Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tobin Owl's avatar

Love your introduction, Crow. Beautifully done!

No, I don't think the debate about viruses is over. Dr. Michael Palmer, in conjunction with Dr Sucharit Bakdi, has written 2 articles defending germ theory and viruses in particular. Sandwiched between is a response by virus skeptic Torsten Engelbrecht. I think both sides brought forth important points.

Expand full comment
Evelyn K. Brunswick's avatar

http://mileswmathis.com/terrain.pdf

Terrain theory is a psyop, essentially. Miles Mathis explains it quite well, without having to use much science to respond to the anti-virology side's ridiculous assertions. It seems to also be linked to the flat earth psyop.

Interestingly I was doing a bit more medical science research today for an article, and have some ready questions for the anti-virus people.

Obviously pollution causes ill health. That can't be argued with. But here's the first question: Can you tell me how these pollutants trigger the body's release of Interferon?

Let's start there. Then later, if necessary, we can move on to the rest of the exceptionally complex human immune system, which is a product of millions of years of evolution in an environment replete with germs of various kinds (bacteria and viruses).

Oh - I should point out (which Mathis also points out), whilst you can't argue against the existence of bacteria, it is true that viruses don't satisfy Koch's postulates because they are an intra-cellular infection. That's something to remember.

There's also zero point in even engaging with these 'no virus' people given the existence of stuff like 'genome sequencing', which has been carried out on Sars-Cov-2, and even gotten as far as demonstrating which elements of the virus have which effects on which bits and functions of the human body, such as the interferon-suppression effect which many viruses have evolved to get around the human body's primary immune response (Interferon is signalling protein which triggers the immune response cascade, which involves dozens and dozens of downstream pathways).

And did you know, for example, that Ivermectin inhibits the ACE2 receptor binding ability of the infamous spike protein? No wonder they wanted to suppress that off-patent, cheap as chips, safe and effective treatment.

You mention 'specialists' and 'generalists' in which the generalist must be intelligent enough to understand the specialist. Well, I am somewhere in between when it comes to medical science, as I can understand all the specialist jargon.

And of course you have to examine the credentials and competency of the people who express opinions dressed up to look like science. I find it interesting that you can do this rational and common sense approach when it comes to some things, but not for others, like the trans thing, for example, where you seem to just take one view from very biased and somewhat fraudulent, pseudoscientific sources with a clearly fascist agenda. There seems to be a contradiction there, is all I'm saying. Yet when someone knowledgeable comes along, like me for example, that person is dismissed, possibly to avoid having to cast aside the confirmation bias (which is just a fancy term for 'prejudice').

Anyhow, let's start with Interferon, as I say, and go from there.

Oh - and the medieval plagues. How about them. And plagues in ancient times. And... and...

Expand full comment
30 more comments...

No posts