“The Plague” or “The Black Death” was said to have wiped out half of Europe’s population in the mid-1300s to earn the title as the most deadly pandemic of all time. It is claimed that the bacterium Yersinia Pestis caused the death of all of these people and that the disease was so infectious that being anywhere near a case could be fatal.
Possibly a contributing factor to the terrain / context in Europe: The Hundred Years War between England and France (1337-1453). Battle of Crecy, 1346, for example, right before the start of the Black Death in Europe.
The English repeatedly invaded France over a long time period, resulting in epic battles (Crecy, Poiters, Agincourt, etc). But in between these big campaigns, the many mercenaries hired on both sides from all over Europe were unemployed... so they were free to rape, plunder, and pillage throughout France (the government of which was in disarray and not of much help). The records from those years read 'famine' year after year. How are farmers going to grow food when bands of armed, skilled, soldier-bandits are rampaging around burning raping and looting?
Whatever the 'cause' was, I think this prolonged famine in an area that was war-ravaged for over a hundred years could contribute this particular plague situation.
Very good of you to mention the 100 Years War. So, not only war-time conditions (very stressful & food shortages), but if you think back to Dickensian England of the 1800s and the squalor & poverty & very shitty diets of the poor (most of the population), imagine how much more primitive and squalid the conditions were in the 1300s?
Lead utensils/cutlery were quite common, too.
And don't forget about the common practice of dumping chamber pots out of windows and into the streets.
Filthy & slovenly conditions -- but not necessarily in the country on the farms, or wealthy areas, just mostly in the cities and big towns.
Our most recent pre-covid plague was the Spanish Flu and we now know it was a plague caused by vaccinations. We also suspect the mortality rate was exaggerated to frighten people into getting jabs (at the time and in the future).
Liam Scheff said it best: Official Stories only serve to protect the Officials.
We had in in the UK and village were devastated. A 1665 plague in the village Eyam (pronounced 'Eem') was very serious but like 2020 they locked down and this in itself is suspicious.
The area has lead mines and there may may well have been issues with the water supply.
It's a slightly tricky question simply because of the numbers game >> fewer people lived in the rural areas and so fewer people died compared to the cities.
Wealthy communities were affected but less so than poorer ones. It's claimed the wealthy were better off for having better access to clean water and good food and lots of open space.
But, we're talking 14th century. I find it hard to believe that more people lived in cities than in the rural areas in 14th century Europe. The rural population was possibly less dense (depending on how the villages were set up), and they definitely had access to more outdoor space, sunshine, most likely cleaner water, fresh food, etc. It would be interesting to dig into that (but I'm probably not going to do so).
Samantha, it appears that the eugenics monsters have been at work for centuries, and with the fraud of virology, the hidden history of plague, the Rockefeller takeover of medicine it is clear that miseducation, false history, and propaganda have been verry effective in confusing, and confounding the masses of humanity. Ye shall know the truth and the truth will make you mad! I was given the polio sugar cube in the 1950s and no other vaccines at that time. I had measles, chicken pox, mumps and some other things that I did not know what they were, but I do know none of these things killed me or anyone else I knew. The vaccines for these pathogens were put on the childhood schedule years after they were virtually gone, and the only logical reason would be profit. All the pieces line up perfectly to see that this was a plan that just needed the technology to catch up. Virology was a way for them to use to scare the population into compliance, and it has worked. I wanted to ask you if you are familiar with Sage Hannahs website? She has been exposing the supposed health freedom fighters for who they actually are! I know that you have asked Bigtree, and McCullagh about viruses, and what they said. It is obvious that they both are not being honest. I do not suppose McCullagh has shown you the photo yet. This entire movement is a front for the protection of the multi trillion-dollar virology fraud. This has been an effective strategy as they have millions of dedicated dupes defending them. Thank you again for educating so many. I pass this information along to as many as I can, and I am always surprised that none have ever questioned the twisted logic of the covid fraud. Jack Williams, Tennessee, USA.
I have no skin in the game here, apart from an interest in outright honesty, but what did Bigtree say about viruses? I was always under the assumption that his campaign(s) meant he was opposed to vaccines. Wouldn't the possibility that viruses didn't exist add another string to his bow? Sorry if the question seems dumb but I just don't have anymore time to research this since I'm pretty full on with the Coivid/Climate bulsht. Thanks
Dear Sharon, thank you for your comment. First let me say that when Dr. Bailey had the video interview with Bigtree, he did not commit to or for this fact. He stated that it would distract from the work he is doing. He deflected, and this was a huge tell because what he is doing is exposing the fraud of vaccines not being harmful. Bam, there is the rub. If his work is about the fraud of vaccines, would it not be extremely important to show that virology is a fraud? Would you not think this more important than anything? No virus, no viral pandemic, no virus, no virology! It begs the question why! Dr. Peter McCullagh stated that he has a photo of a virus, and yet has not seen fit to show it to Dr. Bailey or anyone else for that matter, and again it begs the question, why. Now, just think of the multi-trillion-dollar virology fraud, and the pushers of this fraud. This is the Unicorn they have used to jab us all for about sixty years with anti-viral vaccines, right? If eugenics is the motive, and it is, then what better way to frighten the public than with a virus. It has worked perfectly for a long time, and if it were exposed for a fraud then the entire edifice would fall apart. The green movement, climate change bullshit has been foisted on us by the verry same player that gave us virology. All part of the entire plan, and none of these things happen in a vacuum. Think about the green movement, as in wind, and solar. How in the hell would you scale up to what is needed for energy consumption. The wind towers are so expensive that they would never pay for themselves, and the solar panels would require the area of all the sunbelt states to generate the power needed, an army of cleaners just to keep them clean, and another army of techs. to repair them. The there is the problem of the silver needed to build them. It is ludicrous and will never happen. It was never meant to happen. They need to destroy the industries and destroy our mean of living so they can usher in the global socialism, digital currency so they can control us. The club of Rome was formed in 1968, and they said publicly that the population needed to be reduced to one billion people by peaceful means. Translation, deindustrialization, globalization, digital currency for control, viral plagues that call for lockdowns, masking, social distancing, mistrust among the population by fear and propaganda. no war or open hostility by bombing or soldiers in the streets. This will be sold as necessary for our protection. Forced jabs that will kill now, and later. Sterility of men and women, low sperm counts to no counts, still births to no births. I know you are covered up with all that we are dealing with and have no time to do the research, but I have gone down this rabbit hole for some time, and I assure you this is real. Now, concerning the players in the health freedom movement. What better strategy to use than a bunch of professionals bucking the system, and talking about the vaccine, the damage, the death the danger but not the virus fraud! If you think critically about this, and especially knowing what Dr. Bailey has proven then you can see that they are the straw men and women being the fronts for virology. It is perfect because the sheep run after the seemingly truth tellers like rock groupies. I have to say that you do have skin in this game because if you have children or want children, and a future, then you do have skin in this game as we all do. This is not about the singular things that appear to be disconnected. They are all connected. I thank you for asking this question, and no, I do not think it was dumb at all. If there is anything else I can inform you about, I would be glad to do so, Jack.
Thanks for the effort to reply and such a comprehensive answer. 'Skin in the game' didn't mean I wasn't interested. I was convinced Covid was a hoax from April 2020, I meant that I have no time to research virus/no-virus because I am devoted to exposing other elements of this criminal enterprise. I rely on other honest souls who have the same motive as I do (defeat evil basically) to fill me in on the many gaps in my knowledge. I am, though, still uncertain as to who is and who isn't controlled opposition and don't want to alienate people who are in fact allies. Franco defeated the International Brigades because they couldn't stop arguing amongst themselves even though they all opposed fascism.
