If viruses don’t exist, then how can we see them?

Guest Post by Steve Kirsch

People who claim “viruses do not exist” will have a tough time explaining these two papers. And a third paper shows all of Koch’s postulates for SARS-CoV-2 published in a top medical journal. Whoops!

Executive summary

This will be my last post on the topic of whether the virus exists.

The answer is yes.

People who think there are no viruses or that SARS-CoV-2 isn’t a virus are badly misinformed.

I’ve offered to bet $1M to anyone who thinks otherwise, but sadly there were no takers.

Why did I spend so much time on this?

A large number of people have been successfully duped into believing viruses and virology are scams.

But this can easily be disproved by science. VERY easily. The virology explanation fits the facts. Their “viruses don’t exist” hypothesis leaves everything unexplained. It couldn’t be simpler.

Yet the virus deniers cannot be moved off “the virus has to be isolated based on a layman’s definition of “isolate” or it doesn’t exist.” This is stupid. That’s not how science works.

Yet, when presented with the facts, people reject them and stick with their beliefs.

The vaccines are a much more complex issue because the data is more complicated.

If we can figure out how to red-pill the people who are bought into the “there is no virus” story, then we may have a technique to red-pill people who think the vaccines are safe.

The problem I have with the vaccine crowd is that they refuse even to engage in dialog. The virus deniers are happy to engage in dialog, but just as dogmatic in their beliefs. So the virus debate allowed me to engage in changing people’s beliefs on a small scale. It was pretty eye opening as I expected this to be much easier than it appeared.

Do I have any doubts I got it wrong? Nope.

The fact that nobody will take my money suggests that they have no conviction in their beliefs. Yet, even without that conviction, it appears that nothing will change their minds. That was counter-intuitive to me.

If you were a virus denier and you have now changed your mind, please indicate that in the comments. I bet the number changed is near zero which suggests to me that logical arguments and data are not persuasive.

It reinforces the old Mark Twain quote:

It’s Easier To Fool People Than To Convince Them That They’ve Been Fooled.

And yes, you were fooled by that because Mark Twain never said that. Think I’m kidding? Here’s the reference.

What did I learn

  1. No amount of evidence and explanation will make a difference to people dug in their beliefs, even if the arguments are simple and clear. The evidence for viruses is overwhelming: it fits all the observed data, bacteriophages have been isolated, there is a peer reviewed paper published in Nature proving Koch’s postulates, larger viruses can be observed under an optical microscope, there is no alternate hypothesis that fits the observations. None of that makes a difference to people bought into that narrative.
  2. People who promote false views invariably shy away from debates. Some people are brave enough to engage, but when the going gets tough, they disengage. We saw this with Patrick Gunnels where as soon as I pointed out bacteriophages are viruses he told me never to contact him again.
  3. People who promote false views will never risk any money in a challenge that is adjudicated.
  4. The method used to mislead people is simple: Establish credibility in some area where you are actually telling the truth. Then you get a loyal following. Then you spin a false story that SOUNDS plausible but where people have limited expertise. So you “teach” people that if the virus hasn’t be isolated, it doesn’t exist. Or that you can get any genetic sequence you want because tiny pieces of RNA can be assembled into anything. Or that Sanger sequencing is unreliable. So you are perceived as an “educator” by leveraging the credibility you previously achieved. Once people are locked in to the narrative, it’s hard to pull them out.
  5. It’s even more effective if you produce an entertaining video about it such as this Sam Bailey video on virology where she positions herself as the expert in the field and she’s telling you what is REALLY going on. It promotes her book. By mixing in snippets of the truth (like that the PCR test being inaccurate but without telling you the whole story), she has just enough seemingly credible content that she position herself as the expert who is going to enlighten you with the magician’s secrets! Pay no attention what virologists tell you! They are misleading you! This method works remarkably well. Even though she’s misleading everyone, she gets comments like this one (with 186 likes): “Outstanding. You might be the most dangerous person to the orthodox medical establishment in existence. Bravo. I have such a deep respect for what you are doing.” Wow. I didn’t read all the comments, but they appeared all to be glowing! At this point, her followers are so loyal that she could debate us, lose badly on every single point, and her followers will believe she won the debate. I’m totally serious about that.
  6. The previous steps work remarkably well due to the Dunning-Kruger effect. The people who you educated now are “experts” and look down on people who are the real experts in the field. Masks are a good example where wearing people are absolutely convinced that they are the “smart” ones in the crowd even though they’ve never read any of the clinical trial data.

