• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
MBDK said:
No, you can't, unless the offering sponsor decides to. THAT, despite any claims to the contrary, is what the German court decided. The sponsor is sole judge of "proof", as they are the one(s) making the conditions for payment. It was a legal issue, and as such, we can expect no amount of "proof" to be accepted for the promised payout. It would be an exercise in futility to continue to attempt to indulge the insatiable.
Click to expand...


You are confusing the issues. The just started "Grand Jury" is an effort run by Germans, but it is not the same as the €1,5 Million challenge, although they of course know each other. The latter is up for about a year, and even if most involved have no money problems, why not contribute it to a charity?

You have not touched the main issue I outlined in the previous post, I notice.
 
Childlike Empress said:
You are confusing the issues. The just started "Grand Jury" is an effort run by Germans, but it is not the same as the €1,5 Million challenge, although they of course know each other. The latter is up for about a year, and even if most involved have no money problems, why not contribute it to a charity?

You have not touched the main issue I outlined in the previous post, I notice.
Click to expand...
The legalese is the same. The sponsors are the final judges to determine if payout criteria is met. No matter what, it never will be.

As I read nothing that wasn't already addressed in my previous post, please provide greater detail into what issue you have.
 
MBDK said:
Also, for a very basic visualization/explanation of how the ex vivo experiments were done, and what they discovered, I suggest watching this video, though it does get a little repetitive at time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84XMFVcLScw&t=842s
Click to expand...


thanks for that, we were cross-posting. Funny that this video is about the Koch postulates I touched upon in my post. All of this is nothing new to me, although I enjoyed listening to that British doctor who seems to be interested in the health of his patients). But you failed again to adress my (or in this case Lanka's) isuue. Where are the isolates? Why are the €1.5 Million are still up to grasp?
 
MBDK said:
The legalese is the same. The sponsors are the final judges to determine if payout criteria is met. No matter what, it never will be.
Click to expand...


The video now has 72K views. It is going viral. If there is something you can demonstrate to be wrong with it, you better do so now.

And if you want to please me, again, show where Lanka is wrong with the virus isolation.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
The video now has 72K views. It is going viral. If there is something you can demonstrate to be wrong with it, you better do so now.

And if you want to please me, again, show where Lsnka is wrong with the virus isolation.
Click to expand...
II have better things to do than watch rehashed idiotic ideas, at this time. I may later, at my discretion. I have to go now, but will leave you with this procedure for isolation:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.23.056309v1.full

Please note that the initial main theory for mistaken viral evidence was contamination. Please explain how that would be possible in the isolation procedure used in this study (excerpt follows).

"Infected Vero cells were scraped from the flask and centrifuged at 300xg for 10 minutes. The cell pellet was rinsed with 0.1M phosphate buffer saline (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) centrifuged at 300xg for 10 minutes. Pellet was fixed 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M Phosphate Buffer Saline (PBS) (pH 7.4) for at least 2 hours at room temperature. The fixed block was washed in 0.1 M phosphate buffer three times for 15 minutes. Post fixation was done in 1% osmium tetroxide in 0.1 M phosphate buffer 1-2 hours at room temperature. In this step, 2% aqueous OsO4 and 0.2M phosphate buffer were mixed in equal volume and used immediately. En Bloc Staining was done to enhance contrast. Bloc was washed at least 3-5 times of 10 minutes each in distilled water to remove all excess phosphate ions, therefore, preventing uranyl acetate (UA) from being precipitated. En bloc was stained with 2% aqueous uranyl acetate for 1 hour at room temperature or 2 hours at 4 °C in dark to prevent uranyl acetate from being precipitated as UA is photo reductive. It was washed 2-3 times of 5 minutes in distilled water. In the dehydration process, bloc was put in 50% ethanol for 10-15 min. Then, it was put in 70% ethanol for 10-15 min. If it is necessary, the bloc may be stored overnight at this stage. The alcohol ratio was increased to 95% and put in it for 10-15 min then transferred into 100% ethanol 3 times for 15 min. Bloc was put 100% Propylene oxide 3 times for 15 min. The sample was transferred in 1:1 EMBed 812 and Propylene Oxide overnight at room temperature in tightly capped vials to prevent moisture from coming into the specimen. EMBed 812 (100%) was straight for 1-2 hours at room temperature. The caps were removed from vials to allow any remaining propylene oxide to evaporate. The sample was labeled and embedded in beam capsules or embedding molds. It was polymerized in 60-70 °C (∼65 °C) oven for 24-48 hours. The sample was viewed in different scales."

Also, they claimed electron microscopes showed dead cell particles, rather than a virus. My referenced study definitely shows unique viral entities.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.23.056309v1.full
 
Canadian truckers protesting govt COVID policies are now called racist. Trudeau said so.

Can someone explain why?


Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 
Bubba said:
Canadian truckers protesting govt COVID policies are now called racist. Trudeau said so.

Can someone explain why?
Click to expand...

Canada: Trudeau denounces anti-vaccine trucker protests
Canadian PM slams intimidation, vandalism and ‘racist flags’ at demonstrations organised by some far-right activists.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/31/canada-trudeau-denounces-anti-vaccine-trucker-protests

"We won’t give in to those who fly racist flags."

Do you think Trudeau was discussing the swastika flags or the confederate flags or both?
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Canada: Trudeau denounces anti-vaccine trucker protests
Canadian PM slams intimidation, vandalism and ‘racist flags’ at demonstrations organised by some far-right activists.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/31/canada-trudeau-denounces-anti-vaccine-trucker-protests

"We won’t give in to those who fly racist flags."

Do you think Trudeau was discussing the swastika flags or the confederate flags or both?
Click to expand...



Oh, I see why now. The truckers are evil racist naziis.
 
Bubba said:
Oh, I see why now. The truckers are evil racist naziis.
Click to expand...

Why are people from the United State protesting in Canada? Idiots with confederate flags... it would be wishful thinking to have Canada keep the USA nuts locked up, and raise the IQ of the USA...

Did you go up there?
 
Bubba said:
Oh, I see why now. The truckers are evil racist naziis.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you have finally realised that the whole point of flying a flag is to make it clear to everyone who sees it exactly where your allegiances lie. Only a few dozen more such blatantly obvious things to finally notice, Bubba.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Influenza is a virus: that's what it is.
Your position on viruses is vague to the point of incomprehensibility.
What, specifically, are your reservations about the body of scientific work demonstrating the existence of viruses, and- perhaps more importantly- what would convince you they actually do exist?
Click to expand...

Influenza is an illness said to be caused by a virus. Whether it is or not I don't know. I think that what is said about how viruses haven't been proved to exist is compelling but that doesn't mean a pathogen isn't responsible for illness, perhaps it just means they haven't found the pathogen they think they have. I simply don't know enough about it.


Unsupported assertions. The junk "science" you have quoted to support this idea that PCR tests don't work has been examined and found sadly wanting. Again, what level of evidence would convince you that Covid is real, and that the tests work?
Click to expand...

Please explain to me how, if testing stopped tomorrow, covid would be able to be diagnosed as not being a cold, flu, whatever.

Can you point me to a PCR test that has specificity and sensitivity rates (false positives and false negatives) published as well as how those rates were determined?


Yet, as I said before, in another of my posts that you ignored, people are dying, and people are getting sick from an illness that displays all the symptoms of Covid. If it's not Covid that's making them ill, then what is?
Oh, and 'I do not accept' on its own is just an argument from incredulity- a logical fallacy, On what factual grounds do you 'not accept' them?
Click to expand...

People die from flu and pneumonia and other respiratory illnesses. Please tell me what the special symptoms are that covid sufferers experience? You are aware that many older people suffering co-morbidities are said to have died of covid.

So you haven't analysed the figures, as you claimed you had, you haven't questioned Bailey's cherry-picking of the data, and the only thing you have is your aforementioned incredulity. Utterly unconvincing.
Click to expand...
Mea culpa. However, the MAIN point of Sam's data which still stands strong is that excess spikes in April 2020 correlated with countries where aggressive drug trials were conducted. I confused myself over the Portugal figures but, in fact, the spike in April 2020 in Portugal was not a significantly excessive spike whereas in Spain it was huge.

At last, some actual data!
Oh, but you really shouldn't have done this. Have you actually read these? Have you?
:sdl:
Click to expand...
I looked at them enough to know where they were conducted and what the dosages were.

First one: Remember, the claim is that Spain and Portugal were carrying out 'aggressive drug tests', that caused a significant spike in mortality in Spain and Portugal.
1. The Solidarity trials were carried out in 52 countries, not just 2 as Bailey claimed. Did you check to see if there was a spike in mortality in the other 50 countries at that time? I'm guessing you didn't.
2. The drugs were an anti-malarial derived from plants, in use for over 30 years and perfectly safe; an anti-cancer drug invented in the 1990s; and a drug used to treat immune system disorders, in use for 20 years and also safe. Which of these drugs does Bailey claim caused the mortality spikes?
Click to expand...
The claim wasn't that both Spain and Portugal were carrying out the tests but only Spain but we see a massive excess spike in Spain where the spike in Portugal is unremarkable and the Solidarity trial WAS conducted in Spain. Can you not see that?

