5 Filters

Sam Bailey interviews John Rappoport

True but AF makes this point:
“ If influenza is primarily an electrical disease, a response to an electrical
disturbance of the atmosphere,

If influenza is primarily an electrical disease, a response to an electrical
disturbance of the atmosphere, then it is not contagious in the ordinary sense.
The patterns of its epidemics should prove this, and they do. For example, the
deadly 1889 pandemic began in a number of widely scattered parts of the
world. Severe outbreaks were reported in May of that year simultaneously in
Bukhara, Uzbekistan; Greenland; and northern Alberta.11 Flu was reported in
July in Philadelphia12 and in Hillston, a remote town in Australia,13 and in
August in the Balkans.14 This pattern being at odds with prevailing theories,
many historians have pretended that the 1889 pandemic didn’t “really” start
until it had seized the western steppes of Siberia at the end of September and
that it then spread in an orderly fashion from there outward throughout the
rest of the world, person to person by contagion. But the trouble is that the
disease still would have had to travel faster than the trains and ships of the
time. It reached Moscow and St. Petersburg during the third or fourth week of
October, but by then, influenza had already been reported in Durban, South
Africa15 and Edinburgh, Scotland.16 New Brunswick, Canada,17 Cairo,18 Paris,19 Berlin,20 and Jamaica21 were reporting epidemics in November;
London, Ontario on December 4;22 Stockholm on December 9;23 New York
on December 11;24 Rome on December 12;25 Madrid on December 13;26 and
Belgrade on December 15.27 Influenza struck explosively and unpredictably,
over and over in waves until early 1894. It was as if something fundamental
had changed in the atmosphere, as if brush fires were being ignited by some
unknown vandal randomly, everywhere in the world.
One observer in East Central Africa, which was struck in September
1890, asserted that influenza had never before appeared in that part of Africa
at all, not within the memory of the oldest living inhabitants.28
“Influenza,” said Dr. Benjamin Lee of the Pennsylvania State Board of
Health, “spreads like a flood, inundating whole sections in an hour… It is
scarcely conceivable that a disease which spreads with such astonishing
rapidity, goes through the process of re-development in each person infected,
and is only communicated from person to person or by infected articles.”29
Influenza works its caprice not only on land, but at sea. With today’s
speed of travel this is no longer obvious, but in previous centuries, when
sailors were attacked with influenza weeks, or even months, out of their last
port of call, it was something to remember. In 1894, Charles Creighton
described fifteen separate historical instances where entire ships or even
many ships in a naval fleet were seized by the illness far from landfall, as if
they had sailed into an influenzal fog, only to discover, in some cases, upon
arriving at their next port, that influenza had broken out on land at the same
time. Creighton added one report from the contemporary pandemic: the
merchantship “Wellington” had sailed with its small crew from London on
December 19, 1891, bound for Lyttelton, New Zealand. On the 26th of
March, after over three months at sea, the captain was suddenly shaken by
intense febrile illness. Upon arriving at Lyttelton on April 2, “the pilot,
coming on board found the captain ill in his berth, and on being told the
symptoms at once said, ‘It is the influenza: I have just had it myself.’”30

I agree mostly with your comments above - but isn’t placing the burden of proving a negative onto the crowd who are proposing a new hypothesis after showing several examples of the virus paradigm failing a bit too much to ask?

My initial reaction to blaming 5G was - sounds like tinfoil hat stuff! But Cowan has put a lot of meat on this bone and AF has produced some startling evidence of the impact of emf and yet he still didn’t question virus theory, so far in my reading!

Like “alarming anthropogenic global warming”” the fat lady has been asked for an encore in relation to the existence of the disease causing virus.

Knowing the power of money, I’m not holding my breath!

cheers

2 Likes

isn’t placing the burden of proving a negative onto the crowd who are proposing a new hypothesis after showing several examples of the virus paradigm failing a bit too much to ask?

No, not really CJ: that crowd should be concentrating on building the case for the paradigm they hope to replace it with, as well as debunking the currently dominant paradigm. My understanding of paradigm shift theory is that when the established paradigm is no longer sustainable then it is replaced. The shift happens quite quickly but it takes a lot of both push and pull first, decades or longer maybe.

