I've never said anything about the water. Has anyone really looked? You'd be surprised. These days nothing can be assumed. Now that you mention it, how much toxins in the water makes a difference to making people sick? I read an article about Lake Mead, which is used as the water source for Las Vegas. The fish in that lake were being affected by women flushing their birth control pills down the toilet. That may sound to some like a hell of a lot of birth control pills. If you look at the volume of Lake Meade and also consider it is a reservoir that has in-flowing fresh water that must make this toxin highly deluded. How much is needed to make a difference? Does all the fish get affected? Do all of us get affected? Or is it a percentage?
Graphene hydroxide (GO) has been found in snow samples. This is a man-made nano particulates that are being sprayed from high above in aircraft. How much GO is needed to affect a certain percentage of the population? What percent of the population is allergic to bee stings? Peanut butter? Oak trees? Poison ivy?
The point I'm making is a bio-toxin can get into the water by aerial spraying and other means. And it doesn't have to sicken everyone. Just a certain percentage. That percentage could be as low as 1% to 2%.
Microplastics are inside all us humans and in basically every single place on Earth. Expeditions to all corners of the Earth have found plastics or microplastics there in both the environment and the organisms. Hard to tell what effects those things may have on the body. Environmentalism isn't all bad, and has some decent principles, like keeping people healthy and contaminant free.
"Environmentalism isn't all bad, and has some decent principles, like keeping people healthy and contaminant free."
I agree as long as the concept are correlated to Nature's Laws. Environmentalism doesn't have to be the fraud it really is. IMHO, most (if not all) environmental groups are completely Co-Oped by the Luciferian Cabal. When I speak of environmentalism, I'm referring to it from an organic level, in which it is understood by and managed not by governments or corporations or non-profit organizations, but by each individual. If this was the well-spring it would feed everything else and the 'corrections' to corporate pollution would be much easier to overcome.
There is a guiding divine Spirit; a Mentality of Spirit; an Air and flow that maintains all life in an immutable fashion. Violations of Nature's Laws always is met with the punishment of revenge. Our Creator has already provided us with everything for us. We just need to learn to use this, instead of depending on government and corporations. Paul Gautschi understands this. It seems everything in life being taught is turning out to be a big LIE. If you have time to watch "Back to Eden" this will give dome insight to what I speak of.
PCR tests are bullshit.. the creator (who conveniently died right before covid) told us not to use them for diagnosis. How is that not commonly known around here?
It's the equivalent of using Bigfoot sightings to justify global warming.
I’ll have to listen to the whole thing again, but from what I gathered, he was focusing on the waste water from the vaxxed and showing the evidence of venom from that. I think he said they COULD be using fresh water sources in select areas to introduce the vax or “snake venom” into those water sources.
I'm not sold on the water supply theory, but much of what he's talked about seems like he is onto something. The venom thing isn't new, and take this quote from June of last year: "Unusual gene insertions within the SARS-CoV-2 viral gene sequence were found that resemble the protein structure and genetic code of a snake venom toxin." It could be that both Remdesivir and the spike protein itself contains DNA from snake venom. My dad was pre-diabetic and was taking injections derived from Gila monster poison to prevent him from becoming type 2 diabetes.
"The attempt to obfuscate all of our research with "muh snake venom."
Who is "all of our research" and "we" that you are referring to? Are you suggesting Dr. Bryan Ardis is wrong?
"It didn't matter if they manufactured it using snake venom (which btw is used in MANY biopharm projects, not just this one.)"
Does it makes sense to use toxins to cure another toxin? What is 'COVID'? What is a 'virus'?
"They're going to look up remdesivir death and Google will put this stupid bullshit front and center along with 16 articles about it being deboonked and us being idiots for falling for "snake oil."
Antidotes are not toxins. An analogy is if there is a strong acid and the 'antidote' of a strong base, that renders it to a neutral and harmless.
"Further to this point, we literally use mold to kill bacteria in our bodies."
Bacteria is Nature's way of biodegrading 'poisons'. To understand this is the 'key' to the kingdom. It is always the method that determines the outcome. To consider the complete environmental effects rather than limit oneself to a reductionist approach is crucial in understanding health.
The narrative really determines how one understands things. Is Koch's Postulate being followed when, for example, a 'virus' has never been isolated in all the history of Virology. This fact alone should make us question other 'settled' science like -- Does Germs (not worms or parasites) or bacteria cause disease?
Science is a continuum; a process of current understanding and is never really 'settled'. So, is it a 'guilt' by association scenario or are they merely associated with the real causes? The Correlation/Causation Fallacy is where two events occurring together are taken to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. This however is not the scientific method. Could the presence of the bacteria be for degrading the toxins that are present as a result of 'something' from the environment? Could the bacteria be Nature's cleanup crew for what is already diseased or dead?
We know in Nature bacteria is used to biodegrade what is dead or diseased in the environment. Why would we be any different from anything else in Nature? A poisoned dead pond will produce algae growth. The algae is not good for you and may produce its own toxins, but it exists in Nature to biodegrade the toxins in the pond. It is the poisoned pond that was the cause of the dead pond, not the algae that is biodegrading the toxins in the pond. We see this understanding at work in municipal waste systems.
The entire problem with bacteriology and Virology is they fail to follow the scientific method. More precisely, they fail to follow Koch's postulates. What has occurred is their science is a one based on an 'assumption', but not fact.
Be more specific on how Dr. Bryan Ardis is "spreading a false narrative". What are you disagreeing with?