I am not sure about this one I took as a child in the fifties but none of them are safe and were not needed due to the disappearance of polio. Incidentally many other maladies were labeled as polio. Miss diagnosed to make it appear to be polio, and for guess what reason. MONY$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Dear Ima, I do not know if you work in virology or are connected in some way but your arguments defending the indefensible are all circular. There has been no isolation period! The entire method used for supposedly finding a virus is a fraud. If the scientific method is the gold standard for science, and virology does not use the scientific method then where does this leave your argument? Empty and meaningless. Only the scientific method can be used to find a virus, and it is not used. Perhaps a virus does exist on the horn of a Unicorn but not in reality. If you will not look at the evidence, they Baileys have shown then perhaps you need to. I have seen the evidence, and virology is a multi-trillion-dollar fraud.
Flog one that shows that a virus has been isolated using proper scientific methods. It should be a no brainer considering how prolific they are claimed to be.
You sir are exactly right! I think Ima is a pharma. plant in the conversation. She apparently has not looked at the two videos the Baileys released that show just how unscientific this fraud is. There is not one paper that is not a circular argument! Thats all they have to cling to. Pathetic.
I run into someone like this on every site! It is an old tactic that they use. Some will argue for a while, and then attack you personally to deflect from the argument. It doesn't work on me. All the supposed health freedom fighters are fronts for the virology fraud. I asked all of them about this, and I get answers like I am too busy to get involved or nothing at all. This includes Malone et al. Never a word on virology. The baileys are the only ones who have shown what a fraud it is. This is a multi-trillion-dollar industry that they need to be protect. Malone worked his entire carrier with the DOD doing this kind of work. All they do is talk about how deadly the vaccine is yada yada. Never a word about virology, Jack.
I am no scientist, but isolation, as you very well know, is only half of the process. You have missed out purification = the basic elementary flaw of all you virus frauds!
Dr. Tom Cowan; Dr. Andrew Kaufman; Mike Stone; Mike Donio; Exposing The Virus Fraud!:
Thank you, Charles! Another truth bomb to this pharma. operative. This is what the virology defenders do to try and dispel the truth. Her argument is as fraudulent as the fake science of virology. Some of their strategy is to attack the person directly rather than actually argue on the subject. Her strategy has not reached this as yet, but I am sure it will eventually. Thank you for seeing the flaws and pointing them out, Jack.
Lots of action back in the early 1900 to support germ theory. John D Rockefeller , Flexner rapport and probably many more that Dr Sam can tell us about. Perhaps back in the middle ages the church saw an opportunity too . Particularly the Catholic one. Never let a good crisis pass you by. See the dust and dead fish - REPENT (and give us your money)Fear keeps us dependant on authority - well some of us. A combination of climate hysteria and disease is sending us all right back to medievil times and the good old elite LOVE IT. They see themselves as neo deities. They've been at it for centuries and now they smell blood. Nothing snuffs out enlightenment faster than scary superstition. Most people probably think that some element of fear is prudency and not at all stupid- just in case. I think steering clear of idiocy is prudent - just in case .
Watch the movie “The Physician” as it shows the drift of a huge dust cloud(volcanic eruption) which travels across Central Europe, followed by the toxic respiratory dysfunctions and food chain destruction, resulting in mass deaths.
We engage in silly living, they're the mop-up crew. We have fixed habitations and start chucking food around, and they come to dinner. No sense pretending we didn't invite them.
I remember at my grandmother's cottage, people would get sloppy in the kitchen, and during one week in July the fat-eater ants would find all the places people had left butter. A different week the sweet-eating ants would find all the places people had left sugar. You couldn't ask for a better reminder for how exactly to keep the kitchen clean.
Yes, of course. Just looking for a clear statement. I do rely on my ant, roach, and mice visitors to remind me to clean-up. The problem is they don't come round anymore even though the garbage is piling up. I'm starting to worry for their wellbeing.
Is there a similar explanation for the Spanish and Portuguese allegedly wiping out whole civilisations in South America with 'smallpox' etc? Even alternative historians still seem to be attached to that one.
The "Viral Delusion" documentary discussed this issue. I forget which episode it was in (I think no. 1). They pointed out that enslavement and starvation and outright massacre can account for the depopulation / genocide of the native populations. The virus story, meanwhile, provides a convenient cover for these crimes.
The 1348 Friuli Earthquake, 6.9 on the Richter Scale: According to contemporary sources, it caused considerable damage to structures; churches and houses collapsed, villages were destroyed and "FOUL ODORS EMANATED FROM THE EARTH".
That volcano (sun spot decline is also suggested as a cause) may have initiated the little ice age. Colder temperatures were widespread and would have led to more crop failure; another reason for the social tensions and war. There are lots of studies showing this cooling period. It also ended the Viking settlement on Greenland.
Trying to get responsible information about something that occurred some 675 years ago, is quite a daunting task. We really cannot imagine the primitive conditions of those times where the plague might have been caused by any number of things.
Even today, there is no verifiable proof of the transmission of viruses and other diseases.
I would bet that even if we could send a team of scientists back in time to investigate this plague, the results would be fudged to purposely support germ theory.
It makes sense to me that the superstition of medieval times encouraged Germ theory story to be a popular explanation. After all, who wants to blame themselves for being unfit? --- As the scientific method became more of a standard the Rockefeller Pharma profiteers were forced to invented confusing methodologies as effective gaslighting. The cytopathic effect (CPE) requires harsh chemicals and cell starvation to produce something that can be called a "virus" under the microscope. This biology standard is absurd. As Rockefeller's allopathic medicine profit schemes provided enormous wealth to purchase advertisement, news articles, universities/medical schools and false narratives that effectively created a belief system based on pseudoscience. Thanks to Dr. Bailey for presenting this particular issue with such class and thoroughness. Just posted - Stefan Lanka exposes the ludicrous CPE process - http://tinyurl.com/yhrcae97
I'm a forest skeptic the way the Baileys are virus skeptics or the way Kelly Brogan knows that psych drugs are worse than useless or Tom Cowan knows that the little human heart isn't a "pump" that pushes blood through tens of thousands of miles of tight little pipes.
Readers to the end of this comment, if any, will discover how this comment relates to the medieval period.
My claim is that trees don't exist.
Trees really don't exist.
I can prove it, but not in the attention span allowed to readers in a comments basement rife with typos. Imagine Sam Bailey in the comments basement of a tree skeptic! How might she fare? How much time would she be allowed? What indifference might she expect from my arbology-skepticism fans? How many Tree Mania books might I be expected to sell, should I opt to write such a tome?
Pretty funny to imagine me "coming out" as a tree skeptic. I could come out as gay, tranz, de-tranz, and re-tranz, not to mention as an oddly tall cislady who is one-sixteenth everything and with nine genders and two nice legs, all of this at the same time, and I could do all of that more easily than I could come out as a tree skeptic. Even the virus skeptics would give me hard looks and bid me keep moving to the back of the bus. "There goes that guy who gives skepticism a bad name." I'd have to stand in back with people who know water is an element and (for that matter) conscious, people who know that comets are electric wonders and not dirty snowballs, and a guy who knows a purple lizard man because the lizard himself wasn't even allowed on the bus. Not to mention that guy who knows that democracy is the false belief that we can appoint a master who is not ourself. Oh wait, that guy looks a lot like my doppelganger.
Just for the record, purple lizard men living at the center of the Earth don't exist. I'm almost sixty-percent sure they don't. Seriously.
People who know that I joke about almost everything might think that my tree-skepticism stance is another of my wild japes. And yet unsettling things can be both true and funny. People tend to confuse serious and significant, is how that happens. It's illegal in most algo-fields to say about Nazis that "getting gold out of Jews is like pulling teeth," even though my joke is seriously funny, deeply empathic, and historically helpful. It's algo-illegal because people like to pretend I mean by such an excellent joke something derogatory to Jews or modern dentistry. Hmm, I actually do mean something derogatory to modern dentistry. Well, you can see how I've been driven, if not to drink, at least to open mics at comedy clubs. That guy Mike is much more open about things than virus skeptics tend to be.
As for comedy, the Baileys stay far away from me, even though I'm a big fan of theirs and even though we have a common friend in Lew Rockwell (well, full disclosure, Lew no longer returns my calls--I've pulled a few stunts), but the single exception to this, the one time that either Bailey has ever acknowledged me in hundreds of comments in Sam's basement, is Mark liking my ebola joke. See? Humor is our common heritage. Mark liked my ebola joke! I can die content now. Die laughing.
