Many have tried likely tens of thousands of times up until the late 1950s. Nobody has ever found any boogeyman-viruses in the living tissue, bodily fluids of dead tissue of a sick or healthy person. Pretty simple.
We live in a world in which healthy skeptics like you and me thrive, in part b/c of the dogged work of researchers who bring the receipts. The notion that "many have tried (to bring to light findings that distinguish w/ the aid of an electron microscope healthy from virally-affected cells) but somehow ALL of their efforts came to naught is equivalent to the DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK argument.
You seem very kind, so let's leave it at this: you're not needing evidence of the contrary to disbelieve in viruses, and I remain uncertain as to what to think (though they'll have to tackle me to the ground before I or any of my loved ones receive another vaccine).
I appreciate your well wishes, TMBZ. Glad to keep it peaceful as we agree to disagree. Take care.
We live in a world in which healthy skeptics like you and me thrive, in part b/c of the dogged work of researchers who bring the receipts. The notion that "many have tried (to bring to light findings that distinguish w/ the aid of an electron microscope healthy from virally-affected cells) but somehow ALL of their efforts came to naught is equivalent to the DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK argument.
Please explain to me how you arrive at this conclusion. The virologists reluctantly, but readily admit this is so. This is why they don't even try to find boogeymen any longer. They stopped trying in the 1950s...and yes...with the use of electron microscopes which were widely in use then.
You seem very kind, so let's leave it at this: you're not needing evidence of the contrary to disbelieve in viruses, and I remain uncertain as to what to think (though they'll have to tackle me to the ground before I or any of my loved ones receive another vaccine).
Well that's a heckuva good start on your part. Kudos to you!
But let's try this another way. For the sake of driving the point home, I'm going to give you the following points:
Scientists have seen viruses (not "exosomes") using the electron microscope
Scientists have purified/isolated said viruses they see, using advanced filtration and centrifugation techniques.
Scientists have pure samples of viruses
Let's say this is all "true", which is effectively what you currently believe. Right?
Wouldn't it follow and be the next most logical and common sense step to use these "purified samples of viruses" in a wide variety of scientific experiments leveraging "normal transmission vectors (surafce, air, water, food exposure)" to demonstrate "transmission"?
Nobody has "proven" anything until this is done anyway, right?
I'm trying to tell you, the reason nobody has ever done this, is because they've already tried thousands of times, with "upurified" samples no less. And it never worked. This is why you won't find such a study since the entire establishment gave up trying this in the 1970s. England's "Common Cold Institute (CCU)" was "officially" shuttered in 1989, but they hadn't done anything even remotely interesting in over a decade by that time.
Now, Iet me also address what is a very common objection to this point, which is that it's "immoral" to infect humans with dis-eases. And yet, we tried exactly this from Pasteur's insane (and highly immoral) experiments in the 1880s, all the way up until the 1950s, when the State of New York tried to infect unsuspecting "orphans" secretly through the drinking water they were served. Both of these examples, pure failures I might add.
A buddy of mine that had just graduated from college and couldn't find a good job participated in a one-month pharmaceutical "clinical trial" for some new drug they were testing. They paid him $4000 which was a lot of money back in the 1980s. He signed away all his rights to sue this company, a shell of a shell of a shell of one of the big pharma companies I might add. But whatever they were giving him, caused him some massive psychoses. So much so, he wanted to leave after the first week, but realized he wouldn't get a nickel if he didn't complete the 30-day program.
Needless to say, my friend had pretty significant psychological problems for over two years. And that pharma shell company paid for about half of his treatments if he swore to never tell his story to a journalist or governmental regulation agency. And he wasn't the only one that had similar problems.
I don't know if these types of programs are still in operation today, but I can assure you, these were far more "immoral" than "infecting volunteers" with an alleged "flu-virus". Right? If I needed the money and knew the worst of what I was getting myself into (flu symptoms), there would be nothing "immoral" about it. Right?
Even smarter, safer and scientifically better would be putting the alleged "flu-virus" in an aerator, water supply, on food, surfaces, etc. which are all the ways we are said to "spread" boogeymen.
But for some reason, nobody has ever done this sort of experiment in the past 50-odd years. In the 1900-1980 timeframe, they did these types of experiments, loosely through various forms of spreading bodily fluids of sick people to healthy people. These all failed spectacularly as well. And they were far from 'scientific" as no "virus" had been isolated from the wide variety of possible substances, toxins, bacteria, etc. that were in those bodily fluids.