So although I couldn’t shift anyone’s thinking as per 1, at least I verified that 2 – 3 hold as a way to assess truth and that 4 is true for any deception.

Bottom line: It’s Easier To Fool People Than To Convince Them That They’ve Been Fooled.

Two papers show viruses that are large enough to be seen with an optical microscope

If viruses don’t exist, how can we see them?

These two papers show recently discovered viruses that are big enough to see and which have distinct shapes that can be easily observed:

  1. Thirty-thousand-year-old distant relative of giant icosahedral DNA viruses with a pandoravirus morphology
  2. The rapidly expanding universe of giant viruses: Mimivirus, Pandoravirus, Pithovirus and Mollivirus. The image above shows light microscope and electron microscope images of the same virus.

If you think these papers are fake, the burden of proof is on you to show evidence of fakery. Generally, fakery doesn’t last too long in top journals, e.g., the faked HCQ paper in the Lancet. Baseless accusations won’t cut it with my readers. If you have proof either of these papers were faked, let’s see the proof.

Koch’s postulates have been satisfied for SARS-CoV-2

Not only can you see viruses, but Koch’s postulates have been satisfied for the SARS-CoV-2 virus in this paper and the results were published in Nature:

Our results demonstrate the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in mice, which—together with previous clinical studies1completely satisfies Koch’s postulates7 and confirms that SARS-CoV-2 is the pathogen responsible for COVID-19.

Of course, Massey et al. have a different interpretation of Koch’s postulates that is difficult, time consuming and expensive to meet, so they would claim that it doesn’t meet THEIR interpretation of Koch’s postulates.

They flatly refuse to debate any of us on this issue, bet or no bet. They can’t argue it’s a waste of their time because we’ll pay them $1M if they are right. That’s an opportunity. Why pass on it? Answer: because they know they would lose.

P.S. I’d ask Tom Cowan, Christine Massey, Mark Bailey, etc. about this but none of them want to talk to me.

The virus has been sequenced

There are thousands of COVID variants.

I used the S gene codons from this Wuhan variant.

Here’s the BLAST search result:

They will tell you gene sequencing is random and you can get anything you want, but clearly some sequences were identical, others had slight mutations in the S gene. But it only matched SARS-CoV-2.

How do we know that viruses exist? 100 years worth of experiments, that’s how!

These articles show how you can use “science” to prove that viruses exist.

How? Simple. The data observed over the past 100 years is a perfect fit to the “viruses exists” hypothesis than the null hypothesis. It’s no more complicated than that.

However, the above is difficult for people to understand that science works just like a courtroom in weighing evidence against a “he did it” vs. “he didn’t do it” hypothesis. In a court room, the jury would never say, “In order to prove he did it, you’d have to isolate the murder weapon” or “you’d have to see a video of him committing the crime.”

Reader comment

From Don Newmeyer:

For a cell biologist like myself, this is an especially tedious and almost pointless debate. People have been studying these viruses for decades, and the scientific community would certainly have raised doubts if there had been any. We argue about everything that’s not firmly nailed down. (The only exception is the politics-driven monomania of late.) I wonder if the virus deniers are actually so numerous, or just a vocal minority.

Answer: Just a vocal minority who don’t even have the courage to even bet $100 that they are right. They have a total lack of conviction in their beliefs. They won’t show up for any debate and use ad hominem attacks as their excuse for avoiding defending their position.

