Wow it's a fascinating read and answers a lot of questions. Thanks for this. With your background, do you agree with most of the conclusions of the article?
I have always wondered if our airways are full of virus that we have to wear masks and social distance, why cant they just take the air and pass it through some liquid culture and isolate the virus from there?
That apart, a few open questions I have after reading the post:
Even if a virus cannot ever be isolated directly, would it preclude from proving that there exists something within people infected by Covid that can be used to infect healthy individuals, while controlling for all other variables.
For example, collecting the liquid from an infected patient, culturing it as they do right now. Then doing the same from a healthy person. Using both the cultures to infect new individuals (animals, cells - does not have to be humans). Proving that the culture from the healthy person does not infect whereas the one from the infected person does.
Has this been done?
If, as Fauci says, virus cannot replicate without cell culture, how about taking the viral culture and allowing the virus to keep replicating until there is enough of it that it can be isolated from all other contaminants?
Is that possible? If now, why not?
I really feel bad this guy takes aim at Steve Kirsch of all people. Steve has been very careful in how he qualifies the isolation issue. He is clearly pointing out that the definition of isolation is not what we think, and the virus has been isolated only as per this funny definition that experts have agreed upon.
This might be strategic, because Steve is absolutely critical in shedding light on a lot of Vaccine horrors and criminality, and for him to outright come and say "Viruses do not exist" would immediately turn off a big portion of people listening to him, and renders his message moot. I think the issue of existence of a viruses in general has to be tackled post-awakening, once people are open to the idea that everything they have been told is wrong. Trying to conflate it with exposing the vaccine or the pandemic will be counter-productive.
Let me address #3. I'll have to think about the other two, and I got something else coming up (Yikes, I have to go cold turkey on GAW!)
I've been reconsidering folks like Steve Kirsch, Robert Malone, Steven Hatfill, and Judy Mikovits (remember, "Be careful who you follow"). Their attacks on the vaxx have been extremely valuable. But the steadfast adherence to the church of virus is troubling. Of course 3 out of the 4 are virologists, so an uncritical attitude might be expected. At least initially, but not once the holes in virology are put to them.
They never say anything that discredits the notions of viruses or virology. Almost as if they have been pushed forward to placate the skeptics while keeping the extremely useful concept of a powerful yet invisible killer that can take on any desired traits very much real and alive (to the extent that a virus can be considered to be alive, that is). The DS can drop Covid as long as they are confident that the thought of a new scary virus is not ridiculous.
I only recently started thinking about limited hangout operations. That is, offering up some truths in order to withhold key and damaging facts, e.g., intriguing arguments against vaccines, so we forget to pursue more sinister aspects of the Covid drama. This was after reading Kirsch's ad hominem attacks on Dr.’s Kaufman, Lanka, and Cowan and claiming that the problem over "isolation" was a trivial semantic issue. As if the meaning of words is not important. It struck me as a very cheesy argument.
I have hopes for Malone. I've been watching him & Kirsch since I saw them on the Brett Weinstein Darkhorse podcast many months back. Malone impressed me, but he seemed naive. Kirsch was good too, but pretty obnoxious. Over the months Malone has evolved -- he is awaking to the evil now, but is still stuck on viruses. But think if we were told that Boolean logic was invalid. We would ignore and deny the possibility until the last possible moment.
Kirsch hasn't evolved at all. I can't figure out why he would be so vested in the virus theory to pretend that both sides have a legitimate claim to what isolation means, and turn to what I view as character assassination.
Boolean logic was invalid. We would ignore and deny the possibility until the last possible moment.
This is how it is. I have noticed that when it comes to redpilling, every person has hard resistance to be redpilled in the area of their expertise. People in medicaly profession refuse to believe doctors and nurses can be evil/stupid. People in journalism can never believe that media is a controlled operation. People in computers find it hard to believe Big Tech is evil, and so on.
Another way of looking at it - we see people taking about Biden's inflation, and how the economy is bad etc. But no one except really fringe guys mention how the whole economy is a ponzi scheme. It has the same similarity to the vaccine hoax vs virus/germ theory hoax.
It is really hard to believe something you spent your whole life mastering is a hoax.
Now, talking about instinct, something tells me that Malone is benign. Steve is just a business/entrepreneurial type who is very much plugged into the matrix, but I feel like he is benign as well. We will see, things will become clearer as time goes by. I am keeping my mind open.
Oh, as for limited hangout, once the vaccine story blows up into normies, good luck containing anything. If anything it will stop them from every trusting a doctor or a scientist!
Yeah, once normies are aware of the damage the vaxx has done they won't trust much of anything in the medical/pharma arena. The elite parasites pushed too many buttons for too long to keep that horse in the barn.
My instinct says to trust Malone on most things, Kirsch on a bit less. I think Kirsch attacks people because it's his personality, not to preserve the concept of the virus. The one person I don't trust at all is David Martin. He is connected to many organizations with globalist aims, is an expert in so many fields, and has so many accomplishments that he is just not believable as a real human being.
Excellent points - both you and u/bubble_bursts. It would seem the whole MIC house of cards might be on the brink of collapse.
As for Dr. Martin, he absolutely falls into the, "be careful who you follow" category. Even so, his delve into patents and their dates of issue is "interesting".
Wow it's a fascinating read and answers a lot of questions. Thanks for this. With your background, do you agree with most of the conclusions of the article?
I have always wondered if our airways are full of virus that we have to wear masks and social distance, why cant they just take the air and pass it through some liquid culture and isolate the virus from there?
That apart, a few open questions I have after reading the post:
For example, collecting the liquid from an infected patient, culturing it as they do right now. Then doing the same from a healthy person. Using both the cultures to infect new individuals (animals, cells - does not have to be humans). Proving that the culture from the healthy person does not infect whereas the one from the infected person does.
Has this been done?
Is that possible? If now, why not?
This might be strategic, because Steve is absolutely critical in shedding light on a lot of Vaccine horrors and criminality, and for him to outright come and say "Viruses do not exist" would immediately turn off a big portion of people listening to him, and renders his message moot. I think the issue of existence of a viruses in general has to be tackled post-awakening, once people are open to the idea that everything they have been told is wrong. Trying to conflate it with exposing the vaccine or the pandemic will be counter-productive.
Let me address #3. I'll have to think about the other two, and I got something else coming up (Yikes, I have to go cold turkey on GAW!)
I've been reconsidering folks like Steve Kirsch, Robert Malone, Steven Hatfill, and Judy Mikovits (remember, "Be careful who you follow"). Their attacks on the vaxx have been extremely valuable. But the steadfast adherence to the church of virus is troubling. Of course 3 out of the 4 are virologists, so an uncritical attitude might be expected. At least initially, but not once the holes in virology are put to them.
They never say anything that discredits the notions of viruses or virology. Almost as if they have been pushed forward to placate the skeptics while keeping the extremely useful concept of a powerful yet invisible killer that can take on any desired traits very much real and alive (to the extent that a virus can be considered to be alive, that is). The DS can drop Covid as long as they are confident that the thought of a new scary virus is not ridiculous.
I only recently started thinking about limited hangout operations. That is, offering up some truths in order to withhold key and damaging facts, e.g., intriguing arguments against vaccines, so we forget to pursue more sinister aspects of the Covid drama. This was after reading Kirsch's ad hominem attacks on Dr.’s Kaufman, Lanka, and Cowan and claiming that the problem over "isolation" was a trivial semantic issue. As if the meaning of words is not important. It struck me as a very cheesy argument.
I have hopes for Malone. I've been watching him & Kirsch since I saw them on the Brett Weinstein Darkhorse podcast many months back. Malone impressed me, but he seemed naive. Kirsch was good too, but pretty obnoxious. Over the months Malone has evolved -- he is awaking to the evil now, but is still stuck on viruses. But think if we were told that Boolean logic was invalid. We would ignore and deny the possibility until the last possible moment.
Kirsch hasn't evolved at all. I can't figure out why he would be so vested in the virus theory to pretend that both sides have a legitimate claim to what isolation means, and turn to what I view as character assassination.
This is how it is. I have noticed that when it comes to redpilling, every person has hard resistance to be redpilled in the area of their expertise. People in medicaly profession refuse to believe doctors and nurses can be evil/stupid. People in journalism can never believe that media is a controlled operation. People in computers find it hard to believe Big Tech is evil, and so on.
Another way of looking at it - we see people taking about Biden's inflation, and how the economy is bad etc. But no one except really fringe guys mention how the whole economy is a ponzi scheme. It has the same similarity to the vaccine hoax vs virus/germ theory hoax.
It is really hard to believe something you spent your whole life mastering is a hoax.
Now, talking about instinct, something tells me that Malone is benign. Steve is just a business/entrepreneurial type who is very much plugged into the matrix, but I feel like he is benign as well. We will see, things will become clearer as time goes by. I am keeping my mind open.
Oh, as for limited hangout, once the vaccine story blows up into normies, good luck containing anything. If anything it will stop them from every trusting a doctor or a scientist!
Yeah, once normies are aware of the damage the vaxx has done they won't trust much of anything in the medical/pharma arena. The elite parasites pushed too many buttons for too long to keep that horse in the barn.
My instinct says to trust Malone on most things, Kirsch on a bit less. I think Kirsch attacks people because it's his personality, not to preserve the concept of the virus. The one person I don't trust at all is David Martin. He is connected to many organizations with globalist aims, is an expert in so many fields, and has so many accomplishments that he is just not believable as a real human being.
Excellent points - both you and u/bubble_bursts. It would seem the whole MIC house of cards might be on the brink of collapse.
As for Dr. Martin, he absolutely falls into the, "be careful who you follow" category. Even so, his delve into patents and their dates of issue is "interesting".