You wrote: “As I have stated numerous times, viruses in culture infect and dissolve cells. In cell culture, an unregulated viral particle placed into culture will begin to dissolve cell walls. “
What I find confusing is that in this post you use the verb ‘infect’ to indicate action by the virus itself, while according to your ‘Viral Misconceptions” essay, it’s the cell that orchestrates the “infection”. Are you anthropomorphizing here? How can viruses infect and dissolve cells when put in culture?
Jun 27, 2023·edited Jun 27, 2023Liked by Jeff Green
Thank you Jeff for being one of the few islands on the net of sanity and genuine intellectual honesty and inquiry when it comes to Terrain Theory. While I do appreciate a lot of what the 'No-Virus' crowd has done to poke holes in the Germ Theory, they seem to be stuck in their own dogmas, which will hurt the cause ultimately. I can only speculate as to why they aren't sticking to the facts. If you haven't seen it, I recommend you watch Christine Massey's debate on "Debunk the Funk with Dr. Wilson" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWYWAD5URrU].
I recognise Massey's laudable work through her hundreds of FOI requests that demonstrate the authorities that should have had a sample of SARS-COV-2 didn't have it, but she performed very poorly in this debate and as an advocate for Terrain Theory in general. She comes across as completely close minded and refuses to engage with Dr. Wilson's presentation.
Although I'm sure your readers would disagree with Dr. Wilson about the covid virus being a pathogen, it's hard to debate what he's saying about gene sequencing. I'm not that knowledgable about this, but obviously lab technicians are sequencing something and repeating it in different labs. This presentation has convinced me that Andrew Kaufman's critique of gene sequencing being random and ambiguous is wrong: he compared it to reconstructing a novel by gluing short sentence fragments back together and matching the words on the ends, but Dr Wilson's presentation shows there's a lot more overlap in the RNA fragments than Kaufman is implying. Kaufman's right that the sequencing technique starts from millions of RNA fragments, but the large overlap between the matches takes the randomness out of the reconstruction.
Cell Biology of Virus Infection. The Role of Cytoskeletal Dynamics Integrity in the Effectiveness of Dengue Virus Infection https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/49374 There are many such books, from which you can learn things. And you can see that they have done a lot of work in laboratories.
Additionally David Martin is a great source on how the laboratories in many countries were making dangerous Corona-virus variants.
Note: The PCR tests with high cycle counts give over 99% false positives. This means that a lot of "infections with the SARS-Cov2" were something different. There can be some discussion in how much of the "Covid cases" were real or not. And this differs a lot per country, and changed over time. Maybe certain places never encountered the SARS-Cov2 virus or had herd-immunity very quickly.
Hi Jeff - forgive me if I might have asked similar questions before, but here goes: are you implying that a human being's cells will produce a specific virus, i.e.: SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1, MERS, Zika, etc. according to the specific type of toxin they are exposed to? If so, this means any and all humans will produce these exact same viruses if they are exposed to the same toxin, yes? Also, how exactly are these viruses accurately identified - using electron microscopy alone?
Hi Jeff, im continually confused by this seeming endless debate over the existence of viruses, which isnt helped by my admitted bias, to which I just don't want them to exist. This is mainly because life, and getting those government fucks to do one would be much easier if this whole sorry episode of our civilization would conclude. Due to my complete novice stance, i remain on the fence to this day, however, with regards to contagion, i am no fence sitter. There is no contagion, which i believe is also your stance. This, as a guy just living his life, id all that really matters to me. I do wish all of you guys fighting the good fight could all come together over a few beers and thrash this out in a friendly manner. I like to think you all have good intentions.
Thank you. I’m a bit confused though.
You wrote: “As I have stated numerous times, viruses in culture infect and dissolve cells. In cell culture, an unregulated viral particle placed into culture will begin to dissolve cell walls. “
What I find confusing is that in this post you use the verb ‘infect’ to indicate action by the virus itself, while according to your ‘Viral Misconceptions” essay, it’s the cell that orchestrates the “infection”. Are you anthropomorphizing here? How can viruses infect and dissolve cells when put in culture?
Thank you Jeff for being one of the few islands on the net of sanity and genuine intellectual honesty and inquiry when it comes to Terrain Theory. While I do appreciate a lot of what the 'No-Virus' crowd has done to poke holes in the Germ Theory, they seem to be stuck in their own dogmas, which will hurt the cause ultimately. I can only speculate as to why they aren't sticking to the facts. If you haven't seen it, I recommend you watch Christine Massey's debate on "Debunk the Funk with Dr. Wilson" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWYWAD5URrU].
I recognise Massey's laudable work through her hundreds of FOI requests that demonstrate the authorities that should have had a sample of SARS-COV-2 didn't have it, but she performed very poorly in this debate and as an advocate for Terrain Theory in general. She comes across as completely close minded and refuses to engage with Dr. Wilson's presentation.
Although I'm sure your readers would disagree with Dr. Wilson about the covid virus being a pathogen, it's hard to debate what he's saying about gene sequencing. I'm not that knowledgable about this, but obviously lab technicians are sequencing something and repeating it in different labs. This presentation has convinced me that Andrew Kaufman's critique of gene sequencing being random and ambiguous is wrong: he compared it to reconstructing a novel by gluing short sentence fragments back together and matching the words on the ends, but Dr Wilson's presentation shows there's a lot more overlap in the RNA fragments than Kaufman is implying. Kaufman's right that the sequencing technique starts from millions of RNA fragments, but the large overlap between the matches takes the randomness out of the reconstruction.
For the no-virus people I made a list of physical evidence, outside the Covid propaganda. It is far from complete, but easy to find.
Here is a plant virus visualized in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOxeJ0aEptU&t=1084s YouTube
Viruses can also be very big. Giant virus infects Ameoba https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3476UHJAFQ YouTube
Cell Biology of Virus Infection. The Role of Cytoskeletal Dynamics Integrity in the Effectiveness of Dengue Virus Infection https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/49374 There are many such books, from which you can learn things. And you can see that they have done a lot of work in laboratories.
Here is some discussion about exosomes and viruses. https://www.cellgs.com/blog/exosomes-and-viruses.html
Extracellular vesicles and viruses: Are they close relatives? https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1605146113
Additionally David Martin is a great source on how the laboratories in many countries were making dangerous Corona-virus variants.
Note: The PCR tests with high cycle counts give over 99% false positives. This means that a lot of "infections with the SARS-Cov2" were something different. There can be some discussion in how much of the "Covid cases" were real or not. And this differs a lot per country, and changed over time. Maybe certain places never encountered the SARS-Cov2 virus or had herd-immunity very quickly.
Never mind the virus isolation which it isn't:
No evidence for contagious/transmittable disease, no evidence for 'viruses' by the current definition!
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virus
.
A list of experiments proving transmission never happened how hard they tried:
dpl003.substack.com/p/virology-the-damning-evidence
.
The real virus is the idea viruses physically exist!
Jeff, show me a virology textbook which is using your definition of a 'virus'.
I'll wait.
For anyone who might be reading this post:
Jeff is using his own definition of a 'virus', which does not include contagion.
Contagion is a part of the mainstream definition of a 'virus'.
Therefore, Jeff agrees that viruses as depicted by mainstream virology, do NOT exist.
QED.
"As I have stated numerous times, viruses in culture infect and dissolve cells."
No, they don't. The so-called 'viruses' are the results of a dying cell, not the other way around.
Stefan Lanka proved it, with controls experiments.
Hi Jeff - forgive me if I might have asked similar questions before, but here goes: are you implying that a human being's cells will produce a specific virus, i.e.: SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1, MERS, Zika, etc. according to the specific type of toxin they are exposed to? If so, this means any and all humans will produce these exact same viruses if they are exposed to the same toxin, yes? Also, how exactly are these viruses accurately identified - using electron microscopy alone?
Hi Jeff, im continually confused by this seeming endless debate over the existence of viruses, which isnt helped by my admitted bias, to which I just don't want them to exist. This is mainly because life, and getting those government fucks to do one would be much easier if this whole sorry episode of our civilization would conclude. Due to my complete novice stance, i remain on the fence to this day, however, with regards to contagion, i am no fence sitter. There is no contagion, which i believe is also your stance. This, as a guy just living his life, id all that really matters to me. I do wish all of you guys fighting the good fight could all come together over a few beers and thrash this out in a friendly manner. I like to think you all have good intentions.