The way to visualize my tree skepticism is to have a giant Crocodile Dundee character upgraded from an Australian to a New Zealand accent, and a state biologist points to the largest tree in Christchurch and says "that's a tree." And Dundee goes, "that's not a tree." [pulls far bigger tree out of his back pocket] "That's a tree."
For extra fun, notice New Zealand people getting triggered at being confused with that other place.
Wait, what? New Zealand really isn't in Australia?
See how much of a prelude a tree skeptic has to have just to make a simple comment? All I wanted to say is that the reason medievals are so filthy in the popular imagination is that it was in this period that the last forests disappeared. And I mean really disappeared. Not even in Poland nor in Belarus would a single tree make it past 1600. Forests bye bye. Gonzo. Poof. And forests are what kept people healthy. Not "forests" the way our impoverished sciencey minds imagine forests, but real trees in real forests, and that's always about the forest FLOOR (sorry for caps but italics aren't permitted). A floor that's information rich and mycelium-wired for hundreds of miles round. The floor: Big Talk. A forest is a floor. Not the vertical sticks but the horizontal deep-time wealth of the floor. Sixty- or a hundred-foot-thick floors, and a man in 2024 who knows how to hyphenate them! That moderns have a contemptuous way of talking about the vestigial woodlands as "the sticks" tells you everything you need to know about how moderns have lost not just the Forest but the memory of a Forest. Lost the cleansing of the Big Talk.
The medieval period was the West's first full-scale experiment in filth, which is to say our first full-scale experiment in life without any forest whatsoever: not even a single tree.
State biologists want you to believe we have trees and forests nowadays, though we lack the hundred-thousand-year-deep floors outside the glacier-retreat lines. Forests exist, say the state biologists. But on this planet the forests have all gone away. Brace for impact. The forests have all gone away. There is nothing more to say.
=========≠=========
Dr. David Thor writes from the Niagara montrecoastal.
Excellent. You both must sense the changing ratios in the human sensorium. Painful and compelling. Reclaiming the balance, embodiment restored, imagination activated. Thanks for helping those of us emerge from our narcosis.
This was an excellent and succinct explanation (as always). Thank you so much Dr Bailey.
I would love to hear a conversation between you and JJ Couey now, as he has shifted so far towards the questioning of viruses altogether that it would probably be very productive.
Like you he is a committed and talented educator and a thoroughly decent human being.
He is struggling to gain traction and desperate to get the message out that there was no "novel" pathogen in 2020; that "viruses" can never "pandemic"; that protocols, fraudulent PCR testing and the misattributing of deaths to covid were responsible for the increase in mortality especially in places like New York; that the intramuscular of any substance with the intent of augmenting an immune system that we have very little to no understanding or appreciation of, is a terrible idea; and that our children are in danger of being hijacked by the notion that the narrative is real and can happen again.
Please accept his invitation. The world is in dire need of your combined compassion and wisdom!
JJ is totally hostile & vile about the No Virus position. He refuses to question the methodologies of virology. He will not listen to reason. He behaves like a gatekeeper.
All we've been shown are computer models and CGI cartoons. No natural or manmade contagious particles have ever been shown to exist. The very concept of contagion is false.
Yeah, he was definitely hostile and unwilling to explore the issue. The most recent thing I heard from him though sounded like he was fully rejecting the possibility of lab engineered virus. His reasoning: it’s never been proven in a scientific experiment! He acknowledged the “no virus” people are justified in claiming viruses aren’t real by the same reasoning: not proven!
But he also stated he doesn’t believe viruses are not real. He’s in that stage of evolution where he’s having cognitive dissonance with his dogma versus his recent realizations. He’ll need to resolve that dissonance pretty soon.
I’m pleased he seems close to speaking honestly from a well researched and logical perspective. He might even impress us with polite behavior. That would be nice.
I agree that he has used dismissive language in the past, but I am very convinced that he is moving in his position. He is also able to admit when he has been wrong, which is a refreshing and rare quality.
I respectfully invite you to watch this because he acknowledges that the "no virus" camp are probably completely correct. This is a recent presentation to the Medical Docs for COVID Ethics International.
IMO it would be more productive to have a public discussion between virus non-believers like Sam, Mark, Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman on 1 side vs a group of virus believers.
I've been brandishing Mark's name for a year or two at people who think of themselves as good at a debate, like Sam Harris and, hmm, that Heather lady who does that podcast with her husband who seems to be on Joe Rogan lately. A couple of others. No takers. I'm not the only one who has presented his name for debate. But the real reason I say that is I've watched Mark's way with a text. He doesn't have the vivacious personality of his wife but he's almost machine-like in the way he doggedly goes line-by-line through sciencey writing. I taught briefly at the same school in New Jersey that Einstein taught at (and in the same century), and I used to have physics friends, so though I don't really respect science, I do have, um, good science social skills, or I used to, and I have a good feel for who's bluffing. At least, let's hope I do.
P.S. to Ernesto: I used to have good social skills in vivo, but my social skills in silico are spotty. I'm not so sure our in silico lives aren't in vitro. For all I know, we're the experiment in the looking glass. Wave if you can see me. Do I look upside down to you?
Oh wow, thanks for that explanation. I don't know Mark, have only seen him 1x or 2x in Sam's vids. Gosh I would love to see him in a debate with those people.
Another person's presentation I saw recently is Dr. Kevin Stillwagon's explanation that viruses exist, notably SARS-CoV-2. Now, I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, and some of the points he made seemed impressive, though unintelligible for a layperson like me.
However, he did make a few points that even I could understand as rubbish.
I used to have access to all the libraries of Harvard and Princeton, but that was in some other century. Nowadays it's on line, and I take everything, even my own certainties, with a grain of salt. Moving through flatworld is one step farther from the real. How I research nowadays is once I've figured out that there's two sides of something, and there's a 'my' side and a 'their' side, I only research their side. I don't go to people who agree with me, only to people who disagree with me. It's the most efficient way, I figure. When the pandemic came in, I was mostly in it for its comic value. I juggle and do comic things on the street to give people a free laugh, so adding a mask like a yarmulke was just part of the fun. But at some point I noticed some guy saying that everyone in the world would eventually get covid. That seemed unlikely, but I started researching. I paid attention only to people who believed in viruses and in covid. I didn't listen to the Baileys or Tom Cowan or anyone like that. I researched at places like the CDC, but more importantly I went, online, to the actual corporations who did the virus isolation. If they figure you're on their side, they'll open up. If you bring skeptical or hostile energy to your quest, certain kinds of information get closed off. I followed the trail along to all the different companies that isolated the virus--it's like ten different companies with lots of literal driving of the solution from one company to another, each lab doing a different thing, one poisoning the solution and another freezing it and still another re-doing the first thing and another centrifuging it, battering and freezing and whirling and poisoning and dye-ing the sample, on and on, each stage believable by itself, till they take the dead and deader frozen whirled thawed battered whipped (repeat repeat) solution of incomprehensible random fragments to the dye guy so that the picture guy who comes after him can see the fragments to get a picture and there's so many fragments to infinity it's a Rorschach where you can see whatever you want to see, like an infinite battlefield where the soldiers were stripped and their bodies hacked and blended and whirled and frozen and re-hacked and blended and whirled and frozen till nothing much bigger than a toe survives and you start imagining anything you want and they bring that to the computer stage and they have two completely different computer enhancements with big computers and fancy software and multiple companies fiddling with the picture to get a final image of a virus. Each lab probably figures the other labs are being honest, and they do their own thing and pass it on to the next place. Getting a virus is like that game at parties where you whisper something in one person's ear and it goes round the room. Even if no one actually lies about what they hear, each transmission degrades enough so that by the time it gets to the other end it's something humorous. And I gotta tell you that even before I got to the end of that long process, I knew that I was never going to worry about viruses. Not ever. And I started licking urinal handles and tabletops in restaurants. I did keep going to the end of the virus "finding" process, all the way through the two huge computers enhancing and enhancing and enhancing the pictures (you'd think if they were computers it would take seconds but it's hours for each process so generally two different days just to enhance the pictures) and even before I got to the end I knew there was nothing to it. Plus, in the unlikely event that they ever do actually discover the holy grail and isolate any virus, let alone the covid one, all they'll have done is prove how far away from a human body you have to get to isolate something. The irrelevance of the process is right there in the word "isolate." And people get fooled because they don't understand size. They don't have a feel for how immense a human body is. It's like people who think seven trillion miles is far away and it turns out it's only in the Oort cloud right here in our own solar system and they finally understand how far away the nearest star is. When I was a kid we talked about the billions of bits in a human, but a decade ago it was trillions, and it's not getting less. Against that, well, if you really understood how small a virus was and how big a body is, you'd have to have a lot of faith to believe those tiny bits could impact it. And then how would you demonstrate causality inside a human subject, when you need ten labs immensely isolated from the very causality you seek to perform the task? It's a closed loop. I haven't heard anyone talk about this, but isolation, the holy grail, moves the grail itself farther from relevance the more you have to seek it. It's like trying to study the Earth by taking a spaceship to Alpha Centauri and finding after a few decades that the star isn't "proxima" at all. Therefore I lick urinal handles quite gleefully now. If you ever lick metal, make sure it's not in a freezing room or your tongue can get stuck. Part of the fun of staying only on the pro-virus side is you get familiar with how colorized and stylized the images of protein actually are at those scales, and how reticent the companies are to say that most of the images are an artist's inspiration. It was all beautiful in its own way, my trek through that fantasy land of artifice and color. But I no longer put much energy into viruses, even "against" them, except for comic effect. And I don't hate the pro-virus people the way a lot of folks in the Baileys' comments basement do. I can see how people who don't have the time I have to research could get caught in the virus belief because they believe the next person in the process. And having never voted or been involved in nations or democracy or all that pursuit of a master, I'm not disappointed by officials who lie. What else are they supposed to do? It's what voters put them there to do. Instead I feel a little sorry for them, as I can see how they're part of the human project of seeking a master who is not one's own self. I call all of it "the divine comedy."
