In a recent panel with Derrick Broze, Whitney Webb, Ryan Christian and Matthew Ehret, there was some talk about the debate regarding “viruses” and I felt that I had to address some of the misconceptions that these people have. DB made a clip of this that can be found here titled “Should the “Truth” Community Divide Itself Over Virus Debates?“.
I wrote these 7 points as a comment to the video that I feel is important to understand.
1. Talking about the issue of “viruses” IS absolutely necessary and productive, despite what many of you seem to think, and I think this false view stems from a lack of understanding of the consequences of this false belief. People worldwide on a daily basis are being misdiagnosed and mistreated because of false diagnostic tests and beliefs that lead to unnecessary harm and even death. A perfect example of this is in April 2020, when it came out a study in JAMA titled “Presenting Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City Area“. The study showed that 97.2% of the people over the age of 65 that were put on a ventilator died. The question that should be asked here is: WHY were they put on a ventilator? Part of the reason was because of the unfounded fear of a new respiratory “virus” where they didn’t want it to be spread among the patients by giving them oxygen. If the people involved would have understood that there is no such thing as “viruses”, then the medical protocol would have been different, and many of these people would have been alive today instead of killed. Not only is this a matter of life and death, but if we don’t learn this thing once and for all, we will continue to be seeing this kind of atrocity happening over and over again until the sun grows cold. Fear is the oldest tool of control and by removing some of the fear, the powers that shouldn’t be would also lose some of their ability to control the population, which should be in everyone’s interest.
2. Talking about the problems in “virology” may be divisive in some sense, but that is because the nature of truth IS divisive, either something is true or not. That is not to say that everyone involved is not working toward the same goal which is freedom, BUT without truth, there is no freedom. As the saying goes, the truth will set us free. We cannot try and achieve freedom by avoiding the truth and while I appreciate the fact that Derrick Broze and Ryan Christian, for example, have interviewed Kaufman, Cowan, etc., there are still too many in the alternative media that haven’t done this, and I am talking about the biggest platforms here that could make a real difference. I would also encourage everyone approaching this topic to go and read the actual studies that falsely claim the isolation of any “virus” and see for themselves instead of just going by “he said/she said”. The “he said/she said” mentality is what has led the world down a path of appeal to authority and is a major reason why so many are being led astray.
3. Ryan Christian acknowledged and accepted the research of Denis Rancourt, which shows that COVID-19 IS an illusion. With that in mind, how can we then claim that there was a “virus” sweeping the world causing a new alleged illness called COVID-19? Either something is an illusion or it’s not, there is no middle ground.
4. Not having all of the answers to various questions about the real causes of various symptoms does not mean that “viruses” exist, just like not having all the answers to why my backyard was destroyed makes unicorns any more real. Here we have to acknowledge what we know and what we don’t know, and what we do know is that there is no scientific evidence for the existence of “viruses”, period. Now, what are the real causes behind the various symptoms that people have? Well, that needs to be looked at on an individual basis, but again, just because we lack the answer does not mean that “viruses” all of a sudden exist.
5. Being sick is NOT evidence of “viruses” just like having a destroyed backyard is not evidence of unicorns. An effect does not prove the existence of a specific thing. It may be very uncomfortable not knowing the real reasons, but it’s even worse blaming false things since we are then ignoring the real causes where no true prevention can occur. Just like during an investigation of a murder, if we lack evidence for a specific suspect, then we have to let the suspect go despite the fact that we may lack evidence for the real murderer. We do not convict innocent people just because we lack a better explanation.
6. COVID-19 as an illness simply does not exist because of the simple reason that its entire basis is on a positive PCR and not on any new distinctive set of symptoms, this is even according to the WHO. If we remove the PCR, then there is no COVID. This supports the findings of Denis Rancourt, who pointed out that COVID is an illusion by looking at the all-cause mortality data in many countries around the world.
7. The talk about “viruses” has nothing to do with germ theory vs. terrain theory, despite what many like to believe, because for that to be the case, then “viruses” have to exist in the first place, which there is no scientific evidence for. We can’t very well talk about the behavior of unicorns depending on the environmental conditions unless we have evidence of their existence, and the same goes for anything, including “viruses”. This is why there is no middle ground here in regards to “viruses”. The germ theory vs. terrain theory debate has more to do with bacteria, fungi and parasites that do exist, where their role and effects are what are being debated.
Other places to find me:
