History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

PAL
Posts: 613
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test

Post by PAL »

Woodman wrote:
"I applaud Ray for not censoring points of view such as mine, and although you think it is not a good thing, I strongly believe that it is important."

Woodman, I too am glad Ray lets your posts be on. It is a judgement that you say I don't think it is a good thing.
It's just not what I believe. So you are right, I don't have to pay attention to it, but I do want to know what the conspiracy theories and other theories are. For me they are rabbit holes to spiral down into, to get lost in. I did much studying of Covid 19, the pros and cons of masking, of vaccinating, etc. I decided to go with the medical establishment I know, on this one. I do use alternative medicines or none at all as well. But after seeing what this virus can do(and I have never had a flu shot) I decided to take the vaccine.
And many medications do have some pretty bad side effects.

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test

Post by woodman »

https://www.covid19reader.com/is-germ-t ... nally-ill/
Is germ theory terminally ill?

Covid Science, Germ theory / By Editorial Team / March 8, 2021
Germ theory has been with us for over a century. It has been responsible for a great leap in human health and well-being. Or has it?

The evidence keeps accumulating that, actually, while microbes certainly do exist, germ theory is often wrong and that it has been given credit that it doesn’t deserve. Even worse, our default position of assuming that germs are responsible for much of the illness that plagues mankind is in itself plaguing mankind.

So, if germ theory – “germs are the cause of most illness” – is true, how do we reconcile that with:

1) Scurvy, beri beri and pellagra were for many years a mystery to medicine. Eventually it became clear that they were related to vitamin deficiency. Nonetheless, even after the link to nutrition was established, the idea of a microbe causing scurvy was resurrected in the wake of Pasteur’s discoveries. (As a result, milk began to be pasteurized which resulted in scurvy becoming problematic once again.)

2) The curve depicting DDT usage and the curve depicting Polio cases match each other so closely it is hard to imagine that it is a mere correlation rather than a cause.

3) Vaccines take the credit for eliminating half a dozen diseases in the 20th century. However, in each case, the vaccines were introduced after these diseases had already mostly disappeared! (So, a better explanation is that improved hygiene and nutrition should get the credit, rather than vaccines.)

4) Koch’s postulates – common sense steps used to prove causality between a suspected pathogen and the supposed disease – have been abandoned by virology so that even if it were true that certain viruses exist there is still no evidence that they cause the diseases in question.

5) The HIV-AIDS hypothesis has been systematically destroyed by Peter Duesberg. For example, many people with AIDS do not have HIV and many people with HIV never get AIDS (violating Koch’s first and third postulates). Even more glaring is the fact that AIDS never spread outside of the initial population, showing that contagion is not a factor in AIDS and thus the idea of a virus causing AIDS is untenable.

6) The HIV test – in the case of AIDS – and the test supposedly detecting SARS-Cov-2 – in the case of Covid – do not detect viruses. They only use indirect evidence that is assumed to be related to a virus. (Finding a horn, for example, is not proof of the existence of unicorns.) Also, there is no other way of detecting the viruses in question, so there is no gold standard to use to ensure the “test” is correct.

7) Though vaccinations are still being given for the measles, the high court in Germany has ruled that there is no evidence of the existence of a measles virus.

8) In the lead up to the Covid panic Neil Ferguson predicted as many as 2.2 million deaths in the USA and as many as half-a-million deaths in the UK from Covid. Despite his own dire warnings, after he had tested positive for Covid, he had contact with his married lover who visited him during the lockdown. If he really believed his own prediction, such behavior would have seriously endangered his girlfriend and her husband. So, one can only wonder if he believed his own predictions.

9) The scientific paper that provided the underpinnings for the Covid panic, the Corman-Drosten paper, makes the statement that their aim was to create a test for the virus even though they had no samples of the virus.

10) Conclusion: Based on all this, it seems reasonable to question the idea that viruses are a great plague to mankind.

