The aspect of viruses that is never mentioned is the very simple question: "Are viruses alive?" Well, you think it's simple until you look into it for two minutes and feel like you've fallen off an intellectual cliff.
Spoiler: the answer is no, they are not. You'll see that the mainstream doesn't say yes or no, they just studiously avoid answering the question rather than giving you the answer and telling you why. Again, no, viruses are not alive. The reason that's a crucial question is that almost everything they want to ascribe to viruses depends on them being living creatures.
Specifically (and skipping over all this mRNA nonsense), traditional vaccines depend on using "killed" viruses. How can something be "killed" if it was never alive? It cannot, so immediately vaccines get pantsed and everyone will start looking around to see who's been selling them this utter bullshit snake oil for centuries.
I would say I'm amazed at how virtually no one knows this, but it's for the same sort of reason people have no idea where money comes from. It's the old, "Spot me one miracle and I can prove the rest." They can't have you knowing about that miracle, can They?
You forgot to include a link to this "definition". I was previously unaware "science" required so much hand-waving. Perhaps my standards are somewhat higher than those of said "science".
I was shown by a good friend who has a doctorate in molecular biology close to twenty-five years ago in an MIT lab over the course of a week that viruses are fantasy.
We looked through slide after slide. "Blah blah virus attacks pig liver," "blah blah virus in human cell..." x 1000 and guess what?
Every slide looked like a hit and run accident, no visible virus or even pathogen that could be logically blamed for this virus bullshit cell damage. Its almost as though the slides were prepared to be blended with a little suspension of disbelief to create their bunk ass "theory."
In order for a creature to want to attack a living being, it needs will. Best case scenario, they are created and passed through whatever they can use to do so, perhaps even "cloud seeding" and "weather manipulation" are just covers for these Pol Pot wanna bes to spread this shit.
Bullets. Thats the only way. Until all of these "patriots" start acting the fucking part, we are fucked, and in my opinion, rightfully so. Anyone who took this OBVIOUSLY dangerous vax from pedo scumbag nazi twats deserves exactly what they fucking get. I genuinely tried IRL to stop people. Now they are both anti-me AND constantly sick and can't figure out why. Its fucking retarded and im sick of fucking with it. ALL OF IT!
In order for a creature to want to attack a living being, it needs will
This is still irrelevant. A falling rock doesn't have will, but it will fall down and wreck someone's truck over an embankment. Will and life aren't requisite for danger.
I'm not sure what to say about the last half of your comment. I feel you. Injecting poison is retarded and now their mistake is our problem.
The rock is a natural occurrence, not an attack! TF you talking about man? I never said something had to be alive to kill you, man, only that something has to be alive to WANT to kill you, and intention is EVERYTHING.
I have literally seen PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that viruses don't exist in a lab in one of the best and most widely known science colleges in America with a guy i grew up with and you're saying that when a rock flies into my windshield on the highway, its an attack?
Muy estupido. It doesn't even track as an actual thought pattern and to me that is the biggest red flag scenario.
I decided around twenty years ago that there would be no more needles in my future. Fun OR not fun. All gone. So right there, vax is out. Nevermind what i saw at MIT.
I don't know who your MIT friend is, but we worked with virus in uni. Similar to a construction worker saying "You can't tell me bricks don't exist because I've worked with bricks."
Virus exists. I'm sorry someone fooled you. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Although it may be possible to prove non-existence in special situations, such as showing that a container does not contain certain items, one cannot prove universal or absolute non-existence.source
The rock metaphor was simply to address a claim that virus must be A Living Organism in order to harm a person. Broken glass on the floor hurts people and glass isn't alive.
Your twist is that something must be alive to ATTACK. Which may be true--it's semantics. But being ATTACKED only applies if you're being force-inoculated by someone. The virus is the proximal weapon, the knife, not the aggressor. And you can harm yourself against it without being ATTACKED.
Okay: 'AIDS' actually started out as 'GRIDS' - Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome - in the very early 80s. A bunch of gays were dying, and it looked like their immune systems were shot.
Enter politics, and GRIDS became AIDS. Also, the virus-hunters looked for a particle, and eventually Gallo did a study where 4 of his 9 test-subjects had a 'virus' (HIV) in their system. This was immediately and with no research declared the cause of AIDS in a press conference.
