APP - Do biological viruses actually exist?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

No, neither I nor the 'no evidence for biological viruses' group referenced in the opening post of this thread have ever claimed that electron micrographs aren't real. The claim is that there is no solid evidence that the microbes recorded in electron micrographs are biological viruses.

Once again. We see nothing but a red herring argument.

If you claim they aren't real you need to provide the following to show they can't be viruses since that is what the Scientific method requires.
1. Identify what they are.
2. Show the RNA sequence associated with the particles in the pictures and identify where it comes from.
3 Explain how the particles got where they are.
4. Explain why the particles exist in cells that end up being damaged but not all damaged cells.

This is another example of you simply ignoring the scientific method and relying on denial. Denial is not science. Denial is pseudoscience.

Without you providing the correct answer you are simply arguing that you simply don't like the conclusion because you don't like the way it was reached. That doesn't prove the answer is wrong as we can see by my example.

Example
1+3 = ?
If I say because a horse's hoof has only one segment and a horse has 4 legs then the answer is 4.
2+3 = ?
If I say because a cow's hoof has 2 segments and a horse has 4 legs then the answer is 4.

The ONLY way you can prove they aren't viruses is by providing the correct answer and tell us how you got that answer so that your logic can be examined.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Show me solid evidence that any of the microbes recorded in any electron micrograph is actually a biological virus and then we can talk about your "proofs".

You will simply post the same garbage over and over and over as you have done for over the last year. Why can you not find new material?

Proof it is a virus -

It came from a creature or plant showing signs of a disease.
It was grown in a cell culture.
It was isolated using one of several different methods
It was sequenced and different shape viruses have different RNA sequences so they can't all be the same.
The RNA sequence shows what proteins it can produce. The damaged cells show evidence of those proteins

 

[Scott]

No other thing can do what viruses do

What thing are you referring to?

Geebus... I have already posted this, you ignored it to answer what you thought would be easier to answer and still failed at that.

I've tried to answer what I thought were your most relevant points. Anyway, let's move on...

• Attachment: Viruses begin by attaching to a specific host cell. They use proteins on their surface (like spikes or capsids) to bind to receptors on the target cell, which determines their host specificity (e.g., why some viruses infect humans and others infect plants or bacteria). [snip]

Hold on there. Before you go on about what you think biological viruses are -doing-, you first need to establish solid evidence that they exist.

 

[Scott]

Unsubstantiated assertions.

There's never been any solid evidence that any microbe fits the definition of biological viruses, thus there is no solid evidence that these organisms exist at all.

Unsubstantiated assertion on your part. There is a lot of solid evidence that a lot of microbes fit the definition of biological viruses. There is a lot of evidence including aver a thousand years of circumstantial evidence that viruses exist.

Alright, show me this evidence then.

 

[Damocles]

I've tried to answer what I thought were your most relevant points. Anyway, let's move on...



Hold on there. Before you go on about what you think biological viruses are -doing-, you first need to establish solid evidence that they exist.

We already have that. The DNA is irrefutable. Since you cannot comprehend the actual facts involved with this argument any further discussion with your flat earth mentality is useless.

 

[Scott]

In the case of Covid, the only way they could supposedly tell that you had the Cov 2 virus was through antibody and PCR tests. The problem is that there was never any solid evidence that those tests could find this alleged Cov 2 virus to begin with. A good article from Mike Stone on exposing the illusion that antibody and PCR tests provide any solid evidence that they are really finding anything of value:

Corona Cross-Reactivity

Let's be specific.

mikestone.substack.com

Denial of science on your part. Rather than rebut my argument that pointed out all the errors in the claim that pcr tests don't find the virus, you just ignore it for weeks and then come back to make the same ridiculous claim as if it is true and never been rebutted.

What alleged "errors in the claim that pcr tests don't find the virus" are you referring to?

 

[Scott]

The assumption that both you and Saunders are making is that the electron micrographs are recording images of biological viruses rather than other microbes.

You are the one making the assumptions by saying they aren't.

The prevailing theory these days is that biological viruses are real. Thus, it is incumbent on those who promulgate this popular view to provide evidence that it is, in fact, true.

 

[Scott]

The assumption that both you and Saunders are making is that the electron micrographs are recording images of biological viruses rather than other microbes. The 2 page statement that I link to and quote in the first post of this thread gets into this. I'll quote a bit of it here:
**
Perhaps the primary evidence that the pathogenic viral theory is problematic is that no published scientific paper has ever shown that particles fulfilling the definition of viruses have been directly isolated and purified from any tissues or bodily fluids of any sick human or animal. Using the commonly accepted definition of “isolation”, which is the separation of one thing from all other things, there is general agreement that this has never been done in the history of virology. Particles that have been successfully isolated through purification have not been shown to be replication-competent, infectious and disease-causing, hence they cannot be said to be viruses. Additionally, the proffered “evidence” of viruses through “genomes" and animal experiments derives from methodologies with insufficient controls.
**

Full article:

The “Settling The Virus Debate” Statement

drsambailey.com

The funny thing about that quote is.... well actually there are several funny things. (I'll just do 3)
1. It demands that viruses be proven by showing that they act like something that isn't a virus.

It doesn't demand anything. It -does- outline a series of steps that researchers can take in order to find evidence (or lack thereof) that biological viruses exist. This is just basic science, specifically, the aspect of fasifiability:
**Falsifiability (or refutability) is a deductive standard of evaluation of scientific theories and hypotheses, introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934). A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable if it can be logically contradicted by an empirical test.
**
Source:

Falsifiability - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

2. It completely changes the meaning of isolation. How do you get an electron micrograph of a virus if it isn't isolated?

What you should be asking is, what evidence have virologists provided that any microbes that they've recorded with electron migrographs are actually biological viruses?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Alright, show me this evidence then.

Let me know when Mike Stone, Dr Bailey or you have refuted any of the following -
Then I can get to the next 20 -

Structure and Organization of Virus Genomes - PMC

This chapter provides an in depth study on the structure, composition, and organization of viral genomes, their classification into double stranded and single stranded DNA viruses, positive and negative stranded RNA viruses with and their genome ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Structure and Classification of Viruses - Medical Microbiology - NCBI Bookshelf

Molecular aspects of poliovirus pathogenesis - PMC

The development of a transgenic mouse model carrying the human poliovirus receptor has made it possible to investigate the molecular mechanisms of the viral dissemination process in a whole organism. Studies on this have provided an insight into the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A 21st Century Perspective of Poliovirus Replication - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Complete genome sequences of six S19 poliovirus reference strains - PMC

We report the complete genome sequences of six S19 poliovirus reference strains for all three poliovirus serotypes, including three Sabin vaccine-derived and three wild-type-derived strains. The S19 strains are extensively attenuated and genetically ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

High-Throughput Next-Generation Sequencing of Polioviruses - PMC

The poliovirus (PV) is currently targeted for worldwide eradication and containment. Sanger-based sequencing of the viral protein 1 (VP1) capsid region is currently the standard method for PV surveillance. However, the whole-genome sequence is ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A comprehensive map of the SARS-CoV-2 genome

MIT researchers generated what they describe as the most complete gene annotation of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. They confirmed several protein-coding genes and found a few others that had been suggested as genes do not code for any proteins.

news.mit.edu

Isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 from the first US COVID-19 patient - PMC

The etiologic agent of the outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan China was identified as severe acute respiratory syndrome associated coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in January, 2020. The first US patient was diagnosed by the State of Washington and the US ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Virus isolation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for diagnostic and research purposes - PMC

Isolation of the new pandemic virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is essential for diagnostic and research purposes including assessment of novel therapeutics. Several primary and continuous cell lines are currently ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The genetic sequence, origin, and diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 - PMC

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a new infectious disease that first emerged in Hubei province, China, in December 2019, which was found to be associated with a large ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2019.0572

Poxviruses - Medical Microbiology - NCBI Bookshelf

https://www.science.org/cms/asset/e010d7a9-9ba2-483a-b1ee-c7ae009af143/pap.pdf

HPV16 and HPV18 Genome Structure, Expression, and Post-Transcriptional Regulation - PMC

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) are a group of small non-enveloped DNA viruses whose infection causes benign tumors or cancers. HPV16 and HPV18, the two most common high-risk HPVs, are responsible for ~70% of all HPV-related cervical cancers and head ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Human papillomavirus: gene expression, regulation and prospects for novel diagnostic methods and antiviral therapies - PMC

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) cause diseases ranging from benign warts to invasive tumours. A subset of these viruses termed “high risk” infects the cervix where persistent infection can lead to cervical cancer. Although many HPV genomes have been ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection - Human Papillomaviruses - NCBI Bookshelf

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

HIV-1 and human genetic variation - Nature Reviews Genetics

McLaren and Fellay review our current understanding of the effects of human genetic variation on HIV infection and disease progression and how this knowledge is contributing to preventative and therapeutic approaches.

www.nature.com

Influenza A Virus Cell Entry, Replication, Virion Assembly and Movement - PMC

Influenza viruses replicate within the nucleus of the host cell. This uncommon RNA virus trait provides influenza with the advantage of access to the nuclear machinery during replication. However, it also increases the complexity of the ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(24)00161-X

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I've tried to answer what I thought were your most relevant points. Anyway, let's move on...



Hold on there. Before you go on about what you think biological viruses are -doing-, you first need to establish solid evidence that they exist.

Complete nonsense on your part. You are doing nothing but using logical fallacies. In science you don't establish that something exists before determining what it is doing. The normal science would be to observe something happening and then try to figure out what caused it. It seems all you have on your side is pseudoscience.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

It doesn't demand anything. It -does- outline a series of steps that researchers can take in order to find evidence (or lack thereof) that biological viruses exist. This is just basic science, specifically, the aspect of fasifiability:
**Falsifiability (or refutability) is a deductive standard of evaluation of scientific theories and hypotheses, introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934). A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable if it can be logically contradicted by an empirical test.
**
Source:

Falsifiability - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What you should be asking is, what evidence have virologists provided that any microbes that they've recorded with electron migrographs are actually biological viruses?

Wow. You give us the meaning of falsification and then completely ignore what falsification is. Falsification requires you to provide an answer as to what the micrographs are if they aren't viruses. Falsification requires you to show what they are. Falsification is the opposite of denial. All you are doing is denial.