Jeff, your clinical dissection of Andrew`s distortion is exemplary but it does worrying reveal the level to which the psychopaths will sink in their attempts to block the truth but more so, the resources that are clearly being made available to fund those engaged in making these lies..
It is indeed bizarre, I agree. There's a complete disregard for presenting evidence as it actually exists, with considerably more effort put into twisting everything to fit a particular narrative. To maintain that narrative, they silence others who simply share factual information, even when it's done without personal attacks. They deliberately escalate situations to provoke a reaction, just so they can discredit you. The effort to maintain their narrative is both deliberate and intense, and the attacks they employ are nothing short of infantile.
circumstantial is not evidence.if viruses existed should only need one paper, one experiment, should be able to isolate as easy as you isolate a grain of pepper from a bag of salt. no addition of any other material added , a culture should not be needed. Lanka papers and lectures easy to understand. there is nothing to catch. bec virus do not exist. pictures of tissue breaking down is being called a virus.
How do you isolate a virus without purification material? You obviously don't realize what you're talking about. Do you expect someone to purify a particle without using some form of fluid?
Also, science doesn't operate as you claim. It is built upon foundational papers and subsequent papers that either continue to validate or invalidate the hypothesis. This isn't a simple matter of having one paper. There are, however, multiple papers—many tens of thousands or more—that prove viruses do indeed exist.
Dr. Quereshi is a liar then, whoever that is. He appears to be another 'doctor' with a Ph.D. who doesn't understand basic virology. Tell him I am willing to debate him live on camera.
Here is what he wrote in one of his articles:
"Concerning the electron microscope picture, it is not a characterization but a picture of an isolate or gunk labeled as a virus. These are just cartoons."
Again, I will debate him live on air and politely explain the basics of viral structure and why micrographs are not "cartoons."
According to Dr. Quereshi's resume he has extensive education and experience in analytical chemistry, particularly analysis of solid oral dosage drugs. I do not see any relevant microbiological laboratory experience. Like many who attempt to debunk virology it appears he has no education or laboratory experience in the field. I have similar experience in analytical chemistry but in the field of virology I am a student, not a teacher.
I suspect you have never and will ever work directly with a snot sample of a supposed sick person with a supposed virus, all work likely in silico, and you wiill never conduct actual transmission experiments as part of your "training", your teacher has never done any either. there is no biology in Virology, Ill be happy to volunteer letting a supposed contagious person deliberstely make me ill via hugging kissing drinking eating from same utensils, coughing in my face etc. ive been proving to all my sick relatives who test positive for convid, flu, bronchitis , cold etc, nothing to catch. also why no breatherlizer test to catch the virus if its a particle?? why need a swab test? why not just cough on petri dish? they claim airborne!! 🤔🤔🤔🤔 you will find nothing, cant make another sick the way they claim. via air. injection is not natural .
thanks, read this but I do not see the process of how they validated this test, not seeing a reference sample of an actual isolated virus. , I only see a reference to pcr test which is 100% fraud , an unvalidated test, no real reference sample. I will keep searching. If you saw it please let me know where i missed it.
Jeff, your clinical dissection of Andrew`s distortion is exemplary but it does worrying reveal the level to which the psychopaths will sink in their attempts to block the truth but more so, the resources that are clearly being made available to fund those engaged in making these lies..
It is indeed bizarre, I agree. There's a complete disregard for presenting evidence as it actually exists, with considerably more effort put into twisting everything to fit a particular narrative. To maintain that narrative, they silence others who simply share factual information, even when it's done without personal attacks. They deliberately escalate situations to provoke a reaction, just so they can discredit you. The effort to maintain their narrative is both deliberate and intense, and the attacks they employ are nothing short of infantile.
there is no virus. www.VirusTruth.NET
all life, all particles are chemistry. there is no physical biology without chemistry.
you are claiming a virus is a particle, a thing. a thing has a chemical structure.
Dr. Quereshi video, hard to find on his site, easy to understand. only need logic.
can maybe find Dr. Q also on this great no drama easy site www.VirusTruth.NET
Chemistry leads to physical things.
circumstantial is not evidence.if viruses existed should only need one paper, one experiment, should be able to isolate as easy as you isolate a grain of pepper from a bag of salt. no addition of any other material added , a culture should not be needed. Lanka papers and lectures easy to understand. there is nothing to catch. bec virus do not exist. pictures of tissue breaking down is being called a virus.
How do you isolate a virus without purification material? You obviously don't realize what you're talking about. Do you expect someone to purify a particle without using some form of fluid?
Also, science doesn't operate as you claim. It is built upon foundational papers and subsequent papers that either continue to validate or invalidate the hypothesis. This isn't a simple matter of having one paper. There are, however, multiple papers—many tens of thousands or more—that prove viruses do indeed exist.
What is the definition of a virus in your opinion
https://jeffgreenhealth.substack.com/p/viewer-question-on-the-nature-of
www.bioanalyticx.com
Dr Quereshi explains how from chemistry perspective.
they dont exist.
Dr. Quereshi is a liar then, whoever that is. He appears to be another 'doctor' with a Ph.D. who doesn't understand basic virology. Tell him I am willing to debate him live on camera.
Here is what he wrote in one of his articles:
"Concerning the electron microscope picture, it is not a characterization but a picture of an isolate or gunk labeled as a virus. These are just cartoons."
Again, I will debate him live on air and politely explain the basics of viral structure and why micrographs are not "cartoons."
According to Dr. Quereshi's resume he has extensive education and experience in analytical chemistry, particularly analysis of solid oral dosage drugs. I do not see any relevant microbiological laboratory experience. Like many who attempt to debunk virology it appears he has no education or laboratory experience in the field. I have similar experience in analytical chemistry but in the field of virology I am a student, not a teacher.
I suspect you have never and will ever work directly with a snot sample of a supposed sick person with a supposed virus, all work likely in silico, and you wiill never conduct actual transmission experiments as part of your "training", your teacher has never done any either. there is no biology in Virology, Ill be happy to volunteer letting a supposed contagious person deliberstely make me ill via hugging kissing drinking eating from same utensils, coughing in my face etc. ive been proving to all my sick relatives who test positive for convid, flu, bronchitis , cold etc, nothing to catch. also why no breatherlizer test to catch the virus if its a particle?? why need a swab test? why not just cough on petri dish? they claim airborne!! 🤔🤔🤔🤔 you will find nothing, cant make another sick the way they claim. via air. injection is not natural .
When you learn the English language, get back to me.
I'm glad you asked about a breathalyzer. A prototype has been developed. It is sensitive to as few as 10 virus particles. Here is a link to the paper:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssensors.3c00512
thanks, read this but I do not see the process of how they validated this test, not seeing a reference sample of an actual isolated virus. , I only see a reference to pcr test which is 100% fraud , an unvalidated test, no real reference sample. I will keep searching. If you saw it please let me know where i missed it.
https://open.substack.com/pub/jeffgreenhealth/p/jamie-andrews-falsehoods-continue?r=emstz&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=66106945
hi, i replied above tried to cut and paste another great site easy no drama website, www.VirusTruth.NET
all physical biology is based on chemistry., for certain, im not sure about radiation.
will try to find Dr Qureshis video link ..its been a few yrs. easy to grasp only need logic