What the media didn't/still doesn't tell us is that in the early 80s, (some/not all) gays lived an insanely degenerate lifestyle -- to the point where some (not all) were taking anti-biotics every day of their lives, simply to forestall the inevitable Chlamydia etc. Furthermore, in order to relax their anuses to facilitate anal sex, they were taking massive amounts of 'poppers', or amyl nitrate. It was advertised in gay magazines as a 'videotape cleaner'. This is why gays were dying of 'Kaposi's Sarcoma', a disease that almost no one gets -- they were destroying their lungs with poppers.
The massive drug-overdosing, particularly with poppers, is the cause of 'AIDS'. It's why AIDS remained a gay phenomenon. It's also why AIDS isn't really a thing these days, because the gay community moved away from massive popper ingestion (keep in mind that gay clubs would mist poppers into the room on a regular basis -- gotta keep that anus loose!).
Also: the idea that hemophiliacs were dying of AIDS is an (almost) complete lie. What's true is that hemophiliacs tested positive for AIDS after the AIDS test was invented, and then they were given drugs that killed them. Prior to the introduction of 'life-saving' AIDS drugs, no hemophiliacs died of AIDS.
As with many things, AIDS is just... doctors killing patients for no reason. Or, for no rea$$$on, if you want.
Of course, the obvious question here is... what about Africans. That's a whole 'nother story, and it's insanely cynical and depressing.
Redkrab: No, they don't fake the tests perse... Hemophiliacs, for example, legitimately tested positive for the 'HIV virus', since they were infused with blood that also tested positive for the 'HIV virus'. If you want to read the story of Arthur Ashe, a world-famous tennis player... well, it's tragic.
The real question, as you ask, is... what are they finding? Well, I can only answer that in a slightly oblique way. If you look into the PCR method, what it does is double the amount of a specific DNA (or RNA) sequence in your body each time you run it. So, if you have only one strand of DNA in your sample, after 20 runs through PCR you'll have 1Million, which will be detectable via 'glowing' techniques.
An aside: if you have alcohol breath, and I can smell it, then in some sense I have alcohol in my nose. If you can amplify the alcohol molecules in my nose by 1M times... you'll think that I, too, was drunk.
So: what are they finding? Well... nothing. They're finding a specific DNA sequence that they have said is the cause of AIDS.
To realize that it's not consider: In the 80s, the US Army tested its recruits, both male and female, for HIV... and it turned out that women had HIV at the same rate as men. But, as you know, women in the US were not affected by AIDS at all!
As a more unpleasant example, the incidence of anal sex in India is astonishingly high! And yet, there's almost no AIDS in India. Same with Thailand, where Ladyboys are a thing. AIDS is largely an African thing, which I'll explain in my response to ChippingToe below.
To summarize, they're detecting a small chain of DNA which has no causative relation to immune deficiency. Then they give you drugs that destroy your liver and kill you. Why??? Well, to paraphrase a Berkley AIDS researcher... 'It's not that what I wrote was wrong... it's just that we're making so much money...'
Chipping: The key point in understanding African 'AIDS' is to consider women. As I wrote to Redkrab above, American women get HIV but... don't die. You might think, OK, Africans have different DNA -- true! But the average American Black only has 20% White DNA, and there are 40 Million of them, so an 'AIDS' crisis would, certainly, show up in African-American women, right? But... it didn't!
So, officially, why did it occur in Africa? Well, apparently, according to the insane NGOs... Africans like 'dry sex' - -so they put herbs in a woman's vagina to dry it out, so that there's more friction... which meant more tearing in the vagina... Ah, as a kid who's had sex, 'friction' isn't the issue. To be vulgar, 'tightness' may be, but I'll leave it at that.
But then: Why did Africans die of AIDS... well... they didn't! Africans died for the usual reasons -- dysentery etc, from which they've died for centuries... Keep in mind that AIDS diseases in the USA were Kaposi's Sarcoma, while in Africa they were dying of diarrhea.
Ah, but, consider... Africans were, latterly, instrumentalized by 'people' to go into gold/diamond mines for 12 hours a day and... well, occasionally died. Is this surprising? Poor nutrition, lack of food, questionable sanitation... and they died. Wow?!?! Why!?!? Okay. AIDS.
Outside of the Chinese Opium trade, AIDS in Africa is the most cynical, horrific thing in history. Africans were dying because of normal reasons, which were re-classified as 'AIDS', so that drugs could be sold, and NGO chicks could pretend that they were 'helping' people.
If you want a good summary of this, read Nancy Turner Banks' 'Blood, Diamond Aids' (that title's from memory, so assuredly wrong, but you'll find it). I know we're on Conspiracies, so some might denigrate Black chicks... but the book is phenomenal.
Alright, now explain how bisexual faggots were able to pass GRIDS to straights who weren't using all those drugs. Then explain how people caught it from blood transfusions.
Kary Mullis says in MULTIPLE lectures that are available on Jewtube that HIV and AIDS COULD NOT BE LINKED SCIENTIFICALLY. Im particularly fond of his "colorful" view of Fauci..
He was taken out because him talking about how little credibility they have constantly during COVID would have ruined the whole scam.
Not only did they kill him, they based THE WHOLE THING on the method HE created. Thats some fuck fuck shit there, boys.
a) Perceivable implies as offered by nature, while suggested tempts one to desire and strive for something others suggest...the former is always available, while the latter tempts one to ignore that for something else; artificial; fictitious...venomous.
b) Venom implies each ones choice of want (temptation) over need (resistance); hence everything within reality can be venomous if one consents to the suggestion thereof.
c) Reasoning implies want vs not want aka temptation (want) vs temptation (not want); while ignoring resistance (need). It's circular logic, while grinding down resistance aka eating itself (ourobouros). Notice also that ouroboros contains robor/robur - "strength" at the center...
in short
Aka "to put it short"...through the lens of perception this implies to put it (inception towards death) short (life), which is what life needs to resist. From the lens of suggested it tempts life to shorten things instead of expressing/lengthening self.
This is just one more example on how fundamental deception operates.
tl; dr: Reason (imbalance) implies venom; implication (balance) implies antidote...if one so chooses.
The aspect of viruses that is never mentioned is the very simple question: "Are viruses alive?" Well, you think it's simple until you look into it for two minutes and feel like you've fallen off an intellectual cliff.
Spoiler: the answer is no, they are not. You'll see that the mainstream doesn't say yes or no, they just studiously avoid answering the question rather than giving you the answer and telling you why. Again, no, viruses are not alive. The reason that's a crucial question is that almost everything they want to ascribe to viruses depends on them being living creatures.
Specifically (and skipping over all this mRNA nonsense), traditional vaccines depend on using "killed" viruses. How can something be "killed" if it was never alive? It cannot, so immediately vaccines get pantsed and everyone will start looking around to see who's been selling them this utter bullshit snake oil for centuries.
I would say I'm amazed at how virtually no one knows this, but it's for the same sort of reason people have no idea where money comes from. It's the old, "Spot me one miracle and I can prove the rest." They can't have you knowing about that miracle, can They?
What they mean is they use the protein sheath without the usually contained DNA or RNA inside. "Killed virus" is an ELI5 description/label.
"Aliveness" is not a prerequisite for being a harmful arrangement of molecules, nor is "aliveness" required in order to mitigate said dangers.
You forgot to include a link to this "definition". I was previously unaware "science" required so much hand-waving. Perhaps my standards are somewhat higher than those of said "science".
Clearly you're smarter than me at this.
Clearly. No offense.
He's right though.
I was shown by a good friend who has a doctorate in molecular biology close to twenty-five years ago in an MIT lab over the course of a week that viruses are fantasy. We looked through slide after slide. "Blah blah virus attacks pig liver," "blah blah virus in human cell..." x 1000 and guess what?
Every slide looked like a hit and run accident, no visible virus or even pathogen that could be logically blamed for this virus bullshit cell damage. Its almost as though the slides were prepared to be blended with a little suspension of disbelief to create their bunk ass "theory."
In order for a creature to want to attack a living being, it needs will. Best case scenario, they are created and passed through whatever they can use to do so, perhaps even "cloud seeding" and "weather manipulation" are just covers for these Pol Pot wanna bes to spread this shit.
Bullets. Thats the only way. Until all of these "patriots" start acting the fucking part, we are fucked, and in my opinion, rightfully so. Anyone who took this OBVIOUSLY dangerous vax from pedo scumbag nazi twats deserves exactly what they fucking get. I genuinely tried IRL to stop people. Now they are both anti-me AND constantly sick and can't figure out why. Its fucking retarded and im sick of fucking with it. ALL OF IT!
This is still irrelevant. A falling rock doesn't have will, but it will fall down and wreck someone's truck over an embankment. Will and life aren't requisite for danger.
I'm not sure what to say about the last half of your comment. I feel you. Injecting poison is retarded and now their mistake is our problem.
The rock is a natural occurrence, not an attack! TF you talking about man? I never said something had to be alive to kill you, man, only that something has to be alive to WANT to kill you, and intention is EVERYTHING.
I have literally seen PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that viruses don't exist in a lab in one of the best and most widely known science colleges in America with a guy i grew up with and you're saying that when a rock flies into my windshield on the highway, its an attack?
Muy estupido. It doesn't even track as an actual thought pattern and to me that is the biggest red flag scenario.
I decided around twenty years ago that there would be no more needles in my future. Fun OR not fun. All gone. So right there, vax is out. Nevermind what i saw at MIT.
I don't know who your MIT friend is, but we worked with virus in uni. Similar to a construction worker saying "You can't tell me bricks don't exist because I've worked with bricks."
Virus exists. I'm sorry someone fooled you. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Although it may be possible to prove non-existence in special situations, such as showing that a container does not contain certain items, one cannot prove universal or absolute non-existence. source
The rock metaphor was simply to address a claim that virus must be A Living Organism in order to harm a person. Broken glass on the floor hurts people and glass isn't alive.
Your twist is that something must be alive to ATTACK. Which may be true--it's semantics. But being ATTACKED only applies if you're being force-inoculated by someone. The virus is the proximal weapon, the knife, not the aggressor. And you can harm yourself against it without being ATTACKED.
aids is entry level bro. even people who still believe in viruses gave up on AIDs lol.
Okay: 'AIDS' actually started out as 'GRIDS' - Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome - in the very early 80s. A bunch of gays were dying, and it looked like their immune systems were shot.
Enter politics, and GRIDS became AIDS. Also, the virus-hunters looked for a particle, and eventually Gallo did a study where 4 of his 9 test-subjects had a 'virus' (HIV) in their system. This was immediately and with no research declared the cause of AIDS in a press conference.
What the media didn't/still doesn't tell us is that in the early 80s, (some/not all) gays lived an insanely degenerate lifestyle -- to the point where some (not all) were taking anti-biotics every day of their lives, simply to forestall the inevitable Chlamydia etc. Furthermore, in order to relax their anuses to facilitate anal sex, they were taking massive amounts of 'poppers', or amyl nitrate. It was advertised in gay magazines as a 'videotape cleaner'. This is why gays were dying of 'Kaposi's Sarcoma', a disease that almost no one gets -- they were destroying their lungs with poppers.
The massive drug-overdosing, particularly with poppers, is the cause of 'AIDS'. It's why AIDS remained a gay phenomenon. It's also why AIDS isn't really a thing these days, because the gay community moved away from massive popper ingestion (keep in mind that gay clubs would mist poppers into the room on a regular basis -- gotta keep that anus loose!).
Also: the idea that hemophiliacs were dying of AIDS is an (almost) complete lie. What's true is that hemophiliacs tested positive for AIDS after the AIDS test was invented, and then they were given drugs that killed them. Prior to the introduction of 'life-saving' AIDS drugs, no hemophiliacs died of AIDS.
As with many things, AIDS is just... doctors killing patients for no reason. Or, for no rea$$$on, if you want.
Of course, the obvious question here is... what about Africans. That's a whole 'nother story, and it's insanely cynical and depressing.
Redkrab: No, they don't fake the tests perse... Hemophiliacs, for example, legitimately tested positive for the 'HIV virus', since they were infused with blood that also tested positive for the 'HIV virus'. If you want to read the story of Arthur Ashe, a world-famous tennis player... well, it's tragic.
The real question, as you ask, is... what are they finding? Well, I can only answer that in a slightly oblique way. If you look into the PCR method, what it does is double the amount of a specific DNA (or RNA) sequence in your body each time you run it. So, if you have only one strand of DNA in your sample, after 20 runs through PCR you'll have 1Million, which will be detectable via 'glowing' techniques.
An aside: if you have alcohol breath, and I can smell it, then in some sense I have alcohol in my nose. If you can amplify the alcohol molecules in my nose by 1M times... you'll think that I, too, was drunk.
So: what are they finding? Well... nothing. They're finding a specific DNA sequence that they have said is the cause of AIDS.
