The monovalent Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines are no longer authorized for use in the United States

[larsenb]

........... but my wife works with microscopes and she has in her high tech lab on campus. Do you have a microscope or do you take someone's word for it? I'm guessing the later. Likely from web none-the-less.

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

I say cause, not that they aren't present. They are present, only they are a result of cellular breakdown, assisting getting rid of dead or dying cells, with no evidence whatsoever that they are causing what is being observed.

Much like flies being observed around garbage. They didn't create the garbage, they are drawn to it for a good reason. To break it down further. Likewise, viruses are there as cellular debris and are there for a good reason. To get rid of the dying and dead cells.

Virology invented the virus model but has consistently failed to fulfil its own requirements.

It is claimed that viruses cause disease after transmitting between hosts such as humans and yet the scientific evidence for these claims is missing.

One of virology’s greatest failures has been the inability to obtain any viral particles directly from the tissues of organisms said to have “viral” diseases.

In order to obfuscate this state of affairs, virologists have resorted to creating their own pseudoscientific methods to replace the longstanding scientific method,

as well as changing the dictionary meaning of words in order to support their anti-scientific practices.

For instance, an “isolated” isolate does not require the physical existence of the particles in order to be afforded “isolation” status.

A viral particle must fulfil defined physical and biological properties including being a replication competent intracellular parasite capable of causing disease in a host such as a human.

However, “viruses” such as SARS-CoV-2 are nothing more than phantom constructs, existing only in imaginations and computer simulations.

In this paradigm, cases of invented diseases like COVID-19 are nothing more than the detection of selected genetic sequences and proteins purported to be “viral.”

The existence of a virus is not required in this loop of circular reasoning and thus entire “pandemics” can be built upon digital creations and falsely sustained through in vitro (“test tube”) molecular reactions.

I tend to agree with everything you've written, however, I think the evidence points to there being a real 'virus-like' entity that was created for specific purposes in the early decade of this century, probably using crispr technology, resulting in the original SARS-Cov1 'virus', whether they used a 'virus' derived from a bat colony or wherever.

And it does enter cells via the ACE2 receptor and replicates therein, to my understanding.

Dr. David Martin has exposed the patent trail of this effort.

[Ymarsakar]

Sars covid is not a disease caused by a virus. The virus has never been isolated in a lab. 9ther viruses have. The genetic sequence they used in the weapons test was not a virus produced by human cells. A bi9 weapon is generally not natural. This one was not.

What other viruses have been isolated?

I am not a virologist. From memory it would be the hiv virus.

When independent peoplr with labs such as mike adams went looking they could never get a sample 9f sars covid 19. There are corona viruses. They are called the common cold.

The key point is that viruses are said to cause disease. This is most likely not true.

[Ymarsakar]

........... but my wife works with microscopes and she has in her high tech lab on campus. Do you have a microscope or do you take someone's word for it? I'm guessing the later. Likely from web none-the-less.

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

I say cause, not that they aren't present. They are present, only they are a result of cellular breakdown, assisting getting rid of dead or dying cells, with no evidence whatsoever that they are causing what is being observed.

Much like flies being observed around garbage. They didn't create the garbage, they are drawn to it for a good reason. To break it down further. Likewise, viruses are there as cellular debris and are there for a good reason. To get rid of the dying and dead cells.

Virology invented the virus model but has consistently failed to fulfil its own requirements.

It is claimed that viruses cause disease after transmitting between hosts such as humans and yet the scientific evidence for these claims is missing.

One of virology’s greatest failures has been the inability to obtain any viral particles directly from the tissues of organisms said to have “viral” diseases.

In order to obfuscate this state of affairs, virologists have resorted to creating their own pseudoscientific methods to replace the longstanding scientific method,

as well as changing the dictionary meaning of words in order to support their anti-scientific practices.

For instance, an “isolated” isolate does not require the physical existence of the particles in order to be afforded “isolation” status.

A viral particle must fulfil defined physical and biological properties including being a replication competent intracellular parasite capable of causing disease in a host such as a human.

However, “viruses” such as SARS-CoV-2 are nothing more than phantom constructs, existing only in imaginations and computer simulations.

In this paradigm, cases of invented diseases like COVID-19 are nothing more than the detection of selected genetic sequences and proteins purported to be “viral.”

The existence of a virus is not required in this loop of circular reasoning and thus entire “pandemics” can be built upon digital creations and falsely sustained through in vitro (“test tube”) molecular reactions.

I tend to agree with everything you've written, however, I think the evidence points to there being a real 'virus-like' entity that was created for specific purposes in the early decade of this century, probably using crispr technology, resulting in the original SARS-Cov1 'virus', whether they used a 'virus' derived from a bat colony or wherever.