In the case of Covid, while there seems to be some evidence that there are “excess deaths” in 2020, the amount seems small enough to question even the existence of a new disease at all. A better explanation seems to be the re-branding of flu, pneumonia, and even heart disease and cancer as Covid cases. Even if there is a new disease, the burden is on the scientific community to prove that a virus is the cause. Otherwise, we run the risk of making things worse. This is what happened when the erroneous HIV-AIDS hypothesis led to treatment with the drug AZT which had the unfortunate effect of causing the same symptoms that are associated with AIDS.

References:

Last edited by woodman on Thu Mar 03, 2022 2:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rideback
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by Rideback »

Repeating the same false narratives from the same grifters over and over will not make them true.

User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by pasayten »

Ray, it might be time to take away a platform that supports sociopathic Behavior

Notice I added the "Beware" warning to the title of his post... :-)

pasayten
Ray Peterson
woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

Mickey M. wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:50 am
Rideback wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 4:58 am

Repeating the same false narratives from the same grifters over and over will not make them true.

and now the anti vax movement thinks a"high court in Germany has ruled that there is no evidence of the existence of a measles virus".

That of course is a lie which is an indication that the anti vax movement desires to kill children by bringing back measles.

Ray, it might be time to take away a platform that supports sociopathic Behavior.

"Antisocial personality disorder, sometimes called sociopathy, is a mental disorder in which a person consistently shows no regard for right and wrong and ignores the rights and feelings of others."

Maybe I have gone too far in trying to share what my findings indicate, but as far as I'm concerned, the burden is on science to prove a virus has been isolated rather than posting electron micrographs with an arrow pointing to the supposed culprit
After all there are a lot of trained scientists and doctors that are not enthusiastic about this jab, but they also believe that these viruses have been isolated, but even if I disagree with many of them, I don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, and I don't use fact check indiscriminately.

I follow Dr. Robert Malone even though he says that he got the jab. Is he a sociopath, too?

I also follow Dr. Peter McCollough. He does not deny that there is a virus. Dr. Peter McCollough has been sounding the alarm for over a year now. His position is that 90% of the deaths from Covid could have been avoided if early treatment protocols were readily available. Is he a psychopath, or a sociopath? Is Joe Rogan a sociopath for having these 2 doctors on his program? I would argue that the sociopaths are the ones trying to censor the other sides of an issue, and those that are discouraging public discourse.

Dr. Judy Miskovits believes that the HIV virus has been isolated, and I disagree with her on that. She was recently in a rather heated debate with Dr. Andrew Kaufman on this issue. They both are against this jab, but they disagree on the issue of isolation.

These people have risked a lot, especially Dr Judy Miskovits.

Dr. Peter Duesberg was a professor at Cal Berkeley, and back in the '80's he was considered one of the leading experts on virology in the world. He said that there was no causal relationship between HIV and AIDS, and because of this he lost his funding, and he was marginalized in many other ways. He was scheduled to be on a segment of 60 minutes, but at the last minute they canceled him, and replaced him with Dr. Fauci. Duesberg believed HIV was real, but he claimed that it is a harmless passenger virus. Scientists that say the virus isolation is an issue believe that Duesberg actually missed an important opportunity because of his failure to recognize the isolation issue.

I am not going to mention the isolation issue anymore since it isn't helping...

Last edited by woodman on Tue Feb 22, 2022 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by mister_coffee »

woodman wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 11:36 am

... the burden is on science to prove a virus has been isolated rather than posting electron micrographs with an arrow pointing to the supposed culprit

You must be joking.

Nobody "isolates" a virus that way.

At a very high level, how they correlate a specific virus to specific disease is they look for DNA or RNA traces specific to that virus in an infected cell. If the traces (really fragments) are large enough and you find them in high enough concentrations then you very likely have isolated the virus causing the infection.

Keep in mind that how science gets portrayed on teevee and how it actually gets done aren't the same.

:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

The issue of virus isolation was used by Patrick King in Alberta, Canada. The Chief medical officer received a subpeona to appear in court, and she could not prove the existence of the virus...

"Ok, the first thing you need to know is that the person Patrick King is talking about as having served a subpoena on is the same Dr Deena Hinshaw, Chief Medical Officer of Health in Alberta Canada.

