It has never been proven they do not exist. From an evolutionary perspective, why would they not? RNA was around a long time, prior to the evolution of DNA. They are not particularly infectious because RNA has no error-checking mechanism, so most of the produced clones will be useless.
It has never been proven they do not exist. From an evolutionary perspective, why would they not? RNA was around a long time, prior to the evolution of DNA. They are not particularly infectious because RNA has no error-checking mechanism, so most of the produced clones will be useless.
Karl, you sound like a flat earther claiming that no one has proven that the earth is spherical, like a ball floating in space. Maybe, like Augustine, you think that if there are people living on the underside of the earth they must have huge feet to keep them from falling off (read the Confessions of St. Augustine). While it's impossible to prove a negative, like virus's don't exist, the fact that in over a century of searching no one can prove that they've found one should be sufficient reason to steer clear of snake oil preparations and vaccines that purport to protect you from them.
Is the 'Flat Earther' analogy the best one? After all, whether you think the earth is an (approx.) sphere, which I do, else flat, the earth still exists.
Maybe, a better analogy is religion; if you believe in an invisible 'entity', no one has ever seen (outside of a psych unit), which I don't.
I neither said I believe viruses exist; just that they might. Unlike the 'no virus' crowd who won't even acknowledge any chance they do exist. Certainly, Kevin McKernan believes they do, as explained in his sub article: 'https://anandamide.substack.com/p/viroids-and-obelisks'.
What I did say, is that evolutionarily they certainly should exist. Lots happens over billions of years, and a pathogen that can attack a host using the host's own energy, seems like an elegant solution for any pathogen.
Well there is one thing that I do know, and that is if there was no media hype there certainly would not have been a 'pandemic' and certainly no 'viruses' ( pathogenic micro-organisms).....however could there be a toxin of sorts around????
Hahaha, I didn't say that virus's don't exist, just that nobody has ever proven that they do, but I will say that there's a lot more evidence for "an invisible entity" that billions of people call God than there is for virus's or dark matter and dark energy.
That a bunch of people, called scientists, postulate the existence of types of matter and energy that can't be seen or interacted with in any way (yet) simply because they were proven wrong about their belief that the universe must be contracting while in fact , by observation, it's expansion is accelerating rather than decelerating because of the influence of this strange stuff, and millions of people as well as who knows how many other scientists accept their hype as fact is a mystery to me; however, that so many people off handedly disregard the likely existence of a creator when there's such an overwhelming amount of evidence for It's existence is a far greater mystery, as you say, "the earth still exists". Where it derives from is quite clear now, the Big Bang, but where and how that event took place is still as great a mystery as it has ever been. To try and make the case "that evolutionarily they (virus's) certainly should exist" is really just an admission that truly obvious explanation is unacceptable, that everything in existence was designed and created by something far beyond our understanding.
As for religion, It's a serious blunder to conflate religion with the creator. Man is responsible for the development of all religions, which exist (in part) to try and explain what they believe are the mysteries of the creator.
The creator, or God as It's called in English, is the designer and prime mover that brought all things into existence for It's own reasons and purposes. If there's no creator then everything is simply an accident, and if that's the case then another accident could end it all at any second.
Hahaha, But how can there be an accident when there's nothing to be involved in an accident? Scientists claim that there was always something there, they like to use the word singularity to describe what was there in the beginning because to most of them the idea of themselves actually being creatures is not acceptable, otherwise they're not the greatest things in creation, they're not really at the top of the food chain. Hahaha!
What you personally believe Karl is obviously up to you, as it is to each of us, and I most certainly won't begrudge your choices.
I wish you the very best in all of your endeavors throughout your entire life, and I hope you have a wonderful day.
It has never been proven they do not exist. From an evolutionary perspective, why would they not? RNA was around a long time, prior to the evolution of DNA. They are not particularly infectious because RNA has no error-checking mechanism, so most of the produced clones will be useless.
Karl, you sound like a flat earther claiming that no one has proven that the earth is spherical, like a ball floating in space. Maybe, like Augustine, you think that if there are people living on the underside of the earth they must have huge feet to keep them from falling off (read the Confessions of St. Augustine). While it's impossible to prove a negative, like virus's don't exist, the fact that in over a century of searching no one can prove that they've found one should be sufficient reason to steer clear of snake oil preparations and vaccines that purport to protect you from them.
Is the 'Flat Earther' analogy the best one? After all, whether you think the earth is an (approx.) sphere, which I do, else flat, the earth still exists.
Maybe, a better analogy is religion; if you believe in an invisible 'entity', no one has ever seen (outside of a psych unit), which I don't.
I neither said I believe viruses exist; just that they might. Unlike the 'no virus' crowd who won't even acknowledge any chance they do exist. Certainly, Kevin McKernan believes they do, as explained in his sub article: 'https://anandamide.substack.com/p/viroids-and-obelisks'.
What I did say, is that evolutionarily they certainly should exist. Lots happens over billions of years, and a pathogen that can attack a host using the host's own energy, seems like an elegant solution for any pathogen.
Well there is one thing that I do know, and that is if there was no media hype there certainly would not have been a 'pandemic' and certainly no 'viruses' ( pathogenic micro-organisms).....however could there be a toxin of sorts around????
Hahaha, I didn't say that virus's don't exist, just that nobody has ever proven that they do, but I will say that there's a lot more evidence for "an invisible entity" that billions of people call God than there is for virus's or dark matter and dark energy.
That a bunch of people, called scientists, postulate the existence of types of matter and energy that can't be seen or interacted with in any way (yet) simply because they were proven wrong about their belief that the universe must be contracting while in fact , by observation, it's expansion is accelerating rather than decelerating because of the influence of this strange stuff, and millions of people as well as who knows how many other scientists accept their hype as fact is a mystery to me; however, that so many people off handedly disregard the likely existence of a creator when there's such an overwhelming amount of evidence for It's existence is a far greater mystery, as you say, "the earth still exists". Where it derives from is quite clear now, the Big Bang, but where and how that event took place is still as great a mystery as it has ever been. To try and make the case "that evolutionarily they (virus's) certainly should exist" is really just an admission that truly obvious explanation is unacceptable, that everything in existence was designed and created by something far beyond our understanding.
As for religion, It's a serious blunder to conflate religion with the creator. Man is responsible for the development of all religions, which exist (in part) to try and explain what they believe are the mysteries of the creator.
The creator, or God as It's called in English, is the designer and prime mover that brought all things into existence for It's own reasons and purposes. If there's no creator then everything is simply an accident, and if that's the case then another accident could end it all at any second.
Hahaha, But how can there be an accident when there's nothing to be involved in an accident? Scientists claim that there was always something there, they like to use the word singularity to describe what was there in the beginning because to most of them the idea of themselves actually being creatures is not acceptable, otherwise they're not the greatest things in creation, they're not really at the top of the food chain. Hahaha!
What you personally believe Karl is obviously up to you, as it is to each of us, and I most certainly won't begrudge your choices.
I wish you the very best in all of your endeavors throughout your entire life, and I hope you have a wonderful day.