To realize that it's not consider: In the 80s, the US Army tested its recruits, both male and female, for HIV... and it turned out that women had HIV at the same rate as men. But, as you know, women in the US were not affected by AIDS at all!
As a more unpleasant example, the incidence of anal sex in India is astonishingly high! And yet, there's almost no AIDS in India. Same with Thailand, where Ladyboys are a thing. AIDS is largely an African thing, which I'll explain in my response to ChippingToe below.
To summarize, they're detecting a small chain of DNA which has no causative relation to immune deficiency. Then they give you drugs that destroy your liver and kill you. Why??? Well, to paraphrase a Berkley AIDS researcher... 'It's not that what I wrote was wrong... it's just that we're making so much money...'
Tell us the Africa story
Chipping: The key point in understanding African 'AIDS' is to consider women. As I wrote to Redkrab above, American women get HIV but... don't die. You might think, OK, Africans have different DNA -- true! But the average American Black only has 20% White DNA, and there are 40 Million of them, so an 'AIDS' crisis would, certainly, show up in African-American women, right? But... it didn't!
So, officially, why did it occur in Africa? Well, apparently, according to the insane NGOs... Africans like 'dry sex' - -so they put herbs in a woman's vagina to dry it out, so that there's more friction... which meant more tearing in the vagina... Ah, as a kid who's had sex, 'friction' isn't the issue. To be vulgar, 'tightness' may be, but I'll leave it at that.
But then: Why did Africans die of AIDS... well... they didn't! Africans died for the usual reasons -- dysentery etc, from which they've died for centuries... Keep in mind that AIDS diseases in the USA were Kaposi's Sarcoma, while in Africa they were dying of diarrhea.
Ah, but, consider... Africans were, latterly, instrumentalized by 'people' to go into gold/diamond mines for 12 hours a day and... well, occasionally died. Is this surprising? Poor nutrition, lack of food, questionable sanitation... and they died. Wow?!?! Why!?!? Okay. AIDS.
Outside of the Chinese Opium trade, AIDS in Africa is the most cynical, horrific thing in history. Africans were dying because of normal reasons, which were re-classified as 'AIDS', so that drugs could be sold, and NGO chicks could pretend that they were 'helping' people.
If you want a good summary of this, read Nancy Turner Banks' 'Blood, Diamond Aids' (that title's from memory, so assuredly wrong, but you'll find it). I know we're on Conspiracies, so some might denigrate Black chicks... but the book is phenomenal.
And we don't even need to bring up Tuskegee experiments, which is a wide open display of what "doctors" will do for "science.'
Even though its WELL documented with countless sources,.to normies its just a "stupid conspiracy."
Again, they are literally ASKING for what they get .
Alright, now explain how bisexual faggots were able to pass GRIDS to straights who weren't using all those drugs. Then explain how people caught it from blood transfusions.
Kary Mullis says in MULTIPLE lectures that are available on Jewtube that HIV and AIDS COULD NOT BE LINKED SCIENTIFICALLY. Im particularly fond of his "colorful" view of Fauci..
He was taken out because him talking about how little credibility they have constantly during COVID would have ruined the whole scam.
Not only did they kill him, they based THE WHOLE THING on the method HE created. Thats some fuck fuck shit there, boys.
a) Thanks for the pdf
b) Virology aka LOGY (logic/reason; logos/words) implies VIRO (venom/poison)...if one consents (vector) to the suggestion (injection) thereof.
So, in short, "reason venom."
a) Perceivable implies as offered by nature, while suggested tempts one to desire and strive for something others suggest...the former is always available, while the latter tempts one to ignore that for something else; artificial; fictitious...venomous.
b) Venom implies each ones choice of want (temptation) over need (resistance); hence everything within reality can be venomous if one consents to the suggestion thereof.
c) Reasoning implies want vs not want aka temptation (want) vs temptation (not want); while ignoring resistance (need). It's circular logic, while grinding down resistance aka eating itself (ourobouros). Notice also that ouroboros contains robor/robur - "strength" at the center...
Aka "to put it short"...through the lens of perception this implies to put it (inception towards death) short (life), which is what life needs to resist. From the lens of suggested it tempts life to shorten things instead of expressing/lengthening self.
This is just one more example on how fundamental deception operates.
tl; dr: Reason (imbalance) implies venom; implication (balance) implies antidote...if one so chooses.