A good example of paradigm shift might be continental drift theory/plate tectonics which was scoffed at far and wide. Wegener was correct, but his hypothesis only gained wide acceptance twenty plus years after his death. There were no financial vested interests in play, or at least I assume not, which prolly helped…

Knowing the power of money, I’m not holding my breath!

… No, nor me.

1 Like

hi @Kieran_Telo , it seems that politics and money determine what science can be changed and what is “settled” - a term which many think should never apply to science any way, but I understand how change can also only occur after the death of leading proponents of the status quo.

The proponents of the , let’s call it, terrain hypothesis seem to be very few in number and yet Sam Bailey had a large following pre-covid censorship rules so the movement as a whole could be bigger than most people realise. Without public support the theory will get nowhere given the power of their opponents.

The work of Stefan Lanka in providing exerimental proof , as he claims, that the terrain proponents are right, maybe a way forward if enough people find out about it. At the moment I have only found poorly recorded podcasts dating back to early 2021.

I have little faith in much of aleopathic medicine and its institutions.

cheers

My thought was that whatever the cause of the illness the symptoms remain the same and would be treated the same. But I can see pre-symptomatic prophylactic treatment would differ - if emf based then it would be like avoiding allergic reactions to those substances, rather than bolstering the immune system.

cheers

The best resource on this whole issue seems to be this one - recommended by Jon Rappoport:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/what-the-hell-is-going-on/

@Kieran_Telo I’m sorry most of the links are in video format - I found this one that isn’t :

Of the video’s I have seen on Stefan Lanka’s experimental proof that virus’s have not been proved to exist this seems to be a good one - if only because the audio is really clear.

Hi folks, last mention of Stefan Lanka!

three part article of an interview with Lanka:

https://truthseeker.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Stefan-Lanka-DSalud-Número-249-English-1-of-3.pdf
https://truthseeker.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Stefan-Lanka-DSalud-Número-249-English-2-of-3.pdf
https://lorphicweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Stefan-Lanka-DSalud-Número-249-English-3-of-3.pdf

I have yet to read these!

cheers

Thanks CJ. I skimmed thru Dr Wysong’s post.

I hate to play the flak chucker game but, for example, he lays a lot of emphasis on whether or not a virus (this virus, any virus…) has been isolated. That line of attack has been used time after time after time by Uncle Tom Cobley and All.

I’m really not sure what people are expecting: an electron microscope photo of coroni in a very very small prison, looking angry and fed up, with some very very very small bits of stale bread on a teeny weeny tiny dented tin plate off to one side?

This study specifically states that actually Sars-CoV-2 has been isolated using standard procedures. I make no assertions as to the validity of the processes. It was a more or less randomly selected article. It doesn’t look far-fetched or scientistic to me.

Honestly: I don’t think that “the virus has never been isolated” is the gotcha that so many people seem to think it is.

Maybe one day the germ theory paradigm will shift. If I’m around to see it I’ll watch with interest. I’ve had the lurgy, it wasn’t very nice, I got over it in 2-3 weeks. What exactly “it” was, and where it came from is much less important than the politics of Covid. I also think this is a much more fruitful arena for push back than bickering about Koch’s postulates or proffering ridiculous photos of hydras or foot long blood clots.

I won’t be coerced or persuaded into getting a jab, I don’t wear face coverings, I did use a lateral flow test once, I wouldn’t dream of taking a PCR test, I never watched a single Downing Street briefing, Chris Whitty interview, Anthony Fauci piece to camera or any other propaganda hit pieces and I have nothing but contempt for the drug pushers, quacks, and frauds who hopped on this bandwagon in 2020 and seem to want to keep it rolling on and on and on. Other people will draw different lines but as long as a decent percentage of us do not cooperate in any more pantomime this thing can be beat.

1 Like

Hi @Kieran_Telo , I hope you are now over the lurgy - I had something of the same recently.

The stuff on “NO VIRUS MEDICINE” NVM?! - is hard to find in print the proponents seem to prefer videos which I know you like to avoid.

I thought your point about proving the NVM theory was sound. I then recalled Stefan Lanka’s lab research which is in fact just that …but of course no-one wants to talk about it in the biology/virology/germ therapy world, and the MSM + many alternative sites have no interest in it.
I think the NVM proponents have a fundamental problem - their’s is a negative theory it does not have any key positive elements. AFAIK.