Read my articles for more info

Here are some of the articles I’ve written (and one by Jeff Green):

  1. The very disingenuous “Settling the virus debate” challenge
  2. Settling the virus debate
  3. Is there a virus? (Patrick Gunnels admits bacteriophages have been isolated. whoops!)
  4. Has the virus been isolated? Yes, but not to “their” specs explaining how Koch’s postulates are obsolete.
  5. I bet $1M a virus exists. Why aren’t they accepting my bet? No takers!
  6. Does anyone want to debate

Articles written by others

  1. Challenge to Christine Massey (by Jeff Green). It’s pretty astounding. I’ll leave it at that. Jeff couldn’t make any headway either. Nobody can. You are arguing science with people who believe in religion.
  2. Thoughts on the existence of viruses and the follow-up article

The “Settling the Virus Debate” challenge

We accepted their “challenge” and offered to do the work they specified. They refused and went into ad hominem attacks. After all, that is how science works.

They have $500K. They could EASILY fund their challenge and do it themselves. Why don’t they? We don’t know that because they won’t answer that question.

If the virus did exist, you’d think that at least one person would be accepting my $1M bet on the matter. You only need $200K to accept, a sum that Christine Massey says they have. There are currently no takers to my bet. Why wouldn’t Christine Massey and her friends accept? Because they know they will lose.

The mastermind behind the challenge is Tom Cowan. He’s not a scientist. He told people that 5G causes COVID. I don’t understand how anyone can take him seriously. Tom, so why was there no COVID in South Korea (which was the first country to massively roll out 5G) until just recently? He refuses to answer that simple question. That’s why he doesn’t want to talk to me; it would look bad if his followers saw how ridiculous his claims are. No legitimate scientist would ever make such an unfounded claim.

See The very disingenuous “Settling the virus debate” challenge for more information.

They have no alternate hypothesis to explain the data that is on the table

Generally, when you challenge an established hypothesis, you do that by presenting an alternative hypothesis that is a better fit to explain all the data (in this case, gathered over the past 100 years). They cannot even explain simple things like how my wife got COVID and then I got it 5 days later. Both of us have been virus free for the entire pandemic. So what caused the COVID antigen tests to go positive? Their alternative hypothesis is “well, we don’t know. It could have been 5G or maybe too much junk food.”

If they don’t accept my bet, this will be my last post on this topic

I have more important things to do with my time than waste more time on this.

I’ve already written 6 articles on the topic. I’ve beat the horse to death.

If you don’t get it, I’m sorry.

If you think I’m dense for not believing Sam Bailey, you are entitled to your opinion. You aren’t going to change my mind at this point. I’ve given them hours and they have no alternate hypothesis that is anywhere even close to credible. And you don’t really believe what Sam Bailey says or you’d accept one of my bets or offer one of your own as described in the term sheet.

Tom Cowan is the “mastermind” behind the challenge and Cowan isn’t a scientist. Their challenge is ridiculous. We have 100 years of data. We don’t need more data and especially data that are specified by a team led by a doctor who has had his medical license revoked and cannot answer a simple question about his 5G hypothesis. Is that the best they could find to lead such an important effort?

At this point, this is beating a dead horse.

I’ve written 6 Substacks on this (see above), and none of these people will debate me, even after extreme monetary incentives to do so.

At this point, if any of them think I’m wrong and are serious about settling the issue, they should accept one of my bets to prove that they are serious and I’ll be happy to engage and we can have a meaningful discussion.

They have more than enough money to do that (they have $500K and my bet minimum is $200K). Who wouldn’t want to double their money in 6 hours?

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise

65
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
VOWG
VOWG

Why has that virus not been used to create a vaccine?

Smedley Mulcher
Smedley Mulcher

Whether the virus exists or not is not the issue. The fact is that it was a not so deadly virus that we shut the world down over and wrecked local, regional and national economies. Viruses may exist but the science of vaccinology is a scam.

AKJohn
AKJohn

Well said. Kirsch brings up some good points. But Vaccinology and Virology are cults. So much bad information is out there about them. So, how do viruses, classified as a non-living thing, find and dig their way into cells where they suddenly become alive and replicate. The pictures seem to be real. Are they?

arnieus
arnieus

I don’t know if viruses exist but something causes contagion. People in the same house often get sick with the same symptoms. No doubt that the vaccine jabs certainly exist and are killing people that were in no mortal danger from any flu. I can imagine no innocent explanation for the unnecessary lock downs and shots.

bigfoot
bigfoot

” . . . something causes contagion.”

