I opened that video with Tom and Mark. I've seen it before. It did make me laugh because I laugh as soon as I see Tom's face. I know he is going to make me laugh, maybe that's a warmup?
Anyway there is a comment on it that says that Tom and Mark buy into flat earth. No reference was provided. I asked for one.
I don't argue with flat earthers because it's a waste of my time but I'm concerned about that comment.
I studied geodesy in school, and I've applied it wearing many hats from surveyor to a designer of air traffic control systems. The earth is not flat. For Tom and Mark I would make an effort.
Eric Coppolino did a good run on it. He tends to throw logical fallacies in, which he should not do, but I don't think he did it on that one.
It's a favourite slur of politicians to call any scientific dissenter a "flat Earther". Mark never said anything like that.
For people who do believe that the Earth is flat, I take a ball and a flashlight and demonstrate how time zones would be impossible if the Earth was flat.
More important than the geometry of the earth (sphere of course), is the plethora of agitators that jump on any anti-flat earth comment-often quoting the bible. They are aggressive, unreasonable, and evasive when cornered. Bible believing normal people don't usually act like this so these agitators are not normal organic commenters. It seems almost like they have an app that rings them to go out and agitprop those comment sections, perhaps AI bots even.
Shh, you don't want to use logic in the fairy tale world that loves to invent things that just adds to the pool of bullshit theories 😂
Occam's razor is dead when it comes to academia as soon as the snake oil salesmen took over.
Same with physics, quantum theory is another stupid invention based on bad methods and the worst assumption of all: that a detector of photons uses no energy and is "invisible". 😂 The famous double slit experiment is total hokum.
Wow! One belief system after another is being shattered in our understanding of our reality. Part of me is terrified while another part of me is ecstatic. Anything that gets us closer to the truth is always welcome. 😊💗
There were many MM experiments, they only want to push the one that did not seem to find Aether. This is a long read but they are all in here, most all find Aether exists.
It may be my imagination, but virologists seem to be operating not unlike witch doctors. They occasionally cure things because the human body is stronger than the disease being fought. Or, the disease is dead, but so is the patient. But, that's OK because the funding is still available.
Thank you for the Mark you are both leaving.Just as the Perth Group and Lanka, against all odds, left their legacy, you have already managed with the same style of self-demand and professionalism to give strength and security to thousands of dispersed minds that internally had some of this knowledge but who felt isolated and still afraid to go public.
Thank you both for giving us the security to be able to transmit the message to our children so that they can do the same and live without that fear.
A negative control experiment or a mock infection is not the only type of control experiment that can be performed. It probably provides the most clarity but it is not the only type of control experiment that is valid.
Lanka's control experiments were not negative control experiments , why then do we call his experiments control experiments? Are Lanka's experiments not valid controls experiments ?
There is a difference between controlling variables and control experiments that run alongside the experiment.
True, it depends on the experiment run which controls are required. If one is testing the toxic effect of media components on cells in a cytopathic effect experiment then no "mock-infected" control is required as "infection" is not being tested. But in an experiment that supposedly tests the effect of a "virus," as Dr. Mark is describing, then a "mock-infection" negative control is required, that being a sample which is identical to the isolated "virus" sample (the independent variable) except lacking the "virus." However, as Dr. Mark points out, the supposed "mock-infection" control is impossible as no "virus" has ever been isolated.
Yes Mia, you are correct. I would call Lanka's experiments a "validation study" of the cell-culture procedure that included low-dose (Concentration) of antibiotic as base control (indeed not a negative or mock), Simply, he showed that the greater doses and types of antibiotics and lower the nutrition added to the medium (the independent variable), the faster the cell death (the dependent variable) was seen.
Since virologists are using these cytotoxic cell cultures to study the cytotoxicity of patient fluids they say have a virus in them (though unproven). Lanka has shown that the cell-culture procedure used in this way is invalid to find any kind of cytotox as a characteristic of the patient sample, and to begin with is not about a virus as patient fluid is not a confirmed purified virus.
Right. Give it a name. You could just frame it like this so people don't have to wade through the jargon.
Experiment 1 shows: Put sick snot (sample) in a dish of various poisons and the cell degrades and makes particles that you can take pictures of if you want.
Experiment 2 ("control") shows: A cell in a dish of (same) various poisons degrades and makes particle debris even with out the sick snot.
