Jump to content

David Icke's claim that 'there is no virus'?


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, GeoffB said:

Where does Lanka get his money from?

He publishes a monthly magazine, runs a website with advertising revenue, sells books and offers pills, lotions and potions all to the gullible.

He can afford top lawyers to appeal a court decision where he had to cough up 100,000 euros to a lowly poor medical student who proved to the court that the measles virus exists. Lanka got off on a legal technicality.

Lanka has no written verifiable proof that viruses do not exist because he knows it will be torn to shreds by people who understand viruses.

Lanka is a fraud.

Where does other virologist get their money from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Whose "facts" though?

 

I do seriously note with interest that this particular thread is the only one you ever participate in, despite being someone who supposedly has followed David Icke and believes/supports much of what he has previously said/written.

 

Despite what you insist, you're coming across like a gatekeeper to me. Prove me wrong, or be gone from here.

I have been telling you that he/she is displaying classic gatekeeping behaviour. To the point of claiming he agree with 99percent of what Icke says but yet unable to state clearly what he agrees with icke about. I have asked him that question a number of time and he never give a straight answer. For example, in my case, i have no qualm in stating clearly that the royal family are indeed reptilian, or at very least, possessed by reptilian spirit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, GeoffB said:

One fundamental point people are missing about David Icke saying that viruses do not exist and a question I would like answered.
David Icke has famously said in the past when he was talking, correctly in my view, about the Global Elites plan of control and to cull the population “Stage one you create a problem. It could be a manufactured virus”.
China and Iran have accused the US of deliberately releasing the virus as a bioweapon.
Someone in the future may release a virus as a bioweapon.
If the Chinese and Iranian governments are right that the US released the virus as a bioweapon or someone releases a virus as a bioweapon in the future (something David Icke has predicted) how will David Icke inform the world or explain with any authority when he is saying now that “viruses do not exist”?
 

The CCP and Iran leadership are both owned by the globalist death cult. Mao was a Rockefeller goffer. All you see is political theatre. It is funny to me how people do not trust the  CCP about anything and yet trust them when they said they have discovered a new virus. Does people here seriously believe that  the ultra secretive and authoritarian Chinese government would have revealed to the world that it has discovered a new virus in Wuhan? Come on, no one here should be that naive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kilowon said:

Addressed the point in my post, I did not mentioned Lanka at all there. Why are the virologist themselves admitting that they did not follow proper procedure to prove that sarscov2 exist and that it is the cause of a disease. Again, where are the literally tens of thousand of scientific papers that confirm the original finding. The fact that you yourself have not read tens of thousands of papers about sarscov2 isolation shows again that you are just parroting and have no idea if that is so.

Your original post contained a falsehood.

You said "All these quotes come from the first papers".

Those quotes do not appear in the papers themselves.

A journalist called Torsten Engelbrecht asked the following question.....

"We asked several study authors “Do your electron micrographs show the purified virus?”, they gave the following responses:"

Their replies do not diminish the fact that the virus SARS-CoV-2 was identified.

I'm not going to go through tens of thousands of scientific papers as it is totally unnecessary.

Reputable scientists write their process in a paper which is for all to see.

If there are any errors the papers can be asked to be retracted.

None of these papers have been retracted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, GeoffB said:

Your original post contained a falsehood.

You said "All these quotes come from the first papers".

Those quotes do not appear in the papers themselves.

A journalist called Torsten Engelbrecht asked the following question.....

"We asked several study authors “Do your electron micrographs show the purified virus?”, they gave the following responses:"

Their replies do not diminish the fact that the virus SARS-CoV-2 was identified.

I'm not going to go through tens of thousands of scientific papers as it is totally unnecessary.

Reputable scientists write their process in a paper which is for all to see.

If there are any errors the papers can be asked to be retracted.

None of these papers have been retracted.

You got to be having me on. Of course, if they give those answers to Engelbrecht it means they admitting the limitations found in their papers. They admitting they did not purified any virus. DUH. Of course there was error in their papers, they did not purified the virus and they admitted to it. So why have all those papers not been retracted? And the second part of your answer is pure scientism. You believe that scientists are godlike being and thus verifying what they claimed is totally unnecessary. Only religious fanatic act like this. Of course, you should verified what they claimed before believing them. The fact that papers pushing the covid narrative have not been retracted by the deeply corrupted medical system should be of no surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, GeoffB said:

Many retired medical professionals are now questioning the whole Covid narrative now they are not worried about being sacked.

Many retired climate scientists are now speaking out about the whole Global Warming narrative.

Not one retired scientist has questioned whether viruses exist because they know it is bunkum.