It is she who admitted that neither she nor Alberta Health had the requested documents for the court case… it was she who finally admitted, in court admissible documents, that the Emperor Has No Clothes.

And then she got out in front of it by changing all the rules and easing nearly all of the restrictions BEFORE this case could bite her in the bum. I think the shocking and dramatic changes to the rules were not what she wanted to do, and were not triggered by the vaccination rates or ANYTHING else… she knew she’d lost in court, the Government had lost in court, and now she was switching to ‘damage limitation’ mode and trying to get in front of the inevitable fallout, which will take months or years to fully play out.

[Another disclaimer – It’s VITAL to note something here, the fact the virus has not been isolated means it cannot be shown to exist in a court of law. Courts do not deal in reality, they never have. They deal in what can be shown to be true within the walls of that court room. In truth they deal in fiction all the time, all kinds of things that aren’t true are treated as if they are, all kinds of things which ARE true are treated as if they aren’t. What matters here is whether they can prove the existence of this thing called Covid 19 within the court room!

Now that doesn’t mean there IS no virus, I’m on the record time and again pointing out that there HAS been a spike in deaths in many countries that shows us clearly there is SOMETHING… but no Government and no Health Department has the right to be making mandates and laws and imposing restrictions on the basis of something they actually haven’t yet proven the specific existence of and cannot prove in a court of law. THAT is the significance of what has happened here.]

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

mister_coffee wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 12:03 pm
woodman wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 11:36 am

... the burden is on science to prove a virus has been isolated rather than posting electron micrographs with an arrow pointing to the supposed culprit

You must be joking.

Nobody "isolates" a virus that way.

At a very high level, how they correlate a specific virus to specific disease is they look for DNA or RNA traces specific to that virus in an infected cell. If the traces (really fragments) are large enough and you find them in high enough concentrations then you very likely have isolated the virus causing the infection.

Keep in mind that how science gets portrayed on teevee and how it actually gets done aren't the same.

There is no way to differentiate between exosomes and "viruses" on an electron micrograph image. IMO, when you look at the big picture exosomes are what are being observed budding out of the cell. Exosomes are the result of intercellular housecleaning, an endogenous phenomena, so technically exosomes might be thought of as a result of "outfection" not infection.

As far as proving a contagious particle is concerned getting back to Koch's Postulates, basically you would need to remove some lung fluid from someone who is sick, who is said to have Covid-19, and place that lung fluid into a healthy host to produce the same symptoms. When you can do this you have proved the existence of the contagious pathogen. It just doesn't make sense to me why they can't prove a virus in this way rather than culturing the biological material like they do. If someone has a "high viral load" I should think it would be simple to prove a contagious virus.

As far as proving the complete genome of the virus, as far as I know they are only able to find pieces or snippets of what they refer to as the virus, and run this on a computer program, and so the genome is said to have been found in silico, or through a computer program.

Rideback
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by Rideback »

There's a reason that your Dr. Robert Malone has been banned from you tube & twitter:
https://www.politifact.com/article/2022 ... ccine-sci/

Joe Rogan is a failed comedian and actor. And his interview with Peter McCollugh demonstrates why he's gotten in so much hot water with Spotify for his disinformation https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 77603.html

Peter Luesberg has been debunked over the years but he's like the Energizer Bunny, he keeps on banging away at his drum.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1980675/ That link has half a dozen articles on his failures.

Your story about Patrick King in Alberta was yet again another conspiracy that court records disprove.
https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2PE0EX

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

I did not check any of Rideback's feedback yet. That being said, instead of resorting to name calling which might be fine, but doesn't really accomplish anything, I just want to reflect on how the world has been held hostage to this "contagious virus". In the beginning there was the familiar refrain of "Stay home, stay safe". Mask wearing and social distancing were sold as common sense measures that we all should take for "the greater good". People were mesmerized by the case counts on the Johns Hopkins dashboard, and followed religiously what the CDC and WHO were telling us.

