These are some of my favorite moments from the Kirsch vs Kaufman debate. Enjoy!
Kaufman can’t easily admit what his full name is.
Kaufman claims bacteriophages exist but other viruses do not.
Thomas Baldwin accused of attacks. Kaufman failed to address Baldwin’s rebuttal.
Kaufman deflects from the importance of ‘stock 4 replication.’
Further ‘stock 4 replication’ deflection.
Kaufman deflects from genome existence and sequencing.
Kaufman deflects further until finally answering the question posed.
Kirsch says Kaufman is misleading people.
Kaufman denies genome sequencing works. Kaufman claims sequencing is merely a “computer simulation.”
Kaufman deflecting from questions on De Novo sequencing.
Kaufman claims sequences have to be identical to be the same type of virus.
Kaufman belittling Kirsch further. Addresses Baldwin further.
Discussion about this post
No posts
I personally, do not trust Kirsch at all !!!!
Hi Jeff, I'm interested to get your considered opinion on Frank Visser's critique of Stefan Lanka's CPE experiments. He's probably the only writer from the "orthodox" side that has taken the time to examine them, as everyone else "in the mainstream" has simply ignored Lanka.
https://www.integralworld.net/visser203.html#3
Visser refutes Lanka's claim that control experiments have never been done before. Mock-infectioned controls are commonly done, according to Visser (but maybe not always), so that in many experiments two specimens are exactly the same (e.g. same chemicals introduced) except for a virus (and as you've discussed many times, Jeff, what's introduced may not be 'pure' virus because we're dealing at such a microscopic scale, but the impurities are so few we can be reasonably sure of what the causative agent is).
Visser says that's it's acknowledged in orthodox virology that mock-infected controls often show cytopathic effects (Lanka claims the opposite), but that introducing the virus shows severe damage, and that's the important difference. The virus certainly appears to break down the cell, as the same thing doesn't happen in the mock-infected sample.
Visser goes further by claiming it's Lanka's experiment that lacks a control, because he needed to also infect the cells with the Covid virus and compare it, but that gets us into a kind of ironic paradox where Lanka doesn't believe that would be possible anyway.