What have you shown us, Dr. Labcoat? If you poison and starve a cell, it breaks down and dies. You don't need sick snot.
What do these experiments have to do with a "virus"? The answer is nothing. You are designing experiments that are supposed to work backwards, like reverse engineering. It has nothing to do with whatever you are purporting to "find". Go find it in nature first. Then come up with an experiment that isn't stupid. The cell culture should have been scrapped the minute it originally hit the white board. We all are currently well aware that cell cultures kill cells.
But Mark and Sam I object...here is a clear photo of a virus specifically the hPIV-3 virus, being killed, I should probably say mortally wounded, using this new and (deadly to virus's ) silicone pad with these little spikes on it. Think of the possibilities. They can save the planet and become billionaires at the same time. That is where all the big money comes from, saving lives and helping people. I am thinking Noble Prize.....
how can you kill something that is'nt live in the first place?,virus (old latin word for poison), when cells are poisoned by all kinds of chemicals in our water,air,food,EMF'S,etc, the body calls on strong solvents to clean it up,it also raises our temperature to do this,of course it makes us feel ill .the toxins pushed out ,they call viruses.
Well this could be bad for the bottom line......imagine selling these silicone " virus traps " by telling your government that it kills the virus when the virus is already dead. What government would pay for silicone masks to be worn by the general population if they didn't really work. Shocking. Simply shocking.
The fact they have no control group in " virus" experiments is covered up by a green monkey haha
Even up to convid the virologists were saying the "corona viruses"(essentially what they found was just dna/rna they can sequence with software like NextGen into unlimited digital "viruses) were found in healthy people.
I look forward to reading your paper Sam. The comments are also a delight, been thinking with gratitude about damage to the hippocampus resulting in a broken bullshit detector. Roughly translated I imagine this refers to the ability to discern ? And explains so much.
A pandemic in a pre-germ-theory past included or was characterised as a spread of fear of contagion that became itself contagious. "Hysteria" is not much given focus in a frame that seeks to mask out or subsume psychic and spiritual being to models of material determination - that are guarded, mediated and controlled by an elite 'priesthood' from a 'black box' of definitions by which to interject control as mind-training or conditioning.
Note our original human response to sickness was 'theurgical' - ie: within a felt participation of spirits or powers that modernity assigns to magical, mythical or religious superstitions.
Retribution and curse would be offset or protected against by intercessions of various kinds of which pharmakon was but one - and in which the 'drug' was contextualised by its intent, such as to be prepared, administered or participated in as a ritual of cultural or spiritual identity.
(See Pharmakon by Michael A Rinella)
Rene Girard came to a transformative understanding of human social order by recognising the pattern of scapegoating - a form of Pharmakon by which to offset an imbalanced accumulation of conflict manifesting as sickness - on any level both inner or outer 'disorder'. This operates what A Course in Miracles calls the redistribution of psychic energies - under narratives that protect a sense of 'control' running scarcity & limitation.
I sketch out the above to indicate that the 'pathological mindset' is itself a result of Terrain - but principally of a dislocation or disconnection-fear arising from an imbalanced or split mind - such as drives our development of technologised 'progress' to ever deeper defence against life framed in suspicion, treachery and threat to a stranger in a strange world.
The need for 'masking defences' runs deeper than any rational process of a mind set of defence against reliving otherwise masked out trauma.
So as I tweeted yesterday:
If we take away a baby's toy (even an inappropriately grabbed object) we meet reaction of denial & deprivation.
Give something else first.
Living vital function is its own field of organism-terrain as exchange & rebalancing.
Integrality is un-susceptible/resilient to disintegration
Well said. In cosmology, the event horizon of the black hole is actually nonsense, too - including the black hole.
1. For a black hole to form as the result of a collapsed star, the star would had to have been a gas. But a gas has no form. The star, then, would had to have been condensed matter, but condensed matter cannot collapse due to its incompressibility.
2. Black holes, by definition, are spatially infinite and eternal. The universe, however, is allegedly the result of the Big Bang; but the Big Bang, having been the beginning, is finite. Infinity and finitude are mutually exclusive. Therefore, black holes cannot exist in a Big Bang universe.
3. Nothing can escape a black hole it is alleged, not even light, yet the escape speed of a black hole is the speed of light. Can light escape or can it not escape?