Step back and think about how you can't do a simple experiment to prove a contagious virus exists simply by taking the lung fluid or snot from a sick person who is suspected of having Covid-19, (and has gotten a positive test result for Covid), and placing that lung fluid or snot into a healthy host to produce the disease in the healthy host, and they are unable to prove transmissibility under controlled conditions yet you think that we should wear PPE and social distance even though under controlled conditions someone's snot will not infect the host, and you think I'm on the wrong track???

I remember hearing about how people living alone in the NYC area were on lockdown, and they didn't have any contact with other's, yet they would get sick, and when they would be sent to the hospital, they tested positive for Covid-19. How did you get sick with Covid if there was no contact with others?

First things first: If you can't prove contagion under controlled lab conditions, either in vitro or in vivo, with the end result being that the particle has infected a healthy host, then why all the PPE??? I say quit deferring to all your experts...

They did experiments during The Spanish flu on soldiers, and on horses to try to prove transmissibility of a virus, and they failed. Germ theory has been quite the psy op weapon. The Boogie man that can't be proven, and so small that you can only detect part of the genome sequence. Did you know that this is how they say there is a virus? It is too small to see the whole genetic sequence. That is how we know it is there. If people are getting sick in clusters or within families, that does not prove a contagious virus.

Last edited by woodman on Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rideback
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by Rideback »

From WHO:
'Current evidence suggests that the virus spreads mainly between people who are in close contact with each other, for example at a conversational distance. The virus can spread from an infected person’s mouth or nose in small liquid particles when they cough, sneeze, speak, sing or breathe. Another person can then contract the virus when infectious particles that pass through the air are inhaled at short range (this is often called short-range aerosol or short-range airborne transmission) or if infectious particles come into direct contact with the eyes, nose, or mouth (droplet transmission).

The virus can also spread in poorly ventilated and/or crowded indoor settings, where people tend to spend longer periods of time. This is because aerosols can remain suspended in the air or travel farther than conversational distance (this is often called long-range aerosol or long-range airborne transmission).

People may also become infected when touching their eyes, nose or mouth after touching surfaces or objects that have been contaminated by the virus.'

THE LAST sentence explains why gloves are worn so that touching surfaces you won't pick up the virus on those surfaces. That also explains why your NY people who were in lockdown contracted the virus; food deliveries, medical deliveries all came with surfaces that contained the virus.

As far as identifying the virus there are literally thousands of articles, peer reviewed on this. Here's one
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456621/

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

Rideback wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 4:51 pm

From WHO:
'Current evidence suggests that the virus spreads mainly between people who are in close contact with each other, for example at a conversational distance. The virus can spread from an infected person’s mouth or nose in small liquid particles when they cough, sneeze, speak, sing or breathe. Another person can then contract the virus when infectious particles that pass through the air are inhaled at short range (this is often called short-range aerosol or short-range airborne transmission) or if infectious particles come into direct contact with the eyes, nose, or mouth (droplet transmission).

The virus can also spread in poorly ventilated and/or crowded indoor settings, where people tend to spend longer periods of time. This is because aerosols can remain suspended in the air or travel farther than conversational distance (this is often called long-range aerosol or long-range airborne transmission).

People may also become infected when touching their eyes, nose or mouth after touching surfaces or objects that have been contaminated by the virus.'

THE LAST sentence explains why gloves are worn so that touching surfaces you won't pick up the virus on those surfaces. That also explains why your NY people who were in lockdown contracted the virus; food deliveries, medical deliveries all came with surfaces that contained the virus.

As far as identifying the virus there are literally thousands of articles, peer reviewed on this. Here's one
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456621/

There is nothing in their rhetoric that proves contagion. I'd suggest appealing to the common sense science rather than authority figures that are telling you how it behaves. Incidentally, a lot of the "scientific papers" that you refer to are deliberately designed to be so complex that even the local tiny home builder admits that he can't follow the complexity. That's what I call being stuck in the weeds... It' not that complicated. I noticed who sponsors these science web-sites. A friend and his wife took remdesivir when he went to the hospital, and he was diagnosed with Covid. He and his wife recovered just fine. They are both very healthy in their mid-70's. He says he doesn't need the jab because of having Covid, so that is the right decision, but now he is sold on remdesivir, and he sends me "a popular study" that shows remdesivir works well. I see on the web-site that the sponsors are companies like Gilead Sciences which produces REmdesivir, and I read all the apparent conflicts of interest at the end, and I wonder why he doesn't see what I see. When the literature gets very complicated you may be stuck in the weeds...

