Settling the Biological Virus Debate

[Scott]

It is actually you who hasn't substantiated that any alleged "unique" RNA sequence comes from any alleged virus.

The RNA sequences are unique.

For starters, there's no solid evidence that these RNA sequences come from viruses at all and from what I can see, no solid evidence that all the genetic fragments that are assembled even come from the same biological entities. It seems that the last time I put up Dr. Mark Bailey's explanation for what's actually going on when virologists "sequence" viruses, you stopped at the first sentence, but that sentence alone makes that clear, so I'll just quote it again:

**
It is pointed out that with regard to virology, a far bigger concern than "computing resources" is that a process that can be employed for sequencing genetic material of known provenance (e.g. human, bacterial, and fungal cells) has morphed into algorithmic assembly of genetic fragments of unknown provenance.
**

For anyone interested in the longer version, it's in Post #532.

 

[Scott]

For those not familiar with the term substantiate in this context, here's the definition that applies from Merriam-Webster:
**
to establish by proof or competent evidence
**

Source:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/substantiate

I don't think I've ever claimed to have proof of evidence, so I'd be using the 'competent evidence' meaning.

I believe I've provided competent evidence that diseases attributed to viruses are in fact caused by environmental factors such as toxins [albeit in another thread post, this one: The Federal Government Is Tracking the Unvaccinated | Mercola.com, Post #43) and EMFs (Post #502).



RNA is everywhere life is. From Wikipedia:
**
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a polymeric molecule essential in various biological roles in coding, decoding, regulation and expression of genes. RNA and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) are nucleic acids. Along with lipids, proteins, and carbohydrates, nucleic acids constitute one of the four major macromolecules essential for all known forms of life.
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA

The onus is on virologists to provide competent evidence that the RNA they find actually comes from any alleged virus.

Because some illness is caused by toxins doesn't prove all diseases are caused by toxins.

I never claimed I had proof, but I have certainly provided solid evidence that environmental factors such as toxins and EMFs can cause diseases attributed to various viruses. Another factor which I may not have mentioned is malnutrition.

In disease that is caused by toxins, the toxin can be identified and is found in the ill organism.

In this day and age, there are many different toxins, EMFs and forms of malnourishment, which can make it difficult if not impossible to pinpoint the exact cause of a given disease or set of diseases. That being said, good efforts have been made to do this.

No such toxin is found in people with Covid, the flu or a cold.

It's hard to find evidence for a toxin/EMF/malnutrition causing a problem if you don't look for those factors as potential causes, don't you think? These days, the go to thing to look for are microbes. That being said, some have found evidence that some alleged viral diseases were in fact caused by environmetntal factors. Quoting from the post you were replying to:

**
I believe I've provided competent evidence that diseases attributed to viruses are in fact caused by environmental factors such as toxins [albeit in another thread post, this one: The Federal Government Is Tracking the Unvaccinated | Mercola.com, Post #43) and EMFs (Post #502).
**

Instead RNA is found in large quantities that is not the sequence of any known source other than a virus.

You mean sequences of unknown provenance that is matched up to other sequences of unknown provenance.

Because RNA is everywhere doesn't mean it doesn't follow rules. It clearly does follow rules and is encoded by DNA or other RNA according to those rules. Specific proteins have a specific sequence and are produced by specific sequences of DNA or RNA. When sequences of RNA are found in large quantities the must have been produced in some way. I guess the RNA being everywhere life is proves that virus RNA is an organism.

There isn't even any solid evidence that viruses exist.

 

[Scott]

It's not me that is so cavalier as to not need evidence for my beliefs. This made me think of a quote from one of Frank Herbert's Dune books:

**
Religion is the emulation of the adult by the child. Religion is the encystment of past beliefs: mythology, which is guesswork, the assumptions of trust in the universe, those pronouncements which men have made in search of personal power, all of it mingled with shreds of enlightenment. And always the ultimate unspoken commandment is "Thou shall not question!" But we question. We break that commandment as a matter of course. The work to which we have set ourselves is the liberating of the imagination, the harnessing of imagination to humankind's deepest sense of creativity.
**

You're a liar. You do not question your religion.

I question things all the time. When Covid started, I believed in viruses just as you do. It was only after a medical journalist friend of mine pointed to the fact that some no longer believed that biological viruses existed that I began to question whether they truly existed. I have always liked to base my beliefs on solid evidence and the more I looked into virology, the more I determined that it was a belief system without any solid foundation.

 

[Scott]

No, I've made the assertion that biological viruses don't exist. Arthur Firstenberg, an author I've quoted, made the assertion that the flu virus exists but remains inert until electromagnetic frequencies, or EMFs, activate it and cause the flu. My own theory is that the the EMFs are doing it without the need for any inert biological virus.