No virology would questioned the existence of virus because it would mean their whole career was a lie. It is not the same with climatologist because no one is claiming climate does not exist. A climatologist who claimed that climate change is not caused by human activities would still have the rest of the feild of climatology to work in while if a virologist claimed virus does not exist then he/she has to find another job or admit his/her lifework was a lie. Two completely different  situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I also noticed that you have not commented on how a non-living piece of materials with no agency of its own can seek and invade cells and hijack them and forced them to reproduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kilowon said:

I have been telling you that he/she is displaying classic gatekeeping behaviour. To the point of claiming he agree with 99percent of what Icke says but yet unable to state clearly what he agrees with icke about. I have asked him that question a number of time and he never give a straight answer. For example, in my case, i have no qualm in stating clearly that the royal family are indeed reptilian, or at very least, possessed by reptilian spirit.

Well, the dude has only posted in this thread, since June.

And he complains and insinuates basically that people who don't accept his version of "reality" and "have books to sell' are "frauds" and "charletons", etc, etc, and that those who give belief to what these "fraud" "booksellers" say are "gullible", ignorant, or "seduced" (stupid).

David Icke "has books to sell"... ???????????????????????????????????????????????

 

The panic and desperation he displays along with the attacks against those that have rejected his Lord and Master-Virology/Germ Theory clearly indicates someone who cannot let go of cherished illusions.

 

He basically gives off a sick image of playing god, telling everyone else what they must accept and believe. No way he has had more than s superficial interest or understanding of David Icke's work.

He's just an ego-artificial intelligence at this point, in this thread.

He's a puppet.

 

 

Then look at what his apparent peers have been up to....for the better of humanity...to save us from his cherished "virus"....

They are acting out that which they call a "virus"......in plain sight....they are "the virus"...they want us looking for and believing in an invisible threat...as they act out the characteristics of a "virus" in their "scientific research labs". Paid with our money/energy/BELIEF.

 

 

Edited by novymir
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, novymir said:

Well, the dude has only posted in this thread, since June.

And he complains and insinuates basically that people who don't accept his version of "reality" and "have books to sell' are "frauds" and "charletons", etc, etc, and that those who give belief to what these "fraud" "booksellers" say are "gullible", ignorant, or "seduced" (stupid).

David Icke "has books to sell"... ???????????????????????????????????????????????

 

The panic and desperation he displays along with the attacks against those that have rejected his Lord and Master-Virology/Germ Theory clearly indicates someone who cannot let go of cherished illusions.

 

He basically gives off a sick image of playing god, telling everyone else what they must accept and believe. No way he has had more than s superficial interest or understanding of David Icke's work.

He's just an ego-artificial intelligence at this point, in this thread.

He's a puppet.

 

no doubt. I am thinking of starting a topic specifically on Terrain theory but i hope grumpy owl can guide me if it is a good idea or better to just post my research in existing thread about the non reality of virus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 10:08 AM, GeoffB said:

A control is done via “mock-Infection” whereby the same experiment is done with the exact same ingredients apart from the fact that the cell used does NOT have a virus attached.

 

Can you provide a link to a paper that shows this being done?

 

I have had discussions with virologists in the past where they have admitted to using off-the-shelf controls that are not made up in the same way as the viral samples and therefore there are many variables between treatment and control arms that could be responsible for any observed cytopathic effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, scowie said:

 

Can you provide a link to a paper that shows this being done?

 

I have had discussions with virologists in the past where they have admitted to using off-the-shelf controls that are not made up in the same way as the viral samples and therefore there are many variables between treatment and control arms that could be responsible for any observed cytopathic effects.

He will not be able to do so as most of the covid papers had no control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to understand what “viruses” are, read The Invisible Rainbow by Arthur Firstenberg. 
 

Wiring in our homes, ultrasonic frequencies in computers, radio waves in televisions,  microwaves in cell phones, etc etc are what is causing cancer, diabetes, immune diseases, heart disease, and what appears to be viruses. Flu outbreaks correspond to solar magnetic activity. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 8:22 PM, GeoffB said:

He can afford top lawyers to appeal a court decision where he had to cough up 100,000 euros to a lowly poor medical student who proved to the court that the measles virus exists. Lanka got off on a legal technicality.

 

 

 

You're a bald-faced liar. The papers brought forward by the student did not meet the evidentiary criteria set forth by Stefan Lanka. This is what the high court stated in its decision, which I have actually read. Lanka did not "get off on a technicality." That's a lie from unscrupulous media sources you're repeating. Can you even read German?

 

 

Quote

Lanka has no written verifiable proof that viruses do not exist because he knows it will be torn to shreds by people who understand viruses.

 

Proving a negative existential claim in the absence of proof of the positive ... God, you're dumb.

 

But the pattern is typical of all claims of the existence of invisible causal agents: thoroughly religious.

Edited by Apotheosis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michelle T said:

If you want to understand what “viruses” are, read The Invisible Rainbow by Arthur Firstenberg. 

 

 

 

If you want to understand what viruses "are", an unobservable theoretical construct from tendentiously selected  and pre-interpreted instrumental, clinical and epidemiological data, read any good books on philosophy of science.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Appealing to virologists as evidence of virology's theories is like appealing to phrenologists as evidence of phrenology's. Such thinking is religious, in the worst sense. It's primitive, dumb, and brings one no closer to knowledge.

 

Regardless, viruses have not been and cannot be proven to exist. Virologists themselves will implicitly admit this when they confirm that their hypothesised entities in principle cannot be shown to meet certain epistemic criteria (e.g., "viruses can NOT be isolated and purified in the dictionary sense of the words and this has always been known by virologists"). So they invent some ad hoc criteria that can be met, like they do after throwing out Koch's postulates, whose fulfillment they regard as sufficient proof of the validity of their claims. However, any close analysis of these criteria will reveal they are logically insufficient to demonstrate existence and causation. In other words, they invent a "standard of evidence" for the very purpose of "evidencing" their claims. "I can't prove this, so I'm going to come up with an idea of "proof" whereby I can "prove" it!" It's insane.

 

 

Edited by Apotheosis
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Apotheosis said:

 

You're a bald-faced liar. The papers brought forward by the student did not meet the evidentiary criteria set forth by Stefan Lanka. This is what the high court stated in its decision, which I have actually read. Lanka did not "get off on a technicality." That's a lie from unscrupulous media sources you're repeating. Can you even read German?

 

 

 

Proving a negative existential claim in the absence of proof of the positive ... God, you're dumb.

 

But the pattern is typical of all claims of the existence of invisible causal agents: thoroughly religious.

The "legal technicality" was that Lanka asked for one paper and the medical student provided 6 and he was late in his submission.

All the judges agreed that the measles virus exists.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, scowie said:

 

Can you provide a link to a paper that shows this being done?

 

I have had discussions with virologists in the past where they have admitted to using off-the-shelf controls that are not made up in the same way as the viral samples and therefore there are many variables between treatment and control arms that could be responsible for any observed cytopathic effects.

"mock-treated hACE2 mice (n = 15) were used as control."

The pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 in hACE2 transgenic mice.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2312-y

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, scowie said:

 

Can you provide a link to a paper that shows this being done?

 

I have had discussions with virologists in the past where they have admitted to using off-the-shelf controls that are not made up in the same way as the viral samples and therefore there are many variables between treatment and control arms that could be responsible for any observed cytopathic effects.

It only took me 10 seconds to find the mock-infection SARS-CoV-2 mice control paper.

Here is another one, there will be loads more......

"were the most decreased genes in our analysis of SARS-CoV-2–infected lung epithelial cells compared to mock controls."

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.623012/full

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Apotheosis said:

Proving a negative existential claim in the absence of proof of the positive ... God, you're dumb.

Well you've just proved you are the dumb one as I'm reliably informed by kowloon that Lanka has done the experiment to prove that viruses do not exist.

However, Lanka hasn't bothered to write down the protocol for real scientists with knowledge of modern virology to rip it to shreds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GeoffB said:

The "legal technicality" was that Lanka asked for one paper and the medical student provided 6 and he was late in his submission.

All the judges agreed that the measles virus exists.

Nope. That was only one of the reason. FFS, I have posted the actual court document in english which anyone can read and you still carrying on with that MSM lie? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeoffB said:

Well you've just proved you are the dumb one as I'm reliably informed by kowloon that Lanka has done the experiment to prove that viruses do not exist.

However, Lanka hasn't bothered to write down the protocol for real scientists with knowledge of modern virology to rip it to shreds.

Real scientists with knowledge of virology? There are no real scientist when it comes to virology as it is a completely made up science with no actuality in reality. No one, in the 150 years of germ theory, has ever shown any scientific proof that a so called virus exist in a living being as the only means to look at that phantasm is through the electron microscope, which can only look at dead things. No one has ever shown that virus exist outside of a cell culture in a lab as the only way to look at virus is through an electron microscope which can only look at dead thing. No one has ever shown that a virus can leave a host and enter another host as the only way to look at virus is in cell culture through an electron microscope which can only look at dead thing. No one has ever shown a virus in vivo as the only way to supposedly see virus is through and electron microscope which can only look at dead thing in cell culture, not living processes and certainly nothing within a living being. How would they even be able to rip Lanka Control experiment to shred when they themselves do not do control for their experiment. In 150 years, every time scientist have tried to infect someone with a virus they have failed. I posted all the link to those failed experiment above which i noticed you conveniently refuse to comment on. Just as you seem unwilling to answer the question  on how a non-living piece of materials with no agency of its own can seek and invade cells and hijack them and forced them to reproduced 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GeoffB said:

It only took me 10 seconds to find the mock-infection SARS-CoV-2 mice control paper.

Here is another one, there will be loads more......

"were the most decreased genes in our analysis of SARS-CoV-2–infected lung epithelial cells compared to mock controls."

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.623012/full

This is a meta analysis. Not an actual experiment. Please explain what the mock control was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, kilowon said:

Nope. That was only one of the reason. FFS, I have posted the actual court document in english which anyone can read and you still carrying on with that MSM lie? 

I have read the court document in English and it doesn't say what you think it says.

Copy and paste the relevant section on here that you are referring to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...