Menstrual cycles, bird migration, murmurations, fish schools, fat household members, ad infinitum are not the result of contagion, but instead are mysteries of life. Well, not the fat example. Obviously, people in the same house may eat the same crap and that has a definite effect on how they look. No contagion. Another example is the Black Death. Poor nutrition and sanitation had the effect of sickening millions of people all at the same time. No contagion.

Christopher Scallio
Christopher Scallio

There is No Isolation of Virus Period! The Isolation process is Flawed! Samples are purposely Contaminated with Bovine Calf Syrum, Toxic & Corosive Chemicals to “Break Down” Biological Cells. The “Goopy” Decayed Biological Matter is Not Virus.

flash
flash

But, scientistry has such a good track record you say…why would anyone dare doctor an image ?

Doctored Images, Fake Data, Plagiarism: Scandals Rock Alzheimer’s, Cancer Research
— This past week in healthcare investigations

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/99918

Anonymous
Anonymous

People believe what they want to believe. I’ve seen and identified viruses in my histology classes in med training.

I know the CIA plants outrageous claims in alt-media so they can paint with a broad brush everyone who doesn’t accept the given narrative as all kooks.

Viruses are ancient and real organisms. COVID is real, it’s no more lethal than a normal flu virus though.

flash
flash

anon has seen the virus. The science is settled….reeeeeeeeee

Anonymous
Anonymous

Complete genomic sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 and variations from prior coronaviruses
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/MRA.00169-20

flash
flash

ha ha ha /\… Of course, because scientoadies said so. Don’t forget to get your booster , bro…

“The title of an editorial in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, dated April 6, 2002, asks the question, “Just How Tainted Has Medicine Become?”4 The article states, “Heavily, and damagingly so, is the answer.” Among other things, in 2001, researchers completed experiments with biotechnology products in which they had a direct financial interest and doctors did not tell their patients that others had died using these products when safer alternatives were available. In the same journal, dated April 11, 2015, Dr. Richard Horton stated the gravity of the problem as follows: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue . . . science has taken a turn towards darkness.”5

https://answersingenesis.org/what-is-science/is-scientific-research-flawed/?utm_source=twitter-aig&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twitter-aig

Most scientists ‘can’t replicate studies by their peers’
By Tom Feilden
Science correspondent
Concern over the reliability of the results published in scientific literature has been growing for some time.

According to a survey published in the journal Nature last summer, more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments.

Marcus Munafo is one of them. Now professor of biological psychology at Bristol University, he almost gave up on a career in science when, as a PhD student, he failed to reproduce a textbook study on anxiety.

“I had a crisis of confidence. I thought maybe it’s me, maybe I didn’t run my study well, maybe I’m not cut out to be a scientist.”

The problem, it turned out, was not with Marcus Munafo’s science, but with the way the scientific literature had been “tidied up” to present a much clearer, more robust outcome.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

Colorado Artist
Colorado Artist

Like clockwork.
Ad hominem.

Colorado Artist
Colorado Artist

“You are arguing science with people who believe in religion.”

It’s the same as arguing with flat earthers and a dozen more
firmly held beliefs. No amount of evidence will ever be enough. It’s a fools
errand even trying. So I don’t argue because I don’t care what they believe.

Mike
Mike

Koch’s postulates have NOT been satisfied for SARS-CoV-2. They were so far off from being satisfied that the Wikipedia page on Koch’s postulates has been edited several times to fit the Covid hoax narrative.

If the Sars-Cov-2 virus exists, then publish the study where it shows that it has been isolated in a lab with a full explanation describing your method of isolation. The studies that are claiming isolation of the virus are a complete joke and don’t even come close to the definition of isolation.