LOL. So your evidence is something that completely refutes your argument?

No, the evidence I took from Arthur Firstenberg's book was that EMFs can cause disease such as the flu. He believed that biological viruses were activated by the EMFs and played a minor part in causing the disease. Having seen no solid evidence of biological viruses, I think it makes more sense to do away with viruses entirely here and simply attribute the sole cause of the flu to EMFs.

If flu existed before we used electricity why did it not become much more prevalent after electricity was being used so much?

Arthur Firstenberg makes the case that that's exactly what happened. From his book The Invisible Rainbow:

**
Influenza Is an Electrical Disease

Suddenly and inexplicably, influenza, whose descriptions had remained consistent for thousands of years, changed its character in 1889. Flu had last seized most of England in November 1847, over half a century earlier. The last flu epidemic in the United States had raged in the winter of 1874–1875. Since ancient times, influenza had been known as a capricious, unpredictable disease, a wild animal that came from nowhere, terrorized whole populations at once without warning and without a schedule, and disappeared as suddenly and mysteriously as it had arrived, not to be seen again for years or decades. It behaved unlike any other illness, was thought not to be contagious, and received its name because its comings and goings were said to be governed by the “influence” of the stars.



But in 1889 influenza was tamed. From that year forward it would be present always, in every part of the world. It would vanish mysteriously as before, but it could be counted on to return, at more or less the same time, the following year. And it has never been absent since.

[snip]

In 2001, Canadian astronomer Ken Tapping, together with two British Columbia physicians, were the latest scientists to confirm, yet again, that for at least the last three centuries influenza pandemics have been most likely to occur during peaks of solar magnetic activity—that is, at the height of each eleven-year sun cycle.

Such a trend is not the only aspect of this disease that has long puzzled virologists. In 1992, one of the world’s authorities on the epidemiology of influenza, R. Edgar Hope-Simpson, published a book in which he reviewed the essential known facts and pointed out that they did not support a mode of transmission by direct human-to-human contact. Hope-Simpson had been perplexed by influenza for a long time, in fact ever since he had treated its victims as a young general practitioner in Dorset, England, during the 1932–1933 epidemic—the very epidemic during which the virus that is associated with the disease in humans was first isolated. But during his 71-year career Hope-Simpson’s questions were never answered. “The sudden explosion of information about the nature of the virus and its antigenic reactions in the human host,” he wrote in 1992, had only “added to the features calling for explanation.”3
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur; Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (pp. 80-82). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 

[Scott]

The problem you have is that people that live near power lines would have flu all the time if your hypothesis had any merit.

You seem to be under the impression that all EMFs are the same. In point of fact, different EMFs affect people differently. Furthermore, different people have different tolerances to EMFs as well. That being said, there is certainly evidence that being near power lines can effect one's health negatively:

Living near Power Lines | newhealthadvisor.org

Why does flu exist in areas that don't have electricity?

Harmful EMFs don't just come from power lines. Radio frequencies, particularly for cell phone communication, are a major one. Nowadays, there are a lot of satellites beaming down EMFs as well. Finally, as mentioned in my last post, even the sun produces a significant amount of harmful EMFs that tend to effect people in its peaks every 11 years.

Why was the flu in 1918-19 worse than flu today? Most of the country was still without electricity back then.

Based on what I read from Arthur Firstenberg's book, it would appear that it was heavily related with the increased use of radio waves around the time of World War I. I think Arthur Firstenberg's Chapter 8 in his Invisible Rainbow book gives a good starting point to how it all began...

**
8. Mystery on the Isle of Wight

In 1904 the bees began to die.

From this quiet island, 23 miles long and 13 miles wide, lying off England's southern coast, one looks across the English Channel toward distant shores of France. In the preceding decade two men, one on each side of the Channel, one a physician and physicist, the other an inventor entrepreneur, had occupied their minds with a newly discovered form of electricity. The work of each man had very different implications for the future of our world.

At the westernmost end of the Isle of Wight, near offshore chalk formations called The Needles, in 1897, a handsome young man named Giuglielmo Marconi erected his own “needle,” a tower as tall as a twelve-story building. It supported the antenna for what became the world’s first permanent radio station. Marconi was liberating electricity, vibrating at close to a million cycles per second, from its confining wires, and was broadcasting it freely through the air itself. He did not stop to ask if this was safe.

