Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

monart

Regulars
  • Posts

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

monart last won the day on February 18

monart had the most liked content!

Previous Fields

  • State (US/Canadian)
    Alberta
  • Country
    Canada
  • Copyright
    Must Attribute
  • Real Name
    Monart Pon

Recent Profile Visitors

1497 profile views

monart's Achievements

Member

Member (4/7)

36

Reputation

  1. Again, the SARS-CoV-2/Covid -19 (S/C) non-believer is not primarily making the claim that S/C doesn't exist; the claim is that the S/C believers have yet to provide proof of S/C's existence. Your conclusion that you had covid and not strep throat (or any other respiratory illness like the cold) may be understandable at the time, "because there's a covid pandemic", but what about now? Is the fact that S/C is yet to be proven to exist as claimed, not actually a fact, and not really relevant?
  2. Again, no documentation has been found or offered, verifying that SAR-CoV-2 has been isolated, purified, and distinctly identified as a new existent, and, furthermore, that it cause Covid-19. Ignoring this fact may lead one to the distraction of comparing "having covid" to having appendicitis or malaria. No tyranny has ever been imposed because of appendicitis or malaria, or the common cold.
  3. Yes, to some, psycho-epistemological barriers to autonomous discovery of the truth are difficult to detect and acknowledge, especially when faced with the potential feelings of fear and guilt.
  4. Many tips and clues are posted by the participants here. The fundamental question is: Has the alleged cause of covid, the "novel SARS-CoV-2", been scientifically proven to exist and be identifiable by a process of isolation and purification? In answering this question, there may be distractions and diversions from its primacy and the controversy that, after 4 years, the answer may still be in the negative. Note that there is an as-yet unclaimed 1.5 million Euros award to any “virologist who presents scientific proof of the existence of a corona virus, including documented control experiments of all steps taken in the proof.”
  5. What's different is that the belief in covid is based on science, so say the covid believers. Our belief is based on observation, experimentation, evidence, logic, and all the methods of reason; whereas, the belief in God is based on revelation, authority, testimonials, intuition, faith. So, do you, the covid believers, know that covid exists by your own reason? Or, do you know it by reliance on the authority of (some of the) experts in virology and epidemiology? For most of us, of course, we have to trust the consensus of experts; we don't have the knowledge or time to learn and know it for ourselves, which is normal and to be expected, for all knowledge outside our own fields. Isn't your trust in covid experts is similar to that of the God believers' trust in their pastors, priests, popes, and theologians? Not at all. Our trust is based on science and the science of the experts. So it's rational for you to trust the covid experts, but not rational for the God believers to trust their God experts. Yet you both don't know for yourself the existence of covid/God. What if belief in either is unjustified because the experts haven't told the whole truth? How do you find out?
  6. Reflecting on all the facets of the covid pandemic tyranny, there is much to think about - even if to most people, it's like a nightmare better to be forgotten, or even if, to a few others, it's like a comedy gone stale and no longer amusing. What's more to look at? The murky reality of "SARS-CoV-2" and "Covid-19" raises doubts in the minds of independent thinkers about the objective existence and identification of a distinct, "novel" virus causing a new respiratory disease, deadly enough to justify a pandemic tyranny. But why then have so many people, the overwhelming majority, including most Objectivists, believe in covid? Consider this: For thousands of years, nearly everyone believed in some God/gods. Even today, in our enlightened, scientific age, according to surveys, 85% of the world population reportedly believe in a God, over 6 billion people – including 2.4 billion Christian (1.4B Catholic), 2 billion Islamic, and1.1 billion Hindu – all preaching and practicing selfless service to God and the needs of others. Why do these mystical beliefs in unproved, non-existent beings and irrational concepts endure and persist? What's similar, and what's different, between belief in God/Christ and belief in covid?
  7. My "overall purpose" on this topic is to expose the truth by challenging believers in "SARS-CoV-2" and "Covid-19" to check their premises, think for themselves, and hold reason as absolute. I myself did that, and have been pointing to what I and others have found. Am I mistaken? Lying? Deluded? Ill-willed? What else have I posted, here or elsewhere? I appreciate and am grateful that, in response to this challenge, each one of you have given it attention and posted your replies. I have learned and am encouraged that there are Objectivists here who are curious and caring about the truth of covid. My will was good, and I've received goodwill in return.