There's a couple of core issues/debates (that never take place) before a fruitful debate about virus detection methodology can even begin to take place.
--# Are Koch's Postulates still relevant? Still the Gold Standard?
--# Is it ethical to allow humans to volunteer for transmission studies?
--# Is it ethical to demand proof of a virus in the form of healthy people made sick by an isolated, purified virus from a sick person?
--# When it comes to experiments & studies regarding health, which ones are more likely to be truly scientific, and, perhaps, helpful: In vivo, or in vitro?
My comment does not plead for a debate a priori about virus detection methodology (VDM). I ask for a debate about the principle about whether viruses exist, and no doubt the virus believers will bring up arguments based on VDM while the non-believers will shoot those down with counter-arguments.
Some or all of the other 4 points you raise may or may not come up as well, but the facilitator of the discussion should keep it focused on the existence of viruses.
BTW, in your point 4 you left 1 testing environment: in silico.
What do you mean by "the principle about whether viruses exist"?
"Overall, "principle" often denotes a fundamental belief or concept that guides behavior or serves as a foundational truth in a specific area of knowledge or ethics."
How would you determine the principle? By what means or method?
Nope, I have not watched any debates, and, as the facilitator in the Bailey vs McCairn debate states in the intro, these kind of debates are very few and far between.
As for "the principle about whether viruses exist": it is a moot topic, with strong opinions on both sides of the aisle. Both sides are convinced they are right because both sides have strong arguments to prove their side.
This aligns with your definition of "principle: "often denotes a fundamental belief or concept that guides behavior or serves as a foundational truth in a specific area of knowledge or ethics".
I do not determine any principle, I am a layperson regarding this topic. However, each party determines their principle.
So, I am not sure what your point is.
In any case, I want to thank you for the link. I have wanted to hear Mark debate this issue with someone from the other side. I listened to the intro, and the fact that McCairn resorts to ad hominems for me means he knows he has lost the argument and is frustrated about it.
Thank you for your reply. I learn from my replies to you.
"I do not determine any principle, I am a layperson regarding this topic. However, each party determines their principle." --
How long will you shirk your due diligence by hiding behind the excuse that you are a "layperson" and refusing to indeed think about the subject and determining your own principle?
To get beyond the layperson status you have to look at the subject nakedly without the belief that you first have to be academically indoctrinated about it.
When it comes to the subject of contagion, you have to ask yourself: What do I require for proof? What do I need as evidence to be convinced that sick people make healthy people sick? What do I need as evidence that a virus exists?
We are talking about a subject that falls under the category of empirical science and therefore opinions & beliefs are not sought -- only interpretations of data, and the scrutinization of the methods used to obtain the data.
If you're gonna think about what is required for proof, you have to think about the methods needed to acquire that proof. You don't have to leave it up to the experts to tell you what proof is required nor what methods must be used to acquire it.
As it stands, the two most common models used in the research about contagious microbes are person-to-person transmission studies, and cell culture analysis. Each of these has their own methodologies and they need to be scrutinized to see if they are sound and do not lead to bullshit results.
With transmission studies, the methodology must robustly attempt to mimic so-called natural transmission and must not include anything unnatural or synthetic such as injection or intubation.
With cell culture analysis, the methodology must include isolation & purification of a microbe which is then used in an attempt to infect, by the most natural means conceivable, a large group of healthy volunteers.
Watching debates can be helpful on the path of your re-education but at the end of the day you really do have to think critically about the subject and examine the methodologies used in papers claiming to have discovered a virus or evil, parasitical, predatory bacterium.
This comment of mine is probably the most important statement made about public health in the West in the last four years, but will be ignored. I love the divine comedy of all of it. People talk talk talk, and don't do their own experiments. Always seeking a master elsewhere.
This is where that wonderful corporate citizen Nestle came charging in to save us all. They created a product Nestle's Milky Bar endorsed by the Milky Bar Kid - who 'only eats what's right, that's Milky Bar it's clean and white' gauntleted to 'vaccinate' the consumer against anything 'Black' including 'The Plague' and one's own Shadow
I hadn't thought about the difference in what was taught in the educational 'systems' around the English speaking countries before. I was raised in a military family, so was exposed to schools around the world, but I remember being taught about the European 'plagues' quite differently than is described here. While the plagues were definitely horrible, the number of dead was only in the area of 20 to 30 percent of the population.
Possibly a contributing factor to the terrain / context in Europe: The Hundred Years War between England and France (1337-1453). Battle of Crecy, 1346, for example, right before the start of the Black Death in Europe.
The English repeatedly invaded France over a long time period, resulting in epic battles (Crecy, Poiters, Agincourt, etc). But in between these big campaigns, the many mercenaries hired on both sides from all over Europe were unemployed... so they were free to rape, plunder, and pillage throughout France (the government of which was in disarray and not of much help). The records from those years read 'famine' year after year. How are farmers going to grow food when bands of armed, skilled, soldier-bandits are rampaging around burning raping and looting?
Whatever the 'cause' was, I think this prolonged famine in an area that was war-ravaged for over a hundred years could contribute this particular plague situation.
Very good of you to mention the 100 Years War. So, not only war-time conditions (very stressful & food shortages), but if you think back to Dickensian England of the 1800s and the squalor & poverty & very shitty diets of the poor (most of the population), imagine how much more primitive and squalid the conditions were in the 1300s?
Lead utensils/cutlery were quite common, too.
And don't forget about the common practice of dumping chamber pots out of windows and into the streets.
Filthy & slovenly conditions -- but not necessarily in the country on the farms, or wealthy areas, just mostly in the cities and big towns.
Our most recent pre-covid plague was the Spanish Flu and we now know it was a plague caused by vaccinations. We also suspect the mortality rate was exaggerated to frighten people into getting jabs (at the time and in the future).
Liam Scheff said it best: Official Stories only serve to protect the Officials.