4. Empirically, black holes have never been proven to exist. The source of black hole theory is purely mathematical. Here, then, is a very brief paper by astrophysics researcher Stephen Crothers which proves this to be the case:
Astrophysics is in a mess. For decades, cosmologists have been chasing research grants where they’ve so often used Einstein’s name as a cash cow for funding. Einstein’s GR for example is riddled with mathematical errors, some of which can be seen in this 2 page paper by the same author, Australian mathematician Stephen Crothers. Einstein was not particularly smart at all.
The work that you good folks are doing is of inestimable value!
The sooner a critical mass of people are awakened to the truth, the better.
The whole medical paradigm needs to be overhauled and replaced with evidence-based science, where dissenting voices are welcomed and engaged with, not vilified and cancelled.
And controlling bodies should have no conflicts of interest.
Sorry, the link for the paper is here: https://drsambailey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Virologys-Event-Horizon.pdf
Hi Sam!
I opened that video with Tom and Mark. I've seen it before. It did make me laugh because I laugh as soon as I see Tom's face. I know he is going to make me laugh, maybe that's a warmup?
Anyway there is a comment on it that says that Tom and Mark buy into flat earth. No reference was provided. I asked for one.
I don't argue with flat earthers because it's a waste of my time but I'm concerned about that comment.
I studied geodesy in school, and I've applied it wearing many hats from surveyor to a designer of air traffic control systems. The earth is not flat. For Tom and Mark I would make an effort.
Eric Coppolino did a good run on it. He tends to throw logical fallacies in, which he should not do, but I don't think he did it on that one.
Mark has never made a comment remotely suggesting flat earth.
I reckon that damaging credibility with throw away online comments is just too easy. Building it is a whole other ball game.
It's a favourite slur of politicians to call any scientific dissenter a "flat Earther". Mark never said anything like that.
For people who do believe that the Earth is flat, I take a ball and a flashlight and demonstrate how time zones would be impossible if the Earth was flat.
It's irrefutable and elegant in its simplicity!
LOL! I think you underestimate them. I haven't heard the conspiracy that is inherent in time zones but I'll bet they have one.
Sure dude, as you wish.
More important than the geometry of the earth (sphere of course), is the plethora of agitators that jump on any anti-flat earth comment-often quoting the bible. They are aggressive, unreasonable, and evasive when cornered. Bible believing normal people don't usually act like this so these agitators are not normal organic commenters. It seems almost like they have an app that rings them to go out and agitprop those comment sections, perhaps AI bots even.
Like I said, a waste of my time.
Yes, please find a rocket to take you outside the dome stat.
You just confused me 😳
Sorry, the translation actually is sphere, not circle.
"By him who sits enthroned above the earth’s sphere,
to whom its inhabitants are as grasshoppers,
who suspends the heavens like a canopy,
stretching them out as a tent to dwell in."
Isaiah 40:22
Mine is from the Hebrew.
Dr Bailey - maybe just update the link in the article?
Greetings from South Africa and a Jerm Warfare member...
thank you
Shh, you don't want to use logic in the fairy tale world that loves to invent things that just adds to the pool of bullshit theories 😂
Occam's razor is dead when it comes to academia as soon as the snake oil salesmen took over.
Same with physics, quantum theory is another stupid invention based on bad methods and the worst assumption of all: that a detector of photons uses no energy and is "invisible". 😂 The famous double slit experiment is total hokum.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkdAkAC4ItcHNLDIK9ORydQl_Ik6GJ0bD
And here's an interesting 4 min blurb of how physics and modern science turned into fantasy, fueled by math and imagination.
https://youtu.be/2KnPBg-tanE
Wow! One belief system after another is being shattered in our understanding of our reality. Part of me is terrified while another part of me is ecstatic. Anything that gets us closer to the truth is always welcome. 😊💗
There were many MM experiments, they only want to push the one that did not seem to find Aether. This is a long read but they are all in here, most all find Aether exists.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341219567_The_Aether
It may be my imagination, but virologists seem to be operating not unlike witch doctors. They occasionally cure things because the human body is stronger than the disease being fought. Or, the disease is dead, but so is the patient. But, that's OK because the funding is still available.
What do you have against witch doctors?