This guy goes to great lengths to discredit people who don’t believe in the Covid hoax. He attempts to claim that people who don’t believe in the hoax don’t believe that viruses even exist. That may be true for some people, but he just makes a generalization and includes everyone in that category.

m
m

OK, give us a link to a neutral, balanced article that reasons why Koch’s postulates apply also to viruses.

Mike
Mike

I’d love to provide a link for you, but I have no idea what the hell a “neutral, balanced article” is. So instead, I’ll give you this:

“Stop arguing about the existence of the virus”

Hopefully this will provide you with more information and why I believe that the Sars-Cov-2 virus doesn’t exist.

Stucky

“Koch’s postulates ” …. blah blah blah ……….

I’m guessing you don’t really know Jack or Shit about “Koch’s postulates ” …. other than what you copied and pasted from a google search.

flash
flash

HA HA HA … viruses need lots of legs , because all the running to and fro they do.

comment image

Anthony Aaron
Anthony Aaron

Michael Landon played that part in a ’50s C-grade fright movie … 

bigfoot
bigfoot

Nice light.

Colorado Artist
Colorado Artist

There are literally thousands of life forms with multiple legs.
Many don’t run on them.
Shall we mock them too because we can see them without magnification?
Asking for logicians.
I like your commentary generally, whoever you are, but I like truth more.
Viruses, are not a conspiracy. Honest. And the earth isn’t flat. Honestly.
The empirical evidence for both is overwhelming. And has withstood a great deal of scrutiny over a great deal of time. Open your mind and seek truth whenever it shocks your
mental map of the world you used to depend on. I used to think my government had
the America’s best interests at heart. I will never make that mistake again.
I re-edited my map. Truth is immutable.

Anonymous
Anonymous

The link is about a mouse study. Koch postulate needs humans for it to be qualified. Kirsh is not about to give me a million for pointing that out though… what a fraud.

Anonymous
Anonymous

They were “humanized” mice. Part of the study was infecting ‘humanized’ mice and “wild” (normal) mice and they say they found that the humanized mice got sick but the regular mouse-type meeces didn’t.
I’m not laying claim to either side of this debate or saying that using “humanized” mice makes things legit. I’m just stating what I read in the study Kirsch linked.

Anonymous
Anonymous

a humanized mouse is not a human. soooo….. yeah……

ken31
ken31

I can’t tell if this is a straw man or a red herring. Eitherway, Steve is an asshole.

flash
flash

Didn’t he take the clot shot too…before he knew not to trust the science , which he now he does ?

DS
DS

Yes, he was part of the interview with Robert Malone that Bret Weinstein did in early 2021 that was pretty much the first public appearance of Malone. They both said they had taken the “vaccine” and were thus getting attention for repudiating it (at least to some degree; I think Malone has said that certain risk groups should stil take it IIRC).

Walt
Walt

So the Science is settled now? Phew, that’s a relief!
Because unsettled Science is so, well, unsettling..

Anonymous
Anonymous

You can’t change minds or even debate in good faith if you don’t take the time to understand the rational basis of an opposing viewpoint. Assuming irrationality and casting those viewpoints as ‘not believing viruses (that we can see!) even exist’ is bad faith and a non-starter.

For example, Cowan–the first name he calls out–never contends that these biological forms ‘don’t exist,’ but rather that we’ve misinterpreted what they are what they do.

Why debate someone who clearly hasn’t read your published work and instead tries to tell you what your position is?

DS
DS

Yup, the idea is that exosomes = virus = cellular debris resulting from toxins, cell mortality, etc.

Stucky

“Yet, when presented with the facts, people reject them and stick with their beliefs.”

Sticking with BELIEFS ….. that’s almost ALWAYS what most people do, no matter what the issue.

It seems that’s just how humans are “wired”.

Anonymous
Anonymous
Putin it where it counts
Putin it where it counts

I didn’t have people rejecting germ theory from my 2022 bingo card

tony
tony

pathogenic viruses do not exist. dr robert young has addressed this matter in detail including the major point that all evidence produced is photographic/photoshop in nature just as kirsch is peddling. koch’s postulates have NEVER been proven for any virus at any time. young has published a massive list of responses from governments and institutions which have denied that they ever isolated sars-cov-2.

what these nincompoops, frauds, and lysinkoists have done is confuse cause with consequence. viruses exist because they are bacteria but these are simply malformations of blood cells. they are the consequence of acidosis or disease – NOT THE CAUSE.