A few years earlier, in 1890, a well-known physician, director of the Laboratory of Biological Physics at the Collège de France in Paris, had already begun investigations bearing on the important question Marconi was not asking: how does electricity of high frequencies affect living organisms? A distinguished presence in physics as well as medicine, Jacques-Arsène d’Arsonval is remembered today for his many contributions in both fields. He devised ultra-sensitive meters to measure magnetic fields, and equipment to measure heat production and respiration in animals; made improvements to the microphone and the telephone; and created a new medical specialty called darsonvalization, which is still practiced today in the nations of the former Soviet Bloc. In the West it has evolved into diathermy, which is the therapeutic use of radio waves to produce heat within the body. But darsonvalization is the use of radio waves medicinally at low power, without generating heat, to produce the kinds of effects d’Arsonval discovered in the early 1890s.

He had first observed that electrotherapy, as then practiced, was not producing uniform results, and he wondered if this was because of lack of precision in the form of the electricity being applied. He therefore designed an induction machine capable of putting out perfectly smooth sine waves, “without jerks or teeth,”1 that would not be injurious to the patient. When he tested this current on human subjects he found, as he had predicted, that at therapeutic doses it caused no pain, yet had potent physiological effects.

“We have seen that with very steady sine waves, nerve and muscle are not stimulated,” he wrote. “The passage of the current nevertheless is responsible for profound modification of metabolism as shown by the consumption of a greater amount of oxygen and the production of considerably more carbon dioxide. If the shape of the wave is changed, each electrical wave will produce a muscular contraction.”2 D’Arsonval had already discovered the reason, 125 years ago, why today’s digital technologies, whose waves have nothing but “jerks and teeth,” are causing so much illness.

D’Arsonval next experimented with alternating currents of high frequency. Using a modification of the wireless apparatus devised a few years earlier by Heinrich Hertz, he exposed humans and animals to currents of 500,000 to 1,000,000 cycles per second, applied either by direct contact or indirectly by induction from a distance. They were close to the frequencies Marconi was soon going to broadcast from the Isle of Wight. In no case did the subject’s body temperature increase. But in every case his subject’s blood pressure fell significantly, without—in the case of human subjects at least—any conscious sensation. D’Arsonval measured the same changes in oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production as with low frequency currents. These facts proved, he wrote, “that the currents of high frequency penetrate deeply into the organism.”3

These early results should have made anyone experimenting with radio waves think twice before exposing the whole world to them indiscriminately—should have at least made them cautious. Marconi, however, was unfamiliar with d’Arsonval’s work. Largely self-educated, the inventor had no inkling of radio’s potential dangers and no fear of it. Therefore when he powered up his new transmitter on the island he had no suspicion that he might be doing himself or anyone else any harm.

If radio waves are dangerous, Marconi, of all people in the world, should have suffered from them. Let us see if he did.
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur; Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 95-97). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.


Mr. Firstenberg then gets the many health issues Marconi and his wife had since he first started experimenting with EMFs, quite sobering.

 

[Scott]

You may find the following article educational:

A Story About Polio, Pesticides and the Meaning of Science | Children's Health Defense

I think you meant to say the article is full of unsubstantiated allegations. And we know what we should do with unsubstantiated allegations.

No, I didn't. I found the article to be chalk full of -substantiated- allegations. If you find that any statement in the linked article is unsubstantiated, by all means, let us know.

Proving once again you can't tell fact from opinion.

What do you think was a substantial allegation in the link you posted?

I think the "Story at a glance" part of the article sums up the substantial allegations made:
**
Story at-a-glance:

•We are told that the science on polio is settled — but that may not be the case.

•There are scientists who believe that polio-like symptoms could be caused by toxic substances, including pesticides.

•At the time of its popularity, DDT was considered not only “safe and effective” but also good for the prevention of polio.

•However, the opposite could be true, and DDT could have been a major contributing factor to the “polio epidemic.”
**

The author even admits he has nothing substantial:
it is one of those cases where I have to humbly accept not knowing the definitive answer at this very second.

I think it's best to quote the author's complete sentence rather than just snipping a bit of it:

**
DDT as a possible cause of polio

There is a theory that DDT poisoning was a major contributor to paralysis diagnosed as polio. The timeline supports it, and it is one of those cases where I have to humbly accept not knowing the definitive answer at this very second.
**

He then goes on to introduce evidence that points to evidence that DDT was quite harmful and that the Salk vaccine was also harmful and known to cause polio as well:

**
The Salk vaccine was introduced in 1954. DDT was banned in the U.S. in 1972. Polio was officially eradicated in the U.S. in 1979. (The vaccine-derived version of polio (!) is reported to be spreading now in developing countries, and according to ABC News, “More polio cases now caused by vaccine than by wild virus.”)

In 2021, Ryan Matters published an excellent, in-depth article called, “mRNA ‘Vaccines,’ Eugenics & the Push for Transhumanism,” in which he looked at the link between polio and DDT, among other things. (I very highly recommend reading his entire article.) Matters wrote:

“One crop pesticide in widespread use at the time was DDT, a highly toxic organochlorine that was widely publicized as being ‘good for you,’ but eventually banned in 1972. In 1953, Dr. Morton Biskind published a paper in the American Journal of Digestive Diseases pointing out that:

“‘McCormick (78), Scobey (100-101) and Goddard (57), in detailed studies, have all pointed out that factors other than infective agents are certainly involved in the etiology of polio, varying from nutritional defects to a variety of poisons which affect the nervous system.’

“The danger of toxic pesticides, including DDT, and their disastrous effects on the environment were illustrated by Rachel Carson in her 1962 book, Silent Spring.

“In more recent times, researchers, Dan Olmstead, co-founder of the Age of Autism, and Mark Blaxill conducted two brilliant investigations into the polio epidemics of the 20th century, reaching a similar conclusion to Scobey and Biskind, namely that the disease was caused by the widespread use of neurotoxic pesticides such as arsenite of soda and DDT.

“Although Salk’s vaccine was hailed as a success, the vaccine itself caused many cases of injury and paralysis. And though there does appear to be a convincing correlation between the timing of the vaccine and the reduction in polio cases, as all good scientists know, causation doesn’t equal correlation [sic], especially considering the fact that DDT was phased out, at least in the US, over the same period.”
**

 

[Scott]

Ignoring that science moves forward seems to be your shtick.

An unsubstantiated assertion.

It's pretty well substantiated. Viruses were unknown to science at the time of Koch.

Based on what I've read, it would appear that the notion of viruses started just a few years after Koch had published his postulates in 1890 with the alleged tobacco mosaic virus:
**
In 1892, the Russian biologist Dmitri Ivanovsky used this filter to study what is now known as the tobacco mosaic virus: crushed leaf extracts from infected tobacco plants remained infectious even after filtration to remove bacteria. Ivanovsky suggested the infection might be caused by a toxin produced by bacteria, but he did not pursue the idea.[3] At the time it was thought that all infectious agents could be retained by filters and grown on a nutrient medium—this was part of the germ theory of disease.[4]

In 1898, the Dutch microbiologist Martinus Beijerinck repeated the experiments and became convinced that the filtered solution contained a new form of infectious agent.[5] He observed that the agent multiplied only in cells that were dividing, but as his experiments did not show that it was made of particles, he called it a contagium vivum fluidum (soluble living germ) and reintroduced the word virus.
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virology

I believe that Dmitri Ivanovsky was much closer to the mark- I don't know the specifics, but I highly suspect that it's toxins that are the true cause of smallpox.

 

[Scott]

Koch's postulates are not logic.

Agreed, but they are logical.

Because something is logical doesn't mean it can be applied to all things.

Koch's postulates were meant for all microbes. When virus microbes couldn't be found using Koch's postulates, instead of questioning whether viruses existed, they simply created more watered down postulates, in this case River's postulates. Only apparently even River's postulates weren't sufficiently watered down either. There are basically no accepted scientific standards for determining whether or not biological viruses exist.

Ducks have wings. Ducks can fly.
Planes have wings. Planes can fly.
That doesn't mean if a child has butterfly wings that they can fly.

Similarly, sequencing a bunch of RNA sequences of unknown provenance doesn't mean that those RNA sequences must be from alleged viruses.

At the time they were created, viruses were not known. Should we apply Newtonian physics instead of quantum physics to quarks since Newtonian physics is logical?

Quantum physics arose for things that Newtonian physics couldn't explain. The thing about alleged viral diseases is that there are far better theories for why people get these diseases than viruses. In essence, virology was a step backwards in health progress, not forwards.

Koch's postulates are not logic. They are a way to identify certain microbes.

Their purpose was not to simply identify certain microbes, but also to determine whether or not certain microbes cause disease.

That isn't exactly true.
https://www.science.org/content/art...ected-people-coronavirus-here-s-what-happened
I am curious as to how nasal swabs were able to transfer the illness from one person to another if the transfer has never been shown.

Quoting from your article:
**
In the study, 34 healthy volunteers ages 18 to 29 were given nose drops with a small amount of the virus.
**

The Cov 2 virus has never been isolated, so anything building on that premise can't be trusted.

 

[Scott]

Koch's postulates are not logic. They are a way to identify certain microbes. They didn't work in all cases so as science does, it revised them. Not because they wanted to invent viruses but because something existed that couldn't be grown in a petri dish.

If you want to believe that, go right ahead. Personally, I'd prefer having some solid evidence that biological viruses exist before believing in them.

And yet you believe in black holes?

