Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GeoffB

  1. 3 hours ago, zArk said:

    You're taking the mickey

    As I said "Modern virology has overwhelming evidence that viruses do exist."


    Viruses have been proved to exist by modern virology through experiments with a living isolated single human cell infected with a virus and shown to infect a different living healthy human cell without the virus. (Modern Virologists have always known that viruses cannot be “isolated” or “purified” in the dictionary sense of the word as viruses are only evident when attached to a living cell). Mock controls are done in almost every case using the same known liquid suspension or substrate. The experiment is written up in a scientific paper for peer review. Just search the internet for “virus cell culture paper” for thousands of these papers. No paper has had to be retracted.


    Viruses have been proved to exist via modern electron microscopy and photographed showing the virus which is similar but different to an exosome. Just search the internet for “virus cell culture paper”, Images. Again no paper has been retracted.


    Viruses have been proved to exist via modern whole gene sequencing (which is the preferred method of identification) of all of the base pairs. SARS-CoV-2 and it’s variants have 29,903 base pairs which have been laboriously whole gene sequenced (it takes 4 to 5 days and NOT computer generated) and uploaded to the GISAID Initiative over 6 million times. Again no paper has been retracted.


    Viruses have been proved to exist via PCR tests which are highly specific and accurate in detecting a unique long gene sequence fragment of the virus you want to detect. It is not so good at diagnosing infection as the virus detected maybe dead fragments and not viable which can only be done by cell culture in a wet lab. However, the CT rate if low is an indication of infectability. (Although PCR tests are incredibly accurate it all depends on the Quality Control measures in the labs. The Lighthouse labs for mass testing in the UK have poor Quality Control and produce many “false positives”). Again no paper has been retracted.


    Viruses have been proved to exist in the German courts in the infamous Lanka v Bardens case where all the judges and experts agreed that the measles virus was real. (Lanka weaseled himself out of paying the 100,000euro bet by persuading the court that it was proved by “six” scientific papers and not “one” that he had asked for).


    There has been no scientific paper, even a pre-print or one not peer reviewed, that has ever suggested that viruses do not exist.


    Unlike thousands of sceptical climate scientists questioning man made global warming there has been no retired virologist or otherwise with nothing to lose in coming forward with any doubts about “viruses existing”. There have been no death bed confessions from modern virologists. There have been no scientific papers suggesting viruses do not exist. This indicates that viruses are real and do exist as has been proved by the methods already stated.

  2. 2 hours ago, MarcusOmouse said:

    Like I already said Geoff - stand proud.


    Mass murdering lunatics are committing genocide based upon a theory that you consistently endorse.


    Stand proud.

    I stand proud next to Andrew Wakefield, Mike Yeadon, Judy Mikovits, Del Bigtree, David Martin etc. etc. who are all fighting against this Covid tyranny and who all know that viruses exist and can cause disease.

  3. 19 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:


    Well you are not going to get any fair judgement from any 'system-serving' scientists, paid to maintain and toe the 'official narrative'.


    I guess you haven't really read many of David Icke's books, otherwise you'd understand what he thinks about 'The System'.


    He may be right or wrong about whether viruses exist or not, but the fact that you so vociferously defend and quote 'mainsteam science' so matter-of-factly makes me question what your intentions here are.

    I have read most of David Ickes's books and have always agreed with him.

    Unfortunately he has dug a big hole for himself for being seduced by Kaufman and saying that "viruses do not exist".

    It is also a big stick for people to beat him with.

    I defended his reptilian entity theory but saying that "viruses do not exist" is a huge mistake.

    Lanka, Kaufman, Cowan, Bailey, Icke, Rappoport, Adams etc. have divided the alternative movement against this Covid tyranny with their ridiculous claim that "viruses do not exist".

    Modern virology has overwhelming evidence that viruses do exist.

  4. 38 minutes ago, MarcusOmouse said:

    You can't seem to get it through your tiny mind even though I have said it many times that I agree that the experimental jabs are an abomination and should be withdrawn and people need to be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

    However, where I differ from David Icke is that the virus is real and probably created in a lab.

    People like you have a knee-jerk reaction to anyone who is against this Covid scam BUT dares to point out that "the emperor has no clothes".

    Viruses are real and cause disease, period.

    • Like 1
  5. 12 minutes ago, bobb said:


    What friggin video did I allegedly point to when I asked you to READ IT!!!

    The video of Dr David Martin in the article you linked to.

    Do keep up.

    Your ramblings are all over the place and you're coming across as confused.

    If you can't be more concise or have anything interesting to offer I suggest you just keep quiet.

  6. 26 minutes ago, bobb said:


    How did you make the connection that I said Viruses do not exist, what I am saying is that this so called Viral outbreak is a whole load of coffolloxs, what I am saying is that something else is going on as pointed out in my first post about covid-19 is the disease, and not the virus!!!

