3 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

LOL. he must have fooled a lot of folks then.... good thing you haven't fooled a single one.

He doesn't fool others, or at least he doesn't succeed in that, as he's too busy fooling himself.

31 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

LOL. he must have fooled a lot of folks then.... good thing you haven't fooled a single one.

You simply do not debate do you Sir?

When you are cornered you turn to silly-billy remarks.

7 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

You simply do not debate do you Sir?

When you are cornered you turn to silly-billy remarks.

when you bring evidence to back claims that enders experiments failed... show proof of your claim

surely some of your cough*cough followers can bring proof?

Ender's experiments should be easy to reproduce.... he only had old technology to use.

Just imagine how famous (better than infamous, no?) you'd be. A REAL hero for showing how the Nobel laureate screwed up.

Who have you fooled lately?

Plenty of evidence you've been fooled... provided by yourself.

Edited Tuesday at 05:03 PM3 days by gamb00ler

4 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

when you bring evidence to back claims that enders experiments failed... show proof of your claim

surely some of your cough*cough followers can bring proof?

Ender's experiments should be easy to reproduce.... he only had old technology to use.

Who have you fooled lately?

They have been reproduced by Doctors Stefan Lanka and Tom Cowan.

Why do the virologists not isolate and purify the virus before starting their experiments?

6 hours ago, atpeace said:

Not sure what upset you. I just stated confirmed cases is not the same as estimated cases. Do you think they are the same?

Congrats you've made it to my ignore list with the rest of the spastics.
Make yourself at home over there.

7 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The know-nothing, fraudulent white-coats are not doing their jobs at all.

In this sort of lab work, establishing the effects of viruses, the very first things are:

1 - get some snot/mucus/tissue that has the entity you are looking for.

2 - isolate the entity.

3 - purify the entity,

4 - get to work seeing what effect it has in the petri-dish, and the further steps of the experiment.

Best practice, is to do another experiment, that runs alongside, WITHOUT the purified entity. Why do this? So one can be sure that it is not the procedure casusing the effects, and it is in fact the entity. Without the 'control' (the other experiment) there is no experimentational integrity what so ever, and any effects the might arise are uncertain; maybe meaningless.

So why do the 'ologists not follow these principles? Well, one reason, as Enders found out, is that other experiment will yield the same results. And secondly, they can't find enough 'virus'. IMO, they will never be able to find enough virus. 'Cause there is not one to be found.

It is all make-believe pseudoscience.

These institutions and labs, that say they have isolated and purified a virus are simply lying. They have to be called out for their fraudulent activities/procedures..

Yet they've saved millions of lives and you're still the armchair quarterback.

3 hours ago, Tourist2 said:

Congrats you've made it to my ignore list with the rest of the spastics.
Make yourself at home over there.

THis is the perfect example of a disgusting individual regardless of what team he is on.

Most of us were appalled by what happened during Covid and how conversation was restricted to one message. We felt we should have a voice and the right to choose. Yet the herd yelled incessantly to obey.

This guy is no different and honestly much worse than the radical pro-vaccine crowd. Just a nasty guy that is leading a pathetic existence just as the vaccine screamers. I see that most are ignoring him and realize he is deranged loser.

Edited Wednesday at 12:24 AM2 days by atpeace

2 hours ago, atpeace said:

Most of us were appalled by what happened during Covid and how conversation was restricted to one message.

But the flip side to being restricted to one message is a lot of nonsensical quackery being perpetuated.

Just because Big Pharma may not be 100% on the up and up, it doesn't mean all your theories are on the up and up.

9 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

They have been reproduced by Doctors Stefan Lanka and Tom Cowan.

Why do the virologists not isolate and purify the virus before starting their experiments?

If you really want to know.... ask them! Or, instead of only seeking confirmation... seek enlightenment.

15 hours ago, johng said:

GIGO ?

I guess you're just OLD... not a software guy.

16 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Vioxx and Thalidomide were OK were they?

Vioxx was potentially one of the most dangerous drugs ever released.

It may have caused cardiovascular issues after only 2 weeks of use.

So yes, it is good to be skeptical of pharmaceuticals.

But they are not all dangerous, or equally potentially dangerous, and some may only cause problems after months or years of use.