The upside for me is I’m learning alot about the history of science which in some ways resonates more strongly than the commercial/political science of today. Maybe I’m showing my age!:slightly_smiling_face:

Cheers

1 Like

One positive response of the no-virus camp is to say: Show us a physical sample of a virus - not an artist’s impression - which has been isolated, and then centrifugally purified, and which shows only a genuinely-purified collection of examples of just one structure - the purported virus - under the electron microscope. And then it needs to be tested on volunteers, to see whether it really is a flill pathogen.

Plenty of hucksters claiming to sell such; can any of them demonstrate having done that basic process, though, rather than buggering about with organic fragments whose molecular structure has been fed into (GIGO-laden) computers that identify it as a virus, after which it’s then PCRed into multiple copies? (Mullis’s PCR process is excellent at that: it’s original, legitimate purpose.)

I’m open to persuasion. Haven’t seen anything very persuasive yet.

In today’s climate of tidal-wave corruption, it’s easy for catch-penny huckster outfits to start milking that scam; but who in this de-facto unregulated freeforall is actually checking their ‘samples’ to see if they come up to scratch?

There’s a huge money band-waggon, and multiple distinguished careers, accreted around the discipline of virology; rather like the one accreted round cancer ‘treatment’. But the question remains open whether viruses really exist. This wouldn’t be the first time that an entire prestigeful industry and academia card-house has been constructed round a specious idea, which eventually collapsed amid a forest of red faces.

Hi @Kieran_Telo , Just looked at the paper you posted and picked out this:

“ 3. Virus isolation

The virus was isolated from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal samples from putative COVID-19 patients. Oropharyngeal samples were diluted with viral transfer medium containing nasopharyngeal swabs and antibiotics (Nystadin, penicillin-streptomycin 1:1 dilution) at 1:4 ratio and incubated for 1 hour at 4°C, before being inoculated onto Vero cells. Inoculated Vero cells were cultured at 37°C, 5% CO2 in 1× Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) supplemented with 2% fetal bovine serum and penicillin-streptomycin. Virus replication and isolation were confirmed through cytopathic effects, gene detection, and electron microscopy.”

This whole process looks like the process SL used in his experiments on pure yeast as opposed to putative covid cells of a patient used above…and he got the same results which proves the process of “isolation” is flawed … the process in the paper above cannot distinguish between a possible virus and exosomes found within humans. All the material and chemicals they add to their “covid” sample totally distorts the substance being examined.
The PMC paper is using a different definition of the word “isolation” it bears no relationship to the normal meaning of the word - SL maintains that the swab samples taken from the patient will contain genetic material with the same density as the “virus” they are looking for and so cannot be distinguished or isolated from exosomes produced by all humans.

cheers

1 Like

Hi @CJ1 and @Kieran_Telo . I agree with Karen that focus on do viruses exist is not helpful. But my conversion to the no virus theory was nailed by the 1918 experiments to see if flu was transmittable. If you don’t know about these (and they are a little gruesome and not for the the squeamish), I’ll try and find a link or two.

1 Like

Ok, thanks for the input. The orthodoxy, if I’ve grasped the essentials, is that virii are such delicate little organisms (I use the word very very loosely!) that the processes described inevitably destroy the structures leaving just the debris. That is not inherently implausible.

The multi-stage rocket metaphor whereby these plucky invaders kamikaze their payloads into our helpless cells is interestingly consonant with dominant technocratic narratives. But does that invalidate the idea any more than the lack of surviving virii? Scientific understanding can only be expressed using language, and since society shapes language (and vice versa, for sure) these sorts of metaphors will gain credence.

Let me stress I’m not asserting this is definitely how things are, but the dominant paradigm has been a thing for much longer than the capture of science by technocracy/Pharma. It has what I’d call explanatory power, no?

Tom Cowan describes it in detail in one of his seminars, Pat. He’s also scathing about the idea that the biochemical soup described above in this thread can somehow be disentangled to yield any sort of authenticated ‘virus’ sample. Rightly so, I’d say. The whole procedure is reminiscent of alchemists’ brews…

Yes, do share please @PatB. I know a little about the various experiments carried out at Porton Down but could do with broadening that knowledge.