    Your exact words in your post were "not the alleged, VIRUS, which in my opinion does not exist".

  7. 44 minutes ago, bobb said:


    And what are you suffering from, what virus are you speaking about?

    Did you read the piece I showed you of how they are lying and deceiving everyone?

    Do you know that anything in Nature can not legally be patented?

    Do you know there is a patent for this, does this mean it's a biological weapon of war which is also illegal?

    Well you can not have your cake and eat it as they say, so give me the low down on what it is you are trying to defend here?

    I'm defending the fact that viruses exist.

    I agree with Dr David Martin that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab.

    You are confused if you are using Dr David Martin to prove that viruses do not exist.

    YouTube have deleted the video you linked to.

  8. 2 hours ago, bobb said:


    I BELIEVE nothing but truth, Covid-19 is the disease, and no one can say HOW it is being transmitted, therefore not a VIRUS!!!

    as for SARS-CoV-2, you need to look at the work done by Dr David Martin, the link I have provided is a fact check piece that is heavily laden with dragon language, and you will need to question everything it alleges to refute, as always, ymmv.

    The truth is that there are many scientific papers showing a cell infected with SARS-CoV-2 infects a different healthy cell and inflicts cytopathic deterioration to that healthy cell. Here is an example in case you missed it. 



    I am a big fan of Dr David Martin and he played a big part in the film Plandemic which showed that the virus is real.


    You seem to be suffering from cognitive dissonance if you are quoting Dr David Martin to prove your point.

  9. 13 hours ago, bobb said:

    Please remember everyone that the term COVID-19 relates to the disease aspect not the alleged, VIRUS, which in my opinion does not exist, it is only the disease that exists and that can be from:






    My personal opinion is it involves Biological, Chemical and probably more importantly Psychological.

    What evidence have you seen that makes you believe the SARS-CoV-2 virus does not exist?

  10. 1 hour ago, zArk said:

    There is no 'cell' virus and there is no RNA virus because RNA is junk science created from junk methodology. the claimed RNA has only ever been documented from muscle cells which had undergone necrosis and were chemically altered during preparation for study.

    Your talking total bullshit.

    Thousands of scientific papers detail their experiments with different cells, the only necrosis is from the virus and there was NO chemical alteration as the preparation for study is immersed in nutrients and antifungals.

    Your delusional.

  11. 2 hours ago, MarcusOmouse said:


    That enough people have been fooled enough to believe  Covid19 is one of them, is the reason our civilization is currently in the mess it is..


    Congratulations on perpetuating it and making a brighter future for our children.

    As I have said countless times Covid has been blown out of all proportion and is being used by the Global Elite to subjugate humankind.

    That doesn't mean I don't believe that some viruses cause disease.

  12. 8 hours ago, bamboozooka said:

    So what?


    1) They soon had plenty of "isolated" samples available (in the scientific sense NOT the dictionary sense) so it is a non-story.


    2) The very early computer generated gene sequence from partial sequencing was subsequently found to be exactly the same as the "real" gene sequence after it had been laboriously whole gene sequenced now over 6 million times so it's a non-story.


    3) They didn't have a clinical specimen at that time but they had the gene sequence to develop the PCR test so it's a non-story.


    This was all early in the so-called pandemic and scientists were rushing to discover the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2.

    The Corman-Drosten RT-PCR test was highly specific and highly accurate at detecting "only" SARS-CoV-2 but has been slightly improved.

    A number of "life-scientists" questioned the accuracy of the original paper to Eurosurveillance where it was first published.

    Six independent scientists reviewed the complaints and dismissed them all.


    It's a non-story.

  13. 3 hours ago, Apotheosis said:

    No. There are many studies and papers that show there exist phenomena, which are interpreted to be effects of a virus, which are associated with subsequent or antecedant cytopathic effects on healthy living cells.

    Yes. It shows that the interpretation that what is causing the phenomena is a virus is correct as the evidence is overwhelming.

  14. 4 hours ago, Apotheosis said:




    I'll do one better. I'll quote your post with the link.



    From the article:





    Proof of the "viral germ theory" or existence of viruses is, then, impossible according to the author's beliefs. You endorsed this article. You said it "neatly explains why viruses exist and why it is important that people in the "alternative media" start to accept the fact." Yet the author emphatically states several times that proof of their existence is not just lacking but in principle impossible.


    So, now that we've proved the existence of this logical inconsistency, what is your answer? Why are you inconsistent?


    Is it a problem of memory? Is it a problem of the intellect? Or is it because you are a dishonest sack of shit with an agenda? Do you even read what you present to us?


    It is a philosophical point on whether anything can be proved to exist.


    However, as the writer of the piece states if the evidence is overwhelming then it is likely something exists.


    The writer agrees that the evidence for virus existing is overwhelming.

  15. 4 hours ago, MarcusOmouse said:

    3 more sentences of waffle.