Do you know if the "Plague" was rampant in the countryside in Europe at the time of the black /death? Or was it mainly in the cities?
We had in in the UK and village were devastated. A 1665 plague in the village Eyam (pronounced 'Eem') was very serious but like 2020 they locked down and this in itself is suspicious.
The area has lead mines and there may may well have been issues with the water supply.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyam
I mentioned the Eyam incident here.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/l-is-for-lockdown/
It's a slightly tricky question simply because of the numbers game >> fewer people lived in the rural areas and so fewer people died compared to the cities.
Wealthy communities were affected but less so than poorer ones. It's claimed the wealthy were better off for having better access to clean water and good food and lots of open space.
But, we're talking 14th century. I find it hard to believe that more people lived in cities than in the rural areas in 14th century Europe. The rural population was possibly less dense (depending on how the villages were set up), and they definitely had access to more outdoor space, sunshine, most likely cleaner water, fresh food, etc. It would be interesting to dig into that (but I'm probably not going to do so).
Haaaa good old inquisition. Aint it
Looking exactly like this nowaday at certain part
Of the planet? And in the same time, Same pandemic scam.
Samantha, it appears that the eugenics monsters have been at work for centuries, and with the fraud of virology, the hidden history of plague, the Rockefeller takeover of medicine it is clear that miseducation, false history, and propaganda have been verry effective in confusing, and confounding the masses of humanity. Ye shall know the truth and the truth will make you mad! I was given the polio sugar cube in the 1950s and no other vaccines at that time. I had measles, chicken pox, mumps and some other things that I did not know what they were, but I do know none of these things killed me or anyone else I knew. The vaccines for these pathogens were put on the childhood schedule years after they were virtually gone, and the only logical reason would be profit. All the pieces line up perfectly to see that this was a plan that just needed the technology to catch up. Virology was a way for them to use to scare the population into compliance, and it has worked. I wanted to ask you if you are familiar with Sage Hannahs website? She has been exposing the supposed health freedom fighters for who they actually are! I know that you have asked Bigtree, and McCullagh about viruses, and what they said. It is obvious that they both are not being honest. I do not suppose McCullagh has shown you the photo yet. This entire movement is a front for the protection of the multi trillion-dollar virology fraud. This has been an effective strategy as they have millions of dedicated dupes defending them. Thank you again for educating so many. I pass this information along to as many as I can, and I am always surprised that none have ever questioned the twisted logic of the covid fraud. Jack Williams, Tennessee, USA.
I have no skin in the game here, apart from an interest in outright honesty, but what did Bigtree say about viruses? I was always under the assumption that his campaign(s) meant he was opposed to vaccines. Wouldn't the possibility that viruses didn't exist add another string to his bow? Sorry if the question seems dumb but I just don't have anymore time to research this since I'm pretty full on with the Coivid/Climate bulsht. Thanks
Dear Sharon, thank you for your comment. First let me say that when Dr. Bailey had the video interview with Bigtree, he did not commit to or for this fact. He stated that it would distract from the work he is doing. He deflected, and this was a huge tell because what he is doing is exposing the fraud of vaccines not being harmful. Bam, there is the rub. If his work is about the fraud of vaccines, would it not be extremely important to show that virology is a fraud? Would you not think this more important than anything? No virus, no viral pandemic, no virus, no virology! It begs the question why! Dr. Peter McCullagh stated that he has a photo of a virus, and yet has not seen fit to show it to Dr. Bailey or anyone else for that matter, and again it begs the question, why. Now, just think of the multi-trillion-dollar virology fraud, and the pushers of this fraud. This is the Unicorn they have used to jab us all for about sixty years with anti-viral vaccines, right? If eugenics is the motive, and it is, then what better way to frighten the public than with a virus. It has worked perfectly for a long time, and if it were exposed for a fraud then the entire edifice would fall apart. The green movement, climate change bullshit has been foisted on us by the verry same player that gave us virology. All part of the entire plan, and none of these things happen in a vacuum. Think about the green movement, as in wind, and solar. How in the hell would you scale up to what is needed for energy consumption. The wind towers are so expensive that they would never pay for themselves, and the solar panels would require the area of all the sunbelt states to generate the power needed, an army of cleaners just to keep them clean, and another army of techs. to repair them. The there is the problem of the silver needed to build them. It is ludicrous and will never happen. It was never meant to happen. They need to destroy the industries and destroy our mean of living so they can usher in the global socialism, digital currency so they can control us. The club of Rome was formed in 1968, and they said publicly that the population needed to be reduced to one billion people by peaceful means. Translation, deindustrialization, globalization, digital currency for control, viral plagues that call for lockdowns, masking, social distancing, mistrust among the population by fear and propaganda. no war or open hostility by bombing or soldiers in the streets. This will be sold as necessary for our protection. Forced jabs that will kill now, and later. Sterility of men and women, low sperm counts to no counts, still births to no births. I know you are covered up with all that we are dealing with and have no time to do the research, but I have gone down this rabbit hole for some time, and I assure you this is real. Now, concerning the players in the health freedom movement. What better strategy to use than a bunch of professionals bucking the system, and talking about the vaccine, the damage, the death the danger but not the virus fraud! If you think critically about this, and especially knowing what Dr. Bailey has proven then you can see that they are the straw men and women being the fronts for virology. It is perfect because the sheep run after the seemingly truth tellers like rock groupies. I have to say that you do have skin in this game because if you have children or want children, and a future, then you do have skin in this game as we all do. This is not about the singular things that appear to be disconnected. They are all connected. I thank you for asking this question, and no, I do not think it was dumb at all. If there is anything else I can inform you about, I would be glad to do so, Jack.
Thanks for the effort to reply and such a comprehensive answer. 'Skin in the game' didn't mean I wasn't interested. I was convinced Covid was a hoax from April 2020, I meant that I have no time to research virus/no-virus because I am devoted to exposing other elements of this criminal enterprise. I rely on other honest souls who have the same motive as I do (defeat evil basically) to fill me in on the many gaps in my knowledge. I am, though, still uncertain as to who is and who isn't controlled opposition and don't want to alienate people who are in fact allies. Franco defeated the International Brigades because they couldn't stop arguing amongst themselves even though they all opposed fascism.
What was the outcome of the sugar cube polio immunization.....any know side effects.....SV40 adverse reactions?
I am not sure about this one I took as a child in the fifties but none of them are safe and were not needed due to the disappearance of polio. Incidentally many other maladies were labeled as polio. Miss diagnosed to make it appear to be polio, and for guess what reason. MONY$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Dear Ima, I do not know if you work in virology or are connected in some way but your arguments defending the indefensible are all circular. There has been no isolation period! The entire method used for supposedly finding a virus is a fraud. If the scientific method is the gold standard for science, and virology does not use the scientific method then where does this leave your argument? Empty and meaningless. Only the scientific method can be used to find a virus, and it is not used. Perhaps a virus does exist on the horn of a Unicorn but not in reality. If you will not look at the evidence, they Baileys have shown then perhaps you need to. I have seen the evidence, and virology is a multi-trillion-dollar fraud.
You flogging articles?
Flog one that shows that a virus has been isolated using proper scientific methods. It should be a no brainer considering how prolific they are claimed to be.
You sir are exactly right! I think Ima is a pharma. plant in the conversation. She apparently has not looked at the two videos the Baileys released that show just how unscientific this fraud is. There is not one paper that is not a circular argument! Thats all they have to cling to. Pathetic.
I had entertained that possibility.
I run into someone like this on every site! It is an old tactic that they use. Some will argue for a while, and then attack you personally to deflect from the argument. It doesn't work on me. All the supposed health freedom fighters are fronts for the virology fraud. I asked all of them about this, and I get answers like I am too busy to get involved or nothing at all. This includes Malone et al. Never a word on virology. The baileys are the only ones who have shown what a fraud it is. This is a multi-trillion-dollar industry that they need to be protect. Malone worked his entire carrier with the DOD doing this kind of work. All they do is talk about how deadly the vaccine is yada yada. Never a word about virology, Jack.
