Sam and Mark Bailey have done a great deal of research on germ theory. Their proposal to settle the virus debate through a detailed study seems reasonable. But the powers that be who propagate it will never allow such a thing. No dissent from the mainstream view is permitted. That should be a clue to you that something is rotten in Denmark. https://drsambailey.com/resources/settling-the-virus-debate/
What's rotten are his facts. Viruses HAVE been isolated, regardless of what he says. The scientific literature is replete with examples of this. Unless he proposes to say the whole of the scientific establishment is lying, he needs to have some extraordinary facts on his side, which he thus far has not presented to anyone.
If he wants a debate, that's great. But it needs to be grounded in reality. He too has some research to do before he can hold his own in such a debate.
These anti-germ/anti-virus advocates arise now and again (e.g., the delusional quack Stephanie Brail wrote about in her Wholistic Substack who argued COVID was caused by snake venom), but they always come up short in the reality quotient.
This isn't about not tolerating dissent. This is about not having patience for delusional fact-free nonsense. There is plenty about modern allopathic medicine to criticize, but the development of germ theory, and its expansion to encompass viruses, viroids, and prions as well as bacteria as potential pathogens, is not one of them.
What makes Sam Bailey's rantings nonsense is the signature logical flaw that he requires germ theory be false BEFORE his theories can be advanced. That's not how it works. His theories need to PROVE the falsity, not assert it as a predicate condition. That explodes his entire system completely and irretrievably, and renders it unworthy of further consideration.
Did they say the scientific establishment is lying? I don't think so and I don't believe they are "lying" either. I would say they are wedded to an orthodox position. It is irrelevant whether they begin believing whether germ theory is true or false. They are saying let's test the theory. They are willing to play ball. But it can never be accomplished because of arrogant people like yourself who is completely convinced he cannot be wrong.
They would have done better to say the scientific establishment is lying. At least then they would have a thesis that could be debated (they would still lose, but there would at least be 30 seconds of actual debate before they got annihilated by the facts).
However, Sam Bailey specifically says this:
"Perhaps the primary evidence that the pathogenic viral theory is problematic is that no published scientific paper has ever shown that particles fulfilling the definition of viruses have been directly isolated and purified from any tissues or bodily fluids of any sick human or animal."
This is a false statement, and there are innumerable papers in the public domain which establish the falsity of this statement. Either Sam Bailey is ignorant of these papers or he is lying. Malice or stupidity, those are the available choices. There is not a third one available.
You can believe that Sam Bailey is not lying, but that will not alter one bit the reality that he IS lying, and that his theories explode immediately from his lies.
We get enough lies from the FDA and the CDC. I'm not enthusiastic about anyone else who wants to add to that burden.
>>This is a false statement, and there are innumerable papers in the public domain which establish the falsity of this statement.<<
This is simply an appeal to authority. The consensus view does not confer legitimacy as you would like everyone to believe. This is how allopathic medicine has established a dictatorship throughout the world. The appeal to the "experts." Once you start believing in the "expets," then you are beholden to them. They call the shots and no dissent is permitted. They are the only ones who have the "cure" and you must follow them. Why? Because only they know what is true and what is false. The appeal to expert authority is why we're in trouble now. The hubris (which you suffer from) stifles scientific debate. I'll say it again: you are disingenuous with your claim that you welcome all challenges to the germ theory. I am even tempted to call you a liar.
Turfseer, I believe you are crapping up an important and otherwise high signal to noise discussion.
Peter has gone out of his way to politely and robustly disprove your argument that viruses do not exist.
You go on and on, without specific critiques of the vast number of research articles which report numerous detail about tens of thousands of types of virus.
Other people argue in various Substacks and other forums that viruses do not exist. This is about as realistic as arguing the the Sun does not exist.
As I said to Peter, I can very much live with his belief in viruses and their pathogenicity in certain cases. I recognize it's a dead end in fighting medical tyranny. The danger of the mRNA vaccines is a much more fertile ground to hold the powers-that-be to account.
No, that's not an appeal to authority. That's an appeal to evidence. You stand corrected.
Within those papers are descriptions of research methodologies, tables of raw data, illustrations of the pathogens isolated (which, by Sam Bailey's reasoning, cannot have been done).
The results of the research methodologies and the tables of raw data is that...wait for it...viruses exist.
And a large number of those research papers are in the public domain. You are at liberty to read them yourself and point out where they are wrong.
Which makes it impossible for their citation to be an appeal to authority. Hence...you stand corrected.
If they do exist, what is their function in the body? The "vast amount of research" you refer to are simply the speculative theories of mainstream virologists. Appealing to their authority does not make it fact.
I invite everyone reading this to see what Jon Rappoport had to say on this subject during the very early days of the so-called pandemic.
Damn! Will the Zombie Virus Apocalypse never come?
I write this piece for those who ordinarily have their heads on straight, when it comes to understanding the basics of HEALTH---but now, because of the тАЬcoronavirus epidemic,тАЭ are drifting back into the medical model: FIXATION ON GERMS.
A correct reading of suppressed medical history reveals that the hypothesis of тАЬone disease, one germтАЭ is a modern con, moving down a blind alley at midnight. And when you add тАЬone vaccineтАЭ to the formula, you get an even greater degree of lunacy.
But you also get a trillion-dollar commercial success.
I donтАЩt care how many contemporary molecular biologists are working in labs, amplifying invisible slivers of who knows what molecules into view, and calling them viruses; itтАЩs a con. This also applies to biowar biologists trying to create super-germs. TheyтАЩre all working in the dark vis-├а-vis the natural processes of the body, which are far more complex and far more protective of health than these scientists know---unless the body is interfered with by direct poisons or gross mechanical destruction.
The history of human health shows that upgrades in public sanitation, hygiene, and improved nutrition have done more for people than all the тАЬgerm-fightingтАЭ pharmaceutical interventions ever invented laid end to end.
But THAT is not a trillion-dollar commercial success.
Even when tissue samples are taken from the body, properly separated through centrifuge, and then observed under an electron microscope, by the most competent and honest researchers, you still get dead pictures of dead particles. As researcher Karma Singh has pointed out, you donтАЩt know, from those pictures, what such particles do or donтАЩt do when theyтАЩre alive and integrated in the body. You canтАЩt infer that they cause disease. The whole operation of the Virus Hunters is one brassy late-night infomercial tap dancing in the long, long history of humans on this planet.
You want germs? No one knows how many there are. From various estimates, we could be talking about thousands of trillions to the thousandth power. Maybe more. If an infinitesimal fraction of the critters caused serious disease, weтАЩd not only all be dead, weтАЩd be dead on dead on dead.
To begin to understand how overblown all these modern epidemic duds are, letтАЩs go to the animals. Farm animals. Pigs. A headline blares: A MILLION PIGS SLAUGHTERED. African Swine Fever Virus was discovered, and in order to stop the contagion, death was rained down on the pigs. On the farm. On the giant factory farm. So a question arises:
Do you seriously think humans sat down next to each of the million pigs and tested him/her for the Virus? Drew a blood or tissue sample?
Twenty pigs tested positive and they killed the rest as matter of course. They always do.
But wait. What are the conditions on this massive million-pig factory farm? LetтАЩs see. Pigs living in their own urine and feces, crowded next to one another, nose to butt, sprayed with toxic chemicals, eating chemical-laced feed---under high stress, never living the kind of existence they were designed for. Think theyтАЩre going to get sick? Think some kind of minimally reliable test might find a virus or two living and replicating in their bodies? Do you seriously think those viruses matter, contrasted against the OBVIOUS immunosuppressive ENVIRONMENT?
As the number one germ hunter of all time, Louis Pasteur, was reported to have confessed on his deathbed: itтАЩs not the germ, itтАЩs the terrain---meaning, itтАЩs the body and its strength and vitality and resiliency---THAT should be the real focus of the healing profession. Building up health.
One problem. ThereтАЩs no money in it.
Oops.
A final note for now: When IтАЩm told that published studies reveal the coronavirus is actually an engineered bioweapon, from a lab, I repeat the assertion IтАЩve been making in this ongoing series of articles:
The researchers are using indirect methods of virus detection (PCR, antibody tests), and as a result, they have no idea what theyтАЩre discovering. It could be fragments of random DNA or RNA, cellular debris, germs that live quite comfortably in the body and never cause harm---and THEN, when the researchers assemble the genetic sequences of these unknown tiny objects and publish them; SO WHAT? And when other people come along and read these sequences and claim there are peculiarities which suggest bio-engineering has taken place, the whole mess of gibberish escalates to a higher level of absurdity. Yes, it has always been the case that biowar scientists in labs are maniacs fiddling and diddling with mixtures of chemicals and germs; and yes, they should all be stopped; but to say that NOW, these loons have precisely located the new coronavirus and are precisely altering it to produce an unstoppable force---thatтАЩs really quite a fantastical leap, and itтАЩs a leap that leads into believing, all over again, that тАЬone germ, one diseaseтАЭ is the pattern of the human body. The body deserves more credit than that.
They exist. They hijack cellular replicating mechanisms to reproduce, and, by invading particular cells, trigger immune system responses which produce the symptoms we associate with infectious respiratory diseases (the fever, et cetera, is not the result of the virus but of the inflammation response that goes along with the immune system working to clear the body of the virus).
And no, this is NOT speculation. Saying that all virology is speculation is, simply put, A LIE.
Facts matter. Research matters. Lies only matter when people are deluded into believing them--and examination of the facts always reveals lies as lies, and obligates the rational man to discard the lies.
Consider Sam Bailey and Jon Rappoport discarded as the liars they are. Permanently.
The Baileys offer to conduct a study to settle the debate. They are not like you who insist that the matter is settled. By dismissing them as "liars," you join the ranks of all the other authoritarians who insist "my way or the highway." If the dark theory of contagion is true, then allow critics to challenge it. If you are THEN correct, so be it. But to cavalierly dismiss all those who you disagree with you as "liars," reveals you to be a person of low character.
I dismiss them as liars because knowingly making demonstrably FALSE statements is what we call LYING.
Their depictions of the state of modern virology are demonstrably false, and the only way for them not to know that is for them to be wholly ignorant of the substance of modern virology--which itself renders their theories absurd. They can be malicious, or they can just be stupid. Take your pick.
And I am happy to allow anyone to challenge germ theory--in fact, I have no power to prevent such a challenge, even if I had the inclination to do so. But here's a tip: that challenge does not begin with "germ theory is false." When that's the opening statement, what follows is not a challenge to anything except the challenger's grasp of reality.
You're completely disingenuous. On one hand you say you are "happy" to allow anyone to challenge germ theory but because you cannot countenance the idea that people like the Baileys begin with the premise the theory is false, therefore you imply that their challenge would not be legitimate. A nice way of saying that you are "not happy" to see such a challenge.
No, I'm pointing out the basic logical reality that the conclusion cannot be the predicate. That's called circular logic--which is to say its false logic.
As Sam Bailey's arguments require that germ theory be false, his arguments cannot be used to disprove germ theory. That is a logical impossibility.
Einstein managed to trump Newton by demonstrating how Newton's theories led into contradictions which his theories of relativity were able to resolve. Using those theories he was able to predict a set of astronomical phenomena which were validated during the observation of a solar eclipse right after the end of WW1 (I want to say 1920, but I might be off by a year or two).
Galileo trumped Aristotle not by stating his theories were false but by showing his theories were false (just not by climbing the leaning tower of Pisa-that part is medieval urban legend).
That's how its done. Show how the new theory trumps the old--which you do not do by first discarding the old theory.
If Sam Bailey wants to disprove germ theory, he's welcome to try. So far he has to even start.
Not only do viruses exist, but the presentation of germ theory as the sudden inspiration of Louis Pasteur in the mid-19th century is itself factually false.
Even Galen, who generally favored the miasma theory, articulated concepts of infected individuals containing the "seeds" of their infection.
Which is why people such as Ignaz Semmelweis and John Snow are important names to know when contemplating the history of germ theory. Their respective accomplishments against puerpal fever and cholera are wholly supportive of a germ theory mode of infection and disease.
And where does Ignaz Semmelweis fit in this "enlightened" theory of disease and infection?
Or, for that matter, John Snow?
Who are you referring to?
You have some research to do if you're going to be throwing shade on germ theory.
