get to it. I will check out the new links you provided, however.
Thank you again for taking the time to write this. I do appreciate it.
It’s strange I had warts as a kid. I hated them. In high school people made fun of me. One day I heated up a knife and burnt the five biggest of them off. They all went away within a couple months, even the ones I didn’t burn off. It was strange.
It was easier for me, because otc salicylic acid came out when I needed them. Took longer, but it worked.
Jon Rapport is another great source regarding the sham of vaccines.
Yes he's very good.
"The Contagion Myth" is a really good book.
Good share. A few days ago I came across this and it really says on the fda.gov site they don't test for covid 19 in their tests. They test for the flu. https://www.fda.news/2021-08-01-fda-covid-pcr-test-fraud.html#
We're all fucking lied to. Im gonna take my anti parasitic medication and kill off any parasites I may have. No wonder they put GO in some vaccines, parasites in others, and who knows, maaaybe once in awhile they will put snake venom in a lucky somebody's vax.
I'm about as ready to ascribe to no virus world as I am flat earth. Every chicken pox case, every cold, every flu, aids, herpes, cancer, all not virus? Nah. Much more likely they over hype the issue. Just like Q said earth is not flat but people still speculate.