Whenever there is a "history of virology" or "great moments in virology science" there is an amazing lacuna.
One fundamental theory is that the dead/inactive "viruses" enter cells and then hijack cell functions (of a variety of cells) for their own replication.
This is an extraordinary theory, which, if virology was a science, would require extraordinary proof.
However, there is no science behind this theory. If there were, c. 1950s there would have been specific experiments that, non-circular, replicable, demonstrated that this occurred.
Never happened.
Simply accepted as "science" by osmosis and peer accolades.
Conclusion, virology is not really a science.
Note that this in a sense precedes the other missing links, such as isolation, infection, transmission. In a sense it is more fundamental, since it is a core definition of viruses that they have this amazing capability.
Illnesses & diseases are not contagious. There are no viruses. Therefore, there is no virology to evolve or advance. It is 100% pseudoscience. The virus hypothesis never advanced to the status of Theory. The hypothesised means of transmission failed to produce any illnesses. And so they resorted to injections, intubations, swabs, and cell cultures -- all of which are blatantly unnatural.
The descriptions of the older procedures require a lot more detail.
“Pasteur started with the rabies virus, which he obtained from infected animals”
What exactly was the process here?
How was infection proven?
How did he know he had a rabies virus? Or any virus at all?
There are a huge number of assumptions buried behind just that one sentence, even before moving to the next step.
Just unpacking this one step alone could be an entire paper in itself.
What are the specific observations separate from the story (narrative) of what is happening?
What other stories (narratives) could explain the observations?
How/where were these other stories shown to be incorrect?
Is the story (narrative) of a viral cause of the actual observations falsifiable? And what experiments were done to show this and what was the specific methodology?
Animal torture without control experiments = indisputable proof of viral infection - couldn't possibly be the torture that makes the lab animals poorly. By the same logic, during the Spanish Inquisition, it wasn't the rack that elicited confessions and made the victims wretched - it was a virus.
Brilliant work Matthew!! Thanks for shining a light on the blatant fraud at the heart of viroLIEgy.
Translation : "a critical look at pedantic gobledegook , esoteric jingo laden psudo-science & presuppositional fallacy of the virus theory perspective"
So, do you deny that you can introduce a disease into an animal from the isolate of another animal? For example the Pasteur experiments you cite with the rabies virus. If the virus is not causing the disease then you have to prove that it is something else. Pasteur didn't know what he was dealing with apart that it was small.
We have many ways of detecting virus particles that you appear to be ignorant of or simply ignore because it doesn't fit your world view:
There is a nice little review of virus isolation and concentration in this link:
1) In vitro culture of viral particles in cell lines. The viruses particles produced in cell culture can then be isolated by various techniques from the cell culture medium. The damaged cells can also appear as plaques on the sheet of growing cells. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_plaque
5) Different viruses cause different diseases with completely different characteristics that are reproducible.
So whatever hypothesis you are putting forward to explain how viruses don't exist, or if they exist they don't cause disease, or if they cause disease they can't be isolated etc etc... YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH EXPLANATIONS THAT FIT ALL OF THE DATA AND OBSERVATIONS OVER A CENTURY OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY.
So, lets here it. What is the alternative. And don't give me "toxins" or "terroir" BS because that cannot explain the phenomenon of rapidly spreading global pandemics.
Not easy to satisfy your demand for alternate explanations without access to the esoteric tools of the trade.
So instead, let's propose a thought experiment:
next time you get the seasonal sniffles and feeling genuinely fluish, obtain a sample from your snot and inject into a fertilised chicken egg and voila! you "grew" the virus. (But make sure to wear a moon suit and deploy BullShit Level 4 safety measures, so you don't accidently set the planet on fire.)
Virology is pure pseudoscience. Viruses are pure fiction. Transmission of disease by ‘pathogenic microbe’ is pure fiction.
I offer £3000 every day for any evidence any infectious biological pathogen has ever existed.
Needless to say - 3 years and still none offered.
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for sharing!
Whenever there is a "history of virology" or "great moments in virology science" there is an amazing lacuna.
One fundamental theory is that the dead/inactive "viruses" enter cells and then hijack cell functions (of a variety of cells) for their own replication.
This is an extraordinary theory, which, if virology was a science, would require extraordinary proof.
However, there is no science behind this theory. If there were, c. 1950s there would have been specific experiments that, non-circular, replicable, demonstrated that this occurred.
Never happened.
Simply accepted as "science" by osmosis and peer accolades.
Conclusion, virology is not really a science.
Note that this in a sense precedes the other missing links, such as isolation, infection, transmission. In a sense it is more fundamental, since it is a core definition of viruses that they have this amazing capability.
Your thoughts?
Thanks!
Steven Avery
Dutchess County, NY USA
https://linktr.ee/stevenavery
"As virology continues to evolve..."
Illnesses & diseases are not contagious. There are no viruses. Therefore, there is no virology to evolve or advance. It is 100% pseudoscience. The virus hypothesis never advanced to the status of Theory. The hypothesised means of transmission failed to produce any illnesses. And so they resorted to injections, intubations, swabs, and cell cultures -- all of which are blatantly unnatural.
The descriptions of the older procedures require a lot more detail.
“Pasteur started with the rabies virus, which he obtained from infected animals”
What exactly was the process here?
How was infection proven?
How did he know he had a rabies virus? Or any virus at all?
There are a huge number of assumptions buried behind just that one sentence, even before moving to the next step.
Just unpacking this one step alone could be an entire paper in itself.
What are the specific observations separate from the story (narrative) of what is happening?
What other stories (narratives) could explain the observations?
How/where were these other stories shown to be incorrect?
Is the story (narrative) of a viral cause of the actual observations falsifiable? And what experiments were done to show this and what was the specific methodology?
So many questions!
One has to wonder who pays for all this complex drivel to be written.
The amount of work involved to fabricate this humungous pile of crap reminds me of reading the literary diarrhoea from Agent 131711.
It was a pleasure. 😂
Animal torture without control experiments = indisputable proof of viral infection - couldn't possibly be the torture that makes the lab animals poorly. By the same logic, during the Spanish Inquisition, it wasn't the rack that elicited confessions and made the victims wretched - it was a virus.
Brilliant work Matthew!! Thanks for shining a light on the blatant fraud at the heart of viroLIEgy.
Translation : "a critical look at pedantic gobledegook , esoteric jingo laden psudo-science & presuppositional fallacy of the virus theory perspective"
So, do you deny that you can introduce a disease into an animal from the isolate of another animal? For example the Pasteur experiments you cite with the rabies virus. If the virus is not causing the disease then you have to prove that it is something else. Pasteur didn't know what he was dealing with apart that it was small.
We have many ways of detecting virus particles that you appear to be ignorant of or simply ignore because it doesn't fit your world view:
There is a nice little review of virus isolation and concentration in this link:
https://scholar.google.ch/scholar_url?url=https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7173433/pdf/main.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SpnFZ8fXL9WUieoPn7TdmQw&scisig=AFWwaebAAb_mdcvXHUXIzYLn5KtX&oi=scholarr
1) In vitro culture of viral particles in cell lines. The viruses particles produced in cell culture can then be isolated by various techniques from the cell culture medium. The damaged cells can also appear as plaques on the sheet of growing cells. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_plaque
2) Laboratory techniques such as density gradient centrifugation that can separate virus particles from other cellular debris. Those particles can be then imaged by electron microscopy or used to reinfect animal hosts. https://www.beckman.ch/resources/reading-material/interviews/fundamentals-of-ultracentrifugal-virus-purification
3) We can isolate and sequence viral genomes and compare viral genomes across different hosts, species, etc. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/virus/vssi/#/
4) We scientists use viral vectors all the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_vector
5) Different viruses cause different diseases with completely different characteristics that are reproducible.
So whatever hypothesis you are putting forward to explain how viruses don't exist, or if they exist they don't cause disease, or if they cause disease they can't be isolated etc etc... YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH EXPLANATIONS THAT FIT ALL OF THE DATA AND OBSERVATIONS OVER A CENTURY OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY.
So, lets here it. What is the alternative. And don't give me "toxins" or "terroir" BS because that cannot explain the phenomenon of rapidly spreading global pandemics.
Not easy to satisfy your demand for alternate explanations without access to the esoteric tools of the trade.
So instead, let's propose a thought experiment:
next time you get the seasonal sniffles and feeling genuinely fluish, obtain a sample from your snot and inject into a fertilised chicken egg and voila! you "grew" the virus. (But make sure to wear a moon suit and deploy BullShit Level 4 safety measures, so you don't accidently set the planet on fire.)
Real Cause of Seasonal Flu & Pandemics
Detox Triggered by EMF, Toxic Injections, and Environmental Toxins
https://talknet.substack.com/p/real-cause-of-seasonal-flu-and-pandemics
Well done! Just as RFK jr. Says the research must be done to prove the theory. As of now it is all smoke and mirrors.