And it does enter cells via the ACE2 receptor and replicates therein, to my understanding.

Dr. David Martin has exposed the patent trail of this effort.

What they were working on was a way to hijack the immune system so that it would produce spike proteins as part of the herd immunity response. The person would then emit viruses in order to warn the herd but those viruses would then contain the spike protein.

This did not happen due to grace of god so they shifted to the next stage. Injections and mrna.

Trojan horse herd immunity.

If they had succeeded world death ratio would be 5 to 15%

FEAR would be a mind killer then. How many would have refused the totalitarian system if 15% of 8 billiom were dead?

The reason the mutations were more virulent but less lethal is because of herd immunity. The virus mutating was the herd defense activating and removing the foreign dna or proteins. The protein was the nano weapon toxin.

[NeveR]

A vaccine that attacks the original strain of COVID that has since been mutated to various forms is not as effective as a bivalent vaccine that attacks current strains.

The "strains" are a bunch of BS. "Covid" isn't even a virus, it's poison. What other explanation do you have for the fact that it has no unique symptoms, just an enhanced version of the flu?

COVID did have unique symptoms that were not present in different variants of the flu. You don't have your sense of smell and taste retarded by the flu. The fevers of a COVID patient are comparatively milder but there's a lot more problems in the respiratory tract.

Loss of taste and smell have been acknowledged symptoms of flu and flulike illness for decades.

And the CDC itself has said "covid" can't be diagnosed by symptoms as the symptoms are indistinguishable from "the flu".

https://off-guardian.org/2023/03/24/40- ... f-covid/#i

Face it, you were conned by a clever ad campaign that lied to you in headlines while admitting the truth in small print.

[madvin]

........... but my wife works with microscopes and she has in her high tech lab on campus. Do you have a microscope or do you take someone's word for it? I'm guessing the later. Likely from web none-the-less.

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

The answer to your question is no, of course not. It just means you trust others. And you make claims up here that are only your opinion, not science, and are disproved under a microscope. I'm not saying everything medical labs do is correct. but they didn't make a fake science here. Like I said, I have in-home experts that have (had access to) the right microscopes and tech. And I do believe them and what they saw with their own eyes. Better than trusting the Internet fringe people that I've never met.

I wouldn’t be hammering on this point if it was merely based on trust.

It goes beyond trust although it started out that way. I don’t just Willy nilly trust people because they merely make sense. I have studied this all out for years and got confirmation.

Yes it is all seen with the microscope. But it’s the interpretation of such that is the problem.

It is precisely that. Fake science as it feeds the pharmaceuticals. Research bears this out.

Since this germ hypothesis is considered a theory, it doesn’t rise the acclaimed truth. However today it is considered “the scientific theory of the disease”, i.e. the official explanation given by Medicine to the arising of the disease (and also represents the ideological ground of the vaccinal practice), it keeps being a “theory”, i.e. an opinion, a conjecture, a belief.

The idea that in the Nature there are terrifying little animals that want the death of people, animals, plants, and other living beings, as an end in itself, isn’t only a disputable, but also an absurd idea, and above all, it is senseless from a biological point of view: how can a living being want the death of another one only in order to kill it? The viruses would attack the other living beings only to kill them, and afterwards to die with them: a biological absurdity! Not even the parasites, that stick to other living beings to nourish themselves and live (sometimes with very dangerous effects for the host), do it with the precise aim of killing.

[madvin]

Sars covid is not a disease caused by a virus. The virus has never been isolated in a lab. 9ther viruses have. The genetic sequence they used in the weapons test was not a virus produced by human cells. A bi9 weapon is generally not natural. This one was not.

What other viruses have been isolated?

I am not a virologist. From memory it would be the hiv virus.

When independent peoplr with labs such as mike adams went looking they could never get a sample 9f sars covid 19. There are corona viruses. They are called the common cold.

The key point is that viruses are said to cause disease. This is most likely not true.

I agree with you. Except I say it isn’t true rather than likely not true. As you know nothing has ever been proven concerning viruses.

HIV falls into the virus construct.

[madvin]

........... but my wife works with microscopes and she has in her high tech lab on campus. Do you have a microscope or do you take someone's word for it? I'm guessing the later. Likely from web none-the-less.

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

I say cause, not that they aren't present. They are present, only they are a result of cellular breakdown, assisting getting rid of dead or dying cells, with no evidence whatsoever that they are causing what is being observed.

Much like flies being observed around garbage. They didn't create the garbage, they are drawn to it for a good reason. To break it down further. Likewise, viruses are there as cellular debris and are there for a good reason. To get rid of the dying and dead cells.

Virology invented the virus model but has consistently failed to fulfil its own requirements.

It is claimed that viruses cause disease after transmitting between hosts such as humans and yet the scientific evidence for these claims is missing.