Sam and Mark Bailey have done a great deal of research on germ theory. Their proposal to settle the virus debate through a detailed study seems reasonable. But the powers that be who propagate it will never allow such a thing. No dissent from the mainstream view is permitted. That should be a clue to you that something is rotten in Denmark. https://drsambailey.com/resources/settling-the-virus-debate/
What's rotten are his facts. Viruses HAVE been isolated, regardless of what he says. The scientific literature is replete with examples of this. Unless he proposes to say the whole of the scientific establishment is lying, he needs to have some extraordinary facts on his side, which he thus far has not presented to anyone.
If he wants a debate, that's great. But it needs to be grounded in reality. He too has some research to do before he can hold his own in such a debate.
These anti-germ/anti-virus advocates arise now and again (e.g., the delusional quack Stephanie Brail wrote about in her Wholistic Substack who argued COVID was caused by snake venom), but they always come up short in the reality quotient.
This isn't about not tolerating dissent. This is about not having patience for delusional fact-free nonsense. There is plenty about modern allopathic medicine to criticize, but the development of germ theory, and its expansion to encompass viruses, viroids, and prions as well as bacteria as potential pathogens, is not one of them.
What makes Sam Bailey's rantings nonsense is the signature logical flaw that he requires germ theory be false BEFORE his theories can be advanced. That's not how it works. His theories need to PROVE the falsity, not assert it as a predicate condition. That explodes his entire system completely and irretrievably, and renders it unworthy of further consideration.
Did they say the scientific establishment is lying? I don't think so and I don't believe they are "lying" either. I would say they are wedded to an orthodox position. It is irrelevant whether they begin believing whether germ theory is true or false. They are saying let's test the theory. They are willing to play ball. But it can never be accomplished because of arrogant people like yourself who is completely convinced he cannot be wrong.
They would have done better to say the scientific establishment is lying. At least then they would have a thesis that could be debated (they would still lose, but there would at least be 30 seconds of actual debate before they got annihilated by the facts).
However, Sam Bailey specifically says this:
"Perhaps the primary evidence that the pathogenic viral theory is problematic is that no published scientific paper has ever shown that particles fulfilling the definition of viruses have been directly isolated and purified from any tissues or bodily fluids of any sick human or animal."
This is a false statement, and there are innumerable papers in the public domain which establish the falsity of this statement. Either Sam Bailey is ignorant of these papers or he is lying. Malice or stupidity, those are the available choices. There is not a third one available.
You can believe that Sam Bailey is not lying, but that will not alter one bit the reality that he IS lying, and that his theories explode immediately from his lies.
We get enough lies from the FDA and the CDC. I'm not enthusiastic about anyone else who wants to add to that burden.
>>This is a false statement, and there are innumerable papers in the public domain which establish the falsity of this statement.<<
This is simply an appeal to authority. The consensus view does not confer legitimacy as you would like everyone to believe. This is how allopathic medicine has established a dictatorship throughout the world. The appeal to the "experts." Once you start believing in the "expets," then you are beholden to them. They call the shots and no dissent is permitted. They are the only ones who have the "cure" and you must follow them. Why? Because only they know what is true and what is false. The appeal to expert authority is why we're in trouble now. The hubris (which you suffer from) stifles scientific debate. I'll say it again: you are disingenuous with your claim that you welcome all challenges to the germ theory. I am even tempted to call you a liar.
Turfseer, I believe you are crapping up an important and otherwise high signal to noise discussion.
Peter has gone out of his way to politely and robustly disprove your argument that viruses do not exist.
You go on and on, without specific critiques of the vast number of research articles which report numerous detail about tens of thousands of types of virus.
Other people argue in various Substacks and other forums that viruses do not exist. This is about as realistic as arguing the the Sun does not exist.
As I said to Peter, I can very much live with his belief in viruses and their pathogenicity in certain cases. I recognize it's a dead end in fighting medical tyranny. The danger of the mRNA vaccines is a much more fertile ground to hold the powers-that-be to account.
No, that's not an appeal to authority. That's an appeal to evidence. You stand corrected.
Within those papers are descriptions of research methodologies, tables of raw data, illustrations of the pathogens isolated (which, by Sam Bailey's reasoning, cannot have been done).
The results of the research methodologies and the tables of raw data is that...wait for it...viruses exist.
And a large number of those research papers are in the public domain. You are at liberty to read them yourself and point out where they are wrong.
Which makes it impossible for their citation to be an appeal to authority. Hence...you stand corrected.
Of course viruses exist. There is a vast amount of research on their innards, behaviour and disease impact.
If they do exist, what is their function in the body? The "vast amount of research" you refer to are simply the speculative theories of mainstream virologists. Appealing to their authority does not make it fact.
I invite everyone reading this to see what Jon Rappoport had to say on this subject during the very early days of the so-called pandemic.
Damn! Will the Zombie Virus Apocalypse never come?
by Jon Rappoport
Continuing my "greatest COVID hits" articles. To read my introduction to this ongoing series, go here:. https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2022/10/03/introduction-to-my-greatest-covid-hits-series-of-articles/ To support my work and get value for value, order my Matrix collections here: https://marketplace.mybigcommerce.com/ and subscribe to my substack here: https://jonrappoport.substack.com/
March 2, 2020
I write this piece for those who ordinarily have their heads on straight, when it comes to understanding the basics of HEALTH---but now, because of the тАЬcoronavirus epidemic,тАЭ are drifting back into the medical model: FIXATION ON GERMS.
A correct reading of suppressed medical history reveals that the hypothesis of тАЬone disease, one germтАЭ is a modern con, moving down a blind alley at midnight. And when you add тАЬone vaccineтАЭ to the formula, you get an even greater degree of lunacy.
But you also get a trillion-dollar commercial success.
I donтАЩt care how many contemporary molecular biologists are working in labs, amplifying invisible slivers of who knows what molecules into view, and calling them viruses; itтАЩs a con. This also applies to biowar biologists trying to create super-germs. TheyтАЩre all working in the dark vis-├а-vis the natural processes of the body, which are far more complex and far more protective of health than these scientists know---unless the body is interfered with by direct poisons or gross mechanical destruction.
The history of human health shows that upgrades in public sanitation, hygiene, and improved nutrition have done more for people than all the тАЬgerm-fightingтАЭ pharmaceutical interventions ever invented laid end to end.
But THAT is not a trillion-dollar commercial success.
Even when tissue samples are taken from the body, properly separated through centrifuge, and then observed under an electron microscope, by the most competent and honest researchers, you still get dead pictures of dead particles. As researcher Karma Singh has pointed out, you donтАЩt know, from those pictures, what such particles do or donтАЩt do when theyтАЩre alive and integrated in the body. You canтАЩt infer that they cause disease. The whole operation of the Virus Hunters is one brassy late-night infomercial tap dancing in the long, long history of humans on this planet.
You want germs? No one knows how many there are. From various estimates, we could be talking about thousands of trillions to the thousandth power. Maybe more. If an infinitesimal fraction of the critters caused serious disease, weтАЩd not only all be dead, weтАЩd be dead on dead on dead.
To begin to understand how overblown all these modern epidemic duds are, letтАЩs go to the animals. Farm animals. Pigs. A headline blares: A MILLION PIGS SLAUGHTERED. African Swine Fever Virus was discovered, and in order to stop the contagion, death was rained down on the pigs. On the farm. On the giant factory farm. So a question arises:
Do you seriously think humans sat down next to each of the million pigs and tested him/her for the Virus? Drew a blood or tissue sample?
Twenty pigs tested positive and they killed the rest as matter of course. They always do.
But wait. What are the conditions on this massive million-pig factory farm? LetтАЩs see. Pigs living in their own urine and feces, crowded next to one another, nose to butt, sprayed with toxic chemicals, eating chemical-laced feed---under high stress, never living the kind of existence they were designed for. Think theyтАЩre going to get sick? Think some kind of minimally reliable test might find a virus or two living and replicating in their bodies? Do you seriously think those viruses matter, contrasted against the OBVIOUS immunosuppressive ENVIRONMENT?
As the number one germ hunter of all time, Louis Pasteur, was reported to have confessed on his deathbed: itтАЩs not the germ, itтАЩs the terrain---meaning, itтАЩs the body and its strength and vitality and resiliency---THAT should be the real focus of the healing profession. Building up health.
One problem. ThereтАЩs no money in it.
Oops.
A final note for now: When IтАЩm told that published studies reveal the coronavirus is actually an engineered bioweapon, from a lab, I repeat the assertion IтАЩve been making in this ongoing series of articles:
The researchers are using indirect methods of virus detection (PCR, antibody tests), and as a result, they have no idea what theyтАЩre discovering. It could be fragments of random DNA or RNA, cellular debris, germs that live quite comfortably in the body and never cause harm---and THEN, when the researchers assemble the genetic sequences of these unknown tiny objects and publish them; SO WHAT? And when other people come along and read these sequences and claim there are peculiarities which suggest bio-engineering has taken place, the whole mess of gibberish escalates to a higher level of absurdity. Yes, it has always been the case that biowar scientists in labs are maniacs fiddling and diddling with mixtures of chemicals and germs; and yes, they should all be stopped; but to say that NOW, these loons have precisely located the new coronavirus and are precisely altering it to produce an unstoppable force---thatтАЩs really quite a fantastical leap, and itтАЩs a leap that leads into believing, all over again, that тАЬone germ, one diseaseтАЭ is the pattern of the human body. The body deserves more credit than that.
They exist. They hijack cellular replicating mechanisms to reproduce, and, by invading particular cells, trigger immune system responses which produce the symptoms we associate with infectious respiratory diseases (the fever, et cetera, is not the result of the virus but of the inflammation response that goes along with the immune system working to clear the body of the virus).
And no, this is NOT speculation. Saying that all virology is speculation is, simply put, A LIE.
Facts matter. Research matters. Lies only matter when people are deluded into believing them--and examination of the facts always reveals lies as lies, and obligates the rational man to discard the lies.
Consider Sam Bailey and Jon Rappoport discarded as the liars they are. Permanently.
Here ends the discussion.
The Baileys offer to conduct a study to settle the debate. They are not like you who insist that the matter is settled. By dismissing them as "liars," you join the ranks of all the other authoritarians who insist "my way or the highway." If the dark theory of contagion is true, then allow critics to challenge it. If you are THEN correct, so be it. But to cavalierly dismiss all those who you disagree with you as "liars," reveals you to be a person of low character.
I dismiss them as liars because knowingly making demonstrably FALSE statements is what we call LYING.
Their depictions of the state of modern virology are demonstrably false, and the only way for them not to know that is for them to be wholly ignorant of the substance of modern virology--which itself renders their theories absurd. They can be malicious, or they can just be stupid. Take your pick.
And I am happy to allow anyone to challenge germ theory--in fact, I have no power to prevent such a challenge, even if I had the inclination to do so. But here's a tip: that challenge does not begin with "germ theory is false." When that's the opening statement, what follows is not a challenge to anything except the challenger's grasp of reality.
Ignaz Semmelweis knew better than that.
John Snow knew better than that.
I know better than that.
And now you know better than that.
You're completely disingenuous. On one hand you say you are "happy" to allow anyone to challenge germ theory but because you cannot countenance the idea that people like the Baileys begin with the premise the theory is false, therefore you imply that their challenge would not be legitimate. A nice way of saying that you are "not happy" to see such a challenge.
No, I'm pointing out the basic logical reality that the conclusion cannot be the predicate. That's called circular logic--which is to say its false logic.
As Sam Bailey's arguments require that germ theory be false, his arguments cannot be used to disprove germ theory. That is a logical impossibility.
Einstein managed to trump Newton by demonstrating how Newton's theories led into contradictions which his theories of relativity were able to resolve. Using those theories he was able to predict a set of astronomical phenomena which were validated during the observation of a solar eclipse right after the end of WW1 (I want to say 1920, but I might be off by a year or two).
Galileo trumped Aristotle not by stating his theories were false but by showing his theories were false (just not by climbing the leaning tower of Pisa-that part is medieval urban legend).
That's how its done. Show how the new theory trumps the old--which you do not do by first discarding the old theory.
If Sam Bailey wants to disprove germ theory, he's welcome to try. So far he has to even start.
If this distresses you, that's your problem.
Not only do viruses exist, but the presentation of germ theory as the sudden inspiration of Louis Pasteur in the mid-19th century is itself factually false.
Even Galen, who generally favored the miasma theory, articulated concepts of infected individuals containing the "seeds" of their infection.
Which is why people such as Ignaz Semmelweis and John Snow are important names to know when contemplating the history of germ theory. Their respective accomplishments against puerpal fever and cholera are wholly supportive of a germ theory mode of infection and disease.