Anonymous
Anonymous

A passing acquaintance. VERY well paid. Said Mitochondria could be/pass as Virus.

AKJohn
AKJohn

Very good distinction. Viruses exist, but are not the cause, but the consequence. SO, when we get sick our body then creates Virus’s? Disease creates viruses, not viruses create disease.

some guy
some guy

a controlled operative, working under a false paradigm.

DS
DS

Yup, pretty much my take also

A group in Australia did great work pretty much proving that HIV was never isolated and therefore didn’t exist — can’t recall the name of the group, but I read their 80+ page report

Iska Waran
Iska Waran

Why is it that the same “viruses don’t exist” people are also the “nukes aren’t real” people and believers that a multinational force of nations patrols the 50,000 mile long “ice wall” that keep the oceans from floating off into the void or bumping into the firmament? if you want to believe we faked the moon landing or that 9-11 was an inside job, fine. Those are at least plausible conspiracy theories that don’t involve all the major governments of the world operating together. The ice wall people make no sense. Besides, I can SEE the fucking shadow of the Earth on the moon. Why does a belief in flat earth seem to require disbelief in nuclear weapons? Is there some Bible verse that prohibits the belief in nukes? “They lie about everything, man” is a stupid response. Do they lie about electricity? Why isn’t there a cohort of people adamant that “electricity isn’t real”? Do people have to get electrocuted to believe in electricity?

grace country pastor

“Besides, I can SEE the fucking shadow of the Earth on the moon.”

Only because you’ve been told that’s what you’re looking at. On many occasions throughout the seasons I look up and see the sun and a partial moon in the sky. If the earth were casting its shadow on the face of the moon causing the differing phases, this would be an absolute impossibility.

The Bible says the moon is a luminous celestial body. It gives off its own light which is of a different nature than sunlight. It’s the lesser light that rules the night. Other than that, I’ve not come to any conclusions as to what the moon might physically be. I don’t think it’s a reflective rock.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran

And every time you see a partial moon at the same time you see the sun, the illuminated side of the moon faces the sun. Funny how that works.

grace country pastor

Keep you eyes and mind open. Check the situation out. You may find yourself saying “what the, huh?” like I did.

Marky
Marky

Only because you’ve been told that’s what you’re looking at.

Who the hell told you what you were looking at?

If the earth were casting its shadow on the face of the moon causing the differing phases, this would be an absolute impossibility.

ur a fucin moron. Your the reason people think Christians and bible believers are idiots.

grace country pastor

Unfortunately, it’s the actual morans of the world who think Christians and Bible believers are idiots. There are none so foolish as those who will not see.

Colorado Artist
Colorado Artist

“Blind’ not fools.
the quote does not appear in the bible.
Jesus did state the principle when he said in Matthew 13:13 that he spoke to the people in parables “because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not.”

Seeing every other celestial body is demonstrably a sphere, but somehow not ours?
Seeing you see not.
I’m the fool, arguing with the blind.

grace country pastor

“Seeing every other celestial body is demonstrably a sphere, but somehow not ours?”

Are you sure about that? God placed those celestial bodies IN the firmament He created to separate the waters from the waters. Get a good look at any star or “planet” through a Nikon P1000, your thoughts will change. It’s rather amazing!

Genesis 1:14-19 KJB… “And God said, Let there be lights IN the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights IN the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them IN the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.”

KJ is a faggot
KJ is a faggot

There are none so foolish as those who will not see.

The irony, it burns.

DS
DS

Perhaps nukes aren’t real — who (amonsgt us regular folks) really knows? But here is, at least, an analysis of why they may not be:
http://mileswmathis.com/bikini.pdf
http://mileswmathis.com/trinity.pdf

AKJohn
AKJohn

OK. Some big viruses have been photographed. Ae the pictures of covid 19 with the little spikes real? no. Are billions/trillions of Viruses flying around infecting us. No. Was Covid 19 really a global pandemic? No. It was a plandemic. Not much is real about viruses, and what is real has been misrepresented and propagandized.