I am no scientist, but isolation, as you very well know, is only half of the process. You have missed out purification = the basic elementary flaw of all you virus frauds!
Dr. Tom Cowan; Dr. Andrew Kaufman; Mike Stone; Mike Donio; Exposing The Virus Fraud!:
https://archive.org/details/dr.-tom-cowan-dr.-andrew-kaufman-mike-stone-mike-donio-exposing-the-virus-fraud
The Virus Fraud Drs. Tom Cowan, Mark And Sam Bailey, and Andy Kaufman:
https://archive.org/details/the-virus-fraud-drs.-tom-cowan-mark-and-sam-bailey-andy-kaufman_202306
Thank you, Charles! Another truth bomb to this pharma. operative. This is what the virology defenders do to try and dispel the truth. Her argument is as fraudulent as the fake science of virology. Some of their strategy is to attack the person directly rather than actually argue on the subject. Her strategy has not reached this as yet, but I am sure it will eventually. Thank you for seeing the flaws and pointing them out, Jack.
https://zlibrary-global.se/book/5422727/3e0e35/virus-mania-how-the-medical-industry-continually-invents-epidemics-making-billiondollar-profits-a.html
https://www.bitchute.com/search/?query=virus%20mania%20part&kind=video&sort=new
The most repetitive comment I make is "Viruses do not exist"
Lots of action back in the early 1900 to support germ theory. John D Rockefeller , Flexner rapport and probably many more that Dr Sam can tell us about. Perhaps back in the middle ages the church saw an opportunity too . Particularly the Catholic one. Never let a good crisis pass you by. See the dust and dead fish - REPENT (and give us your money)Fear keeps us dependant on authority - well some of us. A combination of climate hysteria and disease is sending us all right back to medievil times and the good old elite LOVE IT. They see themselves as neo deities. They've been at it for centuries and now they smell blood. Nothing snuffs out enlightenment faster than scary superstition. Most people probably think that some element of fear is prudency and not at all stupid- just in case. I think steering clear of idiocy is prudent - just in case .
Germ theory is like religion, both invented to blind you from the truth of your own power and to kill people
Watch the movie “The Physician” as it shows the drift of a huge dust cloud(volcanic eruption) which travels across Central Europe, followed by the toxic respiratory dysfunctions and food chain destruction, resulting in mass deaths.
The rat plagues ( clean up crew)follow after.
yes, rats come at our invitation to help out
"at our invitation" How so?
We engage in silly living, they're the mop-up crew. We have fixed habitations and start chucking food around, and they come to dinner. No sense pretending we didn't invite them.
I remember at my grandmother's cottage, people would get sloppy in the kitchen, and during one week in July the fat-eater ants would find all the places people had left butter. A different week the sweet-eating ants would find all the places people had left sugar. You couldn't ask for a better reminder for how exactly to keep the kitchen clean.
Yes, of course. Just looking for a clear statement. I do rely on my ant, roach, and mice visitors to remind me to clean-up. The problem is they don't come round anymore even though the garbage is piling up. I'm starting to worry for their wellbeing.
Great point.
Is there a similar explanation for the Spanish and Portuguese allegedly wiping out whole civilisations in South America with 'smallpox' etc? Even alternative historians still seem to be attached to that one.
The "Viral Delusion" documentary discussed this issue. I forget which episode it was in (I think no. 1). They pointed out that enslavement and starvation and outright massacre can account for the depopulation / genocide of the native populations. The virus story, meanwhile, provides a convenient cover for these crimes.
Yes, my suspicion was always that they were covering up massacres.
What Really Makes You Ill talks about this, if I remember correctly starvation and forced slavery in toxic mines being one possibility.
Smallpox is most likely bed bugs spread to natives by giving them infected blankets, Tom Cowan talks about it in his book "The Contagion Myth".
Yes please. Would love to view the underside of those purported truths.
The 1348 Friuli Earthquake, 6.9 on the Richter Scale: According to contemporary sources, it caused considerable damage to structures; churches and houses collapsed, villages were destroyed and "FOUL ODORS EMANATED FROM THE EARTH".
That volcano (sun spot decline is also suggested as a cause) may have initiated the little ice age. Colder temperatures were widespread and would have led to more crop failure; another reason for the social tensions and war. There are lots of studies showing this cooling period. It also ended the Viking settlement on Greenland.
Trying to get responsible information about something that occurred some 675 years ago, is quite a daunting task. We really cannot imagine the primitive conditions of those times where the plague might have been caused by any number of things.
Even today, there is no verifiable proof of the transmission of viruses and other diseases.
I would bet that even if we could send a team of scientists back in time to investigate this plague, the results would be fudged to purposely support germ theory.
Could one risk claiming that the glorious Germ Theory was implemented by design. Could be , right?
It makes sense to me that the superstition of medieval times encouraged Germ theory story to be a popular explanation. After all, who wants to blame themselves for being unfit? --- As the scientific method became more of a standard the Rockefeller Pharma profiteers were forced to invented confusing methodologies as effective gaslighting. The cytopathic effect (CPE) requires harsh chemicals and cell starvation to produce something that can be called a "virus" under the microscope. This biology standard is absurd. As Rockefeller's allopathic medicine profit schemes provided enormous wealth to purchase advertisement, news articles, universities/medical schools and false narratives that effectively created a belief system based on pseudoscience. Thanks to Dr. Bailey for presenting this particular issue with such class and thoroughness. Just posted - Stefan Lanka exposes the ludicrous CPE process - http://tinyurl.com/yhrcae97
I'm a forest skeptic the way the Baileys are virus skeptics or the way Kelly Brogan knows that psych drugs are worse than useless or Tom Cowan knows that the little human heart isn't a "pump" that pushes blood through tens of thousands of miles of tight little pipes.
Readers to the end of this comment, if any, will discover how this comment relates to the medieval period.
My claim is that trees don't exist.
Trees really don't exist.
I can prove it, but not in the attention span allowed to readers in a comments basement rife with typos. Imagine Sam Bailey in the comments basement of a tree skeptic! How might she fare? How much time would she be allowed? What indifference might she expect from my arbology-skepticism fans? How many Tree Mania books might I be expected to sell, should I opt to write such a tome?
Pretty funny to imagine me "coming out" as a tree skeptic. I could come out as gay, tranz, de-tranz, and re-tranz, not to mention as an oddly tall cislady who is one-sixteenth everything and with nine genders and two nice legs, all of this at the same time, and I could do all of that more easily than I could come out as a tree skeptic. Even the virus skeptics would give me hard looks and bid me keep moving to the back of the bus. "There goes that guy who gives skepticism a bad name." I'd have to stand in back with people who know water is an element and (for that matter) conscious, people who know that comets are electric wonders and not dirty snowballs, and a guy who knows a purple lizard man because the lizard himself wasn't even allowed on the bus. Not to mention that guy who knows that democracy is the false belief that we can appoint a master who is not ourself. Oh wait, that guy looks a lot like my doppelganger.
Just for the record, purple lizard men living at the center of the Earth don't exist. I'm almost sixty-percent sure they don't. Seriously.
People who know that I joke about almost everything might think that my tree-skepticism stance is another of my wild japes. And yet unsettling things can be both true and funny. People tend to confuse serious and significant, is how that happens. It's illegal in most algo-fields to say about Nazis that "getting gold out of Jews is like pulling teeth," even though my joke is seriously funny, deeply empathic, and historically helpful. It's algo-illegal because people like to pretend I mean by such an excellent joke something derogatory to Jews or modern dentistry. Hmm, I actually do mean something derogatory to modern dentistry. Well, you can see how I've been driven, if not to drink, at least to open mics at comedy clubs. That guy Mike is much more open about things than virus skeptics tend to be.
As for comedy, the Baileys stay far away from me, even though I'm a big fan of theirs and even though we have a common friend in Lew Rockwell (well, full disclosure, Lew no longer returns my calls--I've pulled a few stunts), but the single exception to this, the one time that either Bailey has ever acknowledged me in hundreds of comments in Sam's basement, is Mark liking my ebola joke. See? Humor is our common heritage. Mark liked my ebola joke! I can die content now. Die laughing.
