| Time | Text |
|---|---|
|
Proving the Virus Existence
00:10:45
|
|
| Okay, welcome everybody. | |
| Today, June 26, 2024, another Wednesday webinar. | |
| Today we're definitely going to be doing questions and answers since I keep promising to do those and we've, people are kindly sending in a number of questions so it seems only fair to get to them. | |
| Not sure that there's any announcements. | |
| I just posted a interview with Kelly Brogan, which everybody should check out. | |
| And she's doing a, I think, a free masterclass tomorrow night, Thursday night. | |
| So you may have a chance to sign up for that. | |
| And the only other thing I wanted to say before I got to the questions is, There's the good news is we're getting a lot more activity. | |
| I've been saying this for a while on the no virus virus debate and a lot more people are weighing in on it. | |
| I mostly hear about these things. | |
| I must admit I don't tend to read the whole articles or watch the videos. | |
| It's just hard for me to sit through most of them, but Anyways, I'm sure you'll see them. | |
| Michael Palmer wrote another rebuttal, and apparently he doesn't believe in one of the fundamental laws of life, which is, if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging. | |
| I think everybody should remember that. | |
| I try to remember that. | |
| But apparently he doesn't believe in that, so he keeps digging a further hole. | |
| I think Drs. | |
| Tenpenny and Pilevski weighed in, and I think one of the ways of describing a lot of what you'll read and hear is actually an interesting word, which I had to look up to get the exact meaning of, but I've heard it a lot. | |
| It's a variation on the W.C. | |
| Fields quote, that if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. | |
| And the word is sophistry. | |
| So I did look up what that word means, because I wasn't sure. | |
| And it said, subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning. | |
| And that's pretty much describes exactly what you'll hear from most of the people who are trying to fight back. | |
| What's so interesting about it is they don't seem to realize that This is a tremendous gift to the perpetrators of this fraud and the whole flandemic sort of thing, because as soon as we get rid of the virus argument, including the lab-created and lab-engineered nonsense and all that, | |
| We end up in two places. | |
| One is a whole lot less fear of what your neighbor or friend or crowds are going to do for you because you realize there's no virus to pass between people. | |
| So you start living life a lot less fearful, which then improves your health and everybody gets better from that. | |
| The second thing is at some point people will start to investigate what actually does make people sick and there is a possibility then that that actually leads to a much saner and healthier and better world because people will stop doing the things which are actually making them sick and actually making people around the world sick | |
| Which has nothing to do with these imaginary viruses. | |
| I just wanted to give an example of one of these sophistry type arguments. | |
| I don't have the quote here to show you, but you can probably take my word for it or go look it up. | |
| It had to do with the idea that you can't prove anything in science. | |
| And so they criticism of us, us being the no virus people is we have this extraordinary, extraordinary high, like burden of proof that we're putting on the virus people. | |
| And so because of that, and because you can't actually prove anything in science, they say that they we will never be satisfied. | |
| And you can never prove this one way or another. | |
| So it becomes just an irrational, ridiculous argument. | |
| That, of course, has nothing to do with what we're saying. | |
| We all realize and I certainly realize that you cannot prove something doesn't exist, because if somebody ends up finding it or proving it does at some point you would have been proven wrong. | |
| But what you can do. | |
| And what it is that we're doing is we can investigate the claim, for instance, that the virologists say that when you get a cytopathic effect, CPE, in a cell culture, that proves there was a virus in the sample. | |
| That's what they say. | |
| In fact, that is how they proved For decades that there was a virus, they put an unpurified sample, or actually partially purified, they never put an actual virus on a cell culture, and then did it without the virus and see if you got a cytopathic effect. | |
| Now we have proven, and there's many, many examples in the literature, That you get a cytopathic effect even without a sample and even without putting something on which could contain a virus. | |
| So we have disproven that that procedure proves there is a virus. | |
| And then the reality is, if that's what you're going to claim is the proof of the existence, And that is clearly, and I would think even at this point, everybody agrees. | |
| Now, even the virologists say, right, well, sometimes you have viruses that they don't cause CPE. | |
| So it turns out, on the one hand, they say, you get a cytopathic effect, that proves there's a virus. | |
| And then they turn around and say, or if you don't get a cytopathic effect, that proves there was a virus that was harmless, and it was just living happily in the cells. | |
| And that's basically sophistry nonsense. | |