Our establishment "experts" don't do any of this...EITHER...with lab animal experiments. All of them involve INJECTIONS, JABCINES, none making any efforts through normal transmission vectors. Why do you suppose that is?
Now, if you do a quick Google search, their algorithm might still be promoting the old 1970s John's Hopkins highly non-scientific experiment in a tuberculosis ward with guinea pigs. This was the "top hit" back in 2020-2021 people would find to "debunk" my assertions. While TB is the result of a bacteria, this is how the establishment is attempting to quash the "contagion hoax" position.
But I encourage you to find and read that John's Hopkins study and see just how many holes you can poke in both their methodology and conclusions. My 10-year old niece designed a better experiment while she was playing video games and I explained it to her. It's one of the dumbest things I've ever read in fact. I laughed my way through it from beginning to end.
you're not needing evidence of the contrary to disbelieve in viruses
This is a "double-negative" sentence that's worth clearing up as I think this point is often lost on most people. Just like you and I both disbelieve in the notion that female unicorns have blonde eyelashes, until PROVEN otherwise, the same holds for the entirety of the "germ theory" myth and existence of boogeymen-viruses.
EM "photographs" of near nano-scopic particles and "experts saying so" is quite simply.....not enough to PROVE THE CLAIM. Like if I went out in the woods and found some short, blonde hairs on a tree trunk, I haven't yet proven they came from my mythical female unicorn yet, right? Even if I produced a photograph of a female unicorn that appeared to have blonde eyelashes, that's still not quite enough, is it (could be photoshopped, right)?
Thus, the only way the establishment can prove their claim is very simple, 5-step process that one of the father's of "germ theory" simply laid out over a hundred years ago.
Identify the "thing/virus" you claim is causing dis-ease in a sick person. (You currently BELIEVE this has been done.).
Remove, isolate and purify this thing/virus from the sick person's fluids/tissues.
Ensure there is no presence of this thing/virus in a healthy person
Expose the healthy person to this thing/virus via normal transmission vectors
Demonstrate the healthy person gets the same dis-ease and identify and isolate the presence of this thing/virus from their bodily fluids
It's all really this simple. You can have your EM photographs, expert assertions, medical school syllabus', viral culturing manufacturing process, and genetic sequencing (really "genetic assembling") fancy-schmancy, highly technical procedures. I'll give it all to you for the sake of my point. Let's say it's all legitimate.
All fo this combined still does NOT PROVE THEIR CLAIM, does it?
The establishment has to transfer these things/viruses via normal transmission vectors, to either human volunteers or lab animals in order to PROVE THEIR CLAIM.
And I'm telling you, the establishment has never achieved this, and frankly, have never even really tried...certainly not in the past 50 years.
So you'll have to contemplate why exactly this is. In a sane world, I would expect there to be thousands, probably tens of thousands of scientific experiments in the establishment journals and literature of this type. But the fact is, there are NONE. Zilch. Zero. Nada.
There's only one logical, rational conclusion that can be drawn as I see it. They don't do it because the ENTIRETY of "germ theory" and contagion is a GIGANTIC FRAUD, end to end. The establishment can no more pull of "Koch's postulates" with boogeymen-viruses than with bacteria.
They don't even try because they know it's a lie ("they" being the higher-up deceivers in our medical institutions). If you were an accredited and well-respected virologist, bacteriologist, immunologist, etc., you couldn't get one red cent of funding or a research grant to perform the 5-step experiment I listed above. This is because the funders know it will fail.
Alternatively, you could get all the funding money you ever needed if your experiment includes needles and toxic substances. There are hundreds, probably thousands of these "clinical trials" going on right now. And I repeat myself by saying that injecting saline into humans can, and often does produce "negative effects". What do these, frankly insane, "medical researchers" exactly think they're doing I wonder?
I'll leave you with this. I'm not here on GA to promote my podcast and I know I'll get myself into hot water if I try to. However, I did one about 3 years ago on boogeymen-viruses that runs a little over an hour and covers the whole history of "germ theory" and "virology" that might further your understanding even more. No need for a link, it shouldn't be hard for you to find our podcasts, knowing only my handle here.
I look forward to your response to all I've said here.
You can write 1M words, Fren, but I very highly doubt that either of us will get the other to see things on this topic as the other does.
To me, Malone has been one of the heroes during the Covid debacle, coming out early against the vaccines.
To you, b/c he doesn't share your view on viruses, he's part of the problem.
It may be that we're both right, but black-and-white thinking - as I've read from you thus far - won't allow for such nuance as yours.
I have far bigger fish to fry both personally and professionally than to spend any more time on debating viruses with you or anyone.
Just know this: by castigating every single doctor and scientist who disagrees with you as part of the problem, you're villainizing people, the great majority of whom weren't aware of the hoax, if indeed viruses aren't real.
And I can't spend another moment corresponding w/ someone with a felt need to judge people who didn't know better. Peace.
And I can't spend another moment corresponding w/ someone with a felt need to judge people who didn't know better.
I've never done any such thing. I have only called out those who have had many opportunities now to "know better". They've chosen to "not know better".
To me, Malone has been one of the heroes during the Covid debacle, coming out early against the vaccines. To you, b/c he doesn't share your view on viruses, he's part of the problem.
That's a misrepresentation of my position. I have called out Dr. Malone (and many others in this space) who have been told, asked and invited to address the numerous points that have been made calling virology at large into question......BECAUSE....they have all chosen to deny, dismiss or ignore the many requests and invitations he has had to address these points. He well knows what has been asserted. His unwillingness to address or discuss these assertions is what I'm pointing out.
There's little doubt in mind that he's been warned/threatened about addressing these assertions which is why he remains silent. It also doesn't help that his entire career would turn out to be a total farce.
For the record, I don't "judge" nor "castigate" the 99% of doctors who are still unaware of the fact that "germ theory" at large has been directly challenged and called into question. I'm well aware of their current level of awareness, which was the same as mine prior to 2020 when this information started to widely spread. They're unwitting victims of mainstream medical brainwashing, just like we are.
Nor do I really "judge" Dr. Malone. But he's part of the larger, wider "fear-mongering" campaign that is the ultimate source of many dis-eases and deaths around the world. He could simply say "in my professional opinion, these mRNA jabs provide zero benefits against COVID"...and keep all his talking points around this subject alone. As soon as he -- and others -- start talking about long-term damage, 'side effects", "permanent damage", "blood clots", "myocarditis", etc. (none of which have been proven), they are all generating untold amounts of FEAR in people that have already taken the COVID jab. This is where the real damage of this ongoing, controlled opposition, fear-mongering campaign is really being done.
The entire debacle can be summed up quite simply. The world at large is teaching each other BELIEFS masquerading as FACTS. This is how the controlling cabal has us all fooled. Herein lies the rub.
We live in a world in which healthy skeptics like you and me thrive, in part b/c of the dogged work of researchers who bring the receipts. The notion that "many have tried (to bring to light findings that distinguish w/ the aid of an electron microscope healthy from virally-affected cells) but somehow ALL of their efforts came to naught is equivalent to the DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK argument.
You seem very kind, so let's leave it at this: you're not needing evidence of the contrary to disbelieve in viruses, and I remain uncertain as to what to think (though they'll have to tackle me to the ground before I or any of my loved ones receive another vaccine).
I appreciate your well wishes, TMBZ. Glad to keep it peaceful as we agree to disagree. Take care.
Please explain to me how you arrive at this conclusion. The virologists reluctantly, but readily admit this is so. This is why they don't even try to find boogeymen any longer. They stopped trying in the 1950s...and yes...with the use of electron microscopes which were widely in use then.
Well that's a heckuva good start on your part. Kudos to you!
But let's try this another way. For the sake of driving the point home, I'm going to give you the following points:
Let's say this is all "true", which is effectively what you currently believe. Right?
Wouldn't it follow and be the next most logical and common sense step to use these "purified samples of viruses" in a wide variety of scientific experiments leveraging "normal transmission vectors (surafce, air, water, food exposure)" to demonstrate "transmission"?
Nobody has "proven" anything until this is done anyway, right?
I'm trying to tell you, the reason nobody has ever done this, is because they've already tried thousands of times, with "upurified" samples no less. And it never worked. This is why you won't find such a study since the entire establishment gave up trying this in the 1970s. England's "Common Cold Institute (CCU)" was "officially" shuttered in 1989, but they hadn't done anything even remotely interesting in over a decade by that time.
