Cont: Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories Part IV

[Cosmic Yak]

OK, I'm signing off for awhile again. Why don't you "skeptics" really approach the debunking argument with an open mind and rather than just arguing with the covid deniers on here, why not really take a proper look? When I looked for argument debunking the moon landings and climate change I went and had a proper look. I looked back and forth at the arguments, I really tried to keep an open mind.

And yet you have not done so here. Why the change of approach?

This is my webpage which has links to a number of other pages. Cosmic Yak was immediately scared off by 9/11 and Sandy Hook on the menu but you don't have to look at other pages, just look at this one and if you bother to read it and have problems with it then you can email me at petral@iinet.net.au. I will return here but I can't sit typing all day and I know that's what I'm inclined to do on this page.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/blog/coronavirus-hoax-jan-2020

Please don't misrepresent my comments: it's naughty.
I was not 'scared off': I was simultaneously appalled and amused by the content of your blog. I'm not scared of paranoid nonsense, I just don't want to read it.

 

[MBDK]

The "legitimate scientific studies" have been debunked in a way I find completely compelling.
https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless

I don't find debunking of climate science compelling and I don't find debunking of the moon landings compelling. I'm not some mindless conspiracy theorist, OK? I look at what's presented and try to work it out with an open mind.

Here's a site for you to get your teeth stuck into - WARNING: NOT A VIROLOGIST and whose grammar and spelling are not perfect, just someone who's studied:
ViroLIEgy.com - Exposing the lies of Germ Theory and virology using their own sources.

Quick glance at your first reference shows it to be laughably naive and deliberately manipulative. It claims regarding Mullis, that "there is no doubt that the biochemist regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection". That sentence links to this article:

https://uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus/

Now, this article claims to disprove the fact that PCR tests can detect a virus, and uses an interview with Mullis to support that claim, which is the point your reference was referencing. However, here is a quote from him in that 1994 interview from Mullis himself:

One of Duesberg’s strongest arguments in the debate has been that the HIV virus is barely detectable in people who suffer from AIDS. Ironically, when PCR was applied to HIV research, around 1989, researchers claimed to have put this complaint to rest. Using the new technology, they were suddenly able to see viral particles in the quantities they couldn’t see before. Scientific articles poured forth stating that HIV was now 100 times more prevalent than was previously thought. But Mullis himself was unimpressed. “PCR made it easier to see that certain people are infected with HIV,” he told Spin in 1992, “and some of those people came down with symptoms of AIDS. But that doesn’t begin even to answer the question, ‘Does HIV cause it?'”

So, Mullis literally said the PCR test DID detect the AIDS virus, his contention was the causality of AIDS.

With such disingenuous, yet easily debunked by the educated, journalism, your source(s) obviously aim for those unschooled in the applicable sciences and subjects.

Your second reference is more of the same, 100% proven wrong by the results of ex vivo experiment results. I leave it to you to figure out how, if you have any integrity at all, as it is expressly simple once you look at the methodology.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Notice how Petra is running away again without having presented a single shred of evidence of her own, nor acknowledging the responses to her claims provided by me and several other forum members here.
Because that's what 'looking at both sides of the argument' really is, and that is how truth is determined.

 

[MBDK]

Notice how Petra is running away again without having presented a single shred of evidence of her own, nor acknowledging the responses to her claims provided by me and several other forum members here.
Because that's what 'looking at both sides of the argument' really is, and that is how truth is determined.

And upon return (if ever), I suspect another amnesic event where Petra loses track of all questions and counter-evidence presented.

 

[bruto]

Features of a psyop are media items that make no sense. Finding the virus in two species of snake right at the outset doesn't make sense so that's the connection with psyop. We do not expect scientists to be looking at snakes for a virus at the outset especially and we have to ask why THESE two species? Did they look in other species and not find them there? Also:
--- People falling flat on their faces
--- People laid out on the ground and on hospital floors
--- Stories about hospitals being erected in 48 hours
--- Alleged patients who have a history in acting and have no credibility
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...uinely-thought-going-die-Covid-19-battle.html

What you will notice in the comments on the Daily Mail article is that the commenters aren't psyop analysts like me, however, they do not believe Tara Jane Langston's story regardless ... because it is contrary to what you'd expect of someone in an ICU.

It doesn't matter what premise I start with as long as I scrupulously keep my mind open to all the evidence and carefully assign it to the hypothesis it fits best. I mean, what premise did you start with? You didn't start with a premise - is that what you're telling me?