    There are countless millions of so called  viruses in a teaspoonful of soil. To say nothing of the trillions in each of our bodies.


    Virus means poison in latin. It has been conveniently hijacked ( and probably defined by the death cult) to justify this ongoing genocide by vaccination.


    Using their definiton of a virus and given their abundance in nature , surely humanity would have already been wiped out by now ?


    Perhaps you have  a scientific paper that explains how such common sense is somehow not common sense?


    You seem to being doing a good job of defying common sense so far.


    Finally, these people promulgating such horseshit ARE coming down.







    I'm glad you agree that viruses exist.


    Some viruses cause disease some don't.



  16. 15 minutes ago, MarcusOmouse said:

    Viruses are indeed a quirk of nature according to your analysis. Suddenlly from nowhere an inert microparticle appears to be developing life. Dare I inquire into the studies on this lately transpiring controversy?

    Just do an internet search for "Are viruses alive".


    You just said "No- one is arguing that a strangely named inert particle ( non -living) exists."

    Most people on here are arguing that exact point that "viruses do not exist".


    There are many studies and scientific papers that shows a virus has cytopathic effects on healthy living cells. Therefore to answer your question yes viruses can cause disease.

  17. 1 hour ago, Apotheosis said:



    You referred us to an article, an article YOU gave your approval to, which repeatedly stated in no uncertain terms the author's own belief that "viral germ theory" CANNOT be proved.


    Yet here you are telling us that "viral germ theory" is something PROVEN.


    Is this a lapse of memory? Is it an incapacity for logical consistence? Or are you just a dishonest piece of shit with an agenda?

    Stop being a lazy piece of shit and give the link to the article.

  18. 11 minutes ago, webtrekker said:


    Exactly! We both know very little and rely on the views of 'experts' that will say almost anything to support their egos and careers.


    We just have to pick what sounds reasonable to ourselves and run with it.




    After leaving grammar school with basic qualifications I entered further education to obtain a professional qualification to enhance my career in engineering.


    It soon dawned on me that the main stream media reporting of world events was a one sided affair and I sought out contrarian views.


    I shunned formal education because it is just one opinion not many opinions and not necessarily the right opinion on what was really happening.


    20 years ago I started following David Icke for an extreme view of the world around us and he has normally been right.


    I am also well read on philosophical and alternative views.


    To understand scientific papers and scientific principles one has to have some basic knowledge of which I am self taught.


    I have seen the work of Lanka, Kaufman, Cowan, Bailey etc. and have learnt enough to dismiss their claims.


    I am aware of the importance of keeping an open mind but when something like the claim that "viruses do not exist" comes along which can easily be refuted it has to be challenged because it is harming the fight against this global tyranny.


    When you look at the four main people above proposing it they are a failed marine biologist, a failed psychiatrist, a failed medic who had to hand in his license and another failed medic being investigated by the health authorities in New Zealand. All of them have books, pills, lotions and potions to sell to the gullible.


    You and I probably agree on many things but this notion that "viruses do not exist" is just plain wrong.

  19. 11 hours ago, webtrekker said:

    Ok then, we're getting nowhere here. You have such a high opinion of your views that you must be someone with many qualifications, perhaps a virolgist, epidemiologist, doctor, gubberment research scientist, .........? What exactly are your qualifications? (Answers on the back of a postage stamp, please).

    What qualifications do you have to dismiss the claims made by eminent and highly qualified doctors, scientists, virologists and epidemiologists over the last 150 years that viruses exist?

    (Answers on the back of a postage stamp please).

  20. 9 hours ago, webtrekker said:


    I wasn't talking about Lanka. How do you explain Enders' statement (as pictured in the video)?




    The video by a Russian nobody is total rubbish.

    Scientists have  known for a long time that you can't isolate or purify a virus in the dictionary sense of the words.

    Mock controls in modern virology are done all the time.

    Viral infected cells are not starved of nutrients, exactly the opposite, they are given nutrients to keep them alive.

    This so-called experiment by Lanka was in April 2021, written up in his own magazine, and totally debunked by scientists who, unlike Lanka, understand virology.

    They didn't dismiss it because they were trying to hide anything, they dismissed it because it was rubbish.

    If it was so important that it would "change virology forever" why has nothing been heard about it since April 2021?

    The answer is that it was rubbish.

    You asked me to comment specifically on Enders.

    His experiments were in the 1950's and totally irrelevant today.

    Why do you think there has been no advancement in virology in almost 70 years?

  21. 1 hour ago, MarcusOmouse said:

    Bacteria are minute LIVING organisms.


    Just like parasites.


    The above are both ALIVE.


    Viruses are inert ( none living ) bits of matter.


    You need to make and understand the  distinction.

    Viruses are a quirk of nature and there is scientific debate on whether they are alive or not.

    You need to make and understand the distinction that viruses exist.

  • Create New...