Now, Iet me also address what is a very common objection to this point, which is that it's "immoral" to infect humans with dis-eases. And yet, we tried exactly this from Pasteur's insane (and highly immoral) experiments in the 1880s, all the way up until the 1950s, when the State of New York tried to infect unsuspecting "orphans" secretly through the drinking water they were served. Both of these examples, pure failures I might add.
A buddy of mine that had just graduated from college and couldn't find a good job participated in a one-month pharmaceutical "clinical trial" for some new drug they were testing. They paid him $4000 which was a lot of money back in the 1980s. He signed away all his rights to sue this company, a shell of a shell of a shell of one of the big pharma companies I might add. But whatever they were giving him, caused him some massive psychoses. So much so, he wanted to leave after the first week, but realized he wouldn't get a nickel if he didn't complete the 30-day program.
Needless to say, my friend had pretty significant psychological problems for over two years. And that pharma shell company paid for about half of his treatments if he swore to never tell his story to a journalist or governmental regulation agency. And he wasn't the only one that had similar problems.
I don't know if these types of programs are still in operation today, but I can assure you, these were far more "immoral" than "infecting volunteers" with an alleged "flu-virus". Right? If I needed the money and knew the worst of what I was getting myself into (flu symptoms), there would be nothing "immoral" about it. Right?
Even smarter, safer and scientifically better would be putting the alleged "flu-virus" in an aerator, water supply, on food, surfaces, etc. which are all the ways we are said to "spread" boogeymen.
But for some reason, nobody has ever done this sort of experiment in the past 50-odd years. In the 1900-1980 timeframe, they did these types of experiments, loosely through various forms of spreading bodily fluids of sick people to healthy people. These all failed spectacularly as well. And they were far from 'scientific" as no "virus" had been isolated from the wide variety of possible substances, toxins, bacteria, etc. that were in those bodily fluids.
Our establishment "experts" don't do any of this...EITHER...with lab animal experiments. All of them involve INJECTIONS, JABCINES, none making any efforts through normal transmission vectors. Why do you suppose that is?
Now, if you do a quick Google search, their algorithm might still be promoting the old 1970s John's Hopkins highly non-scientific experiment in a tuberculosis ward with guinea pigs. This was the "top hit" back in 2020-2021 people would find to "debunk" my assertions. While TB is the result of a bacteria, this is how the establishment is attempting to quash the "contagion hoax" position.
But I encourage you to find and read that John's Hopkins study and see just how many holes you can poke in both their methodology and conclusions. My 10-year old niece designed a better experiment while she was playing video games and I explained it to her. It's one of the dumbest things I've ever read in fact. I laughed my way through it from beginning to end.
This is a "double-negative" sentence that's worth clearing up as I think this point is often lost on most people. Just like you and I both disbelieve in the notion that female unicorns have blonde eyelashes, until PROVEN otherwise, the same holds for the entirety of the "germ theory" myth and existence of boogeymen-viruses.
EM "photographs" of near nano-scopic particles and "experts saying so" is quite simply.....not enough to PROVE THE CLAIM. Like if I went out in the woods and found some short, blonde hairs on a tree trunk, I haven't yet proven they came from my mythical female unicorn yet, right? Even if I produced a photograph of a female unicorn that appeared to have blonde eyelashes, that's still not quite enough, is it (could be photoshopped, right)?
Thus, the only way the establishment can prove their claim is very simple, 5-step process that one of the father's of "germ theory" simply laid out over a hundred years ago.
Identify the "thing/virus" you claim is causing dis-ease in a sick person. (You currently BELIEVE this has been done.).
Remove, isolate and purify this thing/virus from the sick person's fluids/tissues.
Ensure there is no presence of this thing/virus in a healthy person
Expose the healthy person to this thing/virus via normal transmission vectors
Demonstrate the healthy person gets the same dis-ease and identify and isolate the presence of this thing/virus from their bodily fluids
It's all really this simple. You can have your EM photographs, expert assertions, medical school syllabus', viral culturing manufacturing process, and genetic sequencing (really "genetic assembling") fancy-schmancy, highly technical procedures. I'll give it all to you for the sake of my point. Let's say it's all legitimate.