Anon y mous
Anon y mous

Thank you. I find much of what I read here on TBP to be very interesting and well thought out. However, have seen some references to viruses not existing and want to pull out my remaining hair. We cannot fault the far left for not really ‘following the science’, if we do not follow it.

DS
DS

It’s not that viruses don’t exist — it’s that they are not what we’ve been told they are. The exosome theory postulates that what are labeled “viruses”, as some type of communicable “organism”, are really the waste products of dead and dying cells that result from environmental and other (e.g. malnutrition, vitamin deficiency) factors.

AKJohn
AKJohn

Yes. And they are not floating around everywhere ready to get us. Tony above has a better description.

Svarga Loka
Svarga Loka

Take a different disease complex then: chickenpox and shingles. I had shingles and 4 days later all of my children had chickenpox.

Evolutionaryly speaking, if my shingles were some other illness (bacterial, toxic, stress related, nutritional deficiency), what is there to gain for the human species to make other people in your environment sick. Clearly, there is a contagious component to it. But why?

I am not decided about what viruses, the moon or other things are, by the way. Just asking questions.

AKJohn
AKJohn

Very good point with Shingles and chickenpox. Virus science has become a cult with much misinformation out there. I find it a slow progression. Kirsch does bring up some very good points that make you look at what you think you know.

AKJohn
AKJohn

Any pox is a leaky fluid. Very contagious. I don’t dispute that. But I do dispute airborne contagious viruses.

bigfoot
bigfoot

If you search Google with this:

A Brief Comparison of Pasteur’s Germ Theory and Béchamp’s Microzymian Theory

you will find a host of articles some for and some against and some confused about the germ/terrain argument.

But Dr. Cowan does a great job of looking at the science or lack thereof regarding viruses in the attached pdf. His first book, “The Myth of Contagion” was banned on Amazon when it got to number one in its category. B&N has it for sale, however. Our library has it, too. (the pdf is not attached owing to my inability to attach it)

DS
DS

Yeah, I don’t know either — I was just trying to give “Anon y mous” the distinction (in my understanding) between what standard virus theory says and what exosome theory says. To be sure, I probably did not faithfully state the latter theory (I am no expert, just read some and watched videos about it). It seems to me that there is some type of ability for exosomes (degraded genetic material) to impact others, simply because it is RNA and/or DNA being passed into the environment that can be ingested by others. Like as you describe with you and your kids.

I implied that exosomes are not communicable, but I don’t know enough to make that claim. I was trying to make the point that virus theory is built on infectious transmission, in contrast to exosome theory which is not (even if possible or likely).

bigfoot
bigfoot

https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-07-10-the-fraud-of-louis-pasteur-and-corrupt-history-of-virology-part-i.html

VIRUS MANIA PART I: The FRAUD of Louis Pasteur and the entirely CORRUPT history of virology

Toxins (including pharmaceuticals), malnutrition, injury, stress, and epigenetic factors may result in disease.

There are and never has been any such thing as a virus and certainly none has ever been isolated.

Bacteria are the firemen, not the firestarters. They arrive at a site where they clean up the mess as is possible.

Studies as old as the hills have shown no transference of sickness can be caused by a sick person’s mucus being breathed in or even injected into another person. These studies are no longer done, but were exhaustive when they were done years ago. Why are they not done today? Guess.

Dr. Tom Cowan wrote a treatise recently on the whole deception and if you were to read it, you could not possibly believe the AMA and Big Pharma have your best interests in mind.

As for sickness occurring in a family within a short timeframe, Cowan answers this in his treatise.

cowan-dr-tom-breaking-the-spell-PDF-for-digital-reading.pdf (not sure how to get this pdf on here).

hardscrabble farmer

I don’t think they’re what they say they are and I definitely do not trust any imagery produced by any institution that receives government funding, so pretty much all of it.

Everybody gets sick, everybody dies and there’s nothing anyone can do to change that reality.