Thank you for the Mark you are both leaving.Just as the Perth Group and Lanka, against all odds, left their legacy, you have already managed with the same style of self-demand and professionalism to give strength and security to thousands of dispersed minds that internally had some of this knowledge but who felt isolated and still afraid to go public.
Thank you both for giving us the security to be able to transmit the message to our children so that they can do the same and live without that fear.
Thank you,
Misha from gamzuletova.org
Keep up the great work!
This video explains the problem with "peer review" - https://rumble.com/v4bq4r0-911-and-the-flawed-peer-review-process.html
The battle you are fighting is exactly the same this 9/11 scientist has been fighting for the last 14 years!
Wikipedia's block listed 9/11 scientist.
Cancelled by Wikipedia for 14 years and counting.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/wikipedias-block-listed-911-scientist
Wikipedia is useful for nailing down the official narrative but not much else.
And in a way, the government's approved counter narrative to steer people away from the truth. You should read my article...
Link?
Wikipedia's block listed 9/11 scientist.
Cancelled by Wikipedia for 14 years and counting.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/wikipedias-block-listed-911-scientist
I commented there. There is no doubt in my mind.
A negative control experiment or a mock infection is not the only type of control experiment that can be performed. It probably provides the most clarity but it is not the only type of control experiment that is valid.
Lanka's control experiments were not negative control experiments , why then do we call his experiments control experiments? Are Lanka's experiments not valid controls experiments ?
There is a difference between controlling variables and control experiments that run alongside the experiment.
True, it depends on the experiment run which controls are required. If one is testing the toxic effect of media components on cells in a cytopathic effect experiment then no "mock-infected" control is required as "infection" is not being tested. But in an experiment that supposedly tests the effect of a "virus," as Dr. Mark is describing, then a "mock-infection" negative control is required, that being a sample which is identical to the isolated "virus" sample (the independent variable) except lacking the "virus." However, as Dr. Mark points out, the supposed "mock-infection" control is impossible as no "virus" has ever been isolated.
Yes Mia, you are correct. I would call Lanka's experiments a "validation study" of the cell-culture procedure that included low-dose (Concentration) of antibiotic as base control (indeed not a negative or mock), Simply, he showed that the greater doses and types of antibiotics and lower the nutrition added to the medium (the independent variable), the faster the cell death (the dependent variable) was seen.
Since virologists are using these cytotoxic cell cultures to study the cytotoxicity of patient fluids they say have a virus in them (though unproven). Lanka has shown that the cell-culture procedure used in this way is invalid to find any kind of cytotox as a characteristic of the patient sample, and to begin with is not about a virus as patient fluid is not a confirmed purified virus.
Right. Give it a name. You could just frame it like this so people don't have to wade through the jargon.
Experiment 1 shows: Put sick snot (sample) in a dish of various poisons and the cell degrades and makes particles that you can take pictures of if you want.
Experiment 2 ("control") shows: A cell in a dish of (same) various poisons degrades and makes particle debris even with out the sick snot.
What have you shown us, Dr. Labcoat? If you poison and starve a cell, it breaks down and dies. You don't need sick snot.
What do these experiments have to do with a "virus"? The answer is nothing. You are designing experiments that are supposed to work backwards, like reverse engineering. It has nothing to do with whatever you are purporting to "find". Go find it in nature first. Then come up with an experiment that isn't stupid. The cell culture should have been scrapped the minute it originally hit the white board. We all are currently well aware that cell cultures kill cells.
'mock- infected' lol what does that even mean?
It means someone is fibbing.
Great topic to tackle, thanks guys!
Congratulations Dr. Mark on your new essay. Could it be possible that one day, you make a collection of your essay's in a single printed book?
But Mark and Sam I object...here is a clear photo of a virus specifically the hPIV-3 virus, being killed, I should probably say mortally wounded, using this new and (deadly to virus's ) silicone pad with these little spikes on it. Think of the possibilities. They can save the planet and become billionaires at the same time. That is where all the big money comes from, saving lives and helping people. I am thinking Noble Prize.....
https://scitechdaily.com/revolutionary-silicon-spikes-destroy-96-of-viruses-on-contact/
how can you kill something that is'nt live in the first place?,virus (old latin word for poison), when cells are poisoned by all kinds of chemicals in our water,air,food,EMF'S,etc, the body calls on strong solvents to clean it up,it also raises our temperature to do this,of course it makes us feel ill .the toxins pushed out ,they call viruses.
Well this could be bad for the bottom line......imagine selling these silicone " virus traps " by telling your government that it kills the virus when the virus is already dead. What government would pay for silicone masks to be worn by the general population if they didn't really work. Shocking. Simply shocking.
The fact they have no control group in " virus" experiments is covered up by a green monkey haha
Even up to convid the virologists were saying the "corona viruses"(essentially what they found was just dna/rna they can sequence with software like NextGen into unlimited digital "viruses) were found in healthy people.
Thank you.
I look forward to reading your paper Sam. The comments are also a delight, been thinking with gratitude about damage to the hippocampus resulting in a broken bullshit detector. Roughly translated I imagine this refers to the ability to discern ? And explains so much.
Blessings and appreciation to you all from Aus.
A pandemic in a pre-germ-theory past included or was characterised as a spread of fear of contagion that became itself contagious. "Hysteria" is not much given focus in a frame that seeks to mask out or subsume psychic and spiritual being to models of material determination - that are guarded, mediated and controlled by an elite 'priesthood' from a 'black box' of definitions by which to interject control as mind-training or conditioning.
Note our original human response to sickness was 'theurgical' - ie: within a felt participation of spirits or powers that modernity assigns to magical, mythical or religious superstitions.
Retribution and curse would be offset or protected against by intercessions of various kinds of which pharmakon was but one - and in which the 'drug' was contextualised by its intent, such as to be prepared, administered or participated in as a ritual of cultural or spiritual identity.
(See Pharmakon by Michael A Rinella)
Rene Girard came to a transformative understanding of human social order by recognising the pattern of scapegoating - a form of Pharmakon by which to offset an imbalanced accumulation of conflict manifesting as sickness - on any level both inner or outer 'disorder'. This operates what A Course in Miracles calls the redistribution of psychic energies - under narratives that protect a sense of 'control' running scarcity & limitation.
I sketch out the above to indicate that the 'pathological mindset' is itself a result of Terrain - but principally of a dislocation or disconnection-fear arising from an imbalanced or split mind - such as drives our development of technologised 'progress' to ever deeper defence against life framed in suspicion, treachery and threat to a stranger in a strange world.
The need for 'masking defences' runs deeper than any rational process of a mind set of defence against reliving otherwise masked out trauma.
So as I tweeted yesterday:
If we take away a baby's toy (even an inappropriately grabbed object) we meet reaction of denial & deprivation.
Give something else first.
Living vital function is its own field of organism-terrain as exchange & rebalancing.
Integrality is un-susceptible/resilient to disintegration
Well said. In cosmology, the event horizon of the black hole is actually nonsense, too - including the black hole.
1. For a black hole to form as the result of a collapsed star, the star would had to have been a gas. But a gas has no form. The star, then, would had to have been condensed matter, but condensed matter cannot collapse due to its incompressibility.
2. Black holes, by definition, are spatially infinite and eternal. The universe, however, is allegedly the result of the Big Bang; but the Big Bang, having been the beginning, is finite. Infinity and finitude are mutually exclusive. Therefore, black holes cannot exist in a Big Bang universe.
3. Nothing can escape a black hole it is alleged, not even light, yet the escape speed of a black hole is the speed of light. Can light escape or can it not escape?
4. Empirically, black holes have never been proven to exist. The source of black hole theory is purely mathematical. Here, then, is a very brief paper by astrophysics researcher Stephen Crothers which proves this to be the case:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1508.0007v1.pdf
Astrophysics is in a mess. For decades, cosmologists have been chasing research grants where they’ve so often used Einstein’s name as a cash cow for funding. Einstein’s GR for example is riddled with mathematical errors, some of which can be seen in this 2 page paper by the same author, Australian mathematician Stephen Crothers. Einstein was not particularly smart at all.
https://vixra.org/pdf/2104.0006v1.pdf
The work that you good folks are doing is of inestimable value!
The sooner a critical mass of people are awakened to the truth, the better.
The whole medical paradigm needs to be overhauled and replaced with evidence-based science, where dissenting voices are welcomed and engaged with, not vilified and cancelled.
And controlling bodies should have no conflicts of interest.
God Bless all of you.