One of virology’s greatest failures has been the inability to obtain any viral particles directly from the tissues of organisms said to have “viral” diseases.

In order to obfuscate this state of affairs, virologists have resorted to creating their own pseudoscientific methods to replace the longstanding scientific method,

as well as changing the dictionary meaning of words in order to support their anti-scientific practices.

For instance, an “isolated” isolate does not require the physical existence of the particles in order to be afforded “isolation” status.

A viral particle must fulfil defined physical and biological properties including being a replication competent intracellular parasite capable of causing disease in a host such as a human.

However, “viruses” such as SARS-CoV-2 are nothing more than phantom constructs, existing only in imaginations and computer simulations.

In this paradigm, cases of invented diseases like COVID-19 are nothing more than the detection of selected genetic sequences and proteins purported to be “viral.”

The existence of a virus is not required in this loop of circular reasoning and thus entire “pandemics” can be built upon digital creations and falsely sustained through in vitro (“test tube”) molecular reactions.

I tend to agree with everything you've written, however, I think the evidence points to there being a real 'virus-like' entity that was created for specific purposes in the early decade of this century, probably using crispr technology, resulting in the original SARS-Cov1 'virus', whether they used a 'virus' derived from a bat colony or wherever.

And it does enter cells via the ACE2 receptor and replicates therein, to my understanding.

Dr. David Martin has exposed the patent trail of this effort.

Since virus particles are actually created by our bodies and not from without the body, I have doubts about that but don’t reject the idea either.

[larsenb]

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

I say cause, not that they aren't present. They are present, only they are a result of cellular breakdown, assisting getting rid of dead or dying cells, with no evidence whatsoever that they are causing what is being observed.

Much like flies being observed around garbage. They didn't create the garbage, they are drawn to it for a good reason. To break it down further. Likewise, viruses are there as cellular debris and are there for a good reason. To get rid of the dying and dead cells.

Virology invented the virus model but has consistently failed to fulfil its own requirements.

It is claimed that viruses cause disease after transmitting between hosts such as humans and yet the scientific evidence for these claims is missing.

One of virology’s greatest failures has been the inability to obtain any viral particles directly from the tissues of organisms said to have “viral” diseases.

In order to obfuscate this state of affairs, virologists have resorted to creating their own pseudoscientific methods to replace the longstanding scientific method,

as well as changing the dictionary meaning of words in order to support their anti-scientific practices.

For instance, an “isolated” isolate does not require the physical existence of the particles in order to be afforded “isolation” status.

A viral particle must fulfil defined physical and biological properties including being a replication competent intracellular parasite capable of causing disease in a host such as a human.

However, “viruses” such as SARS-CoV-2 are nothing more than phantom constructs, existing only in imaginations and computer simulations.

In this paradigm, cases of invented diseases like COVID-19 are nothing more than the detection of selected genetic sequences and proteins purported to be “viral.”

The existence of a virus is not required in this loop of circular reasoning and thus entire “pandemics” can be built upon digital creations and falsely sustained through in vitro (“test tube”) molecular reactions.

I tend to agree with everything you've written, however, I think the evidence points to there being a real 'virus-like' entity that was created for specific purposes in the early decade of this century, probably using crispr technology, resulting in the original SARS-Cov1 'virus', whether they used a 'virus' derived from a bat colony or wherever.

And it does enter cells via the ACE2 receptor and replicates therein, to my understanding.

Dr. David Martin has exposed the patent trail of this effort.

Since virus particles are actually created by our bodies and not from without the body, I have doubts about that but don’t reject the idea either.

Right. The cellular debris theory, which makes quite a bit of sense. However, cells of other organisms are apt to produce the same thing.

From my readings, such entities, allegedly consisting of DNA and/or RNA fragments (the viral genome), can be picked up by other organisms, and in some cases, enter cells of the host organism and be replicated, and thus create a preponderance of them that produces symptoms described as illness, as well as anti-bodies as part of the immune response bent on destroying them.

I've been very impressed by reading many descriptions by virologists, etc., that describe the methodologies they use to support this model. And yes, I'm aware of Koch's Postulates, etc., and the lack of evidence virus infections display for fulfilling these postulates.

David Martin claims the patent information indicates that SARS-Cov1 was an engineered entity, which was initially created to produce a vector that would help introduce a vaccine into two different animal populations to combat diseases they were subjected to.

[Ymarsakar]

What other viruses have been isolated?

I am not a virologist. From memory it would be the hiv virus.

When independent peoplr with labs such as mike adams went looking they could never get a sample 9f sars covid 19. There are corona viruses. They are called the common cold.

The key point is that viruses are said to cause disease. This is most likely not true.

