All Episodes
Previous Next
March 25, 2021 - Jim Fetzer
01:05:51
Dr Stefan Lanka - The Origins of Virus Theory and the Science that Destroys It
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Stefan, welcome!
Hello!
Perfect!
You made it!
I was worried about daylight savings time, but... Yeah, but I checked it double, you know.
Got it.
Okay, everybody is very anxious to hear you today, very excited.
We won't exaggerate, right?
Right.
So I'm going to just do a very brief introduction, because I think most everybody actually knows who you are, and like I said, they're very excited to hear you.
Okay.
Look, Tom, you have a reflection on your choices.
I know there's nothing I can do about that.
Okay.
Let me just turn up the sound a little bit.
So I am actually honored to have Stefan join us today.
I am also very happy to, I think I can call Stefan a new friend of mine and we've had a lot of collaboration in the past few months and Much to my benefit, I would say.
And to mine, you know.
And one thing I would say, which I was thinking about this, I can't really think of anybody who I think knows more about the history and the practice of virology than Stefan Lenka.
But it's a curious thing to say that, because it reminds me of a few days ago, I was invited by a group of doctors to join a working group on viruses.
And of course, I asked what time it was, and they said a time, and I said, oh, I can't do it at that time, because that's when my meeting about unicorns is.
To say you're an expert on viruses is a bit like being an expert on unicorns, although unicorns have prettier pictures.
So it's a funny thing to say.
But anyways, so with that, I just want to say what we're The things that we're hoping to hear or hoping you would address, first of all, is just the history of virology, which I've heard you speak on this before, and it really puts everything in context.
The next thing which I hear a lot from people is, has a pathogenic virus actually ever been seen from a sick human being?
And it's a very interesting question.
And I think I know the answer to that, but I will let you say it.
And then we would love to hear about the experiments that you're doing now and what it is that you're hoping to demonstrate and why it's so important to demonstrate these things.
And so with that, I'm going to turn the floor over to Stefan And he's going to tell us a little about the history of virology and how we got into this mess that we're in now.
So again, welcome, Stefan.
Okay, welcome you, Tom, and hello to everybody.
And yeah, Tom, thanks to you that you make the control experiments happen, which I'm going to talk soon.
First, let's go into the history of virology and we have to go all back 2,500 years and we have to listen to Plato when Plato is saying that the Greek medical doctors can't cope with most of diseases.
he wrote this and he gives an explanation for this catastrophe which already happened at his time.
And he said that when something is not working, something is ill, an organ, an eye, a bone or
something else, the doctors work on this, where they see the symptom. But he says they all forgot
the source of the organ, the source of the eye, the source of the bone, it's the soul.
So they're not treating the soul.
This is criticism and it's very, very sharp and very interesting and it shows that something was going on already by then.
And for me, I went from the history, of course, from me being a student of biology, and then I went back.
First, of course, I went into marine biology in order to help the oceans not to get more polluted, not to collapse, because they are producing 70% of oxygen.
Of course, then I found in the marine algae a structure in an organ where usually spores Spores, which you can see with the light microscope, they are going to sit down, they are going to grow and build big, big algae again.
And in this algae, I observed that there were no spores produced, but an amorphous mass.
So I went with this In the electron microscope to see if it's a fungi or fungal spores or what's going on.
And I saw billions of small particles, hexahexagonal, like we think viruses look like.
And I thought, whoa, I found a harmless virus and a harmless stable virus host relationship because The production of the harmless virus was not doing harm to the algae.
And I had really to fight to get a lab and when I managed this, I could isolate the structure and I thought I have a harmless virus.
Then when another professor, a friend of mine, I could use his lab space.
He was a real big specialist on nucleic acid and sequencing.
And it was the Austrian professor Fritz Pohl.
And he told me, Hey Stefan, did you check what you are telling to the students?
You are warning in front of AIDS and HIV and everybody should use double condoms.
And so did you check this?
And I said, the world is saying this.
He told me he was not asking the world, he was asking me.
Anyway, I asked him why he has questions on this and why he's questioning this and he told me that he heard some rumors that Gallo was manipulating.
So I went He said I should go immediately to the library and every paper of interest I should copy twice for him.
And so we started to discuss on this thing and this is how I came into the history of biology.
And very soon I realized that Gallo, in order to prove that he has a virus, he was killing his cell cultures.
And the other one who eventually got the Nobel Prize in 2008 for HIV, the French Montagnier, he said, no, no, my virus, if it's a virus at all, then it's multiplying the white blood cells.
So we have an immunological overload.
But what he was saying at this time already, if the people will stop using sexual drugs and eat good food, vitamins and pure water, they even will get not only healthy but get rid of the virus.
So everybody was hating Montaner, but in the end, he received the Nobel Prize in 2008.
That's an important part of biology, because two different concepts, but it was the reason I saw that Gallo was really manipulating, he was killing his cell cultures with hydrocortisol, and I thought, so some probably more than Gallo, and probably all the scene and the politicians are aware of this Act of betraying.
And so I thought Viralgy is betrayal.
And this was a big mistake.
Because of course what I saw in both papers of Gallo and of Montagnier, I saw They claim a virus, but they never saw a virus like me.
I could isolate a structure.
I could see it in great number inside the host in an isolated form.
I could do the biochemical analysis of all its proteins.
And the most important thing, its genetic material.
Always a given size, always the same structure, and always the same sequence.
And in the paper of Montagnier and Gallo, nothing like disappeared.
Only an enzymatic activity was equaled that there should be a virus somewhere else around.
And as the cells were dying, that they think all the materials, or at least some of the materials of the cell cultures dying in the lab are viral.
And so it's their secret how they could choose some of them and say, look, those are the viral proteins using in the antibody tests.
At this time, everybody was antibody testing.
ELISA, you know, or Western blood.
In principle, it's the same.
Well, of course, when I realized that there is a virus in the title but no viral structure inside, I thought I have overseen something or medical doctors are, you know, keeping their real isolation protocols secret and I don't know.
So I was not speaking with anybody on this because I was afraid losing my lab.
I mean, in the fifth term, as a young student, I had my own lab, access to every kind of electron microscopic and microscopic techniques, you know.
So, but then I was sure I was looking right and left.
I saw, oh, measles virus the same, hepatitis A and B the same.
A virus claim, but no virus.
So, and this is how I went in, and then, of course, I blamed the other one, establishing the infectious theory, Robert Koch.
I blamed him, and Louis Pasteur, I blamed him as guilty of this betrayal, what's going on, you know?
And in fact, Pasteur, He wrote down in his diary, which became public at the Princeton University in 1993, you know, that he was cheating, that he was really intentionally killing sheeps and saying, look, in public events, look, they died because they were infected and not vaccinated.
And he was using sheeps, not infected, not treated with nothing and said, look, they are vaccinated, they are infected and nothing happens.
And all sort of these things I found in his diary.
But to my great, you know, I was really shocked when I was reading Max Perutz in my favorite newspaper.
My favorite newspaper till this moment was the New York Review of Books.
I mean, this is the intellectual flagship I found such.
A lot of important articles in this paper, and all of a sudden Perutz was writing, and, oh, thanks God that Montané was cheating a little bit, otherwise the infectious theories would have no possibility to become a global act of knowledge.
At this time there were no proofs, and thanks God Montané was exaggerating.
So, anyway.
Then I was going more back in history.
Where does the concept come from?
Because virus means a toxic protein, a toxic substance, a toxin of disease.
That means virus in Latin.
And so Before 52, a virus was really thought to be a protein which is toxic.
And only after 22, 1922, a virus was thought to be A nucleic acid, a dangerous one.
The poor one naked like Ebola and the rich one with an envelope.
Anyway, so we have a paradigm shift in 52.
And so I went back in history, where does this concept arose from?
And I eventually landed at Rudolf Wirthoff in 1858.
And then I, of course, I understood very quick where this concept arose, because before there was the notion, which originated in ancient Greek, that the diseases are caused when a liquid inside your body, we had the four liquids, it's going to be stuck, and then this liquid turns out into a toxin, a toxic substance, which is causing disease.
And this was the ancient theory of disease, the liquid, the humoral theory of disease, and this was abandoned already because when there were light microscopes, even lenses, In 1650, my piggy, they saw, well, organs are built out of different layers of tissue.
But when we have a change in an organ, in a disease, the disease is not spreading left or to the right.
Never.
So all observations are disproving, or were disproving, the theory that the toxin, it's built up somewhere in the body and it's spread by diffusion, right?
So this was already abandoned, and Virchow also took a great deal to disprove this theory in 1884.
But all of a sudden, 10 years older, for given reasons I won't outline here at the moment, he came up with a completely different theory, and he reactivated this old ...idea of a toxin, of disease, of a virus inside his new theory.
And of course, he had to become famous.
He was full of debts.
His father put on him.
He wanted to become a priest.
His father forced him to study medicine.
In 1848, he really claimed a very important thing that all infectious diseases disappear immediately if the people become If they become food, if they become water to wash, to clean, if they have no insects in their beds walking around, if they can heat in winter.
I mean, these were his claims in 1848.
And for this, he's praised still today.
But 10 years later, when the revolution and the time, the political situation in Germany becomes really stiff, much more harder than in 48, then he came up with a new theory.
And he said, the cell, we are not originating out of tissues, which was already at this time was established fact.
He said, we are coming out of single cells and the cell is the smallest indivisible unit of life.
And that all diseases are coming out of a single cell when the cell is producing the toxin of disease, so the virus.
This is the same idea of disease, the liquid theory, now produced or seen inside a cell.
Why Virchow came up with this theory of a cell?
And this was the next great finding, that all our theory of life, that we are originating out of atoms, that atoms touching themselves, building molecules and then life, it's coming out of this.
This is not invented by the atom theory by Einstein or if not by Virchow.
This was invented in Greece by Democrit and Epicurus was transporting this, making it very public later on.
This comes from old Greece, this theory, and Virchow just came across this theory and was using it.
because it was already fashionable in the Enlightenment, but also before, that all explanations
of life should be without God, without ghosts, without a field, without consciousness.
This was one prerequisite in order to be a scientist, because this was the baseline of
the Enlightenment as a counteraction or a counter reaction on more than a thousand years of church
misbehavior in Europe. And so So.
all explanation on life could only be materialistic.
And in fact, even those in the Enlightenment have not invented this theory.
As I found, when going back, even more and more back in history, I landed at Democrit.
And he said, we are producing a new theory of life because we won't know God anymore inside the explanation
for a given reason, for good reason.
He said that a lot of religions are causing fear in the people.
In front of God.
They are afraid of God, that God is punishing and God is punishing with disease.
That was the Catholic Church telling for more than a thousand years, you know.
So they said, we want to have a theory of life without any of this sort.
And they could not imagine that this became a religion on its own, you know, with the ancient theory.
That, yeah, when the liquids talk inside the body, then they turn into a toxic matter.
And, amen, this is it, what we have now.
And not only in biology.
Biology at the moment is the tip of the iceberg, the visible, very visible tip of the iceberg.
But it's also the very sharp needle to implode the balloon, which we have and gets every day bigger, you know.
So, and But the challenge, what we have, it's not only biologies.
It's cancer, for example.
It's all chronic disease.
I mean, when somebody's believing that in his body, his own matter, its own substances turn into the bad, into a vicious thing, nobody's able to get it under control and it's going to eat you up.
And even if that it's going to march, you know, Inside your body.
Then we are in the theory of metastasis.
And this is the majority of people believing it.
And if, of course, if you are believing cancer, if you believe in metastasis, you are believing in flying metastasis, which you can spill out and therefore we have to wear a mask.
And that's why the majority is believing into this concept.
It's Our history.
And we have to face our history.
And it's so deeply inside our thinking that all our thinking, it's so deep in.
And as a student, as a pupil, I had to learn all of this.
And so if we castrate our imagination, right, we have no other means to Imagine what is disease or even what is health, you know.
And this is the challenge what we have to see, that we have to work to come back to the roots and the roots have been in Ayurvedic medicine.
I mean, there was the soul is dominating the whole thing.
And then, depending on the liquid states inside your body, which the Greek culture didn't understand.
Of course, there is a huge body of proof that the Greek culture was importing its medical knowledge from Ayurvedic philosophy, which in India itself was destroyed by the British when they Have been there and still are there.
So the only original philosophy and schools of Ayurvedic medicine you will find in Sri Lanka, by the way.
So anyway, this is the history not only of Virology, this is the history of disease and it becomes clear when we have a mind setting that inside our bodies there is no field acting, no God, no spirit, no consciousness whatsoever, we are forced to think in materialistic interactions only.
And even with Virchow, we are forced to think that when we are a bulk of minerals and whatsoever fatty acid proteins, that to direct all of this, that every organism comes out of one single cell, which is not true, by the way.
And the whole cellular concept, it's not true.
Please read your Harold Tillman.
It's all there in English.
So, but then you are forced to imagine a building plan And building a functional plan for ourselves to produce a human being.
This is what we are forced to.
And then we are already in the dead end and we go into details and blah, and yeah.
And of course we had done the shift in the paradigm shift in 52, that when they did the control experiments, they realized, oh, our proteins We consider to be a virus.
They also came into existence when we let healthy organs, healthy tissue into decay.
Then we have exactly the same.
And in electron microscopy we cannot see something specific.
So, and then the new virology was orientating itself on those structures.
I had the luck to isolate some out of the ocean.
Nowadays they call themselves, the virologists call themselves giant viruses because they're such a huge genetic material, you know.
Always the same length, always the same structure, always the same sequence.
And what I found, it's not a harmless virus out of this thing.
It's a kind of mini spore.
It's not a spore itself.
When the algae realize that there is no condition to build normal spores, which can swim, look to find a good place for itself and grow out again, so they build much smaller particles.
Those particles were first...
Detected, isolated, and characterized in bacteria.
And in bacteria, they are called bacteriophages.
Phage, from phage or cytosis, to eat, to swallow.
But those structures are not eating the bacteria.
This is a misconception.
This is already, you know, a very narrow view to the things.
When bacteria die, it must be a virus, right?
In the end, it's a mini-spores which can themselves develop again into larger units.
Enderlein already claiming that the cellular theory of life must be wrong because he observed that cellular structure disintegrate into smaller structures, he just could observe in a light microscope and even smaller one, he could not absorb anymore.
And but also smaller structures do materialize out of invisible structures and forming cells.
So this is what he was seeing and but this was the minority because with Virchow, Virchow's attempt was to unite medicine and state 1848 for a good reason, to help people, to avoid plagues and everything.
And in 1858, he adapted to the new political situation and he said, well, in medicine, it's like in the state, the single cells could easily, you know, get parasitic, get egoistic and then kill the head.
And so it's in the state as well.
One does not see it directly, but he gave some really good indications that he meant the Jewish people, that they easily can get out of control, get parasited, you know, endangering the head, the king.
And he was friend, he became friend to the king, because his uncle from his mother's side, Mr. Heze, he was the friend of the king.
And so he became a boss of the Charité in 58.
I mean, the leading clinic in Germany, where now all the Corona crisis originated out from.
Only with Professor Trosten's, the virologist from the Charité, doing, he managed that the local panic in Wuhan would spread into a global panic.
It was the doing of Professor Trosten, which I outlined in my papers on what he was doing.
So this is the story.
From the detail from a mini spore to bacteriophages which then from in 54 became the model of viruses, how should the model virus look like a stable nucleic acid of a given size, given structure, given sequence.
Enveloped inside a shell out of protein, this is what we'll find in bacteriophages and giant viruses, better named mini spores, right?
Smaller than the usual spores.
And they become the model of what how viruses should look like.
So when then in 1954 So, John Franklin Enders came up with the idea, okay, we don't know what is a virus, because the experiments 52 with bacteriophages disproven the old idea of virus, because the old idea was a protein is a toxic virus is a toxic protein, which the capability of self replication, because it was
The protein itself is the genetic material.
So all proteins are able to self-replicate.
But in doing research with bacteriophages in 1952, it was become known that a protein always needs a nucleic acid to be replicated, right?
For this, the Nobel Prize in Medicine was given in 69, and it's really interesting and important to check the justification of the Nobel Prize in 69 for the phage group, because the last sentence says, this phage just became the model for the whole virology.
Model.
And here we are.
What they are believing, That when cells in the laboratory are dying, and this is what John Franklin was doing in 1954, he was a bacteriologist.
He knew, ah, when we starve bacteria to death and if we maltreat them, they all of a sudden transfer themselves into phages, which are there, of course.
And he said, look, Now we are without model of biology, but probably when cells are dying equally like bacterias in the test tube, probably it's the same that they transfer themselves into viral matter.
This was in June 54, where nobody had an idea how a virus is going to look like, right?
The old virology abandoned themselves.
But because Anders got in December 1954 the Nobel Prize for an old idea of him on poliovirus, the old virology, from 1948, this paper from June 1954 It became a scientific fact, which was never ever questioned.
Even Anders was saying in his paper on the first of June 54, that this is speculation, that we see a lot of contradictions, probably the cells dying because of unknown factors.
Or another virus inside there.
So here we go.
They never took out control experiments, which we are now carrying out at the moment.
Again, I carried them out in a miscellaneous process, which I won at the end.
And we are carrying them out now, especially for Ebola.
And we are not realizing, and not realizing till today, that they are killing those cells Intoxifying them with cytotoxic antibiotics, starving them to death, reducing the nutrition, and of course adding material proteins which are in decay, and everything which is in decay is toxic and disturbing those cell cultures in the test tube.
But when those cells are dying in the test tube, they equal it with the presence of the virus, With the isolation, that they isolate it from something outside the laboratory, inside the laboratory, and call it the isolate.
And the material not being filtered, it's called the living virus and it's used as a vaccine, you know, because they believe till today it's turning everything into viral matter, which is in the case in bacteria.
But never proven in cells and disproven.
And then they begin to take small pieces out of proteins and adding them up mentally to a model of a virus.
They add up very small pieces of nucleic acid and add them up to a long nucleic acid, which is a pure mental product and never isolated, never seen.
Anywhere.
So this is the history of biology, how it evolved and how it became a self-fooling mechanism, of course with fooling the whole society, but where there was a predisposition for, you know, disbelief because there were no other thinking since two and a half thousand years.
So this is it, what's going on.
And I mean, in order to get clear, I recommend everybody go into the history.
It helps to understand where this is coming from, why so many people are believing in this concept, why I myself was believing in this concept.
Everybody, you know.
And then if you know the history, you know the way out.
If you know the way in, you know the way out.
So if you don't know it, then you are without orientation.
Easy.
So the next thing is, the biologists are doing seven steps to fool themselves that, oh, when they photograph something, it's a virus, or when they add up the small molecules to a big one, we have the viral genomic.
There are seven points.
Seven points.
And if you trust Read them in the papers, materials and methods of any virus which is said to cause disease.
You'll find two sensational things and I mean it's easy like this and it poor me that I only in this year I came across how easy it is and to you know but okay that's it.
So in every of those seven steps you'll find that they are disproving themselves.
They are really, the virologists themselves are disproving themselves.
And in every step, every technique they are using in these seven steps, those are seven techniques, right?
They never, never took out control experiments to show if not the experiments themselves are producing the results.
And a scientific paper without a controlled experiment, without the control that the technique I used is falsifying, it's varying the result or it's producing the result, it's not scientific.
And therefore the law which regulates all means of pandemic measures, the infectious, the law of infectious diseases, it disclaims and this asks everybody to act in a scientific manner and science and the rules of science are defined and therefore just naming those seven facts and the anti-scientific
Behaviour of the manifest anti-scientific proof of their own doing.
This is what I ask in Germany now to do the people.
I call this action the Red Card for Corona.
And people are writing letters already to the health authorities and saying, look, those are the facts.
You are academic.
You can check it in 30 minutes.
And therefore, no means could be supposed or posed upon me.
I am free.
I must not take a risk.
I must not take a test and so on.
And this activity starts.
And this, in the end, I am absolutely sure, is going to let the balloon Explode or implode, however you like it, right?
Stefan, could you run, could you walk us through those seven steps?
Oh please, yeah!
The first step I mentioned already.
Since endos, every virologist believes when his cell cultures are dying in the test tube, right, that there must have been a virus, but they never controlled it.
So we controlled it twice already and we get the cells dying without infectious material.
So in other words, whether you put an initial virus or not, you get the same result.
Exactly and this is called the cytopathic effect when some cells are causing to melt together or you know to just disappear and when the button of the test tube becomes visible this they call the cytopathic effect and they equal it with the presence and the isolation of the virus and then they believe The material which they'll find afterwards, this is of viral nature.
This is in case of bacterias when they are producing phages, right?
This is the case when I am producing giant viruses, mini spores, right?
But this is not the case in the test tube with eukaryotic cells.
Interestingly, Enders actually said that in his original paper, that we know that we get the same result even if we don't start with anything from a child with measles.
That's it.
And he also said in this paper that probably this what they are doing in the test tube most likely has nothing in common with real measles.
We have just to read it, you know.
And of course, a little bit history helps here again.
Endos never studied medicine or biology.
He served in World War I as a pilot, as a young pilot already.
He was 18, I think, there.
And then he studied sociology, he was then the, of course, he was ambassador in all these elite universities and things.
And then he ran into, he studied after World War II, he studied again sociology and yeah, German language and Celtic, you know.
So he ran into biologists working on phages and As a soldier, oh wow, viruses and bacteria, he just went in and he had not to study biology, to just run into the lab and do his work and do his PhD on this.
So he lacked every scientific thinking, right?
And of course some other details because his idea for which he became the Nobel Prize in 1948, it was stolen by Salk.
And Salk made the vaccine and didn't give credit or any outcome of his gains to Anders.
He had the idea.
That the poliovirus, it's not tissue specific.
So, Jonas Zeig was buying all human embryos all over the world, taking the skin up and the muscles down and fermented it with a piece of brain of a diseased, polio-diseased human being.
And then this was the polio vaccine, right?
So, and this was the reason why Anders was completely fed up and all the scientific community.
You can read this really very happily on Very, you know, on Wikipedia even, you'll find on the English Wikipedia page, you'll find this story.
Okay, so let's go to the next art of the seven.
They never carried out controlled experiments, but they considered the molecules of the dying cells as viral, okay?
The next step, what they are doing, they use particles inside the tissue.
They fix the tissue and cut it in thin slices and look through the electron microscope.
And they find some typical structures of dying cells, VLE, you know, some tissue dots, they walk like amoebs.
And when they cut through with the electron microscope, they show only the circles and claim, oh, those are viruses.
But they never ever were isolating those structures, showing, look, this is the viral nucleic acid inside, the viral proteins.
And no control experiments.
They never did the same with tissue causes, exactly treated in the same manner.
You must imagine, they never ever did it.
So this is point two.
Then point three is, they come up with another sort of particles claiming, where they said, oh, those are viral particles.
And if you go into the technical details, you easily see that they centrifuge all the proteins in the test tube down to the button.
And then they take it up with a syringe and mix it.
And so they vortex this mixture out of proteins, fatty acids and detergents.
And what do we have?
We have soap bubbles.
The German expression is mit Seele.
I think in English it's my seal, right?
Yeah, my seal.
So soap bubbles.
And they add color, stain, let it dry, and use another technique of electron microscopy to look from above on these particles.
So the same, they never isolated those particles and say, look, here we have the biochemistry, we have the viral proteins, we have the viral nucleic acid.
They don't have it, okay?
So And they did not a control experiment.
They never tried it with uninfected, but same treated cell cultures in the same way.
Never.
So it's completely, this behavior, it's anti-scientific in point one, point two, point three, and all other points to come.
The fourth point, the fourth step, what they are doing from billions of small genetic debris They are sequencing, they read the sequence of very small pieces, and then they add them up to a large piece.
They add them up, and this process is called alignment.
And it's incredible that they never ever carried out a controlled experiment with equally treated cell cultures, equally treated cell cultures, and just doing the same.
No control experiments.
And the fact which itself they are disproving themselves, they add something to a big piece and the big piece never ever showed up in reality.
And since 50 years it's easy to show up that there is a A big genetic material of this given size is there.
This is called gel electrophoresis.
This is a standard technique to show, yeah, I have a piece of genetic material this given size.
With this technique, all bacteriophages are genetically, from their nucleus acids, they were characterized, right?
And so this is point four, point five.
In order to build a genome of the virus, when they came up, oh, I find a new virus in Wuhan, or I repeat the experiment, they always need a given genome as A point of orientation where they add the smaller pieces where they do fit to a given genome.
So this would be like a sentence out of the Bible with 30,000 letters, right?
And we use a small letters combination of 1, 2, 3, 5 letters and try to fix them to the place where they fit, right?
And no control experiments again and The control experiment would be to try to get the alignment of another RNA virus, which would be a measles virus, which would be an Ebola virus, HIV, right?
This would be the control experiment with the same data set.
Let's try if we can fabricate another virus.
And I can tell you, yes, it's like this.
I showed it already in the measles virus process and here in In other words, you can take the same raw data set, the same pieces of short pieces of RNA in the mixture,
And then you can find the template for the coronavirus, or the template for the HIV virus, or the template for the measles virus, and then you tell the computer to orient it or align it to that template and in each case it will, which will make you say,
yes, I found this person has measles, they have HIV, they have Ebola, they have Zika, and by the
way, they have coronavirus. That's it.
Yes.
So, and this is then the definite experimental disproof, you know, and can you imagine the coronavirus is said that it mutated two years ago, it becomes into existence, right?
So, I'm now on my way to find an old data set 10 years ago on measles virus, right?
Or on HIV, right?
And as soon as I get hold of original sequence data, which was produced for HIV, I'm going to produce you coronavirus.
Definitely.
And this is going to be the definitely experimental disproval of virology.
But till we have this, the arguments on its own, it's enough because we are inside point five, yes?
And inside point five, where the Use a given sequence to add the smaller sequences accordingly, right?
This sequence, this given sequence, never ever came out of a virus.
It's a biological unit.
Itself, always, it's a fabricated thing, right?
So, biology has no viral genome.
And everything what they use in order to do an alignment, it's a fabrication on its own already.
Yeah, that's why they call it an in silico genome of an in silico virus.
That's it, that's it.
But in silico, I mean, even this is a little bit, you know, because in silico there is some matter, but of course in silico, yes.
In English it sounds better than in German.
Okay, no, it's a good explanation.
It means it's inside the computer only, not in reality.
So let's come to point six, you know.
Everybody thinks, and it was your question at the beginning, that viruses never ever saw a virus inside a living being or inside its liquids.
And it's easy.
Everybody can check it easily on every single photograph.
of a virus, which could, which should show a virus, you'll find the notion that it's from a cell culture, but never from the blood, never from the salvia, never from the semen, never from another liquid of the body, never from a lymph node, never from, from, from inside.
Not from a human, not from animal, not from a plant.
And this is astonishing!
I mean, They go to the moon, they go to Mars, whatsoever, but they never manage to get a virus photographed inside a human being, nor that they can show its nucleic acid inside a liquid, body liquid, salvia or blood.
We have all to wear a mask in order not to spread the virus with every breath, take, you know.
Thousands of them, but they never ever.
And this is completely unscientific, not to tell the public that they never ever were able, first, not to show a virus inside their blood, inside a human being, and second, never ever were able to see The gene, the complete genome of a virus inside blood, inside salvia, you know, never ever.
And this is point six.
You know, Stefan, let me just comment on that.
I spent some part of this morning looking in PubMed for any paper that described the morphology of a virus from a living There are a few papers that claim that, but when you actually read the details, they say, well, they have very different morphologies.
In other words, some of these particles look like bullets, and some of them look round, and some of them look like rods, and somehow they're all the same virus.
And it's bizarre, it's like, yeah.
What they are doing, they say, look, we stain some of the proteins, we have some specific antibodies, they are connected with a staining, and then we'll see something inside the body.
This is what they are doing, of course, but it's not showing that there is a particle somewhere.
The definition of a virus, it's all race, it's core, and that's the genetic material.
And here we go.
This has a given size, a given structure, and a given sequence.
And this never ever shows up somewhere.
And you must imagine all these masks, you know, and Biden calling for two masks, you know.
I mean, how crazy.
And so, but on the other hand, thanks God, How could you think of a change, of a predicament shift in society without such a crisis?
Impossible.
When I think a year back, I could not imagine that we had a success going to the streets.
Now the people are listening on the streets.
And now in Germany, the politicians are saying, look, 30% of the German population, it's not believing in virus anymore.
And so we need another 20% and then the next election, then it's done, you know.
And this is our work, what we have to do to convince the facts, naming the facts where everybody can, on its own, can check it and can check the logic.
And the seventh point, It's very interesting, because in a review work of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, they published a review of 89 pages to the early history of biology.
Tom, can I have a short break?
There is the bell down running.
Yeah, well, I was going to try to finish, but yes, if you need to... Okay, I'll come back soon.
So you take over, okay?
Okay.
Uh, not sure how, uh, So I think what we'll do here is we'll hear the seventh and then I'm going to ask Stefan how people can learn more about what he's doing and how to even participate and maybe help his studies.
I think then what I'll do is when we have the Friday session There may be some things that Stefan said that I can try to further explain.
So I will try to do that on Friday during the usual, I think it's two o'clock Eastern Time session.
Yeah, this, you know, it's interesting this, this last point, point six, is something that's just so key to this whole thing.
Because if you ask, well, if you tell anybody out there, have they ever actually seen, isolated, characterized, and found the entire genome of a single so-called pathogenic virus from a person who's sick with that disease?
I have spent hours and hours looking through PubMed, searching all the sites that any doctor or anybody can get access to.
And there's literally no article that demonstrates that.
As hard as that is for all of us to believe, as hard as that is to wrap your brain around, that's just the fact.
You know, some of the ones I found today, because I was determined to see if there was even one article.
They make references to something, but it's not anything like Stefan is describing.
All right, Stefan, I will do seventh, and then I want you to tell people how they can help you do with this, where they can go to get more information, maybe Contribute, donate, or just find out more about what they can do to help.
Well, there are some important English texts on my webpage freely available.
For further information, I think the most important thing is to study the deeper biology.
There are already three translations of three texts on mine, and the basis is the findings of Dr. Hamer, which he once called the new medicine, right?
This is the actual and really scientific form of Psychosomatic, but psychosomatic would be too short as an explanation, you know.
He came for his own experience with, after his son died, he developed the cancer of testicle and then he thought, well, does it happen to others?
He asked other patients and he said, yeah, how do you know that my child died?
And he said, it happened to me.
So he went into Brain scans himself and others with the same diagnosis, and he found that always in the same part of the brain, the same disease gives a signal, right?
And so he thought that he solved all the open questions on cancer, but later he found that it's with skin, with hair, with teeth, with everything, you know?
These findings are of greatest importance to study because you learn two things.
Second, that the old model That something from outside comes inside and destroying you can't possibly be true.
And the most important is you learn how spirit works, how spirituality works on you, how we are functioning.
You see that every part of your body has its own consciousness of its function at this side, being the skin on the outside or a part of the organ inside.
And it can change when it becomes under pressure.
This could be a real accident, but also a situation where you believe that you live under a constant alarm, that it becomes extensional, that seeing what happens is too much for you, you are isolated from everybody.
And then your flesh is changing and, you know, You know, everybody knows a word can kill and a word can heal, and this you are going to learn when you are checking this information on the new medicine.
I think, Tom, you had an interview already with a lady in the States working on this, at least.
We haven't done it yet, but we're going to get to that.
But let's just, I just want to wrap this up, just so we're careful of your time here, Stefan.
So, Maybe just go through the seventh point, just quickly.
Okay, ah, the seventh point, it's easy.
In this review where I spoke about, of the Max Planck Institute on History of Science, there you can read that when the old biology was disproving itself, themselves, they find out when they took out animal experiments, they never ever were able to transmit the disease, an infectious disease.
But this is said nowadays, you know, that we have a model for COVID-19, we have a model for measles, we have this and that.
So, and if you check these publications, you will see that they are a completely A. Antiscientific, because no controls, and B. That the treatment of the animals, injecting large amounts of liquid into the brain, inside the ear, inside the eye, with a tube inside your lungs, that the conditions of the experiments themselves are causing the disease.
It's easy like this.
So that was the seven points.
Okay.
Stefan, tell us your website so that people can find out more.
The website is Wissenschaft Blues with double F. Probably you spell it.
Yeah, we'll put it on the show notes.
And probably I think soon there is going to a translation of the red card for Corona, right?
This is a web page where I have the seven points inside.
I hope soon there is going to be a book published or our book in German, Corona, further into chaos or a chance for everybody that this is going to be in English as well.
And anyway, I mean, you have such a lot of information attracted in your work.
I mean, the importance of nutrition and all those things.
There's such a lot of information out there and you contributed a lot.
I think the bottom line here, Stefan, if you agree, is that the chemistry and the structure follows consciousness, not the other way around.
That's it, and that's the most important thing.
When you see the work of Hamer, he had printed out a big tabella where you'll find, according to all kinds of tissues, to the four tissues we have, and you'll find every piece of organ or skin, you know, what may happen here or there.
And if you see it and you turn it into the positive, that not a trauma is acting, which he terms a biological conflict, but you turn it into its function, then you see the building map of God, of your body.
I mean, how it's meant.
And it's immediately, it's a proof that when everything has its consciousness at its place and inside your, then of course it had its consciousness inside the whole context.
Yeah, because we don't start and end where we are visibly be seen because we have to breathe and we have, this is the energy which comes into us, you know, and it's not only coming from the sun, we are connected with everything.
And I mean, this is Probably the most important information, for me it was the most important thing, that I could get rid of this atom theory, living in the nowhere, in the vacuum, you know, and so this is just not true.
We are living in the ether and the substance water is building, when building a surface, this thin lining, this is its own substance on its own and that's the substance our tissue are This substance creates everything and even all the molecules and elements and they go back into this substance.
And this is the reason that the stronger we are in the mind, the stronger we can deal with toxins and with everything.
I mean, look into the prisons where people are not well nourished and the ones who have a clear mind, a clear belief and they go out strong, upright and healthy, no teeth, laughs, you know.
So those are the proofs that the consciousness, you know.
And of course, when the matter is there, our body, we have to fulfill its own rules, you know, the blood streaming, the oxygen, the flow of energy and information and being connected with it.
And the one who is happy, who has his belief That he's wanted and that he's part of a thing, you know, because I think the most cruel thing in life is that you really believe or you're afraid that you are a product of, by accident.
And then if you disintegrate, nothing will rest.
And this, this thing which Friedrich Nietzsche was Writing down step by step what this makes out of a human being and out of him, driving him directly into madness.
This is the main source, I think, the main reason why humankind is so mad, why they are so greedy, why they want to prove themselves, you know, in their short lifetime to become rich, to be powerful, to compensate this, you know, This incredible notions.
It's a misconception.
It's a huge misconception.
It's a huge misconception and in our culture it's originated some 2500 years ago and we have a
chance now to to reverse it. Thanks to all things. Stefan, okay we're gonna do this again someday.
And we're gonna.
And...
As often as needed, as often as wanted.
I thank you very much for your dedication, for your students, for your friends, for your colleagues.
Stephan, thank you.
Everybody read, go to Stephan's website, read the papers.
They're amazing.
And Stephan, thank you very much.
And yeah, we'll be in touch.
Thank you, Tom.
Thank you.
▲
Export Selection