There is a difference between the "flat earth" and "viruses don't exist" theories.
"Viruses don't exist" is really the "Viruses haven't been proven to exist" theory and sounds less retarded. The truth is, the existing evidence, even based on the research done by the main stream scientific community, does not prove the existence of virus. It is only inferred.
There is a huge difference between proof and inference.
What is the real implication of this?
The implication is, it is necessary to spend atleast a generation or two of research into understanding pathology thats attributed to viruses, following sound scientific methods, unbiased scientists, without coaxing and cajoling with banishment by the peers or lucrative funding.
I'm still on the fence with respect to the germ vs. terrain theories, and look to these forums for ideas I haven't considered. Which documentary did you watch? Why did you feel it lacked substance?
I do agree with you that the flat earth stuff is counterproductive.
I know what you mean about documentaries. They are a considerable investment in time, and, if they are poorly done, I'm angry afterwards that I wasted time watching it. That's why I prefer articles, but they seem to be going the way of the dinosaur in favor of video these days. I know you are reluctant to invest any more time investigating it yourself, but I found this one thought-provoking: https://www.goyimtv.tv/v/2556202374/Terrain--Virus-Hoax-Documentary--Sept-22--2022 There's also a new documentary called "Terrain" that was available for free a few weeks ago on BitChute, but I can't find it now without signing up on the producer's website.
There are some very compelling arguments for the terrain theory, like one example where sailors on a ship fell ill with the same illness affecting those on shore...yet the ship never docked. On the other hand, I haven't seen yet a satisfactory explanation of why the American Indians suffered from "smallpox," which was alleged to be a disease that Europeans brought to the continent. I have seen references that smallpox was actually a symptom of contamination from rats, etc., but I'd certainly like to see more.
Also, there is the fact that not one virus has ever been isolated. It's all theory, promoted by pharmaceutical companies and medical schools. It's a whole system of thought, meant to feed itself.
I'm one of those guys who likes to see both sides of an argument, especially if there are new ideas I'd never considered, that seem to hold validity.
The best thing to do is not argue with these people about flat earth, viruses or religion. Just ignore them. you are not going to convince them if you laid the proof out in front of them. Waste of time and type!
There is a difference between the "flat earth" and "viruses don't exist" theories.
"Viruses don't exist" is really the "Viruses haven't been proven to exist" theory and sounds less retarded. The truth is, the existing evidence, even based on the research done by the main stream scientific community, does not prove the existence of virus. It is only inferred.
There is a huge difference between proof and inference.
What is the real implication of this?
The implication is, it is necessary to spend atleast a generation or two of research into understanding pathology thats attributed to viruses, following sound scientific methods, unbiased scientists, without coaxing and cajoling with banishment by the peers or lucrative funding.
Yes
I'm still on the fence with respect to the germ vs. terrain theories, and look to these forums for ideas I haven't considered. Which documentary did you watch? Why did you feel it lacked substance?
I do agree with you that the flat earth stuff is counterproductive.
I know what you mean about documentaries. They are a considerable investment in time, and, if they are poorly done, I'm angry afterwards that I wasted time watching it. That's why I prefer articles, but they seem to be going the way of the dinosaur in favor of video these days. I know you are reluctant to invest any more time investigating it yourself, but I found this one thought-provoking: https://www.goyimtv.tv/v/2556202374/Terrain--Virus-Hoax-Documentary--Sept-22--2022 There's also a new documentary called "Terrain" that was available for free a few weeks ago on BitChute, but I can't find it now without signing up on the producer's website.
There are some very compelling arguments for the terrain theory, like one example where sailors on a ship fell ill with the same illness affecting those on shore...yet the ship never docked. On the other hand, I haven't seen yet a satisfactory explanation of why the American Indians suffered from "smallpox," which was alleged to be a disease that Europeans brought to the continent. I have seen references that smallpox was actually a symptom of contamination from rats, etc., but I'd certainly like to see more.
Also, there is the fact that not one virus has ever been isolated. It's all theory, promoted by pharmaceutical companies and medical schools. It's a whole system of thought, meant to feed itself.
I'm one of those guys who likes to see both sides of an argument, especially if there are new ideas I'd never considered, that seem to hold validity.
The best thing to do is not argue with these people about flat earth, viruses or religion. Just ignore them. you are not going to convince them if you laid the proof out in front of them. Waste of time and type!
Umm but they really don't exist, that's the fucking point.
Umm there is no such a thing as "time", it's fake news.
Lol, "time doesn't exist"...
Unless you have to calculate velocity, or measure radioactive decay.