People want to eat whatever they want, become fat, do drugs, get old and not get sick. Then the science/pharma community tells them it’s no problem they have the answer. Clearly they don’t.

Then we all wind up arguing with each other over how many viruses can dance on the head of a pin. It’s tiresome.

Live your life prepared to die at any moment. Stay healthy by eating nutritious foods in reasonable amounts, drink plenty of water, stay physically active your entire life, do things that keep you interested and involved, find purpose in whatever you do, avoid vexatious people, stay close to nature and the seasons, love one another and even if you do wind up getting sick and dying at some point, at least you’ve lived well.

Unless you feel drawn to defending the establishment and all of its asinine strictures, whatever they happen to be at any given time, and denigrating anyone who disagrees.

Whatever floats your boat.

Steve
Steve

1) Who is paying for the studies? If the daily counsel says milk is good for you,and they paid for the study. Their study is biased and might be fixed to say what is in their interest. ( By the way other studies say the other way

https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20200214/rethinking-mik-science-takes-on-the-dairy-dilemma

Another example. If the study to confirm Virus is paid by the food and drug people, They have a vested interest that the finding go one way. Thus the could create studies to prove their point that are biased and may even remove data that disagrees.

Unfortunately, Steve you could be biased as this shows.

https://substack.com/profile/40661664-steve-kirsch

Quote Executive Director, Vaccine Safety Research Foundation Unquote

You have a vested interest one way. I am not in the Health Science and thus am not an expert. But I do a lot of reading and alway try to see both sides. Red Flags come up when that other side is labeled as fake or mis-information. The words I see is not Virus FACT but Virus THEORY.

It is possible virus exist, but it is also you are taking something and giving it the name virus. There is no way on this earth to prove that blue is blue. A question for you. Just because we name something, does that mean it is what we name it. What we think of solid is really mostly space. We and our minds are often fooled. Also we also put our own bias on things and see things the way we want whether or not that is the truth. So I put it to you this way, NO ONE CAN PROVE WHETHER VIRUS EXIST OR NOT. Just naming something does not make it that. Remember that a coral snake could just be a king snake. Truth is alway true. Theories may or may not be true

Muscledawg (not to be known as Delusionaldawg)😉
Muscledawg (not to be known as Delusionaldawg)😉

I’d be interested to know if Jon Rappoport would take him on.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Dr.s Lanka, Kaufman, Cowan, the Bailey’s, Rasnick, and others explain the problems with the science used to support the existence of viruses so clearly, any undergraduate student who has completed a research methods course can see right through the charade that is virology. You are doing great work Steve, but you are clearly wrong here and seem to be out of your depth, as you don’t seem to have that grasp of the basic scientific method. Images and genetic sequences are meaningless if the research has not established the existence of virions and shown them to be pathogenic using an ecologically valid method. There is no control condition in any of these studies, and the studies that did include controls (including Enders 1950’s publicaitons that launched this technique) demonstrated that the same alleged virions are found when there is no fluid from a sick person. The images you allege are of virions are likely of exosomes, and that has been mentioned in several papers published in top journals, e.g., https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3322934/

Anonymous
Anonymous

Funny how none of this proves that viruses exist. Nobody has ever seen a virus. EVER. What is seen under a microscope is a still 2d image of decay after numerous chemical process and macerations. Theres a reason germ theory is still a theory. It’s funny how you say it’s so easy to see they exist because you can see them… But you can’t. What you call a virus is debris. And then you make up a genome sequence and computer image. It’s all a hoax. It’s very easily been proven to be a hoax by Lanka.

bigfoot
bigfoot

I have watched you have a discussion with two other people, one of which was Dr. Malone. A bigger ass than you would be hard to imagine. Lots of people watching that scene expressed their disgust with you. You apologized as the numbers grew who called and wrote in during that discussion. It is completely understandable why even Dr. Cowen refuses to get in the same room as you. No matter what the facts are, you are certain to defend your interpretation of them to the death and deny payment anyway, anyhow.

ShekelGrabber

Shill alert.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading