If they are using PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2, they are only detecting fragments of what they purport the genome is (2 or 3 genes). Is there any evidence that they have detected a full intact particle of SARS-CoV-2?
As for being an utter waste of time, if there are no viruses, a lot of issues will no longer be relevant. That is worth knowing the truth.
If they are using PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2, they are only detecting fragments of what they purport the genome is (2 or 3 genes). Is there any evidence that they have detected a full intact particle of SARS-CoV-2?
As for being an utter waste of time, if there are no viruses, a lot of issues will no longer be relevant. That is worth knowing the truth.
PCR is utterly bogus as a test for infectious diseases. Its inventor, the late Kary Mullis, warned of that, when he saw that this manufacturing technique was being misused. I wrote about that here:
If people waste time trying to prove or disprove existence of a virus, enormous undertakings to try to establish exhaustive proof one way or the other of that - which was utterly irrelevant to COVID tyranny rollout - then valuable time and energy will be wasted while our human rights are violated.
COVID is about tyranny, and how much a sheep-like populace will accept. That's it. That's the important topic.
Tyranny is an important topic. The reason for the tyranny is also an important topic. It could be argued that if they didn't use health as a reason they could use something else. True, but health is something that affects everyone, that is why it is such an important topic. If infectious disease is accepted as not real, then they have lost one major money and control funnel. War is good for business. Disease and viruses are good for business.
If they lose viruses as an enemy they have far less to work with in terms of terrorizing every single individual. The could move on to money or food but that threatens survival and is likely impossible to keep a lid on. Tests, masks, lockdowns and quackcination can all continue or at least be attempted as long as they have the enemy of a virus to fight.
I do see your point, and should have clarified that I do, which I believe is:
If viruses don't exist, then the entire pretext of the current tyranny crumbles to dust.
However, my points are:
1) Proving that viruses either definitely do or don't exist is exhausting labor, a huge distraction, and may be impossible, even with state of the art microscopy, and more importantly:
2) It didn't have to be viruses that served as a pretext for tyranny. It could have been contact with allegedly poisonous cockroach exoskeleton, or the barbs on the back of cricket legs, or antbites, or sunlight, or inhaling nitrogen, (80% of air) or anything that could be weaponized to the point of mass formation, to get the sheep running trembling into lockdown and self-suffocation.
And nobody denies that roaches, crickets, ants, nitrogen or sunlight exist.
1) I don't see why it is exhausting. If they have the tech to make an mRNA strand and put it in a quackcine, I don't understand how they can not detect such as well.
2) I don't think using insects or sunlight will work anywhere near as well as proposing contagious disease. The data already shows there is no pandemic, it will be very hard to sell a story based on insects, nitrogen or sunlight.
Okay, but antibiotic-resistant bacteria can be as easily blamed as a virus. Cholera wiped out NYC in the 1840's, far more devastating than any virus. Scarlet fever, bubonic plague were also far more devastating than any virus. All bacterial. Must we also deny the existence of bacteria?
You say people will not be fooled by sunlight or nitrogen or insect proteins, but a nothing burger virus, SARS-CoV-2, with a 99.85% survival rate (IFR = 0.015%, had the.idiots all masking up and ducking under their furniture. So any scam could fool them.
I respect your viewpoint by the way, just disagreeing.
No justification to deny the existence of bacteria. They can easily be proven to exist, but they have not been blamed for any mass illness in the last few decades. We already have antibiotics, so quackcination would not be valid. If someone had what was determined to be a bacterial infection (the Terrain Model adherents may dispute that), but regardless, one could just take the antibiotics, case closed.
They could try a bacterial pandemic, but I don't think many would buy it as we already have proven medicine that is effective with side effects that should be able to be remedied with probiotics.
You are right, they could try something else and see if the sheep go for it, but I think the probability of success will be quite low.
The fear of viruses has a long history and they are trying to squeeze it for every last drop.
The end is here. As the author says, Do Not Comply. I will add, do not believe any virus or contagion story they come up with and they will lose that angle with which to abuse us.
Exactly. Viruses are way more likely to exist than not. It's practically indisputable. As I've said many times to virus deniers, explain why measles rash looks very different from shingles rash, looks very different than mumps. They have no answer, except, 'Well, that must be some pollutant,' but they never name the specific pollutants.
Sure, it would be convenient for all COVID -related tyranny to miraculously disappear if you could prove viruses don't exist. But, for better or worse, that contradicts reality. The tyranny itself is the problem, NOT this very easily defeated viral infection.