The way to visualize my tree skepticism is to have a giant Crocodile Dundee character upgraded from an Australian to a New Zealand accent, and a state biologist points to the largest tree in Christchurch and says "that's a tree." And Dundee goes, "that's not a tree." [pulls far bigger tree out of his back pocket] "That's a tree."
For extra fun, notice New Zealand people getting triggered at being confused with that other place.
Wait, what? New Zealand really isn't in Australia?
See how much of a prelude a tree skeptic has to have just to make a simple comment? All I wanted to say is that the reason medievals are so filthy in the popular imagination is that it was in this period that the last forests disappeared. And I mean really disappeared. Not even in Poland nor in Belarus would a single tree make it past 1600. Forests bye bye. Gonzo. Poof. And forests are what kept people healthy. Not "forests" the way our impoverished sciencey minds imagine forests, but real trees in real forests, and that's always about the forest FLOOR (sorry for caps but italics aren't permitted). A floor that's information rich and mycelium-wired for hundreds of miles round. The floor: Big Talk. A forest is a floor. Not the vertical sticks but the horizontal deep-time wealth of the floor. Sixty- or a hundred-foot-thick floors, and a man in 2024 who knows how to hyphenate them! That moderns have a contemptuous way of talking about the vestigial woodlands as "the sticks" tells you everything you need to know about how moderns have lost not just the Forest but the memory of a Forest. Lost the cleansing of the Big Talk.
The medieval period was the West's first full-scale experiment in filth, which is to say our first full-scale experiment in life without any forest whatsoever: not even a single tree.
State biologists want you to believe we have trees and forests nowadays, though we lack the hundred-thousand-year-deep floors outside the glacier-retreat lines. Forests exist, say the state biologists. But on this planet the forests have all gone away. Brace for impact. The forests have all gone away. There is nothing more to say.
=========≠=========
Dr. David Thor writes from the Niagara montrecoastal.
Personally, I prefer to avoid cliches like the plague.
Oh, boom. Best all-round comment under this video.
Also - Loss of forest = massive mud runoff = massive silt in rivers = riparian ecosystem loss = no fishies :(
right? Endless knock-on effects. That Flight of the Conchords thingie was hilarious. Aberration...it's pronounced aborigine.
// likely posted here before //
(2 mins) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeGdahBW5i8
Flight of the Conchords - Keitha
Thank you , thank you , thank you , dear doctor.
Dr Kalish/ Kalish institute talks a lot about cell danger response and viruses mangling mitochondria function.
How do we freeze-dry that?
I'm experimenting with Methylene Blue.
And Q10.
Which stops working when I eat a box of Coco Pops.
Excellent. You both must sense the changing ratios in the human sensorium. Painful and compelling. Reclaiming the balance, embodiment restored, imagination activated. Thanks for helping those of us emerge from our narcosis.
proper use of "sensorium" noted
This was an excellent and succinct explanation (as always). Thank you so much Dr Bailey.
I would love to hear a conversation between you and JJ Couey now, as he has shifted so far towards the questioning of viruses altogether that it would probably be very productive.
Like you he is a committed and talented educator and a thoroughly decent human being.
He is struggling to gain traction and desperate to get the message out that there was no "novel" pathogen in 2020; that "viruses" can never "pandemic"; that protocols, fraudulent PCR testing and the misattributing of deaths to covid were responsible for the increase in mortality especially in places like New York; that the intramuscular of any substance with the intent of augmenting an immune system that we have very little to no understanding or appreciation of, is a terrible idea; and that our children are in danger of being hijacked by the notion that the narrative is real and can happen again.
Please accept his invitation. The world is in dire need of your combined compassion and wisdom!
JJ is totally hostile & vile about the No Virus position. He refuses to question the methodologies of virology. He will not listen to reason. He behaves like a gatekeeper.
As I listened to JJ more closely he is saying the no virus camp is also “right” in their way.......
There are synthetic sequences lab created clones to mimic virus....RNA does not pandemic
His lesson on how this is done is worth studying....
His passion should not be misconstrued.....
He admits being misguided for a long time and has a full page of explanation.....
Yes Sam and Couey get together.....
Help stop the divide
Preventgenocide2030
Get out of the UN and all it’s tentacles .....otherwise none of these opinions or lifetime academic lanes will make any difference at all.
WHO do you think is really vile, what organizations?
All we've been shown are computer models and CGI cartoons. No natural or manmade contagious particles have ever been shown to exist. The very concept of contagion is false.
"cartoons," exactly
Yeah, he was definitely hostile and unwilling to explore the issue. The most recent thing I heard from him though sounded like he was fully rejecting the possibility of lab engineered virus. His reasoning: it’s never been proven in a scientific experiment! He acknowledged the “no virus” people are justified in claiming viruses aren’t real by the same reasoning: not proven!
But he also stated he doesn’t believe viruses are not real. He’s in that stage of evolution where he’s having cognitive dissonance with his dogma versus his recent realizations. He’ll need to resolve that dissonance pretty soon.
I’m pleased he seems close to speaking honestly from a well researched and logical perspective. He might even impress us with polite behavior. That would be nice.
I agree that he has used dismissive language in the past, but I am very convinced that he is moving in his position. He is also able to admit when he has been wrong, which is a refreshing and rare quality.
I respectfully invite you to watch this because he acknowledges that the "no virus" camp are probably completely correct. This is a recent presentation to the Medical Docs for COVID Ethics International.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2041515078
IMO it would be more productive to have a public discussion between virus non-believers like Sam, Mark, Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman on 1 side vs a group of virus believers.
They're all scared of Mark Bailey. No one could stand up to him.
What makes you say that?
I've been brandishing Mark's name for a year or two at people who think of themselves as good at a debate, like Sam Harris and, hmm, that Heather lady who does that podcast with her husband who seems to be on Joe Rogan lately. A couple of others. No takers. I'm not the only one who has presented his name for debate. But the real reason I say that is I've watched Mark's way with a text. He doesn't have the vivacious personality of his wife but he's almost machine-like in the way he doggedly goes line-by-line through sciencey writing. I taught briefly at the same school in New Jersey that Einstein taught at (and in the same century), and I used to have physics friends, so though I don't really respect science, I do have, um, good science social skills, or I used to, and I have a good feel for who's bluffing. At least, let's hope I do.
P.S. to Ernesto: I used to have good social skills in vivo, but my social skills in silico are spotty. I'm not so sure our in silico lives aren't in vitro. For all I know, we're the experiment in the looking glass. Wave if you can see me. Do I look upside down to you?
🤣 👍
Oh wow, thanks for that explanation. I don't know Mark, have only seen him 1x or 2x in Sam's vids. Gosh I would love to see him in a debate with those people.
Another person's presentation I saw recently is Dr. Kevin Stillwagon's explanation that viruses exist, notably SARS-CoV-2. Now, I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, and some of the points he made seemed impressive, though unintelligible for a layperson like me.
However, he did make a few points that even I could understand as rubbish.
I used to have access to all the libraries of Harvard and Princeton, but that was in some other century. Nowadays it's on line, and I take everything, even my own certainties, with a grain of salt. Moving through flatworld is one step farther from the real. How I research nowadays is once I've figured out that there's two sides of something, and there's a 'my' side and a 'their' side, I only research their side. I don't go to people who agree with me, only to people who disagree with me. It's the most efficient way, I figure. When the pandemic came in, I was mostly in it for its comic value. I juggle and do comic things on the street to give people a free laugh, so adding a mask like a yarmulke was just part of the fun. But at some point I noticed some guy saying that everyone in the world would eventually get covid. That seemed unlikely, but I started researching. I paid attention only to people who believed in viruses and in covid. I didn't listen to the Baileys or Tom Cowan or anyone like that. I researched at places like the CDC, but more importantly I went, online, to the actual corporations who did the virus isolation. If they figure you're on their side, they'll open up. If you bring skeptical or hostile energy to your quest, certain kinds of information get closed off. I followed the trail along to all the different companies that isolated the virus--it's like ten different companies with lots of literal driving of the solution from one company to another, each lab doing a different thing, one poisoning the solution and another freezing it and still another re-doing the first thing and another centrifuging it, battering and freezing and whirling and poisoning and dye-ing the sample, on and on, each stage believable by itself, till they take the dead and deader frozen whirled thawed battered whipped (repeat repeat) solution of incomprehensible random fragments to the dye guy so that the picture guy who comes after him can see the fragments to get a picture and there's so many fragments to infinity it's a Rorschach where you can see whatever you want to see, like an infinite battlefield where the soldiers were stripped and their bodies hacked and blended and whirled and frozen and re-hacked and blended and whirled and frozen till nothing much bigger than a toe survives and you start imagining anything you want and they bring that to the computer stage and they have two completely different computer enhancements with big computers and fancy software and multiple companies fiddling with the picture to get a final image of a virus. Each lab probably figures the other labs are being honest, and they do their own thing and pass it on to the next place. Getting a virus is like that game at parties where you whisper something in one person's ear and it goes round the room. Even if no one actually lies about what they hear, each transmission degrades enough so that by the time it gets to the other end it's something humorous. And I gotta tell you that even before I got to the end of that long process, I knew that I was never going to worry about viruses. Not ever. And I started licking urinal handles and tabletops in restaurants. I did keep going to the end of the virus "finding" process, all the way through the two huge computers enhancing and enhancing and enhancing the pictures (you'd think if they were computers it would take seconds but it's hours for each process so generally two different days just to enhance the pictures) and even before I got to the end I knew there was nothing to it. Plus, in the unlikely event that they ever do actually discover the holy grail and isolate any virus, let alone the covid one, all they'll have done is prove how far away from a human body you have to get to isolate something. The irrelevance of the process is right there in the word "isolate." And people get fooled because they don't understand size. They don't have a feel for how immense a human body is. It's like people who think seven trillion miles is far away and it turns out it's only in the Oort cloud right here in our own solar system and they finally understand how far away the nearest star is. When I was a kid we talked about the billions of bits in a human, but a decade ago it was trillions, and it's not getting less. Against that, well, if you really understood how small a virus was and how big a body is, you'd have to have a lot of faith to believe those tiny bits could impact it. And then how would you demonstrate causality inside a human subject, when you need ten labs immensely isolated from the very causality you seek to perform the task? It's a closed loop. I haven't heard anyone talk about this, but isolation, the holy grail, moves the grail itself farther from relevance the more you have to seek it. It's like trying to study the Earth by taking a spaceship to Alpha Centauri and finding after a few decades that the star isn't "proxima" at all. Therefore I lick urinal handles quite gleefully now. If you ever lick metal, make sure it's not in a freezing room or your tongue can get stuck. Part of the fun of staying only on the pro-virus side is you get familiar with how colorized and stylized the images of protein actually are at those scales, and how reticent the companies are to say that most of the images are an artist's inspiration. It was all beautiful in its own way, my trek through that fantasy land of artifice and color. But I no longer put much energy into viruses, even "against" them, except for comic effect. And I don't hate the pro-virus people the way a lot of folks in the Baileys' comments basement do. I can see how people who don't have the time I have to research could get caught in the virus belief because they believe the next person in the process. And having never voted or been involved in nations or democracy or all that pursuit of a master, I'm not disappointed by officials who lie. What else are they supposed to do? It's what voters put them there to do. Instead I feel a little sorry for them, as I can see how they're part of the human project of seeking a master who is not one's own self. I call all of it "the divine comedy."
There's a couple of core issues/debates (that never take place) before a fruitful debate about virus detection methodology can even begin to take place.
--# Are Koch's Postulates still relevant? Still the Gold Standard?
--# Is it ethical to allow humans to volunteer for transmission studies?
--# Is it ethical to demand proof of a virus in the form of healthy people made sick by an isolated, purified virus from a sick person?
--# When it comes to experiments & studies regarding health, which ones are more likely to be truly scientific, and, perhaps, helpful: In vivo, or in vitro?
My comment does not plead for a debate a priori about virus detection methodology (VDM). I ask for a debate about the principle about whether viruses exist, and no doubt the virus believers will bring up arguments based on VDM while the non-believers will shoot those down with counter-arguments.
Some or all of the other 4 points you raise may or may not come up as well, but the facilitator of the discussion should keep it focused on the existence of viruses.
BTW, in your point 4 you left 1 testing environment: in silico.
"I ask for a debate about the principle about whether viruses exist" --
Have you watched any debates?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ni4eWL8PNQlW/
There's more debates at that channel.
What do you mean by "the principle about whether viruses exist"?
"Overall, "principle" often denotes a fundamental belief or concept that guides behavior or serves as a foundational truth in a specific area of knowledge or ethics."
How would you determine the principle? By what means or method?
Nope, I have not watched any debates, and, as the facilitator in the Bailey vs McCairn debate states in the intro, these kind of debates are very few and far between.
As for "the principle about whether viruses exist": it is a moot topic, with strong opinions on both sides of the aisle. Both sides are convinced they are right because both sides have strong arguments to prove their side.
This aligns with your definition of "principle: "often denotes a fundamental belief or concept that guides behavior or serves as a foundational truth in a specific area of knowledge or ethics".
I do not determine any principle, I am a layperson regarding this topic. However, each party determines their principle.
So, I am not sure what your point is.
In any case, I want to thank you for the link. I have wanted to hear Mark debate this issue with someone from the other side. I listened to the intro, and the fact that McCairn resorts to ad hominems for me means he knows he has lost the argument and is frustrated about it.
Anyway, thanks again.
Thank you for your reply. I learn from my replies to you.
"I do not determine any principle, I am a layperson regarding this topic. However, each party determines their principle." --
How long will you shirk your due diligence by hiding behind the excuse that you are a "layperson" and refusing to indeed think about the subject and determining your own principle?
To get beyond the layperson status you have to look at the subject nakedly without the belief that you first have to be academically indoctrinated about it.
When it comes to the subject of contagion, you have to ask yourself: What do I require for proof? What do I need as evidence to be convinced that sick people make healthy people sick? What do I need as evidence that a virus exists?
We are talking about a subject that falls under the category of empirical science and therefore opinions & beliefs are not sought -- only interpretations of data, and the scrutinization of the methods used to obtain the data.
If you're gonna think about what is required for proof, you have to think about the methods needed to acquire that proof. You don't have to leave it up to the experts to tell you what proof is required nor what methods must be used to acquire it.
As it stands, the two most common models used in the research about contagious microbes are person-to-person transmission studies, and cell culture analysis. Each of these has their own methodologies and they need to be scrutinized to see if they are sound and do not lead to bullshit results.
With transmission studies, the methodology must robustly attempt to mimic so-called natural transmission and must not include anything unnatural or synthetic such as injection or intubation.
With cell culture analysis, the methodology must include isolation & purification of a microbe which is then used in an attempt to infect, by the most natural means conceivable, a large group of healthy volunteers.
Watching debates can be helpful on the path of your re-education but at the end of the day you really do have to think critically about the subject and examine the methodologies used in papers claiming to have discovered a virus or evil, parasitical, predatory bacterium.
This comment of mine is probably the most important statement made about public health in the West in the last four years, but will be ignored. I love the divine comedy of all of it. People talk talk talk, and don't do their own experiments. Always seeking a master elsewhere.
This is where that wonderful corporate citizen Nestle came charging in to save us all. They created a product Nestle's Milky Bar endorsed by the Milky Bar Kid - who 'only eats what's right, that's Milky Bar it's clean and white' gauntleted to 'vaccinate' the consumer against anything 'Black' including 'The Plague' and one's own Shadow
I hadn't thought about the difference in what was taught in the educational 'systems' around the English speaking countries before. I was raised in a military family, so was exposed to schools around the world, but I remember being taught about the European 'plagues' quite differently than is described here. While the plagues were definitely horrible, the number of dead was only in the area of 20 to 30 percent of the population.