A couple of weeks ago, I was given the opportunity to present some of my research to a group of scientists, that included several virologists. The core hypothesis that is presented could be summed up as follows; the plethora of seemingly disparate ‘diseases’ are in fact varying symptoms of poisoning. There is one poison in particular, arsenic, that we have been able to link back to just about every ‘disease’ known to us. Virology can essentially be thought of as a subset of toxicology.
Hi Seb, I used to follow you on Twitter before I get permanently banned (4x accounts!).
I've listened to probably 30 minutes of this now, skipping around to various points. But I'm having trouble discerning exactly what your thesis is.
Can you summarize in a couple of paragraphs here how you and Caroline propose "revising" Germ Theory?
First of all, as Alec Zeck pointed out when he spoke to Doctors for COVID Ethics last month, "Germ Theory" is really just a (failed) hypothesis. It cannot rise to the status of a "Theory" until the basic hypothesis has been shown, vie experimental data, to be a predictive model and is thus likely correct. This is impossible, as the independent variable, the alleged "virus" has never been shown to exist.
The so-called Virology is one big scam, built on lies and manipulation, to make people sick again and again with toxic injections until death, to help the pharma lobby and all who are involved with shares to profit - and that is clearly criminal!!!! Instead of writing such a mess, you can also present and explain it quite simply, if you really understand something about it - after 40 years(until retirement) in this profession with years of belief in something that never existed up to the realization of the clear fraud with everything that goes with it, I know 100% what I am writing about!!!! You confuse people with something completely nonsensical and alien to science, that has absolutely NO basis!
Have you ever tried using hair mineral analysis to find evidence of arsenic or mercury in any of the individuals who you suspect have symptoms of toxic poisoning ? The test may cost around $200 but the results can be interesting.
Seb, if you meet with the virologists again, or whatever even if you don't, check out microvesicles.org. You can see a whole database of various vesicles. The scary thing is they are using them as biomarkers for disease, and that's going to be a sketchy proposition. Another one germ, one disease model. The reason it is sketchy is because the body and nature are pleomorphic. We can't have standardized databases and Lanka pointed this out with the human genome project.
But the point is, all of those exosomes have been said to be isolated. Only viruses do not follow the same method, as Tom noted, and have not been similarly "isolated". (Of course they are not fully isolated because they admit they still get smaller vesicles in with the larger.) But as stated, those should work, if viruses exist.
But the viros say, well we don't have enough if we do it that way. They can't find them. Well then you don't have a virulent pathogen that replicates as is said. There would be tons of them.
Wow, none other than Dr. Tom Cowan did a commentary on this today!
(I wonder how he found this? I didn't send it to anyone)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/uMmYoHuLQ3Ps/
I think you'll enjoy it, Seb.
He does raise some of the same points that I was making.
But he's very gentle and polite. :)
Hi Seb, I used to follow you on Twitter before I get permanently banned (4x accounts!).
I've listened to probably 30 minutes of this now, skipping around to various points. But I'm having trouble discerning exactly what your thesis is.
Can you summarize in a couple of paragraphs here how you and Caroline propose "revising" Germ Theory?
First of all, as Alec Zeck pointed out when he spoke to Doctors for COVID Ethics last month, "Germ Theory" is really just a (failed) hypothesis. It cannot rise to the status of a "Theory" until the basic hypothesis has been shown, vie experimental data, to be a predictive model and is thus likely correct. This is impossible, as the independent variable, the alleged "virus" has never been shown to exist.
Thanks,
BH
https://rumble.com/v1yx1dk-alec-zeck.html
To my way of thinking, that's like suggesting that we revise Geocentrism.
I would suggest that bad ideas should be discarded, not revised.
The so-called Virology is one big scam, built on lies and manipulation, to make people sick again and again with toxic injections until death, to help the pharma lobby and all who are involved with shares to profit - and that is clearly criminal!!!! Instead of writing such a mess, you can also present and explain it quite simply, if you really understand something about it - after 40 years(until retirement) in this profession with years of belief in something that never existed up to the realization of the clear fraud with everything that goes with it, I know 100% what I am writing about!!!! You confuse people with something completely nonsensical and alien to science, that has absolutely NO basis!
https://maryann255.substack.com/p/the-truth-is-always-on-the-other-66c
Have you ever tried using hair mineral analysis to find evidence of arsenic or mercury in any of the individuals who you suspect have symptoms of toxic poisoning ? The test may cost around $200 but the results can be interesting.
Seb, if you meet with the virologists again, or whatever even if you don't, check out microvesicles.org. You can see a whole database of various vesicles. The scary thing is they are using them as biomarkers for disease, and that's going to be a sketchy proposition. Another one germ, one disease model. The reason it is sketchy is because the body and nature are pleomorphic. We can't have standardized databases and Lanka pointed this out with the human genome project.
But the point is, all of those exosomes have been said to be isolated. Only viruses do not follow the same method, as Tom noted, and have not been similarly "isolated". (Of course they are not fully isolated because they admit they still get smaller vesicles in with the larger.) But as stated, those should work, if viruses exist.
But the viros say, well we don't have enough if we do it that way. They can't find them. Well then you don't have a virulent pathogen that replicates as is said. There would be tons of them.