All fo this combined still does NOT PROVE THEIR CLAIM, does it?
The establishment has to transfer these things/viruses via normal transmission vectors, to either human volunteers or lab animals in order to PROVE THEIR CLAIM.
And I'm telling you, the establishment has never achieved this, and frankly, have never even really tried...certainly not in the past 50 years.
So you'll have to contemplate why exactly this is. In a sane world, I would expect there to be thousands, probably tens of thousands of scientific experiments in the establishment journals and literature of this type. But the fact is, there are NONE. Zilch. Zero. Nada.
There's only one logical, rational conclusion that can be drawn as I see it. They don't do it because the ENTIRETY of "germ theory" and contagion is a GIGANTIC FRAUD, end to end. The establishment can no more pull of "Koch's postulates" with boogeymen-viruses than with bacteria.
They don't even try because they know it's a lie ("they" being the higher-up deceivers in our medical institutions). If you were an accredited and well-respected virologist, bacteriologist, immunologist, etc., you couldn't get one red cent of funding or a research grant to perform the 5-step experiment I listed above. This is because the funders know it will fail.
Alternatively, you could get all the funding money you ever needed if your experiment includes needles and toxic substances. There are hundreds, probably thousands of these "clinical trials" going on right now. And I repeat myself by saying that injecting saline into humans can, and often does produce "negative effects". What do these, frankly insane, "medical researchers" exactly think they're doing I wonder?
I'll leave you with this. I'm not here on GA to promote my podcast and I know I'll get myself into hot water if I try to. However, I did one about 3 years ago on boogeymen-viruses that runs a little over an hour and covers the whole history of "germ theory" and "virology" that might further your understanding even more. No need for a link, it shouldn't be hard for you to find our podcasts, knowing only my handle here.
I look forward to your response to all I've said here.
You can write 1M words, Fren, but I very highly doubt that either of us will get the other to see things on this topic as the other does.
To me, Malone has been one of the heroes during the Covid debacle, coming out early against the vaccines.
To you, b/c he doesn't share your view on viruses, he's part of the problem.
It may be that we're both right, but black-and-white thinking - as I've read from you thus far - won't allow for such nuance as yours.
I have far bigger fish to fry both personally and professionally than to spend any more time on debating viruses with you or anyone.
Just know this: by castigating every single doctor and scientist who disagrees with you as part of the problem, you're villainizing people, the great majority of whom weren't aware of the hoax, if indeed viruses aren't real.
And I can't spend another moment corresponding w/ someone with a felt need to judge people who didn't know better. Peace.
I've never done any such thing. I have only called out those who have had many opportunities now to "know better". They've chosen to "not know better".
That's a misrepresentation of my position. I have called out Dr. Malone (and many others in this space) who have been told, asked and invited to address the numerous points that have been made calling virology at large into question......BECAUSE....they have all chosen to deny, dismiss or ignore the many requests and invitations he has had to address these points. He well knows what has been asserted. His unwillingness to address or discuss these assertions is what I'm pointing out.
There's little doubt in mind that he's been warned/threatened about addressing these assertions which is why he remains silent. It also doesn't help that his entire career would turn out to be a total farce.
For the record, I don't "judge" nor "castigate" the 99% of doctors who are still unaware of the fact that "germ theory" at large has been directly challenged and called into question. I'm well aware of their current level of awareness, which was the same as mine prior to 2020 when this information started to widely spread. They're unwitting victims of mainstream medical brainwashing, just like we are.
Nor do I really "judge" Dr. Malone. But he's part of the larger, wider "fear-mongering" campaign that is the ultimate source of many dis-eases and deaths around the world. He could simply say "in my professional opinion, these mRNA jabs provide zero benefits against COVID"...and keep all his talking points around this subject alone. As soon as he -- and others -- start talking about long-term damage, 'side effects", "permanent damage", "blood clots", "myocarditis", etc. (none of which have been proven), they are all generating untold amounts of FEAR in people that have already taken the COVID jab. This is where the real damage of this ongoing, controlled opposition, fear-mongering campaign is really being done.
The entire debacle can be summed up quite simply. The world at large is teaching each other BELIEFS masquerading as FACTS. This is how the controlling cabal has us all fooled. Herein lies the rub.