I've never said anything about the water. Has anyone really looked? You'd be surprised. These days nothing can be assumed. Now that you mention it, how much toxins in the water makes a difference to making people sick? I read an article about Lake Mead, which is used as the water source for Las Vegas. The fish in that lake were being affected by women flushing their birth control pills down the toilet. That may sound to some like a hell of a lot of birth control pills. If you look at the volume of Lake Meade and also consider it is a reservoir that has in-flowing fresh water that must make this toxin highly deluded. How much is needed to make a difference? Does all the fish get affected? Do all of us get affected? Or is it a percentage?
Graphene hydroxide (GO) has been found in snow samples. This is a man-made nano particulates that are being sprayed from high above in aircraft. How much GO is needed to affect a certain percentage of the population? What percent of the population is allergic to bee stings? Peanut butter? Oak trees? Poison ivy?
The point I'm making is a bio-toxin can get into the water by aerial spraying and other means. And it doesn't have to sicken everyone. Just a certain percentage. That percentage could be as low as 1% to 2%.
Microplastics are inside all us humans and in basically every single place on Earth. Expeditions to all corners of the Earth have found plastics or microplastics there in both the environment and the organisms. Hard to tell what effects those things may have on the body. Environmentalism isn't all bad, and has some decent principles, like keeping people healthy and contaminant free.
I agree as long as the concept are correlated to Nature's Laws. Environmentalism doesn't have to be the fraud it really is. IMHO, most (if not all) environmental groups are completely Co-Oped by the Luciferian Cabal. When I speak of environmentalism, I'm referring to it from an organic level, in which it is understood by and managed not by governments or corporations or non-profit organizations, but by each individual. If this was the well-spring it would feed everything else and the 'corrections' to corporate pollution would be much easier to overcome.
There is a guiding divine Spirit; a Mentality of Spirit; an Air and flow that maintains all life in an immutable fashion. Violations of Nature's Laws always is met with the punishment of revenge. Our Creator has already provided us with everything for us. We just need to learn to use this, instead of depending on government and corporations. Paul Gautschi understands this. It seems everything in life being taught is turning out to be a big LIE. If you have time to watch "Back to Eden" this will give dome insight to what I speak of.
PCR tests are bullshit.. the creator (who conveniently died right before covid) told us not to use them for diagnosis. How is that not commonly known around here?
It's the equivalent of using Bigfoot sightings to justify global warming.
I’ll have to listen to the whole thing again, but from what I gathered, he was focusing on the waste water from the vaxxed and showing the evidence of venom from that. I think he said they COULD be using fresh water sources in select areas to introduce the vax or “snake venom” into those water sources.
I'm not sold on the water supply theory, but much of what he's talked about seems like he is onto something. The venom thing isn't new, and take this quote from June of last year: "Unusual gene insertions within the SARS-CoV-2 viral gene sequence were found that resemble the protein structure and genetic code of a snake venom toxin." It could be that both Remdesivir and the spike protein itself contains DNA from snake venom. My dad was pre-diabetic and was taking injections derived from Gila monster poison to prevent him from becoming type 2 diabetes.
Source: https://transcendingsquare.com/2021/06/18/snake-venom-toxin-in-the-spike-protein/
Who is "all of our research" and "we" that you are referring to? Are you suggesting Dr. Bryan Ardis is wrong?
Does it makes sense to use toxins to cure another toxin? What is 'COVID'? What is a 'virus'?
What is Remdesivir? What is its history?
Do you not know what antidotes are made from?
Further to this point, we literally use mold to kill bacteria in our bodies.
Antidotes are not toxins. An analogy is if there is a strong acid and the 'antidote' of a strong base, that renders it to a neutral and harmless.
Bacteria is Nature's way of biodegrading 'poisons'. To understand this is the 'key' to the kingdom. It is always the method that determines the outcome. To consider the complete environmental effects rather than limit oneself to a reductionist approach is crucial in understanding health.
The narrative really determines how one understands things. Is Koch's Postulate being followed when, for example, a 'virus' has never been isolated in all the history of Virology. This fact alone should make us question other 'settled' science like -- Does Germs (not worms or parasites) or bacteria cause disease?
Science is a continuum; a process of current understanding and is never really 'settled'. So, is it a 'guilt' by association scenario or are they merely associated with the real causes? The Correlation/Causation Fallacy is where two events occurring together are taken to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. This however is not the scientific method. Could the presence of the bacteria be for degrading the toxins that are present as a result of 'something' from the environment? Could the bacteria be Nature's cleanup crew for what is already diseased or dead?
We know in Nature bacteria is used to biodegrade what is dead or diseased in the environment. Why would we be any different from anything else in Nature? A poisoned dead pond will produce algae growth. The algae is not good for you and may produce its own toxins, but it exists in Nature to biodegrade the toxins in the pond. It is the poisoned pond that was the cause of the dead pond, not the algae that is biodegrading the toxins in the pond. We see this understanding at work in municipal waste systems.
The entire problem with bacteriology and Virology is they fail to follow the scientific method. More precisely, they fail to follow Koch's postulates. What has occurred is their science is a one based on an 'assumption', but not fact.
Have you read this? https://www.abc15.com/news/coronavirus/university-of-arizona-researchers-find-link-between-covid-deaths-and-snake-venom
https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/04/15/snakes-spike-protein-injections-things-to-consider/
https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-04-13-venomtech-company-announces-massive-library-of-snake-venom-peptides-for-pharmaceutical-deployment.html
https://www.cell.com/biophysj/fulltext/S0006-3495(21)00146-6#relatedArticles