Interesting piece at ZH on the origins of COVID. Too much for me to read sadly. Seems worth the time.
How you are supposed to âcreateâ a new version of something that has never existed in reality in the first place is beyond me. This is more distraction for the chronically distracted
No wonder itâs beyond you, if you think everyone has to believe your theory 
Explain Iran
Yes, it would be great if everyone believed my theory which is, of course, that human illness is essentially endogenous (I donât think Iâve expressed this here before so Iâm grateful to you for the prompt).
The theory, yet to be proved, that it is exogenous - and can be contagious, another theory yet to be proved - and understood only by âmedical scientistsâ who have a monopoly on the âcuresâ (which can only be achieved by âexpertsâ wielding chemical weapons, sharp knives and government mandates) has resulted in many poor saps (like me not long ago!) outsourcing their responsibility for their own health. This is in accordance with the Rockefeller revolution in medical âscienceâ that was instituted a hundred years ago. This has enabled the arseholes to terrorize all the people in the world ever since especially over the last 5 years.
Many are still prepared to obey massa on the strength of their fear of the next âvirusâ. Any discussion based on an assumption of the reality of âvirusesâ and âcontagionâ helps reinforce the mind control.
Live well, avoid toxic insults (5G, sugar, vaccinations, war, mindfucks etc.) and stay healthy!
Iran, like Russia, China, just about every bloody country, is signed up to the WHO and its lies (as well as to the UN âsustainable developmentâ control matrix).
Explain Tanzania
That would be because they are not a member of the WHO?
Iâm truly sorry. The position Iâm currently in means I struggle to explain myself properly due to time constraints.
Youâre obviously aware of Marburg. Itâs popped up recently in Tanzania of all places. We know it as an African disease, but did you know it first appeared in East Germany in '67? It then resurfaced in South Africa and Rhodesia 8 years later. It went on to appear twice more in Kenya before surfacing in Russia in '88 and '90. Since then, it has stayed on the African continent.
Why East Germany? Could it be due to the cold war?
This is what I meant by explain Iran. They had a particularly nasty version, as did the Chinese. My wife was seriously ill over Xmas '19. Started about a week before xmas.she was determined to do Xmas dinner and was wiped out for ten days. It was not fluâŚ
I have no doubts about the controlling of âhealthâ by the WHO. I just canât shift the feeling that someone took the opportunity to add crisis to drama.
1 Like
Iâm aware that âMarburgâ is best known as the actual town visited and written about by Milton Mayer in âThey Thought They Were Freeâ. Its other significance lies in its being chosen to name yet another non-existent âvirusâ (that we need to fear a lot, to the point of being prepared to sacrifice the few remaining freedoms we have so massa can protect us).
Of course your wife was ill (so was mine and so was I around that same time!). There are several possible âexplanationsâ for these illnesses. I refer you to my answer to Evvy, above, and to the work of Dawn Lester & David Parker, What Really Makes You Ill and to Drs. Sam & Mark Bailey, in particular the second item on this Q & A session:
About Iran: the global mafia pulls strings in Iran just as it does elsewhere. Iran dutifully complied with WHO directives to help produce the âCovidâ scam as did China, Italy, the US, etc. etc.
Tanzaniaâs president (a doctor), John Magafuli, saw through the hoax and got himself heart attacked for his trouble, as did several other dissident national leaders.
Youâve spotted the exaggeration of the âdramaâ (correct word choice!). What Iâm saying is that the âdramaâ itself was founded on a lie (Covid) which was itself founded on a lie (the allopathic medical model including, in particular, âgerm theoryâ). The whole thing was - is - a globalist scam, a money/power/land grab that is still playing out. It is still being enabled by the success of false âvirusâ propaganda.
(Sorry to hijack your time!! Best wishes.)
2 Likes
Thanks @AlanG for the further elucidations.
I have no objection to such theories, however Pharma and the globalists must be very happy when no-virusers target their critics.
Regarding the theory itself I donât think alternative theory being proposed goes very far in explaining the visible symptoms or mechanisms of what appear to be viruses. I watched Dr Sam Bailey talking about measles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tuduRT2HS4
and her main focus was on why the usual explanation doesnât in their opinion meet scientific standards of proof.
Leaving aside that this criticism is applying modern thinking - influenced by increasingly capable technology - to classic old work which was I presume the best available at the time, there is a significant logical shortfall between what might be the case (ie that by modern standards the scientists of the 1950s could have done more to prove or nail down the theory ) and what is claimed on top of that (ie that there are indeed no viruses).
Eg Sam Bailey says âFailure to demonstrate the full characteristics of the alleged particlesâ and âthe complete failure to show that they can cause diseaseâ.
This (together with a few scornful tones) does have a look of a commitment to endlessly nitpick, and to never accept proof that reasonable people would probably accept.
Was it really a âcomplete failureâ? Or just that âas far as reasonably possibleâ can always be disputed.
How do you demonstrate the âfull characteristicsâ of biological particles?
I accept that there are qualified people who agree with Sam Bailey and co but it looks to me as if these demonstrations are only enough to raise a few questions about âstandards of proofâ and do not actually establish any claim to answers.
Yet you can see from the responses of followers that many believe that the no-virus pioneers have shown that viruses do NOT exist.
Going back to my first point, I would be more impressed if they announced any ongoing work to prove their theory - as opposed to declaring everything that has been done pathetically inadequate, and proclaiming that the honest scientists disagreeing with them are frauds.
ED
1 Like
Hi @Evvy_dense - the Baileyâs have looked at many so-called virusâ and put forward alternative explanations for the illness - polio has clear connections to widespread use of DDT, the failed attempts to pass the so-called Spanish flu virus to healthy subjects - an illness which could be explained by increased EMFs in the atmosphere at the time. When a scientist claims something the burden of proof is theirs, the Baileys, amongst many , have shown by close analysis of the paperwork that no-one has proved the existence of any virus.
For research look at the work of Stephan Lanka - he has shown that following the same procedures of virologists the same results can be obtained even if you leave out the so-called virus containing material.
As big pharma and the WHO move into avian flu to cull the worldâs supply of chickens and they push out more Covid Boosters by the million for kids ( who in the main had no problem with any so-called Covid illness) we have to start our objections and research all over again. The no-virus theory deals with all these moves in one go and so far the no-virus theory has not been disproved.
see :
cheers
1 Like
Hi Evvy. There is no âalternative theoryâ being proposed other than the bodyâs responses to various toxic insults. The point about the âvirusâ argument is that the germ theory doesnât hold water. No other single explanation is needed to replace âgerm theoryâ. Tom Cowan likens this argument to someone claiming to be adopted and not being believed until he can say who his real parents were.
What is needed is an acceptance by the the owners and controllers of mainstream âscienceâ who fund research and edit the publication of results that further (any!) research into the effects on human health of the many new toxins in the environment; the thousands of manufactured chemicals, electro magnetic radiation in all its manifestations, aluminium (for Godâs sake!), nanoparticles of anything, nuclear radiation and what I would characterise as toxins but are hard to pin down like fear (natural or weaponised) and exploitative relationships, which have been around for a bit longer but can be as devastating to health as any of the above, should be prioritised, undertaken and publicised. Theyâre not going to go there, they know who they serve.
Of course nobody will ever prove that âvirusesâ donât exist: its just daft to believe in them when none have been found in a living organism and shown to be âcatchingâ and the inventor of them has long since been proved to be a cheat and a liar.
Poor olâ Uncle Tom got precisely nowhere with this in 2022:
He did get an offer of a debate from Kirsch but, as anyone can tell whoâs reading these
threads, thatâs the road to nowhere.
1 Like
If I remember correctly, John Enders, who received the Nobel prize for âdiscoveringâ the measles âvirusâ did actually perform control experiments. He mixed and froze the same poisoned chemical soup as before but left out the âviralâ material. On examining the results under electron microscopy he found particles that were âindistinguishableâ from âvirusesâ. (That, of course, did not detract from his historic triumph, on which many fortunes have been made and lives ruined, in the slightest!)
I think Stephen Lanka repeated the process. How many times must the âvirusâ story be scientifically debunked before the true believers notice anything? I can understand, though not forgive, the promotion of their self-interests by the drug manufacturers and their downstream pushers but why on Earth should anyone else want to weigh in on their behalf?
Thanks for this CJ, takes us further forward. Iâm not trying to prove a side one way or the other, just observing that the NVs are mainly asserting that the proof of the viruses, as claimed to exist and behave, is not up to scratch. The burden of proof of âscienceâ is with the âscientistsâ as you say - but who is to sign off the proof? It is possible to always reject it and for outsiders itâs not feasible to judge, as the points of dispute are tecnhical and technological nitty-gritties.
As far as I can tell few have addressed it, but Iâve seen Dr Malone answer that Dr Lankaâs experiments and methods would not be accepted by the mainstream.
WIthout enrolling in OU courses in microbiology, biochemistry and virology Iâve know way of knowing. Probably not even then!
Cheers
Hi Alan
âThere is no âalternative theoryâ being proposed other than the bodyâs responses to various toxic insults. The point about the âvirusâ argument is that the germ theory doesnât hold water. No other single explanation is needed to replace âgerm theoryâ. Tom Cowan likens this argument to someone claiming to be adopted and not being believed until he can say who his real parents were.â
Has he told the Baileyâs that? They do seem to have offered alternative explanations for apparent âvirusâ phenomena.
Iâm with them on that one - the explanatory power of the virus theory is one of the reasons for it gaining traction before there was any evidence. We arenât talking hard science, because experiments are - at the Nâth degree - imprecise due to contamination and imperfect equipment function. So we are left with the power of logical argument, and human judgement, and these explanations play an important role in the absence of âproofâ.
I agree with your large paragraph that follows, though it doesnât depend on a particular view on viruses. One theory Dr Jenner had was that sufficient vitamin C will overcome any virus!
I would add that the present juggernaut of medical madness can - and clearly should - be challenged perfectly logically, without the need to insist on resolution of an issue that is not fundamental to it.
âOf course nobody will ever prove that âvirusesâ donât exist: its just daft to believe in them when none have been found in a living organism and shown to be âcatchingâ and the inventor of them has long since been proved to be a cheat and a liar.â
Thereâs the rub; there will never be a proof on your terms, so youâre on Easy Street.
Kudos to the Baileyâs and Cowan et al for the experimental challenge though. Unfortunately the idea doesnât register strongly enough to get any takers (not counting Steve obviously as heâs not a biologist). The NVs can even claim a moral victory by default - but in the covid era, moral victories are ten a penny! People are left with picking a side and itâs not âdaftâ to pick the one that absolute proof apart, still seems to have the strongest arguments or explanatory power.
I also find it striking that with neither side (letâs say) landing a decisive blow in the argument, the target of the leading NVs is the so-called medical freedom movement - itâs like they are more perturbed by people like Peter McCullough having the temerity to disagree with them, than Anthony Fauci and his (pay)masters harming millions with his fake remedies.
Cheers