| sense. | |
| So, that has been disproven. | |
| Now, that means you have to come up with some other way to try to prove that that thing exists. | |
| And they did, actually. | |
| So with HIV, they said, well, viruses, HIV, has different proteins than the lymphocyte that it infects. | |
| Let me just be clear about that. | |
| You got this lymphocyte—it's a kind of white blood cell—it's in your body, and they say this person's T lymphocytes are infected with HIV, and the HIV has different proteins than the T lymphocyte. | |
| Obviously, because it's a different organism, right? | |
| So it's got to have proteins which are unique to HIV. | |
| So that's the claim. | |
| So then you do a study. | |
| This was the Gelderblum study. | |
| You do an electrophoresis. | |
| In other words, you examine all of the proteins in an infected T lymphocyte. | |
| You get, I think the number was 28 proteins, right? | |
| So those are the proteins that were from, allegedly, the T lymphocyte and the HIV. | |
| Okay? | |
| So then you do a T lymphocyte that couldn't possibly be infected with HIV, and you do the same procedure, and lo and behold, you get the same 28 proteins. | |
| Now that's a very easy thing to sort out if you're willing to think, which means that all of those 28 proteins came from the T lymphocyte. | |
| There was no HIV proteins. | |
| There are no proteins that are unique. | |
| Whether they're in different ratios, that has no relevance because obviously one is in a sick person and one is in a well person, so one could imagine they have different proteins, but there are no HIV proteins. | |
| And if there are no HIV proteins, then it's not a distinct organism. | |
| In other words, it's not different from the T lymphocyte, which means it's not there. | |
| Which means you've disproven that as a method of claiming the virus exists. | |
| And so that's what we mean by proving things. | |
| And they turn that around using sophistry to Try to confuse you so that you don't think in a normal way. | |
| And as I keep saying, that's because most doctors and scientists seem to have a thought disorder, which I think we should have a new syndrome called Medical School Acquired Thought Disorder. | |
|
Why Some Don't Care
00:04:03
|
|
| could be also, there's a variation of it, or a variant of this, which is called PhD program acquired thought disorder. | |
| And that is contagious, and it is rampant in our system. | |
| And so a lot of people have come down with that disease. | |
| And it's pretty easy to spot if you're just willing to take a few minutes to actually think. | |
| Okay, hopefully that's clear. | |
| So you'll know you can get a good laugh when you read and watch these different people trying to demonstrate their knowledge of virology. | |
| One thing I forgot to say last time. | |
| Because I forgot to emphasize, there is a third reason why people get this wrong. | |
| So the first two I outlined, one is that they have one of these thought disorders that I just outlined, the medical school or PhD program acquired thought disorder. | |
| So that's the common one. | |
| And most people have a similar kind of thought disorder where they're not able to actually think through the process. | |
| So that's the most common reason why people get this wrong. | |
| And then there is a very few, a very minor subset of people who are have nefarious interests so they're basically lying and they have different financial interests or power interests or something and i don't think that happens very much but it is possible and it probably does happen some | |
| there is a third reason which i forgot to emphasize which i would say is a legitimate reason which is that you just don't care and this is common For instance, I've said this many times, like, I know nothing about car engines and carburetors. | |
| In fact, truth be told, I don't even know whether modern cars have carburetors, or whether somehow that's an old-fashioned engine technology which has gone by the wayside, and modern cars don't even have carburetors. | |
| Frankly, I don't know. | |
| And mostly, if somebody tried to explain it to me, I would probably kind of go blank. | |
| Because frankly, I don't really give a damn about carburetors, and I don't really give a damn about cars. | |
| I've only in my life chosen cars because I could afford them, they were reliable, and got me where I wanted to go in reasonable comfort. | |
| And further than that, I didn't have any particular interest in cars. | |
| Fair enough. | |
| We all have subjects like that. | |
| The point, though, that I want to make is you are never going to hear me make public criticism or arguments about for or against the existence or the function of carburetors. | |
| I'm not going to do that because I know I don't know anything about it, and that's fair enough as long as you just don't weigh in on it. | |
| So I don't know why these people who don't actually take the effort and time to look into it, they could just say they just don't care. | |
| Whether it's viruses or not, what difference does it make? | |
| I mean, I don't agree. | |
| If you're a medical doctor, it seems like you ought to know that, but you know, fair enough. | |
| If you don't want to know, you don't want to know. | |
| Just don't weigh in on it and pretend you're writing these scholarly papers about Or videos about critical thinking and arguments for the viruses, because you just don't know. | |