Keep in mind vaccines are 1 dose (and maybe 1 or 2 boosters), but that's different than taking a drug daily for weeks or months or years. Often, it's the continual repeated dosage that causes issues.

Edited Wednesday at 02:56 AM2 days by save the frogs

49 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

If you really want to know.... ask them! Or, instead of only seeking confirmation... seek enlightenment.

I know why the virologists do not attempt to isolate and purify the virus.

And I'll tell you Sir, and any other AN members, or visitors, that might be baffled like yourself. Why? Because there is no virus out there to be isolated and purified. That is why they bypass the most important steps, and simply make stuff up. Wouldn't want to let the cat out for all to see; would they?

This virology nonsense - along with the other ologies = is just $$$ making, fraudulent pseudoscience.

Edited Wednesday at 03:32 AM2 days by Stiddle Mump

4 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

This virology nonsense - along with the other ologies = is just $$$ making, fraudulent pseudoscience.

You claim that viruses don't exist.

Yet you expect everyone to believe that "turbo cancer" exists.

This is a non-scientific term that was completely fabricated by the conspiracy crowd.

5 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Yet they've saved millions of lives and you're still the armchair quarterback.

Are you referring to vaccines or medical authorities Sir?

What is a vaccine for?

And how did Vioxx and Thalidomide** slip through the regulator's net? And just as bad. When the effects were brought to light they were still reluctant to make the Pharma concerned to withdraw their nasty products.

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Oldham_Kelsey

11 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I know why the virologists do not attempt to isolate and purify the virus.

And I'll tell you Sir, and any other AN members, or visitors, that might be baffled like yourself. Why? Because there is no virus out there to be isolated and purified. That is why they bypass the most important steps, and simply make stuff up. Wouldn't want to let the cat out for all to see; would they?

This virology nonsense - along with the other ologies = is just $$$ making, fraudulent pseudoscience.

I'm guessing you didn't read, or possibly understand the links I posted. there are quite a few more that state what a virus is. Are all of them wrong, seeing they come from all over and aren't affiliated with each other? I'm not sure where you got your information from but have you ever considered it's wrong? When 20 scientists all say the same thing and 2 say different, where does one go?

1 minute ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Are you referring to vaccines or medical authorities Sir?

What is a vaccine for?

And how did Vioxx and Thalidomide** slip through the regulator's net? And just as bad. When the effects were brought to light they were still reluctant to make the Pharma concerned to withdraw their nasty products.

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Oldham_Kelsey

I never said all vaccines are good, just as many medicines aren't also, and some have side effects that can be worse than what they're supposed to fight. It's plainly obvious some vaccines curtailed some disease spreads, and saved millions of lives. What the Covid vaccine can do in the long term will be found out, as it's hard to ascertain if those who had problems would have had them anyway, or already had them before the vaccine. Money makes many things happen, and doctors over prescribing has killed more people yearly than other illegal drugs, until Fentanyl came around as an illegal drug spread around, so it's a legitimate fear many have about any medications or vaccines.

3 hours ago, atpeace said:

THis is the perfect example of a disgusting individual regardless of what team he is on.

Most of us were appalled by what happened during Covid and how conversation was restricted to one message. We felt we should have a voice and the right to choose. Yet the herd yelled incessantly to obey.

This guy is no different and honestly much worse than the radical pro-vaccine crowd. Just a nasty guy that is leading a pathetic existence just as the vaccine screamers. I see that most are ignoring him and realize he is deranged loser.

"Most of us were appalled"

Sorry who is "us"?

Have you quantified you claim?

Or does it just feel like everyone should agree with you?

I think a lot depends on where a person was during Covid and how bad it was in the area.

I used to look at the "Herman Cain Awards" as it was one of the few places actually showing what COVID hospital treatment and end stage suffering was like.

One week saying COVID is like the flu, next week in the hospital on a ventilator.

End stage COVID suffering was horrible at the height of the pandemic, now of course the disease is much milder.

8 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I'm guessing you didn't read, or possibly understand the links I posted. there are quite a few more that state what a virus is. Are all of them wrong, seeing they come from all over and aren't affiliated with each other? I'm not sure where you got your information from but have you ever considered it's wrong? When 20 scientists all say the same thing and 2 say different, where does one go?

I can understand links Sir. I can also read the nonsense in the content. I simply do not agree with what they are proposing, suggesting, postulating or even stating. There is no evidence to back up their claims.

Let me address the bolded parts of your post. IMO, there are two types of wrong here. These white-coats could actually believe what they are doing. More fool them I say. Whilst others know that they are doing bad stuff, but their handsome $$$ pay-checks, and possible $$$ grants, over-ride any morals they might have about honesty. Shame on them I say.

The 20 scientist you refer to are all believers in the 'elephants in the sky' model. They are paid to sell a certain narrative. See this all over. Not just in the medical industry.

17 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

And how did Vioxx and Thalidomide** slip through the regulator's net?

Vioxx should never have been approved.

But it doesn't mean the Covid vaccine causes cancer.

You are exploiting weaknesses in Big Pharma to exaggerate your own agenda.

7 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I can understand links Sir. I can also read the nonsense in the content. I simply do not agree with what they are proposing, suggesting, postulating or even stating. There is no evidence to back up their claims.

Let me address the bolded parts of your post. IMO, there are two types of wrong here. These white-coats could actually believe what they are doing. More fool them I say. Whilst others know that they are doing bad stuff, but their handsome $$$ pay-checks, and possible $$$ grants, over-ride any morals they might have about honesty. Shame on them I say.

The 20 scientist you refer to are all believers in the 'elephants in the sky' model. They are paid to sell a certain narrative. See this all over. Not just in the medical industry.

It's okay, as some won't believe the truth no matter how much evidence is shown. These are called skeptics. Again, when 20 are all saying the same things about viruses, and these are coming from proven, legitimate sources, these are known as facts. There are many scientists that are in the business to help others and not for the money. You think all of them are saying the same things, from different labs , states and countries and all are getting paid by the same entity? That's a conspiracy theory that won't fly.

11 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

when you bring evidence to back claims that enders experiments failed... show proof of your claim

surely some of your cough*cough followers can bring proof?

Ender's experiments should be easy to reproduce.... he only had old technology to use.

Just imagine how famous (better than infamous, no?) you'd be. A REAL hero for showing how the Nobel laureate screwed up.

Who have you fooled lately?

Plenty of evidence you've been fooled... provided by yourself.

I'm not at all sure if you actually believe the stuff in your posts,or you just like being contentious.

I don't need to bring evidence to the table. Terrain and nature are here as we correspond. No need to prove anything there.

However, if the virologists and the other 'ologist say there is a virus out there; then let them show the evidence. Where is there a paper that shows isolation and purification of the said entity? I've looked, others have looked. Kary Mullis looked, Doctors, Cowan, Kaufman, Bailey, Lanka and many others have looked and what do you know. They couldn't find any.

Now! If virus don't exist. At least the contagious ones, surely that brings into focus the whole vaccine industry. After all, one of its cornerstones is the virus.

51 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I don't need to bring evidence to the table. Terrain and nature are here as we correspond. No need to prove anything there.

OK..... you're switching to playing dodgeball... LOL

51 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I'm not at all sure if you actually believe the stuff in your posts,or you just like being contentious.

I don't need to bring evidence to the table. Terrain and nature are here as we correspond. No need to prove anything there.

However, if the virologists and the other 'ologist say there is a virus out there; then let them show the evidence. Where is there a paper that shows isolation and purification of the said entity? I've looked, others have looked. Kary Mullis looked, Doctors, Cowan, Kaufman, Bailey, Lanka and many others have looked and what do you know. They couldn't find any.

Now! If virus don't exist. At least the contagious ones, surely that brings into focus the whole vaccine industry. After all, one of its cornerstones is the virus.

OK.... to summarize... all you got is denial of the nobel laureate's work.... nobody on your 'side' has anything stronger than the words dug up by searching the internet... got it.

You're blissfully ignorant of how your 'side' could add supporting facts derived through medical studies.... at least some of those studies could be conducted on other species to avoid the ethics issues associated with human testing.

Edited Wednesday at 05:30 AM2 days by gamb00ler

3 hours ago, save the frogs said:

But the flip side to being restricted to one message is a lot of nonsensical quackery being perpetuated.

Just because Big Pharma may not be 100% on the up and up, it doesn't mean all your theories are on the up and up.

My theories are probably close to yours. Not sure what you are getting at. Maybe the pronoun "you" was meant in a generic ssense?

34 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

OK.... to summarize... all you got is denial of the nobel laureate's work.... nobody on your 'side' has anything stronger than the words dug up by searching the internet... got it.

You're blissfully ignorant of how your 'side' could add supporting facts derived through medical studies.... at least some of those studies could be conducted on other species to avoid the ethics issues associated with human testing.

Many of those/these Nobel awards are nonsense. In the medical industry; it's just a big club of back-slappers. Although there have been a few worthy champions.

So! The guy comes to you and says ' God is gonna emerge from the heavens soon.' I say 'I don't believe in god'. And he retorts 'Prove there is no god!'

That obviously nonsense. However!

The virologist says 'We have found a virus.' I say 'I don't believe viruses exist.' And he retorts 'Prove there are no viruses.'

Nature has the answers we seek.

Edited Wednesday at 06:16 AM2 days by Stiddle Mump

3 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Many of those/these Nobel awards are nonsense. In the medical industry; it's just a big club of back-slappers. Although there have been a few worthy champions.

So! The guy comes to you and says ' God is gonna emerge from the heavens soon.' I say 'I don't believe in god'. And he retorts 'Prove there is no god!'

That obviously nonsense. However!

The virologist says 'we have found a new virus.' I say 'I don't believe viruses exist.' And he retorts 'Prove there are no viruses.'

Nature has the answers we seek.

I always thought it was more a member of the prolatariat trying to disprove something their government really really wants everyone to believe.

Nothing to do with science, but all to do with their power and greed.

And their level of response and repression, will be proportional to their direct financial loss.

If your ruler has an investment in (lets say) surgical masks, and you claim they don't work, you'll be arrested and discredited extremely quickly.

Edited Wednesday at 06:23 AM2 days by BritManToo

Those for or against vaccines for the most part will never agree about anything. Nobody gives rats arse about the other teams arguments and only a few consider them. Some may delude themselves they are winning the argument.

I'm extremely healthy and Covid wasn't a real danger for me. I got vaccinated for other reasons other than fearing death. What was the most frustrating for me was the extremely unhealthy screaming at those of us that were healthy to get vaccinated. We aren't even allowed to raise questions at times. These screamers didn't care about society. If they did they wouldn't scream at those that weren't vaccinated. THey were just cowards and that rubbed me wrong. If you are unhealthy, accept the risks and don't demand everybody to do what is best for you. Politey detail the reason why you feel it would be beneficial and let them make a decision. Polite discourse convinced me to get vaccinated.

Edited Wednesday at 06:42 AM2 days by atpeace

16 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Those for or against vaccines for the most part will never agree about anything. Nobody gives rats arse about the other teams arguments and only a few consider them. Some may delude themselves they are winning the argument.

I'm extremely healthy and Covid wasn't a real danger for me. I got vaccinated for other reasons other than fearing death. What was the most frustrating for me was the extremely unhealthy screaming at those of us that were healthy to get vaccinated. We aren't even allowed to raise questions at times. These screamers didn't care about society. If they did they wouldn't scream at those that weren't vaccinated. THey were just cowards and that rubbed me wrong. If you are unhealthy, accept the risks and don't demand everybody to do what is best for you. Politey detail the reason why you feel it would be beneficial and let them make a decision. Polite discourse convinced me to get vaccinated.

Magdalene Taylor might interest you Sir. She is not a vaccine preacher as such, but she is a champion for kids. I'll put a link below to her www. Well worth a quick look. And if you like what she has to say; there is tons of very interesting content to get stuck into.

https://www.informedparent.co.uk

1 hour ago, atpeace said:

My theories are probably close to yours. Not sure what you are getting at. Maybe the pronoun "you" was meant in a generic ssense?

Yeah, it wasn't directed at you.

Sorry.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The virologist says 'We have found a virus.' I say 'I don't believe viruses exist.' And he retorts 'Prove there are no viruses.'

I just had a look at the basic definition of "Terrain Theory".

And it seems to make sense.

I don't think cancer can proliferate in a healthy body (terrain), for instance.

However, I don't think it eliminates the "Germ Theory" and renders viruses non-existant.

I think there is some validity to both theories to explain disease.

And AI agrees with me, except the Terrain Theory folks need to tweak their theory a bit.

So you appear to be partially right, and that's better than being 0% right.

Edited Wednesday at 07:27 AM2 days by save the frogs