The first thing I ever heard about the Coronavirus was that it was suspected of crossing over from an animal. To me it makes abundant sense, then, to look for animals that might harbor it, either as hosts or carriers. What you expect scientists to do is irrelevant unless you know why they do it and what they've done, and you immediately admit that you do not know whether they looked at other snakes, or other animals. You claim to keep your mind open, but you assign evidence to a hypothesis that you believe fits it best, while simply discarding or denying evidence that does not. There is, for example, abundant evidence that white tail deer are a reservoir of the virus. It's reported by reliable researchers, who have tested actual deer in the real world. And yet, according to you no such virus exists. If you have a reason for doubting this evidence that is grounded in criticism of the procedure with which it was gathered, I have not heard it. What I have heard is that you deny the existence of the virus itself, a preconception that makes it impossible for you to consider the evidence from the get-go. If you deny the virus, all evidence to the contrary is a hoax before it is even seen.

Sure I start with a premise too. I start with the presumption that the world is real. The presumption that science is real. The presumption that worldwide conspiracies that require the secret cooperation of disparate groups with disparate interests and mortal enmity are unlikely enough to require at least some evidence of their existence. I could go on, but I know it's hopeless. I looked briefly at your web page. I hope it's not a breach of forum rules to note that a person who can write that kind of stuff is not receptive to reason, and it would be foolhardy of me to bother trying.

By the way, I saw the Challenger disaster live on TV. Did you? You seem to have a theory that the occupants of that spectacular explosion survived. I did not bother to watch the video. Too many cookies. But anyone who believes that claptrap should replace whatever is in their heads with some of those cookies, to get an upgrade.

And though I know nobody who lost a child in Sandy Hook, I know some of their neighbors. I cannot begin to express the utter and complete disgust I feel for those who deny that event. I know Alex Jones lost a suit on that front, but I think justice was not fully served as long as a person of such idiocy blended with sneering greed and savage cruelty lives on this side of hell.

derail about the Challenger Disaster split to here

Posted By: jimbob

 

[Bubba]

Petra, neither Swiss Policy Research nor Off-Guardian are reliable sites.

Yes, of course they must be smeared as "not reliable". when they expose the truth about MSM


Swiss Policy Research did the work and drew the chart showing which MSM Owners, execs, etc were also in, or connected to Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, and Council on Foreign Relations

They both publish conspiracy theories,

Oh no! Cover the childrens' eyes and ears !

Largely unbeknownst to the general public, executives and top journalists of almost all major US media outlets have long been members of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Established in 1921 as a private, bipartisan organization to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities”, the CFR and its close to 5000 elite members for decades have shaped US foreign policy and public discourse about it. As a well-known Council member famously explained, they transformed the American republic into a global empire, albeit a “bene*volent” one.

Based on official membership rosters, the following illustration depicts for the first time the extensive media network of the CFR and its two major international affiliate organizations: the Bilderberg Group (mainly covering the US and Europe) and the Trilateral Commission (covering North America, Europe and East Asia), both established by Council leaders to foster elite cooperation at the global level.

 

[Bubba]

by Petra View Post
"They" are the very rich and powerful from all around the globe and include the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Clintons, Bushes, Royal Families, Gates, Epstein, and many names we've never heard of. According to former high-finance operative, Ronald Bernard, they comprise about 8,000 people. Who I really wonder about is Elon Musk. He's rich and powerful but I somehow don't think he's part of this crowd but I have no idea. "They" are people who go back in history. The techniques for controlling us are with their ancestors or if they're "nouveau" they will get told.

junkshop replied
Oh, how disappointing. Bog-standard conspiracy crap.

Oh, how disappointing. Tory Borg-standard denial crap

 

[Susheel]

Hey Bubba...I was waiting for your grand revelations and acute insights into developments at the Durham Investigations thread.

 

[Petra]

And yet you have not done so here. Why the change of approach?

Please don't misrepresent my comments: it's naughty.
I was not 'scared off': I was simultaneously appalled and amused by the content of your blog. I'm not scared of paranoid nonsense, I just don't want to read it.

You have such a wonderfully open mind, Cosmic Yak.

OK so I peeked again although I really need to not be on this page typing madly all the time.

I'm afraid I still haven't seen a response to my question that you said was upthread. Can you please give me a link to your response upthread or simply give an answer again.

Please refute my claim that what is put forward for the suspicion of a "novel" virus is unscientific.

Suspicion of a "novel" virus is based on an alleged "cluster" of 44 cases of pneumonia of "unknown origin" in the highly-polluted city of Wuhan.
44 cases doesn't make a cluster and pneumonia has many causes - "unknown origin" makes no sense.
Then, if indeed these 44 cases of pneumonia were caused by a novel virus why is the association between pneumonia and the novel virus now completely lost?
https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2020-DON229

 

[beachnut]

"open mind", and personal experience, are winning again

Oh dear, I'm afraid it's rather you in possession of the shallow, knee-jerk "thinking."

I wasn't putting forward my "personal opinion" but rather my "personal EXPERIENCE" and I was putting it forward as an element in my case, not "proof", simply an element.

It seems to me that people on this thread don't believe that personal experience plays any role in determining whether or not what we hear from media and government 24/7 is true.

Is that what I'm to understand?

That "personal experience" should play absolutely no role in determining whether a pandemic is occurring or not. "Personal experience" and "pandemic" have ZERO connection, it's just what's put forward by media, government and scientific papers that we need to pay attention to? Is that it? Is that what you guys advise? "Personal experience" completely excluded from argument and it's just:
--- Media (who always tell the truth)
--- Government (who always tell the truth)
--- Scientific papers (which are always accurate)

But then even the media tell us stuff that contradicts the narrative. There is actually a reasonable amount of internal contradiction which is only to be expected.
Media telling us that median age of covid mortality in Australia: 86 for women, 81 for men.
https://www.facebook.com/TurningPointAustralia/videos/3863750390515887/

lol, some projection, BS, and more cherry picking to woo

... Why don't you "skeptics" really approach the debunking argument with an open mind ...

The old "open mind" gamut? In some cases it is like an open marriage, and the wife, aka the brain and rational thinking skills, left.

 

[MBDK]

44 cases doesn't make a cluster and pneumonia has many causes - "unknown origin" makes no sense.
Then, if indeed these 44 cases of pneumonia were caused by a novel virus why is the association between pneumonia and the novel virus now completely lost?
https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2020-DON229

You are REALLY confused with basic medical terminology and pathology.

First error - not understanding what a "medical cluster" is.

Solution - Read from an accredited source. From - https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Disease+Cluster

Disease Cluster
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
(1) Two or more cases of a relatively uncommon event or disease related in time and/or place perceived to be greater than expected by chance
(2) An unusual aggregation, real or perceived, of health events that are grouped together in time and space, which is reported to a public health department

Second error - complete ignorance regarding viral diagnostics and identification.

Solution - honest research, even a small amount.

Here you will find out a lot more information regarding the disease and the diagnostic tests used to identify the source. Obviously, when you have a "cluster" of infections where no known source can be identified, a "novel" cause (likely a virus) is suspected.

The basic procedure for identifying an infectious virus is here -

https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/how-scientists-identify-virus

3rd error - claiming COVID-19 is now disassociated with pneumonia.

Solution - get out of the swamp. This lie is only spread in conspiracy circles. One of many, many, many, many sources -

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-basics

In some people, COVID-19 causes more severe symptoms like high fever, severe cough, and shortness of breath, which often indicates pneumonia.

Next error: Any further post making these ludicrous claims.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Indeed.
This insistence by Petra that she has seen no factual rebuttals to her claims is way beyond the limits of plausibility. It is testament to the power of disinformation that she is- honestly or not- unable to acknowledge even the presence of counter-arguments. Scary and tragic in equal measures.

No, your memory is failing you. It wasn't that I didn't answer a question of yours. it was that you didn't ask a question of mine.
For the umpteenth time:
Do you have any actual evidence that the scientific consensus about Covid is wrong, and do you have any actual evidence for the fraud you keep alleging?

Your suspicions and incredulity do not constitute evidence. Neither does your repetitive and frankly tiresome posting of the WHO link, which in any case has been dealt with upthread.

Evidence, Petra. Do you have any evidence?

You have such a wonderfully open mind, Cosmic Yak.

OK so I peeked again although I really need to not be on this page typing madly all the time.

I'm afraid I still haven't seen a response to my question that you said was upthread. Can you please give me a link to your response upthread or simply give an answer again.

This has to be performance art. No-one could seriously be posting this stuff.
Petra, are you for real? Are you doing this for a bet? Is someone paying you for this?

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Upthread? Do you have a link?

Yes.
Next time, it would be preferable if you would actually read the replies you get, rather than ignoring them and then pretending no-one has answered you.

I'm afraid I still haven't seen a response to my question that you said was upthread. Can you please give me a link to your response upthread or simply give an answer again.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

You are REALLY confused with basic medical terminology and pathology.

First error - not understanding what a "medical cluster" is.

Solution - Read from an accredited source. From - https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Disease+Cluster



Second error - complete ignorance regarding viral diagnostics and identification.

Solution - honest research, even a small amount.

Here you will find out a lot more information regarding the disease and the diagnostic tests used to identify the source. Obviously, when you have a "cluster" of infections where no known source can be identified, a "novel" cause (likely a virus) is suspected.

The basic procedure for identifying an infectious virus is here -

https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/how-scientists-identify-virus

3rd error - claiming COVID-19 is now disassociated with pneumonia.

Solution - get out of the swamp. This lie is only spread in conspiracy circles. One of many, many, many, many sources -

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-basics


Next error: Any further post making these ludicrous claims.

So, how long before Petra posts again that no-one has answered her point?
I'm guessing less than a day.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Yes, of course they must be smeared as "not reliable". when they expose the truth about MSM


Swiss Policy Research did the work and drew the chart showing which MSM Owners, execs, etc were also in, or connected to Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, and Council on Foreign Relations

This. Again. You're like a stuck record, Bubba.
You don't even believe this yourself. Why keep posting it?
Also, off-topic.

 

[EaglePuncher]

OK, I'm signing off for awhile again. Why don't you "skeptics" really approach the debunking argument with an open mind and rather than just arguing with the covid deniers on here, why not really take a proper look? When I looked for argument debunking the moon landings and climate change I went and had a proper look. I looked back and forth at the arguments, I really tried to keep an open mind.

This is my webpage which has links to a number of other pages. Cosmic Yak was immediately scared off by 9/11 and Sandy Hook on the menu but you don't have to look at other pages, just look at this one and if you bother to read it and have problems with it then you can email me at petral@iinet.net.au. I will return here but I can't sit typing all day and I know that's what I'm inclined to do on this page.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/blog/coronavirus-hoax-jan-2020

Oh well I asked you a question about the mechanics of the "fake" pandemic, you ignored me. Why? Is it because you can't explain the "fake" pandemic?

 

[Craig4]

I started with the presumption that it was a psyop when they...
Who is 'they'?
"They" are the very rich and powerful from all around the globe and include the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Clintons, Bushes, Royal Families, Gates, Epstein, and many names we've never heard of. According to former high-finance operative, Ronald Bernard, they comprise about 8,000 people. Who I really wonder about is Elon Musk. He's rich and powerful but I somehow don't think he's part of this crowd but I have no idea. "They" are people who go back in history. The techniques for controlling us are with their ancestors or if they're "nouveau" they will get told.

...showed us people falling flat on their faces...
Link, please.
https://twitter.com/rachadchahine/status/1220785179146563585


...and told us that two species of snakes were "reservoirs" of the virus...
Link, please.
Just to say: I first saw the snake thing in Wikipedia (always my first point of call because it always gives us the nonsense to indicate psyop), however, the Wikipedia page was erased never to be seen again - not in History, completely wiped)
https://www.unco.edu/news/articles/snake-expert-lack-of-evidence-coronavirus-snakes.aspx

...Do you think I was hasty?
Until I see this evidence I can't take a reasoned position, so pony up.
Done.

Okay, I see one of your main problems now. You're suffering from the delusion that there are hidden hands controlling the world. You're afraid of the wrong thing. What you should be worried about is that no one is in charge.

 

[junkshop]

...I'm just hazarding a guess, I don't know.

Indeed.

 

[smartcooky]

Yes, of course they must be smeared as "not reliable". when they expose the truth about MSM

This. Again. You're like a stuck record, Bubba..

Indeed

 

[Chris_Halkides]

structures of purified proteins

I am reading a link (that Petra provided) to an article in the OffGuardian that doubted the existence of this virus, based on its supposed lack of purity in EM images.

A number of individual proteins from SARS CoV2 had had their structures solved. This link summarized the situation as of October 2020. Solving the structure of a protein by X-ray crystallography or by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) necessarily implies that this protein was purified. "In this review, the SARS-CoV-2 related structures published in peer-reviewed papers are analyzed in depth." More structures have been solved since the time that this article appeared.