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.”
You’re so fixated on me giving you some reading material (which in itself was NOT the focal point of the argument) that you failed to realize why. I didn’t think you could prove yourself to be more blind, but, you did.
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.
Your "scientific process" does not exist in virology!
They use circular logic and confirmation biases. It is not science. Read any virology paper and they are all littered with logical fallacies.
But, you won't. You have proven yourself blind and of ill thought. Congratulations.
You’re so fixated on me giving you some reading material (which in itself was NOT the focal point of the argument) that you failed to realize why. I didn’t think you could prove yourself to be more blind, but, you did.