1. Carried out in the UK, not in Spain or Portugal.
2. Trialled, among others, aspirin. Is aspirin suddenly lethal, or is this yet more bollocks?
3. The trials did not test the same drugs as the Solidarity trial.
4. The trials did not finish in April 2020.
5. The results are published. Even if they applied to Spain or Portugal, which they do not, they do not indicate high levels of mortality.
Click to expand...

1. I was just referring in a general sense to both tests being conducted and I didn't mean that both were done in Europe. It would really be much more enlightening to actually watch Sam's video which refers to the UK as well.

2. It's the amount of drug - don't remember aspirin, I think she was talking about Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine - it's more about the amount, not the drug itself.

3. Yeah and?

4. Can you tell me when the trial finished in Spain. I can't see it though it seems you think it wasn't conducted there when it was.

5. Solidarity was conducted in Spain not in the UK and I didn't mean to suggest that both trials were conducted in Spain.,

1. This is about hydroxychloroquine, the so-called wonder drug of the conspiracy crew. and how dangerous it is, It is not about any of the drugs in the other trials.
2. This article is about studies in Brazil and the UK, not Spain or Portugal.

So, in summary- what the chuffing hell are you talking about? Did you just google random drug studies and post them here? Did you actually read them yourself?
Do not, please, pretend you examined this evidence. This is a joke, nothing more.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Solidarity was conducted in Spain and NO trials were conducted in Portugal. You seem to have the impression that the video was just about Spain and Portugal when they were just examples.

I don't think I'll ever discuss data again on which a video is based where the video itself really needs to be watched. It just creates confusion.
 
abaddon said:
Do your own research. <snigger>
Click to expand...

I've watched Sam's videos where she responds to her detractors and what you're asking me to do is to go back and watch them again and read Alison Campbell again and pick out what the detractor said and what Sam said in response but I ain't going to do it.

If all someone can come up with is "She talks a load of nonsense" as said by some mainstream shill then I don't have to respond to that, do I? Do you really think the obligation is on me?

If you want to say someone talks nonsense you need to specify what you think is nonsense otherwise you have zero credibility.
 
MBDK said:
I did when first offered, and gave you one of the scientific papers that tell exactly HOW they do what Off Guardian was confused on (or more likely willfully ignorant on). The paper IS the evidence for adequate purification. Did you read it? If you do not believe it does what I claim, relate EXACTLY which specific portion(s) you have a problem with and why, in detail. If you wish to hand-wave legitimate scientific work away and promote ignorance, then you are intellectually unreasonable, and beyond help.
Click to expand...

I looked at the paper but I don't understand it. Can you specifically address what OffG falsely claims and say exactly where it is addressed in the paper. What I don't understand is if OffG has got it wrong why haven't debunkers pointed out what they've got wrong? I'm not a scientist so I simply rely on the debunking trail and where it ends. There are fact-checkers galore out there and this article completely refutes the science put forward for a pandemic. Surely to goodness someone should be debunking this article if what it said was false ... well PolitiFact did and their debunking was lame in the extreme.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
Not to mention almost 400 million subsequent cases and more than 5 million deaths.
Click to expand...

If the argument is that there's no covid then the reported 5 million deaths won't be from covid and if the science put forward to say that covid exists is shown to be fraudulent then we can infer that the claim of 5 million deaths from covid is false. We must look at the science put forward. What do you say about the "science" put forward for the suspicion of a new virus?

Yeah, someone oughta think about sequencing its genome.
Click to expand...
Yes, we all know a genome is claimed but the science put forward for a genome is fraudulent. You can't just push out what is claimed you need to address the claims of fraudulence.


Isn't Rasnick the guy who denied the existence of HIV, or at least its connection with AIDS, so he could claim the vitamin supplements he was selling would treat the disease?
Click to expand...
Why yes he was ... Kary Mullis, a friend and colleague of David, who won the Nobel prize for the invention of the PCR technique fraudulently being used to test for the alleged covid also denied the connection between HIV and AIDS. How 'bout them apples? All so long ago now. AIDS, yes I remember those ads with the grim reaper and the bowling ball in Australia. Did you have them too? AIDS, all so long ago now. Haven't heard of anyone with AIDS in years. How 'bout you?


And Bailey says viruses have never been shown to cause disease.
Click to expand...
Yes she did.

I don't think this is a very fruitful exercise so I'll end it here.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom