Five Simple Questions For Virologists
Hello, everyone. Almost three years into the "great virus debate," we're still awaiting answers to questions we have for virologists. I thought this would be a good time to put forward in one place the five most basic unanswered questions, with the hope that any virologist will reply with answers. I'm happy to share their answers with my audience.
Question One: When attempting to prove the existence of any "thing," we follow certain procedures. First, we define the thing we are looking for, then we go to the natural habitat of that thing and attempt to find it. If we find it and we isolate it (meaning, separate it from its environment so we have it in pure form), this step allows us to find out what the thing is composed of and what it does. It works very well with trees, frogs, bacteria and even nanoparticles.
Can you give us a reference in which this step has been done for any pathogenic virus, and, if this reference doesn't exist, explain why not?
Question Two: Virologists claim that the "viral culture" experiment proves the existence of the virus. In that experiment, an unpurified sample is taken from a sick person and mixed with fetal bovine serum, toxic antibiotics, and a starvation medium. It is then inoculated on a highly inbred cell culture, which results in the breakdown of the cells (called "cytopathic effect”). This process is called "isolation" of the virus.
Can you define what the term "isolation" means to you, and whether you agree that the above process is a scientifically based isolation procedure?
Question Three: The scientific method at its core means the choosing of an independent variable (that which you wish to study) and a dependent variable (the effect this independent variable causes). By this widely accepted definition of the scientific method, one would need to isolate and test the virus and only the virus as the independent variable. So, a proper experiment would be to isolate a pure virus from a sick person that you allege is made sick with this virus and inoculate this and only this virus onto the cell culture and see whether it causes the CPE. Then, of course, one would run a control experiment: The identical steps would be taken, except no virus would be added to the culture.
Can you point us to a study in which this clear experiment has been done? If it doesn't exist, please explain why. If the reason is that you can't find the purified virus in any fluid of any sick plant, animal, or human, then are you willing to acknowledge that the only experiment one could do to prove the existence of these viruses simply can't be done? If you agree that this experiment can't be done, could you please refer us to a paper that shows how a "viral culture" is experimentally validated with proper controls at every step of the experiment?
Question Four: It is often claimed by doctors and scientists that every nook and cranny of our bodies is teeming with viruses. These viruses, it is claimed, make up what is called a "virome." Some claim there are 10 to the 48th number of viruses in our bodies.
If this is true, when you inoculate unpurified lung samples onto cell cultures, presumably containing gazillions of these viruses, why is the only virus that "grows" the one you're looking for, i.e., SARS-CoV-2? Why aren't these other viruses seen, photographed, and found in the broken-down cell culture?
Question Five: Finally, can you offer other examples of "things" that are claimed to exist solely through the finding of pieces of that thing? To be clear, if no records of a purified virus such as SARS-CoV-2 exists, by what logic or scientific principles can one claim to prove that any piece, such as an antigen or genome, has come from that "thing?"
All the best,
Tom
Nike on
To give the impression that they are demigods of knowledge, so-called scientists take advantage of people’s naivety and credulity to do things in the opposite way than they should, when it comes to proving the existence of something specific (for example: proving the existence of hypothetical viruses or hypothetical sub-atomic particles). First, using conjecture, so-called scientists make assumptions about the existence of hypothetical particles, after which they start conducting all kinds of experiments trying to find direct and indirect evidence to show whether their assumptions were correct. This way of doing science is upside down, it is absurd, it is devoid of any reason. In reality, a true scientist will not make any assumptions about what exactly exists, but will simply declare that only those particles exist for which there is direct evidence. A true scientist does not first hypothesize the existence of something and then go in search of the hypothesis. This thing is only done by charlatans paid by the System to fool Humanity with scientific lies, to take people away from Reality, Truth and the Creator God.
Raivo Mosona on
Interesting and probably you never get answers. It’s because “virology science” is more like a religion or a cult and all heretics must be burned or otherwise killed. I’ve found your e-mail in my spam folder and it means, Google, YouTube, LinkedIn etc. platforms are all misinformation spreaders. It’s very sad, we have to find a way to build sapiens society where knowledge drives development, not greed, fear, obedience and slavery. Currently there is no sapiens society, this is bigbrained baboon society.
Éva LaRoche on
Excellent questions, Tom! For a while now, I’ve had a few questions as well. If there are quadrillions of viruses lurking out there and within us, then how is it they go on the attack one at a time? Do the viruses hold a ‘scary’ pageant and the winner gets to have their turn in the spotlight being propagandized in the news? Or do viruses use a democratic process by holding a board meeting, where they vote on which virus should reek havoc that season? Or maybe the answer is simply that virus mothers raised their baby viruses properly by teaching them to take turns. Well, whatever the case me be, it’s certainly something to ponder.
Ryan Wiese on
Your the best. People are ignorant. That is all. Thanks Tom.
Alex Eulenberg on
Answer to question 5: Dinosaurs are claimed to have existed solely through the finding of their fossilized “pieces.”
David A Howard on
SADS http://stateofthenation.co/?p=137214
Candace Suarez on
Super clear. Thank you.
Sue on
Couldn’t be clearer. Stefan Lanka’s experiments couldn’t be clearer in what they show. Why are they not getting this? Why are they not choosing to get it? Are Tom and the others flogging a dead horse? Beats me. Is the answer simply to say, you go your way and we’ll go ours? And then to just simply wait for the seesaw to tip our way with the eventual, gradual awakening?
Gordon Miller on
We live in a society where we have been indoctrinated to believe it takes an “expert” to understand anything regarding health and medicine. No, BS baffles brains. All you need is common sense and the ability to ask questions. Just like Dr. Tom! And his questions are dynamite.👍