Last edited by woodman on Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

I just want to say that I have been thinking about viruses, etc., for about 4 years or so. I remember asking my boss when I worked in home construction about 3 years ago what he thinks about vaccines, and if he and his family get the flu vaccine, and he said no way. It wasn't even on his radar. Fast forward to Dec. 2019, and I shared some stuff with him from my point of view. For some reason he and his family were all in on this one. I just want to point out how his attitude towards vaccines changed with this new season...

The other thing is that the first week of Jan/2020 I wrote a short letter to the editor of the MV News before Covid was even a thing yet in the US. My letter concerned a news story from the previous week out of Okanogan. 2 people came down with hep. B, and it was resolved. Also, 2 people were apparently exposed to the 2 people who were infected. The writer of the news story said that all 4 were vaccinated. This didn't make sense to me at all that the 2 that were infected would also be vaccinated, and so I wrote a letter to the editor to see if this was correct. I asked any medical professionals to respond to my letter to give me insight, but nobody responded. To my way of thinking back then, it didn't make sense to me that the 2 people who were infected would get the jab if they developed natural immunity. This is just to give you a sense that I have been thinking about these things before Covid got started.

Rideback
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by Rideback »

I can't make heads or tails out of your story.

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

Mickey M. wrote: Wed Feb 23, 2022 9:10 am
Rideback wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:12 pm

I can't make heads or tails out of your story.

I think he is confirming that he does not get medical advise from a personal physician.

The pandamic has given another reason why universal health care should be the law of the land.

I think the last time I went to a physician with a medical issue that I had was about 8 years ago. I was having knee problems after I jogged for 2 miles or so on the high school track. In Winthrop he did an MRI, and confirmed that I had some "arthritis" in my knee, but he qualified it by saying that 50% of people over 50 have some arthritis. I had a cortizone shot scheduled for a few weeks later, but prior to the appointment I cancelled because I did research that indicated that a cortizone shot only helps in the short term,and usually does more harm than good, and I didn't need to be playing tennis that badly, but rather I believed that I could somehow heal my knee condition, and basically that is what I did through a healthy diet, and consistent light exercise such as vigorous walking for 3 miles or so. A year later, and my knee was back to 100%, and I was able to play tennis like I had before I hurt my knee, and I have been able to jog, although when I jog I take shorter strides (higher cadence/youtube video) which puts less stress on the knees, so I run a little slower, but I get the same benefits. So, I benefited by figuring it out for myself. Who knows where I would be if I followed through with the cortizone shot.

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/live-q-a ... 6FVq1.html

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

You gotta serve somebody. I'm just a messenger...short 2 minute video:

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/there-ar ... yhOM3.html

PAL
Posts: 613
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by PAL »

Full of it.

Rideback
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by Rideback »

Repeated cortisone shots can damage tissue when given in the same spot. But your one shot would have more likely helped the healing process. Your doctor could have told you that.

I take it you still haven't read the links I gave about your quacks so you're still being conned. Sigh.

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

woodman wrote: Wed Feb 23, 2022 6:37 pm

You gotta serve somebody. I'm just a messenger...short 2 minute video:

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/there-ar ... yhOM3.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPh1qC6TQpI&t=1749s

woodman
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:17 pm
Contact:

Re: History of Fauci and PCR test (Beware - use your own due diligence)

Post by woodman »

The doctor never mentioned about increased risks with more cortizone shots. You may be correct that just one shot may have sped up my healing, but he didn't say anything about that either. The cortizone shot affects the endocrine system of the body from what I understand, so there can be complications affecting the whole body. At some point ,atleast with some people, it can produce unwanted side effects.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest