Let’s accelerate that process. Humanity awakening from its enslavement to allopathic medicine in a faster manner will shift the timeline forward such that we skip a lot of pain and suffering.
Indeed, the Global Cult agenda depends on this process being slowed as much as possible (since it is the nature of timeline dynamics that the awakening does occur; it’s not a matter of if; it’s when). The Global Cult is banking on keeping people brainwashed and thus easy to control and manipulate.
Spread this document. May not open in brave:
https://u1lib.org/book/17573423/2c377f
And then this:
https://book4you.org/book/5418297/958a07 What Really Makes You Ill?: Why Everything You Thought You Knew About Disease Is Wrong Dawn Lester, David Parker
I am happy to answer any questions.
This is the more nuanced explanation and is in fact the correct way of discussing it; I say viruses don’t exist in the title because most people do not think of a virus like you described.
To be most accurate, the correct statement is that viruses as exogenous contagious pathogens do not exist.
There's no reason to act like a shitty patronizing clickbait journalist. Instead, say something like:
Viruses aren't what you think they are.
Viruses don't actually cause disease.
Big pharma is lying to you about what viruses actually do.
etc etc. There are many ways to speak in simple language and still preserve accuracy and nuance.
The definition 99.99999% of people give to viruses is exogenous contagious pathogen, so for almost anyone you will speak to saying viruses don’t exist is true given their definition of virus.
No, the definition the vast majority of people have for viruses is much simpler. It's just "sickness" to them. So if I just tell them "viruses don't exist", it's like I'm telling them to deny their own personal experiences of being sick in bed with the flu or whatever. It feels hostile, like I'm calling them a liar. They reflexively resist me, making it much harder to convince them otherwise.
In contrast, the statement "viruses aren't what made you sick" is not only more accurate and nuanced, it doesn't sound like it's denying what happened to them (ie: getting sick). It's just bringing into question WHY it happened. People are much more willing to consider alternate viewpoints that don't feel like contradictions of their own lived experiences.
I don’t disagree with that. That’s a good way of putting it actually.
In defense of the semantical nature of the discourse, I don’t believe anyone of any opinion is denying that people get sick.
Indeed, quite the opposite. The pursuit of truth should be an understanding of WHY people get sick. We have been effectively blocked from having that conversation by big Pharma and institutional powers by the virus nonsense that all of allopathic medicine is based on.
👆Correct.