I agree with you. Except I say it isn’t true rather than likely not true. As you know nothing has ever been proven concerning viruses.

HIV falls into the virus construct.

I am trying to appear like I am not black pilled into conspiracy world land ; )

Since this is not my field, I don't feel like making pronouncements that I have to do work to back up using stuff I never made an effort to recall. The people that did the research on viruses and why they didn't cause diseases but correlated to diseases, came from Flat Earth Theory after all, initially. That was a whole other can of worms.

I guarantee you that Flat Earthers from the post 2015 grassroots movement did not take no wax. THey don't even trust Nasa let alone big pharma.

[Ymarsakar]

I don't have access to microscopes. Does that disqualify me from seeing truth in others who do have access? Not only access, but:
1) perform experiments
2) interpret lab reports, more specifically lab reports dealing with virus experiments

Without exception, none of the lab papers prove scientifically that viruses cause anything.

The answer to your question is no, of course not. It just means you trust others. And you make claims up here that are only your opinion, not science, and are disproved under a microscope. I'm not saying everything medical labs do is correct. but they didn't make a fake science here. Like I said, I have in-home experts that have (had access to) the right microscopes and tech. And I do believe them and what they saw with their own eyes. Better than trusting the Internet fringe people that I've never met.

I wouldn’t be hammering on this point if it was merely based on trust.

It goes beyond trust although it started out that way. I don’t just Willy nilly trust people because they merely make sense. I have studied this all out for years and got confirmation.

Yes it is all seen with the microscope. But it’s the interpretation of such that is the problem.

It is precisely that. Fake science as it feeds the pharmaceuticals. Research bears this out.

Since this germ hypothesis is considered a theory, it doesn’t rise the acclaimed truth. However today it is considered “the scientific theory of the disease”, i.e. the official explanation given by Medicine to the arising of the disease (and also represents the ideological ground of the vaccinal practice), it keeps being a “theory”, i.e. an opinion, a conjecture, a belief.

The idea that in the Nature there are terrifying little animals that want the death of people, animals, plants, and other living beings, as an end in itself, isn’t only a disputable, but also an absurd idea, and above all, it is senseless from a biological point of view: how can a living being want the death of another one only in order to kill it? The viruses would attack the other living beings only to kill them, and afterwards to die with them: a biological absurdity! Not even the parasites, that stick to other living beings to nourish themselves and live (sometimes with very dangerous effects for the host), do it with the precise aim of killing.

AH, now the gravity theory, that is my hobby field. I can definitely out argue how scientists are stuck with the old theories of classical physics and won't budge on their principles of faith and belief (lie).

I out argued some physicists and professors on this matter. It is surprisingly how little they knew.

Bio warfare applications, wasn't even on my radar until 2020 at least. I had not seen a single conspiracy theory about it nor had I invested the evidence/research field, other than that Flat Earther who called into question the germ theory.

[madvin]

I am not a virologist. From memory it would be the hiv virus.

When independent peoplr with labs such as mike adams went looking they could never get a sample 9f sars covid 19. There are corona viruses. They are called the common cold.

The key point is that viruses are said to cause disease. This is most likely not true.

I agree with you. Except I say it isn’t true rather than likely not true. As you know nothing has ever been proven concerning viruses.

HIV falls into the virus construct.

I am trying to appear like I am not black pilled into conspiracy world land ; )

Since this is not my field, I don't feel like making pronouncements that I have to do work to back up using stuff I never made an effort to recall. The people that did the research on viruses and why they didn't cause diseases but correlated to diseases, came from Flat Earth Theory after all, initially. That was a whole other can of worms.

I guarantee you that Flat Earthers from the post 2015 grassroots movement did not take no wax. THey don't even trust Nasa let alone big pharma.

I never really equated flat earthers with virus deniers.

[Ymarsakar]

I agree with you. Except I say it isn’t true rather than likely not true. As you know nothing has ever been proven concerning viruses.

HIV falls into the virus construct.

I am trying to appear like I am not black pilled into conspiracy world land ; )

Since this is not my field, I don't feel like making pronouncements that I have to do work to back up using stuff I never made an effort to recall. The people that did the research on viruses and why they didn't cause diseases but correlated to diseases, came from Flat Earth Theory after all, initially. That was a whole other can of worms.

I guarantee you that Flat Earthers from the post 2015 grassroots movement did not take no wax. THey don't even trust Nasa let alone big pharma.

I never really equated flat earthers with virus deniers.

The 2015+ group was the only one I had heard of on youtube talk about redoing the experiments, such as Sophia Smallstorm. But I wasn't interested in virology, so I took a look and holy spirit in 2018 said virology was obsolete, so I went looking for alternate healing methods instead.

I never heard of terrain theory at the time either. They had suppressed that one pretty well over the decades.