  8. That may have happened for new potential exposure to (outdoor but not indoor) air pollutants, but not to pre-existing and ongoing cases of polluted-air caused respiratory illnesses/deaths. For these prior cases, being kept indoors and wearing masks by anti-pandemic measures would have been too late and unhelpful. The significant and premier example of this was in Wuhan, where there was already an epidemic of respiratory illnesses/deaths due to the prior years of increasingly severe air pollution, against which there had been daily protests -- until the CCP's draconian covid lockdowns were imposed. How many of these pollution cases were re-diagnosed as covid? Indeed, the first paper reporting on the study that discovered a "novel coronavirus" (a paper which I read myself and have referenced a few times here), does not account for the polluted-air caused cases in the selection of patients for their study. {And the study team admitted, when asked, that they had not isolated and purified the "novel" virus and yet had sequenced "it".)
  9. Yes, and I did acknowledge your point here, where I also wrote that not all respiratory illnesses/deaths are caused by microbes; some are caused by breathing polluted, toxic air, and some by other, non-microbial causes.
  10. Is covid's existence not "the question", because it's definitively proven, or because it's a trivial, unimportant question? Why was the "government response "100% wrong", if covid is real, deadly, and contagious, given the legal emergency and quarantine powers, and the moral-political principles prevailing? Indeed, the government had the legal responsibility, if covid is real, to STOP THE SPREAD, even at the suffering and loss of individuals.
  11. Double-checking back, I acknowledge that I don't clearly know what you did or did not claim. What do you really claim?
  12. The "massive amounts of health care workers", or any number of believers or partial believers, don't need to be "lying", they don't need to be"involved in a huge conspiracy". They don't even need to know the truth; they just need to believe, trust in the "experts" and authorities, do their jobs, keep their head and eyes down, and just do as they're told. The "list" of "evidence" are all downstream and derivative, contingent for validity on the primary evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been proven to exist definitively and distinctly, by its having been isolated and purified. Verified documentation is yet to be found for this proof. Continued attempts to use "deaths", "vaccines", and consensus as "evidence from reality" are really just circular reasoning and begging the question, along with appeals to popularity, authority, and ignorance. My "overall purpose" on this topic is to expose the truth by challenging believers in "SARS-CoV-2" and "Covid-19" to check their premises, think for themselves, and hold reason as absolute. I myself did that, and have been pointing to what I and others have found. Am I mistaken? Lying? Deluded? Ill-willed? What else have I posted, here or elsewhere?
  13. That's about sums it up. Add: "And that's sufficient justification to impose global pandemic tyranny (following the WHO-extolled exemplar of China)."
  14. Where is the "massive amount of evidence"? Do you know of one paper clearly showing that SARS-CoV-2 was isolated and purified?. Investigators have searched and have yet to find or receive one. As has been repeatedly pointed out, the claim that SARS-CoV-2 has not been proven, by isolation and purification, to exist with a distinct and definite identity, is not the same claim as that it doesn't exist. It's not a "conspiracy theory" to not accept a claim without proof. The burden of proof is on they who assert, not on the non-believer to disprove the assertion. It's a credit to Objectivism, on this topic, that its epistemology (and ethics) are applied and Ayn Rand's advice is followed, to "check your premises", think for oneself, with "reason as one's only absolute". "Nothing to do with Miss Rand's philosophy in any manner"?
  15. To claim that covid vaccine research is "direct proof" of SARS-CoV-2's existence and identity, is the same circular reasoning as the claim that covid deaths are also proofs. They both assume that which is yet to be proven (proven with a definite, not probabilistic identity). Even if 99% of the FOI request were administrative exclusions (which they're not, as shown by Christine Massey's notarized documents), why aren't there the 1% of records (research papers) of SARS-CoV-2 having been isolated and purified? Moreover, a sampling of papers, including the first one from Wuhan, show no isolation and purification were done. Authors of some of those papers, when contacted, confirmed that they did not do isolation and purification. Even more revealing, apologists have insisted that current microbiology neither practice nor require virus isolation, and that virus identification is in percentages of probability. (See earlier posts on all this.)
×
×
  • Create New...