These are my thoughts exactly. People always hope for leaks, but in a compartmentalized world you won't get any. Leaks come from on high, or from people who want to leak. It IS possible to withhold vital information for long periods of time.
Chunk Yogurt actually saying something reasonable? What day.
Fascinating.
I’ve been studying germ theory and terrain theory for four years, and this is the first time I’ve heard this.
Do you have some reading material on this topic?
Why do they have the most gross names?
God they have parasites everywhere. I was not aware they’d be so desperate to go thousands of miles just for fish
Bruh just click ‘no thanks’ or ‘continue reading’
Substack doesn’t force you to subscribe
Yes that’s precisely what I was thinking of!
They admitted this in early 2020 and no one noticed. Of course it only comes out now after their schemes are well passed.
Another hit! Please don't stop writing songs
Hawaii Is one of the best places to build a shelter
-sea levels are not rising
-Kauai and Maui geologically very stable (occasional earthquakes are not an issue)
-fertile soil and unlimited fish.
The only issue I see with Hawaii is: it’s an island and the locals hate you. In a billionaire’s case, they’ve trapped themselves on an island with a target on their back
They’re already 51% lizard anyways
I’m on lecture 19 of 34. Started his Total Onslaught series a few months ago.
He has mentioned Ellen G White once.
Take it with a grain of salt. He is an excellent scholar and should still be highly regarded.
Are you watching Walter Veith’s presentations? Good stuff. Groundbreaking considering it was all in the early 00s
Being schizo is not itself worthy of being banned though… just ignore it.
I just had an argument with a legitimate narrative-pushing retard. Account was only a week old so I knew it was most likely a troll.
FWoC to me is just an annoying text wall that I usually scroll past. There’s not much he writes worth engaging in, so I would just ignore him. Def not banworthy.
These dental studies over what foods we are designed to eat are all irrelevant:
Fruitheads say “our mouth shape and tooth shape dictate we only eat a pants”
Meatheads say “we have fire therefore meat can be softened and consumed without problem”
Very few people ever bring up “our mouths and teeth are designed perfectly for complex language”
No animal could achieve as much as we have simply because their communication is limited. We have the mouth that can create language, and therefore express deeper thought.
Food type is almost irrelevant (just avoid all processed oils, sugars, and carbs)
Fans just caught up in the fervor of the moment... and also being invited in by the DC police...
Ha.
Haha.
Rofl.
"Virus denier" is the same as "climate change denier:" a very clear-cut fallacy. You're acting like you own the place. You don't know who I am, and I don't know who you are, but I absolutely know when someone is lazy.
I have provided you with the essentials of this concept, but if you're too intellectually fragile to even dare read a simple paper, than just say so. In your responses, you have demonstrated six logical fallacies. You have proven that you don't have any authority over this issue so you saying things like "not worth my time" and how I've "got another thing coming" is more laughable than your already pathetic arguments. Now, your animal brain has truly lost it's reason and is now making empty threats.
Bless you, my child. Be at peace.
Not only do you not have time to read, I'm beginning to think you cannot read at all.
In what I wrote is your answer: everything you stated is untrue.
Put on your big-boy pants, and read the paper.
You are not listening. You posted a link of some site showing images of bacteria (which are very real) and viruses (which are very much not real), blind to the truth that viruses are nothing more than dead cell debris.
Then you asked for a "peer reviewed" paper, and then have since been doing nothing but attacking an author for trying to make a living outside of medicine, claiming that should disqualify him from any opinion ever, despite him having two decades in the field.
On top of that, your criteria for what a "peer" even is had not been defined. It is obvious you didn't read what I sent, because there are dozens of doctors who helped write this report, and hundreds more who have "reviewed" it. "Peer review" is simply receiving critique from others in your relevant field. So, this paper has been reviewed, critiqued, commented on, etc... by people from all sides of this aisle, and you can find those reviews if you just stop being stuck up the asshole of dogma for a brief moment.
All you have been doing is attacking this (retired) doctor while refusing to read a now well-reviewed paper (so of course you wouldn't see the critiques of it; isn't that the best part of peer review?).
No, you say that "if it does not end up in an "official" journal, then it is fake! Fake! My high-priest of SciEnCe says it's fake because Lancet or Cell did not publish it!."
Sweetie, your priests are lying to you. Their "peer reviewed" papers and experiments claiming viruses exist are: faulty, illogical, not repeatable, contain no control experiments, and violate their own rules of what constitutes virology. In other words, it is not science.
So you stating that there needs to be experiments proving that viruses do not exist is the most backwards logic imaginable. Viruses, have never even been proved! And you demand that somehow we disprove them? lol
Virology at it's core is created on a false notion that these tiny little mystery particles (which have never been isolated, or been shown to replicate, or been shown to cause the specific disease they took the original sample from), grown in poisoned culture with different DNAs from different species, make you sick. There are more logical reasons why someone would get sick than invisible make-believe little particles.
Did you know that you can "make" viruses using no original sample at all? Surely that is a paper you'd be interested in. There are examples of how different samples of the same control culture, with no foreign material having been introduced, under different conditions will "create" different "viruses."
At this point, I am only feeding a troll because you have refused to hear what I'm saying because you are so insecure you hide behind "muh peer reviewed only" guise to ward off anything that could potentially change your mind.
Virology, is just an extension of pharma. It's just good for business, but has no basis in truth.
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.
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.
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.
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?
That is literally the final set scene from a James Bond movie