Your logic is so faulty I just had an earthquake at my house, and your dogma is so misbehaving it needs to be put down.
You can’t stomach reading anything controversial, solely because it’s not “peer-reviewed? You are the epitome of how there is no man more blind than the one who chooses not to see. You’ve covered your eyes and ears and are screaming “lalalala” whilst on a high horse of demanding “peer review,” but you’ve already proven that you wouldn’t read such a paper, so I will not be providing you with anything more, because you would ignore it.
He is substantiating his claim by picking apart the very “peer-reviewed” papers that push this virus bullshit.
If you read it, you will see that it is not some esoteric medical knowledge, it’s been out in the open this whole time. Virology is based on trash science (some of which has even been peer reviewed, mind you) and he is simply pointing out the flaws. Now, he is most certainly not the only one doing this today, and this paper is hardly original (in the sense that he is referencing research already done and is pointing out flaws that have already been pointed out) but it is organized, and he is echoing the fact that no virus has ever been isolated.
You are now banging on your keyboard claiming that “experts” writing “peer-reviewed” papers have isolated “viruses,m” but you will never find a paper where they didn’t end up poisoning and starving a cell culture, looking at this toxic soup, and claiming that those tiny little particles floating around are “viruses.” In no study ever have they isolated those tiny little particles, yet they still claim they can replicate, invade a cell, and cause disease.
Why? Because look at how many there are in this soup we created! End of story. We shall call this virus sixninefourtwenty!
The data you claim doesn’t exist is literally right in front of your face, and it’s very easy to go through it yourself (but you won’t) and see that all experiments ever done in virology have yielded absolute junk data, as virology is nothing more than a belief system with particular rituals that give particular results, furthering the belief. It is a prime example of circular reasoning.
At its core, Virology has never proven and can never prove a virus can cause any disease. Why? Because mixing shit in a blender and then adding more shit to it will never be isolation, it will only ever be a mixture of different cells dying and degrading, and can never replicate what happens inside a body. But you peer-reviewed-paper-reading pompous ass will still insist that if a paper has been peer reviewed, then it must be true.
If a bunch of mathematicians peer reviewed a paper claiming that 2+2 equals 5 and signed their stamp of approval on it, would you believe that? If a bunch of geophysicists peer reviewed a paper claiming the earth is flat and they all signed off in it, would you believe that?
Find me one paper where a virus was isolated completely. It doesn’t exist. All studies of virology claiming isolation all use the word “serum” profusely. The claims are that within this “serums” are the disease-causing agents responsible for making someone ill.
It is akin to taking a big scoop of pond mud and claiming that within the scoop exists a whole frog.
There was no further analysis of the scoop, but it was assumed that the mud contains a whole frog because frogs live in ponds.
Virology takes fluids from a person exhibiting symptoms, filters out the solids, places it in a culture consisting of:
Bovine fetal tissue
Monkey kidney tissue
Toxic Antibiotics
(Sometimes) human liver cells
Then they take this Frankensoup, let it develop, then look under a microscope to only view minuscule particles, then claim those particles are the virus.
They all fail to remove those particles they claim are the virus, put them in a pure culture (no foreign dna), grow them, extract them, infect another person with them, wait until that person exhibits the same symptoms as the original host, then isolate the exact same particle from the new sick person. That is what is required to prove a virus.
Instead, what you are satisfied with is a group of people looking into a bowl of toxic soup and saying “there’s a virus in there somewhere.”
Your logic is so faulty I just had an earthquake at my house, and your dogma is so misbehaving it needs to be put down.
You can’t stomach reading anything controversial, solely because it’s not “peer-reviewed? You are the epitome of how there is no man more blind than the one who chooses not to see. You’ve covered your eyes and ears and are screaming “lalalala” whilst on a high horse of demanding “peer review,” but you’ve already proven that you wouldn’t read such a paper, so I will not be providing you with anything more, because you would ignore it.
He is substantiating his claim by picking apart the very “peer-reviewed” papers that push this virus bullshit.
If you read it, you will see that it is not some esoteric medical knowledge, it’s been out in the open this whole time. Virology is based on trash science (some of which has even been peer reviewed, mind you) and he is simply pointing out the flaws. Now, he is most certainly not the only one doing this today, and this paper is hardly original (in the sense that he is referencing research already done and is pointing out flaws that have already been pointed out) but it is organized, and he is echoing the fact that no virus has ever been isolated.
You are now banging on your keyboard claiming that “experts” writing “peer-reviewed” papers have isolated “viruses,m” but you will never find a paper where they didn’t end up poisoning and starving a cell culture, looking at this toxic soup, and claiming that those tiny little particles floating around are “viruses.” In no study ever have they isolated those tiny little particles, yet they still claim they can replicate, invade a cell, and cause disease.
Why? Because look at how many there are in this soup we created! End of story. We shall call this virus sixninefourtwenty!
The data you claim doesn’t exist is literally right in front of your face, and it’s very easy to go through it yourself (but you won’t) and see that all experiments ever done in virology have yielded absolute junk data, as virology is nothing more than a belief system with particular rituals that give particular results, furthering the belief. It is a prime example of circular reasoning.
At its core, Virology has never proven and can never prove a virus can cause any disease. Why? Because mixing shit in a blender and then adding more shit to it will never be isolation, it will only ever be a mixture of different cells dying and degrading, and can never replicate what happens inside a body. But you peer-reviewed-paper-reading pompous ass will still insist that if a paper has been peer reviewed, then it must be true.
If a bunch of mathematicians peer reviewed a paper claiming that 2+2 equals 5 and signed their stamp of approval on it, would you believe that? If a bunch of geophysicists peer reviewed a paper claiming the earth is flat and they all signed off in it, would you believe that?
Find me one paper where a virus was isolated completely. It doesn’t exist. All studies of virology claiming isolation all use the word “serum” profusely. The claims are that within this “serums” are the disease-causing agents responsible for making someone ill.
It is akin to taking a big scoop of pond mud and claiming that within the scoop exists a whole frog.
There was no further analysis of the scoop, but it was assumed that the mud contains a whole frog because frogs live in ponds.
Virology takes fluids from a person exhibiting symptoms, filters out the solids, places it in a culture consisting of:
Bovine fetal tissue
Monkey kidney tissue
Toxic Antibiotics
(Sometimes) human liver cells
Then they take this Frankensoup, let it develop, then look under a microscope to only view minuscule particles, then claim those particles are the virus.
They all fail to remove those particles they claim are the virus, put them in a pure culture (no foreign dna), grow them, extract them, infect another person with them, wait until that person exhibits the same symptoms as the original host, then isolate the exact same particle from the new sick person. That is what is required to prove a virus.
Instead, what you are satisfied with is a group of people looking into a bowl of toxic soup and saying “there’s a virus in there somewhere.”
THAT is trash science. That is belief.