If they are using PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2, they are only detecting fragments of what they purport the genome is (2 or 3 genes). Is there any evidence that they have detected a full intact particle of SARS-CoV-2?
As for being an utter waste of time, if there are no viruses, a lot of issues will no longer be relevant. That is worth knowing the truth.
PCR is utterly bogus as a test for infectious diseases. Its inventor, the late Kary Mullis, warned of that, when he saw that this manufacturing technique was being misused. I wrote about that here:
https://pdmj.org/papers/is_there_a_pandemic
If people waste time trying to prove or disprove existence of a virus, enormous undertakings to try to establish exhaustive proof one way or the other of that - which was utterly irrelevant to COVID tyranny rollout - then valuable time and energy will be wasted while our human rights are violated.
COVID is about tyranny, and how much a sheep-like populace will accept. That's it. That's the important topic.
Tyranny is an important topic. The reason for the tyranny is also an important topic. It could be argued that if they didn't use health as a reason they could use something else. True, but health is something that affects everyone, that is why it is such an important topic. If infectious disease is accepted as not real, then they have lost one major money and control funnel. War is good for business. Disease and viruses are good for business.
If they lose viruses as an enemy they have far less to work with in terms of terrorizing every single individual. The could move on to money or food but that threatens survival and is likely impossible to keep a lid on. Tests, masks, lockdowns and quackcination can all continue or at least be attempted as long as they have the enemy of a virus to fight.
I do see your point, and should have clarified that I do, which I believe is:
If viruses don't exist, then the entire pretext of the current tyranny crumbles to dust.
However, my points are:
1) Proving that viruses either definitely do or don't exist is exhausting labor, a huge distraction, and may be impossible, even with state of the art microscopy, and more importantly:
2) It didn't have to be viruses that served as a pretext for tyranny. It could have been contact with allegedly poisonous cockroach exoskeleton, or the barbs on the back of cricket legs, or antbites, or sunlight, or inhaling nitrogen, (80% of air) or anything that could be weaponized to the point of mass formation, to get the sheep running trembling into lockdown and self-suffocation.
And nobody denies that roaches, crickets, ants, nitrogen or sunlight exist.
1) I don't see why it is exhausting. If they have the tech to make an mRNA strand and put it in a quackcine, I don't understand how they can not detect such as well.
2) I don't think using insects or sunlight will work anywhere near as well as proposing contagious disease. The data already shows there is no pandemic, it will be very hard to sell a story based on insects, nitrogen or sunlight.
The viruses are contagious story must be discarded or we will just keep getting more of things like this: https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/hundreds-may-be-infected-with-polio-virus-nys-top-doctor-says-urging-vaccinations/3811499/
Okay, but antibiotic-resistant bacteria can be as easily blamed as a virus. Cholera wiped out NYC in the 1840's, far more devastating than any virus. Scarlet fever, bubonic plague were also far more devastating than any virus. All bacterial. Must we also deny the existence of bacteria?
You say people will not be fooled by sunlight or nitrogen or insect proteins, but a nothing burger virus, SARS-CoV-2, with a 99.85% survival rate (IFR = 0.015%, had the.idiots all masking up and ducking under their furniture. So any scam could fool them.
I respect your viewpoint by the way, just disagreeing.
No justification to deny the existence of bacteria. They can easily be proven to exist, but they have not been blamed for any mass illness in the last few decades. We already have antibiotics, so quackcination would not be valid. If someone had what was determined to be a bacterial infection (the Terrain Model adherents may dispute that), but regardless, one could just take the antibiotics, case closed.
They could try a bacterial pandemic, but I don't think many would buy it as we already have proven medicine that is effective with side effects that should be able to be remedied with probiotics.
You are right, they could try something else and see if the sheep go for it, but I think the probability of success will be quite low.
The fear of viruses has a long history and they are trying to squeeze it for every last drop.
The end is here. As the author says, Do Not Comply. I will add, do not believe any virus or contagion story they come up with and they will lose that angle with which to abuse us.
Exactly. Viruses are way more likely to exist than not. It's practically indisputable. As I've said many times to virus deniers, explain why measles rash looks very different from shingles rash, looks very different than mumps. They have no answer, except, 'Well, that must be some pollutant,' but they never name the specific pollutants.
Sure, it would be convenient for all COVID -related tyranny to miraculously disappear if you could prove viruses don't exist. But, for better or worse, that contradicts reality. The tyranny itself is the problem, NOT this very easily defeated viral infection.