…but broadly it’s the same approach as that followed by fire investigators, isn’t it? They sift carefully through the residues from many scenes and look for patterns. Finding intact cans of petrol is probably quite rare, but their chemical signatures not so much.

Ah but chemical signatures of what? Find petrol residues, hypothesise cans. Yet no cans can be extracted intact, and displayed to the wretched strict-scientific-method sceptics.

The petrol could have got there in other ways than in cans…

Circular reasoning suggests a hypothesis - virus ‘theory’ - whose shelf-life is up.

I remain open to the idea that viruses are real. It’s been a reasonably persuasive hypothesis for a while. It could still turn out to be true; demonstrably true, that it is; which it seems not to be just now. But it does seem to be fraying a bit at the edges.

I still can’t see exactly how all the observed behaviour of - allegedly-infectious - diseases can be explained fully by some non-viral hypothesis; the way apparently-infectious scurvy is actually explained by lack of vitamin C. But it feels as if an alternative explanation must be there, somewhere; hovering just beyond conception, until some inspired person suddenly gets the insight, like Kekule literally dreaming about the Ourobouros and suddenly seeing, in a flash of inspiration, the ring form of the benzene molecule.

Seems to me that Cowan, Kaufman, Lanka, the Baileys, and - particularly - Zach Bush with his developing terrain insights, are preparing the ground for that flash of understanding.

And, as you suggest K, that would comport with the zeitgeist of our time: Now swinging away from the philosophical-materialism which has proven so handy to the commercialising of science, particularly by BPh gangstercap, towards the philosophical-idealism; which perhaps doesn’t lend itself to squalid commercialisation so much…?

Hi @PatB , yes Firstenberg mentions it early on in his Invisible Rainbow when discussing the relationship between sunspots and flu outbreaks.

As to the NVM argument, I accept that "the terrain is everything " as many have said but the existence of an alternative trigger for a disease like flu or covid on top of the terrain principles does open the door for a no virus alternative paradigm.
Stefan Lanka shows how poisoning and starving cell material in vitro produces the same electron microscopic images no matter what you are testing. And if cell material cannot be filtered into shape and density bands different from human produced exosomes i.e. true isolation, then we cannot know what we are testing.

There are so many instances of science being suppressed for money and political agendas that one more shouldn’t surprise us but this shouldn’t prevent us from supporting principled research even though it undermines germ theory, big pharma and the Gates cabal! We can of course continue to argue the points about the last 2 years of pure scam whilst pursuing the NVM research as well as the influence of nano electrical impacts on susceptible bodies due to environmental conditions including sunspots.
To use a legal analogy, lawyers argue cases along several alternative strands at the same time not just one.

Cheers

1 Like

Sorry @Kieran_Telo , you’ve lost me. I’m not sure I understand you.

Cheers

Quoting from Virus Mania.

In November 1918, 62 healthy sailors sent to prison, were given a pardon if they took part in an experiment. Navy doctors collected mucus from men who were desperately ill from the flu, gathering thick secretions for their noses and throats. They sprayed mucus from the flu patients into the noses and throats of some men and dropped it into the eyes of others.

Trying to simulate what happens naturally when people are exposed to flu victims, they took ten of the ‘volunteers’ onto the hospital ward where men were dying of the disease. The ten men were to approach one of the sick men, lean into his face, breath his fetid breath and chat for 5 minutes. To ensure full exposure the sick man was to exhale deeply while the healthy man drew the sick mans breath directly into his lungs. Finally the flu victim coughed five time into the volunteers face.

Not a single healthy man got sick!

The experiment was repeated with 50 more imprisoned sailors. Once again, the results did not support any aspect of contagion.

2 Likes

Hi @RhisiartGwilym , Firstenberg states early on that scurvy was found not to be a contagious disease at all so it would not confound the NVM theory.
Or is that what you are saying?

The fact that we properly maintain our terrain with the right balance of vitamins and nutrients is not disturbed by NVM theory as terrain theory works side by side with NVM combined with the trigger mechanisms of Zach Bush’s biome theories or nano electricity from environmental impacts (which may in fact be encompassed within ZB’s theories!).

Cheers