I find the evidence that black holes exist to be highly credible.

There is a database of over 6,000,000 times that RNA has been sequenced and it doesn't fit the sequence of any RNA produced in animal cells.

No, you have a database of a bunch of RNA snippets of unknown provenance that virologists claim are from these alleged viruses. I've yet to see any evidence that any alleged biological virus has ever been isolated. Without true isolation, it's impossible to know the true provenance of these RNA snippets.

Since RNA indicates a life form and the RNA doesn't come from the cell, where does it come from? You have just argued that it MUST come from a life form. The most likely life form at this time would be a virus.

No, the most likely life forms are from all the RNA life forms out there- I'm guessing most if not all of the found RNA snippets are coming from cells. From Wikipedia:

**
Some RNA molecules play an active role within cells by catalyzing biological reactions, controlling gene expression, or sensing and communicating responses to cellular signals. One of these active processes is protein synthesis, a universal function in which RNA molecules direct the synthesis of proteins on ribosomes. This process uses transfer RNA (tRNA) molecules to deliver amino acids to the ribosome, where ribosomal RNA (rRNA) then links amino acids together to form coded proteins.
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA

 

[Scott]

No, that wouldn't be my logic. I'm simply pointing out that the laws of physics must be missing something if they break down in black holes.

And Koch's postulates don't work for humans, viruses and wombats so they must be missing something.

Koch's postulates were never meant for anything other than microbes. Humans and wombats aren't microbes, but these alleged biological viruses are.

That is why they changed them

Technically, Koch's postulates themselves remain the same, although Thomas Rivers 'revised' them for viruses. There's a good article in viroliegy.com that gets into the details:
Thomas Rivers Revision of Koch’s Postulates (1937) | viroliegy.com

Quoting from it:

**
By 1937, it was very clear that virologists were unable to satisfy any of Koch’s Postulates in order to prove invisible particles assumed to be “viruses” existed and could cause disease. Even Robert Koch himself had difficulty with his own Postulates which led him to wiggle around some of them in attempts to “prove” pathogenicity of certain bacteria. Instead of accepting that the Postulates, as originally stated, worked and disproved the Germ Theory, virologists looked to various indirect immunological methods to prove their claims.

This led to Thomas Rivers and his own attempts to water down Koch’s Postulates by revising them to allow virologists even more wiggle room and expanding the 4 Postulates to 6. Unfortunately for all of virology, Koch had unintentionally trapped them in a logical prison for which they still can not free themselves from. If virologists deny Koch’s original Postulates, they are denying logic itself. Presented below are highlights from River’s attempted revision:

[snip]

All Rivers did was deliberately weaken Koch’s Postulates in order to make life easier for virologists to skirt around established rules of logic. Anyone claiming that they fulfilled Koch’s Postulates by using the criteria laid forth by Rivers are outright lying and being intentionally fraudulent…which in all honesty, sums up virology to a T.
**

The sad thing is that virologists haven't even been able to satisfy River's postulates. Rivers' postulates still require the isolation of the microbe in question, and there's no solid evidence that any alleged biological virus has ever been isolated.

 

[Scott]

Science simply applies the best answer they have to the facts.

I agree that -true- science does this.

And yet you want to throw away the only theory that explains the diseases, how they pass from one organism to another and why the RNA exists for something that can't begin to explain it.

1- I've already provided alternative theories for allegedly viral diseases many times. In short, they are environmental/terrain theories, mainly toxins, EMFs and malnutrition.

2- You've provided no solid evidence that any allegedly viral diseases are contagious.

3- RNA exists in many cells, no need for these alleged biological viruses to explain RNA fragments in tissue samples.

 

[Scott]

Again, this isn't true. I've pointed to evidence strongly suggesting that toxins and EMFs are the most likely true causes of diseases attributed to biological viruses.

You have not pointed to any strong evidence.

I strongly disagree.

Your explanation doesn't explain why the RNA exists.

As mentioned many times, RNA is present in many cells, no need for these alleged biological viruses to account for it.

Your explanation doesn't explain why the RNA multiplies.

My understanding of RNA is limited, but based on what I've read, I'm guessing that RNA multiplies in life forms just as DNA multiplies in life forms. RNA definitely has various functions within the body. I'll quote the first part of Wikipedia's article on the subject:

**
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a polymeric molecule essential in various biological roles in coding, decoding, regulation and expression of genes. RNA and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) are nucleic acids. Along with lipids, proteins, and carbohydrates, nucleic acids constitute one of the four major macromolecules essential for all known forms of life. Like DNA, RNA is assembled as a chain of nucleotides, but unlike DNA, RNA is found in nature as a single strand folded onto itself, rather than a paired double strand. Cellular organisms use messenger RNA (mRNA) to convey genetic information (using the nitrogenous bases of guanine, uracil, adenine, and cytosine, denoted by the letters G, U, A, and C) that directs synthesis of specific proteins.
**

Your explanation doesn't explain why virus RNA sequences don't align with any other RNA found in healthy cells.

You have yet to present any evidence that alleged viral genomes are anything but pseudoscientific inventions by virologists.

Your explanation doesn't explain why the disease spreads instead of being localized which is what would occur if it was a toxin.

As I've mentioned before, diseases can also be caused by EMFs and malnutrition. Those 3 factors encompass most of the world.

Your explanation has not identified any toxins associated with viral diseases.

Again, that's not true, I've identified several. If you really can't remember me doing it, I can go over a few once more.

Your EMF explanation says that viruses DO exist which directly contradicts your claim they don't.

No, that would be Arther Firstenberg's explanation. My own explanation does away with the virus part.

Until you can explain in total and without deflection how all of those occur your don't have any evidence at all.

Reminds me of a certain phrase from something like a debunker's handbook- that is, that they will demand complete solutions or claim that the theory or theories are invalid. I have never said I have all the answers. I -do- believe that there are far more likely explanations for alleged viral diseases than viruses and I've spent a fair amount of time getting into these alternative theories.

 

[Into the Night]

I question things all the time.

Lie.

When Covid started, I believed in viruses just as you do. It was only after a medical journalist friend of mine pointed to the fact that some no longer believed that biological viruses existed that I began to question whether they truly existed. I have always liked to base my beliefs on solid evidence and the more I looked into virology, the more I determined that it was a belief system without any solid foundation.

Viruses exist by definition.
Science is not a journal nor a friend nor a journalist.

You simply deny science. You have already denied several theories of science and whole branches of science.

 

[Into the Night]

No, the evidence I took from Arthur Firstenberg's book was that EMFs can cause disease such as the flu. He believed that biological viruses were activated by the EMFs and played a minor part in causing the disease. Having seen no solid evidence of biological viruses, I think it makes more sense to do away with viruses entirely here and simply attribute the sole cause of the flu to EMFs.



Arthur Firstenberg makes the case that that's exactly what happened. From his book The Invisible Rainbow:

**
Influenza Is an Electrical Disease

Suddenly and inexplicably, influenza, whose descriptions had remained consistent for thousands of years, changed its character in 1889. Flu had last seized most of England in November 1847, over half a century earlier. The last flu epidemic in the United States had raged in the winter of 1874–1875. Since ancient times, influenza had been known as a capricious, unpredictable disease, a wild animal that came from nowhere, terrorized whole populations at once without warning and without a schedule, and disappeared as suddenly and mysteriously as it had arrived, not to be seen again for years or decades. It behaved unlike any other illness, was thought not to be contagious, and received its name because its comings and goings were said to be governed by the “influence” of the stars.

View attachment 24605

But in 1889 influenza was tamed. From that year forward it would be present always, in every part of the world. It would vanish mysteriously as before, but it could be counted on to return, at more or less the same time, the following year. And it has never been absent since.

[snip]

In 2001, Canadian astronomer Ken Tapping, together with two British Columbia physicians, were the latest scientists to confirm, yet again, that for at least the last three centuries influenza pandemics have been most likely to occur during peaks of solar magnetic activity—that is, at the height of each eleven-year sun cycle.

Such a trend is not the only aspect of this disease that has long puzzled virologists. In 1992, one of the world’s authorities on the epidemiology of influenza, R. Edgar Hope-Simpson, published a book in which he reviewed the essential known facts and pointed out that they did not support a mode of transmission by direct human-to-human contact. Hope-Simpson had been perplexed by influenza for a long time, in fact ever since he had treated its victims as a young general practitioner in Dorset, England, during the 1932–1933 epidemic—the very epidemic during which the virus that is associated with the disease in humans was first isolated. But during his 71-year career Hope-Simpson’s questions were never answered. “The sudden explosion of information about the nature of the virus and its antigenic reactions in the human host,” he wrote in 1992, had only “added to the features calling for explanation.”3
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur; Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (pp. 80-82). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

The human body is not effected by electrical or magnetic fields.

Again, you are following wacky religions. Making up numbers and using them as data is also a fallacy (argument from randU fallacy).

 

[Scott]

Apparently you didn't really digest what Mr. Firstenberg said. He believed that the alleged flu virus was essentially inert. If the alleged flu virus was inert, the same effect could happen without a virus at all. I quoted a passage from Mr. Firstenberg's book that dealt specifically with the flu virus, but there is a lot more of his book that talks of the negative health effects that EMFs have regardless of whether any alleged virus is present at all. And then there are the role of other environmental toxins as well. There have been studies suggesting that air pollution "worsened the effects" of Covid:

Coronavirus and Air Pollution | harvard.edu

Why air pollution is linked to severe cases of COVID-19 | stanford.edu

Does air pollution increase risk from COVID-19? Here's what we know | abcnews.go.com

If the Cov 2 virus doesn't exist, then it stands to reason that air pollution itself might be one of the causes of Covid 19. It's no secret that people in China were wearing masks long before Covid 19, due to the terrible quality of the air.

Another example of you running from one explanation to another when your explanations don't make any sense.

No, what I've been saying is that I believe that there are probably numerous causes for the disease called Covid 19, as well as for other diseases that are generally attributed to biological viruses, and I've been presenting evidence that suggests this is the case, such as the articles I linked to in my previous post.

If one thing can worsen another is not proof that the first thing is the cause.

Agreed. I have never stated that I had proof. What I've been presenting is evidence for the theory that allegedly viral diseases are in fact caused by other factors.

 

[Scott]

I did make that assertion, although I think that Dr. Mark Bailey gives a better explanation of what's going on. I've quoted his explanation in Post #532.

Nowhere in the quote does Bailey address the actual process of how de novo assembly works.

If you're interested in the definition (or at least -a- definition) of de novo assembly, I recommend the following article:
What is de novo assembly? |*thesequencingcenter.com

The article makes it clear from the outset that there is some inconsistency when it comes to the definition, so it sets out its own definition. If we can agree with that definition for the purposes of this discussion, I think we should be good.

He doesn't discuss the computer code. He doesn't discuss the overlapping segments.

He actually does mention hypothetical overlapping segments in the construction of the Cov 2 virus, I just didn't quote that part. I'll quote the paragraph where he mentions it, as well as the 2 subsequent paragraphs. I've bolded 2 contiguous sentences that I think are highly important- the first mentions how their remained a high match for known human RNA sequences and the second talks about the precise de novo assembly method and software used, which is something you seemed interested in as well...

**
In any case, they obtained some bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) from their patient and with this crude specimen reported that, “total RNA was extracted from 200μl of BALF.” Their methods section detailed that this was achieved, “using the RNeasy Plus Universal Mini kit (Qiagen),” i.e. through spin column centrifugation. They claimed that, “ribosomal RNA depletion was performed during library construction,” however, see page 43 as to why this is dubious as there remained a high match for known human RNA sequences. They then proceeded to shotgun sequence the brew, starting with random fragmentation of the genetic material into short lengths averaging 150 nucleotides and conversion of the RNA to DNA using a reverse transcriptase enzyme.90 56,565,928 such short reads were generated and this information was fed into Megahit and Trinity, software platforms for de novo algorithm-based assembly. Through Megahit, 384,096 contigs, or hypothetical overlapping sequences were generated and the longest one (30,474 nucleotides) was declared to have a “nucleotide identity of 89.1%” to bat SL-CoVZC45, another fictional construct that will be dealt with subsequently. (Trinity generated over 1.3 million contigs but the longest one was only 11,760 nucleotides — in other words, they would not have found the “genome” if they had just used this software platform.) The word ‘virus’ suddenly appeared when they state, “the genome sequence of this virus, as well as its termini, were determined and confirmed by reverse- transcription PCR.” This is a sleight of hand as the PCR simply amplifies pre-selected sequences and has no capacity to confirm a previously unknown genome. As PCR expert Stephen Bustin has explained, “PCR requires you to know what the sequence of your target is...so once you know that there’s something in your sample, then you would try to isolate it, yes. And then once you’ve isolated it, then you sequence it again, or PCR it up.”91 In other words, PCR itself cannot identify the origins of the sequences and the methodology of Fan Wu et al. did not establish the origin of their described sequences. However, in the very next sentence they announce to the world that, “this virus strain was designated as WH-Human 1 coronavirus (WHCV)”.

