June 8, 2023
Denis,
Re your new interview with the euphemistically-named “Canadians for Truth”:
You admitted that no-virus arguments are well founded.
But you said that you don’t agree when we supposedly say “you haven’t done this, therefore viruses don’t exist” – misrepresenting our actual argument, which is that the onus is on the yes-virus people to prove their claims and they have never done so for any alleged “virus” in the 100+ years of virology… yet turned the whole upside down anyways during fake-covid.
“Just because…. blah blah… doesn’t mean they don’t exist!” Sure Denis, and Santa might actually exist too.
Virologists have had 100+ years and still never came up with a shred of valid evidence, and always rely on idiotic circular/backwards reasoning and leaps of illogic, and zillions of studies have been published on “SARS-COV-2” and every single one of is pseudoscience, and all “they” actually have are useless, fraudulent tests. And every attempt to demonstrate contagion has failed miserably, so there isn’t even probable cause to look for a “virus”.
And as you know perfectly well, literally hundreds of institutions (216 and counting) have already been challenged, via official freedom of information requests, and none have been able to cite any record of anyone on Earth obtaining a sample of this alleged “virus” to even study. There is no valid independent variable available, and hence zero science is even possible. You’re a physicist, and this is far from rocket science.
But it’s the supposed wrong-thinking of no-virus people that you chose to highlight!
“It’s almost impossible to prove a negative” – Not really. I can prove right now that there isn’t a monkey sitting on my keyboard, and will send you a pic if you don’t believe me. But why are you even discussing this? The onus isn’t on no-virus people to prove no-virus, the onus is on yes-virus people to prove their yes-virus claims. Surely you realize where the burden of proof lies.
“It may be that viruses are small… and that is certainly the case.” Oh really?
Paraphrasing: “And maybe viruses have a genome, and maybe their genomes are unique, and maybe they can use PCR and know what their genome is, and maybe they can use PCR on an unpurified sample and detect that genome.”
Respectfully, have you lost your mind? Why are you feeding this nonsense, instead of plainly stating that all tests for a purely hypothetical, never-shown-to-exist, replication-competent intracellular obligate parasite that is contagious and causes disease via natural routes of exposure are fraudulent and useless and cannot possibly be validated?
Why do you suggest that we attack the PCR tests -as if this hasn’t already been done ad nauseum since 2020?
No-virus people attacked all of the tests, long ago.
No-virus people attacked the fake “virus isolation”, long ago.
No-virus people attacked the fake “virus sequencing”, long ago.
No-virus people attacked the “point and declare” EM idiocy, long ago.
No-virus people attacked the horrific, useless animal experiments, long ago.
No-virus people have been there, done that, Denis. In fact, some no-virus people have gone far beyond this.
“I told the public I’m going to look into whether or not we can answer this question. What I meant was….I’m going to study that (PCR) technique.” – Baloney. You have indicated during the past year that you were looking into whether or not viruses have been shown to exist.
“I think PCR is an over-hyped technique that is not able to do what they claim it does… in my view. That’s my bias.”
This is what we’ve waited over a year for? To hear that you “THINK” PCR is “over-hyped” and that that’s your “BIAS”?
No Denis, it is a crystal-clear fact that PCR or any test for an imaginary virus is criminal and fraudulent.
“It’s a lengthy and detailed process.” Oh Please. I came into this knowing nothing about virology, or even biology or chemistry, and nothing about PCR, and had it figured out in months. Common sense tells you that a “test” for a tiny “sequence” cannot confirm the presence of a full length “genome”, let alone an intact “virus”, let alone an infection, let alone a disease. Official documents even tell you it can’t do that. It would be fraudulent even if “a virus” had been shown to exist. And I knew the virus story was false thanks to 2 clear presentations from Dr. Andrew Kaufman and was sending out FOI requests on the topic by May 14, 2020.
You’re had 3+ years, with a team of people helping you, and you still won’t even make a clear statement on “SARS-COV-2”.
And you know perfectly well that this is not only about fake-covid, it’s about all of virology and fake-contagion and all of the related harms, both coerced and voluntary, past, present and future.
Despite the fact that we’re already being told that “the next pandemic” will make “covid” look like a walk in the park:
Instead of educating people on the absurd methods of virology, or even explaining any of the tests in a useful way – which would empower people to immediately debunk any future claims of “viruses” and to see that historical claims of “viruses” are also rubbish – you’ve chosen to laugh at and complain about no-virus people, leave psuedoscientific methods unchallenged, and leave the door open for future scamdemics.
What a joke.
Christine
Addendum, July 11, 2023:
I’ve decided to post the emails that I had with Denis in the hours before writing this article; see below.
