On dividing a resistance, the existence of viruses, 'the COVID response', & spreading-non-deadly threats
Preventing pandemic re-runs
Motivated by our interactions with Bill Rice and other apparent misunderstandings of our views, we seek to clarify our shared position on fundamental issues and questions.1
Dividing a Resistance
For at least two years, the following ideas have pervaded the ‘COVID contrarian’ space:
There is a monolithic “resistance” or “movement” comprised of all who dissent in ways big and small from the ‘official’ narrative about the COVID Event,
Disagreement among individuals presumed to be part of that group is harmful and must be avoided at all costs.
These beliefs are untethered from reality and contrary to how humans make meaning, produce knowledge, and solve problems.
Obviously, individuals who are part of the same organization, co-author written works, make presentations together, or embark on joint ventures must be in agreement regarding certain goals and questions.
In the public sphere, however, no one should be expected to conform to an ill-defined ‘herd’ simply because they identify as non-Covidian.
The Threat
In early 2020, the WHO, CCP, and officials around the world contended:
There is a threat - specifically, a novel coronavirus that causes a unique disease and adds risk of severe illness and/or death to some people is spreading between humans.
We contend the opposite:
There was no threat involving a spreading novel coronavirus, whether between humans or in the air.
“Viruses Don’t Exist”
Holding the above view is not contingent on accepting or rejecting that viruses “exist”. It could be seen as a bridge between those who insist on entering the conversation with viruses aren’t a thing and those who say there was a manmade or naturally-emergent coronavirus that spread somehow from one or more points of origin.
Questions such as
What are the things called viruses?
Are viruses, whatever they are, causal of illness?
“Where” are viruses? Do they transmit? How do we know/why do we say so?
are scientifically and medically important, and the answers have far-reaching social, political, and economic ramifications.
We each have learned many new things over the past few years from books, articles, presentations, and individuals with respect to viruses and ‘the science’ of why some people experience colds and respiratory illnesses at some times, and why others appear "immune". It is clear that what most of us have been taught and assume to be necessarily true about viruses (and much else) is very far from being “settled science.”
But we cannot agree that saying “Viruses are fake!” or making similar statements is a superior or more legitimate tactic for persuading people about the depth and breadth of the lies they have been told than choosing to dismantle the individual precepts of the WHO et al’s pandemic claims.
“What Really Matters is the RESPONSE”
The virus/origins of the virus don’t matter, some say, what matters is the RESPONSE.2
This position may appear well-meaning, yet it is flawed.
It absolutely matters whether a novel coronavirus was "spreading," because this was the terminology used to scare the populace, shut down schools and places of worship, hurt industries, and justify deployment of a dedicated shot.
For both of us, the biggest lie told by governing authorities wasn’t there is a virus or there is a novel virus. It was something is spreading — a la the 15 Days to Slow the Spread propaganda campaign.
Based on everything we’ve investigated and analyzed, including two places that reported extremely fast and high-magnitude death events in spring 2020 (New York and Bergamo), we see no evidence of spread and no reason that even one hour of thought - let alone 15 days, 30 more days, and beyond - should have been dedicated to considering a ‘response’ to a non-existent threat.
If there was dispersal of a pathogen, infectious clone, poison, or “signal” in certain locations, it was not via person to person transmission or spread but via one or more direct methods such as testing reagents, swabs, oxygen tanks, or similar mechanisms.
Silently Spreading But Not Deadly
Some analysts say SARS-CoV-2 is a manmade virus (or came from a lab), wasn’t especially deadly, but was spreading in fall 2019 or sooner and made people sick.
We used to hold this view ourselves (minus the confidence about lab origin). Studying specific events, documents, and granular data of different kinds changed our minds.
One problem with believing scientists can create or adulterate a viable ‘coronavirus’ that is able to ‘compete’ in the natural world is that it empowers the Perpetrators and sets them up for re-runs. If a concocted entity can escape or leak on a worker and transmit, or be released into thin air and make a people all over the world sick, it means the capacity to create illusions has some basis in reality. We see no reason to believe this can or has been done.
Everything we all witnessed and experienced indicates that an agent - including an infectious clone or ‘poison’ - isn’t needed. A story, new test, and screens showing images & numbers are enough to make the public think something is spreading.
Art of the (Im)possible
The COVID-19 Event was highly successful. Regardless of whether a similar operation is activated again anytime soon, or is executed in the same way, those in power have demonstrated what is possible.
This is bad news for posterity and perhaps the best reason of all to resist the temptation to assert that it doesn't matter if there was a novel virus spreading - what 'really' matters is the response, versus the claims about a threat.
If pandemics involving spreading ‘viruses’ - whether deadly or harmless - are impossible (as we and many others believe to be the case), then we can pronounce the phenomenon counterfeit and cross it off the list of emergencies that officials and private parties can feign to their advantage and our detriment.
Related
 | A guest post by
|
I don’t know of anyone who has looked at a lot of evidence used to underwrite claims for a new virus, which they called “SARS-Cov-2” says “viruses don’t exist”.
The scientific method is NOT able to yield evidence of non-existence of anything.
A more precise and more correct statement, which the scientific method can yield information on the basis of which to express an opinion, is “There is no scientific evidence for the existence of viruses”.
That’s the position I’ve reached. Initially, it seemed an absurd notion, because of the horrifying implications (which include organised fraud over several decades on “viruses” themselves as well as meaning many diseases were misattributed, that contagion must also be fraudulent and have alternative explanations & finally that all vaccines with the possible exception of those against bacterial toxins, such as Tetanus, are also wholly fraudulent.
It’s not necessary to be a scientist in order to understand the evidence that led me to my current opinion.
The claim for their existence rests upon several techniques which could be termed “pillars”.
These are routinely used & have become widely accepted as “the kind of information that’s needed to validate the existence of a new virus”.
Pillars include “isolation” in which oddly enough, no separation whatsoever is involved. On the contrary, isolation in virology involves adding a sample purporting to contain the claimed pathogen to cells in culture and watching these calls die, described as a “cytopathic effect” (CPE). What you’re never told is that the cells have had their culture conditions altered in several ways, such as starvation of essential nutrients and addition of drugs, claimed to be required to prevent bacterial infection of the culture, which however are directly toxic to the starving cells. We know this because control experiments are never conducted, in which all steps except adding the claimed virus are done. The results of such control experiments are simply missing from every paper, or its stated they were done yet nothing happened to the cells, so it MUST be die to the new virus!
The scientific method has been breached since 1956 in the fake discipline called Virology. The key journals must be controlled by those in on the fraud, because everyone I know who had ever been a peer reviewer would decline to consider the manuscript on the basis of failings of the most serious kind.
There are a handful of other pillars, such as claimed visual identification using a special kind of microscopy, called “Electron Microscopy” (EM).
The objects, if they existed, are claimed to be so tiny that they remain invisible to the human eye, even magnified to the optical limits inherent in “Light Microscopy”, the kind you might have peered down at college. The most important thing to know about the results of EM, which are images assembled by computers from beams of electrons fired at the prepared sample, which has been distorted beyond recognition by being coated with platinum, gold or other materials, are simply declared as “a virus” by the investigator. There is no evidence linking the objects visualised by EM and a disease, or a genetic sequence or anything at all. Some call this “the point and declare” school of virology. Because nobody has ever really “isolated a virus”, using techniques that pass muster using the scientific method, there is simply no basis to claim that anything seen on an EM images is a particular thing.
Genomic methods make up at least two other “pillars”, and in here we find PCR, a method for amplifying the amount of a gene sequence (the method originally invented by Kary Mullis). It is not valid to use this method to then declare that a sample “contains virus X”. It’s circular logic. Recognise we cannot know what the genetic sequence of a novel thing is. Yet “probes” are designed in order to amplify particular sequences on the grounds that “the new virus is thought to be related to a previous family of viruses called “virus A”, “virus B” and “virus C”. Since neither A, nor B, nor C have ever been isolated, I hope you can immediately see the circularity of this.
The PCR method in any case picks out only 2 or 3 tiny pieces of the claimed “full length genetic sequence” of the purported virus. Further sequencing is done on all the other pieces sitting, it is claimed”, between the pieces that were claimed to have been identified by the PCR method. What you end up with are hundreds of thousands or short pieces which could have derived from anything including the animal or human from which the original sample was taken, or from bacteria or fungi present in that sample. It’s impossible to assemble this molecular jigsaw & what is now introduced is computer trickery called Next Generation Sequencing, which assembles all the huge number of short pieces in every conceivable manner by means of common ends to the short pieces, a technique of assembling “Contigs” (potentially overlapping or contiguous endings).
The permutations & combinations that this software can yield are nonsensical unless you constrain the “full length sequence” in some ways.
As soon as you apply limiters (such as conditions, requirements and exclusions) you’re not discovering anything, you’re MAKING it up.
Contagion or transmission is another “pillar”. Clinical symptomatic transmission has never been demonstrated for any claimed “viral illness”. Not one.
I could go on but here’s the key point:
Anyone familiar with the absolute minimal requirements of the discipline of the scientific method for examining the physical world soon realises that EVERY single one of the evidential “pillars” is not only invalid nonsense but it’s knowing fakery. The person doing it knows key controls are misting. The reviewer knows that none of the lodged genetic sequences have valid connections to anything in the real world & the journal editors must be in on this long lived, systematic fraud.
I will have missed some “pillars” but I hope you’ve at least understood my realisation that these are not of stone but pretend supports of papier mache, assembled to create an illusory world.
I don’t want anyone to “believe me”. Science doesn’t care about my or your beliefs. You can however verify any or all of what I’ve said here.
I recommend anyone who understands the scientific method well enough to review the evidence for themselves.
I put it to you that, having done so, you realise that the answers to many other questions become completely obvious: all claims made by the authorities about viruses, illnesses claimed to be caused by them, their transmission, their treatment and all vaccines are definitely, unambiguously, deliberately lies.
Best wishes,
Mike
This is an essentially complete list of my relevant scientific reports since early 2020: https://denisrancourt.ca/categories.php?id=1&name=covid
A list of my video presentations is here:
https://denisrancourt.ca/page.php?id=12&name=videos
Our main reports about covid are here:
https://correlation-canada.org/research/