— We need to pause at this point as it is where the fraudulent virus, soon to be renamed SARS-CoV-2, was invented out of thin air. A virus that the WHO claims, with no eviden6al support whatsoever, is the causa6ve agent of COVID-19.​

For it is this “genome” that was submiged to GenBank on the 5th of January 202092 that was seized on by Drosten et al. to help produce their phoney PCR protocol assay sequences,93 which in turn were published with indecent haste by the WHO for all the world to use, thereby turning WH- Human 1 into the world’s reference genome for a claimed pathogen. It is this invenEon that is responsible for the whole bag of destrucEve tricks imposed on the world following the announcement of the pandemic by the WHO on the 11th of March 2020.94

However, anyone paying attention can see that there is no evidence whatsoever of a virus in the Fan Wu et al. paper. A virus is claimed to be a tiny replication-competent obligate intracellular parasite, consisting of a genome surrounded by a proteinaceous coat: it is an infectious particle that causes disease in a host. All Fan Wu et al. had was a 41-year-old man with pneumonia and a software-assembled model “genome” made from sequences of unestablished origin found in the man’s lung washings. To make it appear legitimate they stated, “the viral genome organization of WHCV was determined by sequence alignment to two representative members of the genus Betacoronavirus: a coronavirus associated with humans (SARS-CoV Tor2, GenBank accession number AY274119) and a coronavirus associated with bats (bat SL-CoVZC45, GenBank accession number MG772933).” These alleged genomes are also simply in silico constructs that have never been proven to exist in their entirety in nature, let alone been shown to come from inside a virus. For example bat SL-CoVZC45 was invented in 2018 by the process of, “19 degenerated PCR primer pairs...designed by multiple alignment of available SARS-CoV and bat SL-CoV sequences deposited in GenBank.”95
**

Source:
A Farewell To Virology (Expert Edition) | drsambailey.com

 

[Into the Night]

1- I've already provided alternative theories for allegedly viral diseases many times. In short, they are environmental/terrain theories, mainly toxins, EMFs and malnutrition.

2- You've provided no solid evidence that any allegedly viral diseases are contagious.

3- RNA exists in many cells, no need for these alleged biological viruses to explain RNA fragments in tissue samples.

No, You have provided only your religious chanting.
A virus exists by definition.

 

[Scott]

I question things all the time.

Lie.

Yet another unsubstantiated assertion right off the bat, one that's rather insulting to boot. I think I'll stop reading this post at this point.

 

[Scott]

No, the evidence I took from Arthur Firstenberg's book was that EMFs can cause disease such as the flu. He believed that biological viruses were activated by the EMFs and played a minor part in causing the disease. Having seen no solid evidence of biological viruses, I think it makes more sense to do away with viruses entirely here and simply attribute the sole cause of the flu to EMFs.



Arthur Firstenberg makes the case that that's exactly what happened. From his book The Invisible Rainbow:

**
Influenza Is an Electrical Disease

Suddenly and inexplicably, influenza, whose descriptions had remained consistent for thousands of years, changed its character in 1889. Flu had last seized most of England in November 1847, over half a century earlier. The last flu epidemic in the United States had raged in the winter of 1874–1875. Since ancient times, influenza had been known as a capricious, unpredictable disease, a wild animal that came from nowhere, terrorized whole populations at once without warning and without a schedule, and disappeared as suddenly and mysteriously as it had arrived, not to be seen again for years or decades. It behaved unlike any other illness, was thought not to be contagious, and received its name because its comings and goings were said to be governed by the “influence” of the stars.

View attachment 24605

But in 1889 influenza was tamed. From that year forward it would be present always, in every part of the world. It would vanish mysteriously as before, but it could be counted on to return, at more or less the same time, the following year. And it has never been absent since.

[snip]

In 2001, Canadian astronomer Ken Tapping, together with two British Columbia physicians, were the latest scientists to confirm, yet again, that for at least the last three centuries influenza pandemics have been most likely to occur during peaks of solar magnetic activity—that is, at the height of each eleven-year sun cycle.

Such a trend is not the only aspect of this disease that has long puzzled virologists. In 1992, one of the world’s authorities on the epidemiology of influenza, R. Edgar Hope-Simpson, published a book in which he reviewed the essential known facts and pointed out that they did not support a mode of transmission by direct human-to-human contact. Hope-Simpson had been perplexed by influenza for a long time, in fact ever since he had treated its victims as a young general practitioner in Dorset, England, during the 1932–1933 epidemic—the very epidemic during which the virus that is associated with the disease in humans was first isolated. But during his 71-year career Hope-Simpson’s questions were never answered. “The sudden explosion of information about the nature of the virus and its antigenic reactions in the human host,” he wrote in 1992, had only “added to the features calling for explanation.”3
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur; Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (pp. 80-82). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

The human body is not effected by electrical or magnetic fields.

I was referring to Electro Magnetic Fields or EMFs for short. There's plenty of evidence that they can have negative health impacts for humans and other life forms. Children's Health Defense published an article a few days ago with evidence of this in the case of 5G towers:

5G Towers Can Make Healthy People Sick, Two Case Reports Show | Children's Health Defense

 

[Into the Night]

Yet another unsubstantiated assertion right off the bat, one that's rather insulting to boot. I think I'll stop reading this post at this point.

Oh, it's substantiated...by your own posts!