I can't "prove it" because an impossible and arbitrary standard has been put forward over what constitutes that standard. If you read the articles linked to by Kirsch by other authors you will see that:
1) Contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate has been repeatedly demonstrated.
2) The way " prove contagion and replication w…
I can't "prove it" because an impossible and arbitrary standard has been put forward over what constitutes that standard. If you read the articles linked to by Kirsch by other authors you will see that:
1) Contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate has been repeatedly demonstrated.
2) The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" is being defined is completely different from what anyone else in the field utilizes.
3) The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" has been defined it is impossible to ever meet that standard.
Dude, why are you just making up claims that are NOT being presented.
Kaufman and Cowan and Bailey, et alia, have offered a simple case: they want to send four (4) samples to 5 different labs. They want to see if each lab will "find" the same germ or lack thereof in the corresponding samples.
Given that Lanka proved that the current methods of "isolation" and sequencing can allow one to "invent" any type of virus, the betting money is that the labs will have divergent findings - using any method they choose. Such a challenge will demonstrate the lack of uniformity in "virology". This is exposing the fraud of HIV tests all over again. I mean, where have you been, Doc?
Lastly, are you ignoring the "in silico" method of "finding" viruses? Again, why not start with something simple? Here is a question, how many measles strains are there? How many strains of HPV are there? I mean PCR depends on the primer, and the software "genetic sequence" game allows fraud. As Kaufman noted, one of the first SARS-CoV-2 papers said that they had 1 million "candidate" sequences or genetic patterns from which to choose.
Quit defending the priests of virology and coding. Or go all in and take the Offit challenge. Either you believe that 10,000 vaccines at one time is safe, or you recognize that most medical "studies" in the realm of vaccines and viral disease are fraud. (It is as though you have no idea. Do you know about the Simpsonwood memo of 2000?)
If you don't have a pure virus isolate (by the very simple definition), because its too hard to do. Then how can you be sure that it is not some of the other crap that is mixed in with the "virus" that is causing the cytopathogneic effect?
The ameoba example Kirsch used is a good example because you can see the viruses on a light microscope and they immediate start killing the ameobas and can be found replicating inside the ameobas.
How do you know its actually a virus if you can't isolate them from the other contaminants that you mix them with? Sorry, I'm not being awkward, i just feel this is one the most fundamental lies that we have been told our whole lives and I have no faith in any system controled by Pharma anymore.
100.0% purity can never be achieved anywhere. The ameoba example was the best I could come up with, because you can clearly see in real time that those particles are present and causing disease in ameobas, and when you further magnify them, you can clearly see they are. viruses. It's possible the viruses don't affect the ameobas and rather summon an invisible demonic spirit we can't see and that demonic spirit is what is responsible for the ameobas dying, but I feel something like that is an unrealistic standard to hold unless you can independently provide evidence an invisible demonic spirit is involved.
AMD may I politely request a link to said Amoeba example Kirsch provided please, as I have missed this one. Sounds interesting. OMG I cannot believe I just said the sound of single celled organisms being light microscope observed getting killed by smaller replicating things is interesting. I think 3 years of this covid BS has gone to my head. As a stand up comic once said, 2020 was suddenly the year that everyone has favourite virologists or naturopaths all of a sudden! WTAF have they done to humanity! Anyway Happy New Fear AMD :)
I dug it up for Kirsch and he decided to write an article on it.
My thought process was:
If there was a virus large enough to see with an optical microscope, that would disprove every single argument these people are using WITHIN their own logical system (which is typically extremely difficult to do).
So then I looked up what the largest viruses were and found an ancient one of them had been thawed from frost and could seen eating amoebas.
It really surprised me that no one on the no virus side didn't have the thought to do this. One of the first things I do whenever I consider adopting a controversial viewpoint is think through every single way my case could be attacked and then if any of those points are valid. It's not a perfect approach, but it keeps me relatively error free here despite much of my content being original (which makes it really hard to be error free since there are just so many different ways each thing can be wrong).
"The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" is being defined is completely different from what anyone else in the field utilizes."
Could this be because the whole field is built on currupted foundations
Yes that is possible. It's also possible that the definition they are putting forward is nonsensical and impossible to utilize in a laboratory setting.
No, not everything is "possible" because you say: "it is also possible that ..."
Please read their challenge, and cite specifics. Or are you assuming that it is impossible for you to understand them due to the fairy dust. I mean, it is possible that fairy dust is preventing you from reading, right?
Oh wait, let me review all the fraudulent accusations and misstatements in the Kirsch letter ... it is possible that Santa Claus wants me to be misled ...
Well look, we could go backwards and forwards all day. And to be honest, niether of as would change our minds. I will only ever be a casual observer of the big guys in this fight, but I know who I stand behind. I wouldnt touch another pharmacuetical for as long as I live, thats all I know. I have no faith in any Doc that sticks this poison in people, which is the vast majority. And I have no faith in the most criminal companies that have ever existed ie. Big Pharma.
Your next question might be "Maybe my feelings are clouding my judgement?". And you might be right. If any one does not view the whole medical complex with huge sceptical and suspisious eye after the last 3 years and not want to tear the whole thing down and rebuild human health from scratch then I would think there is something wrong with them.
Well it should be clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that I am opposed to the covid vaccines and have been from the very very start and I am skeptical of many parts of medicine...but I also likewise will not discard things I firmly believe are true.
Well, I appreciate the discussion, and the respectful manner that you hold yourself in. Its time for bed for me in the UK. We'll have to agree to disagree. Have a good day.
"The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" has been defined it is impossible to ever meet that standard."
Then it will always be a theory, and a pretty daft one at that.
Kirsch has lost any respect I had for him in the way he has dealt with people. Not that that fact colours my opinion on the debate, as it doesnt, i'm just stating afact
I can't "prove it" because an impossible and arbitrary standard has been put forward over what constitutes that standard. If you read the articles linked to by Kirsch by other authors you will see that:
1) Contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate has been repeatedly demonstrated.
2) The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" is being defined is completely different from what anyone else in the field utilizes.
3) The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" has been defined it is impossible to ever meet that standard.
Dude, why are you just making up claims that are NOT being presented.
Kaufman and Cowan and Bailey, et alia, have offered a simple case: they want to send four (4) samples to 5 different labs. They want to see if each lab will "find" the same germ or lack thereof in the corresponding samples.
Given that Lanka proved that the current methods of "isolation" and sequencing can allow one to "invent" any type of virus, the betting money is that the labs will have divergent findings - using any method they choose. Such a challenge will demonstrate the lack of uniformity in "virology". This is exposing the fraud of HIV tests all over again. I mean, where have you been, Doc?
Lastly, are you ignoring the "in silico" method of "finding" viruses? Again, why not start with something simple? Here is a question, how many measles strains are there? How many strains of HPV are there? I mean PCR depends on the primer, and the software "genetic sequence" game allows fraud. As Kaufman noted, one of the first SARS-CoV-2 papers said that they had 1 million "candidate" sequences or genetic patterns from which to choose.
Quit defending the priests of virology and coding. Or go all in and take the Offit challenge. Either you believe that 10,000 vaccines at one time is safe, or you recognize that most medical "studies" in the realm of vaccines and viral disease are fraud. (It is as though you have no idea. Do you know about the Simpsonwood memo of 2000?)
If you don't have a pure virus isolate (by the very simple definition), because its too hard to do. Then how can you be sure that it is not some of the other crap that is mixed in with the "virus" that is causing the cytopathogneic effect?
The ameoba example Kirsch used is a good example because you can see the viruses on a light microscope and they immediate start killing the ameobas and can be found replicating inside the ameobas.
How do you know its actually a virus if you can't isolate them from the other contaminants that you mix them with? Sorry, I'm not being awkward, i just feel this is one the most fundamental lies that we have been told our whole lives and I have no faith in any system controled by Pharma anymore.
100.0% purity can never be achieved anywhere. The ameoba example was the best I could come up with, because you can clearly see in real time that those particles are present and causing disease in ameobas, and when you further magnify them, you can clearly see they are. viruses. It's possible the viruses don't affect the ameobas and rather summon an invisible demonic spirit we can't see and that demonic spirit is what is responsible for the ameobas dying, but I feel something like that is an unrealistic standard to hold unless you can independently provide evidence an invisible demonic spirit is involved.
AMD may I politely request a link to said Amoeba example Kirsch provided please, as I have missed this one. Sounds interesting. OMG I cannot believe I just said the sound of single celled organisms being light microscope observed getting killed by smaller replicating things is interesting. I think 3 years of this covid BS has gone to my head. As a stand up comic once said, 2020 was suddenly the year that everyone has favourite virologists or naturopaths all of a sudden! WTAF have they done to humanity! Anyway Happy New Fear AMD :)
I dug it up for Kirsch and he decided to write an article on it.
My thought process was:
If there was a virus large enough to see with an optical microscope, that would disprove every single argument these people are using WITHIN their own logical system (which is typically extremely difficult to do).
So then I looked up what the largest viruses were and found an ancient one of them had been thawed from frost and could seen eating amoebas.
It really surprised me that no one on the no virus side didn't have the thought to do this. One of the first things I do whenever I consider adopting a controversial viewpoint is think through every single way my case could be attacked and then if any of those points are valid. It's not a perfect approach, but it keeps me relatively error free here despite much of my content being original (which makes it really hard to be error free since there are just so many different ways each thing can be wrong).
Happy 2023 to you too!
"The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" is being defined is completely different from what anyone else in the field utilizes."
Could this be because the whole field is built on currupted foundations
Yes that is possible. It's also possible that the definition they are putting forward is nonsensical and impossible to utilize in a laboratory setting.
No, not everything is "possible" because you say: "it is also possible that ..."
Please read their challenge, and cite specifics. Or are you assuming that it is impossible for you to understand them due to the fairy dust. I mean, it is possible that fairy dust is preventing you from reading, right?
Oh wait, let me review all the fraudulent accusations and misstatements in the Kirsch letter ... it is possible that Santa Claus wants me to be misled ...
Well look, we could go backwards and forwards all day. And to be honest, niether of as would change our minds. I will only ever be a casual observer of the big guys in this fight, but I know who I stand behind. I wouldnt touch another pharmacuetical for as long as I live, thats all I know. I have no faith in any Doc that sticks this poison in people, which is the vast majority. And I have no faith in the most criminal companies that have ever existed ie. Big Pharma.
Your next question might be "Maybe my feelings are clouding my judgement?". And you might be right. If any one does not view the whole medical complex with huge sceptical and suspisious eye after the last 3 years and not want to tear the whole thing down and rebuild human health from scratch then I would think there is something wrong with them.
Well it should be clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that I am opposed to the covid vaccines and have been from the very very start and I am skeptical of many parts of medicine...but I also likewise will not discard things I firmly believe are true.
Well, I appreciate the discussion, and the respectful manner that you hold yourself in. Its time for bed for me in the UK. We'll have to agree to disagree. Have a good day.
"The way " prove contagion and replication with a pure virus isolate" has been defined it is impossible to ever meet that standard."
Then it will always be a theory, and a pretty daft one at that.
Kirsch has lost any respect I had for him in the way he has dealt with people. Not that that fact colours my opinion on the debate, as it doesnt, i'm just stating afact
But by that logic, everything will be a theory.
Is that a problem?