Settling the Biological Virus Debate

Telegraph systems do NOT use high voltage. The radio waves they produce are negligible.

Arther Firstenberg, author of "The Invisible Rainbow", provides evidence that that's not the case. From the book:

**
“Anxiety disorder,” afflicting one-sixth of humanity, did not exist before the 1860s, when telegraph wires first encircled the earth. No hint of it appears in the medical literature before 1866.
**

Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 2). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Another passage further in:
**
It is easy to calculate, using these simple assumptions, that the electric fields beneath the earliest telegraph wires were up to 30,000 times stronger than the natural electric field of the earth at that frequency.
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 53). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.
 

As mentioned in other posts, the focus of this thread is to examine the evidence, or lack thereof, that viruses exist. Also mentioned elsewhere, when it comes to the Cov 2 virus, I believe we should be focusing on Iain Davis' article linked to below:

COVID19 – Evidence Of Global Fraud | Off Guardian
 

You're repeating your links- I understand, as there is a delay in the time that I respond to your posts, but as I mentioned in my previous post, I think we should focus on Iain Davis' article on the Cov 2 virus. Anyway, as mentioned previously, the focus of this thread is for evidence to be presented that biological viruses exist or, failing that, recognizing the possibility if not the probability that biological viruses don't in fact exist.
 
What actual data and experimentation have you presented to us on this thread? What experiments did Dr Sam Bailey conduct? What data has she collected using the scientific method?

Again, you're deviating from the purpose of this thread, which is to focus on the evidence, or lack thereof, that viruses exist.
 
Okay. Let's follow this:
Since multiple people have observed the sun rise this morning, it doesn't exist.

Viruses exist. Proof by identity. So does the Sun. Proof by identity.

I think we can all agree that the sun exists.

As to viruses, saying that they exist doesn't make it so. I'm not sure what you mean by proof by identity, but again simply saying that doesn't make them exist either.
 
It really doesn't matter if someone is a 'professional' or holds a doctorate.

It matters if they have knowledge on a given subject. In this case, the subject is viruses, and I definitely believe some if not all of the people who signed the statement linked to in the opening post have a significant amount of knowledge on the subject.

Viruses exist. Proof by identity. You can observe them with an electron microscope.

You can observe microbes with an electron microscope. The issue is whether any of those microbes are biological viruses.
 
You can observe them using an electron microscope.

Can we?

Yes.

Can you prove that any microbe seen under an electron microscope is actually a biological virus?



I've seen no evidence that what's been observed under any electron microscrope is actually a Cov 2 virus.

Argument of ignorance fallacy.

I'm guessing you are referring to the Argument from Ignorance fallacy. Quoting Wikipedia's introduction to it:

**
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
**

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

I have never claimed that I can prove that viruses don't exist. You and others here, however, have claimed that viruses do exist and seem to be suggesting that this is true so long as I can't prove that they don't exist. Sounds like an Argument from Ignorance to me.

This article is making the same fallacies you are.

Genome sequencing does not have be perfect to relate a virus to a series. This sequence is known as Covid-2 of the Covid/SARS series of viruses. It is also called covid19. The virus exists. Proof by identity.

Saying the virus exists doesn't make it so. As to Iain Davis' article, I think at this point it might be a good idea to quote some of it, as I think it can do a better job of explaining the flaws in the Cov 2 virus narrative than I can...

**
The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre published the first full SARS-CoV-2 genome (MN908947.1 ). This has been updated many times. However, MN908947.1 was the first genetic sequence describing the alleged COVID 19 etiologic agent (SARS-CoV-2).

All subsequent claims, tests, treatments, statistics, vaccine development and resultant policies are based upon this sequence. If the tests for this novel virus don’t identify anything capable of causing illness in human beings, the whole COVID 19 narrative is nothing but a charade.

The WUHAN researchers stated that they had effectively pieced the SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequence together by matching fragments found in samples with other, previously discovered, genetic sequences. From the gathered material they found an 87.1% match with SARS coronavirus (SARS-Cov). They used de novo assembly and targeted PCR and found 29,891-base-pair which shared a 79.6% sequence match to SARS-CoV.

They had to use de novo assembly because they had no priori knowledge of the correct sequence or order of those fragments. Quite simply, the WHO’s statement that Chinese researchers isolated the virus on the 7th January is false.

**

Source:
COVID19 – Evidence Of Global Fraud | Off Guardian

Now...to the fraud.

In the entire Covid/SARS series of viruses, NONE have been found to kill. Covid19 is a particularly mild variant of the series. There is no such thing as a 'delta variant' or 'xxy variant'. It is not possible to have a variant of a variant. It is either covid19, or it is not.

Well, since I don't believe a Cov 2 virus exists, I can certainly agree that it hasn't killed anyone.

The fraud is by DEMOCRATS implementing fear mongering over this virus to make Trump look bad. It is DEMOCRATS that shut down the economy and later used this same virus to commit massive election fraud sufficient to cause the 2020 election to fault.
The 'vaccine' by Pfizer or by J&J are not. They are treatments. They are experimental treatments. They program cells to manufacture covid19 viruses. Getting hooked on these 'vaccinations' and 'boosters' is simply infecting and reinfecting yourself with covid19.

Again, I'd have to disagree on this bit about the vaccines making Cov 2 viruses, as I don't believe they exist at all, but I certainly believe that all the Covid vaccines I've seen are toxic and should not be injected into anyone.

Mandating any vaccine or treatment against covid19 produces Paradox V:
1. I get 'vaccinated' to protect myself from covid19.
2. I demand you get 'vaccinated' because my 'vaccine' doesn't work.

I certainly agree that the logic here is incredibly twisted.

Mandating any mask to protect yourself from covid19 produces Paradox M.
1. I wear a mask to protect myself from covid19.
2. I demand you wear a mask because mine doesn't work.

I certainly agree with that as well, although I believe the logic for them is that masks are more meant to protect others than to protect oneself. It's not an argument I agree with.

These actually apply to all pathogens, not just covid19.

Masks in particular are not recommended to wear for longer than a couple of hours. They are dust masks. They do not stop any virus. Wearing them for long periods of time exposes you to bacteria and fungi that builds up in the mask material. This in turn can cause serious infections, including pneumonia.

I certainly agree that masks can build up nasty stuff. I generally used reusable cotton masks when I had to, and felt I had to wash them every few days or I'd sneeze in them.

The virus exists. So does the fraud.

We at least agree on the fraud part :-p.
 
Agreed, this is definitely not a partisan issue. The only group of doctors and other professionals that I know of who have signed a statement challenging the notion that biological viruses exist are referenced in the opening post of this thread. It took me around a year to finally come around to their belief on this. The more I looked at the evidence, the more their belief made sense to me.

So you decided to join this religion. Oh well, your own illiteracy prevails.

I once saw religion defined as a set of beliefs. I think we can agree that that's rather vague, however. By that definition, everyone has a religion, even atheists. I like discussing things with people because I like explaining why I believe certain things and seeing why others believe different things. What I -don't- like about a lot of religions is the reluctance most of them have to any debate on said beliefs.
 
Arther Firstenberg, author of "The Invisible Rainbow", provides evidence that that's not the case. From the book:

**
“Anxiety disorder,” afflicting one-sixth of humanity, did not exist before the 1860s, when telegraph wires first encircled the earth. No hint of it appears in the medical literature before 1866.
**

Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 2). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Another passage further in:
**
It is easy to calculate, using these simple assumptions, that the electric fields beneath the earliest telegraph wires were up to 30,000 times stronger than the natural electric field of the earth at that frequency.
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 53). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

LOL. And does he also have evidence of unicorns not existing until then as well?

But I am curious what evidence he actually has that anxiety disorder didn't exist before the 1860's. Because something wasn't diagnosed or described in the medical literature is not evidence that it didn't exist. It simply means it wasn't described with those terms. Did infection not happen before it was described in the medical literature? Did hand bones not exist before they were described in Gray's anatomy?

I am curious what Firstenberg thinks the word "hysteria" means in the medical literature and if it didn't exist even though it was described in ancient Egypt and ancient Greece.

Provide the calculations. Science requires actual science that can be replicated.
 
You're repeating your links- I understand, as there is a delay in the time that I respond to your posts, but as I mentioned in my previous post, I think we should focus on Iain Davis' article on the Cov 2 virus. Anyway, as mentioned previously, the focus of this thread is for evidence to be presented that biological viruses exist or, failing that, recognizing the possibility if not the probability that biological viruses don't in fact exist.

So you want to simply ignore actual science and concentrate on an opinion piece that contains no science? I think that explains your position clearly. You are unable to make a valid argument based on science.

I give you a dozen scientific articles from scientific journals that clearly show your opinion pieces don't know the science. Here let me give you them again.

Evidence of the covid virus being isolated and sequenced.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC703e6342/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...98743X20304274
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7366528/
https://link.springer.com/article/10...96-020-03899-4

Evidence of other viruses being isolated and sequenced.
https://link.springer.com/article/10...96-020-03899-4
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/profes...terization.htm
https://asm.org/Articles/2020/Octobe...-Is-in-the-Gen
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/d...rstb.2019.0572
https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/be...n-torrent-ngs/

Directions of how to isolate a virus and sequence it's RNA
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...42682219300728
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro.2016.182
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3709572/
https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/...985-017-0741-5
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0027805
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.01360-14
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3502977/

Feel free to point to the ones that you think don't contain actual science.

Your opinion piece certainly doesn't contain science. It is nothing but bullshit wrapped in more bullshit.
 
I think we can all agree that the sun exists.

As to viruses, saying that they exist doesn't make it so. I'm not sure what you mean by proof by identity, but again simply saying that doesn't make them exist either.

No. We don't all agree that the sun exists.

https://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63776.0

I've been working on some scientific research, and I'm starting to come to the conclusion that the Sun is merely a reflection of the flat moon
Clearly some don't believe the sun exists and since they don't believe it, shouldn't you have to prove it does exist? That is your argument when it comes to viruses. Should we not apply the same standard to the sun?
 
It matters if they have knowledge on a given subject. In this case, the subject is viruses, and I definitely believe some if not all of the people who signed the statement linked to in the opening post have a significant amount of knowledge on the subject.
Just because you believe something doesn't make it true. There is more evidence that viruses exist than that the people who signed that statement have any knowledge on the subject.

Here are multiple scientific articles that provide evidence of viruses existing.

Evidence of the covid virus being isolated and sequenced.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC703e6342/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...98743X20304274
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7366528/
https://link.springer.com/article/10...96-020-03899-4

Evidence of other viruses being isolated and sequenced.
https://link.springer.com/article/10...96-020-03899-4
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/profes...terization.htm
https://asm.org/Articles/2020/Octobe...-Is-in-the-Gen
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/d...rstb.2019.0572
https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/be...n-torrent-ngs/

Directions of how to isolate a virus and sequence it's RNA
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...42682219300728
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro.2016.182
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3709572/
https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/...985-017-0741-5
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0027805
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.01360-14
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3502977/

Now.. what evidence do you have that those who signed that paper have significant knowledge on the subject? Do you have 12 papers showing they are knowledgeable? Any published papers in any scientific journals by any one of them on the subject of viruses?
 
I think we can all agree that the sun exists.
Not according to you.
As to viruses, saying that they exist doesn't make it so. I'm not sure what you mean by proof by identity, but again simply saying that doesn't make them exist either.
They can be observed. They can be sequenced. Since you don't understand what the proof of identity is, it is an axiom of logic. It is the basic equation: A->A.
Viruses exist by definition, just as the Sun exists by definition. Just as you can observe the Sun, you can observe viruses.
 
It matters if they have knowledge on a given subject. In this case, the subject is viruses, and I definitely believe some if not all of the people who signed the statement linked to in the opening post have a significant amount of knowledge on the subject.
Paradox. Irrational. You can't have people being an 'expert' on something they say doesn't exist!
You can observe microbes with an electron microscope.
That you can. Bacteria can be observed with a good optical microscope. Viruses can be observed with an electron microscope.
The issue is whether any of those microbes are biological viruses.
Viruses are not living things. They are not 'biological'.
 
Arther Firstenberg, author of "The Invisible Rainbow", provides evidence that that's not the case. From the book:

**
“Anxiety disorder,” afflicting one-sixth of humanity, did not exist before the 1860s, when telegraph wires first encircled the earth. No hint of it appears in the medical literature before 1866.
**

Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 2). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Another passage further in:
**
It is easy to calculate, using these simple assumptions, that the electric fields beneath the earliest telegraph wires were up to 30,000 times stronger than the natural electric field of the earth at that frequency.
**

Source:
Firstenberg, Arthur. The Invisible Rainbow (p. 53). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Okay. This is the old 'electromagnetic fields are killing us' crap.

Telegraph systems may use thousands of volts or operate with only a few volts. Some operate with only millivolts.
ALL such systems do produce magnetism AND electromagnetic waves, or light. This light is a VERY low frequency, far below even infrared light. At these frequencies, people are transparent. The light passes right through them and does not interact with any tissue. Indeed, such low frequencies will pass right through the Earth. It is also transparent at those frequencies.

As frequencies increase, you starting getting into radio frequencies. These also do not interact with the body, which is still transparent to those frequencies.

Direct current has no frequency and does not emit electromagnetic waves. Just magnetism.

Power companies routinely distribute power at either 50Hz or 60Hz, well below any radio wave. Again, the electromagnetic wave at 50 or 60Hz passes right through the body. Human tissue is completely transparent to this frequency of light. These power companies and interconnect operators routinely work around very high voltages. They experience no greater rate of disease or infection than the general population that doesn't work around such high voltages. Indeed, several remote tribes that live nowhere near any power line or power station suffer higher rates of disease and infections (due to living in primitive conditions).

Earth's magnetic field (and corresponding electric field) has no frequency.

Anxiety certainly did exist before 1860. I'll leave it to you to imagine the anxiety caused by the Black Death all around you, or the fall of Rome, or just getting through a harsh winter. I might point out the War of Secession itself, or the anxiety experienced by the slaves, whipped for the slightest mistake as well.

There ARE some frequencies of light absorbed by human tissue. One of these is infrared light. People both emit and absorb infrared light.
Eyesight works because human tissue is absorbing visible light. This absorption triggers a nerve response in the retina.
UV-a light is absorbed as well, causing pigment in each skin cell to orient itself to protect the nucleus like an umbrella. This gives us a 'tan'.
UV-b light is somewhat dangerous. Most is filtered out by oxygen (turning it into ozone). Some does still reach the surface. This causes more immediate damage to human tissue when absorbed, resulting in what we call 'sunburn'.
UV-c light is very dangerous! None reaches the ground. It is all filtered out by ozone (turning it into oxygen). Absorption of UV-c light causes severe 'burn' like damage and possible permanent blindness.
Xrays are also absorbed by human tissue. This frequency is also dangerous in high doses. Xray technicians carefully monitor the dosage received when recording an image.

The higher the frequency, the more energy in the photon (Planck's law). Absorbing energetic photons CAN cause damage. Absorbing visible light or less at the levels emitted by our Sun causes no damage. One exception is looking directly at the Sun, which will focus a spot of intense infrared light on the retina, cooking it just like a bug under a magnifying glass. The resulting damage can be permanent, causing blindness.


So much for the 'killer power line radiation' religion.
 
Unsubstantiated assertion.

Yes. He does make unsubstantiated assertions. Lots of them. Why does the author not address the multitude Covid viruses that have been sequenced in the database. It appears it has been sequenced over 6,000,000 times by multiple labs in many countries.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/v...ide&VirusLineage_ss=SARS-CoV-2, taxid:2697049

Did you bother to compare what he does to the definition you posted about the scientific method? Tell us what data he collected. Tell us what experiments he conducted. Does he provide the evidence to be able to duplicate his results with an objective experiment? You will notice that he claims they could be exosomes but he doesn't provide measurements with his pictures to show that an exosome is the same size as a viruses that have been imaged with an electron microscope?
For that matter, how can he claim that exosomes exist since they have never been isolated using Koch's postulates? Why would he claim something exists that can't be isolated when he argues that something can't exist if it can't be isolated?

Based on his images, an exosome could be the size of a tennis ball. How do we know it isn't?
GettyImages-1416912208.jpg
 
Back
Top